It's Time For A 20HMR. Please Help It Happen...

[TGT]

Guys, it's been 29 years since Remington made a 20 cal rimfire rifle and ammo. It was one flat shooting, hard hitting, sub MOA @100 yard shooting $69 rifle if ever there was one! It was a poorly marketed and ill received round called the Remington 5mm.


NOW'S THE TIME TO RETURN THE GREAT 20 CAL RIMFIRE ROUND TO US.
IF THEY BUILD A 20HMR, IT WILL SELL! BUT WE HAVE TO LET THEM KNOW! Hornady would likely be the best prospects to make it happen.


The differences and advantages between the old Remington 5mm rimfire then, and a new "20HMR" now:

1) Unlike in 1976, a bottle necked rimfire is now familiar, and popular.
2)Unlike the 5mm, a 20HMR will simply utilize the already produced HMR case.
3)The 20 cal round is now standardized & accepted thanks to the 204 Ruger.
4)Hornady already offers 20 cal bullets & they will be only to glad to sell more.
5)A 32 grain 20HMR = best of both worlds between the 22mag, & 17HMR....
6) It will be easy for gun makers to adapt their 17HMR rifles to a new 20HMR.

It will shoot faster and flatter then a 22 mag., but shoot as accurate as the 17HMR. The 32 grain 20HMR will do all this while hitting almost twice as hard as the 17 grain 17HMR !

I'd eat my hat if a 20HMR flopped while everyone still ran out to buy the needle sized .17 round, or the lumbering 22 mag. I'm not Knocking the 17HMR, or the 22 mag. I'm just saying that a 32 grain 20 HMR would be the best of both. The HMR band wagon has already been rolling, and a 20 cal HMR would be an instant hit.

PLEASE CONTACT HORNADY AND ADVISE THEM OF YOUR INTEREST IN BUYING SUCH A RIFLE AND RIMFIRE ROUND. I have.
http://www.hornady.com/contact_us.php

NOTE: I think it would be advisable to refer to it as a "20HMR" that you desire. The "HMR" phrase is already magical to marketers, and so they might listen harder!

 

[hksw]

I must be missing something. Why not just get a .204R?

 

[cracked butt]

I'm holding out for the .19 HMR

 

[dakotasin]

got no use for a 20 cal anything, especially not a rimfire... have you seen the price of 17hmr ammo??

best of luck w/ it, though - i hope they'll help ya get what you want.

 

[George S.]

I have a .17HMR and while it does seem to be a bit better ballistically than a .22WMR, the cost of the 17HMR round is, IMHO, ridiculous. I can't really justify shooting it a lot simply because of the ammo cost. For the same amount of money, I can shoot my .45ACP or for less money, I can shoot .38spl, .357mag, 9mm, .223 Remington and (if I shop around) .30-06 for my Garand or 1903A3!!

What does this round really do better than similar sizes currently available?? Your reasons given may help the marketing people or the tool makers but what really makes the round better ballistically? Velocity numbers are cool things to read about, but will it kill varmints any quicker? If a 32 grain .20HMR bullet is good, why isn't the 32 grain .204 Ruger as good. At around 4000fps and roughly 1200 ft-lbs of energy, I would think it would be heads above a rimfire bullet of the same size and weight.

There is a whole world of .22nnn calibers that have been around for many years and somwhere in that stack is an excellent caliber for just about any need. True, they are centerfire rounds, but for velocity, enegry, and bullet weight, there are a good dozen or so calibers that will outshoot rimfire stuff.

New calibers are getting to be just a marketing tool in order to sell some new rifle and create profits for gun makers and ammo makers without a real need for some niche caliber. Did the shooting world really need a .17HMR much less a .17HM2??

 

[Selfdfenz]

I thought the Hummer was a just a goofy trick to boost gun and ammo maker profits. Then I stumbled on one at a gun show, NIB and cheap, so I bit.

Well I was wrong. It may be one of the most accurate rifles I own and I love shooting it. I don't think the ammo price will stay as high is it is now forever.

On the other hand I can't see why they whipped up the 17 HMR short. Peps that have them are nuts over the thing so go figure.

TGT
You make some good points but I'm not sure the hole between the 22 mag and 17 Hummer needs to be filled. Guys that hunt with the hummer already complain it is a little too destructive on small critters and the the caliber is too light for coyotes. Why wouldn't the 20 HMR have the same issues?

Not argueing, just wondering.

Best
S-

 

[AZRickD]

Owners of these rounds paying extra for the precision projectile.

Rick

 

[Johnny Guest]

No, it won't work out.

I mean, you have a good idea there, but we're waaaayy ahead of you. The HUGE gap between the .17 and the .22 rimfires is already slated to be filled by an exactly-splitting-the-difference cartridge, the
.195 Aguila Super Rimfire Magnum!

Sorry about that.

 

[TGT]

.... a .195 what? Ok, so where is this 19 cal round and the rifle that shoots it? I'm all ears.

BTW; Please....the next guy on any web sight that tells me to purchase a 204 Ruger while I'm talking rimfire..... I'm going to tell him that it sounds like a logical suggestion, and I'll consider if he shows me how to stick a 222 Magnum up his Marlin 39A

 

[Coltdriver]

I have a .17HMR. Easily the most accurate "off the shelf" rifle I have ever owned.

But it is a bit light for anything bigger than a prarie dog.

Recently a .204 got added to my collection. Very cool cartridge. Shoot flat right out to about 300 yards. But it is a center fire.

I think the limiting factor with these rimfires is ultimately the cost of the ammo. When I think rimfire, I think brick of ammo for $10.

So at some point with the rimfires the ammo cost is going to limit the popularity of the gun. At least with the .204 I can reload.

 

[El Rojo]

I have never seen the appeal of the .17 HMR or .17 Mach 2 myself. For shooting squirrels I either use my .22LR or my .223 or even .308. You use the .22LR for everything within 50 to 75 yards and the bigger guns for everything over. So the question is, why would I want to spend anywhere from 3 to 4 times more for shooting squirrels with a .17 or even a new, old .20 caliber when the .22LR kills them just as dead as they ever were? The answer is I wouldn't.

When varminting, either give me a cheap clean kill or one explosive, expensive kill. I only need two calibers to do that and .22LR is hands down the cheapest clean kill at short distance. If the .17 or the .20 could make squirrels fly, I would consider it, but since they don't, it serves no purpose.

Of course that is just me and everyone else is entitled to their own wants and desires.

 

[sumpnz]

Why not just get the ammo companies to make .22mag with the same powders as the .17HMR and the high quality jacketed ballistic tip type bullets as they're using in the Hummer. That would get you all of the advantages of the ".20HMR" without the expense of new gun (assuming you already own a box-mag fed .22mag - since pointy bullets shouldn't be used in a tube mag).

 

[hksw]

So at some point with the rimfires the ammo cost is going to limit the popularity of the gun. At least with the .204 I can reload.

My point exactly.

A .20 rimfire will undoubtedly still be cheaper than .204Rug up front but after a couple reloads, IMO, the cost advantage would go to the .204Rug. Plus you can tune the load to be even more precise than a rimfire could ever be.

 

[Vitamin G]

.50hmr, please...

 

[sumpnz]

A .20 rimfire will undoubtedly still be cheaper than .204Rug up front but after a couple reloads, IMO, the cost advantage would go to the .204Rug

Can you get under $0.14/round for .204 reloads? If you're patient enough to wait for a good deal at the gun shows, and stock up then, you can get .17HMR for about $7/50 ($0.14/round).

I suppose in the end though, it doesn't matter if ".20HMR" is cheaper or more expensive than .204Ruger. They would serve totally different purposes considering that the .204 would get double the MV. It's unlikely anyone would choose one over the other due to cost of ammo. Afterall, how many people are ditching .17Rem for .17HMR or vice versa?

 

[TGT]

1)The 22mag, is what it is already, and will not generate any new sales or enthusiasm. And the Remington 5MM is an antique, and bad water under the bridge. It's gone forever even if another 20 cal rimfire returns.

2)Even though some of us have no use for a 17HMR, THE SALES SHOW THAT PLENTY OF US DO. Manufacturers will go where there's money to be made.... and "HMR" is magic at this time. (...and so hence too would be a 20HMR.)

3)Some of us will do just fine with a 22. But your 4 legged targets aren't always walking up to you from 175 yards out to get a better look at you. Neither do I think anything that moves, should be shot with a 22 just because it's cheap ammo you can buy it a dime a dozen in milk cartons.
I've seen a black bear cub plugged with a couple of dozen rounds of 22's and left there. The dumb ass who shot it evidently must of thrown his last beer can out of his truck window instead of saving it for a target.

4)If you can afford a $13 box of quality centerfire ammo, then you can afford a box of quality $10 rimfire ammo. I like to reload too, but sometimes it's easier just to buy a box on a shelf of the ready made stuff. If I want to hit a target hard at 350 yards with a 22-250, and not miss it......then why should I demand to pay less for a 17HMR or 20HMR cartridge that I want to use on a target at 125 yards? It doesn't matter to me if it's a rimfire round. I am still willing to pay for it at the same price as the larger 22-250 cartridge, as long as it hits my target at 125 yards, and doesn't miss it. Make sence?

 

[El Rojo]

It doesn't matter to me if it's a rimfire round. I am still willing to pay for it at the same price as the larger 22-250 cartridge, as long as it hits my target at 125 yards, and doesn't miss it. Make sence?

Yes, you make sense. However, if it were me personally, I would rather shoot that varmint at 125 yards with the 22-250 than the .17 HMR. I mean the .17 might be able to do the job, but I want to see what I am hitting at that distance. I personally would rather shoot my bigger guns at further distances and go cheap and accurate up close. The .22LR does that for me. As far as using .22LR on anything other than varmints and steel, that isn't what it was designed for and that isn't an issue. If I want to shoot big game, I will use my big game calibers. I am talking varmints here.

So again, if I want to shoot at varmints up close, I will use the .22LR. If I want to shoot at them past 100 yards, that is what the .223 or .308 are for. The .17's cost just doesn't justify its use to me. Again to each their own.

 

[Poodleshooter]

What about a 20HM1.75 to fill in that critical gap between the 17HM2 and the .22lr?

 

[TGT]

Poodleshooter,

I understand and agree with the premise of your jest.

I really can't understand the need of the 17 being loaded down further into the 22LR case. It's not like we needed a lesser substitute for the 17HMR cause the recoil and blast of it is so severe.

Must be a whole lot of folks who want to be shooting cockaroaches in their house with minimal patch up repair to their walls.(?)