adam_oz
Member
I just bought a 17 HMR and love it. I work in a gun store and have found that some people do not feel the same way. What do you think about the round?
17 HMR........What do you think?
- Thread starter adam_oz
- Start date
- Status
sarduy
Member
17 hmr?
just a .22 on exteroids
just a .22 on exteroids
skinewmexico
Member
Greatest thing since sliced bread. Got me back into shooting after a 20 year lay off. Starting shooting the 17, next thing I know, I'm in IDPA, 3 gun, F-class, and hunting. And it will sure smack down big jacks at 150 yards.
EHCRain10
Member
got a savage 93 in 17HMR and its my go to gun for small game
dmazur
Member
It's an "in between-er" 
Ammo's just too expensive for plinking all day at tin cans, like a .22LR encourages.
It has a flat enough trajectory to take prairie dogs at 150 yds.
It doesn't really have enough power for coyotes, so it's not a .223 (or a .243)
In between...
I have one, and I find limited use for it. If I lived near some pastures with a serious rodent problem, I might use it more. Before taking out the .243 for the ones that think they're safe.
Ammo's just too expensive for plinking all day at tin cans, like a .22LR encourages.
It has a flat enough trajectory to take prairie dogs at 150 yds.
It doesn't really have enough power for coyotes, so it's not a .223 (or a .243)
In between...
I have one, and I find limited use for it. If I lived near some pastures with a serious rodent problem, I might use it more. Before taking out the .243 for the ones that think they're safe.
The Highlander
Member
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2008
- Messages
- 256
Round fires like a laser out to about 165. It's a fun little round, but it's more costly than the .22LR. (Then again it's more powerful) If I needed a weapon that fired at that range and further I'd go for a larger centerfire cartridge.
adam oz said:
For calm, windless, days it will dispatch rabbits out to 220 yards and foxes out to 130 yards with V-max ammo'. But, in windy conditions I back off to half these ranges.
V-Max is very destructive to small animals at ranges out to about 130 yards, after that I've found it pencils though with little or no expansion.
Overall I'd say this micro calibre rimfire punches way above it's weight.
ECVMatt
Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2004
- Messages
- 2,871
I like it too...
I bought one when they first came out and had some problems taking raccoons and possums. It did not work as well as the .22m. So I sold my first one and just stuck with the .22M.
Then I watched my buddy shoot his. He was culling turtles that had snuck into his tank stocked with bass and catfish. He shot from 15 to about 125 yards and never missed. He gets to shoot everyday, so he is a great shot. Even so I was amazed at the over 100 yard shots he was making on targets that were no more that 4" tall.
It made me rethink the whole thing. He still uses his .22M for bigger stuff, but for rodents, turtles and birds he uses the .17HRM. So I have a new one and am experimenting with it. I like it a lot so far.
Matt
I bought one when they first came out and had some problems taking raccoons and possums. It did not work as well as the .22m. So I sold my first one and just stuck with the .22M.
Then I watched my buddy shoot his. He was culling turtles that had snuck into his tank stocked with bass and catfish. He shot from 15 to about 125 yards and never missed. He gets to shoot everyday, so he is a great shot. Even so I was amazed at the over 100 yard shots he was making on targets that were no more that 4" tall.
It made me rethink the whole thing. He still uses his .22M for bigger stuff, but for rodents, turtles and birds he uses the .17HRM. So I have a new one and am experimenting with it. I like it a lot so far.
Matt
Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
member
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2007
- Messages
- 13,146
That's about exactly right. .17 hummer is perfect for crows and other birds, ground squirrels, prairie dogs, small vermin. But for "medium" vermin - racoons, beavers, coyotes and such - .22 magnum is a lot better choice, and pretty much the bare minimum for beavers and coyotes in my book. Now as for turtles - the .17 HMR is fine for head shots if you can make it. But for penetration of the shells - yes, the .17 HMR can and will do it, but I'd still rather have a heavy .22 mag for a big turtle to easily pop through the shell.
Shawnee
member
What I think is the .17hmr will enjoy some popularity for a while longer until the "gotta-have-everything-new" crowd figures out it fills a niche that isn't there and then you'll be able to buy .17hmr rifles for a dime a dozen.
taprackbang
member
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2008
- Messages
- 411
I am thinking about getting a .17 HMR in lieu of a .22 rifle. Do you guys think this is a good idea? Sounds funny but the .17 round looks cool. This thread kind of confirms it for me.
doc2rn
Member
For the price it's over rated. .22 lr is just as good at 1/3 the price.
Get a better .22 like a Ruger 77/22 or a CZ and you will see the difference evaporate.
Get a better .22 like a Ruger 77/22 or a CZ and you will see the difference evaporate.
Welome aboard az.
To attain the precision the standard grade .17 HMR will afford you, you will need to use higher and high end .22 lr match grade ammo. It will also out perform the .22 lr terminally in every range the .22 will shoot.
To get the absolute most out of my .22 lr CZs, I have to use either RWS R50 or top end Lapua. (To keep costs down, Wolf Match Extra works well enough for me for practice.) The .17 HMRs CZs I have have no problem keeping up. The cost of ammo is a wash.
Going past 6 years now, I don't think the .17 HMR can be labelled 'new' anymore. It is still going pretty strong.
IMO, the .17 HMR will be here for ever after having established its place with tiny group holes. Even with the 5 mm coming along.
To attain the precision the standard grade .17 HMR will afford you, you will need to use higher and high end .22 lr match grade ammo. It will also out perform the .22 lr terminally in every range the .22 will shoot.
To get the absolute most out of my .22 lr CZs, I have to use either RWS R50 or top end Lapua. (To keep costs down, Wolf Match Extra works well enough for me for practice.) The .17 HMRs CZs I have have no problem keeping up. The cost of ammo is a wash.
Going past 6 years now, I don't think the .17 HMR can be labelled 'new' anymore. It is still going pretty strong.
IMO, the .17 HMR will be here for ever after having established its place with tiny group holes. Even with the 5 mm coming along.
Mike128
Member
My 22 is for plinking all day, and I have several. However, it had some deficiency when hunting. Mainly riccochets and short range. The 17HMR addressed both issues for me and works very well for anything I needed it to due up to racoon size.
Der Verge
Member
I like the HMR, though I do not currently own one. I it a great caliber when used on the right things, at the correct ranges. I drapped a yote at about 230 yards once. Just proof that a well placed shot.....though I will definately use something bigger next time. My only gripe, is the cost. It is very much like the .22wmr (same case) except in popularity. I thought as it became more popular, the ammo cost would drop. I was wrong again. I can load .223, cost wise, so closely, and with the higher versatility of .223, the .17 has been put on the back burner.
Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
member
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2007
- Messages
- 13,146
+1 to that.
Vern Humphrey
Member
I've always liked the .22 LR. My squirrel rifle is a Kimber M82. Years ago, my wife gave me a Ruger 77/22M as a turkey rifle. And I have a .22 Hornet (another M82 Kimber.)
Try as I might, I can't find a hole in my battery shaped like a .17 HMR.
Try as I might, I can't find a hole in my battery shaped like a .17 HMR.
Tarvis
Member
Worthless, not even close to 50 bmg performance, which is what it's based off of.
Shawnee
member
"To attain the precision the standard grade .17 HMR will afford you, you will need to use higher and high end .22 lr match grade ammo."
Make Ya a deal - I'll give you $10 for every shooter who shoots in order to "attain the precision..." and you give me just $1 for every shooter who goes shooting just for FUN and couldn't give a rat's baby-pink bottom if his rifle shoots 1.5" groups instead of 1/2" groups. Deal ?
"It will also out perform the .22 lr terminally in every range the .22 will shoot. " NOT if you're standing up on your back legs in a field plinking at thistelheads or starlings or spinner targets etc.
"To get the absolute most out of my .22 lr CZs,..." Make Ya a deal - I'll give you $10 for every shooter who shoots in order "to get the absolute most out of their rifle..." and you give me just $1 for every shooter who goes shooting just for FUN and couldn't give a rat's baby-pink bottom if his rifle shoots 1.5" groups instead of 1/2" groups. Deal ?
"The .17 HMRs CZs I have have no problem keeping up. The cost of ammo is a wash.". Nope. It is a wash ONLY when you believe all the nation's .22 shooters are deathly allergic to the cheap, fun plinking ammo they buy by the brick every week at Walmart and K-mart and Target and Acadamy and etc., etc. The very fact that the discount places stock the "cheapo" ammo and not the Lapua is - to me - a real strong indicator that the shooting public is a heck of a lot more anxious to plink a pine cone or a rat snake with 10 1-cent .22 cartridges than they are to shoot three 30-cent cartridges through the same tiny hole. I could be wrong about that though. How 'bout if I give you $10 for every high-dollar .22lr AND every .17hmr shooters fire next Saturday and you give me just $1 for every .22 rimfire they shoot next Saturday ? Deal ?
"Going past 6 years now, I don't think the .17 HMR can be labelled 'new' anymore. It is still going pretty strong." The 303. British, the .33 Winchester, .250 Savage, .220 Swift, the .22 Jet and .244 Remington have all been around a lot longer than 6 years but I know you wouldn't say they are going strong. Gun sales and number of cartridges sold should be better indicators of how "strong" a cartridge is going and the .22lr wins hands down - probably 1000 times over. There is often a huge gap between what the Advertising Dept. are braying about 24/7 and what the Public is really spending their hard-earned dollars for.
"IMO, the .17 HMR will be here for ever after having established its place with tiny group holes. Even with the 5 mm coming along. " I obviously disagree but you are surely welcome to your opinion.
Make Ya a deal - I'll give you $10 for every shooter who shoots in order to "attain the precision..." and you give me just $1 for every shooter who goes shooting just for FUN and couldn't give a rat's baby-pink bottom if his rifle shoots 1.5" groups instead of 1/2" groups. Deal ?
"It will also out perform the .22 lr terminally in every range the .22 will shoot. " NOT if you're standing up on your back legs in a field plinking at thistelheads or starlings or spinner targets etc.
"To get the absolute most out of my .22 lr CZs,..." Make Ya a deal - I'll give you $10 for every shooter who shoots in order "to get the absolute most out of their rifle..." and you give me just $1 for every shooter who goes shooting just for FUN and couldn't give a rat's baby-pink bottom if his rifle shoots 1.5" groups instead of 1/2" groups. Deal ?
"The .17 HMRs CZs I have have no problem keeping up. The cost of ammo is a wash.". Nope. It is a wash ONLY when you believe all the nation's .22 shooters are deathly allergic to the cheap, fun plinking ammo they buy by the brick every week at Walmart and K-mart and Target and Acadamy and etc., etc. The very fact that the discount places stock the "cheapo" ammo and not the Lapua is - to me - a real strong indicator that the shooting public is a heck of a lot more anxious to plink a pine cone or a rat snake with 10 1-cent .22 cartridges than they are to shoot three 30-cent cartridges through the same tiny hole. I could be wrong about that though.
How 'bout if I give you $10 for every high-dollar .22lr AND every .17hmr shooters fire next Saturday and you give me just $1 for every .22 rimfire they shoot next Saturday ? Deal ?"Going past 6 years now, I don't think the .17 HMR can be labelled 'new' anymore. It is still going pretty strong." The 303. British, the .33 Winchester, .250 Savage, .220 Swift, the .22 Jet and .244 Remington have all been around a lot longer than 6 years but I know you wouldn't say they are going strong. Gun sales and number of cartridges sold should be better indicators of how "strong" a cartridge is going and the .22lr wins hands down - probably 1000 times over. There is often a huge gap between what the Advertising Dept. are braying about 24/7 and what the Public is really spending their hard-earned dollars for.
"IMO, the .17 HMR will be here for ever after having established its place with tiny group holes. Even with the 5 mm coming along. " I obviously disagree but you are surely welcome to your opinion.
Now, that's an unfair appraisal.
The .17 is a very different cartridge from the .22, and does different things.
I know plenty of people who love their .22s and have no need for a .308, but that doesn't make the .308 any less of a cartridge.
.17HMR offers a good deal more distance and is more precise than most .22 ammunition on the market. I also shoot a heckuva lot more .22 than .17, but that doesn't mean that I don't like my .17 or think that it doesn't have its own place.
It bridges the gap between centerfires and rimfires, and adds anywhere from 50 to 100 yards to the .22. I like it because its a whole lot quieter than my .223s, and with such a small bullet, I feel safer shooting it in certain areas that offer longer shots, but are still well within earshot and possible ricochet range of a centerfire.
5mm Rimfire looks like its going to be a lot of fun, too.
The .17 is a very different cartridge from the .22, and does different things.
I know plenty of people who love their .22s and have no need for a .308, but that doesn't make the .308 any less of a cartridge.
.17HMR offers a good deal more distance and is more precise than most .22 ammunition on the market. I also shoot a heckuva lot more .22 than .17, but that doesn't mean that I don't like my .17 or think that it doesn't have its own place.
It bridges the gap between centerfires and rimfires, and adds anywhere from 50 to 100 yards to the .22. I like it because its a whole lot quieter than my .223s, and with such a small bullet, I feel safer shooting it in certain areas that offer longer shots, but are still well within earshot and possible ricochet range of a centerfire.
5mm Rimfire looks like its going to be a lot of fun, too.
Shawnee
member
"It bridges the gap between centerfires and rimfires"
Not as well, or as cheaply, as the .22 magnum does for 99% of the nation's rimfire shooters in the field. And that idea seems to be getting put forth more and more on the forums - and at the cash register.
And if you want a really sweet, well-mannered .22 centerfire that will turn your .223 into a safe queen, there is always the .22 Hornet.
But, Hey .... rimfires are all about FUN !
Enjoy your .17hmr and your 5mm and your .22lrs and your .22 magnum. It's your money and your time.
Not as well, or as cheaply, as the .22 magnum does for 99% of the nation's rimfire shooters in the field. And that idea seems to be getting put forth more and more on the forums - and at the cash register.
And if you want a really sweet, well-mannered .22 centerfire that will turn your .223 into a safe queen, there is always the .22 Hornet.
But, Hey .... rimfires are all about FUN !
Enjoy your .17hmr and your 5mm and your .22lrs and your .22 magnum. It's your money and your time.
R.W.Dale
Member
look on the ground at your range! At our range 90% of the longer than LR rimfire hulls are of the 17HMR variety. I'll go so far as to say that 17hmr is already MORE popular and prolific than 22wmr
and you wanna talk about the high cost of ammo?
- Status
