Itty bitty bullets: loading the .204 Ruger

Guns Magazine, May, 2007 by Charles E. Petty

Our industry depends on new products every year to keep shooters' interest up and to make sure they spend a little money. They do and so do we, so our world revolves nicely on its axis. When the .204 Ruger was introduced in 2004 it created a bunch of interest and hoopla. The primary reason was because it was fast. Published velocity figures were over 4,200 feet per second for a 32-grain bullet. Unfortunately, as is often the case, no real gun in my experience went so fast, although 4,000 fps was doable.

On paper it would appear as if the .204 was better than the venerable .223 because factory ballistics for a 40-grain bullet in both cartridges showed a 200 fps advantage for the .204. But in real guns there was no difference.

So 2005 die sales for it were at the top of the chart and there was lots of enthusiasm for the cartridge. It quickly appeared in ammo and gun catalogs and where bullet manufacturers had few 20-caliber bullets, now there were many.

Obviously this was a job for the handloading editor and I worked with rifles from CZ and Savage. Bullets came on the market quickly and I shot with Berger, Hornady and Sierra bullets in 30- to 40-grain weights. In May of 2005 I used it on two Montana prairie dog hunts and it was there my opinion of the .204 was really formed.

If a mouse broke wind as the bullet was passing by, the little bullets would wander off course and, if the Montana winds behaved normally, prairie dog safety was virtually assured past 200 yards. Shots made easily with the .223 and 50-grain bullets became difficult with .204s.

Fan or No?

Now I am not alone in my view of the cartridge, but there are probably just as many shooters who love it dearly and, as it is with almost everything to do with guns or cartridges, there is no right or wrong--just different opinions.

Still, it is interesting to work with any new cartridge although it might be a reach to say necking down the .222 Magnum to 20 caliber qualifies. But it does give us a case with a tiny bit more powder capacity than the .223.

With small cases such as this, the normal supposition would be to use relatively fast-burning powders, but my testing and published data suggests the medium speeds will do better. Of course, when I first started with the .204 there wasn't any data and I began by looking at powders successful in the .223. I tried Varget, Ramshot TAC, Vihtavuori N-135, Hodgdon Benchmark and H-335.

Bullets came on line very quickly and before I was finished, I had shot bullets of 30-, 32- and 35-grain weights from Berger plus 32- and 40-grain from Sierra and Homady.

My first test rifle was a lovely CZ and before long I had four factory loads to use to establish baseline accuracy and velocity.

Power Up

For handloading I chose to focus on those same bullet weights at first from both Hornady and Sierra seated out as long as possible within the limits of the rifle's magazine.

The first goal was to see if the mythical 4,000 fps was reachable with the 32-grain bullets. It was. A charge of 29 grains of Ramshot TAC gave 4,085 fps and 0.79" groups and 26 grains Benchmark gave 4,000 and 1" groups. Several other powders gave velocities over 3,900 fps, but nothing really stood out in the accuracy department.

It was also easy to duplicate factory velocities with 40 grainers. A charge of 29 grains Varget gave 3,766 and 0.7" with the 40-grain Hornady and 27 of TAC yielded 3,673 and 0.9".

I wouldn't call any of those groups really outstanding and the only really good group was 0.38" from a 32-grain Sierra with 24 grains of Benchmark at 3,320 fps. In that case, as charge weights went up to get closer to factory velocities, accuracy went down, but it was still pretty good at the heaviest charge I tried of 26 grains with 3,677 and 0.58". Later I learned Hodgdon's maximum load is 28 grains, but I didn't get a chance to try it.

Although I wasn't overly impressed with the .204, my experience seems to be at odds with some other published reviews. One writer whose opinion I value had experience contrary to mine and is actually quite fond of the cartridge. I guess that's why we have horse races.

FACTORY LOADS

LOAD                           VELOCITY   GROUP SIZE
(BRAND, BULLET WEIGHT, TYPE)     (FPS)     (INCHES)

HORNADY 32 V-MAX                 3,970        .74
HORNADY 40 V-MAX                 3,715       1.24
REMINGTON 32 ACCU-TIP            3,951       1.02
REMINGTON 40 ACCU-TIP            3,678        .57

Notes: Group size the product of five shots at 100 yards.

SELECTED LOADS

BULLET                         CHARGE
(BRAND, WEIGHT,   POWDER      (WEIGHT,   VELOCITY   GROUP SIZE
GRAINS)           (BRAND)      GRAINS)     (FPS)     (INCHES)

HORNADY 32        TAC           29.0       4,085        .79
HORNADY 32        Benchmark     26.0       4,000        1.0
SIERRA 32         Benchmark     24.0       3,320        .38
SIERRA 32         Benchmark     26.0       3,677        .58
HORNADY 40        Varget        29.0       3,766        .70
HORNADY 40        TAC           27.0       3,673        .90
HORNADY 40        N-135         27.0       3,653        .72

Notes: Groups fired at 100 yards.

All loads assembled in Remington brass with CCI BR primers.