I would like to see it in the mini-14.

I'd like to see and accessory single-shot pistol top-end that can be fitted on a Mark II rimfire pistol.

so can you guys tell me what a bullet this size moving this fast is going to do to a little red fox Sounds like maybe it might put pieces of fur clear from me to you

Hi Cal:

The Ruger literature says the .204 is "the same length as the .223 Remington ... " leading me to believe it is based on the .223 case. Until someone can get a mic on one, we'll have to speculate.

Ruger's initial press release on November 6 said "same overall case length as the .222 Remington Magnum". The current webpage says .223 length. So I guess until we see a final reamer print, we don't really know what it is.

See the conflicting info at the addresses below:

http://www.ruger-firearms.com/Firearms/News-11-06-2003.html

http://www.midsouthshooterssupply.com/pdf/News-11-06-2003.pdf

If anyone has seen a reamer print or has firm info, please share it.

http://www.angelfire.com/sd/6mmackley/twentycaliber.html
Mike Johnston

Triple Duce Mag, short neck, shoulders blown out to improve it, more capacity than the parent case . Should be a hoot. Only problem is the brass, either Remington .222 mag, (questionable consistancy) and rumor has it Hornadys making the factory brass(worse yet). Should be a little faster than the Tactical .20 (my operating load is right at 4,250ish) but I'm ok with trading a little velocity for all that great .223 brass at reasonable prices.

It would be great if Ruger/Hornaday finalized the new cartridge based on the .223 case..........

Honest guys my post is more than speculation. I can't tell you where it came from but that's the scoop.

I just wrote a note to Hornady today, and asked if the cartridge was based on 222 Rem, 223 Rem or the 222 Rem Mag!

< !--color--> Their reply was 222 Remington Magnum! < !--color-->

I agree, it would really be nice if it were based on the 223 Rem! Especially when you think about all of that cheap brass out there on the market!

Ya think it would be crazy to take a new Ruger when they come out , and have the barrel set back and rechambered to twenty tactical. ? ?

Then proceed to load with cheap .223 brass ?? (grin)

So once again I have to ask since no one answered last time what in your opinions is this calibur going to be like on fox type critters

The fox will give up with just vital hit. I suppose that .20" bullet will be fine.

I am all for new stuff. However this cartridge does not seem to be better than a Swift.

To tell the truth I am kind of excited about this new Ruger caliber and Rifle. I think it will be a great rig in the Colony Varmint fields and I am sure from what I have seen of the 20's that it will work just great on Coyote, Bobcat and Fox. With all that F.P.S. capability one could certainly dial down the speedometer on the 204 Ruger to find a sweet spot that would be both fur friendly, accurate and still have the flat trajectory.

Yeah, I have never been one to rave about Rugers accuracy and usually seek out Remington Rifles for my accuracy dollar. But in the recent past I have noticed more and more of my friends pleased with their Rugers accuracy wise. Indeed the last Ruger Rifle I bought gives me ammazing and consistent accuracy! It is the bolt action Model 77/17 Varminter in caliber 17 HMR. Numerous folks have relayed to me their happiness recently with their 77 centerfire Varminters accuracy.

So I am willing to give it the old college try when they become available. I Hunt a lot of Colony Varmints and there is no doubt in my mind that this Rifle will outperform the Swift in this regard - less barrel heat! This comes in handy in Colony Varmint situations! I do not know how many hours I have wasted on the high plains waiting for the wonderfully flat shooting Swifts (and their large powder charges) barrels to cool down! Meanwhile Varmints escaping! Yeah visualize 46 grains of burning powder from a Swift versus around 26 - 27 grains from a 222 Remington Magnum case! Lot of calories difference there! Let alone the obvious recoil reduction 20 grains less bullet and 20 grains less powder to figure into the recoil equation. I just love my 17 centerfire Varminters for the ability to see exactly where the bullet strikes on a Colony Varmint! I can not do that with any of my Swifts. I am going to venture a W.A.G. here and surmise that the recoil on the 204 Ruger Varminter will be such a person can spot their own hits (and misses) - this again is important to me as I sometimes Varmint Hunt without a spotter.

And while we are on the subject of cases for Petes Sake - I own a 222 Remington Magnum and not only are the cases relatively inexpensive they last for ever! I mean literally forever. This expense worry, in my mind (and I am notoriously a penny pincher) is simply not on my list of 204 Ruger concerns at all!

Kudos to Ruger in finally following Remingtons lead in developing some new Rifle cartridges!

I am looking forward to having one this summer and putting the whack on some Prairie Dogs, Rock Chucks, Ground Squirrels and the burgeoning Rabbit population here on the high plains!

Hold into the wind

VarmintGuy

Click on this link to see picture of ruger 204 http://www.midsouthshooterssupply.com/204ruger.asp

From the picture it looks like they pushed the shoulder forward some leaving a slightly short neck . Looks like it would have somewhat greater capacity than a .222 mag.

Midway has .222 mag brass at about $175 per thousand , whilst once fired .223 can be had for $35 per thousand . $140 might not break the bank , but it would still be dam nice if you could utilize .223 brass for the .204 ........

Sdgunslinger: I will go $173.00 for the 222 Magnum and $112.00 for the 223 Remington - I mean lets compare apples to apples here. Comparing new Remington 222 Remington Magnum brass to once fired unkown and mixed brand 223 Remington brass does not fly for me! As far as I am concerned I would never again waste my time and significant effort sorting, depriming and cleaning any amount of once fired military or shot in police machine guns brass! That is just not gonna happen for $61.00 or $120.00 (the once fired military in my Midway catalog is listed at $58.00 per 1,000). I suggest a person get known quality new brass that will probably last you a lifetime (when you buy the new Remington 222 Magnum brass). And then handload it for the 204 Magnum.

Naw - just not worth worrying about the brass cost.

And the 223 Remington once fired ammo I have bought and salvaged all came from auto guns and was dirty, bent and otherwise more trouble than it was worth to bring online. It still had to be fired in my Varmint guns before I could get consistent performance from it. So there would go 1,000 bullets, powder charges and primers! No savings there!

I have 222 family of cartridges brass that I have fired 20 times! So at that rate if an afficianado of the 204 bought 1,000 pieces of brass that would be uhhh..... 20,000 firings before new brass would be needed! Or $173.00 divided by 20,000 for a brass cost of uhhh.... next to nothing! Less than one cent ($.00865) per firing, brass cost. I would guess at least 2 barrels would have come and gone by the time that much brass wore out. Buying and installing new barrels now that is an expense worth contemplation!

Yeah, I am fully aware of the price difference between new 223 Remington and new 222 Remington Magnum brass. The reason, obviously, is that the Hornady and Ruger folks went with the larger Magnum case was for more velocity! That velocity in the 204 Ruger (4,225 F.P.S.) will make for an awfully flat trajectory and make for smaller windage holds also! I am willing to pay the piper for fast and flat! No problemo!

Hold into the wind

VarmintGuy

As I've said, Triple Duce Mag, short neck, shoulders blown out to improve it, more capacity than the parent case. Trust me . I'm with VarmintGuy on the cost of brass, used cobbled together brass in a $2,000 rifle with a $600.00 scope never figured for me. Hell I've been known to buy weight segregated Lapua .223 from from Midway at $38.00 per 100 take it out of the bag load it and shoot it, sweetest brass you'll ever use.

As to the reason for the choice in cartridge, try this: Ruger and Hornady wanted a propriatary round with their name on it. The Tactical .20 duplicates the ballistics of the .204 Ruger and it is already a well known and proven wildcat. But then Ruger and Hornady have to give the credit to Todd Kindler who developed the Tact.20 and brought the whole .20 market to the table for Ruger and Hornady to capitalize on. Very few of us dedicated sub-caliber guys would be shooting the rounds we are if it weren't for Todd. Don't get me wrong I'm glad it's coming out, and I think anyone whose played with a Tact.20 as I have will assure you It'll be a hit, it's to much fun and makes too much sense not to. But it should have been the Tactical .20 or the .20 Kindler or something of the like, without Todd we wouldn't have the following .20 cal nessesities:Berger bullets, Hornady bullets, Redding and Wilson dies, Dewey rods etc. etc. But business is business and we'll all benifit from a factory .20.

To those of you unsure about this round weigh this with the negative comments of the guys that have never shot a .20 but choose to run it down just to have something to say: My Tact.20 uses 24.2 grains of powder to move a 33 grain bullet with a coeffecient of close to .200 at 4,250ish fps. 2 inches high at 100 yards = 2.2 at 200 = 1/2 inch high 300 = 7 1/2 inch low at 400. The scope doesn't leave the target under recoil, you see the hits. Think of a 33 grain V-Max at 4,250 shooting p-dogs when you can see the hits big fun. My hope is that Remington either recognize's this round or comes out with somthing like it of their own, I can only dream about a Tact.20 in a 40X.

Now boys , no one is talking about $2000 rifles here.........we're talking a Ruger for mebbe $500 across the counter and when I get mine I will probably slap on a $250 Bushnell Elite......not a $600 glass .

I've gotten very good .223 brass by buying segregated Lake City stuff from gun show vendors........I would put the Lake City up against Remmy stuff any day of the week......I have had very mixed results with Remmy bulk brass . If you truly want premium .223 brass , I would give the Laupau route a go . Varmint guy , Midway currently has the once fired .223 brass for $35 per thou on their website.

Reguardless of my minor complaint against the .204 (not based off the .223 case) , will still be very happy to see this project get off the ground .......

sdgunslinger, I'm with you on the lake city. While at my age lifes too short to buy used brass (I don't even buy green bananas) I do like lake city and if I ended up with a bunch I'd segregate it by weight but I'd use it.

I didn't mean to sound elitest with the $2,000.00 rifle bit, I like any thing that shoots well. I'll defer to others on Rugers accuracy, other than rimfires and hand guns I quit buying them about 20 years ago after several attempts ended in frustration. I do like the looks of the M77, and the Number1 is truly a beautiful rifle but again reports of it's inconsistancies has kept me from taking the plunge. As to enexpensive glass I've been very happy with the Weaver 6X20 Grand Slams about $325.00 from Natchez and truly a bargin at that.

What ever you get I'll bet you love the .20, what a hoot Those S.D. p-dogs won't know what hit em.

Well.......



I want a 26 inch,20 cal barrel on my Encore frame!

I just wish that they'd have used the 223 as host brass!

I e-mailed Virgin Valley and they want $365.00 (for 20 Tac) and they want extra for anything over 21 inches, then I went to the MidSouth web site and they want $225.59 (for 204 Ruger), so,it looks like (from a $ stand-point)I have to go with the 204 Ruger. I just can't justify the cost difference between the 20 Tactical and the 204 Ruger!



We'll see what happens by the time the wood chucks come out in late spring!