Remington 700 .204
- Thread starter Holt
- Start date
I've got an XR-100 in 204. Seems OK, though I have yet to do any real load work on it since it's been back from repair.
I'm somewhat disappointed with this particular gun as it seems to have a slow barrel - loads always clock in 200-300fps behind what the load book SAYS they should, although I can also increase my powder charges beyond what the load book indicates without any signs of pressure. I do moly my bullets, so this may contribute to the slower speeds and lower apparent pressures, though I've never before seen moly make quite this much difference.
Out of the box, the gun had a deep chamfer cut around the firing pin hole which manifested as severe primer cratering and leaking. Turns out this was a defect from the factory, and I had the bolt body replaced under warantee.
Hanging out on the Saubier sub-caliber forums, I learned that these sub-caliber cartridges have a reputation for being hard on primers, even under normal pressures. The suspicion is that they produce sharp pressure spikes that drop almost instantly, so that the MAP (maximum AVERAGE pressure) is still in spec. Therefore, you can shoot factory ammo or handloads known to be mild, and still have issues with the primers, despite the fact that everything is well within spec. It's been recommended that I try using Remington 7 1/2 BR primers as they have thicker cups than the Federal match I've been using. (CCI BR's are also thicker). I have yet to try and loads with the new primers. Slow powders seem to play a role here as well, it's better to go with powders on the slightly faster end of the spectrum.
This gun really doesn't care for factory ammo which is just as well as I don't shoot factory (except in the beginning before you could get .204 brass). So far, I'm working with Sierra 39gr BK's over Varget, though Varget seems a little slow for this round - I suspect something a little faster such as 4895 would be a little more suitable.
Before I had the defective bolt body replaced, I was starting to have some good luck with 29.1grs of Varget behind 39gr BK's seated out to the lands. This load is WAY over the max published loads, but velocities are in the right 3800fps range. This load produced some spectacular groups.
Anyway, I hope to do some more load work with it this summer and see what I can find.
I'm somewhat disappointed with this particular gun as it seems to have a slow barrel - loads always clock in 200-300fps behind what the load book SAYS they should, although I can also increase my powder charges beyond what the load book indicates without any signs of pressure. I do moly my bullets, so this may contribute to the slower speeds and lower apparent pressures, though I've never before seen moly make quite this much difference.
Out of the box, the gun had a deep chamfer cut around the firing pin hole which manifested as severe primer cratering and leaking. Turns out this was a defect from the factory, and I had the bolt body replaced under warantee.
Hanging out on the Saubier sub-caliber forums, I learned that these sub-caliber cartridges have a reputation for being hard on primers, even under normal pressures. The suspicion is that they produce sharp pressure spikes that drop almost instantly, so that the MAP (maximum AVERAGE pressure) is still in spec. Therefore, you can shoot factory ammo or handloads known to be mild, and still have issues with the primers, despite the fact that everything is well within spec. It's been recommended that I try using Remington 7 1/2 BR primers as they have thicker cups than the Federal match I've been using. (CCI BR's are also thicker). I have yet to try and loads with the new primers. Slow powders seem to play a role here as well, it's better to go with powders on the slightly faster end of the spectrum.
This gun really doesn't care for factory ammo which is just as well as I don't shoot factory (except in the beginning before you could get .204 brass). So far, I'm working with Sierra 39gr BK's over Varget, though Varget seems a little slow for this round - I suspect something a little faster such as 4895 would be a little more suitable.
Before I had the defective bolt body replaced, I was starting to have some good luck with 29.1grs of Varget behind 39gr BK's seated out to the lands. This load is WAY over the max published loads, but velocities are in the right 3800fps range. This load produced some spectacular groups.
Anyway, I hope to do some more load work with it this summer and see what I can find.
I have owned the same gun - a remington XR-100 - in both 22-250 and 204 Ruger, which forms the basis of my opinions of the cartridge.
The round itself is great, at least on paper. I haven't shot any gophers with it yet, though that'll change over the next few weeks. The little 40 grain bullets should drift about the same as 55 grain pills out of a .22 CF. Which means that this cartridge shouldn't be particularly suceptible to the wind as compared to 22-250's and Swifts, while providing trajectories more like 40 grainers out of the '250's and Swifts.
IT recoils a LOT less, which means you can spot your own shots which is a HUGE advantage in the field. And because it burns a lot less powder than 22-250's, I find it heats up a lot less as well. I can get about twice as many shots out of the 204 than my 22-250 before the barrels get too warm.
I find the blast and noise about on par with the 223, and noticably less than the 'boom' from its 22-250 sibling.
Overall, I think the 204 should nicely span the gap from the 17 Rem to the 22-250. The velocity and recoil of the 17, with the wind drift resistance of the 22-250. In my mind, the 204 effectively displaces the 223 remington from the gopher patch. It has all the advantages of the 223, and then some. I don't see it replacing the 22-250 though, rather complimenting it. The '250 carries much more energy than the 204, and there may be some critters where that is appropriate. I also don't see it taking a role in long range shots beyond 300 yards or so - once you start getting that far out, you should be looking towards fast-twists and heavy aerodynamic bullets instead of muzzle velocity.
The round itself is great, at least on paper. I haven't shot any gophers with it yet, though that'll change over the next few weeks. The little 40 grain bullets should drift about the same as 55 grain pills out of a .22 CF. Which means that this cartridge shouldn't be particularly suceptible to the wind as compared to 22-250's and Swifts, while providing trajectories more like 40 grainers out of the '250's and Swifts.
IT recoils a LOT less, which means you can spot your own shots which is a HUGE advantage in the field. And because it burns a lot less powder than 22-250's, I find it heats up a lot less as well. I can get about twice as many shots out of the 204 than my 22-250 before the barrels get too warm.
I find the blast and noise about on par with the 223, and noticably less than the 'boom' from its 22-250 sibling.
Overall, I think the 204 should nicely span the gap from the 17 Rem to the 22-250. The velocity and recoil of the 17, with the wind drift resistance of the 22-250. In my mind, the 204 effectively displaces the 223 remington from the gopher patch. It has all the advantages of the 223, and then some. I don't see it replacing the 22-250 though, rather complimenting it. The '250 carries much more energy than the 204, and there may be some critters where that is appropriate. I also don't see it taking a role in long range shots beyond 300 yards or so - once you start getting that far out, you should be looking towards fast-twists and heavy aerodynamic bullets instead of muzzle velocity.
- Location
- South Cariboo, BC
boonerbuck has a 700LVSF that is a tack driver. It's a fantastic coyote round if you want to preserve the fur. Although I haven't seen it's performance on gophers personally, the round should be ideal.
prosper said:
I have heard this from a few owners, hard to get those published velocites.
I always thought moly was supposed increase velocity??
.204 sounds like a great gopher round which switches to a great yote round in the winter, I want one
i shoot a savage 12. i load the 40 vmax with BLC-2 and get 3936 fps and .3 groups. H322 shoots 40's just as accurate, but 3775fps. the 32 vmax i can only get to 4108 and .7 groups.
friends of mine shoot remingtons and will shoot 32's in the .3's but 40's in the .7's.
i shot around 80 gophers with it on friday, you can see the hits. some of them got blown out of the scope view though. it was really windy so i had to keep my shots between 75 and 200 yards. i had to leave the close ones for the old lady to take care of with the 22mag.
i have it zeroed at 250 and had to aim 1 inch low to hit all shots to 200.
friends of mine shoot remingtons and will shoot 32's in the .3's but 40's in the .7's.
i shot around 80 gophers with it on friday, you can see the hits. some of them got blown out of the scope view though. it was really windy so i had to keep my shots between 75 and 200 yards. i had to leave the close ones for the old lady to take care of with the 22mag.
i have it zeroed at 250 and had to aim 1 inch low to hit all shots to 200.
My .204 is a Remmy 700 VLS. It's been accurate with every .20 cal bullet I've tried, from the 32 gr Hornady Vmax and Sierra Blitz King right up through to the 45 gr Hornady soft point. I love the caliber. My only complaint with the VLS is the weight .. too heavy to be a comfortable carry rifle. Considering a CZ 527 in .204 next.
I also just got a 700 in 204. Mine is the cheapass adl. Tried about 20 different bullet/powder comb. last sun.All loads were inside the inch. Bullets were from 30 bergers to v max/sierra in 32 and some berger 40's. The 30's were over 4100fs and some loads were 1 hole well under 1/2" Only complaint is the trigger. The spring on the weight adj is wedged in and it takes near 2 fingers to pull. I took the trigger from my 17 and swaped them for the day. If it ever warms up here we'll sight for 250 like rmk and head for the 'fer patch. The recoil and blast are slightly more than 17 but lot less than 22-250AI or 220 swift. Looks like a keeper. Mark
