603Country
New member
Ya know, I think Art has a point about the 223 being more 'informal'. I like the round, but when the mail absolutely has to be delivered, I'll grab the Swift or the 260 or ramp up to the 270.
I agree with everything you both have said. Maybe I am just sick hearing about it , I mean every magazine and TV show you see that's all they talk about.
I just don't understand why so many people are fascinated with the .223 Rem.
Now don't get me wrong it's a great little cartage. But everything you read and hear you would think that it will do anything you will ever want to do with a rifle.
Really? Why would that rock? What do either of these do that 223 can't do better? Especially in an AR platform. Even if your claim is that the 204 is faster and flatter shooting (and it is) 223 still is accurately moving a 35 gr bullet about +/- 4000fps in a long rifle. That's pretty dang fast and flat, too. And when 20 cal bullets are topping out around 50gr the 204 performance starts looking like 55 grain 223. That's where 204 performance and versatility end, exactly where the 223 loves to be. Neither cartridges are cheaper. AR rifles chambered in these calibers are definitely more expensive. Oh,.. and 17wsm doesn't even factor in a comparison with either 204 or 223. It falls short on speed, power, price, and availability.Now, an AR chambered in .204Ruger... that would freakin' rock. Or 17WSM.
I just don't get it.
An AR in .223/5.56 leaves a lot of bases uncovered.Elk, or pretty much any quarry larger than small deer
I dont think 223 goes at 4000 fts, more like 2.5 / 3000 fts. And I think most of the people using ar (not bolt cuz I dont know) use 55gr and 62gr bullets and not 35gr. Myself, im looking for a much heavier bullet, my colt has a 1-7 twist rate.I like 223 for most of the same reasons I like .308 and 30-06. Cheap brass and cheap bullets. 223 is even cheap to reload than the other 2. 223 brass lasts a damned long time in a single shot or bolt action, too. There's a wide range of bullets. 223 can be very very accurate. What's not to love?
Really? Why would that rock? What do either of these do that 223 can't do better? Especially in an AR platform. Even if your claim is that the 204 is faster and flatter shooting (and it is) 223 still is accurately moving a 35 gr bullet about +/- 4000fps in a long rifle. That's pretty dang fast and flat, too. And when 20 cal bullets are topping out around 50gr the 204 performance starts looking like 55 grain 223. That's where 204 performance and versatility end, exactly where the 223 loves to be. Neither cartridges are cheaper. AR rifles chambered in these calibers are definitely more expensive. Oh,.. and 17wsm doesn't even factor in a comparison with either 204 or 223. It falls short on speed, power, price, and availability.
I'm not trolling you on this,.. I just don't get it.