Author Topic: Which 22-250 to get (Read 6704 times)

MT4XFore · « **Reply #30 on:** June 27, 2005, 04:10:20 PM »

Obviously the 204 Ruger and the 22-250 are BOTH fine varmint calibers. However, there is a lot of erroneous info being fed about here. Yes, the 204 Ruger with a muzzle velocity of 4225 with a 32 grain bullet does retain ALMOST 1900 fps at 500 yds, with only 345 ft-lbs of energy. The 22-250 shooting a 55 grain bullet with a muzzle velocity of 3800 fps retains over 100 fps MORE velocity than the 204 and 120 MORE ft-lbs of energy at the same distance. With a 200 yd. zero, the trajectories of both are virtually identical! Since the 22-250 can shoot its 40gr. pill much faster than the 204 can shoot its 40 grain pill, there is no need in comparing them, therefore the 204 CANNOT beat the 22-250 in all categories. All this info was pulled from Hornady's reloading handbook. With that said, up here in windy Montana, the 204 just cannot buck the wind like a 22-250. But lets face it, the 22-250 can't buck the wind like a 243, or a 25 caliber either. So, I know that still doesn't help you with a decision. Your original question, which 22.250 is still open, and you have recieved a lot of good suggestions. But let's not try to compare apples and oranges by sticking a 204 in where it doesn't belong.

mjbgalt · « **Reply #31 on:** June 27, 2005, 04:35:21 PM »

yeah but how long does that .22-250 barrel last at 4,300 fps? not long. and how much copper gets in your barrel? none with the .204 since the powder has anti copper fouling agent in it.

and the ballistic coefficient of the .204 is the same at 40 grains as it is with a 60 grain .22-250 bullet.

-Matt

mt3030 · « **Reply #32 on:** June 27, 2005, 04:46:50 PM »

MT4xFore:

Well stated. I've been shooting p-dogs off and on all spring with a group using 204s, 223s, 22-250s and 243s. Side by side, day after day. The 204 might stick around, but it will not be because it out performs established calibers. It's just another pony in the stable, and a weak one at that. But to each his own. Thats why we have blondes, redheads, and brunettes! Is this a great hobby or what?!

As for the original question: You've choosen a great caliber for what you've stated your needs are. If you will be shooting for long sessons from one location, like p-dogs, consider a heavy barrel. If your planning on carrying/traveling more, consider a sporter weight. Get whatever one feels the best to you and you can afford. Mount a good (mid-priced) scope, then go kill something. Build some confidence in your rig and never look back, until it is worn out!

Wally

mt3030 · « **Reply #33 on:** June 27, 2005, 09:42:28 PM »

This post was inappropriate and insulting to fellow board members, so I chose to edit out my bad manners. See later post.

warf73 · « **Reply #34 on:** June 27, 2005, 11:25:24 PM »

204Ruger vs. 22-250Rem.

Well not but a few weeks ago I did a Pdog hunt in OK.

The 204 held its own against the 22-250 the whole weekend.

I love my 204 and my cousin loves his 22-250 both are great rounds for Pdogs and other varmint critters.

As for the wind well hate to say it but neither is worth a dam in a stiff cross wind.
You dont have to take my word for it there was 5 other guys that couldnt hit anything because of the wind. Ol GB gave up because of the wind as did I.

Both the 204 and 22-250 blow up Pdogs like no ones business.

Is the 204 the cure all round HELL no there is no such round that I'm aware of.

As for the fouling well I noticed that my Ruger M77 Target Grey needed cleaned about every 40-45 rounds. It's easy to see when you are missing easy shots (200-350yards) that its time to clean. My cousins Remington 700 with custom barrel needed cleaned around 35-40 rounds. We were both thing that the reason behind the shot difference (which was very small) could have been the bullet manufacture. But it could have been a million reasons why it was different.

If you want a 22-250 go for it, if you want a 204 go for it. Both are great rounds and will kill loads of critters for ya.

And to the subject matter at hand I would buy a Ruger M77 Target Grey I'm very pleased with mine and I'm planning on buying another and yup you guessed it in 22-250.

Warf

Buckskin · « **Reply #35 on:** June 28, 2005, 04:39:09 AM »

Wow MT4, nice of you to give a fair comparison!! Also you should check your references. How about this one off of the hornady webpage.
Both bullets being 40ga va-max sighted at 200, target at 500.

204 2133 ft/sec, 404 ft.lbs, -28.1 drop
22-250 1771 ft/sec, 278 ft.lbs, -31.7 drop
Guess which one is going to drift more??

They may be apples and oranges, but there not strawberries and watermelons!!

Quote

the 204 Ruger with a muzzle velocity of 4225 with a 32 grain bullet does retain ALMOST 1900 fps at 500 yds, with only 345 ft-lbs of energy. The 22-250 shooting a 55 grain bullet with a muzzle velocity of 3800 fps retains over 100 fps MORE velocity than the 204 and 120 MORE ft-lbs of energy at the same distance.Since the 22-250 can shoot its 40gr. pill much faster than the 204 can shoot its 40 grain pill, there is no need in comparing them, therefore the 204 CANNOT beat the 22-250 in all categories.

MT4XFore · « **Reply #36 on:** June 28, 2005, 06:37:22 AM »

BS, er, I mean buckskin, you are right. I concede to your obvious mastery of the 204. If that's your gun, more power to ya, it's a dandy, just dont try convincing someone it's better than something else. In some areas it may be, in others it isn't. As MT3030 said, it's one of many ponies in a stable.

Crazyhorse, good luck on finding a good 22-250. There are many choices out there and ammo is EASY to find ANYWHERE.

Jim

Buckskin · « **Reply #37 on:** June 28, 2005, 07:49:16 AM »

Ahhhh I see, only EMPTY4 can push his preferences here.
At least I give accurate comparisons for people to judge for themselves.
There is nothing wrong with a 22-250, its just edged out in performance by the 204. The 204 doesn't throw as heavy of bullet, but what do you really need in a true varmint rifle? Distance and accuracy. Forgot to mention that the 204 used 1/3 less powder than the 22-250 meaning less cost and less damage to the throat.

MT4XFore · « **Reply #38 on:** June 28, 2005, 08:46:00 AM »

Buckskin,
I haven't been trying to push any preference here, only to keep a little reality in the game. As I said before, both calibers are great varmint getters, they each have their pros and cons. But neither one is superior to the other in all respects. Since I also have a 222 mag, I must say that the 204 gets a lot more out of the same case! Life is too short to squabble about insignificant things like the virtues of these two calibers. Enjoy your 204, you need to work for Ruger! I will enjoy my 22-250 and we will both be happy. Didn't want to disparage your baby there. Sorry if I upset you, didn't mean too, now maybe Crazyhorse can get some REAL help!

Hey Crazy, have ya looked at a CZ550 varminter? Nice rifle!!!!

Ya'll have a good day and God Bless.

Jim

Buckskin · « **Reply #39 on:** June 28, 2005, 09:16:43 AM »

Come on, you haven't pushed your preference? Believe me you didn't upset me in the least MT. Not worth it. But your reality is obscured a bit. Also I have never owned a ruger, but I do hear good things about their single shots. I now will stand down and watch you spew your infinite wisdom and give crazyhorse some real help.

Buckskin · « **Reply #40 on:** June 28, 2005, 09:23:18 AM »

Off the subject - I want to sincerely thank you for your service in the Air Force and your contribution of protecting this great country of ours!!

MT4XFore · « **Reply #41 on:** June 28, 2005, 10:17:55 AM »

Off the subject: Thanks Buckskin, I appreciate that. I hunted for years with a Ruger #1, fun to carry but nortoriously hard to make to shoot well. Nothing at all like your Encores and Contenders which seem to shoot really well all the time. I will spew forth one last comment, you need to get a 22-250 barrel for your encore , or trade your buddy for his! :wink:

Have a good one, maybe one day we can dust some PD's side by side so I can get a real education.

Jim

Buckskin · « **Reply #42 on:** June 28, 2005, 10:39:06 AM »

I would certainly enjoy that.

mjbgalt · « **Reply #43 on:** June 28, 2005, 11:50:07 AM »

mt3030, i would get your facts straight before throwing around insults.

dont you look foolish when i point out on hornadys site where it says the anti coppering agent is indeed in the powder. and in the November 2004 issue of Rifle magazine where it talks about the anti coppering agent in the powder, and where it explicitly states that the army had this technology and released it, allowing it to be used in the private sector BY hornady. so the government DID have this technology.

and in my post i never once said it was the answer to everything as you state, so apparently you have reading problems too.

i have read other posts by you which were not rude and in fact were helpful and i have learned from them. however i havent seen you be this rude before and i dont appreciate it. saying i believe in ridiculous things and that i am ignorant because i reported on something i read is pretty assinine on your part. this board isnt for rudeness.

so either be polite and friendly or go play with the other little kids who cant be polite.

-Matt

mt3030 · « **Reply #44 on:** June 28, 2005, 07:51:15 PM »

Well, you are right. Maybe I was confused on who said what due to similar avatars. And I bow to your learning.

As I read back at my postings, it is obvious that my responses were not measured and accurate. I apologize to you and all fellow members. We all have bad days, which I know is no excuse.

I have never owned or loaded for the 204. But I have shot along with them over long days in the p-dog towns, and the 204 does build copper fouling.

mjbgalt · « **Reply #45 on:** June 29, 2005, 01:57:21 AM »

no problem, i just get a little fired up. i am not mad, just was frustrated that someone seemed to think i was an idiot when all i was doing was trying to help someone who asked a question.

sure it builds copper, they all do, i was just telling the guy who asked that if it would make a difference to him, it supposedly builds copper less quickly.

as far as i am concerned, we're on good terms :grin:

-Matt

Buckskin · « **Reply #46 on:** June 30, 2005, 08:40:37 AM »

Ahhh so those comments were directed at me???

Anyway, I dumped my first coyote with the controvercial 204 last night. 365 yards with about a 5 mph crosswind. He never knew what hit him, dropped like a stone. It was nearly dark when I walked out to him and I think I found the enterance hole, either that or it was a tick mark. The exit was about 2x the diameter of the slug, after it broke its neck. I was very impressed. I wish it would have been prime, because it was the nicest hide friendly kill I've ever had.

Buckskin · « **Reply #47 on:** June 30, 2005, 10:14:42 AM »

Here is an interesting article about the 204 that my good friend MT4XFore put me onto.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQY/is_10_50/ai_n6180938#continue

By the way, I forgot to mention that you get to see impact of your bullet with the 204. Pretty cool on the yote last night.

cal sibley · « **Reply #48 on:** July 01, 2005, 05:41:31 AM »

I think there's more at issue here than simply the caliber. I've got rifles in .222Rem. (2), .222Rem.Mag. and .22-250. All of them will do the job nicely at the distances I shoot. All are very accurate, grouping .4" or smaller. You've got to ask yourself, what you will use the rifle for and how far you will walk. My .22-250 weighs in at 13.0lbs. It's a brute to lug around the woodchuck fields. A warm summer day will rapidly have you singing the blues. My Hart barreled .222Rem.Mag on the other hand weighs 8 1/2lbs. It's heavy enough to be accurate, but pleasant enough to carry. I think too few shooters consider this until it is too late. Just one mans opinion. Best wishes.

Cal - Montreal

jro45 · « **Reply #49 on:** July 05, 2005, 04:03:32 AM »

My 22-250 is a Model 700 Remington and weights about 9 lbs. It can reach out to 400 yds with no problem. I've been shooting ground hogs at around 100 yds with it lately. Have a couple longer shots available but no bullet stop. I have a 6x24 power scope on it also.

Coyote Hunter · « **Reply #50 on:** July 06, 2005, 06:16:37 PM »

Got a Ruger M77 MKII VT Target Grey for Christmas a couple years back. Shot a 0.5" group at 200 yards with it, 4 shots. Made me smile. Love that rifle.

Woodchuck Sniper · « **Reply #51 on:** July 31, 2005, 05:57:30 AM »

Buckskin, I am glad you enjoy your new .204. I do not agree with many of your statements however in regards to the ".204 or 22-250". There is a reason the 22-250 earned the name "Varminter".

" If you can shoot the 40gr v-max (mine does not like them at this point) it beats the 22-250 in every catergory." You say this (my pal's .204 does not like the 40 grain either btw) yet when you compare you use the 40 grain rather than the 35 to stack in favor of the .204.

Use what people are shooting and compare .204/32 grain, 22-250/55 grain (not 40 grain)
Reality looks like this from Hornady's site. .204 32 grain V-max @ 500 yards 1899 fps / 256 ft lbs. 22-250 55 grain v-max @ 500 yards 1880 fps / 432 ft. lbs...........thats what people shoot (and you know it)
Now what were you saying about drift ? How about killing power ? 9 out of 10 22-250 shooters including myself shoot 55 grain first 50 grain second, nobody shoots a "40 grain".

"short barrel life 22-250" Where did you get that from ? Barrel life depends on barrel quality and over heating & proper cleaning. My Tikka T3 Varmint has a heavy Sako match grade barrel on it in 22-250. I don't shoot bench rest just sand bags at the rod & gun and varmint hunt. I will not shoot this barrel out in my lifetime (mid 40's now). Yet we really don't know about the .204 yet do we.

The link you posted on the .204 ends with this
"Logically if we burn less powder we have to give up something. What we give up here is energy. The Swift achieves its ballistics with heavier bullets than the .204, and these heavier bullets carry more energy. I'm not about to retire my Swift; I can imagine circumstances such as coyotes or rockchucks at 400 500 yards when I'd feel happier with the Swift's heavier bullet. For most of my varmint shooting the .204 already has more than enough energy. On gopher and prairie dog shoots I think the .204 should prove just about perfect."

Exactly........."praire dogs" You said " you don't need more than 40 grains for varmints". Yea........for praire dogs, coyotes the prefered ammo is 55 grain, caliber is 22-250 and .223. How about woodchucks at 400 yards.........your pushing it.
Varminter as in 22-250 stands for all around.

Accuracy - The 22-250 was used in Bench Rest some. Along with the .223 it often wins factory gun bench shoots, egg shoots, etc. Some .204's are accurate but they are not more accurate.

Bottom Line I would not suggest to your buddy to buy a .204 barrel for his Thompson Center when he already has a 22-250. Heck if your going to do that. Have him start over with a real rifle like a Tikka T3 Varmint or a Sako

:-D

I like new varmint rounds including the .204 (very much in fact). But, to post mis-leading BS is another story. The .204 fits right in with the .222,.223, 22-250 & Swifty on the light end............but not better than the 22-250 in anything (my oppionion).

nomosendero · « **Reply #52 on:** July 31, 2005, 10:27:23 AM »

WoodchuckSniper
Welcome to Graybeard Outdoors. There is a lot of good info & good people
on this site. I also think that the 22-250 is better all-round than the 204.

However, no cartridge is best for every varmit need, the uses are too vast
& varied. The 223 & 204 & similar capacity cases are better than the
22-250 for high volume prairie dog shooting as the barrels on the higher
capacity rounds heat up faster & cool-down slower. I like to take along
a bigger round like a 22-250 or even a 25-06 & ocassionally shoot dogs
on the outer fringes for fun & more range, but I want to save those barrels. Also, with the 204 you can call your own shots & correct for them without a spotter.
My overall first choice is the bolt gun, but I use Handi's a little, the Encore
& now a Rock River Arms AR 223 with a Wilson 24" bull. This may become
my favorite Varmiter as it will shoot sub 1/2" & the weight holds it down &
I can shoot the first dog & then their buddies without moving to work
a bolt or open up an action!

Concerning the big Varmits like Coyotes & Bobcats,etc. the 22-250 is a
little better choice. One thing that you may not know about is the 39
Gr. Sierra 204. I don't yet know why the 39 stabilizes well in some 204's
& the 40 Hor. doesn't, but that is happening, at least in many Savages.
Alot of examples of this are showing up in rugerhunting.com & the BC
is higher in the 39 Ser. than in the 40 Hor. This changes things & that is
why I said the 22-250 is a little better. If I feel the ranges are going to
be very long & conditions are windy, I will break out the 25-06 AI which
would kick both of their butts anyway.

If you shoot factory loads, the 22-250 is the far better choice.

Back to the original post, I would urge you to look at the Savage Low
profile Varmiter.

Woodchuck Sniper · « **Reply #53 on:** July 31, 2005, 03:40:17 PM »

Nomo,

I agree with "the 22-250 is better all-round". I only stated it's pro's after reading through the thread. personally I think the .204 would be nice praire dogs. But, I live in Ground Hog country.......just in from the hay field in fact, where I had a whoping 3 shots this evening 2 @ 440 yards 1@ 200. Barrel heating was not a problem, having enough "whomp" left at 450 yards for hog's is nice. Drift is another story.

nomosendero · « **Reply #54 on:** July 31, 2005, 05:19:28 PM »

Woodchuck Sniper
Sound's like a fruitful afternoon. I don't get as many Woodchuck opportunities as I used to. I live in the Southern fringe of Woodchuck
country. I am working on getting some Woodchuck shooting places up
closer to the Missouri line. I get some Coyote shooting in and other
critters such as Armadillo that always need to be shot
Good Luck!

Woodchuck Sniper · « **Reply #55 on:** August 01, 2005, 03:14:47 AM »

Quote from: nomosendero

Woodchuck Sniper
Sound's like a fruitful afternoon. I don't get as many Woodchuck opportunities as I used to. I live in the Southern fringe of Woodchuck
country. I am working on getting some Woodchuck shooting places up
closer to the Missouri line. I get some Coyote shooting in and other
critters such as Armadillo that always need to be shot
Good Luck!

Well I was out for 1 1/2 hours. I seen 5 differant wwodchucks and shot at 2. I pass on close ones. This is one of my larger and well scouted fields so it's a little above average for here in upstate NY. To me it's slow compared to what I read about praire dog shooting.
My point was with the heavy barrel and woodchucks I am not to worried about barrel heat up. We will see in the next few years how the .204's do. So far extended barrel life in them for a hot rod.......is just on paper and talk. My pal's .204 gets plenty hot at the range. I hope the .204 barrel's do last long.............but, again so far it's just talk. We will see if the groups open up to over a inch once they get 2000-3000 rounds through them. After all it is a hot rod, doubt your going to see 10,000 rounds like a .223 shooting at 4000 or better F.P.S. I don't care what Hornady and others say.
Like those from Missouri say.................."show me". :-)

Buckskin · « **Reply #56 on:** August 01, 2005, 04:26:12 AM »

Woodchuck sniper,

I guess because the 204 doesn't have a nickname its not a varmint rifle.. Do you really think that nobody can shoot a 40gr 204 load??? Just because my rifle doesn't like the 40s doesn't mean all 204s can't shoot them( and you know it). I have since tried the 39 sierras and they shoot dimes. Reality is, that the 204 beats the 22-250 in every category in the 40gar, even if you think nobody shoots them. And the 204, 40gar is 250ft/sec faster than your 50gar at 500yds, giving up a mere 28 ft.lbs. FYI, there are 2 bullet companies that put out 50gar bullets in 20 caliber. hmm, looks like were getting closer to the varminter!!

Barrels do wear out, that is a fact that you really should be aware of.
And cleaning has little to do with barrel life. It the throat of the barrel (thats down near the bullet) that takes a beating from the heat.

I have killed 2 coyotes with my 204, one at about 350 yards and one at 410. Both were as dead as if I shot them with my 300RUM. Guess what, they were with those low energy 32gr pills. I guarantee that the 204 will kill any woodchuck that the 22-250 can.

"Some 204s are accurate"

Strange statement. And I suppose all 22-250s are shooters.

NOTHING that I stated is mis-leading BS, unlike your statements.

And I would love to put my inferior Encore 204 up against your real rifle 22-250 Tikka any day, any yardage.

mjbgalt · « **Reply #57 on:** August 01, 2005, 04:43:41 AM »

i would have to echo those statements...my .204 shoots the 32 and 40's equally as well and i do resent the comment disrepecting my encore.

"real" rifles can do many things and can do each thing well. sounds like my encore. tell me, if your 22-250 wants to be a .308 sometime, can it?

mine can.

-Matt

Woodchuck Sniper · « **Reply #58 on:** August 01, 2005, 12:47:49 PM »

Quote from: Buckskin

Woodchuck sniper,

I guess because the 204 doesn't have a nickname its not a varmint rifle.. Do you really think that nobody can shoot a 40gr 204 load??? Just because my rifle doesn't like the 40s doesn't mean all 204s can't shoot them( and you know it). I have since tried the 39 sierras and they shoot dimes. Reality is, that the 204 beats the 22-250 in every category in the 40gar, even if you think nobody shoots them. And the 204, 40gar is 250ft/sec faster than your 50gar at 500yds, giving up a mere 28 ft.lbs. FYI, there are 2 bullet companies that put out 50gar bullets in 20 caliber. hmm, looks like were getting closer to the varminter!!

Barrels do wear out, that is a fact that you really should be aware of.
And cleaning has little to do with barrel life. It the throat of the barrel (thats down near the bullet) that takes a beating from the heat.

I have killed 2 coyotes with my 204, one at about 350 yards and one at 410. Both were as dead as if I shot them with my 300RUM. Guess what, they were with those low energy 32gr pills. I guarantee that the 204 will kill any woodchuck that the 22-250 can.

"Some 204s are accurate" Strange statement. And I suppose all 22-250s are shooters.

NOTHING that I stated is mis-leading BS, unlike your statements.

And I would love to put my inferior Encore 204 up against your real rifle 22-250 Tikka any day, any yardage.

Hey Thinskin,
I have watched you go through this "22-250" thread justifying and arguing how your new .204 is "superior in everyway to the 22-250". You have tried to compare a 40 grain .204 (after you stated yours don't shoot it) to a 40 grain 22-250 which is hard to even find and buy at a gunshop because most 22-250 shooters with a 1-14 twist use 55 grain, those with a 1-12 (Savage) are going heavier. You seem to think that a lighter faster bullet wins at long distance. I am surprised the 1000 yard shooters don't switch to .204

You make very bold statements and like to argue and justify. You seem to like to dish it out but don't taste it. I have one question for you ace.................how does it taste ? Another hint.......before you start challenging guys to a shoot(real mature) you may want to find out who your dealing with before you loose your kick'em up truck in a shoot. You might want to check a little closer with Hornady in regards to that special powder for longer barrel life only for .204's statement while your at it and ask if it has anything to do with "longer barrel life" compared to a 22-250.

If you want a name for your .204 how about thin skin.

poncaguy · « **Reply #59 on:** August 01, 2005, 02:30:18 PM »

I shoot 2 223's, 2 22-250's, and a Encore 204. I like them all.223 is cheaper, 22-250 more versitile and 204 a little more accurate in my rifles..,