22-250 or 204 Ruger

H

homesick

New member
I am in the mind set to get another rifle and not sure which caliber to get a 204 Ruger or a 22-250. I even thought about a 220 Swift. I have had several 22-250s and always enjoyed shooting them, most all were very accurate.
I have had a couple 204s and was never real pleased with accuracy but they were really fun to shoot. ( in fairness to the 204 both rifles were used when I bought them, one was a T/C pro hunter the other a 700 VTR).
I know a few guys from our gun club have gone to the 204 over the 22-250.
I'd like your thoughts or ideas on this. I handload so ammo is not an issue.
 
Handloading I'd take the 250... 35gr at 4,435 fps from 24" barrel at a steel-friendly 58,000 psi. Factory ammo that light is rare and expensive. You have to see that bullet in action to believe the trajectory. 330 yards zero holdover on woodchucks.
 
I have a savage 12 with heavy barrel in 22-250. I shoot less than .5 moa at 100 and 200 yards.

Also 22-250 is easier to find. I like the umc 50gr hollow points.

625a2dd7-9cb9-a0ca.jpg

625a2dd7-9cce-a552.jpg
 
It seems as though if your shooting up to 40gr bullets, the 204 is better.
You get roughly the same velocities but the .20cal bullets will have a higher BC, meaning less wind drift and less drop.

If you were to get a faster twist barrel and start running the heavier, higher BC .224 bullets, then its a bit different.

Also 204 wont get as hot, it'l use less powder, and be quieter.
 
I own and shoot all 3 rounds mentioned, 22-250, 204, and the Swift. The Swift is my hands down favorite, but honestly, not for any valid reason!
I will say that if I had only one gun to take on a prairie dog shoot, the 204 would be the one.

If you reload, or even if you dont...rising ammo or compnent costs will favor the 204 also.
 
The guys I've talked with pointed out that the 204's lower recoil allowed the shooter to see hits/misses. Even the very moderate recoil of the 22/250 can move the scope off target enough to preclude seeing the strike of the bullet.
 
I have both rifles along with the 222 and 223. I love small calibers. The 204 has lower recoil for sure but overall I like the 250 the best easier to keep clean and reloading has not been as finicky so far. Accuracy all are about equal so that is a non issue.My 204 and 22-250 are Savages the other two are Remingtons. Either will serve the purpose but the 250 is more versatile you can even hunt deer with it.
Good luck
roc1
 
Thanks for yor advise to this point as I am leaning toward the 22-250 as I also am an old dog:), my 1st 250 was a 788 Remington new in the box and I was in the Air Force at the time. Enough said about old farts, I also have been thru the 17 Rem. hype but thats another thread.
 
The 204 is nice from a recoil standpoint although I have found that my handloads have more recoil than factory ammo. Still not enough to lose sight of the target.

The 250 definitely beats the 204 in velocity for light bullet. The 204 maxes out at not more than 4,200 fps with 32gr bullets and realistically with most powders is closer to 4,000. The 40gr are 3,900 theoretical max but realistically 37-3,800. The 250 will EASILY exceed 4,400 with 35gr bullets. It's a solid 200 and usually 400 fps faster with a bullet 10% heavier.

All this, and I own a 204 and not a 250. I do load for both though, so I know what I'm talking about in the velocity numbers.

On the other hand, my 204 is an absolute tack driver and a pleasure to shoot. Trajectory differences are in fractions of an inch out to about 300 yards. Realistically, either will do the job and whatever's on the receiving end will never know the difference.
 
Homesick:

The 22-250 will hold up, in the wind, better than the .204. When prairie dog shooting I shoot a .223 until the wind comes up. With the changing wind I switch to a 22-250. If I owned a 243 I would use it. However, when the wind blows it's your shooting skils the kill the dogs, not rifle caliber.

Semper Fi.

Gunnery sergeant
Clifford L. Hughes
USMC Retired
 
The only thing is the BCs of the light .224 cal bullets are a lot lower than that of the .20 cal bullets. So generally speaking you can get better trajectories and less wind drift with the 204 Ruger, with less noise and burning less powder, creating less heat.

Once you step up into the higher BC .224 bullets then it starts to change.

I did a lot of looking into ballistics of 204 and 223, and even with the with a 75gr bullet BC of .435 a 204 Ruger with a 55gr .381 BC bullet had a lot less wind drift.

I know that 22-250 is a lot different, but ballistics can be surprising sometimes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top