OT - .204 Ruger; any insights? other recommendations?

homefront · Post by **homefront** » Tue Feb 26, 2008 10:35 pm

Articles I've read make this round sound very interesting. Very flat shooting, no recoil, decent wind drift resistance. Sounds like a good coyote/bobcat/fox/chuck/ round. Might even be fun on paper targets.
I saw a CZ 527 Varmint (used, but you'd never know it) with rings on my dealers rack today, and he said I could have it for $375.
Opinions?

rangerider7 · Post by **rangerider7** » Tue Feb 26, 2008 10:53 pm

I have the CZ 527 204 and love it. They are great rifles for the price and very accurate. That is a good price in my opinion. I bought mine new and put a Leupold scope on it. They are everything they say they are. I use it predator hunting when I'm on the move. I use a Bushmaster Predator 223 when I still hunt, but sometimes I just take whatever lever I have in the truck. Good luck on your decision.

morgan in nm · Post by **morgan in nm** » Tue Feb 26, 2008 10:57 pm

I don't know anything about the CZ but my dad has a 204 ruger in the standard 77 and it is quite impressive. The wind doesn't seem to be a major factor. There are a couple of things about them that might be of some concern in my experience. While the recoil is low, his rifle has one of the loudest reports of any I have fired. The other factor is that the bullet is explosive. Don't plan on saving hides using the 32grn Hornady. A local fish and game officer claimed that he killed a coyote with his at 800 yds. While not saying that it is impossible, I didn't see it. For my dad's, we were able to get an average 1.5" group at 200 yds with it.

HEAD0001 · Post by **HEAD0001** » Wed Feb 27, 2008 9:36 am

IMO the 204 is like the 17 Remington. It is cute but does not have any real world application. The mfrs. did a great job on marketing with this one. You have to remember that you are putting a bullet out there with no weight to it. And you levergun guy's know the value of bullet weight. I can get 2.5" line of sight shooting with a lot of cartridges out to about 275 yards, and that is the effective killing range on varmints(except prairie dog's) of any size with the 204.

The 223 Remington will do 2.5" line of sight with a heavier bullet that has no recoil, and if you shoot factory loads the 223 will do it at 1/2 the price of 204 ammo-or less.

If you shoot at ground hog's or larger varmint's at 275 yards or longer then you are asking for crawl off's with the 204. Heck the 223 Remington becomes a bit light past 275 yards for ground hog's and larger.

I believe a 223 Remington would serve your needs better, and cheaper. there are plenty of used 223's out there. And they are easy to sell if you want to get rid of it.

The reason I can say this with conviction is simple. I fell for the hype on the 204 and the 17 HMR. And I was miserably disappointed in both. But I do a lot of varmint hunting, and gave the rigs a real workout. They did not stand up. I went back to my 22 magnum, 22 Hornet, and 223. Tom.

nemhed · Post by **nemhed** » Wed Feb 27, 2008 11:04 am

My brother has a Remington in 204 which he loves for it's flat shooting ability, but he doesn't want to get it beat up so he uses his 223 for most of his varmint hunting. The 204 seems to me to be like a lot of the newer cartridges in that it answers a question no one asked. If you do some internet searching the issues of throat erosion and barrel life crop up just like with the 220 Swift. I personally use a 55 gr JSP in 223 for coyotes and I wouldn't want to go any smaller or lighter. Coyotes can take a lot of punishment and keep on truckin'. Also, I didn't feel the added range of a 22-250 justified the additional cost, but I live in Indiana not Arizona, 200 yds is a long shot here when calling yotes. In the end, all these cartridges that have come out in the last 20 years sound like fun but I'm pretty conservative with my selection when I put my money down. I'm always paranoid that new fangled, wonder round will be discontinued a few years down the road.

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » Wed Feb 27, 2008 12:34 pm

Thanks Nemhed that answers something for me as well. When I saw the velocities involved with that thing my first thought was that the barrel life would be rather short.

Rusty <><

homefront · Post by **homefront** » Wed Feb 27, 2008 5:28 pm

So the consensus is that anything the .204 can do, the .223 can do better and cheaper? I handload, and compared the cost of brass and bullets, which is the same for the two calibers. Maybe the cost of off the shelf cartridges is more?
I originally gave thought to the Hornet, because I wanted something more than a .22 LR, but less than a .30-30, for plinking and longer range shooting. I'd like to shoot long range (2-300 yards) accurately, with an efficient, flat shooting cartridge. An article on the .204 caught my attention. Several others also seemed to fit the bill, and now I'm just confused. Maybe there's no clear choice, but I am still interested in hearing the experiences of others.

nemhed · Post by **nemhed** » Wed Feb 27, 2008 5:44 pm

You're right, there is no clear choice. All cartridges are a compromise in one regard or another. If you like that CZ and want to see what the 204 can do for you, then go for it and give us a range report.

marlinman93 · Post by **marlinman93** » Wed Feb 27, 2008 7:37 pm

Considering the .223 or the .22-250 will do a better job, and cheaper too, the question I've had is why did they even bring it out?
The .17 Rem. is great, but very few are around. The .204 will probably go the same route as the .17 Rem. Never obsolete, but sales will drop to the point that it wont really be a player in varmint hunting.
At least that's my guess.

homefront · Post by **homefront** » Wed Feb 27, 2008 7:51 pm

The .204 will probably go the same route as the .17 Rem. Never obsolete, but sales will drop to the point that it wont really be a player in varmint hunting.

I'm not so sure.

http://www.shootersforum.com/showthread.htm?t=42127

marlinman93 · Post by **marlinman93** » Wed Feb 27, 2008 10:46 pm

If it's so popular, and catching on so well, then why do most bullet makers only carry a couple different bullets for reloading it? Give me a .22 centerfire any day. Lots of bullet selctin, and they're way more versatile, plus buck the wind much better. Anybody who can hit a coyote at 300 yds with a 10 mph crosswind in a .204 better be one heck of a great shot. That little 32 gr. or 40 gr. bullet wont begin to be accurate with the slightest crosswind.

Bronco · Post by **Bronco** » Thu Feb 28, 2008 12:55 am

Howdy,
Actually if you check the ballistic charts you will find that at the velocity the .204 shoots a 40 grainer close to 4000fps, it bucks the wind better than a 55gr out a 223 and is on par with a 22-250 with a 55gr. Don't have one, worried about wearing out a barrel on squirrels. Got a 20 VarTarg for that, lot less barrel heat. It is not a fast as a .204 ruger but it will push the 40's at 3500fps and you can watch the mayhem, even at a hundred!

John

handirifle · Post by **handirifle** » Thu Feb 28, 2008 1:58 am

I've read of a few that own them and are not impressed on coyotes once past 275-300yds. The 223 runs out of steam there too, but the 223 is still cheaper all around and much greater bullet selection.

I asked about their pelt saving abilities, and was warned away from them.

To me, the 223 would be (and is) my personal choice, and if I wanted more range, it would be the 22-250. But there you get more cost, more recoil and report.

Like was said, they all have some compromise.

Bronco · Post by **Bronco** » Thu Feb 28, 2008 11:10 am

Howdy,
I agree, it is hard to beat the 223 for the price of ammo and with the right bullet a decent 300yd gun on varmits.
John

homefront · Post by **homefront** » Thu Feb 28, 2008 12:31 pm

The dealer has the non-varmint variation in .223; I'll have a look.

marlinman93 · Post by **marlinman93** » Thu Feb 28, 2008 7:51 pm

handirifle wrote:
To me, the 223 would be (and is) my personal choice, and if I wanted more range, it would be the 22-250. But there you get more cost, more recoil and report.

Like was said, they all have some compromise.

Have you ever fired a .22-250? It might have more recoil, and a bit more muzzle blast, but it's sure hard to tell from behind the gun! I've owned both .223 and .22-250 for 30 years, and I sure can't see any significant recoil from either.

Greg807 · Post by **Greg807** » Thu Feb 28, 2008 11:04 pm

High velocity and light bullets don't work with big coyotes, they knockemdown but don't kill them at longer ranges. most of the time you'll have to finish them off with a side arm. After 20 years I've settled on the 6mm.

Jeeps · Post by **Jeeps** » Sat Mar 01, 2008 4:00 pm

Besides throat erosion you have to consider accuracy falling off due to fouling
the bigger the bore the less you need to clean.

But as was already stated in the all these posts, there are allot of reasons why
centerfire .22's have always been the "go to" guns for varminting.

I have a CZ 527 in .22hornet and a Contender carbine in .223, I grab my hornet
almost every time. Tack driver, won't make me deaf

EDIT: I forgot to mention that most of the opinions your gonna get about these
things will be Ford/Chevy answers. People usually like what they like, were all
weird that way.