.204 vs .220

Pirate hunter

Well-Known Member
I have never owned a centre fire smaller than a .243 but fancy a designated foxing rifle. And fancy either of the above just wondered what people thoughts on the two were!!!

Andy
 

hairlesshunter

Well-Known Member
Not having had 220 can't say much but I do have a 204r and its Fantastic for Fox long and short range also long range rabbit and crow
 

palo

Well-Known Member
Both are great calibres for foxing, I used a 220 for about 10 years then changed it for a 204 and have been using it for quite a while now.
I prefer the 204, there is no recoil and you can see your hits through the scope.
 

Tom D

Well-Known Member
I chrono'd my .20Vartarg today, 3447fps, at that speed the 39gn SBK sighted 1" high is 1.5 high at 140yds and 1.5" low at 280yds. So it's seriously flat, even at 300 yds it's less than 3" low. Point and shoot..
 

Roedinator

Distinguished Member
As above seriously great fox round sieara 39 grain blitz king 3750 fps
accounted for 7 foxes fri night for 7 shots
regards pete
 

bobjs

Well-Known Member
not a 204 but both are 20 tacticals.

daytime semi custom sako rifle, 39gr bk 20" barrel hitting crows yesterday out past 400 yards 20 shots 17 hit.

night setup tikka rifle running 40gr Vmax 22" barrel hit a fox (cub) at 312 yards last night and down it went, 5 shots 3 foxes. first shot was to check zero of my drone pro. missed shot was when I cut a barbed wire fence that I did not see when taking a shot at a big dog fox,

overall the 20 cals are great cals, no recoil, light and as stated you can watch the shot from trigger to target.

bob.
 

FreshFace

Well-Known Member
I have and shoot both, well almost, it's actually a 220 Ackley Improved version.

To my mind there is next to nothing in the ballistics, but the 204 definitely allows you to maintain sight picture. The Swift seems to hit harder and allows you some margin for error in shot placement, but that is probably more to do with the bullet I'm using - 55g Vmax moly. Another consideration for you maybe reloading costs, the 204 wins.

With me it comes down to the rifle, the Swift is a 26" barrel varmint rifle, whereas the 204 is a 22" lightweight rifle, and this will do all the perceived heavier varmint rifle will do at sensible fox shooting ranges.

I will always own a Swift, there's just something about it that has always held a fascination for me, since a kid(I'm still a big kid)
I would find a rifle that you like first and go from there.
 

RETIC80

Well-Known Member
I also own both, a savage 12 LRPV and a rem 700 vssf in an AI chassis. The .204 is like a laser, extremely accurate, its my current go to lamp/fox rig, not as destructive as the swift but i certainly have had no wounded foxes with it, hits with authority, my rifle loves 32gr vmax, wasn't fussed on the 39sbk's. The .220 though is something else, like freshface said, it has a hold on me for some reason, like a mythical beast lol, owned it for a good number of years, wicked round, actually just loaded up 20 rounds with 50gr vmax earlier today. I zeroed it the other day and had a 3 shot group at 100 yards measuring 0.5", not bad with a fixed power 8x56 s/b. The .204 is great for watching shots, love mine, but love my .220 too!
Just get both!!
 

jimmy milnes

Well-Known Member
I'm first to admit I know sweet FA about either of these calibres but would like to ask the genuine question of what's the benefits of these over a 222 or 223 ?
Cheers
Jimmy
Ps.... all using say a 40grn vmax ?
 

RETIC80

Well-Known Member
The .220 with a 40gr bullet will be well over the 4000fps mark , and the .204 with 32gr bullets isnt too far behind, i suppose you can say then the difference is outright velocity, but then they will all do the job very well, the .222/.223 time proven very capable fox/vermin rounds, very accurate etc etc, it all comes down to personal preference at the end of the day, i like the .220 just because its one of quickest rounds. The .204 has mild recoil and you can spot your shots, but then to so has the .222 imo, owned one many years ago. Hope that answers your question, cheers.
 

SussexFallow

Well-Known Member
I'm first to admit I know sweet FA about either of these calibres but would like to ask the genuine question of what's the benefits of these over a 222 or 223 ?
Cheers
Jimmy
Ps.... all using say a 40grn vmax ?
Between 223 and 204 which i shoot both I would say recoil is the only factor which if using nv edges me towards the 204.
 

jimmy milnes

Well-Known Member
The .220 with a 40gr bullet will be well over the 4000fps mark , and the .204 with 32gr bullets isnt too far behind, i suppose you can say then the difference is outright velocity, but then they will all do the job very well, the .222/.223 time proven very capable fox/vermin rounds, very accurate etc etc, it all comes down to personal preference at the end of the day, i like the .220 just because its one of quickest rounds. The .204 has mild recoil and you can spot your shots, but then to so has the .222 imo, owned one many years ago. Hope that answers your question, cheers.
Much obliged matey cheers
 

Tom D

Well-Known Member
What's great about the 20's is the ballistics, from the 220 swift the 50gn 22 Vmax at 4000fps is 5.3 Moa low at 500 yds and carries 432lbft of energy. The 40gn .20 Vmax started at 3750fps is 3.7 Moa low and still carries 714lbft of energy! So even though the 220 starts out faster and has 25% more weight it looses speed so much faster and therefore energy. The 204 will Buck the wind better too. If you used the 80gn .22 Vmax it might fare better against the 204...
 

Tom D

Well-Known Member
39sbk130816.jpg



Even my little Vartarg which can only chuck the 39/40gn bullets at 3450fps or so still has better ballistics than the 220 swift with a 50gn. the 39 sierras that I use are carrying 528lbft of energy at 500yds, and thats from 18.9gn of powder, probably half what you'd use in the 220!

Plus it shoots groups like the one above, .247 moa....
 
Last edited:

Whitebeard

Well-Known Member
Tom, whats your ballistic data source, According to Exbal, 500yd energy levels of the 204 and your Vartarg are only half of those you stated.

Ian
 

Top