.17 Mach II?????


PDA






hillbilly
February 15, 2004, 06:46 PM
I heard on Gun Talk this afternoon talk of the .17 Mach II cartridge....The .22 LR based version of of the .17 HMR.

Okay.....so who knows details?

hillbilly

If you enjoyed reading about ".17 Mach II?????" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
hillbilly
February 15, 2004, 07:18 PM
Found a few details at this link

http://www.outdoorsbest.com/shotshow/atk_ST_0214/


17 Mach 2: CCI and Hornady have teamed their bullet cartridge manufacturing expertise to produce an exciting new rimfire cartridge, the new 17 Mach 2. This bullet offers a magnum cartridge-like performance in a small package--the same length as a .22 Long Rifle. The groups are phenomenal. The 17-grain Hornady V-MAX bullet leaves the muzzle at over 2,000 feet per second (fps), and is faster at 150 yards than a .22 Long Rifle at the muzzle. Mid-range rise is only one inch when sighted for 100 yards. This product is so new ATK has yet to get a price point on it. Consumers can expect this product to hit dealer shelves late summer 2004.

Sisco
February 15, 2004, 07:31 PM
Midway USA is listing ammo for it. None in stock yet but they do list it. :confused:

Muzzle Velocity: 2100 fps
Muzzle Energy: Not yet available

Recommended Uses: Varmint hunting, small game, plinking.

Notes:

This cartridge is based on the 22 Long Rifle necked down to 17 caliber.

It is not a variation of the 17 Magnum Rimfire and is not interchangeable with it.



http://www.midwayusa.com/ebrowse.exe/browse?TabID=6&CategoryID=10011&CategoryString=653+***+7547+***

Greybeard
February 15, 2004, 08:48 PM
I'm pretty sure we've a member here who may want to throw in HER .02 on this. Cats-die-now, where are you?

Coltdriver
February 15, 2004, 09:07 PM
Unless I am mistaken this is the same cartridge configuration that Aquila has been trying to get off the ground for the past year plus or so.

If a .17 HMR is shooting way over 2500FPS and you can shoot dimes at 50 yards and quarters at 100 yards I don't understand where this fits.

Perhaps you can re barrel a .22??

What is the unique angle of this cartridge??

Bruce H
February 15, 2004, 09:35 PM
What is the unique angle of this cartridge ??

It is new. That is all it takes.

hillbilly
February 15, 2004, 09:40 PM
The other angle would be that this .17 rimfire is about as 2/3 to 1/2 as expensive as .17 HMR, at least according to what I heard on Gun Talk today.

Something like $5 or $6 per box of 50.

hillbilly

Sisco
February 15, 2004, 10:07 PM
Perhaps you can re barrel a .22??
I'm sure someone will make a 10/22 retrofit. It's already been done with the HMR.

kernal_panic
February 15, 2004, 11:32 PM
I see this being more popular than 17 hmr.


for all of those with easily replaceable barrrels on our .22 lr rifles and pistols. i for one will be looking for a barrel for my smith m22

buttrap
February 16, 2004, 06:56 AM
why the heck would anyone bother when you can get a .22 mag for the same ammo price and have probably 5 times the knock down at 150 yds? ahhh just as its a new thing?

CatsDieNow
February 16, 2004, 08:45 AM
I like my .17 HMR because it's got negligible recoil and you can see the holes being made through the scope. Kills them woodchucks good too.

I'm not sure I see the usefulness of this, but then a lot of people told me my .17 HMR would be worthless too.

Further discussion at rimfirecentral.com (http://rimfirecentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=50701)

Tamara
February 16, 2004, 08:51 AM
why the heck would anyone bother when you can get a .22 mag for the same ammo price and have probably 5 times the knock down at 150 yds? ahhh just as its a new thing?

Because, as folks above have pointed out, this new cartridge is only a simple barrel swap away for every P-22, 10/22, Neos, M41, et cetera owner out there.

Why spend the bucks on a new gun when you can just get another barrel for one you have? T/C's been making a mint off the concept for decades. :)

Snowdog
February 16, 2004, 10:13 AM
I wonder if there'll be any safety issues with chambering such a round for tube-fed rifles such as the Marlin model 60.

I get the feeling Marlin wouldn't dare, but I certainly wouldn't hesitate to pick up another $99 model 60 if chambered for this round.

Matt G
February 16, 2004, 01:40 PM
If it really is the same length as the .22 L.R. cartridge, then I see this round doing well. After all, it can be chambered in ANY firearm model set up for .22 LR, with only a change to the bore diameter. Magazines for .22 LR will work. Receivers and breech faces and extractors and ejector angles for .22 LR will all work. Feeding should actually work better. I see auto firearms for this.

[shrug]

I could be wrong. But it'll be a low-cost experiment for the manufacturers to test-market their firearms in this cartridge, which means you're likely to see quite a few examples to try. That bodes well. Always bet on the option that is cheap for the manufacturer to market.

Kooter
February 16, 2004, 06:18 PM
I wonder if there'll be any safety issues with chambering such a round for tube-fed rifles such as the Marlin model 60.


why would there be any safety issues? the round is a rimfire so the point of one bullet is not on the primer of the bullet in front of it. there should be no problem with it in a tube fed.

hksw
February 16, 2004, 07:15 PM
I wonder if there'll be any safety issues with chambering such a round for tube-fed rifles such as the Marlin model 60.

IMO, I don't think there will be a safety issue with this setup as Winchester already has the 9417.(9422M chambered for .17 HMR.) The shortness of the new .17 as compared to the HMR round will probably allow the point to get a little farther from the center but will probably be still far away from the rim. Could be wrong though, just my guess.

If you enjoyed reading about ".17 Mach II?????" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!