Author Topic: Stock or custom Encore rifle barrels?? (Read 2346 times)

Buckskin · « **on:** March 17, 2005, 08:59:20 AM »

I'm going to purchase a Ruger .204. And can't decide if I should go for a Bullberry barrel or not. Upside is its guaranteed to be a MOA barrel, and of course built to my standards.
Downside is its another $100 and it may take up to 16 weeks for delivery.
What do you guys think???
Another thought, if I go Bullberry, should I go with a heavy varmint or medium varmint bull barrel???
So many decisions!!!!

Flash · « **Reply #1 on:** March 17, 2005, 09:34:58 AM »

What's all the hype about the 204? The 22-250 will smoke it on it's worst day regarding distance and energy. Sure, the 204 boasts 4,000 fps but who actually got their's to fly that fast? And....what a selection of bullets to choose from!

Buckskin · « **Reply #2 on:** March 17, 2005, 10:08:38 AM »

You've got to be kidding. 204 is quit a bit flatter that a 22-250.
I'm not nockin it but ballistic charts don't lie.
Hornady 40g V MAX @500 yds sighted at 200
402 2133 fps, 404 ft/lbs, -28 inches
22-250 1771 fps, 278 ft/lbs, -32 inches

And who cares about how many factory loads are out there. Besides the 204 is so hot and so many gun makers are making them, there will be many factory loads in the future.

Sorry Flashy

SLAVAGE · « **Reply #3 on:** March 17, 2005, 10:26:34 AM »

ok that this is smoking an say you do get about 4k in speed
um now im no expert here but some thing going that fast
has any one that did any experimenting about how much throat erosion
ive been told thats the bigest fall back of the 220 switft its very fast an the granddaddy of the 22's but it burns the barrel out quickly all so

Buckskin · « **Reply #4 on:** March 17, 2005, 11:04:45 AM »

I talked to a guy that tested the 204 with winchester.

They ran something like 8000 rounds thru one and it did not show any wear in throat or accuracy. I would guess that this small caliber disipates the heat a bit better than the bigger rounds.

skb2706 · « **Reply #5 on:** March 17, 2005, 11:18:33 AM »

The big deal is you can take your Contender....not talkin an Encore and make a true prairie dog smokin unit out of it. No other available chambering for a Contender even comes close. Using less than 29 gr. of powder and no recoil......no you can't make it a 22-250 but they are fun as hxll.

skb2706 · « **Reply #6 on:** March 17, 2005, 11:36:49 AM »

Buckskin - I am a big fan of BB barrels and have a few, excellent accuracy but the factory TC .204 full bull barrel is very accurate.....the paper work I got back with mine...hand written note .500" group at 100 yds. three shots ( I returned it because it didn't lockup correctly). That is what Fred will guarantee with his. I get 32 gr. Sierra blitz kings at 4100 plus fps. Bought mine from a forum member for $190....I think you can get them new for around $215. A BB full bull carbine length will run you more than $350.

Flash · « **Reply #7 on:** March 17, 2005, 01:11:26 PM »

Buckie,
You think balistic charts are truthful?? I have aquaintences that haven't been able to get the WSM's to be any where close to what Winchester boasts but I guess the 204 is magically different. I forgot to mention that I can't shoot 40 grain bullets in my 22-250 with any kind of acceptable results since they seem to come apart and make a patern rather than a hole. But, the 55 grain bullets will shoot fine and my balistic chart at 500 yards reads....1946 fps/462 ft.lbs. I must be missing something here but certainly not a $500 expense for something not as good.

skb2706 · « **Reply #8 on:** March 18, 2005, 03:56:56 AM »

Bucks comparison was 40 gr. bullets.................

Buckskin · « **Reply #9 on:** March 18, 2005, 08:29:34 AM »

Flashy,

I thought you said ballistic charts aren't truthful. I guess yours must be different. But at least your comparing apples to oranges.

See thats why I compared the two - same weight, same ballistic coefficient.

Flash · « **Reply #10 on:** March 18, 2005, 11:46:58 AM »

I realize that you compared the two with 40 grain bullets but my rifling twist won't shoot 40 grain bullets worth a damn. As a matter of fact, I haven't met anyone with a 22-250 who could break 4,000 fps and have acceptable accuracy with a 40 grain bullet. So for comparison, the 204 really shouldn't fall into the same class as the 22-250. I was just commenting on why an individual would spend more money for an item that wouldn't perform as good as something already available and you quickly educated me. Hope you enjoy your 204.

Flash · « **Reply #11 on:** March 19, 2005, 01:33:20 AM »

I just got a Winchester Ammunition catalog yesterday and I had to share this. The 204 at 500 yards with a 34 grain bullet has a whopping 146 ft lbs of energy. That's a 22 long rifle at the muzzle with the same grain weight. The long range trajectory table is interesting as well. The 204's bullet drop is over a foot beyond the Supreme 22-250 at 500 yards. Gosh, what a revelation Ruger came up with.

Keith L · « **Reply #12 on:** March 19, 2005, 04:45:56 AM »

Remington's on line balistics indicate at 500 yards more energy for a 40 grain .204 over a 50 grain 22-250, and two inches less drop. And the Federal tables give a 416 Rigby lots more steam than both of them at 500 yards.

Different strokes for different folks, Flash. That should be no threat to you.

skb2706 · « **Reply #13 on:** March 19, 2005, 07:51:21 AM »

Buckskins original request was for opinions on quality of barrel from BB vs. factory. The merits of a .204 compared to a 22-250 had little if anything to do with the thread. I'll be curious to see what you decide Buckskin.
I like the high volume long range effects of the .204 when used on varmint sized creatures equally suited to both calibers. I shoot a ton of pds and few shots are taken beyond 400 yds......any hits....center mass....all pds are equally dead.

Flash · « **Reply #14 on:** March 19, 2005, 09:24:46 AM »

Fox Ridge will allow you to return the barrel if you aren't satisfied with it's accuracy. :wink:

Buckskin · « **Reply #15 on:** March 19, 2005, 12:07:21 PM »

Yeah I was wondering how we got off on a comparison of 204 to 22-250 also. If I already had a 22-250 i wouldn't think of getting a 204. But why not go with a flatter shooting bullet with less powder. If I really need to knock something down I will use my 300 RUM, which at 750 yards still has 1448 ft/lbs and 133" drop. Great pd gun.

Keith L · « **Reply #16 on:** March 19, 2005, 12:24:33 PM »

Let us know what you get. I am thinking of getting one also and am interested in your decision and how it comes out.

smokey66 · « **Reply #17 on:** March 20, 2005, 03:58:05 AM »

why is it so difficult for some people to answer a simple question. Buckskin asked a very simple question, T/C or Bullerry?...he did not ask about a 22-250 or a 7mm-08 or 20 gauge mossberg..he did not ask for any opinions about a 204 ruger, but he got them. this is becoming more and more of a problem on this forum. whenever a person asks about a particular caliber, the first thing you hear is " don't buy that caliber, you MUST shoot exactly what I shoot or you are stupid"..people need to start answering the question sthat are being asked, and keep their opinions to themselves unless asked for them...this thread sounds like a couple of 8 year old boys arguing "my dad can beat up your dad"..pretty sickening.....

tcman · « **Reply #18 on:** March 20, 2005, 04:06:07 AM »

I wondered the same thing in regards to a different caliber. I looked at BB and their accuracy statement is no different than what T/C dvertises day-in, day-out on TV "Minute Angle of Accuracy" right out of the box.

If I have a barrel that is not a shooter, MOA or less, I will make T/C own up to their advertising, before spending $450 on a barrel that also warrants MOA. Just my $0.02

Flash · « **Reply #19 on:** March 20, 2005, 05:33:36 AM »

Hey now, a 7mm-08 is a dandy caliber! Kinda ranks up there with a 22-250 but I dunno bout that Mossberg.

I wish this site did have audio, I never heard anything here. :cry:

abhound · « **Reply #20 on:** March 20, 2005, 07:02:33 AM »

I was in the same boat as Buckskin a wile back regarding the .204 and decided to go with the Bullberry. Basically because of what I have read in magazines and other forums about the 204 as being extremely accurate and better barrel life than most other varmint calibers. I figured, if it's already an inherent actuate round, why not get the most out of it by going with a custom barrel. Also I wanted it in a configuration that I could not get from TC, 23" stainless full bull. The main draw back to this, besides the additional cost is the wait. I've been waiting for about 10 weeks now.

skb2706 · « **Reply #21 on:** March 20, 2005, 08:54:15 AM »

Waiting for Bullberry is like waiting for the "second coming". Fred will usually tell you 12 weeks but it ends up being considerably longer. That is why I went with the factory barrel...I bought it from a forum member on a sweet deal and got it in a couple days. Had a little trouble with it as it didn't lock up correctly...sent it to TC they exchanged it and put the old style locking bolts on the new one. Sent me a note with it regarding its accuracy...I was pleased.
In two days it will get a real work out as the annual trek for the first prairie dog shoot of the year happens on the 23rd.

abhound - Contender or Encore ? In a Contender they come 23" full bull.

abhound · « **Reply #22 on:** March 20, 2005, 03:57:01 PM »

Mine is a Encore.
Is the factory 204 barrel full bull or heavy taper? The Bullberry is 1" all the way to the muzzle.

Buckskin · « **Reply #23 on:** March 21, 2005, 03:57:34 AM »

Thanks for the input guys. I'm going to give T/C a shot, and throw the extra money into a better scope. Some of the things that I've heard about BB make me a bit weary - long wait, needing to use there hangers, etc. But I know they make an excellent product. If T/C can make me happy there will be several more barrels from them down the line.
I know Fred tested the barrel lengths in the 204 and found that the optimal length is 23", but he started at 24", why not 26". Is it because the factory barrels are 26? And that he may have seen better #'s from it??? The difference from 23-24" was only about 5 fps!

okiecat · « **Reply #24 on:** March 25, 2005, 01:30:46 PM »

I've got 2 and half cents if anybody wants to listen. I too have looked at the custom barrel and also at the Fox tc's. I also have a 22-250 , 17rem,22H,223 but I'm curious about the 20 tatical. It is supposed to have about 300fps over the 204, and this is with powder that I can buy! I am now ready for input or a reaming.

5Redman8 · « **Reply #25 on:** March 25, 2005, 08:58:54 PM »

Okie....YOU GOT IT!!!!

The 20 Tac kicks the crap out of the 204 with less powder and MUCH better brass options. Not sure if it beats it by 300fps but it will do better with less powder and with the 20Tac.....you can do it with over the counter powder....not some Hornady hush hush proprietary this or that blend.

And as far as the 22-250....204 comparison....there is no comparison. 22-250 with high BC bullets ie 69gr with flatten a 204 any day.

Now I have no problem if someone wants a 204 but lets be sure we know what it is. If you think 500yds is probable with a 204....think again. WIND DRIFT IS A BUGER for a LOW BC bullet.

TC or Bullberry......I would go off the board for an OTT or SSK.

Later,
Kyle

abhound · « **Reply #26 on:** March 26, 2005, 07:18:09 AM »

I'm sure the 20-tac is a fine caliber and will outshoot the 204, but can you buy off the shelf ammo for it? I mean, I reload everything I shoot, of course other than rimfires, but there is the rare occasion that I run out of shells while dog hunting and have to run to a local sporting goods and buy more ammo. Of course you have to re-zero the gun, but at least I can still continue to shoot. Also there's not allot of info on the 20-tac as far as barrel life, chamber pressures and such. I,m kind of a stickler on the barrel life part because of a problem I had with a Rem 220 swift. My accuracy started to open up after about 3000 rounds and became unshootable, as far as accuracy goes, at about 6000. Took it to the gunsmith and was told that it had lost the first 2" of throat. Now I might have just had a bum barrel, but it kind of soured me on the 220 swift and I read other people saying similar things about the 22-250. Some of my 223s have had over 10,000 rounds with only slight changes in group size. So when the 204 came out and I started reading reviews on it I was happy to find that they were finding barrel life to be as good as the 223 and significantly better than the 220 swift and 22-250. That and the fact that I can get ammo almost anywhere swayed me to go with the 204.

As far as wind drift, your exactly right. Wind will have a greater effect on lighter bullets, but that becomes part of the game when my buddies and I are shooting. In fact, some of the ranches we shoot dogs on don't allow centerfire rifles at all so it becomes quite fun to figure out how much over and how much left or right to hold. We routinely kill dogs at or over 200 yards in high wind with 10/22s and bulk ammo. You just have to figure out where to hold.

5Redman8 · « **Reply #27 on:** March 26, 2005, 12:22:24 PM »

Abhound,

The 220Swift is a burner...no doubt. I am surprised you got 3,000 accurate rounds through it. I would have assumed 2,000 shots would be about right for the 220.

I cannot imagine a 204Ruger doing 4,000fps is going to be nice on the barrel? As I would not think the 20Tac would be easy either. Just figure the "good barrel life" for the 204 was just HYPE....not that anyone woulod intentionally perpetuate falsehoods to sell a cartridge :?

Now you did mention the one I love....223. 10,000 serviceable rounds is good...GREAT even. I like the 223 with heavies as well as the 22-250AI with heavies. I never worry about buying ammo of the shelf. 90% of the guns I own or have owned have been wildcats.

I also do not prairie dog hunt so that has to be taken for what it is worth. The most ammo I have burned in a day has been 100-125rds.

Later,
Kyle

abhound · « **Reply #28 on:** March 27, 2005, 10:33:41 AM »

Well from what I gather, throat erosion is not necessarily caused by high velocities alone. Velocity in conjunction with other factors such as chamber pressure and even the type of powder you burn and differences in copper alloys in the jacket all contribute to barrel burn. In the right combination such as the 220 swift it happens quickly. Other caliber's have been plagued with the same problem. Take the 264 win mag. for instance. It has always been known as a barrel burner. It shoots a 120 gr bullet at around 3200-3400 fps and a 7mm rem mag with the same weight bullet at around the same or even higher velocities doesn't have the barrel burn problem. So it's kind of difficult to tell if the 204 will or will not be a burner. Only time will tell. For me, I should know in a year and a half or so being that I plan on using the 204 pretty much exclusively for varmints for the next couple years to give it a good tryout. There's been times when I've gone through over 500 rounds in a weekend. And that's just centerfire.