In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

204ruger vs 17rem Opinions Please

ern98ern98 Member Posts: 1,725 ✭✭✭✭✭
edited October 2006 in Ask the Experts
I'm thinking about getting a new barrel for my AR flat top. I've beeen seeing adds for barrels in any number of calibers. But, the calibers that are calling me are the new 204ruger or the 17rem. The 17rem is well known, and very overbore. But, I don't know much about the 204ruger. Is this round here to stay or is it just another flash in the pan on it's way to the graveyard of lost munitions?
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • agloreaglore Member Posts: 6,012
    edited November -1
    The 204 Ruger is here to stay. Everybody and their brother chambers firearms for it.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • temblortemblor Member Posts: 2,153 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Ditto what aglore said. It's already more popular than the 17 Remington.
    Both are pretty much strictly varmit rounds for small stuff.
    The 204 is based on a 222 Remington Magnum case (basicly a slightly longer 223 rem. case) necked to 20 caliber.
    Both require frequent cleaning due to the small bore size, the 17 more so.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • nononsensenononsense Member Posts: 10,928 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    ern98,

    Here's a good selection of information and data for the .204 Ruger cartridge:

    http://www.204ruger.com/

    www.sierrabullets.com/siteart/cartridge/204Ruger.pdf

    http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger204.htm

    http://www.rifleshootermag.com/featured_rifles/204_022505/

    http://www.bullberry.com/204Rugerdata.html

    I don't have any opinion for or against the .204 Ruger but while it will probably remain a viable cartridge for a long time, it may not be the absolute answer as an additional flattop upper. There is not an abundance of bullets currently available nor loaded ammunition. I know that they aren't as new as the .204 Ruger but the .222 Remington and the .222 Remington Magnum (parent to the .204) have established both selection and accuracy as well as fitting into your flattop. Just a little more to consider.

    Best.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dclocodcloco Member Posts: 2,967
    edited November -1
    I own both.

    If you want absolute destruction on prairie dogs out to 405 yards (longest I have shot, so far), the 204 round is for you.

    If you are shooting fur bearing animals for the cape, use the 17 (also 400 yard rifle).

    Reloading? 204 brass is almost half price of the 17. Bullet selection is excellent for the 204 - from 30 grain to 50 grain.

    BUT....the 223 will kill anything just as spectacularly...and cheaper to reload for (less powder).

    If I were in your position...I would be leaning towards a 6.8 caliber.

    What is your intended use for the rifle?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.