204 ruger or 22-250 for pairedogs/groundhogs

Varmint Exterminator,

Scroll through the thread and check out Mitchell's second post. I think you'll find what you missed.
I'd put a sizable wager down that out of all the new cartridges introduced three that be around for the long haul are the 17 HMR, 300 WSM, and 204 Ruger.
 
SilverFox beat me to it. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Dan,
From what I overhear in the gunshops, guys kill woodchucks all the time at 600 yards with the 22-250 just holding a hair over their backs.
 
Yeah chuck, I've heard much the same. I guess we've been hanging around the same shops and didn't even know it. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

And of course if you really want to quadruple the killing power of the 22-250 you can step on up to the gunshop-coffee-clatch vaunted 220 Swift, which of course "explodes" groundhogs from 750 yards away. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

I do agree with the above post that the .204 is here to stay. It's currently enjoying a bit of extra hype in the gun rags (as is common with new cartridge offerings). But when the .204 comes back to earth, it'll still be a great cartridge--so long as it is used within its realm of capabilities.

Dan
 
varmint exterminator-- from what I saw and read I don't think your foot got very deep into your throat so there should be absolutely no extraction problems. It's easy to miss these things.
 
fooge,

There is nothing wrong with the 40 gr bullet at short range. It just slows down so fast it turns the 22-250 into a short range caliber.

Jack
 
If there is one thing I have learned in my 50 years on this earth is that if I say that I wouldn't buy this or that is that I usually end up with 2 of each.:)So I'll let you guys know when I pick up my new 204.:)
 
well silverfox you talked me into it i was at a show today and picked up a new 204ruger!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif i am happy now i need to get money again to i can buy a scope . hey one quick question i know you already answered this to other people but what powders did you find work the best??? thanks all of you in helping me make me choise i think i like it.
 
silverfox, you are the man i read all your posts and enjoy all your pictures. you even peeked my interest in the 204. in feburary i will be going to the harrisburg pa outdoor show and i will visit the outdoorsmans booth. he displays more coopers then you can shake a stick at. if he has a model 21 classic in 204 it might just come home with me. in october i will be in malta,montana bird and deer hunting and will drive home thru wilston nd. i sure would like to shoot a dog with you. bob kudile
 
Hey silver fox!
Have you done any testing with the 204 in the wind .
Im curious about what kind of drift those light bullets have in the wind .
Im looking to maybe getting a 204 this spring .
Lots of windy days here.
Thanks keep up the good work we realy appreciate it.
 
mitchell-- Congratulations on your new rifle purchase. What make and model rifle did you purchase? When you save up to purchase a scope, try to buy the very best you can afford--so save up for a long time and get a real good scope. The .204 Ruger caliber deserves as scope that will really help you reach out and touch those critters accurately.

What powder your rifle will like is really hard to say for sure. Since you already own a .243 and if you reload for that, maybe you already have a powder on hand that might work with the .204 Ruger. I have found that Varget worked well in my .243 with the 58 gr. V-Max. and did shoot a few loads of Varget in the .204 Ruger, but didn't find it gave me the velocity I wanted. I also used to use Win 760 and IMR 4350 in my .243, but I don't find them on many of the lists of favorites for the .204 Ruger. You may have to find a different powder for the .204 Ruger.

The Hodgdon Web site has a nice load data chart at Hodgdon reloading data for .204 Ruger and I would recommend you start there for minimum and maximum load suggestions. I like to try to pick powders that will work in the heat and cold of North DaColder, so I tend to select powders from the Hodgdon Extreme powders. Of the Extreme Powders listed in the .204 Ruger load data, H4895 has been my choice for my Savage 12VLP. I think BL-C(2), Benchmark, H335, and H322 also look like they should work well with the 32 gr. bullets, although only Benchmark and H322 are in the Extreme bunch.

REMEMBER, always start low on the powder charge range and work your way up. These powder charges may be safe in my rifle, but they may blow up in your face. Use them at your own risk!!!!

For bullets in the 35 gr. and 40 gr. weight class, the BL-C(2), H335, and H4895 powders seem to give the best velocities. The loads of H4895 are listed as "compressed" loads, but my recollection is that until I got up around 28.8 or so gr. of H4895, my loads weren't compressed. Your casing capacity may vary a little bit, so be careful!!! You also have to pay real close attention to how deep you seat your bullets if you are reaching the "compressed" load area. Pay real close attention to the amount of powder in your casings!!

One powder that I have not seen listed anywhere else except in a discussion thread on AccurateReloading.com is AA2230. It appears to have some fairly decent potentional, at least for the 32 gr. bullets. I haven't had a chance to test it with the 35 gr. Bergers or the 40 gr. Berger or V-Max, so I can't tell you how it might work with them. I do have the charge weights, muzzle velocities and comments on group sizes from the AccurateReloading.com poster who tried these loads if you are interested.

Ramshot Powder company has finished some of their testing with .204 Ruger loads and recommends Tac and X-Terminator powder for use with the 32 gr. and 40 gr. bullets in the .204 Ruger.

The following data was posted by Gary Wenzel over on the Saubier.com board:

32 gr. V-Max

Xterminator 24.0 to 27.0 gr.
Tac 26.0 to 29.0 gr.

40 gr. V-Max 3,800 fps

Xterminator 21.0 to 25.0 gr.
Tac 24.0 to 27.0 gr.

Both Max loads for the 40 gr. bullet are supposed to get 3,800 fps.
No velocities were give for the 32 gr. bullet loads.

Here are some loads someone posted for the .204 Ruger using 32 gr. and 40 gr. bullets and N140 and Win 748. Be very carful with the Win 748. I used a little bit over the 29.6 gr. load listed for the 32 gr. bullet and the primer pockets stretched so much you could seat primers with just finger pressure afterwards!!!!

This table wouldn't line up when I copied and pasted so I had to print it, scan it, save it as a JPEG, upload it to my photo hosting site, and post it as an image. Hope it shows up OK. I HAVE NOT tested these loads nor do I vouch for them being safe in your rifle. Use them at your own risk and work up from the lower charges, please don't start at the top charge weights.

N140_W748_loads--small.jpg


In the Winter 2004 issue of Small Caliber News, Todd Kindler posted some reloading information for the .204 Ruger. I think there was another author who also had some reloading data for the .204 Ruger posted there as well. Mr. Kindler seems to favor Reloder 10X for both his Tactical 20 AND for the .204 Ruger. You might want to find a copy of that issue and take a read on what he has to say.

Good luck and let us know how your progress with your new rifle.
 
mitchell-- Vihtavuori is a famous powder maker from Finland. I have had extremely good results using N540 with heavier bullets in my .17 Remington. If you read the information listed about the N500 series of powders it tells you the following:

Adding nitroglycerol to the traditional single base powder makes possible in addition to geometry and coating a third controlled variable of ballistic properties: energy content. Vihtavuori calls powders that have nitroglycerol added (maximum 25%) high energy NC-powders, which form N500 series.

Adding nitroglycerol to the high energy N500 series is done by impregnation. After that, the grains are coated with a new type of chemical which results in very progressive burning characteristics.

The composition of a typical high energy powder is as follows:

* nitrocellulose * nitroglycerol

* coating agent * stabilizer

* flame reducing agent * wear reducing agent

Geometrically the powders in the N500 series are equal to the N100 series. Although these new powders have a higher energy content, they do not cause greater wear to the gun. This is because the surface of the powder has been treated with an agent designed to reduce barrel wear. N500 series powders work well at different temperatures, even better than the traditional N100 and N300 series. Temperature sensitivity naturally depends very much on the weapon and on the cartridge. The manufacturing technique employed permits a very high bulk density, which in turn makes it possible to use a bigger charge in a certain limited loading volume
Here's a link to their Web site:

Vihtavuori Laupa
 
boy did I really solve the problem now i just picked a 22-250 . so now I got 204 223 22-250 243 and 308 all for groundhogs I think I’m going crazy /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
 
bob kudile-- sorry that I missed the last post you made where you said you'd be up in the Malta, MT area deer & bird hunting and would be traveling through Williston on your return home. When the time comes next October, post a PM or e-mail me and we can sure try to set up a coyote calling session either in eastern Montana or somewhere around Williston in NW North DaColder. Keep me posted on your plans.

mitchell-- You did the right thing when you purchased both the .204 Ruger and the 22-250!!! The more rifles you have the more fun you will have!!!! The only thing I can see that is missing from that arsenal that you ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO HAVE is a rifle in the .17 caliber area!!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif I sure hope you remedy that shortcoming in your arsenal before next summer!!
 
Blueridge--Whoops!!!! I guess I missed reading your question too! Man, I am really getting careless in my old age--sorry!

If you are referring to the 32 gr. V-Max bullets when you asked about "drift for those light bullets," then yes, I have shot lots of prairie dogs using the 32 gr. V-Max bullets in the wind. The wind drift for the 32 gr. V-Max bullets in my handloads (4,255 fps muzzle velocity) is just a tiny bit more than the wind drift for a 55 gr. V-Max bullet (3,700 fps MV) in the 22-250. Here are the numbers and I hope things line up so they are comprehensible:

Yards-----32 gr. V-Max-------55 gr. V-Max
100-----------1.0"-----------------0.9"
200-----------4.1"-----------------3.9"
300-----------9.9"-----------------9.3"
400----------18.8"----------------17.6"
500----------31.9"----------------29.5"

The 32 gr. V-Max IS NOT your best choice of bullet in the .204 Ruger for shots beyond 300 yards. The 40 gr. V-Max is a much better choice for the 300 yard and beyond shots with the .204 Ruger. It has much lower wind drift numbers than the 55 gr. V-Max in the 22-250. Just scroll back up to where I posted those numbers for the 55 gr. V-Max in 22-250 and the 40 gr. V-Max in the .204 Ruger. Even ft-lbs of energy for the 40 gr. V-Max, although a wee bit less, should give you "killing power" out to 500 yards on almost and even keel with the 55 gr. 22-250 bullet.

This goes along with what Jack Roberts has been trying to get across in this thread--while the 40 gr. bullet (a very light-weight bullet in the 22-2500 IS NOT a good long-range bullet for that caliber, neither is the 32 gr. bullet a good long-range bullet for the .204 Ruger because it is a very light-weight bullet for that caliber. For comparisons of wind drift, trajectory, etc., one should take the heaviest bullet these rifles can stabilize with factory twists in each caliber. So the "fair" comparison would be to compare a 55 gr. pill in the 22-250 with a 40 gr. pill in the .204 Ruger.

[edited for a couple of spelling/grammar errors!]
 
Back
Top