new to reloading the 204 question

[h10doc]

I New here and to reloading there for reloading the 204. I was looking at using the 40 hdy with using Accurate powder 2520. Is this a good combo and what would be a good starting powder load? Thanks

[Rick in Oregon]

Welcome to the forum h10doc. For starters, you may want to browse the top black bars of the forum screen, the one titled ".204 Load Data" to see some of the combinations that have worked for members.

As you only plan to use Hornady bullets, and are new to reloading, I trust you have the Hornady Handloading Manual at hand also, as it has step-by-step instructions, and includes the 204 Ruger with most popular powders. I'd not proceed further until you have at least one reloading manual, two are better. Over time you'll accrue even more, and can compare loads from manual to manual.

[Hotshot]

Most of the 204 reloaders on this forum have been having their best success with powders that burn a little faster than 2520. That doesn't mean it wouldn't work well, but given a choice when buying powder I'd try one that's more popular with these guys as they have tried a lot of combinations. R10X, 4895, and Benchmark are some of the favorites. I'd try 2460 if I was to go Accurate and 40 grain bullets. If you allready have a supply of 2520 then try it. Always start out a couple grains below max and work up being mindfull of high pressure signs. On the index page there is load data for Accurate as well as most other powder on the upper black bar. Thanks for joining us!

[YoteSmoker]

If I were to try Accurate powder in the 204 I would start with 2230. Powders that work well for me of the ones I've tested are H322, H4895, and H335.

[Silverfox]

h10doc--I see you have been getting all kinds of suggestions about powders OTHER than AA2520, for the most part, so I'll share my experience with AA2520 with you. I am of the belief that as the bullets you are using in a particular caliber get heavier, then a little slower burning powder will probably be a better choice. That being said, I have use fairly fast powders with some of the heavier bullets I shoot in the .204 Ruger with GREAT accuracy too. One such powder is H4895. It's not a super fast powder, but definitely a faster burning powder than AA2520.

REMEMBER: The loads I am listing work just fine in my Savage 12VLP, HOWEVER, your mileage may vary considerably, so start well below the charges I list and work your way up very slowly--like no more than .2 of a grain at a time.

I DO NOT use the 40 gr. Hornady V-Max, but I do use the 40 gr. Nosler BT with AA2520. The shape of those two bullets is different, so you'll need to abide by my caveat in the paragraph above. I started out by looking at the Accurate Arms Load Data (click on the .204 Load Data link at the top of the page here), and saw that their Starting Load with AA2520 was 24.5 gr. and the Maximum Load was listed at 27.5 gr.. Since I am not the sharpest pencil in the box, I decided I'd start my load testing a load just a bit below the Max Load and started with 27.0 gr. of AA2520, Winchester once-fired and neck sized casings, touched off by a Remington 7½ primer. I also loaded up three casings with 27.2 gr., and 3 with 27.4 gr.--still .1 of a grain below the max listed by Accurate Arms.

All test loads were fired at 100 yards. I fired the first three shots with 27.0 gr. The first shot was out of a clean barrel. The next two shots were about 1 inch apart.

The 27.2 gr. load gave me three holes in the paper that measured .414" center to center. This load average 3,873 fps at 12 feet from the muzzle on a day when the temperature was about 63º.

The 27.4 gr. load gave me a three shot group that measured .548" from center to center with shots 1 and 3 touching. The average velocity of these three shots was 3,884 fps.

For my next trip to the range, I loaded three casing with 27.1 gr. of AA2520 and three with 27.3 gr. The temperature this day was 58º. The 27.1 gr. load gave me an average velocity of 3,866 fps, but the group measured 1.00" center to center. The 27.3 gr. load gave me 3,903 fps with shots 1 and 2 almost in the same hole!!! You guessed it--shot #3 was a tiny bit over 1 inch left of shots 1 AND 2. I am certain it was the JERK behind the trigger jerking the shot.

I was pretty sure that the 27.3 gr. load was going to be my load, so on my next trip to the range I loaded up 4 casings with 27.3 gr. of AA2520. The four shots averaged 3,833 fps and gave me a 4-shot group that measured .280" center to center.

I use 3,869 fps as the muzzle velocity of this load and have my trajectory and wind deflection charts based on that MV. My main prairie dog bullet is the 39 gr. Sierra BlitzKing, so I have my scope adjusted for my 39 gr. Sierra load. The scope is set so that bullet hits 1 inch high at 100 yards and is dead on windage-wise. With the load of 27.3 gr. of AA2520, the 40 gr. Nosler BTs have a POI that is 3/4" high and 1/4" right of where the 39 gr. Sierras hit at 100 yards. This allows me to use these two different bullets without messing with my scope settings and the impact point is almost identical (the Nosler shoots a wee bit lower) and you only have to allow a little higher hold or holdoff to the left a wee bit on extremely long shots.

I also have a load for the 40 gr. Nosler BTs worked up using H4895. That load averaged 3,936 fps at the muzzle and is every bit as accurate as my 27.3 gr. load of AA2520. When I burn up the last of my AA2520 powder, I'll be switching over to H4895 for that bullet.

The 40 gr. Nosler BTs give me a lot more red mist and hangtime on prairie dogs than the 39 gr. Sierras with the Sierras having the accuracy edge, but not by much.

[Hotshot]

Whenever I use a powder that is on the slow side of burn rate for the application, I get less velocity, burn more powder, but most important to me is that the loads seem to leave more carbon residue to clean out of the barrel. Typical "slow burn" loads do seem to be accurate in many cases. How about some opinions on this subject? There is more combined loading experience on this forum than anywhere else I can think of.