.223 or .204 or ??

OP...you sound like a cool cat..

I would look for a used Tikka or Rem 223 blued, syn. not common but do come along..204 is nice..but 223 sounds more like what you are looking for.
Optic's there is nothing wrong with a $300-$400 scope..I mean most optic's are pretty good, go to a hunting store and look through them all in your price range..don't be persuaded by the salesman..look outside with them..not in the store.
Optic's are like women..some are okay...some are better..but it depends who is looking.
 
They're about the same. It is not like the animal will notice the slight differences from both cartridges.

The big difference is that .223 is a lot cheaper.
 
Consider a Remy Varminter

I bought a Remington Varmint .223 (heavy barrel) and scope for $800. I reload, and found that the damn thing is a real tack driver....heavy, but a sweet tack driver.

To make it better, I got rid of the tupperware stock. Lo and behold, the groups got even tighter. Hogue stock + Harris bi-pod = one hell of a gun.

50 gr v-max.
 
Comil_1983 said:
$1000 would be way out of my price range.... Believe it or not, Some Gunnutz don't have alot of funds to purchase firearms. I'm in a similar boat as the OP and my total buget for a rifle with optics is $600 or less! So please don't assume everyone can drop a grand on just a rifle at the drop of a hat.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you are stuck with a single shot or a stevens, with an inexpensive scope on it.
 
sobo4303 said:
I bought a Remington Varmint .223 (heavy barrel) and scope for $800. I reload, and found that the damn thing is a real tack driver....heavy, but a sweet tack driver.

To make it better, I got rid of the tupperware stock. Lo and behold, the groups got even tighter. Hogue stock + Harris bi-pod = one hell of a gun.

50 gr v-max.
Click to expand...

I got the same in a 22-250, it's a shooter. Just put a 6.5-20X50 Burris on it:)
 
Redhouse said:
I had a .204, more of a barrel burner, for me was fussier to load for, for sure a lot more cleaning of the barrel...
Click to expand...

I gotta disagree with all of this....

.204 is great for its intended purpose. The best f.i.i.p. actually. Reloading is on par with 223 cost-wise using like-components if not ever so slightly cheaper. It is NOT a bbl burner, I have no idea where people get this idea from. And I clean my 204 about as often as I vote NDP. Just remember its shooting 32grain projectiles and isn't intended for elephants. Does the 223 offer more 'options' for reloading... sure, but not in the 4200fps range. Will you find more 223 on the shelf? Sure.... but none of it performs like the 204. Its all about what you want your rifle to do. Don't buy into the anti 204 crap. If you wanna pound squirrels or crows at awesome distances pick one up and you'll be impressed. If you're scared of spending a little extra to get started with good hornady brass, may as well stick with a .22lr.
 
BrotherRockeye said:
What is expensive about shooting .204?

...
Click to expand...

I think it's one of this things that comes from the fact you don't see "bulk pack's" of 204 and is therefore considered 'expensive' in some folks eyes. The last time i tried buying some crap umc 'bulk pack' .223 I gotta say, there was no bargain to be had! I couldn't believe the high prices. I'd buy some nice factory Hornady 204 and reload any day. .204 factory hasn't come down a whole lot since it was released, but availability is way better and unlike what a lot of naysayers said, it's not going out of production, and isn't a fad like some of the wssm's etc. Anyways, if people look at buying quality brass etc, there really is nothing expensive about 204 I agree 100%.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom