223 or 204
- Thread starter shields92
- Start date
Personal choice really, they both kill foxes very well indeed. I've got both but now use the 204 exclusively, just because I really like it. It would be very hard to put a convincing case for either. I have to say, the more I use the 204 the better I like it.
Not very helpful I'm afraid but that's rifles for you!
Not very helpful I'm afraid but that's rifles for you!
sir-lamp-alot
Well-Known Member
Thats a helpfull post
sir-lamp-alot
Well-Known Member
As already said both will kill foxes and kill them well, the .204 certainly has its fans and its not hard to see why with a lovley flat trajectory and good accuracy but the .223 can also be used for muntjac/cwd or Roe up in Scotland unlike the .204 which maybe somthing to consider and you also have the option to go for a fast twist rate barrel in the .223 if you wanted to shot heavier grain bullets but for general foxing I would just avoid the fast twist rifles all together, one other thing aswell is that you will find many more .223 offerings out there than a .204 especially on the 2nd hand market but that in no way means you wont find a decent rifle in .204
I do not think there is much in it. I have a Tikka T3 in 223 1:12 twist,
It is amazing accurate with Varmageddon 40gr at 3500fps and 53g V-max or Varmageddon at 3200 fps.
I looked at changing to a 204 but could not see and real advantage. speeds when comparing 40 grain look similar.
I looked at the weight of the rifle and found again no real diffrence.
Reloading 223 is straight forward, bullets available with ease. no dea about 204.
buying new or used? used you will get a bigger chose in 223.
Do not think you will go wrong from either of them.
David
It is amazing accurate with Varmageddon 40gr at 3500fps and 53g V-max or Varmageddon at 3200 fps.
I looked at changing to a 204 but could not see and real advantage. speeds when comparing 40 grain look similar.
I looked at the weight of the rifle and found again no real diffrence.
Reloading 223 is straight forward, bullets available with ease. no dea about 204.
buying new or used? used you will get a bigger chose in 223.
Do not think you will go wrong from either of them.
David
I wish they compared apples with apples. 204 with 40 g and 223 with 40 g.
looking at the video its got the 204 at 3900fps, On the Nosler load data the fps is no where near this, but if you use N530 your up at those ranges all other powders are around 3600.
in 223, Nosler 40g 3800fps with 2 powders and N130 gives about 3700.
so my take is there is no real world difference between 40g in 204 or 223.
David
The Pigeon Man
Well-Known Member
I debated over these two calibres before getting the 223 for the following reasons;
Better availability of ammo.
Cheaper ammo.
Better availability of secondhand rifles.
More bullet weight options.
Less effected by wind drift.
Better resale value of 223 rifles.
At the end of the day a 223 will put a 40gr bullet downrange at similar speeds to a 204. The idea of firing 32gr bullets near appealed to me.
Better availability of ammo.
Cheaper ammo.
Better availability of secondhand rifles.
More bullet weight options.
Less effected by wind drift.
Better resale value of 223 rifles.
At the end of the day a 223 will put a 40gr bullet downrange at similar speeds to a 204. The idea of firing 32gr bullets near appealed to me.
sir-slots-alot
Well-Known Member
Totally agree , they are both excellent for fox and vermin , but if your looking for a big ballistic advantage by selecting the 204, Im sorry it just isn't there.
I ran the two caliber together for a couple of years and compared them side by side on many occasions.
If you compare like with like , my 223 shoots a 40 grn Nosler at 3800fps - A similar speed can be achieved with the 204.
In my the real world field tests , the 204 had 1 inch of drop less than the 223 at 400 yards - I too was expecting to see a big difference at this range , but that's not the way it is in the field - (only on someones PC when they plug in BS numbers - i.e the b Youtube video above)
So the question is - WHY isn't the 204 far better than the 223 with the same weight bullet ????
Well the answer is very simple . the BCs of the 204 bullets are shamelessly hyped up - also the muzzle velocity are also inflated.
TBH what do expect when Hornady release a new caliber in 2006 that directly challenges the 223 and 22.250.
They aren't going to sell many if there slogan is " BUY the 204 - its just a tad flatter than the 223" .
At the time Hornady convinced shooters by using down loaded 22.250 data with very low BC soft point ammo - and compared this against inflated speeds and bullet BCs to sell the 204 dream. TBH i also jumped on the band wagon too , sounds to good to be true - and it is.
After comparing and testing the 223 and 204 i can absolutely say there is very little in performance in running a 223 shooting a 40 grn bullets at 3700 / 3800 fps and shooting a 204 at normal foxing and vermin ranges. If you want to shoot Longer Range - i.e above 4/500 yrds - neither the 204 or the 223 using light wight bullets are very good - but the 223 comes in many factory options that allow you to select bullets that are totally at home with these conditions.
Real differences are.
As said they are both excellent calibers but the versatility of the 223 is a game winner for me
Alan
I ran the two caliber together for a couple of years and compared them side by side on many occasions.
If you compare like with like , my 223 shoots a 40 grn Nosler at 3800fps - A similar speed can be achieved with the 204.
In my the real world field tests , the 204 had 1 inch of drop less than the 223 at 400 yards - I too was expecting to see a big difference at this range , but that's not the way it is in the field - (only on someones PC when they plug in BS numbers - i.e the b Youtube video above)
So the question is - WHY isn't the 204 far better than the 223 with the same weight bullet ????
Well the answer is very simple . the BCs of the 204 bullets are shamelessly hyped up - also the muzzle velocity are also inflated.
TBH what do expect when Hornady release a new caliber in 2006 that directly challenges the 223 and 22.250.
They aren't going to sell many if there slogan is " BUY the 204 - its just a tad flatter than the 223" .
At the time Hornady convinced shooters by using down loaded 22.250 data with very low BC soft point ammo - and compared this against inflated speeds and bullet BCs to sell the 204 dream. TBH i also jumped on the band wagon too , sounds to good to be true - and it is.
After comparing and testing the 223 and 204 i can absolutely say there is very little in performance in running a 223 shooting a 40 grn bullets at 3700 / 3800 fps and shooting a 204 at normal foxing and vermin ranges. If you want to shoot Longer Range - i.e above 4/500 yrds - neither the 204 or the 223 using light wight bullets are very good - but the 223 comes in many factory options that allow you to select bullets that are totally at home with these conditions.
Real differences are.
- 223 has far more rifle to choose from
- There are more barrel twist options
- There are far more bullets to choose from
- 223 is dear legal
- More choice of reloading equipment
- 223 has better barrel life
- and at the end of the day much easier to sell with a higher resale value. (due to the above)
As said they are both excellent calibers but the versatility of the 223 is a game winner for me
Alan
Was trying to direct the OP to the search function as the very same question got asked a couple of weeks ago
I started off with a .204 and the thing wouldn't group under 3" at 100m. Tried the usual, brands of ammo, mod on and off, scopes, shooters, you name it but I had a lemon.
Like Sir Slots Alot says ammo choice is better for .223 and for that reason alone I applied for a variation and went .223 I then realised I should've gone .243 so I could cater for roe as well!
Like Sir Slots Alot says ammo choice is better for .223 and for that reason alone I applied for a variation and went .223 I then realised I should've gone .243 so I could cater for roe as well!
ChesterP
Well-Known Member
Once you have a 223 in the cabinet, it's probably the only rifle that will stay there whilst other cals come and go. The most versatile of CF's for sure imho. 204 is fine for foxing but nothing is "flat shooting" and any differences in trajectory are minimal at best where 40gr bullets are concerned. I'd argue in favour of a faster twist 223 to make the most of that versatility. My 1/8 shoots everything from 50gr to 80gr really well. Going 1/12 pretty much limits you to 40-55gr for best results, perhaps 60 if you pick the right bullet but I've yet to see anyone shot 60gr from a 1/12 and get the thing to group consistently at 200 plus yds. The 1/8 can send a 75grn tmk 700 yds at moa in the right conditions or sling a 50gr out at 3300fps with a better BC than the 204's 40gr offerings. Either way, Charilie's dead. Pick whatever one appeals, learn to shoot it and crack on.
Kevgun
Well-Known Member
Used my mates .204 it was ok but I done my homework and bought a .223 24”barrel 1:8 twist and I have shot more Foxes this year than the previous 4 years and my previous Foxing Rifle is a 22.250 which I still have, I would still prefer 22.250 over .204 after helping a friend with a pest control job the 22.250 was better in the wind, I’m not worried about flat shooting trajectory can be adjusted for, see too many pass through for my liking, but each to their own.
Having watched some of your excellent vids Alan, I would say you know exactly what you are talking about - sound advice!
longrangestalker
Well-Known Member
Iv just had a full custom built in 204 to really try and push it and test it to its max with a 26” barrel and to be honest once the barrel has had it I will be going back to a 223 but going Ackley improved shooting 50gr bullets
.204 39gr blitskings at 4000fps
300yards 625ft-lb and 6.4inch drop
.223ai 40gr blitskings 4100fps
300yards 599ft-lb and 6.7inch drop
.223ai 50gr blitskings at 3800fps
300yards 736ft-lb and 7.3 inch drop
223ai 55gr blitskings at 3650fps
300yards 795ft-lb and 7.8 inch drop
Out to 300 there is no real difference between them but one thing I have found is the penetration on the .223 regardless of bullet weight is far superior to the .204
.204 39gr blitskings at 4000fps
300yards 625ft-lb and 6.4inch drop
.223ai 40gr blitskings 4100fps
300yards 599ft-lb and 6.7inch drop
.223ai 50gr blitskings at 3800fps
300yards 736ft-lb and 7.3 inch drop
223ai 55gr blitskings at 3650fps
300yards 795ft-lb and 7.8 inch drop
Out to 300 there is no real difference between them but one thing I have found is the penetration on the .223 regardless of bullet weight is far superior to the .204
Sonicdmb73
Well-Known Member
I don’t have a 204 Ruger, I do have a 204 calibre though a 20 Tac. Which is very similar ballistically.
I also have a 222 not as versatile as a 223 but it is enough. For my needs.
So I have had the 222 for years and like the 223 it’s legal for small deer and Roe in Scotland. It is also perfectly capable of dropping foxes and other vermin out to a good distance.
That said I tend to use the 20 Tac for foxing and crows. In particular if the range is getting over 300 yards. It is an accurate cartridge with little felt recoil.
The question I suppose is that if I could only have one which would it be?
Tough one as I am not in prime Muntjac or CWD territory or that close to Scotland. That the advantage of legality swings it.
If I put aside the actual model of rifle which would definitely be the Sako over the CZ. The 20 Tac would probably get chosen. As the terminal effect of a 39/40 grain bullet from it. Punches above its weight compared to the same brand and weight from the 222. Speed kills.
All that said you have to consider rifle choice. Cost and availability.
Ammunition availability factory or the components.
Whether or not you want a Deer legal or just fox/vermin rifle.
Those questions should get you to the best for you.
Me well I have had the 222 rebarreled and I have a spare ready for the 20. I don’t have to decide on either.
I also have a 222 not as versatile as a 223 but it is enough. For my needs.
So I have had the 222 for years and like the 223 it’s legal for small deer and Roe in Scotland. It is also perfectly capable of dropping foxes and other vermin out to a good distance.
That said I tend to use the 20 Tac for foxing and crows. In particular if the range is getting over 300 yards. It is an accurate cartridge with little felt recoil.
The question I suppose is that if I could only have one which would it be?
Tough one as I am not in prime Muntjac or CWD territory or that close to Scotland. That the advantage of legality swings it.
If I put aside the actual model of rifle which would definitely be the Sako over the CZ. The 20 Tac would probably get chosen. As the terminal effect of a 39/40 grain bullet from it. Punches above its weight compared to the same brand and weight from the 222. Speed kills.
All that said you have to consider rifle choice. Cost and availability.
Ammunition availability factory or the components.
Whether or not you want a Deer legal or just fox/vermin rifle.
Those questions should get you to the best for you.
Me well I have had the 222 rebarreled and I have a spare ready for the 20. I don’t have to decide on either.
Similar threads
