Does a .17 centerfire have a place in your safe? (Graphic animal images in thread)

[H&Hhunter]

.17 rifles are neat I guess. But I just don't see what they will do for me that a .22 CF won't do better and cheaper in most cases. I had a .22 Hornet for a bit it's a really cool little piece of Americana. But a .223 whips it in every way and is much cheaper to feed.

There is no room for a .17 anything in my gun safe.

 

[Jackal]

My caliber's start at .22 and go up.

 

[montanaoffroader]

For me, the jury is still out. I would like to actually get my hands on a .17 Hornet before I make up my mind.

I haven't really felt the need to pick up a .17 HMR, but the Hornet might be just the ticket to fill the gap between the .22 LR and .223 rounds. Also, unlike the HMR, the Hornet is reloadable.

Therefore, my answer is "Maybe". Until I get a chance to try one out I will keep an open mind on the subject.

 

[cfullgraf]

Different strokes for different folks.

I have two 17 Remington rifles, a bolt action and an AR-15. It takes a little more care to reload due to itty bitty bullets and small case necks, but I do not find it more difficult than other small caliber rifle rounds.

Except for 22 LR, I have no use for any other rimfire round. i like the flexibility that reloading provides me.

 

[tallpaul]

Had a Mach II…useless.

While at the new pricing it is not as attractive I love the lil mach II round. I go in late but when it was 3 dollar a box it was 1/4 to 1/3 cheaper than the hmr with 80-90 percent of the performance. Even now I find it useful for urban pesting where noise and ricochet would be a concern- While it may not be your cupo of tea many of us find it extremely useful!

 

[Art Eatman]

Heh. I watched a fella zap prairie dogs with a .17 Mach II. To a hundred yards, it's as good as a .220 Swift.

I figure that all cartridges have some sort of limitation. What counts is the purpose and intent for its use. I'm not going after bison with a Swift...

 

[H&Hhunter]

One of the things that I do see a .17 Hornet for would be varmint or target shooting for the recoil sensitive. Of course a .223 in a bolt gun doesn't have any recoil either but the .17 can be had in some very petite compact little rifles. If I needed a rationalization to own own one that's the case I'd present to my self.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Heh. I watched a fella zap prairie dogs with a .17 Mach II. To a hundred yards, it's as good as a .220 Swift.

Well, I dunno about that, but I do know it kill's 'em dead, and the faster little bullet holds accuracy better than a .22 LR; my cheap little 917M2 holds MOA to 130 yards.

Used the Mach II quite a bit for praire rats in a semi-rural subdivision nearby (2-5 acre lots). Quiet enough to not tick off the neighbors, and more effective than .22 LR.

 

[Offfhand]

Room for a .17 CF in my gun room? So far I have only five: Two factory rifles and three wildcats. (.17 Rem, .17 Fireball, .17 Javalina, .17/223 and .17/222Mag.) And there's always room for more whenever another good .17 comes along.

 

[Art Eatman]

Well, dead's dead. Granted, the Swift creates more red mist.

 

[barnbwt]

There is no room for a .17 anything in my gun safe

Not surprising by a guy who goes by "H&H Hunter" (or is there a 17H&H Magnum already?)

My deal with sub 22 calibers is the case throats are getting so small that you've gotta be getting some serious inefficiencies introduced by boundary layer effects. Cross sectional area is the determining factor in how much mass (read: available power) can pass through a supersonic venturi, and there's precious little at those sizes. The boundary layer of low-speed gas along the surface of the case wall makes it get even smaller and less efficient. A 22 sabot with a 17 caliber projectile would seem to be a better theoretical solution in almost every way; if only we could develop one.

TCB

 

[MachIVshooter]

Granted, the Swift creates more red mist.

And therein lies the thrill for me. lol. Just knocking them down doesn't satisfy my varmint hunting desires; I want true carnage. The king of the hill for that is a .25-06 with a 75 grainer @ 3,700-3,800 FPS, but my .25-06 is a sporter, and mild as the recoil is, it still gets old after 100+ rounds prone. So my .220 is my primary 200-700 yard varminter. Inside of 200, I like my .17 Rem best. Can watch all the action through the scope, even at 16x.

 

[TMCCOY]

If you have a .17HMR and .223 or similar, I think you're all set.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I split the difference with a .22 Hornet. For the Ozarks, it's ideal.

 

[Peter M. Eick]

I go back and forth between a 222 and a 17 Rem. In the end I will probably do the 222 since it is easier to reload, clean and potentially quieter, but the 17 Rem keeps drawing me back in just for the fun of it. I know my 22/250 will do what the 17 Rem will do, but the 17 requires a bit of finesse in loading, cleaning and shooting.

So I have not made my mind up, but I have considered a 17 Rem now for about 30 years and still not bought one.