Bob Addy
New member
Rattler, you can post all the tables and figures there are. The truth about the 204 comes from actual in the field use.
I gave it a real go except for reloading. The round was disappointing. I had ????? about it after the 2nd dog I shot and it ran. A perfect 60 yard broadside shot. A 223 or Swift would have put it down. It did put several down at longer distances, most were facing me. All my runners were shot broadside, and with large entrance holes, usually with a lung hanging out. I had 6 runners and one lost over my period of testing. To me that is way too many. After the last shot and lost animal I lost all confidence with the 204.
Holes and fur damage??? It(204) was as bad and sometimes worse than my Swift.
I guess everyone is looking for that magic cartridge that will run faster than a Swift, drop them dead in the tracks like a Swift and have no fur damage. I'll keep shooting a Swift, it has definitely proven itself.
I gave it a real go except for reloading. The round was disappointing. I had ????? about it after the 2nd dog I shot and it ran. A perfect 60 yard broadside shot. A 223 or Swift would have put it down. It did put several down at longer distances, most were facing me. All my runners were shot broadside, and with large entrance holes, usually with a lung hanging out. I had 6 runners and one lost over my period of testing. To me that is way too many. After the last shot and lost animal I lost all confidence with the 204.
Holes and fur damage??? It(204) was as bad and sometimes worse than my Swift.
I guess everyone is looking for that magic cartridge that will run faster than a Swift, drop them dead in the tracks like a Swift and have no fur damage. I'll keep shooting a Swift, it has definitely proven itself.