.204 Ruger or .223 Remington ???

[B23]

Your numbers for the 39gr BK and 40gr Vmax are quite a ways off from what I get when I run those same numbers. I got 14.86in of drift

The new 53gr Vmax with .290 BC will certainly close the gap on the .204 vs .223 debate.

 

[whitely]

Your numbers for the 39gr BK and 40gr Vmax are quite a ways off from what I get when I run those same numbers. I got 14.86in of drift

The new 53gr Vmax with .290 BC will certainly close the gap on the .204 vs .223 debate.

I should have said that I ran those calculations at 7000 ft. At lower altitude there will be more drift (I get around 14" or so at 500 ft). I just checked, and those numbers were actually from the pointblank ballistics program, not JBM. They are still fairly close, and certainly you can compare the relative drifts with the same input variables.

I also picked up some of the .223 V-max 53 gr. I hope the .290 BC is as advertised. The bullet certainly looks like it should work out - We'll see.

 

[FAL Shot]

Well, I own them both. The .223 Rem can use the 75 Scirocco II, the 65 GameKing, or the 60 Partition, so better for game size up to deer.

For coyote or smaller size varmints, I definitely go with the .204 Ruger.

Bullet selection is much better in .223 Rem, and I picked up over 1000 .223 Rem brass this past year. I almost never see .204 Ruger brass on the ground.

On the cost side of things, you can get a big stash of .223 Rem loads for far less money, with far more versatility for different size game.

Once you have a brass stash, the reload costs are very close together for .204 Ruger and .223 Rem.

 

[strombeckj]

The .204 shooting 39-40gr bullets will out perform the .223 shooting 40-50gr's. The new 53gr V-Max need a 1:12 or tighter from my experience and costly if your not hand loading since Hornady is the only one loading them.

I own variations of both .20 Practical and .223AI and reach for my .20 Practical more often then not, love the low recoil, even though my .223AI has a break. Both are PD slayers out to 500 yards.

Good luck with your choice.

Jon

 

[threejones]

Both rounds will be great for you. I've shot both out to 300yds (the .223 much longer, but I'm confident the 204 would keep up, I've just never had the chance to push it) If your aware of what each round will do, and you already have a deer rifle, it really comes down to the rifle itself. They're both great for little critters, neither has the recoil of a 243, it's more a matter of load vs rifle weight (or either could be fitted with a break, making even a super light recoil like a pellet gun) Bullet selection is really the only big difference. I say find the least expencive rifle that will meet your accuracy needs of either cal. Worry more about the gun, you've already narrowed down the cal selection as much as you really need to.

 

[tuck2]

Most all of my shooting has been at prairie dogs. I only shoot targets off a bench rest to develope reloads and check a rifles accuracy. If you are comming out to prairie dog country have a accurate .204 Ruger rifle. I started shooting p dogs in 1949 with a 22 RF rifle. I dont know if there is a perfict p dog rifle but I keep trying to find it. Sofar I have shot them with 17 HM2, 17 HMR, 17 Fireball, 17 Rem, 204 Ruger, 22 RF, 22 WMR, 22 Hornet, 221 Fireball, 222 Rem, 223 Rem, 22-250 Rem, 220 Swift, 243 Win, and deer-elk rifles. Except the Hornet, the centerfire p dog rifles will shoot sub .75 inch 100 Yd groups. For me, the 204 Ruger, 17 Fireball, and 17 HMR rifles will cover most my p dog shooting. But when I can get an accurate Hornady 17 Hornet rifle Ill give it a tryout. It must have a low muzzle blast , flat shooting out 175 yards ,could be a fine round for spring p dog pup shooting. I have two accurate bolt action 223 Rem rifles but dont use them since getting the 204 rifle.

 

[dogbuster0006]

+1 for the .223rem I have a rem700 and an ar15 both chambered for it. I don't have much experience with the 204 but i can tell you the muzzle report is much much more than that of a .223. I'm on a budget and for me .223 is where it's at. I can buy ammo just about anywhere and it's cheaper than 204. I run 55gr v-max out of both of mine and the accuracy is awesome!!! My ar will shoot one ragged hole at 100yd, and 3/4-1"at 200, i can hit standard size clay pigeons at 400yd with either of them. For me .223 is ideal, if i were shooting past 3-400yd all the time or had many many more shot opportunities at those distances I'd consider the .204 but, for my area the .223 can't be beat.

 

[tonkit]

I find an interesting observation in these posts. The shooters that have very little or mostly no experience with the 204 recommend the 223.

The shooters that have experience with both unanimously recommend the 204

Personally, I own and shoot both (at least I used to). I rarely shoot my 223 anymore. The only reason that I keep it is that it is a Colt HBar Match Grade AR-15. It is the gun that I hand visitors who want to "pray and spray" with an AR.

But when I want to KILL coyotes, rabbits, crows, p-dogs, stay cats etc. I'll go to the DPMS AR 204. It is an absolute tack driver and with the factory Federal Premium 39gr. BK rounds it drops coyotes DEAD! The first coyote I shot with that bullet was running away at about 200 yards. I barked...he turned...I shot...and he fell like he had been run over by a locomotive! And nothing moved, not an ear, not his tail, nothing...just dead. The coolest part is I got to see the whole thing right through the scope!

Yep, I own both. I like both. But the 204 is WAY more fun, more accurate, and far better in the wind. As a matter of fact the 39BK loads will fare better in cross winds than the 22-250 in similar "weight for caliber" bullets. But that is subjective and only because of the high BC of the sierra 39gr bullet.

Bottom line: Get the 204 You won't regret it! Just sayin'

 

[Tokimini]

My son works part time in the gun department at a local Dick's Sporting goods.
Anytime someone walks in and asks for a .223 he tells them anything a .223 does a .204 will do faster, flatter, and better. Then he pulls out his phone and shows them a pic of one of my 5 shot 100 yard groups from my .204 that is smaller than the dime I used for reference. No one he has talked to went with the .223. As Tonkit said, anyone who has every shot one loves it. There are a lot of .223s out there gathering dust because of the .204

 

[HOG55]

I have 2,000+ rounds down my .204 Savage.. The gun still shoots better than I do. I put a Choate stock on it and have it weighted to 20 lbs. The glass is a Leipold 8.5x 25x50. It is strictly a bench gun.

I use the .223 for coyotes and the .204 on ground squirrels.

 

[codyjoe1128]

One of these days I will be purchasing a Savage model 12 vlp bdm in 204 ruger...my wifes Remington 700 in 204 is one sweet shootin gun...

 

[Hunter2678]

I'd go with a .223 over a .204 myself. More versatility.

 

[hemiallen]

For long range shooting, which your 243 does, go with a 9 or tighter twist 223, for light recoil and good ballistics/ velocity go 204 with 32 grain bullets.


Actually, get both and ditch the 243...lol


Allen

 

[Akkill]

i don´t have a 204, so im just going to add one more interesting bullet for the 204 shooters.

berger 55 gr Match Grade Long Range BT Varmint, bc. 381 g1 .