.223 vs. .22-250 vs. .204ruger

[tango2echo]

I have decided that I need to give a Savage Model 10 Predator in brushy camo a new home. I am trying to decide on which caliber. I do not need another .243, so that's out. I like the idea of cheap .223 ammo. I also reload. I don't see much that the .22-250 can do that the .223 and .204 can't, so I am leaning towards the .223 or .204. Honestly, I know little about the .204. The gun will be used for predator control, mostly foxes, feral dogs, and coyotes. I plan to download for a little quieter report and cost effectiveness. Thoughts, opinions.......

Thanks,

T2E

 

[husker]

22-250 its just faster and flater. in husker country its about 50-50 between 22-250 and the 223 when it comes to cals. for killen dogs.id go 22-250 if its a bolt action and 223 if its a auto loader. thats just me. my personal fav. dog killer is the rem. mohawk 600 222. have the internal mag refit for 223 and then Horady 223 45gr. bthp

 

[hlq]

I plan to download for a little quieter report and cost effectiveness. Thoughts, opinions.......

If this is your main criteria then the .223 would be a good choice. 1. brass is cheaper and can many times be picked up easier at ranges simply because more people shoot them. 2. It takes about the same amount of powder as the .204 and ~ 1/3 less than the 22-250 to reload the same weight bullet. As far as report goes I won't comment as I simply don't know.

 

[husker]

i do.there all load 22-250 its a diffrent kind of loud. its sharp and high pitched its the only rifle i make sure i have ear plugs for it rings my ears like a 357 mag. boy is it fast. you can watch it split the air going down range on a hot humid day. i tried with the 223 its not quite fast enough for a vapor trail i dont think.223 40 gr. nos bt with benchmark powder= about 3550 in vel. 22-250 same bullet and powder = 4100

 

[Pat S]

I just had this same decision to make and I settled on a .22-250. For me it was a close call between the 204 and .22-250. After 300 yds. either of these have an edge over the .223 in trajectory. I wanted something that would reach out to 400-500 with less drop.

 

[husker]

there both cookin down range next atom splitter for me is going to be in the cal. 204 ruger

 

[husker]

pats what was your reason for chosing the 22-250 over the 204?

 

[Pat S]

I think the 204 is a good caliber but the .22-250 has been around longer and I like tradition calibers for availability of ammo and brass. I also think the .22-250 will buck the wind better at longer ranges then the 204. Heck if I could have got it in the rifle I choose I would have bought a 220 Swift. I had one years ago and have always liked that caliber. I may regret not getting the 204 though----it sure looks good on paper!

 

[MachIVshooter]

I may regret not getting the 204 though----it sure looks good on paper!

The diffrence in praire dog carnage between my .220 Swift and my sister's .204 is pretty dramatic. 55 grain at 3,950 is considerably more destructive than 32 grain at 4,150.

That said, when I really want to dismantle rats, I use a .25-06 with 75 grain V-max's at 3,720 FPS. I've launched praire dog parts over telephone lines with that combo.

 

[NCsmitty]

When it gets down and dirty, the 22-250 does the deed. I'm sure you would be happy with any of the choices, but the extra punch of the 22-250 gives it the edge in most situations.

NCsmitty

 

[husker]

ya the old 22-250 will turn praire dogs inside out. just about vaporiz a rat i would think. now i have to rethink the purchase of ruger204, you say. 3700fps with 75gr vmax out of 25-06 i like the way that sounds

 

[gvnwst]

I use a .25-06 with 75 grain V-max's at 3,720 FPS. I've launched praire dog parts over telephone lines with that combo.

I have heard of someone making 30" barreled .300WSMs, shooting 110gr bullets at like 4k fps! They did DAMAGE...


I would go with the .223, but that is just because i allready have another rifle chambered in it. For shots over 400yd, i would go with the .22-250, just for the punch.

 

[mljdeckard]

If you could load the .204 to the same ability as factory loads, it might be different, but you can't.

The 22-250 has the range on all of them.

 

[tango2echo]

Mljdeckard...are you saying you can't load the .204 to match or exceed factory specs? Please explain.

Also, key to my decision will be cost of operation...not just "carnage". A fox is just as dead if shot by a .223 as it is by a .25-06. Cost of ammo/reloads will be important. Also, some of the areas where I do predator control are somewhat "urban", so as mentioned above, report volume will be a concern.

T2E

 

[Scott23]

I have both and reload for both. The 204 is a great little cartridge, but I'd have to agree that the 22-250 is the better choice. It all depends on if you want it to double as a long range rig or mainly for calling in coyotes. Generally, you don't need a long range rifle for calling in yotes. Usually you can get them in within a hundred yards with the ocassional long shot. The 22-250 again would be my choice heaver bullet, better BC and will put them down fast.

 

[deerhunter61]

I do not have a 204 but I do have a 22-250 and a .223. I enjoy shooting both but if I had to choose one with everything being equal it would be my 22-250. I simply believe it provides a little more versatility. I also would not hesitate shooting PDs at long range where I would not even consider shooting my .223.

Perhaps someone with experience will share what range they are comfortable with when shooting a .223.

Also although I do not recommend it I have taken two deer with my 22-250 and one dropped in its tracks while the other ran about 40 yards before piling up.

Hope this info helps...

 

[snakeman]

They are all great but 22-250 can double as a deer rifle whereas the others are on the light side.

 

[mljdeckard]

The .204 commercial loads use powder not available to the public. In handloading, the velocity advantage is somewhat diminished.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.204_Ruger

If I HAD (?!) to have more velocity than a 22-250, I would doodle around with a .22 CHEtah. (A .243 or .308 necked down to a .224 bullet.) At least with that one, you can form your own brass and use conventional powders.

 

[MachIVshooter]

A fox is just as dead if shot by a .223 as it is by a .25-06

You're not a varminter

Seriously, blowing them to bits is half the fun.

Also, some of the areas where I do predator control are somewhat "urban", so as mentioned above, report volume will be a concern.

Then you don't want a .25-06; it is one of the loudest rifle cartridges out there (couldn't really tell you why, but it is). On the same note, you might consider a second rifle in .22 Hornet or .218 bee for that duty. .223 still barks pretty good.

 

[Horsemany]

The 22-250 is noticeably more dramatic on pdogs compared to a 204 especially any distance over 300yds. The 204 is also a bastage to load for. New powder dispenser end.
New cleaning rods.
New special order pilot for case trimmer.
Hard to meter certain powders into the small case.


The 22-250 is favored by anyone I shoot with who owns both. The 223 is at a slight disadvantage because of ballistics IMO.

 

[tango2echo]

Now Horsemany, you are the first one to mention that...with the .204 I would need some new tools...which is more money spent...

T2E

 

[1858rem]

i was tryin to decide between a .204 and 22-250 and got the .204 since it was only 400 bucks scoped and really nice lookin

i have never heard a 22-250 before but the .204 will definately ring your ears and is much louder than .223.

reloads for the .204 cost me .27 each and are with my load currently shooting 1/2MOA or less.

the 40gvmax do real good in the wind, not normally more than 3-5" in a normal, well kinda heavy breeze at 340yds...i load them to about 3800fps going by listed data but i also hit 2-3" higher than handloads.com ballistic calculator is telling me i should so my gun may have a "fast" barrel

theres no more time spent reloading for my .204 than the other rifles take, i use a lee trimmer and a filed down 22-250 length gauge to trim with, but i also check every case length with a micrometer....

the .204 is very flat shooting! with the 40g zeroed at 100yds(im starting to think 200 or 250 would be a better zero) it puts the 32g's 1.25 high at 100 yds and zeroed for about 250, and 2" low at 300, perfect for pdogs.

my own question,
up untill now i have shot only target at 100, 200, and 340yds, what would be a good zero for crow/20oz bottle shooting in the 3-400yd range, what kind of max pointblank could the following load have?>>> ----.204cal----40g vmax boat tail ballistic tip---- .275BC--- approximately 3800fps---scope height 1.25"--what else do those calculators need?

btw i have a .308 for deer and a .22mag for anything smaller than beaver and a .204 for fun

 

[1858rem]

aside from any new tools needed, you save a lot of money over powder charges with the .204 vs 22-250...

but....bullets are only like 40bucks for 500 in .224 and 65bucks/500 in .204


so thats your decision, $0.27 a rd is good nuff for me

 

[fletchbutt152]

One Cartridge for everything.

I have not seen it myself, but instead of a 25-06 just put a 90 gr in a .270. I would think this would be cheaper. My Dad shot that round a little on praire squirrels a while back.

 

[Horsemany]

For casual shooting that may work fine. But if you really get into prairie dogs you shoot enough rounds fast enough that you could melt the throat out of a 270 in one day. And once the barrel heated up your shots would be all over the place.

Last year I decided it was well worth the extra 8 grains in powder to use the 22-250. It flies a little truer out to ranges past 400yds and the hits are a lot more fun to watch. I've got one on video from last year.....looks like somebody unzipped his jacket. Sploosh!