|
.204 WSM
Can anyone offer an explanation as to why Ruger built the .204 off the.222 Rem mag case? Why not engineer it as a short magnum right off the bat? Are they leaving the short magnums up to Winchester & Rem? Like the new 338 Federal, its just a necked-up 308..Why?
|
RE: .204 WSM
cuz shortmagnums or super short magnums aren't greatly accepted into the shooting community, yet. The 300WSM has a great following, but the rest are kinda dead in the water. Whereas a totally "new" round that isn't super stubby or chubby is more acceptable.
|
RE: .204 WSM
if you were familiar with any of Bill Rugers history you would know that Bill Ruger was quite a traditional feller. I'm sure Bill Rugers legacy and traditions would have played a major role in Ruger cartridge designs. Just look at the 480 Ruger its your typical straight wall rimmed pistol case. It wouldnt surprise me one bit if Ruger never developes a short magnum cartridge.
|
RE: .204 WSM
deleted
|
RE: .204 WSM
The .204 Ruger was developed by Hornady.....NOT RUGER.
Further it was being researched and developed several years before the WSMs and WSSMs came out. I have a small sample of the first run of 204 bullets Hornady made in 1998. Why the 222 mag case?.......I suspect there was royalties to be paid to the woodchuck den if they came out with what is called the 20 tactical. So the 222 mag case permitted an escape from the royalties. |
RE: .204 WSM
ORIGINAL: Vapodog The .204 Ruger was developed by Hornady.....NOT RUGER. Further it was being researched and developed several years before the WSMs and WSSMs came out. I have a small sample of the first run of 204 bullets Hornady made in 1998. Why the 222 mag case?.......I suspect there was royalties to be paid to the woodchuck den if they came out with what is called the 20 tactical. So the 222 mag case permitted an escape from the royalties. developed by hornady for ruger |
RE: .204 WSM
Okay, Stop, Breathe, count to ten..............
Short mag......are you kidding me, The 222rem mag is a short action cartridge. I quess I don't get your point at all. The real question should be why wasn't it based off of the 222 cartridge an inherantly accurate cartridge. I quess they didn't use the WSSM brass; because they liked their brass to actually seal to the chamber is a possibility. BTW I like/love the WSM line but I hate/ dispise the WSSM line. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:29 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.