Page 1 of 1

.204 Ruger vs. .17 Fireball

Posted: Sat Apr 10, 2010 8:34 pm
by Verminator2
I hate to admit it, but right now I don't have a .204 :eek: I sold my DPMS a while ago to fund a .280 AI, I needed a big game rifle. Now I'm starting to miss the small calibers for squirrels and such. So I've been searching for some sort of a squirrel rifle and was wondering what you all thought about the .204 vs. the .17 Fireball? I figure the .204 has some extra range on it, but I'm really only going to be shooting 200-300 yards on squirrels. How does the launch factor compare? Fireball brass is expensive, but it should last a long time. I probably won't be shooting more than 100 rounds in a session anyway. Thanks.

Re: .204 Ruger vs. .17 Fireball

Posted: Sun Apr 11, 2010 3:17 am
by glenn asher
I've been fooling around with a .22 Hornet here lately. It's a pain in the neck to load, since the case is so small, and so are the bullets. The case is a pain, and it's difficult to get the bullets started into the case. My .221 Fireball is easier to load, but the .204 (of those three cases) is MUCH easier to load. For that reason alone, I'd go with the .204.

I'm getting cranky these days :mrgreen:

Re: .204 Ruger vs. .17 Fireball

Posted: Sun Apr 11, 2010 6:52 am
by wirelessguy2005
i have multiple rifles in both calibers. I truly love the 204 as a caliber and would never be without one. However i also enjoy the .17 fireball and the many benefits that it offers. If you are handloading the .17 fireball it can be just as affordable to shoot as the .204 and offers a few benefits that the 204 doesn't. The fireball has almost zero recoil, has less report, and takes less powder. If you pick up some of the 30, 27, or 25 grain gold bullets from Todd Kindler it can make the .17 fireball a real contender in the .204 realm. The 30 grain gold has as high of a BC as the 40 grain 204 Vmax bullet. Just my 2 cents

Re: .204 Ruger vs. .17 Fireball

Posted: Sun Apr 11, 2010 9:20 pm
by Sidewinderwa
I have both calibers but have not had my 17 Fireball very long. Just got it back from the gunsmith to try to get the accuracy up to snuff. You can see the hits better with the FB than the 204. The wind will deflect the FB more than the 204. I think that either caliber will do just fine out to 300 yards. My big fingers do better putting the 204 in the case than the smaller FB. I will never be without a 204 however, it is my favorite! I am putting a 20 VarTarg together now for the best of both worlds :banana:

Re: .204 Ruger vs. .17 Fireball

Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 9:07 pm
by Verminator2
I'm thinking I'm going to try the .17 Fireball. I really like the idea of zero recoil,17gr. of powder, and 20 grain bullets zipping along at 4000. Hope that doesn't mean I'm banned :shock: :lol: I'll end up with another .204 barrel for it probably. I might try a barrel nut or something on this and have it like a savage. Except prettier :whistle:

:lol:

Re: .204 Ruger vs. .17 Fireball

Posted: Tue Apr 13, 2010 9:03 am
by Rick in Oregon
Verminator2 wrote:I'm thinking I'm going to try the .17 Fireball. I really like the idea of zero recoil,17gr. of powder, and 20 grain bullets zipping along at 4000. Hope that doesn't mean I'm banned :shock: :lol: I'll end up with another .204 barrel for it probably. I might try a barrel nut or something on this and have it like a savage. Except prettier :whistle:

:lol:
Verm: No worries, they didn't ban me with my 17 Mach IV (samo-samo as the 17FB), so you should be safe. ;)

We love our 204's, but ya just gotta admit, these babies look just right on the bench in the rat patch:

Image

Skippy REALLY hates them, I really love 'em. The cases shown are freshly formed from 221FB, neck turned and annealed, and loaded with H322 and the 25gr Berger at 3,860fps. The results speak for themselves:

Image

Impact was at 326 yards. See what I mean?.....How can you possibly resist? :wink:

Re: .204 Ruger vs. .17 Fireball

Posted: Tue Apr 13, 2010 7:22 pm
by Verminator2
That's what I like to see Rick! The more I think about this the more I want it, just something different. I really need a job so I can get this before the rats go down :lol:

Re: .204 Ruger vs. .17 Fireball

Posted: Thu Apr 29, 2010 9:21 am
by tuck2
I,m an old gun nut, started shooting prairie dogs back in 1949 with a 22 rifle with a Wearver J-4 scope. You will pertty well set up if you come out to prairie dog country with 17 HMR, 17 Fireball, and .204 Ruger rifles. If you go to www.huntingnut.com and down load their ballistics program you can see the difference of the three rounds. Prairie dogs get muzzle blast smart so I like the small calibers.

Re: .204 Ruger vs. .17 Fireball

Posted: Thu Apr 29, 2010 10:38 am
by FireBallGuy
I own both and shoot both OFTEN and to me the 204 is my long range rig and the little 17 is my short range varmint/plinking gun. It is stupid cheap to reload for, has no recoil, you see hits and generally is a lot of fun to shoot! I have made clean kills out to just past 400 yards on calm days with mine and is my personal choice for hunting edible things such as bunnies....dumps them like a bad habit! Fouling is pretty much a non issue, my SPS shoots VERY well with 25 grain bergers and hornadys, not much luck yet with the 20's though. I feel EVERYONE needs to have a centerfire 17 to play with!

Re: .204 Ruger vs. .17 Fireball

Posted: Thu Apr 29, 2010 3:30 pm
by Bayou City Boy
They are both excellent cartridges, but they are different enough from each other that you need one of each.

JMO - BCB

Re: .204 Ruger vs. .17 Fireball

Posted: Mon May 03, 2010 8:42 am
by FireBallGuy
Had a nice shot at a LARGE Jack rabbit on saturday.....about 300 yards....was kind of trotting along, thought about taking a shot on the run but I kinda figured he would stop and sure enough. One 25 grain Vmax to the chest and the deed was done! Love this gun!