« previous next »
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: 204 Ruger  (Read 2047 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline bobg

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (8)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1555
  • Gender: Male
204 Ruger
« on: June 21, 2009, 02:22:48 AM »
  What are your thoughts on IMR 3031 for the 204?  I use it in all my 22 caliber rifles so i have a good supply. Not sure now what brass i have. I will be using 32 grain Sierra bullets and Rem. 7 1/2 primers. Thanks for your thoughts.
     bobg
Logged

Offline saltydog

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 387
Re: 204 Ruger
« Reply #1 on: June 25, 2009, 01:55:57 AM »
As you already use it why not stick with it. It is a good choice for lighter bullets in 224's and the 32 grain 20 cal is certainly a light bullet. I have found it easier in my area to buy Benchmark or RL7 so I have not been using the IMR products. Now that Hogdon is vending them the IMR products may get more widespread shelving.
Logged

Offline Catfish

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2696
Re: 204 Ruger
« Reply #2 on: June 25, 2009, 09:16:37 AM »
3031 is alittle on the warm side and won`t get the velocities a powder that is just alittle slower wil get, but if you can live with 200 fps less and it shoots well in your rifle go for it. The game won`t notice the difference in velocity.  ;) and 10 yrds. of max. point blank range isn`t much.
Logged

Offline skb2706

  • Trade Count: (5)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1428
Re: 204 Ruger
« Reply #3 on: June 25, 2009, 10:30:01 AM »
I shoot a couple of .204s in volume and I would look elsewhere for a powder as IMR3031 meters like crap. The thought of weighing out hundreds of rounds doesn't make me all warm. WW748 and RL10X shoot excellent and meter nicely.
Logged

Offline Ahab

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 398
  • Gender: Male
Re: 204 Ruger
« Reply #4 on: July 22, 2009, 07:57:11 AM »
Re 10 is the only way to go. ;)
Logged
NRA Endowment
Arizona Bighorn Sheep Society member
Arizona Antelope Foundation member

Offline gube

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 57
  • Gender: Male
Re: 204 Ruger
« Reply #5 on: July 25, 2009, 10:30:53 PM »
RL-10X and benchmark are my favorites for all three of my 204's
Logged
aim small miss small
Savage Vaporizer

Offline Catfish

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2696
Re: 204 Ruger
« Reply #6 on: July 26, 2009, 10:49:56 AM »
The .204 doesn`t seem to be picky. H-332, H-335, BLc2, AA-2230, AA-2460 or anything else in the range of burn rate has worked well for me.
Logged

Offline ratpatrol

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 33
Re: 204 Ruger
« Reply #7 on: July 27, 2009, 05:45:35 AM »
Has anybody used imr 4320? I read somebody said it will match factory vel. I can not find any listing for it in any books. If so list min. and max. loads. I have 4lbs. I would like to use in my 204.
Logged

Offline Catfish

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2696
Re: 204 Ruger
« Reply #8 on: July 27, 2009, 03:03:48 PM »
I have the list of IMR powders that they recomand for the .204 and IMR does not list it as a .204 powder. They do list 4064, which is alittle faster and show it as a compressed load. Judgeing from that I would say it would be safe to shoot, but your velcities would be down from 4064.
Logged

Offline bobg

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (8)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1555
  • Gender: Male
Re: 204 Ruger
« Reply #9 on: July 27, 2009, 05:54:53 PM »
  I found almost a full pound of 748 that i didn't know i had. Think i will start with that. Thanks folks for all the advice.
           bobg
Logged

Offline saltydog

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 387
Re: 204 Ruger
« Reply #10 on: July 30, 2009, 03:29:44 PM »
Around 28 grains of 748 and a 40 gr. bullet is a published load - however 748 is a slower powder than the orginal 3031 you asked about - it meters much better but your top end fps potential is more limited.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »