Newby calibre advice

[Gwion]

I agree with the statement that 223 is better for a newby. Also fits your bill very well.

[bigfellascott]

Thanks for the feedback. I had a play with a number of 204 models at LGS and particularly like the feel of the tikka SS hunter with timber stock. Good weight and fit - comes in 223 so may re-think calibre.
I plan a mix of sitting and varmint shooting out to 300 but also walk and stalking as have access to a few thousand acres with a mix of hills and bush plus open paddocks with very cagey pests. The rifle mentioned above suitable?
Anyone who reloads both have some real costs per round once setup of 204 v 223
Again - appreciate time taken for advice.

Cheers.

Cost of loading will be fairly similar with equal quality components, but you can buy cheaper brass in .223 and cheaper bulk bullets, particularly if you buy thousands at a time.
.223 also offers some very expensive premium bullets.
.204 needs more frequent bore cleaning than the .223, but not as bad as the .17's.

Last bag of 204 brass cost me $41 per 100. I find the biggest expense of any reloading is the projectile as a rule, the premium ones can really add to the cost of a reloaded round, the best projectile I found for cost effectiveness and great performance was the Sierra Super Roo (1000pk) I managed to get them for $110 about 4yrs ago which = 11c a projectile, now I think they are up around 16c depending on where you buy them from.

My 204 projies cost around 39c each (premium Sierra BK 39's) and you can buy projies for the 204 for around 9.9c for the Hornady Zmax and no doubt there are others out there that are just as cheap.

As for barrel cleaning, I can't say I notice any issues with having to clean it any more than any other cal I use, they all get cleaned after each hunt anyway.

Pretty sure the OP's only hunting a few bunnies and foxes so cost won't be that great a drama but definitely the 204 is one cal that really should be reloaded if you want to keep costs down to a reasonable level. Last boxes of factory 204 cost around $40 (premium ammo) .

The 204 really is perfect for smashing bunnies and foxes at long long ranges (not that the 223 can't do the same) just takes a bit more elevation etc to get the job done.

End of the day hunting doesn't usually involve high volume shooting, sometimes no shots are taken so cost becomes somewhat irrelevant in such situations. Range shooting well that's a diff matter all together.

[bladeracer]

Last bag of 204 brass cost me $41 per 100. I find the biggest expense of any reloading is the projectile as a rule, the premium ones can really add to the cost of a reloaded round, the best projectile I found for cost effectiveness and great performance was the Sierra Super Roo (1000pk) I managed to get them for $110 about 4yrs ago which = 11c a projectile, now I think they are up around 16c depending on where you buy them from.

My 204 projies cost around 39c each (premium Sierra BK 39's) and you can buy projies for the 204 for around 9.9c for the Hornady Zmax and no doubt there are others out there that are just as cheap.

As for barrel cleaning, I can't say I notice any issues with having to clean it any more than any other cal I use, they all get cleaned after each hunt anyway.

Pretty sure the OP's only hunting a few bunnies and foxes so cost won't be that great a drama but definitely the 204 is one cal that really should be reloaded if you want to keep costs down to a reasonable level. Last boxes of factory 204 cost around $40 (premium ammo) .

The 204 really is perfect for smashing bunnies and foxes at long long ranges (not that the 223 can't do the same) just takes a bit more elevation etc to get the job done.

End of the day hunting doesn't usually involve high volume shooting, sometimes no shots are taken so cost becomes somewhat irrelevant in such situations. Range shooting well that's a diff matter all together.

Good info there.
Who makes the $41 .204 Brass?
I'm using Norma and Hornady and both were $100 per hundred.
Cheapest brass I've bought was the 6.5x52mm Carcano at $35 per hundred, which is pretty odd I think as I can't get bullets for it at all.

I shoot several of my rifles every week, I keep shot logs for every firearm and clean them based on round count. Certainly not every time I shoot them - except the blackpowder, that gets cleaned as soon as the last ball leaves the muzzle. If I've been out in the rain I'll clean them though.

[bigfellascott]

Last bag of 204 brass cost me $41 per 100. I find the biggest expense of any reloading is the projectile as a rule, the premium ones can really add to the cost of a reloaded round, the best projectile I found for cost effectiveness and great performance was the Sierra Super Roo (1000pk) I managed to get them for $110 about 4yrs ago which = 11c a projectile, now I think they are up around 16c depending on where you buy them from.

My 204 projies cost around 39c each (premium Sierra BK 39's) and you can buy projies for the 204 for around 9.9c for the Hornady Zmax and no doubt there are others out there that are just as cheap.

As for barrel cleaning, I can't say I notice any issues with having to clean it any more than any other cal I use, they all get cleaned after each hunt anyway.

Pretty sure the OP's only hunting a few bunnies and foxes so cost won't be that great a drama but definitely the 204 is one cal that really should be reloaded if you want to keep costs down to a reasonable level. Last boxes of factory 204 cost around $40 (premium ammo) .

The 204 really is perfect for smashing bunnies and foxes at long long ranges (not that the 223 can't do the same) just takes a bit more elevation etc to get the job done.

End of the day hunting doesn't usually involve high volume shooting, sometimes no shots are taken so cost becomes somewhat irrelevant in such situations. Range shooting well that's a diff matter all together.

Good info there.
Who makes the $41 .204 Brass?
I'm using Norma and Hornady and both were $100 per hundred.
Cheapest brass I've bought was the 6.5x52mm Carcano at $35 per hundred, which is pretty odd I think as I can't get bullets for it at all.

I shoot several of my rifles every week, I keep shot logs for every firearm and clean them based on round count. Certainly not every time I shoot them - except the blackpowder, that gets cleaned as soon as the last ball leaves the muzzle. If I've been out in the rain I'll clean them though.

Remington.

[bladeracer]

Remington.

Thanks for that
I'll have a look at those when I need the next batch.

[bigfellascott]

Remington.

Thanks for that
I'll have a look at those when I need the next batch.

From memory they were from HPGS (about 2yrs ago)

[Bills Shed]

[quote="Cost of loading will be fairly similar with equal quality components, but you can buy cheaper brass in .223 and cheaper bulk bullets, particularly if you buy thousands at a time.
.223 also offers some very expensive premium bullets.
.204 needs more frequent bore cleaning than the .223, but not as bad as the .17's.[/quote]

Cleaning....another issue and can of worms. I have never had a 204 but have had a 223 and still run a 17. The 17 does not need any more cleaning than any other rifle I own. Some nights it will fire a hunded rounds with no noticeable loss of accuracy. Mind you I am shooting brass jacketed projectiles and not copper but I think it makes little, if any, difference. Also on the cost of projectiles, yes the .224" diameter, common weight, projectiles are cheaper and that is the major expense. I notice that projectiles are going up in price very quickly. For smaller, not so common, calibres, even in .224, ie 40 gn hornet, the prices are right up there. It is one of the reasons that I got into swaging projectiles. My cost will never increase.
To the OP, if you want to keep it simple and keep the cost down, I would have to say go the 223, then get into reloading and then the choice is endless. Have fun.

Bill

[happyhunter]

Remington.

Thanks for that
I'll have a look at those when I need the next batch.

From memory they were from HPGS (about 2yrs ago)

The price of Remington cases has been pretty stable. I haven't bought any for a while but they are still under 50 bucks last I saw, which was a few weeks back.

[Garth]

223 bit like bums every one has one easy to get ammo and large selection of projectiles

[Gettingstarted]

Took the plunge, and went with the 204 Tikka hunter with SS fluted. After the feedback here on ammo availability it did some ringing around and found it readily available at a couple of my LGS so that tipped the scales in that direction. Took it out for the first time on the weekend and really pleased. Was really windy and gusty while sighting in but was able to get groups of 3 at around the 1inch or a bit over straight out of the box at 100 metres. I feel my shooting skill at present is not doing the rifle justice. Can only get better.
Found pretty quickly 40grn to be more consistent than 32 and for around half the price sellier and bellot to be more than enough for pegging vermin.
On a side note, went with a cogswell and Harrison 22lr and again very pleased. Was a bit concerned after I got talked into it at LGS but couldn't be more impressed with accuracy. Tried 8 brands of ammo and found with both Winchester and eley subs it could do I 5 group consistently into 10-15 mm circle.
Thanks to all who provided advice, it was all taken on board - when I decided not to go 223 I figured there's nothing to stop me getting one down the track if the 204 doesn't live up to expectations! Cheers.

[Khan]

Will almost exclusively be hunting rabbits and foxes and tossing up between 204 and 223 with a preference for the 204 for flatter shooting.

You've already got it so not that this matters now but just for the sake of conversation.

I wouldn't count flatter shooting from the .204 as the definitive factor in buying one.

Yeah, the 24gr loads for .204 are fkn fast (flat) over the first few hundred metres but that drops off.

Shooting any heavier pills performance from the .223 is close enough to the same or sometimes better.

Comparing load data from ADI max velocities for a 35gr pill in each cartridge are

.204 Ruger: 3,961 fps
.223 Rem: 3,891 fps

70fps slower from the .223, only a little really when you're talking about near 4,000 fps muzzle velocity.


With 50gr pills max velocities are

.204 Ruger: 3,352 fps
.223 Rem: 3,468 fps

116fps faster from the 223 in that case.


Not knocking your purchase, it'll be great I'm sure They both would have been.

Just mentioning it while it was going... A bit of speed here or there isn't everything.

Anyway happy shooting, enjoy!

[Gettingstarted]

No doubt the 223 would have done what I needed. As I mentioned I may well end up with one also given how addictive this seems.
Would a 50grn let me see the hit? Can you get 50grn in .2 cal?
Anyway time will tell but at the moment I could not be happier with it.

[happyhunter]

Yeah, the 24gr loads for .204 are fkn fast (flat) over the first few hundred metres but that drops off.

With the 204 you wouldn't bother with 24 or 50 grain bullets. It's designed for 32 to 40 grain bullets and those weights will always produce the best results.

The 204 will shoot flatter than the 223, even at the same muzzle velocity, because the longer bullets for weight have a higher ballistic coefficient, same as 7mm-08 vs 308, so on so forth, and that is the point of going the 20 cal over .224 for small game.

I don't need ADI data to know this as I have owned, reloaded and shoot both, and the 204 wins every time.

[bladeracer]

Can you get 50grn in .2 cal?

Not that I've been able to find, but you can get the 45gn occasionally.
And I have some 55gn bullets to try out, though I don't expect them to work.

[Bosbefok]

What happens if you run into a pig or goat? The .223 will be more versatile and will still take the varmints at 300m+. Unless the rifles sole aim is small varmints at long range then go the .204.

[happyhunter]

What if? I'd shoot it anyway