22-250 or 204

[matt 270WSM]

I was thinking of geting a 22-250 or a204rug

i was thinking a cz

i walso thinking a bushnell elite 6500 4.5-30-50

[AB2506]

Can't go wrong with either caliber, assuming it is for coyotes. If you are thinking of the CZ, I vote for the 204 as it is built on a smaller rifle. Quite nice. No problem with the scope, but I don't think you need the 50mm objective. 40mm is plenty. Have fun!

[matt 270WSM]

thanks for the info
yes it is for coyotes whate do you think of cz is it the best bang for my buck

[JohnB]

I have the CZ 550 in 22-250 with 6.5-20X50 Zeiss and I sure like it.

[matt 270WSM]

zeiss is way to much money

[rem338win]

I think that your best bang for the buck would be a Tikka. But I like the CZ and wouldn't hesitate to own one. The scope choice is good, but you'll never use anything above 16x on coyotes. Personally I'd go 22-250, because of the wind drift issues out to 500yds, but either will kill well, and the ,204 uses 35% less powder. 22-250, 38grs of AA2700, CCI BR primer, and a 55gr B-Tip. It works great.

[AB2506]

I only have Leupold 2.5-8x36 VXIII on my 22-250 and 17 Fireball. I seldom move the scope off of 4-5x on coyotes. Have shot out to 450 on 4x. You don't need a big scope for coyotes.

[matt 270WSM]

the longest shot you have taken at a coyote

[JohninAB]

I have Bushnell Elite 3200 that is 5-15x40 and usually leave it on 6 power especially when calling as most shots are 200 yards and in. No need for big magnification a 3-9x40 would be lots of scope in my humble opinion.

As for 22-250 vs 204, have used both. Both are awesome yote guns although I sold my 204 and kept the 22-250 for the heavier bullet I can shoot if I go after wolves. Will get another 204 as they have too much fun factor in them as there is no recoil to speak of and watching the smack being laid down thru the scope is cool.

[matt 270WSM]

Thaks for all the info

[JWilliscroft]

[QUOTE=matt 270WSM;229843]I was thinking of geting a 22-250 or a204rug

i was thinking a cz

I have both a .22-250 & a .204 Ruger both in CZ. The .22-250 is a 550 Varmint Laminated, & the .204 is a 527 Varmint Kevlar. Both shoot 1/2" groups @ 100 with 50 gr & 40 gr respectively. Neither seem to like the lighter weight offerings, with groups immediately increacing to the 1 1/4" to 1 1/2" range as soon as I lighten bullet weight. I perfer the .204 as it is alot lighter, & more efficent on powder. The .22-250 takes about ten grains of powder more, which converts into about 1/3rd more loading out of a pound of powder with the .204. I like the nonexistent recoil of the .204, as I can watch the gophers explode, where as the .22-250, has just enough jump that I miss the impact. Case stretch is also a major consideration with the .22-250, something the .204 seems immune to. As a side note... the .204 really bucks the wind, far better than I'd expected. The only time I missed is when I tried to "dope" the wind. That little 20 cal. bullet hit time after time exactly where I pointed it. Both rifles have their place & at extreme extended ranges, the 50 gr. .22-250 will no dought fair a little better, but when I can make a gopher explode @ 300 yards, & see it, I'll take my little .204 Ruger.
On both of these rifles, I adjusted the trigger down to 2 1/2 lbs. doing away with the single set trigger, which I found either to heavy & rough or to light & spooky.
Either rifle will serve you well !!

[matt 270WSM]

[Tundra Monkey]

LOL Matt.....just go get the 22-250

tm

[matt 270WSM]

[gube]

If you plan on doing a lot of shooting in "target rich" fields (prarie dog or paper) and willing to re-load, I would go with the 204. Ballistic twin to the 22-250 and burns 1/3 less powder.
If you don't plan on doing a lot of shooting and are just using it for mostly yotes and don't re-load, then your'e better off going with the 22-250.

I have a couple of 204's cuz I do a lot of prairie doggin and I re-load (up to a 1000+ rounds per year). I also have a 243 for those really windy days. Bullet selection is "key" for the 204. Bergers, wildcats, and 45 gr hornady SP's are ideal for yotes. The ballistic tips I use on the smaller critters.
Either one you chose would be a good choice. Both calibers are exceptional.

[matt 270WSM]

[FishBrain]

Well Matt, are you as confused as I am??
I think what everyone is trying to say is, it doesnt matter which one you get. unles you reload.
lol

[gube]

Originally Posted by matt 270WSM

the longest shot you have taken at a coyote

With the 204 I've taken many yotes out just past 300 yds (bait pile).
I've taken a few just past 400 yds. All with the 35 and 40 gr bergers. All were "bang flops" "DRT's". When I'm calling, most of my shots are under 200 yds. I've only had one runner with the 35 gr berger (called in and shot from about 60 yds off the back of my deck and ran about 75 yds). It's been a very fun little caliber.

Either/or, they both kill yotes. Wouldn't worry 'bout the wind drift thing, the 22 center-fires are affected as well.

[Kale 19]

One thing to remember if your not reloading is that the 22-250 is probably easier to find shells for. Its funny. I had this same dilema as you a year ago. Couldn't decide between the 2 calibers. I ended up going with the 22-250 in a remington VssF 2 with a bushnell 6500 4.5-30-50mm. Great gun. Punches 3/8in groups all day long. This perticular rifle is more of a target rifle and not as practical for yotes. I use it for shooting magpies and crows out to 300yards and don't do a lot of walking with it. As for the scope, it is great. People will tell you that you don't need 30X power and that may be true but the beauty of this scope is that you can bring it down to 4.5X and if for some reason you do want a ton of magnification, its right there. Overall either caliber will serve the purpose you have discribed. Just remember to pick the rifle that fits you best. I can't comment on CZ since I have never owned one but as far as I know, most modern rifles today can outshoot the guy pulling the trigger. (Their all pretty danm good). Good luck and let us know how you make out. Happy yapper hunting.

[sbtennex]

Originally Posted by matt 270WSM

zeiss is way to much money

For who? Paid under $500 Cdn for my 3.5-10X44 and less than $400 Cdn for my 3-9X40, both Conquests, less than a yeear and a half ago. SIR is selling the 3-9 for around the $500 mark, a lot less than a whole pile of Leupolds that can't hold a candle to the Zeiss anywhere even remotely close to the same price range. Seems to me I paid almost that for a 4200 Elite in a package deal a while back.

[matt 270WSM]

Originally Posted by sbtennex

For who? Paid under $500 Cdn for my 3.5-10X44 and less than $400 Cdn for my 3-9X40, both Conquests, less than a yeear and a half ago. SIR is selling the 3-9 for around the $500 mark, a lot less than a whole pile of Leupolds that can't hold a candle to the Zeiss anywhere even remotely close to the same price range. Seems to me I paid almost that for a 4200 Elite in a package deal a while back.

Well I got a Ziess 4.5-14-44 it was cheaper than the bushnel elite 6500
I also got a cz 527 amarcan in 204

[bradh]

Matt...

I just bought a 4.5-14X50 Zeiss for 575.oo shipped off the net. It will go on my 204. I have a 22-250 as well and it doesn't really matter to me which one I grab, they are both great coyote guns.

I have foudn that the 204 us not nearly as picky about what powder you feed it. guys were right when they say the 204 is an inherently accurate cartrdige.

Enjoy.