|
|
Post by Douglas Blair on Jul 19, 2004 18:03:06 GMT -5
How does this cartridge stack up against it's parent cartridge the .223? I have been hearing some interesting things about this cartridge.
|
|
|
|
Post by Desert Rat on Aug 3, 2004 11:54:16 GMT -5
Do you mean the .204 Ruger? I believe it is strictly a varmint proposition...shooting a 32 grain bullet it might out perform the .223 out to 300 yards, but really neither cartridge has much tactical application, I would think, as even the .223 is only a 500 yard combat cartridge at best. It is indeed interesting, as it has the BC of the heavier .22 bullets, but achieves 4000fps. While velocity remains high, within 300 yards, it must really shoot flat. Still, light bullets run out of steam fast, so I don't think anyone will be shooting the cartridge much over 250-300 yards. Once that little 32 grain pill slows down, it's going to be all over the place, and won't hurt much when it does hit something bigger than a ground squirrel. "They" say the cartridge is easy on barrels, which would be interesting also. Now if they have come out with a .20" that shoots a 50-60 grain bullet over 3200fps, (  ) that might have some longer range, tactical applications, although I will still probably stick with my 6mm Remington, and .303 British Tactical Rifles, and I believe even a 7.62X51mm would have longer range hit probablility than a .20, shooting a 60 grain bullet at 3200fps. But I'm guessing such a hypothetical cartridge might be good out to 700 at best, (which I think my 6mm Remington, with the 90 grain FMJBT will do) whereas the 7.62X51mm will shoot out to 800 easy, or more, and the .30-06, 7.92X57mm and .303 British will shoot out to 1000 yards. Just a thought! Rat |
|
|
|
Post by Douglas Blair on Aug 5, 2004 20:24:50 GMT -5
No, the 204 Ruger is a different caliber. The 20 Tactical is a necked down .223 (5.56 NATO). I also understand the military snipers are now using this cartridge in the M-16/AR15.
From what I can gather it is almost as flat as a stove lid out past 300 yards. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by JACKJR60 on Aug 8, 2004 1:08:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Douglas Blair on Aug 8, 2004 10:12:46 GMT -5
Nice article Jack. Very interesting.. Thanks for the link. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by JACKJR60 on Aug 9, 2004 0:48:22 GMT -5
Doug, don't know if you went back to the main site for smallcaliber.com but those guys are some serious small caliber shooters and make doers and magicians with the small stuff. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to sit around and think this stuff up. Like today I think I'll invent the .201 DBS (Douglas Blair Special!!)Jack  |
|
|
|
Post by Douglas Blair on Aug 9, 2004 8:23:15 GMT -5
Wouldn't it be nice to be able to sit around and think this stuff up. Like today I think I'll invent the .201 DBS (Douglas Blair Special!!)Jack Yes it sounds like they have the small calibers down pat. What would the .201DBS be based on? ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Rifleman on Aug 10, 2004 1:22:34 GMT -5
Hey have you fellas checked out the new xm8 and the 6.8 spc ? I think the xm8 is pretty cool but only if they go up in caliber from the .223. The .223 is just too little, can you guess my opinion of the 20 tactical>?
I'm a 308 man, but a 243/6mm class cartridge in a good rifle is what our boys need. And by the way, the barret 50 cal turned out to be pretty effective too !! ;D
Rifleman "Semper Fi"
|
|
|
|
Post by JACKJR60 on Aug 10, 2004 8:18:05 GMT -5
Doug, the RifleMan took the words right outta my mouth. The .201 DBS's parent case would be the .243.  Jack |
|
|
|
Post by Douglas Blair on Aug 10, 2004 8:19:46 GMT -5
Rifleman, I am a 30-06 shooter and meaning no disrespect don't like the "NATO" (308) cartridge. I like the 6 MM but don't care for the .243 I like the 7 MM Rem Mag, 25-06, .270, 280, 260, 8X57, .22 Hornet, 220 Swift, 7 MM-08, .375 H&H Mag. and the 45/70.
I see no reason for anything bigger than the 375 or the 45/70.
I have tried the .308 in three different guns and I couldn't get any of them to shoot like the 30-06 Sprg. I know most say the NATO is more accurate than the 06 but you can't prove that by me. It also don't have the "snort" the 06 has either especially with the heavier bullets. I guess this is the reason so many calibers are with us. What one shooter likes the next one simply don't.
|
|
|
|
Post by JACKJR60 on Aug 10, 2004 8:36:53 GMT -5
Doug, yep the venerable .30-06 to me is the greatest cartridge ever developed. It will do everything in the right hands, at least on this continent.
Jack
|
|
|
|
Post by Desert Rat on Aug 10, 2004 19:45:10 GMT -5
I believe the 50BMG would make a good parent case for the .201 DBS.
Doug, sure the .45-70 and .375 will do everything, but the old .50-70 is a real sweetheart too, if you have not tried it. A Trapdoor Springfield in .50-70 is a really nice combination. Almost got one for $500 recently, until everyone and thier mother's brother told the guy he needed to take it to a gunshow and squeeze every penny out of it, and indeed he got $700 which is out of my price range.
But that's ok...I'll keep saving for my Parker Hale 1853 three band Enfield .577, and should get there pretty soon.
Rat
|
|
|
|
Post by JACKJR60 on Aug 10, 2004 23:29:50 GMT -5
Desert Rat said.............. "I believe the 50BMG would make a good parent case for the .201 DBS."Shucks I didn't know we were going for an anti tank round. ;D Let's see 55gr FMJ armor piercing at 10000 fps. WOW!!!  Jack |
|
|
|
Post by Douglas Blair on Aug 11, 2004 7:02:52 GMT -5
Using the 50BMG for the .201 DBS would be almost the same as the .22 Loundenboomer. ;D No kidding someone necked down the big 50 to .22 once but the barrel didn't last long enough to get the gun zeroed in. |
|
|
|
Post by Rifleman on Aug 14, 2004 18:10:57 GMT -5
Doug. I also like the 30-06 and my favorite hunting rifle is a 30-06. I bought it because it does have a little more energy available then the .308 I am a little surprised you had no luck with the .308 though with accuracy. But I think it was just the luck of the draw. I have had .308's that would not shoot well, as well as some 30-06's that would shoot very well, but alot of this was a function of the gun and not the cartridge. Not trying to start a debate here, just thought I would encourage you to read this article at www.snipercountry.com/articles/accuracyfacts.asp and then maybe you will consider giving the .308 another chance. But hey, If you don't thats ok , the 30-06 is a fine cartridge too. ;D Rifleman " Always Faithful" |
|
|
|
Post by Douglas Blair on Aug 18, 2004 12:00:54 GMT -5
Thanks for the article Rifleman. I have read similar articles before and can say I yet to see any edge the 7.62 NATO has over the 06. In fact I have a 303-06 which will put three bullets in one ragged hole at 100 yards. This rifle started it's life as a 7.65 Argentine Mauser. I had it re chambered to take 30-06 brass and load the ammo with .311 bullets. The barrel is a standard 4 groove military which is glass bedded and free floated into a Bishop stock with a Timney trigger set at 2 pounds. The barrel was around 29 inches which I had cut back to 24 inches, and target crowned. The "steps" were left in the barrel as they are said to improve accuracy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rifleman on Aug 18, 2004 12:16:30 GMT -5
Ya gotta love a guy who sticks to his guns.
Rifleman
|
|
|
|
Post by JACKJR60 on Aug 18, 2004 13:55:09 GMT -5
Doug, gotta love those Mausers. My heart belongs to a Swede 96/38 that is my best shooter. I have a VZ24 that is sporterized with a douglas .30-06 barrel and timney trigger, Boyd's stock and it is a sweet shooter also. I also have a whole pile of Mosin Nagants (all original) that I shoot with iron sights that do pretty fair.
Jack
|
|
) that might have some longer range, tactical applications, although I will still probably stick with my 6mm Remington, and .303 British Tactical Rifles, and I believe even a 7.62X51mm would have longer range hit probablility than a .20, shooting a 60 grain bullet at 3200fps. 
I was gonna say sumpin' but I forgot what it was! 
