Which cartridge would perform better at 300+ yards: .204 Ruger, .22-250, or .223 Remington?

I just bought a Remington XR 100 Rangemaster, which is available in the chamberings mentioned above. Mine is in 22-250, a cartridge I have never owned before. I did a little playing around to see what the differences in the chamberings are.

With a 100 yard zero using Remington 50gr Premier AccuTip ammo, the drop at 500 yards is 52 inches and the bullet is still traveling at 1850 fps.

With the 223 under the same conditions with the same bullet, you would have 52.5 inches drop and the bullet would be traveling at 1575 fps.

In the 204 Ruger, with a 33 grain bullet, you start out with 4200 fps muzzle velocity. At 500 yards, this bullet drops 29 inches and is traveling at 1836 fps.

So, you get less drop with the 204 Ruger, but you get more energy with the 22-250. The 223 falls in between for energy. It is interesting that at 500 yards, the 22-250 and the 204 Ruger are traveling at about the same speed.

With a 10 mph crosswind, the 223 will move 36.8 inches off target at 500 yards. The 22-250 moves 30.7 inches off. The 204 Ruger is pushed 24.6 inches off course.

IMO, you will be well served by all of them. There is no practical accuracy difference between the three. With the 204 Ruger, the recoil impulse is so small, you can watch your hits through the scope. Sometimes, you can do that with the 223; it's hard to see your hits with the 22-250, because it has a heftier recoil.

The 204 Ruger is one flat shooting cartridge. It will be interesting to see how it is treated over time. I still see guys shooting 45 year old Remington 721s chambered in 222 Rem, but the 22-250 is the third or fourth most popular cartridge, based on reloading die sales.

NOTE: Trajectory info from Remington Shoot! ballistic software. All references to ammo in this answer are based on Remington factory specifications.

I am surprised that it is showing only .5 inch more drop at 500 yards with the .223 as compared to the 22-250. 52 inches and 52.5 inches? I am not knocking the .223, I own 3, but I am surprised it is that close to the 22-250.

I have two .204s and a couple of the other two as well. My observations....for what its worth. You will not likely get 4200 FPS with a 33 gr. .204 bullet. The real world says more like 4000-4100 by handloading unless you like living on the edge.

Which works better at 300 yds. Depends on what needs to be done. Given the current available bullets, a .204 Ruger is at the top of the pile for prairie dogs but not my first chice for coyotes.

I can do everything with my 22-250 and more than I can with either of my .204s. The .223 never leaves the gun cabinet anymore.

I just did a quick reference check in the Nosler # 4 reloading manual. It seems to me the factory Remington ammo is short changing the 22-250. I came up with a difference of about 10" using a 50gr Ballistic Tip @ 500 yards. ( .223 vs 22-250 ) I don't have any 204 reference to check.

As far as whats better ????????????????????????

I belive it's more about the shooter and what he's confortable with !!!!

For me, I tend to favor the heavier bullets past 300 yards.

chambered221 wrote:

As far as whats better ????????????????????????

Call me crazy, but the better round is the one that hits what you point it at, whether it's a 20 cal, 22 cal, 24 cal, or 30 cal.....

hunterjoe21, I agree, if you have it in the gun cupboard and it shoots OK then all else is moot. I have never used any of the 20 cals but still use my 22/250 and 222 and my 17 rem and they all do the job on the day.

Since I had never had a p-dog rifle, first I shot my buddies .223 & .204, and right then I knew I wanted the .204. Now if I had an AR I might have went with the .223 just because of all the surplus ammo, but I got a sweet bolt action and it is great-has become my favorite rifle. As for the 22-250, no doubt it is awesome, but I just love that little shove the .204 gives, and I can even see hits on the p-dogs.

As for velocity, I can get 4100 fps with a 32 V-Max, but I keep it at an avg. of 4000 and accuracy is great.

Several of us that own 204s believe the cartridge's effectiveness could be improved with better bullets, especially on coyotes. We have urged Barnes to bring out a TSX in the 40gr range.

I like the 204 on prairie dogs, but, feel it is more suseptible to wind (where there are prairie dogs, there is usually wind) with the 32-33 gr bullets. Beyond 300 yards, the Swift, and probably, the 22-250 would give better performance in my experience.

We usually priortize the long shots and have been improving our 500 and 600 yard kills, but, acurately reading mirage at those distances is very challenging for our group. We haven't been able to get the 204 to be as reliable as the 22-250/220 Swift at those ranges and under those conditions.

Lets not forget the 204 Ruger with the 39 & 40 gr bullets. The 39 gr SBK has a BC of .285 and a MV of 3880 fps. This results in 500 yard data, from Point Blank, showing that this bullet drops 29.43 inches from 100 yd zero with 42.63" total drop and is traveling at 2225 fps at 500 yds. The 500 yd wind drift is 22.28" and the energy calculates as 429 fp.

My experience has shown that the 223, 22-250, 204 Ruger & a variety of other 22 & 204 cartridges are capable of effective use in the 500 - 600 yd ranges. Generally, the best gun is the one you have the most practice with.


Edited to correct errors.

:wtf:IMOPFO-I tend to stick with the 22's ,as they have the most choices available in bullet weights,types and construction,of I believe all of the varmint class calibers.The smaller calibers may have an advantage as to recoil but as far as flat shooting the 220 swift is still pretty hard to beat!Oh sure we have probably all heard the stories about how fast a swift can "wash out" a barrel,but the 204 is pretty new and about any thing that is running 4kfps and higher is a barrel burner.Any one here wish to really PUSH THE VELOCITY ENVELOPE?Visit the link www.reloadersnest.com/...oadID=1147

What determines if a bullet has good long range characteristics?? If we just look at the bullet, BC wraps up the total bullet external ballistic characteristics. Generally a high BC bullet will be long, heavy, pointy and probably have a boattail.

One of the best, for BC & long range, is the Hornady 750 gr 50 cal A-Max. It has a BC of 1.050 & a sectional density of .412. One of the worst is the 35 gr .224 Hornady VMAX. The 35 gr Hornady has a BC of .109 & a sectional density of .1.

Run your rifle/pistol and the available bullets on a ballistic program and compare TOF, wind drift, drop, velocity at range, energy at range, etc. There are a lot of myths to be debunked and lessons that can be learned from the computer. Of course some of the old truths are forever true. Such as, 'If it ain't accurate, it ain't shit.' and 'practice, practice' practice.'.

aint we shooters a strange bunch. the designers make us a super hot varmit cartridge with great results for what it was intended.no sooner do we get it than we want to push its capabilities. I recall back when centerfire 17s were all the rage reading of a gun guru shooting everything up to zebra with it...thats spelt a greater chance of wounding than clean kill to me.the 22/250 has been around the block once or twice and has a proven track record of its capabilities. I believe with a heavier projectile it may have more drop but will be by far the more reliable option at 300yrds plus, as it has more retained energy to do the biz when you connect cleanly. Here in NZ we unfortunatly have a person who is telling in magazines of shooting deer at ranges up to and over 1000meters and has gained a large following of wanabies. my problem with this is is if you dont hit em cleanly they can travel a hang of a long way before you can finish them off.I have too much respect for the critters we hunt to take that chance. just my $2 worth.

What magazine is that Elvis, and who is the clown writing for it?

Its strange how many writers of magazine articles are taken as being the ducks guts when the put pen to paper. Nick Harvey has a massive following here in Oz, but personally I don't have any real time for his articles. To me he appears to be your typical "good words for payment" type of writer. He has contradicted himself in more than one article.

Cheers, Vince

TRBLSHTR wrote:

Any one here wish to really PUSH THE VELOCITY ENVELOPE?Visit the link www.reloadersnest.com/...oadID=1147

Handloader managed to get to 5,050fps with his 22-250.

Dimitri

TRBLSHTR...The loads posted on that site are within book specifications. I saw no load data that excedes Lyman or Sierra manuals...In fact I load even hotter on some of what they had posted....357 magnum for one. They list 16.5 grains of W-296 under a 140 grain HPXTP and I load 18.5 grains of W-296 under the same bullet. According to their velocity (fps) it's a bit high as to what I get for that 16.5 grains...Wonder what they are using for a firing platform? I only get 1400 fps (on average) from a 6 1/2" Ruger Blackhawk with 18.5 grains.

However...They DO have very good load information. Good sight...Does need more powder and bullet variations. A lot of the powders that I use were not listed...