The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Hunt

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old December 29, 2005, 09:34 PM   #1
Join Date: December 29, 2005
Posts: 17
.204 Ruger for Coyotes?

Has anyone used the new .204 for coyotes. I've been eyeing up a new rifle and I'm leaning toward the new .204 or maybe even a .220 Swift. I was wondering if the .204 has enough guts to get the job done....I'm guessing it should work just fine.
Brian429 is offline  
Old December 29, 2005, 10:25 PM   #2
roy reali
Senior Member
Join Date: August 23, 2005
Posts: 3,248
You Bet

I grew up on a small family farm. My dad raised several different farm animals. Our biggest fear was from roaming, feral dogs. Many of these dogs were as big as a typical coyote, some were much larger. My dad kept a rifle on the ready to dispatch them.

He used a Remington bolt action in .22 rimfire. He dropped several large canines with it.

If a .22LR can kill an animal of coyote size, I am sure the .204 will do.

Last edited by roy reali; December 29, 2005 at 11:20 PM.
roy reali is offline  
Old January 2, 2006, 01:59 PM   #3
Wild Bill Bucks
Senior Member
Join Date: December 28, 2005
Location: Southeastern Oklahoma, Next door to Sasquatch
Posts: 1,266
According to Chuck Hawkes the .204 has a muzzle velocity of 4225 fps with a 32 grain bullet and has 1308 ft. Lbs of energy.

At 300 yards it is still moving at 2531 fps with 469 ft. lbs of energy.

Shoots very flat out to about 222 yards.

I haven't shot one myself but do have a barrel ordered for my Encore.

I have a freind that has one and says you will see the hole in the target before you feel the recoil of the gun. (Can't wait to get mine and try that)

Should be one hell of a yote thumper.
Wild Bill Bucks is offline  
Old January 2, 2006, 09:40 PM   #4
Long Path
Senior Member
Join Date: May 31, 1999
Location: N. Texas
Posts: 5,896
Sounds like fun, and sounds highly effective, but it's bound to be murderous loud, and burns a lot of powder for each shot (if you reload, and who could afford to buy such proprietary ammo, even if it were readily found?). I suppose it's a little flatter out to medium range than a .22-250, but would a yodel dog really know the difference? I bleedin' doubt it.

Sometimes the bandwagon is worth riding, because of the easier accessibility of ammo.
"Welcome to The Firing Line, a virtual community dedicated to the discussion and advancement of responsible firearms ownership."T.F.L. Policy Page
Will you, too, be one who stands in the gap? ____________
Long Path is offline  
Old January 4, 2006, 09:49 PM   #5
Senior Member
Join Date: December 21, 2005
Posts: 256
IN GENERAL, the .204 is flatter and faster than the 22-250. Some 22-250 handloads may be equal or better but MOST factory loads for the .204 perform ballistically better than MOST factory loads for the 22-250. Weather, wind, bullet weight, and final target may make a difference.

The .204 actually burns LESS powder than the 22-250 or .223 so it is actually quieter than either of those two guns, and, less muzzle jump and recoil.

Think of the .204 as a 22-250, only more pleasant to shoot!!

On to coyotes! .204 out to 250 - no problem. Past that, if the wind is light and you can put a bullet in the right place, it's still acceptable. Beyond THAT, the bullet gets a little light for my tastes and I'd prefer a .243/25-06 for shots over 300 yards and/or in strong wind. Incidentally, I have the same opinion about the 22-250.
duck911 is offline  

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:39 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2017 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent:
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.09270 seconds with 9 queries