204 Ruger

According to Handloads.com ballistic calculator, you should be good past 500 yards if you're getting those 40 grain bullets to 3900fps out of the barrel and you can make the shots..

Over 2100fps and almost 400ft/lbs of energy at 500 yards, at 65 degrees Fahrenheit, sea level. That's about 100ft-lbs energy more than .22WMR makes at the muzzle, almost 100fps faster, with the same weight bullet, and the .204 has an advantage on sectional density. People hunt yotes with 22WMR all the time. I think with the .204, the wind is more of a threat to your shot, than running out of 'juice' at ethical hunting ranges.
Just my $.02
 
Practically probably the same as 22-250 and a bit further than 223.
I'd say 300-400 yards. If you are a crack shot, and can judge weather conditions well then maybe 500+, but if you are a rubbish shot what ever your abilities reach too.

A gut shot is a gut shot no matter what range, and a heart lung shot out too at least 400 yards will do the trick.
 
If I am hunting... which means no benchrest....it will out last my ability to hold for a good shot...depending on my set up and conditions,. 300-350 is about all I can hold on yote vitals...
balistically...I agree with the 500yds.... great round.;)
 
3-12x40 would probably be more versatile. Unless you already own the scope you mentioned, which would be fine.
 
Would a 3.5x10x40 be enough for a walking varmiter.
Click to expand...

Most folks would say it's "enough" but it's not what I would prefer. I like lots of power. I look for 20x or more top end on a varmint scope. Low end depends on how close you expect to have to shoot.
 
Nowadays, folks like lots of magnification 35 years ago when I built my first varmint rifle, I started out with a Weaver 4X and did fine on ground squirrels out to 350-400 yds. More magnification does not make you a better shot, it does however let you see more details and focus on precise shot placement. Or not. I think a 3-9X is just fine for a walking varminter, but obviously others feel it is not. But I will say that it is a good starting point. Give it a try.
 
Sure it will do, but if you are having to buy a scope you may as well go for more.
I could shoot small varmints reasonably easy with 9x magnification. But it's a heck of a lot easier with my new scope and 16x.

I think 4-16 is one of the best zoom ranges, I used a fixed 4x on my 22lr for shooting rabbits for a long time and it worked a treat. Unless you want to spend a fair bit of money, then the new Leupold VX6 in 3-18 or 4-24 would be my pick.
 
The .204 Ruger is tricky in the wind. It just does not have enough inertia to stay on course very well. I am a whole lot better at compensating for the heavy high b.c. bullets than I am the light screamers. If you can hit a yote at 550 with the .204, it still has the energy for the kill.
 
You wont really need to fiddle around with the parallax adjustment. Unless you have it set way out you can quite easily use it without it being perfect. Set it on 100yards and it'll be the same as most non adjustable parallax scopes.

Say you had it set on 6x and something popped out and you had to take a quick shot, you wont have a single problem. If you were on 18x and something was out at 300yards, the 5 seconds it took to adjust the side focus more than makes up for the extra magnification.
 
You wont really need to fiddle around with the parallax adjustment...
Click to expand...

I've always been a bit curious why folks would specifically not want an adjustable parallax. It's almost as if they think a scope that doesn't have an adjustment doesn't have parallax. As you said, most scopes without adjustment are set to something around 100 yards, though I've seen as low as 50 and as high as 150.

I typically set mine at 100 and only adjust it for long shots. It's like having a fixed when you want it and an adjustable when you need it.... you can't do that with a fixed objective.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top