June 5, 2003, 08:04 AM
Hi, my budy is interested in buying a new rifle. he will use it for general plinking and groundogs. He is shooting 100+ yards so i told him to skip the 22lr due to bullet drop. What is better 22 mag or the new 17 hmr. How is the performance of each caliber and does its performance cover the higher ammo prices? He is looking at a savage 17v or a marlin.
June 5, 2003, 08:15 AM
I'm looking into the .17HMR myself. However, your buddy will find the .22WMR offers a wider selection of ammunition that can most likely can be found for a few bucks less.
I don't think there will be a huge difference in performance at the ranges you're talking about, but I'd put my money on the heavier .22WMR slug for game larger than ground squirrel and rabbit at 100+ yards. Sorry folks, that's just what I gather from the media available to me thus far. Maybe the newer 25gr offering will even the field, who knows.
My purpose for the .17HMR is to defeat the evil grey squirrel, so the tiny 17gr slug will do just fine.
June 5, 2003, 03:24 PM
The 22 Mag. will hold up better in any sort of crossbreeze. And like the poster above wrote, he'll find a much better selection of bullet weights available.
June 5, 2003, 03:33 PM
For groundhog size varmints, you would be better off with the 22 Mag. but there have been many G-hogs shot with the 17 Hummer all the way out to 200 yrds that died the same as if hit with a 22 Mag. The wind is the main problem with the 17 Hummer, it don't take much to blow it around. 4 mph side wind can push it about 1". The 17 is more accurate than most 22 Mags. are. I have both and the 17 shoot groups half the size of the 22 Mag. 17 HRM = 3/4" to 1", 22 Mag. = 1" to 1-1/2".
June 5, 2003, 03:43 PM
.22 WMR is the way to go. Ammo is cheaper, and it is easy to find compared to .17 HMR. The 40 gr bullet should hit harder too. You might want to think about one of these:
I got one for Christmas and LOVE it. This thing is very accurate, at 50 yards my groups are about 3/10 an inch. My friend, who is a better marksman than I, gave it a try and shot a group just under 1/4 an inch at 50 yards! I've got a Bushnell Banner 3-9X40 wide angle scope on there, seems to make a great combo. The best part about these guns is the price tag: about $120 (before scope)
June 6, 2003, 03:02 AM
If I didn't have a rimfire bolt rifle and I were wanting to buy one for taking game, I'd look long and hard at the .17. Then I'd get a 22 Magnum. They will both take game out to 150 yards or so (personal experience here, I'm sure it will take game further but I haven't done it).
The .22 Magnum will buck wind better than the .17... The 22 will hit very nearly as hard out to 125 yards. The 17 will have a flatter trajectory but the catch is... the case of 22 Magnum ammo I have will shoot flatter than the case of .17 HMR ammo you can't buy!
If ammo was available, I'd more than likely get a 17 because where I shoot 50 percent of the, there is very little wind. By most counts, .17 groups does seem to be a bit smaller than 22 Mag groups. The 17 extends your range without having to think about it.
By the way, I have a Marlin 22 Mag and a Savage 22LR and both are decent rifles and have taken game... Reasonably accurate too. But if there's any way possible your friend can extend his budget to include the CZ 452 American, it is absoultely vastly superior in every conceivable way and only costs about $100 more. The trigger alone is worth the $100 difference not to mention the better finish, the real life-sized bolt, the better stock, the proven accuracy...
Business end of the CZ.