204 rifle

[big-john]

what do you all thank about the 204 cal rifles.What is the best 204 rifle on the market now..An what would be the best scope for the 204 an would it make a good coyote rifle???

[Daryl]

I think there is alot of info under the reloading section on the .204

[RandyRoede]

BJ, don't own one and if I was looking for a COYOTE gun it would not be the 204, it's kind of the square dancin caliber of sorts, something like" Spin your coyote of he goes, you might find him,who knows," "The 204 is an awful small pill, have to get a perfect hit to kill," So grab a bigger caliber and you'll see, Those old coyotes won't get away from thee" YEEEHAAWWW!!

Seriously I have not owned one, have shot it at Pdogs, guys have tried to sell me one and let me use one but i just don't believe it was meant to be a coyote gun, some may love it I just think it is a little small. IMO Awful tough to beat 22-250 and a plain old 55 grain soft point, I shoot 52 A max bullets for work and they tend to splash I have bought 55 SP and have not seen it in them like the 52's. I think it may be a great fox or cat gun though, I just haven't shot enough to see what it can or can't do on them either.

[wizbang]

Hey, Big John

I've had a couple 204s and have loved them. I had a ruger 77 varmint package and it was a tack driver. I traded that one away awhile ago and got a Kimber 84m varmint in 204-- the nicest gun I've ever owned. The kimbers and coopers are nice but if you're not into spending that much, I think CZs are the best for the money right now; they have the best wood in the price range. They're triggers are good for the money and I think they're making one with a heavy barrel now too.

As far as the cartridge goes, I've seen it turn a 6" 3/8" steel silouette target into a saucer-- the 204 dented the plate about 0.5" deep at 150 yards. It was acutally pretty neat to see because every bit of lead was fused to the steel target. We thought we'd be smart and make some reusable steel targets. Guess not. I suppose any coyote will spin and run if you don't hit 'em right-- no matter what bullet. Inside of 200 yards, I'm not sure what difference 15 grains of lead makes. I guess I'm of the philosophy that the caliber or bullet weight doesn't matter if I put the pill in the right spot. Not sure where you hunt, but I don't seem to have any nasty immortal 120 lb coyotes around. Granted, they're not cats, but they're not wolves either.

I have noticed some pretty serious wind drift outside of that, though. The best thing about the 204 that I absolutely love is that its cheaper than most rounds to load and a hell of alot easier on barrels (than say 220, etc.). There's not much muzzle flip either. Here's a good page on the ballistics: http://www.6mmbr.com/20Caliber.html Though its still substantial, the wind drift isn't as bad as one would think-- on paper anyway...

If you're about to spend alot on a gun, though, it seems like there's some sense in getting a caliber you can use for other game like antelope, etc. I kinda wish I'd have gotten a 243 ai for that reason, but I think that will give me a reason to get my wife another gun for christmas.

[ponydog]

I am new to this site......just logged in today .....I shoot a CZ 527 varmint in a .204 caliber.....it has been a great caliber for me...and yeah, I have downed
several coyotes at ranges of 100 to 225 to 250 yards with the 32 grain HMS bullet. I have yet to lose one. I take it to Texas each December as we varmint, hog, Turkey, and deer hunt. It has pinned several feral hogs, dozens of coyotes, and a few javelina as well as scores of jackrabbits. I guess it does have some wind drift.....most smaller calibers do. The thing I like most....is that I see what I hit when it hits them. Almost NO recoil....and I could not be happier for what it does for my needs. As most things go.....do what works best for you .....and your specific hunting needs. I will pick it up every time I leave the house ....it's the most accurate gun I own. Hats off to CZ , for making a great shooter.

[Pilgrim]

If I didn't know how to do my own 700 smith work I'd look at a CZ sporter, but I have subjective prejudices just like anyone else. Lots to choose from. I do have what started out as a 700 ADL in .204 I bought in June. Intent was to re-barrel but my stock barrel shoots 1/4"MOA after working some bugs out.

As for the caliber: No kills but no remorse. Only way I'd cooperatively part with it is to fund another 700 action .204 project.

One thing is I seem to be in the minority by shooting 39 grain bullets vs. the majority of hunters go with 32 grain. 39 is superior in terms of windage and energy, but I suppose lazer speed is fun too. I'll lay low til the proof's in the pudding.

[CrittrCallr]

New to the site, so thought I'd get my feet wet. Been shooting the .204 for about 4 years now, in a Ruger m77, a T/C 14" contender and the last year in a Shaw barreled AR. I shoot 35gr Bergers and have not had one take more 3 or 4 steps when hit properly. I started out shooting 40gr Bergers but went to the 35's on advice from a friend who also shoots a .204.

As to the rifle, Savage puts out one that's hard to beat for the $$ and is as accurate as any except some custom jobs.

[Coyotehunter]

what was you thoughts on the 40 gr. bergers? I have been shooting the 35 bergers but have wanted to go up to the 40 when I shot up what I have on the shelf. I do not believe this is a great coyote gun and do use mine mainly for fox and smaller. I have shot some coyotes with it but a bad shot is a run off.

[CrittrCallr]

I liked the 40gr Bergers and still shoot them in my Ruger, but the AR likes the 35gr and since I've been carrying it more than the Ruger........

There are several .204 yote hunters down here. No one seems to be having a problem dropping yotes with the .204 as long as shots are kept in the boiler
room.

[lyonch]

There are several .204 yote hunters down here. No one seems to be having a problem dropping yotes with the .204 as long as shots are kept in the boiler
room.

Shot placement is everyhting on a .204!! as it is with any gun. As long as you get penetration into the boiler room of a coyote you will kill it. Same goes for a head shot. I still feel that a .204 is not a coyote gun. I have seen too many run offs from bigger harder hitting calibers than the .204. I feel it would be a great jackrabbit/fox gun though!!

[Pilgrim]

I do consider points made by considerably more experienced coyote killers like RandyR & Coyotehunter as "Good judgment comes from bad experience".

Even so, an important variable that plays into my .204 ownership is that it's virtually "new" in terms of history. Consider I bought a 7Rem Mag in 1999. The caliber was 40 or so year old at the time and all sorts of bullets were made for it. 10 years later there are many more and better bullet choices available, but even now that's not the case for some less popular calibers--- So a great caliber can have it's hands tied based on what manufacturers are willing to produce. One example is the .260 Rem.

My opinion (not unique) is that the 204 is a brilliant cartridge. There are very few (literally) cartridges that can provide the same ballistic economies. That said, I do wish there were more and better bullets available, and I expect that to be so as "Necessity is the mother of invention" and the 204 Ruger is a glaring success from a market demand standpoint.

Seems the bullet makers' answer to coyotes is "rapid fragmentation is best", which I think does favor some calibers, but maybe there's better stuff on the horizon, maybe in greater retention (?). Again, bullet availability should get attention when considering a rifle caliber. That's an important, but not exclusive reason when considering 'why' 223 & 22-250 are a leap ahead of all calibers when accounting for dead coyotes.

Scopes: Lots of variety and opinions. My 204 has a Weaver V16, and doing great with it--- but wouldn't put such high magnification or carry weight on a bigger game rifle.

[barebackjack]

My opinion of the .204 is its a fox gun. Not a coyote gun. That being said, can it kill coyotes, of course. But as a "primary" coyote gun i'd go bigger. I used to kill coyotes with my .17 Rem, but I didnt make a practice of it and it wasnt meant as a "coyote gun".

Ballistically, the .204 looks awesome on paper. But its terminal ballistics have MUCH to be desired of, in my opinion. That light little pill just doesnt transfer its energy well to the target, especially a tough target like a coyote. I dont care how fast it is, how flat it shots, or how much energy it packs, if it doesnt transfer that energy to the target, than its all for nothing. And in my experiences, it just doesnt transfer that energy.

Ive seen three coyotes hit with a .204, ALL were solid hits to the chest region and ALL were runners. I dont know how far theyd have all gone as I wasnt gonna sit around and watch em run away so put two of them down with the .22-250. The third was an escapee.

Im just not sold on it as a "primary" coyote caliber.

[Pilgrim]

barebackjack,

I read your post on the three coyotes shot with a .204 at 125-200 yards. Of all variables, what failed: The bullet, the caliber, the energy, bullet placement?

You imply the examples you witnessed were the result of the caliber failing to tranfer energy to the target. What do you mean by that?

[barebackjack]

Considering that all shots were well placed, im guessing that shot placement wasnt the issue.

Bullet issue, possibly. I dont know what he was shooting for bullets, I think hornady's, but all three were hit with the same bullets.

Terminal ballistics is the behavior of a projectile when it hits a target. This can be defined as "stopping power", in a sense. Im only just starting to understand it, a little. From what ive gleaned so far on the topic is that bullet weight, syle, and velocity are the three key points. And than of course, the intended target.
Basically, its how a bullet puts its energy to use.

For example, if you shoot a deer with a blunt tipped arrow (like a bludgeon point) that arrow is transferring ALL of its retained energy to the target. Now its not making any wound channel, but its still transferring all its energy to the target. Now if you shoot that deer with a broadhead and get a clean pass thru shot, your only transferring a percentage of that projectiles energy to the target. As some is spent upon exiting the target. But, it creates a wound channel. What you want, obviously is a bullet that not only penetrates the target but also transfers as much of its energy to the target as possible, something I dont think the .204 is doing.

Now add ballistic tip bullets into the picture and the whole thing gets even more complicated and I get lost. Any bullet will expend energy getting to the target, impacting the target, doing what it does IN the target (mushrooming, fragmenting, etc etc) and than expend more energy upon exiting the target (if this occurs) and continueing its flight. Terminal ballistics describes, or attempts to, the middle two, impact and bullet nature in the target.

From what ive seen, I dont think the small 30-40 grain bullets are transferring their energy well to the target, their "splashing" on the surface, their breaking up into very small fragments that arent doing enough damage, or something else is happening. I dont know what. But from what ive seen, there is something that this small pill ISNT doing to a coyote to make it go down fast.
I shoot 50 grainers in my .22-250, and some will say a 10 grain difference in bullet weight doesnt make that much difference when it comes to varmint sized critters, and theres plenty of literature that supports this theory. But theres also alot of literature that describes a sort of "minimum" bullet weight for a given target. A sort of "cut-off" point in which performance will fall by the wayside quite dramaticaly in some cases. Much like a max velocity. You may see super tight groups at 3600 FPS, push it to 3700 and they open up dramaticaly.

Like I said, ive only just started looking into it, and probably didnt describe anything very well.

For record, when I skun the two .204 hit coyotes they were both solid hits. One was center of the chest facing, the other was a middle shoulder broadside. The chest hit looked to only have superficial muscle damage but I dont know that id call it a "surface splash" as there was little pelt damage. The broadside hit had two small fragment holes through the one lung. The rest looked to be just superficial muscle damage and again, little pelt damage. The 250 hits were both behind the liver, and did severe damage to internal organs and the spine.

[Pilgrim]

BBJ,

Well put. Enjoyed your response.