View Full Version : Any field results for Ruger 204?
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.
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.
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.
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.
I'll give 'er a shot (No pun intended).
A college kid I met a month or three back said his was quite wicked on feral hog. Ear shots dropped 'em in tracks.
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.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.