204 or 220 Swift..
- Thread starter dogbustin
- Start date
joed
New member
I have no ambition to own any cartridge less then .224, but that is another story.
Th Swift is one of the all time greats even though not many manufacturers chamber rifles for it anymore. In all honesty, I'd rather have the Swift then a .22-250. A few months ago I looked all over for a rifle chambered in the Swift. I settled for the 250 and regret it.
Th Swift is one of the all time greats even though not many manufacturers chamber rifles for it anymore. In all honesty, I'd rather have the Swift then a .22-250. A few months ago I looked all over for a rifle chambered in the Swift. I settled for the 250 and regret it.
Rustydust
Active member
About all I can say is that I just plain dig .220 Swifts. I have a .204 Ruger that shoots fine and have taken boat load of ground squirrels with it as well as a rock chuck and numerous prairie dogs. It is a good and accurate gun.
BUT, it is not a .220 Swift. For sure, there are going to be people responding about how the .204 shoots just as flat as the Swift and burns less powder and brass is cheaper and all and they would be right. It is just that for some reason that .204 will sit in my safe and the Swift will come out a lot more often. Watching a ground squirrel explode at 400+ yards with a hit from that Swift can certainly help to make you love it too.
I think that on a tight twisty track a Mazda Miata would kick the stuffing out of a '69 Z-28 Camaro, but which one would you rather have parked in your garage or be out cruising with? That's how I and many others feel about a .220 Swift. It is going on 80 years old and can still kick butt on a lot of newer more "improved" rounds. My safe will alway have at least one of them in there I can tell you that.
Get what you like best. But to me anyway, the .220 Swift will always be the king of the varmint rounds.
BUT, it is not a .220 Swift. For sure, there are going to be people responding about how the .204 shoots just as flat as the Swift and burns less powder and brass is cheaper and all and they would be right. It is just that for some reason that .204 will sit in my safe and the Swift will come out a lot more often. Watching a ground squirrel explode at 400+ yards with a hit from that Swift can certainly help to make you love it too.
I think that on a tight twisty track a Mazda Miata would kick the stuffing out of a '69 Z-28 Camaro, but which one would you rather have parked in your garage or be out cruising with? That's how I and many others feel about a .220 Swift. It is going on 80 years old and can still kick butt on a lot of newer more "improved" rounds. My safe will alway have at least one of them in there I can tell you that.
Get what you like best. But to me anyway, the .220 Swift will always be the king of the varmint rounds.
SShooterZ
New member
Not having shot a swift, I can't comment on it.
I will say that with 204R you get the advantage of watching your targets explode through your scope as recoil is minimal.
Reloading is rather easy and from what I can tell, you have to work hard to find a 204R that won't shoot.
I would like to own/shoot a Swift one day just to experience it though.
I will say that with 204R you get the advantage of watching your targets explode through your scope as recoil is minimal.
Reloading is rather easy and from what I can tell, you have to work hard to find a 204R that won't shoot.
I would like to own/shoot a Swift one day just to experience it though.
kyotekiller25
Well-known member
Having owned a swift and seeing what a 55g NBT at 3925fps does to varmints/coyotes, I'll take that over the little wimpy 204...I took coyotes to 600 yards with DRT authority and 2" exit holes regularly with my swift, I doubt a 204 would do as good a job.
I also ran my swift to 4400fps with 40g bullets, so I dont wanna hear anyone say how much flatter the 204 ruger is, blah blah blah.
204 ruger is a pdog rifle and thats about it IMO. I would never have a use for one unless I lived in wyoming or montana and shot pdogs every year.
Swift is way more versatile so it gets the nod 10x over for me.
I also ran my swift to 4400fps with 40g bullets, so I dont wanna hear anyone say how much flatter the 204 ruger is, blah blah blah.
204 ruger is a pdog rifle and thats about it IMO. I would never have a use for one unless I lived in wyoming or montana and shot pdogs every year.
Swift is way more versatile so it gets the nod 10x over for me.
claimbuster
New member
Started shooting my Dad's first Swift in 1953. He gave it to me in 1962. There has always been at least one Swift here all the time since, sometimes two or three.
Bought my first 204R in 2006. Always been at least one if not two or three since then.
So, I still can't be much help to you!
Bought my first 204R in 2006. Always been at least one if not two or three since then.
So, I still can't be much help to you!
kyotekiller25
Well-known member
Where was the 243 in this comparison, I didn't see it...
I have a 243 as well, yah I know all about the 55s in a 243 at 3900-4K, fast, flat, and work pretty good on dogs out to 600.
Thats why I got rid of the swift and got a 243. I can shoot 55s like a lazer just like the swift, but having the added benefit of using it on deer with heavier bullets, and out to 1K with the 95 and 105g VLD/AMAX/SMK bullets make it a better choice for me.
I have a 243 as well, yah I know all about the 55s in a 243 at 3900-4K, fast, flat, and work pretty good on dogs out to 600.
Thats why I got rid of the swift and got a 243. I can shoot 55s like a lazer just like the swift, but having the added benefit of using it on deer with heavier bullets, and out to 1K with the 95 and 105g VLD/AMAX/SMK bullets make it a better choice for me.
Bax
New member
One additional point to consider about the .204 and .220:
Cost. Not just for factory loaded ammunition, but for components if you handload. Brass for the .220 Swift is nearly twice that of .204 Ruger brass in my area. Also, you will be using more powder for the .220, so powder costs go up a bit. Bullets cost about the same, so that isnt a huge deal.
Additionally, consider ammo availability in your area. Odds are that at some point in your life you are going to go hunting and drive almost the whole way to your destination and realize that you left your ammo at home and will be forced to buy ammo at a local gun shop that may or may not carry less common calibers. Just food for thought on that.
All in all, I own a .204 and really enjoy shooting it. But the .220 has a cool factor that not many people can replicate.
PS: I found the PERFECT .220 Swift for you to buy
http://hendershots.net/gunRoomDetail.aspx?id=2880
Cost. Not just for factory loaded ammunition, but for components if you handload. Brass for the .220 Swift is nearly twice that of .204 Ruger brass in my area. Also, you will be using more powder for the .220, so powder costs go up a bit. Bullets cost about the same, so that isnt a huge deal.
Additionally, consider ammo availability in your area. Odds are that at some point in your life you are going to go hunting and drive almost the whole way to your destination and realize that you left your ammo at home and will be forced to buy ammo at a local gun shop that may or may not carry less common calibers. Just food for thought on that.
All in all, I own a .204 and really enjoy shooting it. But the .220 has a cool factor that not many people can replicate.
PS: I found the PERFECT .220 Swift for you to buy
http://hendershots.net/gunRoomDetail.aspx?id=2880
doggin coyotes
Well-known member
It's just damm refreshing to see a thread that isn't titled .223 vs 22-250.
MPFD
Active member
Originally Posted By: kyotekiller25Where was the 243 in this comparison, I didn't see it...
I have a 243 as well, yah I know all about the 55s in a 243 at 3900-4K, fast, flat, and work pretty good on dogs out to 600.
Thats why I got rid of the swift and got a 243. I can shoot 55s like a lazer just like the swift, but having the added benefit of using it on deer with heavier bullets, and out to 1K with the 95 and 105g VLD/AMAX/SMK bullets make it a better choice for me.
Just playing devils advocate...
I have a 243 as well, yah I know all about the 55s in a 243 at 3900-4K, fast, flat, and work pretty good on dogs out to 600.
Thats why I got rid of the swift and got a 243. I can shoot 55s like a lazer just like the swift, but having the added benefit of using it on deer with heavier bullets, and out to 1K with the 95 and 105g VLD/AMAX/SMK bullets make it a better choice for me.
Last edited:
zilla
New member
Apples and oranges.. I have a 204 and love it.. Never had a Swift but have always thought about buying one. I did have 2 - 22-250's, but eventually got rid of em.. Maybe someday I'll own a Swift if I can find one for the right price.. For the shooting I do these days my 204 is just fine..
joed
New member
There is nothing like a Swift for varmint hunting. I'm not a fan of the .20 caliber though I hear a lot about them. There is just something cool about the Swift. Try and find one, and you'll know they are unique.
One friend of mine has the Swift. I'd swear it is more accurate then the .22-250 and has more velocity. The Swift isn't as finicky with powders as the 250 is either.
Brass may cost more and it may use more powder but that cartridge is the ultimate.
One friend of mine has the Swift. I'd swear it is more accurate then the .22-250 and has more velocity. The Swift isn't as finicky with powders as the 250 is either.
Brass may cost more and it may use more powder but that cartridge is the ultimate.
Originally Posted By: kyotekiller25Where was the 243 in this comparison, I didn't see it...
I have a 243 as well, yah I know all about the 55s in a 243 at 3900-4K, fast, flat, and work pretty good on dogs out to 600.
Thats why I got rid of the swift and got a 243. I can shoot 55s like a lazer just like the swift, but having the added benefit of using it on deer with heavier bullets, and out to 1K with the 95 and 105g VLD/AMAX/SMK bullets make it a better choice for me.
Ya but it doesn't help the economy.
I have a 243 as well, yah I know all about the 55s in a 243 at 3900-4K, fast, flat, and work pretty good on dogs out to 600.
Thats why I got rid of the swift and got a 243. I can shoot 55s like a lazer just like the swift, but having the added benefit of using it on deer with heavier bullets, and out to 1K with the 95 and 105g VLD/AMAX/SMK bullets make it a better choice for me.
Ya but it doesn't help the economy.
Flat Land Coaxer
New member
RustyDusty said it best and i agree with doggin coyotes 100%!!!
joed
New member
Originally Posted By: Luke Baxter
PS: I found the PERFECT .220 Swift for you to buy
http://hendershots.net/gunRoomDetail.aspx?id=2880
You almost got me on that one, nice rifle but pricey. I was looking at the Remington VS SF II in .220 Swift for about $1100.
I've wanted a Swift for about 6 months, they aren't easy to find. I settled for a .22-250 in a Special Cabelas Edition VS stainless. I regret it, I should have sprung for the Swift.
PS: I found the PERFECT .220 Swift for you to buy
http://hendershots.net/gunRoomDetail.aspx?id=2880
You almost got me on that one, nice rifle but pricey. I was looking at the Remington VS SF II in .220 Swift for about $1100.
I've wanted a Swift for about 6 months, they aren't easy to find. I settled for a .22-250 in a Special Cabelas Edition VS stainless. I regret it, I should have sprung for the Swift.
happyyoter
New member
like them both 204 is hard to beat.