Has there been any wildcat development of the .204? Perhaps an ackley type improvement and necking up to .22 cal?

yes absolutely - they call it the 222 rem mag

The 204 is pretty "Ackleyized" from the factory with minimal body taper and 30-deg shoulder. Necking it up to .224 would indeed make a 222 Rem Mag Improved. I plan to neck it up to .257.

So you are saying the .222RM is a wildcat of the .204 Ruger? I just want to get this straight so as not appear to regurgitate false information.

NO the 204 is a wildcat of the 222RM- what he said is if you neck it up to 22 you just returned to the parent case in a "improved" format. The 222RM AI has been around for years- the difference being it has a 40* shoulder versus the 30* on the 204

So then we should not wildcat the .204 Ruger cause someone else has done it with the .222RM?

I suppose next you will say we should not own the .30-338wm cause the .308 Norma Magnum?

Hell for that matter why don't we just eliminate every wildcat since 1903 and be done with it. Or better yet we should go back to 1873. While we are at it we can get rid of that silly smokeless powder too. After all it's just a passing fad.

Now look at what waterfowler is doing here. That is very nice looking cartridge. Do you suppose someone did that with the .222RM? I'd be willing to bet my left nut that it's been done. But it's still a valid idea.

I'll bet that the two yahoos from MN and ND don't even own a rifle chambered for a wildcat cartridge.

I was thinking the opposite way. Why not neck down a 223WSSM to 204? or for that matter the 243WSSM to 204?

If you put a nice fast twist barrel on one and shoot the 50 gr bergers, I think you would have a winner.

What say you?

Jim

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mann:
Now look at what waterfowler is doing here. That is very nice looking cartridge. Do you suppose someone did that with the .222RM? I'd be willing to bet my left nut that it's been done.

---

Mann,
Thanks for the compliment. And yes it has been done before as the 257 Kimber (see below), although my idea requires no fireforming. You get to keep your left nut...

check out small caliber news or gre-tan website. most 20 cals have been done already. i guess the wssm and the 20 br spit them out so fast they are awaitin the bullet construction to catch up to the chambering. they have sent em' over 5000fps but the bullets aren't holding up.
man, no need to get the burs riled up. they were just politely letting you know that what you were considering is available in one form or another.
the 204 is a cool round but the 20tac offers super quality brass and similar velocities. same effect just a different flavor.
woofer

Woofer, You are correct I did over react a bit. I have noticed on this wildcat board there are a bunch of people that seem very negative about wildcats. I feel any wildcat idea is valid if the person doing it is spending their own money and time. I contend that most wildcats have become "standard wildcats". When a person can buy wildcat dies from a companies warehouse stock it is probably a standard wildcat. I also contend you would be hard pressed to come up with an idea that hasn't been done before in some form or another.

mann, so true. i love em'. if i could afford them i would have more than my share for sure. you really have to check out those websites. you would be amazed at what those buggers can really do.
woofer

Buildn' "wildcats" is about like buildn' "hot rods" or "choppers", there may not be any real "need" for such a creation. (other than to please the owner/creator)

How ya goin fellas.I have a martini chambered in 222 K rimmed.I cant buy factory dies for it.I bought the gun and was told it was a standard 222 rimmed.When I fired some rounds they came out with a 40 degree shoulder.Reloading them is time consuming but well worth it.Very accurate.I have been neck sizing with 222 die,and if the shoulder is more than .356 I have to put it in a full length die with decapper removed,but only about 20mm into die.Great gun to shoot,well worth the buggering around.

Some folks just dont get it.. ..I dont think anybody here said it wasnt worth doing. Its as about as worth doing as wildcating the the 280 Rem case by necking it up to 30 cal. Thats what I think was said.

True enough. However the 35 whelen does get an ackley job and for what gain? It is still a popular wildcat. Why not just go with the 358 norma mag? It will out perform that old 35 whelen all day long. As for the .280 and '06, the 280 case shoulder is .050" to .10" longer than the '06 so there is more room in the case. If I were to improve any '06 case it would be the 280 over any other just cause the shoulder length. The 280 ackley is said to come very close to the 7mm RM but that is still a popular wildcat. What about the weatherby cases from the 375H&H? Lazzeroni? Ackley, Jamison, Newton, Gibbs? Maybe people should stop that and just go with the norm? Won't these people just conform? I could go on all day with these types of comparisons. But that would be pointless and very time consuming.

Wildcat cartridges were originally developed to fill a gap in performance among standard cartridges. That gap no longer exists so wild cating has become a "hobbie" (please forgive the term) for the guy who loves to explore with what is there and to try to improve upon it. remember, with out wildcats we would all be shooting 8x57 mausers and 30-06 springfields.

So, don't sit here and mock me saying... "Some folks just dont get it.." Cause it is obvious to me that you don't! I don't want you to think like me. I just want explain my ideas so you understand where I am coming from.

Thank you for your time and ..

Good Luck!

I think Waterfowler has a great idea!! I remember Mr Ackley telling me in the early 70s that, had he to do it all over again, he would most likely have done a 30 or 35 Deg shoulder than his 40 deg. He said he would have lost a grain or two but the feeding, sizing, forming etc differences would have made up for it. I did much the same when I necked the 6.5x50 RWS down to 17 a few years ago. It worked fine but didn`t do a whole lot more than my H&R Ultra Wildcat in 17/223. Nuff said I think I`ll locate a donor Sako Vixen and make a 25 "Waterfowler". Hey!!! The name even has a certain ring to it . Yeah. The "25 Waterfowler""
Yeah!!!

Aloha, Mark

I am not mocking you Mann I am saying that you took offense to the first couple of replys because you did not "get it".
Necking the 280 Rem up to 30 cal would not leave you with a 280AI it would leave you with something close to a 30-06AI(if you took out the taper and blew out the shoulder) I read the initial responses to your first post as saying you dont need to mess with opening up Ruger 204 brass to 22 cal when you could just start with the 222 Rem mag and be at the same endpoint. But instead of hearing them you claimed that they probably werent catters and didnt know what they were talking about. That is why I was making the correlation with the 280...why not alter the parent case that is closer to your desired case dimensions instead of altering an offspring back to near parent case dimensions.

I give up. You are all correct. Please excuse my ignorance.

quote:

---

I think I`ll locate a donor Sako Vixen and make a 25 "Waterfowler". Hey!!! The name even has a certain ring to it . Yeah. The "25 Waterfowler"

---

Mark,
I'm honored... Do me a favor and have that reamer throated for the 75-grain Barnes X and/or Hornady VMax and I assure you I'll send you at least a couple of barrels to chamber for me.

Mann,
Maybe you should remember that you are a new member here and that there are members here that have forgotten more than you know! Leave the snottiness in your kleenex.
Stepchild

I was just thinking, if you neck it up to 6.5mm, you could probably push a barnes 100 gr triple shock to about 2900 fps in a 21" tube. If you used one of the mini-mauser actions, you could make a fairly light stalking rifle.

stepchild2
Just because I am a new member here doesn't mean I haven't been screwing around with wildcats for a long damn time!! You don't know me and for you to presume that other people you don't know have some how forgotten more than I know is purely bullshit on your part. So stuff it up your newby ass!!!!!

No need for personal attacks.

Many of us have played with wildcats enough to realize most often they aren't worth the effort. But, we still like to fiddle with them just to have something a little different.

Considering the 204 is a relatively new cartridge, there probably aren't many folks that have gotten around to wildcatting them yet. There are also many cases with similar capacities that have been around for awhile.

I have no dog in this fight, so I really don't worry too much. One thing that did rub me a little wrong was this statement, but I my hypoglycemic state I might have misread it:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mann:
Wildcat cartridges were originally developed to fill a gap in performance among standard cartridges. That gap no longer exists so wild cating has become a "hobbie" (please forgive the term) for the guy who loves to explore with what is there and to try to improve upon it. remember, with out wildcats we would all be shooting 8x57 mausers and 30-06 springfields.

---

Am I to understand we no longer have a need for wildcatting, as every existing cartridge we need is out there already? I must disagree. Even with all the cartridges that exist, we are finding that in certain platforms, we lack those cartridges that offer the performance we seek. In the last 4 years, more new cartridges have been developed for the AR-15/M-16 platform than in quite some time. Several of these are deployed overseas, some in official capacity, others in "not so official" form. All were the result of one form or another of wild catting. Rest assured that the "folks in the field" felt that a significant need and GAP existed and that they are glad someone took the time to address it.

Let's not dismiss the need for wild catting just yet and relegate it to the scrap heap of "nice to have but not really necessary"

quote:

---

Originally posted by butchloc:
yes absolutely - they call it the 222 rem mag

---

Necking up the 204 ruger would be "un-wildcatting" so to speak.

quote:

---

Originally posted by MartytW:
I have no dog in this fight, so I really don't worry too much. One thing that did rub me a little wrong was this statement, but I my hypoglycemic state I might have misread it:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mann:
Wildcat cartridges were originally developed to fill a gap in performance among standard cartridges. That gap no longer exists so wild cating has become a "hobbie" (please forgive the term) for the guy who loves to explore with what is there and to try to improve upon it. remember, with out wildcats we would all be shooting 8x57 mausers and 30-06 springfields.

---

Am I to understand we no longer have a need for wildcatting, as every existing cartridge we need is out there already? I must disagree. Even with all the cartridges that exist, we are finding that in certain platforms, we lack those cartridges that offer the performance we seek. In the last 4 years, more new cartridges have been developed for the AR-15/M-16 platform than in quite some time. Several of these are deployed overseas, some in official capacity, others in "not so official" form. All were the result of one form or another of wild catting. Rest assured that the "folks in the field" felt that a significant need and GAP existed and that they are glad someone took the time to address it.

Let's not dismiss the need for wild catting just yet and relegate it to the scrap heap of "nice to have but not really necessary"

---

6.8 SPC, 6.5 Grendel, .458 SOCOM, .50 Beowolf...that's just the last couple years or so...

quote:

---

Marty ter Weeme, Teppo Jutsu LLC
Home of the .458 SOCOM
Let's not dismiss the need for wild catting just yet and relegate it to the scrap heap of "nice to have but not really necessary"

---

Sorry, I forgot your 500 Phantom (AR-10) as well as your .338 Spectre.

Forgive me.

6mm X
30 HRT (Teppo Jutsu)
357 Max Rimless
416 Mag Rimless
7mm SCAR (Teppo Jutsu)
475 TREMOR (Teppo Jutsu)
502 Thunder Sabre

These are just a few that I can think of off the top of my head but numerous more exist.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mann:

I'll bet that the two yahoos from MN and ND don't even own a rifle chambered for a wildcat cartridge.

---

Well, Mann, Dwayne ownes a gunshop, if I am not mistaken, that does some decent work out of Dickinson ND.

And Butchloc is totally right that the 204 Ruger was based on the 222 Rem Mag.

So does pointing that out make them a couple of YaHoos?

Maybe you ought to get a few of your facts straight before showing a little negativity toward other forum members.

We are all here to share, and personally I have learned a lot from a lot of guys on here, and a lot of people have learned things that I have been able to share.

Like would necking a 22/250 to 25 caliber make it a 25/22/250?

thunderbolt

quote:

---

Originally posted by P47D:
Like would necking a 22/250 to 25 caliber make it a 25/22/250?

thunderbolt

---

Abso-gall-darn-lutely!

(Excuse me, I'm kind of a yayhoo)

The problem with message boards is that there is no real way to sense the "tone" or "feel" of what somebody is trying to say. I think Mann took some things personally due to misinterpretation / lack of communication. What Butch and Duane (and me) were saying is that the 204 is based on the 222 Mag with an improved case. If you neck the 204 up to 22, you end up with a 222 Mag Improved (like a 25/22/250 would be a 250 Savage). I don't think any ill intentions, jabs or insults were intended, just simply trying to answer the initial question posted. I'd dare say that Duane has as much wildcat experience here as anybody and has probably fired as many wildcats as I have any centerfire rifle. I hope I'm the Yahoo he is someday...

PS: Can somebody give me a Quickload estimate for the 257x204 'Waterfowler' above? My calculations give me 34.7 grains of water capacity to the top of case neck and I'm interested in 75-grain bullets from a 20-21" barrel (using AA2460 if its in the database). Thanks!

Waterfowler:

Glad at least one guy picked up on a 25/22/250 being a 250 Savage. Last fall I was shooting at 725 yds, ( an old rock out there), and some guy asked what I was shooting at. I told him and he saw me hit it about 4 times in a row.

He started showing me his new Browning 223 WSSM, and bragging about what that was suppose to be able to do.

Then he asked me about what cartridge I was shooting at the rock with. I told him it was a Winchester 6mm Medium Short Thin Mag, on a Model 70 action.

He got all excited about that one, and wanted to know if it was a new cartridge. I told him Winchester had had it out for quite a while " i believe" ( I was playing a little dumb.).

So he asked me the name one more time and I told him. He wrote it down and left to head over to the gun shop he said to ask about them.

Another buddy was standing there, and with a smerk asked me what line of BS was I feeding that guy. I told him I was using a Winchester 6mm medium thin Mag. 'What the hell is that" he asked.

I told him a lot of guys who are not into the short mag craze call it a 243. He about feel off his stool laughing.

Those short mag craze guys can get a little gullible at times?

cheers
seafire

Of course the .204 Ruger came out of work with the Tac 20, a .223-necked-to-.204 wildcat itself.

I've gone the Tac 20 route because of plentiful brass, it's really easy to wildcat/neck down, and there are lots of good bullets.

Hi all; I think necking up the .204 Ruger to .22 caliber would make an interesting and easily made version of the .222 Rem. Mag. Impv. One issue may be the short neck on the .204 Ruger, it would become even shorter as you opened up the neck for the .224 bullet. But you could push the neck - shoulder juntion back to the original .204 Ruger dimensions and have the reamer ground accordingly. Still the neck would be short in comparison to the .222 Rem. Mag., but some of the .222 Rem. Mag Impv. versions utilized a shorter neck and were single shot fed to keep the bullet out of the boiler room. On the plus side, necking the .204 Ruger up to .224 and keeping all dimensions the same includeing the datum line, neck shoulder juntion, except the neck diameter would alleviate any need for fire forming.
Just as a side note: I have been shooting a .20 X .222 Rem. Mag. Impv. - 40* shoulder since late 1993. A very accurate cartridge with about the same case capacity as the .20 - PPC. Velocities run right at 4,200 FPS out of 22" barrels with 36 Gr. bullets. So, is the .204 Ruger an offspring - wildcat of my version? NO, just another version of the parent case.
Have a good day.... Michael _ WA.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael_WA:
One issue may be the short neck on the .204 Ruger, it would become even shorter as you opened up the neck for the .224 bullet.

Michael,
I think you have it backwards. As you neck up a case, the neck lengthens as long as the shoulder angle and case length remain the same. While the 204 has a reasonable short neck, it would remain nearly square (caliber length) if necked up to 224.

Hello again;
You are absolutely correct sir, was just sitting down to post correction when I saw your post. As you opened the neck up on the .204 Ruger the neck would lengthen, seems it would be ideal for forming a .222 Rem. Mag. Impv - 30* shoulder. You could basically form the improved case to fit the chamber and do away with the usual fire forming.
My apologizes for the wrong information on the original post, don't know what I was thinking, or it is quite apparent I wasn't thinking.

michael,
check out woodchuckden.com. they have brass in the 20 tactical all ready to go. they might even have 22 tactical brass. better quality and similar performance with no fireforming...
woofer

quote:

I plan to neck it up to .257.

I'm also thinking of a rimmed version of the .25-204 using the same reamer and 5.6x50R brass and barreling a Martini Cadet action. Anybody got experience with centerfires in the little Martinis?

Woofer, do you know Greg from Gre-tan? He is a great guy. I was in his shop looking at those loads you described above based on the WSSM cases. Those look like they would hit like lightning.