.223 versus .204

iflylow74 · 01-04-2006, 10:28 AM

I read somewhere that a .223 with small bullets (40 grain I think) pretty much matched the .204 ballistics but at a much cheaper price for ammo and rifle. Has anybody else heard this, or had any first hand experience?

poison · 01-04-2006, 03:07 PM

Im going to shoot both .204 and .223 if my friend ever gets down here from Santa Fe. He has them in new Ruger M77IIs. I was checking out the cartarges at the gun shop the other day and it looks intersting. I will let you know.

iflylow74 · 01-05-2006, 08:36 AM

Thanks poison!

raccoon29 · 01-05-2006, 07:47 PM

I personally doubt it but there is a possibility.

iflylow74 · 01-06-2006, 09:08 AM

It my not be true but I believe I read it in American Rifleman or some magazine of that caliber.

BattleRifleG3 · 01-09-2006, 12:24 AM

In subjective testing, the 204 has been really good with high accuracy groups at modest ranges. Having a highly accurate round as a standard can be a good thing. I'd stick with 223 myself, accepting general standardization over specialization.

ben_MM7 · 01-12-2006, 09:52 PM

I read that exact acticle online just tonight, I have to go back to the shop to get the link but it was something like 55 fps difference at 300 or so yards. I will post if I remember tomorrow!

Ben

reloader · 02-14-2007, 01:43 PM

i was just lookin at my reloading book and its true if you shoot 40grn bullet in both guns the 204 is 52 feet faster then the 223. i shoot the 223 and love it

wolverine · 02-14-2007, 03:03 PM

.204 is so the guys that spend days at a time hunting praire dogs can load them HOT for longer shots than the .223 is capable of. for just general shooting the .223 is superior.

lefty o · 02-15-2007, 06:26 AM

the 204 is a short range cartridge in comparison to the .223. why the 223 is better, heavier bullets are less affected by wind at longer distances.

mnsota-phats · 02-22-2007, 04:56 PM

just the forum i was looking for! i am in the process of trying to decide between a .204 and a .223. Since i am on a limited budget (500$) this further complicates the process. I orginally wanted a .204 in a heavy barrel but have found it hard to find one in my price range. Along comes a .223 at a local dealer (howa heavy brrl. 24")for $499 and changes my direction as far as the "leading gun" when it comes time to actually purchase one. i realize that i will additionally have to put glass on the rifle which is why i am trying to find one for $500. I have done some research online comparing the two calibers so i know the tradeoffs between the two but i dont own either of the guns so i have no "tire meets the road" experience when it comes to the 2 calibers. Actually i read somewhere that the .204 would experience less wind drift than the .223 (which is contrary to what i would have thought) due to velocity and less surface area for the wind to affect.... anyway ... any input/thoughts any of you have on these 2 calibers would be appreciated. BTW this gun would mainly be used for varmint (yotes,fox) rabbit things of that nature and a little target shootin. Thanks in advance!

lefty o · 02-22-2007, 05:19 PM

for coyotes, and fox go with the .223. it is cheaper to shoot. the lighter bullet will trypically experience more wind drift at longer yardage. check out some bullet manufacturers websites and look at the B.C. (billistic coefficient). the bullet with the higher B.C. will experience less wind drift. not normally listed, but B.C. changes for each bullet as velocity changes. take 1 bullet and fire it at 3000fps, and it will have a higher B.C. than the same exact bullet driven at 3500fps. in my opinion, inside of 300yds B.C. is not overly critical for a hunting application.

mnsota-phats · 02-22-2007, 08:35 PM

thanks for the input lefty (fellow minnesotan) i think i may end up going with the .223, although it wasnt what i set out looking for it has slowly crept up on me and i feel "good" about purchasing one. with my limited budget the ammo affordability factor has really come into play, i will be able to get custom loads, through a licesened dealer that has a contract with the local police dept, for cheap (to the tune of 100 hp,jhp,and sometimes fmj shells for about $30) so that is a selling point in itself. again thanks!

Zen900 · 02-22-2007, 09:36 PM

I don't handload my ammo so I stick with .223 for economics. The guys who handload their own ammo enjoy the .204. Depends on your cup of tea.

01-04-2006, 10:28 AM	#1
iflylow74 Registered User Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Arkansaw Posts: 1,029 Blog Entries: 11	.223 versus .204 I read somewhere that a .223 with small bullets (40 grain I think) pretty much matched the .204 ballistics but at a much cheaper price for ammo and rifle. Has anybody else heard this, or had any first hand experience? __________________ Just because you can't win, doesn't mean you shouldn't fight. -me

01-05-2006, 08:36 AM	#3
iflylow74 Registered User Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Arkansaw Posts: 1,029 Blog Entries: 11	Thanks poison! __________________ Just because you can't win, doesn't mean you shouldn't fight. -me

01-06-2006, 09:08 AM	#5
iflylow74 Registered User Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Arkansaw Posts: 1,029 Blog Entries: 11	It my not be true but I believe I read it in American Rifleman or some magazine of that caliber. __________________ Just because you can't win, doesn't mean you shouldn't fight. -me

01-09-2006, 12:24 AM	#6
BattleRifleG3 Super Moderator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Western PA Posts: 11,401 Images: 13	In subjective testing, the 204 has been really good with high accuracy groups at modest ranges. Having a highly accurate round as a standard can be a good thing. I'd stick with 223 myself, accepting general standardization over specialization. __________________ Trust is earned, not... GIVEN away. - Worf

01-04-2006, 03:07 PM	#2
poison Registered User Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: New Mexico Posts: 14	Im going to shoot both .204 and .223 if my friend ever gets down here from Santa Fe. He has them in new Ruger M77IIs. I was checking out the cartarges at the gun shop the other day and it looks intersting. I will let you know.

01-05-2006, 07:47 PM	#4
raccoon29 Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 52	I personally doubt it but there is a possibility.

01-12-2006, 09:52 PM	#7
ben_MM7 Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 25	I read that exact acticle online just tonight, I have to go back to the shop to get the link but it was something like 55 fps difference at 300 or so yards. I will post if I remember tomorrow! Ben

02-14-2007, 01:43 PM	#8
reloader Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Middleburg Posts: 27	i was just lookin at my reloading book and its true if you shoot 40grn bullet in both guns the 204 is 52 feet faster then the 223. i shoot the 223 and love it

02-14-2007, 03:03 PM	#9
wolverine Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 132	.204 is so the guys that spend days at a time hunting praire dogs can load them HOT for longer shots than the .223 is capable of. for just general shooting the .223 is superior.

02-15-2007, 06:26 AM	#10
lefty o Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: mn Posts: 4,806	the 204 is a short range cartridge in comparison to the .223. why the 223 is better, heavier bullets are less affected by wind at longer distances.

02-22-2007, 04:56 PM	#11
mnsota-phats Registered User Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 2	just the forum i was looking for! i am in the process of trying to decide between a .204 and a .223. Since i am on a limited budget (500$) this further complicates the process. I orginally wanted a .204 in a heavy barrel but have found it hard to find one in my price range. Along comes a .223 at a local dealer (howa heavy brrl. 24")for $499 and changes my direction as far as the "leading gun" when it comes time to actually purchase one. i realize that i will additionally have to put glass on the rifle which is why i am trying to find one for $500. I have done some research online comparing the two calibers so i know the tradeoffs between the two but i dont own either of the guns so i have no "tire meets the road" experience when it comes to the 2 calibers. Actually i read somewhere that the .204 would experience less wind drift than the .223 (which is contrary to what i would have thought) due to velocity and less surface area for the wind to affect.... anyway ... any input/thoughts any of you have on these 2 calibers would be appreciated. BTW this gun would mainly be used for varmint (yotes,fox) rabbit things of that nature and a little target shootin. Thanks in advance!

02-22-2007, 05:19 PM	#12
lefty o Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: mn Posts: 4,806	for coyotes, and fox go with the .223. it is cheaper to shoot. the lighter bullet will trypically experience more wind drift at longer yardage. check out some bullet manufacturers websites and look at the B.C. (billistic coefficient). the bullet with the higher B.C. will experience less wind drift. not normally listed, but B.C. changes for each bullet as velocity changes. take 1 bullet and fire it at 3000fps, and it will have a higher B.C. than the same exact bullet driven at 3500fps. in my opinion, inside of 300yds B.C. is not overly critical for a hunting application.

02-22-2007, 08:35 PM	#13
mnsota-phats Registered User Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 2	thanks for the input lefty (fellow minnesotan) i think i may end up going with the .223, although it wasnt what i set out looking for it has slowly crept up on me and i feel "good" about purchasing one. with my limited budget the ammo affordability factor has really come into play, i will be able to get custom loads, through a licesened dealer that has a contract with the local police dept, for cheap (to the tune of 100 hp,jhp,and sometimes fmj shells for about $30) so that is a selling point in itself. again thanks!

02-22-2007, 09:36 PM	#14
Zen900 Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 701	I don't handload my ammo so I stick with .223 for economics. The guys who handload their own ammo enjoy the .204. Depends on your cup of tea.