Is it worth it? When you could have a .220 Swift of course it isn't.
Is .20TAC worth it?
- Thread starter timbeech
- Start date
247sniper
Well-Known Member
Just get a .204, it will give you every advantage of the .20 cals, like factory rifles, brass, reloading components, the .20 Tac just uses a tiny bit less powder to achive similar velocities, 500 yard rabbits are plentyfull with the .204 if you know what your doing.
The onky advantage the .223 has is cheap and avilable ammo, can be deer legal, however not intended for the OP use. The .204 is ballisticly better in the wind then any .223 unless you have a fast twist shooting the 75/80 grain A-Max's. The .223 does work and is a great caliber but the .20's just does it better in just about every way!
Steve.
The onky advantage the .223 has is cheap and avilable ammo, can be deer legal, however not intended for the OP use. The .204 is ballisticly better in the wind then any .223 unless you have a fast twist shooting the 75/80 grain A-Max's. The .223 does work and is a great caliber but the .20's just does it better in just about every way!
Steve.
I beg to differ with the .22 53gr hornady V-max. A claimed BC of .290
The sierra blitz king .20 39gr is .289 BC.
I regret selling my Tikka T3 .223 and replacing it with a full custom .20 not work the money or ballistic advantage.
Any long range bunny busting out comes the 6mmbr. But that's another story....
6pt-sika
Well-Known Member
Never had a 20 TAC . But I have had a couple 204 Ruger's that I liked quite a bit . I also like the 222 REM quite a bit and always seem to have one or two of them as well . The 223 while a decent enough round just has never won me over . Not saying it didn't shoot well etc (I've had maybe 8-10 of them over the years), it's just a cartridge I never really cared for in a bolt action or Ruger #1 . Now I will say after shooting that M-16 last week I would like a Colt M-16 in 223 but thats more of a say it and spray type deal !
All in all you can say I'm an advocate of both the 204 Ruger and the 222 REM . And you can add the 220 Swift and 243 WIN which have also been mentioned here .
All in all you can say I'm an advocate of both the 204 Ruger and the 222 REM . And you can add the 220 Swift and 243 WIN which have also been mentioned here .
Talk to MarinePMI of this site. He has one that he is somewhat disenchanted with. I believe pressures were spiking before you got any serious range from the heavy bullets, but I'm not sure. He can fill you in. I do know he's yanking that barrel in favor of a 9.3x62 he has in the works.~Muir
As to the OP. I shot a 20 Practical this past month and watched the owner make a lot of 400 yard kills on prairiedogs half hidden in the grass. I'm sold. My CZ 204 is going to become a Practical. Two-twenty three brass is cheap and plentiful. (even here you get bent over when you try to buy 204 brass) The Practical is easy to form and load. Fast and accurate.~Muir
Tom D
Well-Known Member
The .20 55 grain berger long range varmint has a Bc of .381! You'll need a helluva big .22 bullet to match that!
247sniper
Well-Known Member
Yes the 53 gran V-Max has a very slightly higher BC, marginal, but when compared with muzzle velocities the .223 pushes them out at (around 3300ftps) compared to the 39 SBK's with a BC of .287 lunching them out at 3850ftps+ this it where the advantage lies with the .20 cal, High BC bullets ( For size) combined with very fast velocities which the .223 fails to have and therefore bows down to the superior .204. This is not only my opinion but fact as well!
Nice calibre, but I like a bit of barrel life! I'll stick with the .243.
Quote from Hodgdon Manual - 'A remington 40x test rifle managed to keep 25 shot aggregates in less than .270 inch, and 5 shot groups after 3000 rounds held in .344 inch. So much for short barrel life.' Heat kills barrel not speed, everyone should own a Swift at some time, in fact it should be compulsory!!!
Last edited:
Who said velocity kills barrels?
Ill stick with the .243...as for the swift like I said nice calibre.
No you didn't say that velocity kills barrels, what you did say was that you 'like a bit of barrel life'. The implication being that your 243 will outlast my Swift, I was just pointing out that this is not a foregone conclusion. In two lines you have summed up the sort of publicity that the Swift has always suffered from,'nice round ( but the barrels don't last)' I would hazard a guess that you have never owned one.
bewsher500
Well-Known Member
You are shooting frogs with a .223?!
Correct I haven't owned the Swift but I do know some that have...funny how all those who I know have had it have noticed throat erosion after around 1500 rounds. My 243 has had 1000s through it with very little ill effect. Tie this with the bullet choice available (55-105) for the 243 against the swift it's the better all rounder. This is my experience and not from a book.
Have to say the .243 is a peach, would never be without one, so versatile as I'm sure most would agree. I've never had one that won't shoot pretty much all I fed it. A friend of mine solely used a .243 with 70g noslers and accounted for 100s of both Fox and Deer.
Guess you could say keep it simple.
I believe so, however reloading for that is by far the best way.
Winchester ballistic silver tip 55 grain
hornady 58 grain vmax
both very good if the rifle likes em
Similar threads
