Any field results for Ruger 204? [Archive] - Glock Talk


View Full Version : Any field results for Ruger 204?

03-02-2005, 00:31
I have been looking at getting that Ruger 204 (have not decided on a model yet). Does anyone have any good/bad field reviews of this caliber. Barrel wear, throat errosion other problems etc...

I am looking for actual people's shooting results not hyped press released lawyer rewritten magazine articles.

03-02-2005, 20:06
I've owned one for awhile. Nothing spectacular, one way or another, to report. Shoots flat and hits hard - but so do a plethora of other well-established varmint rounds.

For my money it's still going to be tough to beat an accurate .223 for a GP pest round. If you need something flatter shooting move up to a .17 Remington.

03-03-2005, 04:12
I've got a 17 Rem. I was looking for something with the same speed but with a little heavier bullet. That's what caught my eye for the .204. I also already have a .223 and a 22-250.

03-03-2005, 10:02
If you're a reloader cobble up some .17 rounds with Berger 30grn. bullets. I've never used them on soft targets but they shoot fine on paper from a stock barrel.

03-03-2005, 12:49
I'll give 'er a shot (No pun intended).

03-06-2005, 11:23
A college kid I met a month or three back said his was quite wicked on feral hog. Ear shots dropped 'em in tracks.

03-12-2005, 18:04
My buddy had a CZ .204 for about two weeks. Very lackluster accuracy. No groups Sub M.O.A. He traded it off for a .22 Hornet. My favorite is the .222 Rem. I have one in a 21" Contender Carbine. Very accurate and very light. My only complaint is that as light as the rifle is, it hops up when fired from a prone posistion, and you cannot watch the bullets impact the target.