Author Topic: 17 rem vs. 204 ruger (Read 2228 times)

Big Game Hunter · « **on:** June 02, 2005, 11:35:53 AM »

I haven't bought a gun in about 5 months so I decided it is time to buy a new one. I have decided on a CZ 527 American in either .17 remington or .204 ruger. I would like any input on the pros/cons of these two calibers. Ballistically, they are almost the same. My main concern is that the .204 is new and will there be ammo readily availalbe 5/10/15 years from now I don't have time to reload. Any opinions welcome.

mjbgalt · « **Reply #1 on:** June 02, 2005, 11:47:29 AM »

well the .204 has a little more thump with a larger bullet but otherwise i would say they are similar. maybe check the price of ammo if you dont reload?

-Matt

victorcharlie · « **Reply #2 on:** June 02, 2005, 01:03:58 PM »

So, your not worried about the .17 Remington's ammo availability off the shelf?

I've wanted both of these calibers for awhile now.........I like them both and have been leaning more toward getting a .204 as the bullet weight is a little greater, and the .204 really comes into it's own after 400 yards or so. I never shoot that far but the numbers are impressive should I ever want to.

The .17 is based on a .223 case so I doubt it will ever hurt for lack of cases.

I don't have a varmit gun at present, and am having to consider the 22.250 and .223 as well. I'm not a fur trader, so fur isn't an issue. Lot more selection in a .22 cal.

My long time shooting buddy and I have had many conversations on the .204 and have just about sorted this out.....but not quite.....I'd be interested in which one you pick and why.......keep us posted please!

tuck2 · « **Reply #3 on:** June 02, 2005, 02:46:11 PM »

The 204 Ruger will be around , see http://www.rugerhunting.com/204_data.php I have a 17 Rem and a 204 Ruger rifles. I think that the 204 R will become more popular than the 17 R

DannoBoone · « **Reply #4 on:** June 02, 2005, 04:31:28 PM »

I got a Tactical 20 a couple of years before even hearing about the .204
Ruger. The two are so ballistically close, they may as well be twins. Had
the .204 Ruger been available when I got the Tac 20, it would have been
a very hard choice between the two. However, like the .17 Rem, the Tac
20 is based on the .223 cartridge. Since it is still (and probably always will
be) a wildcat cartridge, I MUST be a reloader. The upside of the .17 Rem
and Tac 20, is that the .223 will probably never be discontinued, and brass
for sizing down will always be available. It's doubtful that the .204 Ruger
will ever be discontinued, but if so, from where will you get the brass?
There isn't much .222 RemMag brass out there. There are ka-zillions of
.223 brass out there right now, if the .223 were discontinued tomorrow!

roper · « **Reply #5 on:** June 03, 2005, 04:29:44 AM »

I think the 204 will be around along time as with the 17rem. I also look at things more as a reloader. I shoot a 17rem but I would go with the 204 and I don't own one but you got alot more manufactors of ammo since your not into reloading yet save the brass for when you do. I bet you could almost be anywhere now and get ammo for a 204 may be alittle harder with the 17rem and the 17 is about $3./$4. higher per box. Just my .02

Buckskin · « **Reply #6 on:** June 07, 2005, 08:50:37 AM »

I'm just getting into my 204 Encore and love it. Would not see trading its ballistics for the 17s. Using Hornady 32s I got well under .5" at 100 (only shot 3 groups) The best part is I shot a 5 shot group at 300 just for kicks and they were all inside 3", if I could have dropped the flyer it would have been around 2". Waiting for calm weather to push it out to 4 and 500 yds and beyond. Simply awesome shooter! I can't wait to put one thru a yote to see what she does. I don't reload brass at the moment but am planning on getting into it. Right now you can't really improve on the factory load, they are extremely impressive. Hornady 204 shells are about $13/box, not bad. And this cartridge will be around for a long time.

warf73 · « **Reply #7 on:** June 07, 2005, 12:06:18 PM »

204 all the way.
If you live were the wind can be a factor the 17 will show its downfall.
Not saying the 204 is wind resistant but it holds up better than the 17.

My hunting buddy has both and he prefers the 17 to the 204.

I love my 204 and prefer it over the 223 with shots 500 yards and in.
It all has to do with the ability to see your hits on your target and it makes a fallow up shot easier.

Warf

Catfish · « **Reply #8 on:** June 08, 2005, 04:37:43 PM »

It really boils down to weather your a hide hunter or not. I`ve never got and exit wound with my .17 Rem. with the proper bullets, but I left a very big hole in a groundhog with my .204. For coyote and larger game the .204 is better, but for fox,ect the .17 Rem. would be the better choice. I like the small bores and have 3 17`s. A .17 AH, a .17 - .223 and a .17 Rem. I also have a .204 and several different .22 cal. varmint rifles. For strickly hide hunting the .17 Rem. If your not a hide hunter the .204. Both do a good job.

Buckskin · « **Reply #9 on:** June 09, 2005, 03:53:43 AM »

Come on Catfish, don't tell me that a .17 won't rip up a groundhog.
I haven't cracked a yote with the 204 yet, so I can't say.

warf73 · « **Reply #10 on:** June 09, 2005, 08:24:47 PM »

I shot 1 yotie last weekend.
Around 100-125yards with 40gr. V-Max out of my .204.
He was some what angled at me .204 hole going in no exit(bullet hit a rib bone)yoti fell over in his tracks and a few quivers later no movement.

Didn't do any skinning it had mange pretty bad.
But from what I seen of the 204 on Pdogs and Jack rabbits, I'm guessing the inside was probly nasty.

Warf

Buckskin · « **Reply #11 on:** June 10, 2005, 03:45:04 AM »

Warf, what gun do you have your 204 in. I couldn't hit a bull in the ass with the 40s, either Hornady or Remington. The 32s shoot like their magical for me but the extra 8 grains throws everything out of whack in my Encore. You must have a different twist rate than I do. I think Encores T/C factory barrels are 1/12 but I could be wrong.

mjbgalt · « **Reply #12 on:** June 10, 2005, 09:34:41 AM »

thats bizarre....i have a 26" encore in .204 and it shoots tiny little groups with both 32 and 40 grainers.

-Matt

warf73 · « **Reply #13 on:** June 11, 2005, 02:06:13 AM »

I'm shooting a Ruger Target Grey with the standard 26" tube.

I've never shot the 32's.

I have a very accurate load I use with alot of dead Pdogs to back it :grin:

I went on the okie pdog shoot, furthest shot taken (with a good laser hit) was just over 430 yards. Common shots were out to 350 yards easy.

I've found that my ruger's sweet spot is only .005" longer than factory ammo.

Warf

DannoBoone · « **Reply #14 on:** June 11, 2005, 07:25:24 AM »

My VVCG Encore .204 (1/12) barrel doesn't like the 40's, either.....my ML
shoots better groups. Best was the old Hornady 33gr, with groups down to
just over 1/8", CtoC. Just dunno why Hornady discontinued them when they
would hold up to 4300fps velocities, accurately. My rifle's "honey load" for
best accuracy is just under 4200fps with the 33's. Haven't tried the 32's,
yet.......still got close to 1000 33's (ordered a bunch after hearing they
were to be replaced with the 32's).

Buckskin · « **Reply #15 on:** June 13, 2005, 04:24:00 AM »

Warf,
Can you share your favorite load, or is it a family secret?

Thanks,
Buckskin

warf73 · « **Reply #16 on:** June 14, 2005, 02:32:41 PM »

.204 Ruger

Brass Winchester
Primer - Winchester Small Rifle Primer
Powder H-335 @ 26.0grs. (+.1)
Bullet Hornady 40gr. V- Max
Velocity - Average velocity is F.P.S.
Max C.O.L - Over all length 2.260" (+-.002")
5 Shot Group - Average 5 shot group .716

I haven't chronied this load yet but might this weekend.
I'm not really worried about FPS with this load so thats why I havent got it yet.

Don't tell anyone my load Buckskin its a family secret

Warf

Buckskin · « **Reply #17 on:** June 15, 2005, 04:01:14 AM »

Thanks Warf!

I will keep it in the lock box with my chili recipe.

Buckskin

Catfish · « **Reply #18 on:** June 15, 2005, 02:32:01 PM »

Buckskin,
I`ve never got an exit with my .17 rem. However, I have left some pretty good size hole with my .17 AH and the 19 gn. Calhoon bullets. I did shoot most of my grounhogs with Berger MEF bullet though. I used them untill I shot one in the back side and did not kill it. Broke it`s back but did not have penitration to get to the vitales. Shot servral with V max`s, and regular HP that did not exit. Maybe it just hit bone going in, but I`ve never got an exit on a groundhog with my .17 Rem. :roll:

warf73 · « **Reply #19 on:** June 16, 2005, 12:43:21 AM »

Anytime Buckskin.

Warf

cal sibley · « **Reply #20 on:** July 07, 2005, 08:16:37 AM »

This is merely personal opinion and may not be true for everyone. I like my Remington 700BDL in .17Rem. It's a joy to shoot, and it's nice being able to see the bullets strike home. It is affected by the wind in spite of some impressive velocities. It also copper fouls like crazy and can be very erratic in terms of accuracy. I find it common to shoot a group of .25" (5 at 100yds.) and not be able to come close to it for the remainder of the day. I clean it every 10 rounds at the range. That helps, but doesn't restore the gilt edged accuracy. It can be a very frustrating rifle at times. Still, I like it and am not certain why. I have no experience with the .204Ruger, but am extremely fond of its big brother, the .222Rem. Mag. I feel the .204 will ride the wind a litle better than the .17Rem. but not by much. Just one mans opinion. Best wishes.

Cal - Montreal

Buckskin · « **Reply #21 on:** July 07, 2005, 10:49:56 AM »

I really don't have to clean my barrel much any more since break in. I probably clean it every 50 shots or so, mostly just to do it, not out of necessity. In my opinion the .17 really can't compare to the 204 ballistically. In energy, velocity and distance the 204 starts to shine where the .17 drops off. I was very suprised how little the 204 drifts in moderate crosswinds.