Home Forums Reloading Varmint Rifles Real Life Comparison 204 Ruger vs. 223 Remington

For [bleep] and giggles I did a couple quick calcs on QL. Looks like the 223, and 204, both will push a 40gr VMax to about 3800 fps given 26" bbls, and 60K pressure. The 204 has the BC advantage at about .25 vs .20.

Kinda goes back to my first comment. The 204 and it's bullets were purpose-built to do a specific thing very well, and it does.

The 223 on the other hand does many things very well.

Yeah, I'm going to have to agree with MM. The 204 certainly has its niche. But it is hotter per shot and less versatile. For example, does anyone "see" loading a 204 with a 60 grainer?

VG - Aren't you glad that I introduced you to the work disenguous? You have used it more in the last few days than I have ever seen it used in the sum total of my life.

A good example being that you choose to cite data from the Hodgdon "basic reloading manual" pointing out that the top velocity they list for the 40 gr bullet in a 223 is 3674 fps - but, conveniently overlooking the fact that in the same publication, even on the same page, the highest velocity listed for the 40 gr bullet in a 204 is 3774 fps. Yep - that's a lot, a whopping 100 fps faster. Too bad that they didn't do the pressure measurements using the same method, I would really like to know at how the pressures really compare to get the extra 100 fps.

By the way the Sierra manual lists the highest velocity for the 204 using a 39 gr bullet as 3700 fps, and the 223 using a 40 gr bullet as 3700 fps. In this case exactly the same velocities - HMMM!

The Nosler manual lists the 40 gr 204 bullet at 3709 fps and the 40 gr 223 bullet at 3860 fps. - WOW!

My Cooper varminter with a 24 inch barrel, using 26.3 gr of VV-133 and a 40 gr Nosler chronographs the load at 3725 during 23 degree temps, I doubt that 3800 is out of line for it in summer temps. To me that gives some verification that the load data in the Nosler manual is close to real world since their mid-range load using VV-133 is 26.0 grs and they show it attaining a velocity of 3704 fps. using a 24" barrel.

What does this all prove - nothing more than what I first posted - "In viewing the chart it is evident that the difference between the 204 and 223 when comparing the 40 gr bullets in each is insignificant in any respect whether it is energy or bullet drop."

Oh yes, I almost forgot the second thing it does, it also serves to illustrate just how disenguous you are and how you like to accuse other folks of being that way in order to deflect criticism from yourself.
Perhaps you should consider changing your user name to Disenguous Guy - particularily since you seem to practice it so often.

drover

A question for your VG - just where in your "wonderful world of all things pertaining to load information" - AKA - Remington catlog - did you find pressures listed for the various cartridges? I have looked though my 2009 issue and it just doesn't seem to be there, could it be that I got short-changed in my free catalog.

As a matter of fact I can't seem to locate any source that cites pressures of the 204 and 223 in the same terms - some list one in PSI, some in CUP, and some with a combination of each.

I certainly would like to view the source you are using. Not that I would doubt anything you say - after all you are steady and true as the mighty oak, steadfast and loyal. Oops! Maybe I have you mixed up with someone else. Anyway would you please cite your source so that some of us more unenlightened folks could share in your knowledge.

drover

Well, great! 60% of the time, you even spelled the word properly.



My point, in case your pointed brain pan missed it was that quite often, ammo manufacturers data varies from the real world because barrel length is different than the test rifle used, lot # of powder varies, temperature varies, neck tension varies. Remington's ballistic lab is a very controlled environment -- the range is not. You don't shoot at the Remington lab -- so REAL WORLD is where the average guy shoots -- the outdoor range - the hunting fields.

But if your reality exists on a piece of paper . . . . . . . help yourself. Just don't expect all of us to get weak in the knees and salivate every time your fingers touch a keyboard.

Just sayin'.

I still think you're all comparing 40s to 40s is what's nonsense, frankly. Compare BC to BC instead of bullet WEIGHTS, and see what you get . Try the 39 Sierra versus the nearest thing in .223 (probably the 69 Matchking) and see what happens.

Have you looked at the BCs of the nosler 40gr 204 vs the 223, I think not for sure as I am not going to run to the basement but I did check the nosler website and the 204s 40gr BC is .239 and the 40 in the 223 is .221 the sierra 39gr is .287 over3800. So really not any difference but maybe to some but those who actually shoot wouldn't spell crap. HAPPY HUNTING

I've no idea how much variation if any there is from lot to lot of VV133. But I do think brass is a factor. The only .223 that gets 40's is a truck gun....the load is 27.5 VV133/40BT=3895 very accurately. Quite a bit more than the basic reloading manual says. That barrel is 14"twist -20" long. Brass is IMI, the chamber is very minimal and with 0 freebore.

I am not sure of the .204 ruger's velocity but i shoot .40 grain nosler varmegeddon hollow points out of my .223 at close to 3500 feet per second and 1/2 inch groups at 100 yards. Good enough for me. I have a 22-250 savage model 12 too but it weighs so much i only shoot it at the range.

Last spring I went rock chuck hunting here in Idaho with one of my buddies. He was using his .204 with a 26” barrel loaded hot and I was using a .223 with a 26”barrel and a 9” suppressor loaded with 40g NBT at 3970fps. I don’t know the speed of his .204 but after 45-50 rock chucks between us in two days I could see no difference in the performance of those two.

When it got windy we both switched to .243s with 70g NBT and continued the fun. My 243 was pushing those 70g at 3700 FPS, yet I know that’s too hot but it works for me.

I passed on the 204 due to the possibility of it becoming harder to find components in the years to come and the great versatility of the 223. I use the same 223 load from above to run two ARs ataround 3600 FPS which have even good for some medium sized mule deer.

Compare same weight or similar BC's if you want real world

With a name like varmintguy I expect a rifle looney to be all about the 17 HMR and 204. If his name was Ishoota30/06 guess what he'd be enamored with? Big deal.

You do realise this thread is 8 years old.............

All pretty much Factual, just cherry picking the facts. Now how about we compare a similar 55 grain cup and core bullet in each as one example & see if you may compare a 50 grain bullets in each Then lets have a poke at 72 grainers in each.Never mind the availability or twist rate need don't need to be bothered w this minor details:)

First, I have no dog in this fight, as I use both calibers and yes, I know this is an old thread.

I believe we can all agree the 223 is far more versatile than the 204 but I'm not sure that was the initial assertion by the OP.

Someone I'm sure will correct me very quickly if I'm mistaken.

As a prairie dog round, for bullets of the same weight, the 204 has a higher B.C., greater velocity, less wind drift and greater energy than the 223. I ran the ballistics out to 800 yards, using Hornady's online calculator. I'm certainly not going to shoot at prairie dogs at 800 yards with the 204 but I'm not gong to do it with the 223, either. I saved all the calculations and am happy to share them with anyone who would like to study or view them.

I like my .223’s. Don’t want to set up for another little gun!

Well, I think we can all agree that the 223 is a prairie dog killer of the 1st degree. I don't think you'll be handicapped.

The problem with the .223 as a p. d. rifle is that it doesn't shoot a 32-grain SBK or V-Max, which are ideal for that game. Even comparing 40-gr. V-Maxes, the .204's better b.c. (.275 vs. .200) gives the .204 a distinct downrange advantage with those.

Actually shoot p. d's with a .204 with 32-gr. SBK's or V-Maxes in a varmint-weight bolt-action rifle and it will quickly be obvious that the specialized varminter is vastly superior to anything else that is not 20-caliber.

All the statisticalizing in the world will not reveal it. Shooting will.

The .223 has wonderful versatility, and is great for larger critters, but it can't touch the .204 for hump rats.

You've just repeated what we've been discussing. There are 2 threads in the varmint rifle reloading area that discusses the 204's superiority over the 223 in the pd fields.