I was just thinking , the .204 seems to be selling quite well . It seems like there would be another niche that could be filled by a Twenty on a smaller case like the fireball.....something similar to the .20 var-targ . It seems to me like alot of folks are shooting the small varmints like gophers these days and such a factory offering just might sell well too ??

I have had the same thought! The 22 Hornet is such a marvelous ground squirrel caliber out to 150 yards that I'm surprised the manufacturers have not brought out a modern equivalent.

I have a .204 Ruger and it seems to me that the only thing it really has to offer is the speed. Take any of that away and you are left with something far less than most lower end .224" offerings. Time will tell but I would be surprised if other .204 chamberings pop up from the factory.

I have been hearing some about a wildcat 20-250 , using 40 or 50 grain bulets. 4000+ fps with those bullets would be something to see.

A .20 K-Hornet would likely have some following. The problem is that there are too few really good Hornet-specific actions out there. The Ruger 77/22H is a nice action, but the rifles have such a poor reputation for accuracy I would question whether it would profit Ruger to bother with cost of developing such a chambering. The new Savage (Model 40?) might very well be a good candidate.

I just wish that Kimber would resurrect the old Model 84 Hornet action, and that Sako would produce some more of its rare P72/M78 Hornet actions.

If you step up to the Mini Mark X, the small Sako 75, or the Kimber 84 you might as well chamber the full length .204 since the actions and magazines are adequate for it. The Remington 700, Browining A-bolt, Ruger M77 and all of the other .204 actions are really actions for the .308 Winchester, and thus are already rather oversized.

But what about a rimfire in .20 caliber on the WMR case? What a fine idea! It would give a 34 grain bullet about 2100 fps and combine the best of the WMR and the HMR! What's that? You say that sounds like the long-forgotten 5mm Remington Magnum? Well, some things just come along before their time, I guess.

dakota is bring out the 20 tactical & I thing the 20 var tang. as i understand it they bought the rights to both

At the NRA Annual Meeting, I asked the Nosler rep if they were planning on offering .20 cal bullets. He replied "yes, not sure how soon, but one of their engineers/R&D types was collaborating on a .20 cal cartridge that will easily exceed the 204 Ruger".
He offered that with little prompting, but who knows if it (whatever "it" is...) will happen.
Maybe a 20BR on a Rem 700?

I have shot a freinds 20-250.
It has the same shoulder angle just .20 cal.
Not sure of the twist ,but it is designed to handle the 40 and 50 gr bullets.
At 300 yds he clains sub 1" , using Berger 40 gr bullets ( I think)

Another freind is finishing a 20 BR

Johnch

.20 Ultra Mag !!

would launch that 32 gr V-Max at over 6000 fps with 98 gr of AR2209 (IMR 4350)

A moderan 22 Hornet is called the 221 Rem. Fireball. The 17-221 was made by Kimber some years ago. A 20-221 would make a nice wildcat round. The 22 Hornet case is very thin when compared to the Fireball case. I would not build a wildcat round on it other than the K-Hornet. If I had a good gunsmith in my area I would have my Kimber rechambered to the K round.

JamesCalhoon.com has a K Hornet case necked to .198. Shoots a 25 grain bullet to 3600 fps if I remember right. Well liked by owners of this cartridge. Read the article on his site. He also has the 30 carbine case necked to .198 with similar results. Very little powder with great results on gophers.

We know the history. Next the 204 Magnum, then the almost, the 204 Short.

There are some rumors floating around that a rifle company will introduce a 20Br in conjunction with Norma. Sounds expensive, but should shoot fast.

Aaron

quote:

Originally posted by aulrich:
I have been hearing some about a wildcat 20-250 , using 40 or 50 grain bulets. 4000+ fps with those bullets would be something to see.

quote:

Originally posted by butchloc:
dakota is bring out the 20 tactical & I thing the 20 var tang. as i understand it they bought the rights to both

Here are but a few. Some are old, some are new:
the .20 Ackley Bee, the .20 Vartag, the .20 Vartag Turbo, the .20 Slammer, the .20 TNT, the Tactical Twenty, the .20 Terminator, the .20 PPC (AND on AND on AND on…).

I am not knocking them. Each one has its own merits and use. But really, how much velocity and accuracy can you practically gain with a factory rifle over the .204 Ruger without decreased barrel life, increased muzzle blast, noise, etc.?

The major gun manufacturers stay in business selling MANY guns, not a few. Dakota can charge enough to make it work. Remington, Ruger and the rest probably can’t, except through their “Custom Shops.†And then there’s barrel twist. Look at the .223 for example. Barrel twists from 1:6.5 to 1:14. When you drop the caliber to weight ratio, the barrel twist rate goes up. Besides that, how many 20 caliber rifles can the market support?

How many 20 caliber rifles in the same cartridge, with different barrel twists are you willing to buy?
You could buy a Savage and three or four different barrels for the different bullet weights. Not me.

quote:

Originally posted by PC:
.20 Ultra Mag !!
would launch that 32 gr V-Max at over 6000 fps with 98 gr of AR2209 (IMR 4350)

How about a 20 caliber cartridge based on a necked-down .50 BMG?
With a 60†barrel and a 50 grain bullet @ 9000 fps, maybe you could shoot PD’s out to 6 miles!
Good grief!

I remember the 17 Remington, the 17Mach IV and a slew of other 17 caliber wildcats.
Great cartridges for what their intended purpose. Where are they now? I understand there were many factors that contributed to their “commercial demise†but they are making a comeback.

No matter how “good†the factory cartridges are, people are going to fiddle and fix.
Isn’t that why people “wildcat†in the first place? To improve the factory offerings and to have something that nobody else has? Also some hoo-ha factor..

quote:

Originally posted by N. S. Sherlock:
We know the history. Next the 204 Magnum, then the almost, the 204 Short.

N. S. Sherlock is right. Old updated isn’t new enough for the shooting public. Its old revisited. The .204 Ruger is old updated.

Next will be the 205 (because 204 sounds SMALLER) Ultra (super-duper) Magnum.
Followed by the 205 Short Action (whiz-bang) Magnum. Then will be the 205 Short Action Ultra (super-duper, whiz-bang) Magnum. The powder companies will LOVE this.
Nothing like burning 100g of powder every time you pull the trigger. Who wouldn’t love that?

The .220 Swift is still the King Biscuit of factory 22’s and it will do just about anything you need a 22 caliber to do. If performance above the .204, is your goal, why not neck down a .220 Swift?
Fast, accurate and brass would be readily available. Hmmmmm?

If ammo manufacturers were smart, they would do years of R & D (yes, even more than they already do!) and develop a cartridge with near optimum amount of powder capacity for bore, good barrel life, reloading economy (powder cost, etc.), along with great accuracy and ease of reloading.
Then they could peddle it to the rifle manufacturers.

Oh wait, that would be the .204 Ruger.

Never mind…

Mostly much ado about less.

I sure hope they offer more in the way of 20 cal. Just think if they only offered one .224

I'd like to see the 5mm Craig come out commercially!

Just to be a reloadable version of the old but not forgotten 5mm Remington! It doesn't need to be super-fast, that's what the 20 Tactical, 204 Ruger and other such chamberings are for!

This would be a good combination to rid ourselves of yard pests and such out to 150 yards or so! Even good enough for woodchucks!

When the .17HMR came out, I thought it would go
over like Mom's apple pie, so got one......and it
did! But when they bottle-necked the .22 long
rifle case down to .17, I thought it would flop...
seems that was a wrong assumption. Something that
would not satisfy my use appears to have suited
many others.

Even though I have a Tactical 20, I see it as
remaining a wildcat, since ballistically, it is
nearly identical to the .204 Ruger. If it's
true that Dakota has purchased the rights of
the Tac 20 from Kindler, how can they possibly
compete with the twin sister made by several
big companies offering fantastic accuracy?

I agree with Chuck White. If there is a market
for another .20 out there, the 5mm Craig would
be a fantastic offering. Seems as though
companies have learned from Remington's "I....
me.....MINE!" mistake of the past, and sharing
the technology and production rights can make
a world of difference for a new cartridge's
success.

DD,

Perhaps the .204 is like the taste of a nice cold glass of orange juice or the feel of a blow job....ya gotta experience it to fully appreciate it!!!

quote:

Originally posted by DigitalDan:
Mostly much ado about less.

Zactly!

quote:

Originally posted by DannoBoone:
...Seems as though companies have learned from Remington's "I....me.....MINE!" mistake of the past, and sharing the technology and production rights can make a world of difference for a new cartridge's success.

Yep. Like I said, rifle companies make money by selling MANY guns, not a few.

Ammo companies make money selling BAZILLIONS of rounds, not a few boxes.

Another 20 caliber?
Looks like a nitch for custom riflemakers and wildcatters.

Oh, wait that's WHY there are custom riflemakers and wildcatters...

Well all in all, there seems to be a lot of ideas floating around out there. What it comes down to for me is accuracy. Speed means nothing if there is no accuracy. You can get that in a production rifle sometimes.
I fell in love with the 19 Calhoon, the modern version of the 22 Hornet shoot a 27gr at 3600 and when James Calhoon rebarrels your Rugar or CZ you can expect groups at .3 not bad. Makes a great squirrel rifle as well as a coyote rifle..............He also has a rebarrel kit for turning your 223 into a 19-223 check out his web sight at http://www.jamescalhoon.com Im seriously considering truning my old .222 into the 19-223 it would be the perfect coyote rifle plus accuracy in the .3 adn.2 A 32gr at 4075 a 36 @ 3900 all the way up to a 44gr at 3650. I have used his bullets for years great prise and great accuracy, plus he will talk to you for hours about varmint hunting and reloading.

SO I guess we do have another 20cal the .198

Short range, I have to agree with you on the 19 cal's. I just bought a used 223 that will become a 19-223 over the winter.

I'll take a 19-250/BR, or 20 cal versions of same, BUT i'll take mine on a Savage Striker or XP handgun, and a Burris 4-12X Mini Ballistic Plex reticle, for 300-500 yd. coyotes. Whoooeee-- sold!

Sdgunslinger: I have to agree that the 204 is becoming one very popular (and very well deserved by the way) Varminting cartridge.
Virtually every Varminter I know has one or is planning on getting one!
Your visualization of the need for another 20 caliber Varminter for folks to choose from I also think is right on. And the 20 MachIV (20 caliber on a 221 Remington Fireball case) I think would be a righteous choice to fill this niche.
I do just want to reiterate that my two decade long self inflicted hesitancy to get with the 17 centerfire Varmint cartridge program was the single biggest blunder of my long Varminting career! And that career was and is replete with lots of blunders!
I take this opportunity to urge any Varminter that may be on the fence regarding a 20 caliber Varminter - to get down off the fence and take the plunge! Make the effort to expand your enjoyment of different Varmint calibers! I am sure you won't be sorry.
I have several friends who are just eye poppingly happy with their 204 Ruger Varminters!
No naysayers as yet! Universal accuracy and amazing ballistics are just a couple of the reasons for this merriment!
And by effort I mean a Varminter is gonna have to deal (for a little while longer) with brass shortages, finding 20 caliber cleaning rods, being unable to bore sight (who makes a 20 caliber spud today for ones bore sighter), finding good cleaning patches, finding proper sized cleaning jags and brushes and apparently in many areas the 20 caliber bullets are in short supply (I think this is due more to the popularity of the 204 though and not a manufacturing shortage).
Anyway I hope no one else makes the mistake regarding the 20 caliber Varminters like I did about 30 years ago in passing on the then new and wonderful 17 caliber centerfire Varmint cartridges! I missed out on a lot of fun and once I did get into the 17 centerfires I have been more than pleased with them! I have 4 17 caliber Varmint Rifles and one 17 caliber Varmint pistol today and would not be without them. I can easily see myself going for a smaller case capacity 20 caliber Varmint (like the 20 MachIV) but I personally would still hesitate on a 20-250 sized Varmint cartridge.
This has more to do with me being a notorious non-hotrodder of Varmint cartridges. I think pushing things that far would negate some of the benefits of the 204 Ruger (like economy, efficiency, lack of recoil [remember the weight of the powder charge figures into the recoil equation], and we all are wondering about barrel life)! The gains made with a 20-250 type case in flatter trajectory may not be worth it when the throat erosion - barrel life factor is figured in? I don't know for sure I am just worrying for worries sake there on that bit of conjecture!
I am very happy with my 204 Ruger's the way they perform now.
Heck I wonder if a 20-250 would start "melting" many of todays wonderful 20 caliber bullets?
For those that want the increase in more speed than the 204 Rugers can produce then I say go for it! And I hope there are no significant detrimental set backs in that pursuit.
Also this, Sdgunslinger, if it was your intent to ask - are you inquiring if some factory would introduce a "smaller" 20 caliber cartridge like the 20 MachIV or even a "larger" 20 caliber cartridge like the 20-250 I am guessing it won't happen for several years. Due mainly to the popularity and efficiency of the 204 Ruger.
Long live the 20 cals!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

.20 Tac would be cool, but what would be the real benefit to it becoming a factory cartridge?

I have only been in the shooting sports for 29 years (I started at 7...sorry for the late start) and it seems that everytime a wildcat goes factory, we:
buy one,
re-stock it;
bed it;
shoot it;
grumble about something measured in thousandths of an inch;
re-barrel it;
grumble some more;
buy dies, bullets, 6 kinds of powder and finally get it to shoot right.
Then turn our attentions to coming up with a wildcat that will beat the crap out of this new factory round.....

ooohhh, I get it now! Yeah, they should make a new factory .20. (How else would we have any fun?)

IV

I think the firearm manufacturers are so desperate to sell us new firearms they are open to almost any caliber. I can't see where we actually need any of the new ones being produced right now. My only reservation is that if a new caliber is offered look out if it doesn't sell well, whether it's a good caliber or not. The manufacturers will drop it like a hot potato in a very few years. Remington is famous for this. Produce a new caliber, hype it to the hils, then drop it from production if it does not meet sales expectations. It's the chance we take I guess. Best wishes.

Cal - Montreal

Cal Sibley: In your attempt at deriding the fine folks at Remington for dropping calibers as soon as they are designed, developed and distributed are you including such wonderful additions to the shooting world as these following cartridges?
17 Remington?
221 Remington Fireball?
222 Remington?
223 Remington?
222 Remington Magnum?
22 Remington Bench Rest?
22-250 Remington???????????????
6mm Remington Bench Rest?
6mm Remington?
25/06 Remington?
260 Remington?
6.8mm Remington SPC?
280 Remington?
7mm/08 Remington?
7mm Remington Magnum?
7mm Remington Short Action Ultra Magnum?
7mm Remington Ultra-Mag?
7mm Remington Short Action Ultra-Magnum?
300 Remington Short Action Ultra Magnum?
300 Remington Ultra Magnum?
338 Remington Ultra Magnum?
35 Remington? (Now that ones been around for a really long time!)
8mm Remington Magnum?
350 Remington Magnum?
375 Remington Ultra Magnum?
416 Remington Magnum?
and last but definitely not least:
44 Remington Magnum?

I am not sure if ANY company has done more in the way of innovation, investment, design, testing and introduction of Rifle cartridges in the last 50 years than the fine folks at Remington???
Instead of deriding them I think all serious Riflemen should THANK the folks at Remington.
That reminds me - Thank you Remington for all the wonderful and accurate Rifle cartridges you have made available to the shooting fraternities!
Long live Big Green!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

There are 18 different .17 Cal. rounds and only 3 wildcat .20 Cal. rounds listed in the book ( The Handloaders Manual Of Cartridge Conversions ) Third Edition . This book is out of date ,there are more .20 s than listed. Anyone who is interested in wildcats should get this book. With all the cartridges now available how did some of us old timers get by with a 22 LR, 220 Swift, 270 Win. and 375 H&H rifles and a 12 Ga.shotgun when we started hunting ?

quote:

Originally posted by VarmintGuy:
Sdgunslinger: I have to agree that the 204 is becoming one very popular (and very well deserved by the way) Varminting cartridge.
Virtually every Varminter I know has one or is planning on getting one!
Your visualization of the need for another 20 caliber Varminter for folks to choose from I also think is right on.
And the 20 MachIV (20 caliber on a 221 Remington Fireball case) I think would be a righteous choice to fill this niche.

…I can easily see myself going for a smaller case capacity 20 caliber Varmint (like the 20 MachIV)
The gains made with a 20-250 type case in flatter trajectory may not be worth it when the throat erosion - barrel life factor is figured in?
Heck I wonder if a 20-250 would start "melting" many of todays wonderful 20 caliber bullets?
For those that want the increase in more speed than the 204 Rugers can produce then I say go for it! And I hope there are no significant detrimental set backs in that pursuit.

Also this, Sdgunslinger, if it was your intent to ask - are you inquiring if some factory would introduce a "smaller" 20 caliber cartridge like the 20 MachIV or even a "larger" 20 caliber cartridge like the 20-250 I am guessing it won't happen for several years. Due mainly to the popularity and efficiency of the 204 Ruger.
Long live the 20 cals!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

I’m with VarmintGuy. I too missed out on the “fun†17 centerfires. Whether it was indifference, ignorance or prejudice, I put little value on the 17 Rem and 17MachIV.
The mach IV is a more efficient cartridge and VG you know how well it shoots.
I gotta get me one of these…

The next “factory†20 caliber offering will probably be a few years off. The manufacturers are all selling as many .204’s as they can build (or in some cases, MORE than they can build), why would they dilute sales with another 20 caliber cartridge? Look at GM. Build what sells, not what you WANT people to buy…
The .204 is flat selling! I gotta get one of these!

When Hornady developed the .204 Ruger, trajectory, accuracy and efficiency were all considerations. I remember about a year ago, when .204 information was just starting to come out in magazine articles people couldn’t believe the speed and ballistics.

Now people are thinking of ways to put bigger bullets in front of more powder; more speed, longer killing range, etc. etc. Pretty soon it’ll be a 20-250, or a 20-220 Swift, or ?.

If there was a better cartridge, that’s probably what Hornady would have developed.
Remember, the guys at Hornady can build anything they want. If this wasn’t the best “overall†cartridge, we would be arguing about another cartridge, not the .204 Ruger.

If the factories were going to come out with another 20 cal, it probably would be a smaller case. The 20 fireball might be a good choice.
Bigger doesn’t always mean better…

Only time will tell.

quote:

Originally posted by IdahoVandal:
.20 Tac would be cool, but what would be the real benefit to it becoming a factory cartridge?

I have only been in the shooting sports for 29 years (I started at 7...sorry for the late start) and it seems that everytime a wildcat goes factory, we:
buy one,
re-stock it;
bed it;
shoot it;
grumble about something measured in thousandths of an inch;
re-barrel it;
grumble some more;
buy dies, bullets, 6 kinds of powder and finally get it to shoot right.
Then turn our attentions to coming up with a wildcat that will beat the crap out of this new factory round.....

ooohhh, I get it now! Yeah, they should make a new factory .20. (How else would we have any fun?)

IV

Yep. No reason to make it a factory round that I can see.
No more than any other 20 caliber wildcat.

If another round was better "overall" than the .204 Ruger, that's what Hornady would have sold to Ruger. I can't believe the guys at Hornady would spend all that time (and money) to come up with a round that was not as efficient as an existing cartridge.

I'll excuse you for your late start.
Better late than never!

What are the cartridge dimensions of the 204? How would a 204 Fireball compare?

Flippy.... I think Hornady and Ruger made the .204 and not the .20 Tactical for a reason....money! If they would have come out with the .20 Tactical how much brass or loaded rds would they have sold?? The .20 Tactical from my experience is just a tick behind the .204 Ruger as far as velocity goes and you can use any brand of .223 brass you'd like, plus a little less powder. Tom

quote:

Originally posted by Ohlsen:
Flippy.... I think Hornady and Ruger made the .204 and not the .20 Tactical for a reason....money! If they would have come out with the .20 Tactical how much brass or loaded rds would they have sold?? The .20 Tactical from my experience is just a tick behind the .204 Ruger as far as velocity goes and you can use any brand of .223 brass you'd like, plus a little less powder. Tom

Tom, Hornady has a pretty good track record for developing great cartridges;
450 Marlin, 480 Ruger, 17HMR, 17M2 (well, three out of four ain’t bad) and now the .204 Ruger.

Hornady couldn’t have “come out†with the 20 Tactical, Todd Kindler did. The best they could have done was legitimize it. I never understood the moniker “Tactical†in the .20 Tactical. It is a varmint cartridge. Maybe because it was developed off the .223 platform and will fit in AR style rifles. Maybe it just sounded cool to Mr. Kindler.
Maybe that’s why Hornady didn’t choose it.

Hornady spent years testing different configurations while developing the .204, and then approached Ruger after they had cartridge in hand. What Ruger did was to agreed to chamber rifles for it. That’s the story I read. There must be a reason Hornady didn’t use the .223 based 20 Tactical or come up with a .223 based cartridge.
I’m thinking case capacity.

Maybe Hornady felt the slightly smaller case of the 20 Tactical was a hindrance rather than a help. I never heard that selling the cartridge to the military or fitting the cartridge into an AR platform was a concern for Hornady. Accuracy and cartridge efficiency were. Most factory varminters are bolt action guns and since the .204 fits into an AR it is moot anyway.

Hornady probably figured (correctly, I might add) that people would “hot-rod†anything they came up with anyway. Starting out with a little more case capacity ends the “They shoulda just necked down a 222 Magnum†argument. And since the military already poo-poo’d the .222 Remington and the .222 Remington Magnum (50 YEARS AGO) there was no reason to infer military interest in either.

I’m sure as a hand loader, you know that larger case capacity works better with heavier (longer) bullets. You can keep the OAL down without the bullet taking up all the powder space. How many times have you read “if they only made the neck longer†or “if they had only made the case bigger?†Downloading a cartridge is always an option, but and it’s a big but, you can only cram so much powder into too small a case.
Been there, done (tried) that.

If Hornady came up with this cartridge after several years (and several thousands of dollars) of development, there was a reason. Money is only a factor if the cartridge works as advertised. Hornady has to recoup their development costs otherwise it wouldn’t make any sense to develop new cartridges.

Nobody makes money if it flops.

Can you say 5mm Remington Magnum Rimfire? …I knew you could!