204 or 223 for gophers

S

shikaree

Member
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
10   0   0
I have a 22-250 tikka and I am super happy with it.

The problem is that when I shoot gophers with hit, I don't see the hit in the scope because of the recoil......and it takes the fun out of it.

I already have a CZ 22 and it is really good/deadly on gopher upto 100 yards.

I need a more powerful gun for gophers for more then 100 yards shots......and I want to see the impact of my shot in the scope.....So


What do you recommed for me, 204 or a 223?
 
Depending on where you are, the cheapest solution would be to have a good gunsmith install an aftermarket muzzle break.

I have one on my 6.5-270WSM, I have no problem seeing the bullets impact the target, with your rifle you should experience almost no recoil
 
.223 ammo is easier to get. So are loading components. Mind you, you're not likely to see the hit with one of them either. The recoil will still move the rifle.
 
204 or 223 is a good choice. Thing to remeber, 223 ammo is avalible at walmart, 204, local gun shop. I own both and i like the 204 as its a good flat shooting rifle but it costs more to shoot it and compontes are harder to find but i like it alot. I like the 223 though as they are cheap for shooting gophers.
 
.223 has more recoil than the .204 I've heard many a time. The .204 is supposed to be harder on barrels. I've read that using BlueDot powder with the .223 gives you less recoil and report while still being able to shoot over 3000fps. I'll be trying that out a little later in the year.
 
both are good gopher cartridges but the .223 will provide you with longer barrel life {if that is a concern} but more importantly....if you dont handload ....a whole lot more choice of ammo. from dirt cheap to match grade . If you do roll your own there is no contest as far as availible components go ....my opinion for what its worth is go .223
 
Uh 223 has recoil??? Never noticed that fer sure. But then I usually have a couple of 30cals with me when I am shooting the 223 as well. One cal I will happily shoot all day long regardless of how hot the loads are.
 
I had a 220 swift, it was arond 12-13 lbs. It show 40 gr bullets at 4350 fps. the rifle kicked up more dust at 300 yds than a .308 but because of the weight there was almost no recoil, you could see hits.

M.

My suggestions get a HEAVIER rifle.
 
I had the same issue

I started my gopher shooting career with the 243 and then moved to the 22-250. I noted the same issues as you. I have gone to the 223 with a break from Corlanes out of Dawson Creek.

The break I bought is a break that does not reduce recoil but increase pressure downwards on the muzzle allowing you to see your shots. I tried it out this past weekend and it work great.

Greg
 
I've never used a .204, so take this for what it's worht..

But if you are only shooting gophers, the .204 *apparently* has a 22-250 trajectory, with much less recoil...

If you are a handloader, I think the .204 would be better, if not..223 for sure.

But I am only talking in "theory" since I've never used the .204..
 
204

204saskman said:
204 or 223 is a good choice. Thing to remeber, 223 ammo is avalible at walmart, 204, local gun shop. I own both and i like the 204 as its a good flat shooting rifle but it costs more to shoot it and compontes are harder to find but i like it alot. I like the 223 though as they are cheap for shooting gophers.
Click to expand...


Since when are components hard to find for 204? Vamx bullets are everywhere and so is the brass. FS
 
The .204 sure is coming along! a couple years ago when I bought mine they were fairly difficult to find stuff for, in comparison. Now the supplies are very common, except of course in big box stores.
I would vote for the .204 too, it is a great varmint round with a point blank range of just under 300 yards. In my experience it is also a great little round in the wind.
I do a lot of reading on that caliber and it seems most guys have the best luck with a 39 grain Blitz King, I have effortlessly dropped coyotes out to about 350 yards with that round.
No recoil, cheap to reload (if you do), inherently accurate, fast and very very destructive, no ricochets (safer)...
 
I have both, 204 is a vssfII, 223 is a cz kevlar so both fairly heavy rifles. They both will cause the flips and mist, more likely to see it in the scope with the 204. I shoot one till it gets hot and switch rifles. I checked into a brake for the 223 but was told that they are not very effective on the 223.
 
I plan on getting a .223 at some point for myself. The .204, which only experiance I've had is seeing others shoot it is impressive. However, I have now heard from more then a few shooters their having a hard time working up a consistant, accurate load. While others have them, others are having issues. That may be true with any rifle, but every .223 I've ever shot has been more than accurate enough. Take that for what it's worth. :)
 
Hopefully these links work, its of Hakx and I blasting gophers. Hakx used a
.223, me my .204

http://s99.photobucket.com/albums/l316/trouterl/?action=view&current=Distant.flv


http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2147040&posted=1#post2147040

I agree Pharoh2, they are quite impressive and it took me a while to get a good consistent, accurated load. Finally I was able to get awesome groups to 200yds with Varget and 40gr Vmax. For the Encore bbl. it seems, for me atleast, that the heavier bullets were preferred. I tried shooting 32Vmax and although they were FREAK'N FAST(4100+fps), they did'nt group well past 100yds. I got to the point where I'd leave the .204 at home and just bring the .22. I suppose better optics would cure some of the poor grouping (Tasco Varmint )? All in all though IMO, go for the .204 if you reload, if not, the .223 is an excellent runner up! Hakx has made some amazing shots with his Stevens 200!!!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom