From a reloaders standpoint...

Tex S · February 24, 2009, 07:10 PM

would you rather have a 220 Swift or 204 Ruger for varmints? I currently do not own a small bore varmint rifle, but I am seriously considering buying one. I have never shot either caliber so I dont really know all that much about them, but something about a bullet screaming at 4000fps + sounds pretty dang cool. Any comments would be great, especially if you own one of these rifles.

jaguarxk120 · February 24, 2009, 07:34 PM

Haven't fired or own either rifle. But as with anything like cars or rifles speed cost money, weather its operating cost or down the line with a shot out barrel. A 223 will last longer than a 220 Swift, burns less powder, barrel life longer. The bigger the case the more powder and sooner the throat of the barrel is burned away. Gotta say this when they ask whatcha shooting and the answer is 22-250 or 25-06 it does make an impresson on some.

One last thought you can really reach and touch someone with the bigger stuff!

shepherddogs · February 24, 2009, 09:15 PM

I'd get a .223 for the reasons previously stated. If you really want something hot, get a 22-250. Ammo is much more available than the Swift.

Teuthis · February 24, 2009, 09:30 PM

Consider that the US armed forces use the 5.56 to kill all sorts of varmints. I reloaded the .223 and it was fun. I have shot them at distance too and I would wager that you could take any size varmint at 500+ yards if you try.

bigalshootmupper · February 24, 2009, 09:39 PM

I'm with you Tex, I own neither of the two and I don't own a 223 either. But I also am looking into getting a super high velocity small caliber rifle to reload for. I'd like to hear from actual reloaders of the 4000fps loads and hear their feedback. If you are like me, you don't plan on shooting 1000 shots a year. I am looking for a light recoil rifle that is .25MOA accurate to shoot subsequently to my 308. 223 would be practical, but maybe that's not what we are looking for.

crowbeaner · February 24, 2009, 09:47 PM

If you want a screamer for varmints, there are 4 calibers that qualify without getting into wildcats, custom barrels and reamers, and a host of other trick goodies.
17 Remington
204 Ruger
22-250
220 Swift
I've shot 3 of the 4, and if I find a club member that has a 204 this spring, I might get a chance to try that also. The 17 is way cool; seeing the whistlepig blow up in the scope really makes me grin. I swear the bullet hits them so fast that there is 4 inches of daylight under them while they are in the air. Crows simply DO NOT like any of them; the bullet catches them in mid caw. A puff of feathers in the air and black shrapnel on the ground makes my day.

Lavid2002 · February 24, 2009, 09:47 PM

I reload for .223 ita a great cartridge, very versatile...acurrate..and reliable. Recoil is nonexistant and when i go from reloading .308 to .223 i feel like im reloading .22LRs

kraigwy · February 24, 2009, 09:50 PM

I believe the questiion was about the 220 Swift and the 204 Ruger.

From the reloaders standpoint, I like the Ruger, its cheaper to load for and its easier on barrels. A lot less muzzle jump with the Ruger which is handy shooting PDs.

I load my ruger with 32 grn Vmax, its plenty good enough to drop coyotes, or the least the ones that made the mistake of trying to eat my chichens.

hardhit · February 24, 2009, 10:02 PM

The 204 is going to be cheaper to run powder wise, I have a 220 swift there’s nothing like lining up on a crow and getting the boom whop and see a cloud of back feathers 250 yards away both cartrides will do it.

troy_mclure · February 24, 2009, 10:19 PM

im just getting started reloading for my .204. components are difficult to find in bulk, and are pricey when in lots of 100.

however, the price even in 100 lots is soo much cheaper than buying factory ammo.

Qtiphky · February 24, 2009, 10:34 PM

The max I have loaded for the .204 is 27 grains of Accur 2520 with a 40 grain Vmax, which doesn't calculate out anywhere near the 4000 fps. This load calculates around 3700 fps, but I don't have a chrony so I don't know for sure. It is well below the maximum load so I am not really worried about it. I haven't noticed any signs of pressure or the like and accuracy is under 1 moa.

A_Gamehog · February 25, 2009, 01:16 AM

Even though I own a 22-250 also, my recomendation is to get a .223 first. The Ruger 204 is shooting lighter bullets, with a wind you want 50+ grains to get accurate in windy conditions. If a mouse farts on the bullets path to your target with a 204 it's off!

They get those great FPS loads shooting smaller bullets.

From Hodgdon's website:

Ruger 204 , 40 GR V-Max 25.7 GR Benchmark = 3646 FPS

Rem 223 , 40 GR V-Max 27.3 GR Benchmark = 3666 FPS

they shoot damn near even! with 50 grain V-Max they also shoot even. but they don't make a heavier load bullet than a 50 for the 204

Back to your question, Don't buy either, get a .223

Just my 2 cents...

troy_mclure · February 25, 2009, 03:30 AM

ah, but with the .204 you can push those 34gr bullets up to 4300+fps.

ive shot my encore with 40gr/3900fps bullets at 300m in a fair wind there was surprising little drift.

kraigwy · February 25, 2009, 08:59 AM

Quote:

ah, but with the .204 you can push those 34gr bullets up to 4300+fps.

Thats what I'm getting using benchmark with 32 gns Amax out of my Ruger #1based on my chrony.

farmall · February 25, 2009, 09:11 AM

I am an avid fan of the Swift and .204 both. I have been shooting the .204 for about the last 4 years on prairie dogs and find I just dont shoot the Swift as much anymore. That said, I still like the Swift better. They are in similar Savage rifles, so it's not a matter of ergonomics. I just find I connect more often with the .204.
From a handloading standpoint, the 204 uses about 25% less powder, but components tend to be pricier, and sometimes hard to find. You also won't reach the 4000fps mark with 40gn bullets using a safe load and a cannister grade powder.
The Swift brass is getting harder to find, and the quality of the W-W brass (the most readily available here) is awful. It also carries an insane price in comparison to other similar cases. Bullets are readily available and you can safely reach the 4000fps mark with 40 grainers.

I love the Swift, really like the 204, and don't see myself parting ways with either anytime soon. Hardhit summed it up best.
Andy

TEDDY · February 25, 2009, 01:42 PM

looking down the road,what caliber will be available.any of them work,but are they going to be around in the future.I think alot are going down,as there are so many it will jam up the ammo companies.just my thoughts.somany have gone since I was born.

February 24, 2009, 09:30 PM	#4
Teuthis Senior Member Join Date: April 9, 2008 Location: Southern Arizona Posts: 537	Consider that the US armed forces use the 5.56 to kill all sorts of varmints. I reloaded the .223 and it was fun. I have shot them at distance too and I would wager that you could take any size varmint at 500+ yards if you try. __________________ Oderint dum Metuant

February 24, 2009, 09:39 PM	#5
bigalshootmupper Senior Member Join Date: November 21, 2008 Location: Georgia Posts: 147	I'm with you Tex, I own neither of the two and I don't own a 223 either. But I also am looking into getting a super high velocity small caliber rifle to reload for. I'd like to hear from actual reloaders of the 4000fps loads and hear their feedback. If you are like me, you don't plan on shooting 1000 shots a year. I am looking for a light recoil rifle that is .25MOA accurate to shoot subsequently to my 308. 223 would be practical, but maybe that's not what we are looking for. __________________ ”If you want to find out what is wrong with your country, go look in the mirror.” Ross Perot

February 24, 2009, 09:47 PM	#6
crowbeaner Senior Member Join Date: June 4, 2007 Location: Upstate SC Posts: 1,943	If you want a screamer for varmints, there are 4 calibers that qualify without getting into wildcats, custom barrels and reamers, and a host of other trick goodies. 17 Remington 204 Ruger 22-250 220 Swift I've shot 3 of the 4, and if I find a club member that has a 204 this spring, I might get a chance to try that also. The 17 is way cool; seeing the whistlepig blow up in the scope really makes me grin. I swear the bullet hits them so fast that there is 4 inches of daylight under them while they are in the air. Crows simply DO NOT like any of them; the bullet catches them in mid caw. A puff of feathers in the air and black shrapnel on the ground makes my day. __________________ If you want your children to follow in your footsteps, be careful where you walk. Beware the man that only owns one gun; he probably knows how to use it. I just hope my ship comes in before my dock rots.

February 24, 2009, 09:47 PM	#7
Lavid2002 Senior Member Join Date: April 6, 2007 Posts: 2,568	I reload for .223 ita a great cartridge, very versatile...acurrate..and reliable. Recoil is nonexistant and when i go from reloading .308 to .223 i feel like im reloading .22LRs __________________ Math>Grammar

February 24, 2009, 09:50 PM	#8
kraigwy Senior Member Join Date: June 16, 2008 Location: Wyoming Posts: 11,061	I believe the questiion was about the 220 Swift and the 204 Ruger. From the reloaders standpoint, I like the Ruger, its cheaper to load for and its easier on barrels. A lot less muzzle jump with the Ruger which is handy shooting PDs. I load my ruger with 32 grn Vmax, its plenty good enough to drop coyotes, or the least the ones that made the mistake of trying to eat my chichens. __________________ Kraig Stuart CPT USAR Ret USAMU Sniper School Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071

February 24, 2009, 07:10 PM	#1
Tex S Senior Member Join Date: November 12, 2008 Location: Fort Worth, TEXAS Posts: 909	From a reloaders standpoint... would you rather have a 220 Swift or 204 Ruger for varmints? I currently do not own a small bore varmint rifle, but I am seriously considering buying one. I have never shot either caliber so I dont really know all that much about them, but something about a bullet screaming at 4000fps + sounds pretty dang cool. Any comments would be great, especially if you own one of these rifles. Last edited by Tex S; February 24, 2009 at 07:19 PM. Reason: sp

February 24, 2009, 07:34 PM	#2
jaguarxk120 Senior Member Join Date: February 28, 2008 Location: Michigan Posts: 2,619	Haven't fired or own either rifle. But as with anything like cars or rifles speed cost money, weather its operating cost or down the line with a shot out barrel. A 223 will last longer than a 220 Swift, burns less powder, barrel life longer. The bigger the case the more powder and sooner the throat of the barrel is burned away. Gotta say this when they ask whatcha shooting and the answer is 22-250 or 25-06 it does make an impresson on some. One last thought you can really reach and touch someone with the bigger stuff!

February 24, 2009, 09:15 PM	#3
shepherddogs Senior Member Join Date: January 9, 2007 Posts: 1,007	I'd get a .223 for the reasons previously stated. If you really want something hot, get a 22-250. Ammo is much more available than the Swift.

February 24, 2009, 10:02 PM	#9
hardhit Senior Member Join Date: August 18, 2008 Posts: 343	The 204 is going to be cheaper to run powder wise, I have a 220 swift there’s nothing like lining up on a crow and getting the boom whop and see a cloud of back feathers 250 yards away both cartrides will do it.

February 24, 2009, 10:19 PM	#10
troy_mclure Senior Member Join Date: November 17, 2008 Location: gulf of mexico Posts: 2,716	im just getting started reloading for my .204. components are difficult to find in bulk, and are pricey when in lots of 100. however, the price even in 100 lots is soo much cheaper than buying factory ammo. __________________ There is only one tactical principle which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wound, death, and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time."

February 24, 2009, 10:34 PM	#11
Qtiphky Senior Member Join Date: December 11, 2008 Location: Upper Michigan, above the Mackinac Bridge Posts: 568	.204 Ruger The max I have loaded for the .204 is 27 grains of Accur 2520 with a 40 grain Vmax, which doesn't calculate out anywhere near the 4000 fps. This load calculates around 3700 fps, but I don't have a chrony so I don't know for sure. It is well below the maximum load so I am not really worried about it. I haven't noticed any signs of pressure or the like and accuracy is under 1 moa.

February 25, 2009, 01:16 AM	#12
A_Gamehog Senior Member Join Date: February 9, 2009 Location: Central Oregun Posts: 563	.223 is one "Must have" rifle Even though I own a 22-250 also, my recomendation is to get a .223 first. The Ruger 204 is shooting lighter bullets, with a wind you want 50+ grains to get accurate in windy conditions. If a mouse farts on the bullets path to your target with a 204 it's off! They get those great FPS loads shooting smaller bullets. From Hodgdon's website: Ruger 204 , 40 GR V-Max 25.7 GR Benchmark = 3646 FPS Rem 223 , 40 GR V-Max 27.3 GR Benchmark = 3666 FPS they shoot damn near even! with 50 grain V-Max they also shoot even. but they don't make a heavier load bullet than a 50 for the 204 Back to your question, Don't buy either, get a .223 Just my 2 cents...

February 25, 2009, 03:30 AM	#13
troy_mclure Senior Member Join Date: November 17, 2008 Location: gulf of mexico Posts: 2,716	ah, but with the .204 you can push those 34gr bullets up to 4300+fps. ive shot my encore with 40gr/3900fps bullets at 300m in a fair wind there was surprising little drift. __________________ There is only one tactical principle which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wound, death, and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time."

February 25, 2009, 09:11 AM	#15
farmall Senior Member Join Date: December 7, 2004 Location: Beatrice Nebraska Posts: 613	I am an avid fan of the Swift and .204 both. I have been shooting the .204 for about the last 4 years on prairie dogs and find I just dont shoot the Swift as much anymore. That said, I still like the Swift better. They are in similar Savage rifles, so it's not a matter of ergonomics. I just find I connect more often with the .204. From a handloading standpoint, the 204 uses about 25% less powder, but components tend to be pricier, and sometimes hard to find. You also won't reach the 4000fps mark with 40gn bullets using a safe load and a cannister grade powder. The Swift brass is getting harder to find, and the quality of the W-W brass (the most readily available here) is awful. It also carries an insane price in comparison to other similar cases. Bullets are readily available and you can safely reach the 4000fps mark with 40 grainers. I love the Swift, really like the 204, and don't see myself parting ways with either anytime soon. Hardhit summed it up best. Andy

February 25, 2009, 01:42 PM	#16
TEDDY Junior member Join Date: December 10, 2006 Location: MANNING SC Posts: 837	which looking down the road,what caliber will be available.any of them work,but are they going to be around in the future.I think alot are going down,as there are so many it will jam up the ammo companies.just my thoughts.somany have gone since I was born.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search