Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles New Ruger .204?

I saw on the Ruger website that they (with Hornady) are intoducing a new caliber the .204 Ruger. Why? Apparently it is a .22 rem mag down to 20 cal. Supposedly a higher velocity and flatter shooting than the 22-250 and 220 swift.



We already have alot of varmint rounds in the 20-243 cals. The new 223 wssm is out now too. While I can see why Ruger wants to expand its offerings and they have had some sucess with the 480 Ruger. I would like to see a 22 cal that offers more than the 22-250 but is not overbore as I would think the 223 wssm is.



How long do you guys think all the new calibers are going to last? Is there really a need for the 204 Ruger?



Andrew

Another fad, another novelty cartridge to reload for 20 years from now.

I think it is a good idea. Many Varmint hunters have been using various 19 and 20 cal rounds for years. What's the problem with Ruger bringing out a factory round?

We have ton's of deer rounds especially 7mm's and .30 cals but that doesn't keep the factories from bringing out more.

Seeing as how the 22-250 is on the brink of overbore and .22 that gives more speed will be overbore.

I like the idea and may just have to add a .20 cal to my Encore system though I may end up with a .20 Tactical instead. Sean

FWIW:

I have read that the ".20" is the perfect varmint round. The reason is that the twenty's don't recoil enough to move the scope off the prarie dog. Thus, the shooter can actually see the prarie dog get hit.

I understand that the shooter also can "see the hit" with a 17 remington, but that the .20 has less wind drift trouble.

I don't know if'n all this is truthful, its just what I reads.

BMT

I have no problem with Ruger or anyone bringing out new rounds. I just really had not heard a cry for a new varmint round and was wondering if I had missed something. It may bring back the 222 mag for a short while as people work up their own brass for the new 204. The 222 was quite the Benchrest rounf back in the day.

Andrew

I believe the new .204 is of merit and it makes pretty good sense to me,all across the board.

It is of a long time common boltface,doesn't require a bunch of action design changes and is of the capacity to do the job,less 40 foot flames exiting the muzzle.

So guys can get her off the shelf,or simply rebarrel and yield one. Plus it would be my guess that most of the Big Makers will chamber for it,as it wouldn't be terribly difficult to tool up for it.

Many bullets exist and it is well supported there.

I can see it catching on,as fast,flat and low recoil sorta sell themselves...................

Just to clarify: I don't have a problem with anybody coming out with a new cartridge. More power to Ruger for taking that step. It's good for the firearms market. I am just a wee bit skeptical about the commercial success. We'll see.

If it lives up to their claims or at least close to them, it is a neat idea. Hopefully the fouling issue won't kill it like the seventeens. A bullet past 3,900 fps is hell on fouling and in my experience Ruger barrels are about as smooth a dirt road. Flinch

Interesting idea. It will be fun seeing if it flies or not.

It has been my experience that .224" bullets work just fine on varmints and predators. And every time I downsize, I run into problems with bullet fouling, excessive wind drift and just plain bad barrels.

I've pissed off a bunch of folks by criticizing the .17 larger calibers in print, but I've just been relating my personal experiences. If the truth hurts, so be it; the truth is still the truth. It's amazing how sensitive the small caliber guys are. It's as if there wasn't anything else to shoot.

Ruger seems to have an alliance with Hornady, so the ammunition and brass will be first rate. I would suspect Savage and T/C will jump into the arena as well. It will be interesting to see if Remchester goes for it.

It should be considerably easier to make a good .20 barrel than a good .17. Just think of the percentages. Straight and proper deep hole drilling is the secret of a great barrel and .17s are just nearly impossible to get right.

As one poster said, it will be interesting to see if the .204 Ruger will pump life into the .222 Remington Magnum. I dearly love the .223 Rem and .223 Ackley, but would have to freely admit the .222 Remington Mag is superior on all counts to the .223.

If the .222 Rem Mag gets a boost, we all win.

Steve

It's called "New and Improved" -- a necessary marketing tactic. I hope they sell the heck out of it.

"I dearly love the .223 Rem and .223 Ackley, but would have to freely admit the .222 Remington Mag is superior on all counts to the .223."

Now hold on there, don't go clouding the issue here. I have a 700 BDL sporter in 222 Rem Mag enroute to me right now. I was thinking of a rebarrel to the 204,but what makes the 222 Mag so much better than the 223?(I have and have had several 223's)

Dogzapper, Ive enjoyed your articles over the years.I lost alot of respect in the last VH mag.You say you pissed off small cal shooters because you had trouble with them.I wonder if nosler made 17s and 20s if they wouldn't be the best calibers for varmints ever. I think as a writer you are to concerned with selling products such as noslers and gunsmiths such as Gordy. I don't mean to offend but sometimes you sound like your on the payroll.

I hope they sell the living daylights out of them. I was "raised" on Rugers and I really want to see that company do well. A Family owned compant that has spent ALOT of $ fighting lawsuits and for the 2nd amendment. I think shooters would be supprised to know how much Ruger was involved in getting sporting clays off to as good start in the US.

Back to the .204-- I would like to own one but I was also worried about fouling and of course ammo availability. Both factory and reloading components. If it is easy for gun junkies to shoot and shoot alot I think the caliber will do very well.

Andrew

My point exactly, navrunner. Yeah, I know that every new cartridge is a variation of a now-old theme. But isn't that what makes it fun? If it fouls, clean the sucker. My crystal ball (or is it an 8-ball?) says that lovers of 17s and 223s will continue to love them...

rembo,



The neat thing about the .222 RemMag is the long neck and slightly increased case capacity. Personally, I'm a real .223 Ackley fan, but it would be neat to inprove the .222 RemMag.



Mossback,



No, I'm not owned by any company or gunsmith. I recommend products, but honestly try to not to be too commercial. The only reason I mention stuff is simply to head my readers in the right direction.



My writing has always been an honest attempt to help my fellow hunters, a lot of whom have not been able to hunt and shoot to the extent that I have. It is not driven by monetary considerations. I retired many years ago and the money part of my life is long over.



I know exactly where you are coming from. Gad, I read some of the writers and it is nothing but a running commentary of product. BS. I only write about the products I personally use and those that give me the most success. There are actions, barrels, stocks, bullets and powders that I have failed me and I do not ever mention them in my writing.



Anyway, it's a two-edged sword. If I wrote and never mentioned a brand, lots of guys would contact me for product info. If I mention the actual stuff I use, then it's too much for a few readers (who happen to use something else and are mad because I'm not using the same gear they are).



Anyway, it's probably impossible to make everybody happy, but I try. Whatever, I promise you honesty.



Steve

If I may inject something here, I'll be glad to see anything on the 222 mag case.. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />.....anything but those WSSM's. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />....such a pain to make feed... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />....222's are nearly perfect in my opinion, feeding , reloading, performace, and seem to be easy to make shoot well. A good 222 mag barrel will last a loooooooong time if you dont get it hot........a little bird(actually an old buzzard <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />) said something about a 6.5 factory round coming soon ????????.......
Charlie

Was that 6.5 a WSM? or was it connected with Ruger? I see they still offer the M77 in 6.5 Sweed. Someone there must love that round as I don't recall any other mfg. offering it currently. (I could be and I am often wrong)

Andrew

Oh man Ruger has gone and done it. A .20 cal right out of the blue and now I want one. I Just have too many unfinished projects clutering up the gun room. I just love it when some manufacture comes out with a new cartridge. It seem that there will be a whole bunch of know it all naysayers trying to discredit the new round longbefore it has a chance to prove it's merit. Prime example is the 17 Hornady, many can't figgure it out it does not fit their needs so it is not any good. I wouldnt have a .17 simply because I find them physically too difficult for me to reload So a 17 rimfire goes against me because it can't be reloaded. I think a .20 I could handle the bullets in my press, but most of all I want one just because.

Bullwnkl.

I suppose we can always use another "new" varmint cartridge, but what we really need are some NEW varmints to shoot 'em at.
I been shooting woodchucks so long, maybe I just need a change of pace. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

it seems to me new calibers are like cars.theres a car for everyone and not everyone likes your car.they could make every caliber from .01 to 50.cal and someone would buy it weather it was practial or not .I say the more the merrier.