Varmint Rifles

[gymsoo]

Since I'm looking for a rifle for targets, varmints, etc and want to make a wise choice I thought a poll would be a good idea.  I already have a 22 LR, a 270 & 30.06 plus several shotguns and I'm looking for something with low recoil.  I appreciate your voting and comments.

Jim Gelatt

[Red Dawg]

I dont think any caliber really stands out as the best. They can all kill anything you want at pretty much any distance depending on how much you shoot. The 6mm remington is amazingly fast but the others are no slouch. The 22-250 and 223 are the most common.

[ICEMAN]

.243     A flat shooter, and still legal for a deer if needed.

[tlbradford]

.204 gets my vote.

[Red Dawg]

.243 win and 6mm remington are the same caliber of bullet. The 6mm is faster and flatter. If you reload you can get 4000 ft. But the 22-250 is just as fast with less recoil.

[KillBilly]

And Barnes makes both the .243/6mm and .22/.250 in the varmint grenade

[Slenk]

Any of the above but then I would use my .338-06 with 225 gr, sierras if thats what I had with me at the time. Deads dead.
Slenk

[Kent Hunter]

It's not in the poll but my vote would be for the .220 Swift. I've shot one now for over twenty years and I love it.

[catwithboost]

I vote with Iceman 243 good all around rifle. I did a lot of asking on the for months and went with 243 and happy with choose. IMO

[huntnphool]

I voted for the 22-250 because of the limited choices on the board but my .220 Swift would have to be my current choice in the safe. I have been eyeballing the .204 the past year, supposed to be another long flat shooter that won't heat the barrel like the Swift.

[Red Dawg]

The .204 is good but runs out of juice fast. Very limited on the ammo also. I am going to add the .22 hornet into the mix. I have now had one for a couple of weeks and let me tell you it is scary accurate. It is a mid range varmint rifle with absolutely no recoil.

[tlbradford]

The .204 does everything a .22-250 can do with less recoil and less powder.  There are a lot of available bullets out there, and a lot of choices in factory ammo.  I just want to clear that up for anyone reading this post.   

[280ackley]

I voted for the .22-250, but agree that the .204 Ruger is a good choice.  You might want to add it to the poll.  I bought a .22-250 a couple of month ago over a .204 mostly because a couple of my hunting partners allready have it.

[Bofire]

The .204 does everything a .22-250 can do with less recoil and less powder.  There are a lot of available bullets out there, and a lot of choices in factory ammo.  I just want to clear that up for anyone reading this post.   

Yarite, and a 243 does everything a 270 does and a 270 does everything a 7mmMag does and a 7mm does everything a 300 does. etc.  except just different!

Carl

[Red Dawg]

I agree that on paper the .204 does look good but that bullet in a slight breeze will not even come close to the 22-250. I stand corrected on bullet selection. Hornady now makes a 45 grain bullet. that one may be pretty good. But for the most part you have a 32 grain and a 40 grain bullet to choose from in factory ammo. Sierra makes a 26 grain i think also of maybe that is the varmint grenade i dont remember. All i know is i have seen them shoot before and if the weather is perfect they are hard to beat. But if anything is out of wack a little bit you are screwed out past 200 yards. that is were the larger caliber is best. Like anything else that is my opinion and opinion are like butholes everyone has them.

[MHWASH]

I voted .223. I own both the 22-250, and .223. So far I cant I cant see a difference on the 4 coyotes I've shot with the 223 this year.

 If you go with a true varmint cal 22 or .204, I believe you will shoot it much more than even a .243. They are just funner inmy opinion.

[KillBilly]

I own a 22-250 and use it, however I also carry my .243 when other game is legal because it is also legal for all big game. I probably won't use the .243 for Elk but I won't hesitate to shoot critters/varmints with my STW either.
I voted .243 only because of a wider selection of bullet weights available.

[tlbradford]

Yarite, and a 243 does everything a 270 does and a 270 does everything a 7mmMag does and a 7mm does everything a 300 does. etc.  except just different!

Carl

Now you are stretching a little to make a point.  How about using .25-06 vs .257, or .280 vs 7mm.  That is closer to what we are talking about here.  I agree you can load up a hot .22 and have much better results than a .204 because the case capacity is so much larger.  However, you are going to do it at the expense of barrel life and additional recoil.

I agree that on paper the .204 does look good but that bullet in a slight breeze will not even come close to the 22-250. I stand corrected on bullet selection. Hornady now makes a 45 grain bullet. that one may be pretty good. But for the most part you have a 32 grain and a 40 grain bullet to choose from in factory ammo. Sierra makes a 26 grain i think also of maybe that is the varmint grenade i dont remember. All i know is i have seen them shoot before and if the weather is perfect they are hard to beat. But if anything is out of wack a little bit you are screwed out past 200 yards. that is were the larger caliber is best. Like anything else that is my opinion and opinion are like butholes everyone has them.

Red Dawg.  I am not getting down on you on your opinion, just trying to show you that you probably were misinformed by someone who shot a .204 when they first came out.  There were a lot of growing pains in the early factory ammo offerings.  Almost all the problems were with accuracy problems and terminal performance on larger animals like coyotes.  Wind drift on a .204 is typically less than or equal to the .22-550.  There is a lot more to take into account, than just bullet weight when looking at how wind effects the flight of the bullet.

I just encourage everyone to do a lot of research before choosing a caliber that suits there needs.

[Red Dawg]

No offence bradford you make a good point. I only have the opinion of what other people have said about the caliber. And from what I saw I was not impressed. But it was a couple of years ago and they have probably fixed the problems. And I have not done a lot of research on it other than looking at ballistic tables a seeing what kind of loads made for it. But I have come to the conclusion that it may be a little better than I originally thought but I still dont think it will compete on a consistant basis with the 22-250.

[280ackley]

I have a buddy that used a .204 this winter instead of his .22-250.  I think he likes the .204 when punching holes in papper but he said he was going back to his .22-250 for coyotes.

[jdb]

if your going to shoot for fur the larger calibers will cause you serious grief. Die hard fur hunters acxtually perfer the centerfire .17's JB

[Red Dawg]

are you being serious. I know that state employed trappers shoot them with 10/22's. But i guess the newer fireball would not be to bad. I suppose they would also be fun to shoot at less than a hundred yards.

[Intruder]

Much of this depends on what criteria you want to use to judge.  Based on pure ballistics there are a ton of good cals out there.  But if you start putting price into the equation and take hand loading out then the 223 really shines.  Also, when you start making the jump from the 22 cal stuff up to 243/6mm stuff that's a big leap.... IMO you've crossed over into big game territory w/ that.   

[WAcoyotehunter]

I have a buddy that used a .204 this winter instead of his .22-250.  I think he likes the .204 when punching holes in papper but he said he was going back to his .22-250 for coyotes.

I have both and have had good luck with both, but i carry my 22-250 after losing a few coyotes that probably would have been anchored with the bigger bullet. 
I carry the .204 if there's a chance for a bobcat. 
rimfires are pretty much in adequate for most coyote hunting.  trappers like them because they shoot from five feet...not 100 yds.

[tlbradford]

Based on pure ballistics there are a ton of good cals out there.  But if you start putting price into the equation and take hand loading out then the 223 really shines.

Totally agree with this.  You can burn up a lot of surplus army ammo you can get on the cheap.  You need to consider the animal you are primarily going to be hunting, handloads or not, recoil issues, price, etc. and figure out which categories are most important to you, then you buy the rifle that meets the most of those needs.

Same thing I tell people when they buy a bird dog.  Don't go by the breed that sounds good, go by the size of your yard, how much time you have to train, kids or not, inside or outside, upland or waterfowl, then choose a breed that meets your requirements.

[Bofire]

"Now you are stretching a little to make a point.  How about using .25-06 vs .257, or .280 vs 7mm.  That is closer to what we are talking about here.  I agree you can load up a hot .22 and have much better results than a .204 because the case capacity is so much larger.  However, you are going to do it at the expense of barrel life and additional recoil."

I chose those calibers because they are similar(not identical) to the diameter difference between a 204 and 22-250. I like the 204, I dont use it cause I have a 22-250 and 223, but the real reason is it is not legal for Cougars. I doubt there is any difference in barrle life between 204/22-250.
Now a 223 is a better long range cartridge than either, has much longer barrel life. The fast twist on the average 223 allow the use of heavier bullets with higher BC.
I know one hunter that uses the 20 caliber exclusively, he takes an average of 200 coyotes per year. ALL the other hunters I know that take large numbers of coyotes (over 150 per year) use larger calibers, up to 243's. Two of them tried the 204 and went back to a 22 caliber.
some day I will own a 204 but it does not "do anything the 22-250 does with less powder and recoil"
I am glad you mention the 280/7 mm express, in my opinion it is far more efficient then the 7mag.
I have really developed doubts about all the belted mags and mags in general under about 35 caliber.
Good discussion!!
Carl

[boneaddict]

I added a couple.  25-06 and 220 swift would be my favorites.

[gymsoo]

Thanks for the voting and comments.  I've made my purchase of a 22-250 and locked the poll.  Thanks again!  Jim

[Red Dawg]

you made a very good choice. what did you end up buying.

[MountainWalk]

im a little late to vote, but i have a few pennies to spend. for me there is not much better you can get than a 220 swift. not as available as the 223 or 22-250, but i believe it has superior wind bucking abilities than the two aforementioned loadings.. it has nice reach and plenty of power...some folks claim its a barrel burner, but i never shoot mine hot, and it once belonging to my g-pa,, a serious handloader, it has had maybe 3000 rounds pushed thru it.. true not as tight grouping as it used to be, but just last week, it put 15 shots in a group measuring 3 inches at 150 yards.. not too bad