Suggestions of a 17hmr or 17 mach 2

Status
Not open for further replies.

PT1911

Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2009
Messages
3,139
Location
alabama
Alright so one of the MANY rifles i am thinking about recently is something in 17cal.. HMR or Mach II... The CZ 452 looks like a really nice rifle and they are available on clearance (in mach II)right now. A friend of mine owns a gun shop and I could likely get one new for right around the $400 mark. Another wholesaler also has them on clearance (the HMR) for a bit more... probably be $425 or so. I LIKE CZ rifles and guns in general..
Any input on this particular rifle?

Any comparable suggestions for other rifles in one of the rimfire 17's?
 
Last edited:
The CZ452 is a superb rifle in every aspect. I just got my 3rd one and can't say enough good things about them. I would highly recommend the 17HMR for a little extra versatility, but you can't go wrong with either one.
 
The 17 Mach II ammo is gonna be harder & harder to find. Fewer guns chamber it every year. Go with the CZ in 17HMR.
 
I own and highly recommend the 452 Varmint in .17HMR, particularly if you’re planning on using it as a range gun. The heavy barrel and wide fore stock give it excellent stability on bags.
 
I was doing a little looking around for a .17 to have some fun with, but decided on something else.

HMR is the way to go. I kept reading the same thing about them, HMR is flatter shooting than the Mach 2, so that alone was enough to make up my mind.

I was planning on getting This rifle, but decided a thumb hole would get in the way of the fact that I shoot ambidextrously, so I was going to end up with This rifle instead. (Not sure why thats listed as a thumbhole stock).

I've seen the first one in action, and it is a tack driver well passed 100 yards. I just decided I have no real use for such a small caliber firearm, as I don't do a lot of small game hunting anymore.
 
I have a Savage with a laminate stock with the thumbhole and a stainless barrel and it is extremely accurate and fun. I would buy the 17HMR because the ammo will probably be easier to purchase and more velocity.
 
Agree on the HMR...

PT 1911--The 17 Mach II was a convenience for manufacturers, so's they could put out a .17 just by slightly re-doing their .22 LR rifle.

As far as the USERS are concerned, IMHO, the Mach II is an answer in search of a question. If it had come out before the HMR, it'd be a different story, MAYBE, but that's not how the progression went, and we can't go back and re-write history.
 
I appreciate the input all, I guess you guys have eliminated the Mach II from consideration... so, that leaves the HMR...

any experiences to encourage/discourage me from the HMR?
 
any experiences to encourage/discourage me from the HMR?
That depends on what you want it for.

As a target rifle, the ammo is a tad expensive when compared to .22 LR. As a small game rifle, it's overly powerful for squirrels and rabbits.

As a varmit rifle, it shines.
 
The 17HMR is a great short range varmint round....as long as the varmint is smaller than 40lbs. A good walk around gun for groundhogs, crows, bobcats, fox, racoon, armadillo.
 
I would trade my HMR for a Mach II if given the option. I'm not a big fan of the HMR. Honestly, it's cost, is the big issue. It runs about twice what HMII ammo runs. I have yet to shoot something with an HMR that the HMII wouldn't have killed just as well. In fact, there are many times I have regretted taking the HMR for squirrel. Sure the HMII has a little more drift and isn't as flat, but I shoot rimfires under 100 yards and in that distance, there isn't much if any significant gain with the HMR. People have said for a while that the HMII is going to be dead. BS. Stinger cases are too easy to neck down. It may be seasonal, but buying in bulk cures that issue. For me, I get just as much use out of the HMII at half the cost.
 
By and large, the .22 LR can do about anything the HM II can do -- I used to shoot smallbore silhouette, and that involves shooting offhand at a squrrel-sized ram at 100 yards. The .22 LR will do the job at that range, and not tear up the squirrel.
 
Bingo. My rimfires are for hunting small game in the woods or for paper punching. The small game is close enough that a .22lr does everything I need from a rimfire while still being easy on the meat. For paper punching, the .22lr is nice in that you can shoot anything from $1.50-$25/50 ammo depending on the mood and the current desire for accuracy.

I guess I don't see the desire for a .17 (at increased ammo cost) compared to a .22lr. Calibers like .22 hornet or .222 are both exceptional rounds for game bigger than a .22lr can handle and both are inexpensive (at least to the reloader). The little .17 just doesn't give me enough of a step up in the sized game I feel comfortable using it one to justify it over a small centerfire. Sure they blow sparrows into a cloud of feathers, but for the game I spend time hunting, it is more of a hassle than an advancement. Now, if you had HMR or HMII ammo that cost $3 a box, I would shoot the thing all day. At $7-8 for HMII and more so $13-16 for HMR, I'll load down on the centerfires.
 
My ability to control my desire to run right out and buy a .17 HMR is based on the fact that I have a Hornet (in my case, an M82 Kimber.) No disrespect meant to anyone, but a 35 grain Hornady V-Max at 3000 fps from a Hornet beats a 17 grain bullet at 2500 fps.
 
I have had just about all 17 rifles, for 500 bucks or less, that are made out there. when all was said and done, I stuck with the mach 2. I dumped all my hmrs. Why you ask?
cost is one thing... I shoot alot, a whole lot> I try to shoot every weekend, when a gunshow is not going on , or i have something I have to do around the house. I can easily shoot 2 boxes at a time, more like 3.
So lets say, your hmr ammo, with tax, comes to 15 bucks a box, or you buy eleym2 from ammunitiontogo.com off the net, for 5 bucks a box. And you shoot 3 boxes a weekend, for an average of 20 weeks a year, out of 52. that is a 30 dollar difference per weekend times 20 weekends. 600 bucks a year is nothing to sneeze at.
Cool factor-- the mach 2 is so diff that people at the range typically go" wow!!! I never heard of that, mind if I try it?" which when they do, the accuracy and the combo of no recoil is a mind blower.
Sick factor-- it also fires the 17 aguila round, the best squirrel round getter ever made. comes in a solid or a hollow point. It is based on a true 22lr case, and a 20 grain round. It does a fair bit slower at about 2000fps, but is not near as explosive as the mach 2 round. Typically , I have found them to be either pretty accurate near the m2 round, or hunting accurate. I happen to have a ruger 7717/m2 that does the unusual... can drop them into the same
hole at 50 yards, but this is not the norm.
Lastly, the 2 rounds that are usually the most accurate for you are also the fastest... the Eley/remmy rounds. remmy is made by eley in this case, I think it is their rounds that didn't pass specs mustard to go in a eley box, but they said, " meh... good enough for remmy..."
these rounds typically leave most dudes' bbls at or near the 2300 fps mark.
Slower than the hmr round for sure, but fast enough for a 100 yd zero, to only be about 4 to 5 inches low at 150... and that is really the max distance you want on a kill shot with a rimfire round anyway. the hmr can do a kill shot longer, for sure, I know a dude who took out a coyote at a marked 168 yards, but for most, 150 yards is all you really need.
Don't worry about ammo production on the m2 round; Eley made about 30 million rounds of this in the last 2 years from what i understand...
yes fewer peeps are making a mach 2 rifle, but you can still find them in 2 diff types of cz, 2 diff types of ruger, excel arms, savage, marlin , nef, ruger 10.22' transformers, even the mighty
anschutz/ also you will find them in kimber, cooper, t/c, and browning if you look really hard.
Sako , Weatherby, and Volquartzen as well.
proly the best bets for the unusual and good, would be to find a marlin semi in 717, but keep that chamber clean!!!... or a Sako quad bbl, there you will get all your rimfires in 1 rifle.
 
Last edited:
well damn rangerruck... why dont you just throw a big ole monkey wrench into the thread!;)
 
To me it depends on what you are doing. If you are shooting a LOT the HM2 is the way to go, if you don't shoot hundreds of rounds a week the HMR is the better choice for a few reason.
I am a HM2 honk, but I live in the real world and unlike some I actually can see the benefits of BOTH rounds. The 22lr cannot even come close to matching the long range accuracy or ballistics of the HM2.
There is plenty of HM2 ammo and as of now it is not going to be stopped. I could go on but rangerruck covered most of it.
 
I bought a Marlin 17m2 shortly after the 17m2 intro. Had to put a Rifle Basix trigger in it. Since I already had .223's I chose the 17m2 over the HMR. I've since given the Marlin to my son and replaced it with a Contender G2 carbine.

Other than breaking out one of my many .22lr's for the grandkids, the 17m2 has replaced them all. Unbelievable accuracy and flat trajectory allows me to nail anything in the crosshairs out to about 115 yds without holdover or of scope adjustments.

I don't know about the m2 future, but Hornady just introduced a non-lead 17m2 for us CA folks in lead-ban land.
 
I have no problem killing squirrels out to 150 yards with my Savage .17 HM2. It's almost too easy. Many have lost their lives out around 200, and we even got one at a measured 300 yards. There is no comparison to the .22 for hunting purposes...95% of the time a squirrel is DRT, even with marginal shots. With a .22, many get back into their holes.

My buddy has the same gun in HMR, and I can bag just as many varmints in an afternoon at the same ranges for a 20 spot less in ammo cost. The reduced muzzle blast is pretty nice too.
 
That right there is a big factor to keep in mind. I have 0 spots to take a 300 yard shot on a squirrel. I have practically 0 spots to take a 100 yard shot on a squirrel. I hunt in the woods with a max shot distance of 25 yards. Even that is on the far end. Anything a .22lr won't kill at that distance, a .17 wouldn't either. If you have the range to shoot pests out to 300 yards, the faster .17s may be of much more value. I think at that range though, a much better choice would be to step into a centerfire rifle, but that's me.
 
the very fact that hornady just made a new round for the 17m2, should
put all the arguements of this round going away, to complete rest.

And as far as throwing a wrench into the works, it is my pleasure!!!
to be honest, I would proly get rid of all my rimfires, if someone introduces a new rifle in 5mm, and someone gets a 32 grainer up to 2500 fps. and keeps the cost under 15 bucks with tax, for the ammo. But until then, I will preach the gospel of both Christ, and the next best thing; the mach2/aguila rifle and rounds!!!! To me, there is no other better rimfire round, for all around accuracy, performance, and cost.
 
Amen rangerruck. My 17m2's are about the only rimfires I fire anymore. I am so happy with them, I can't begin to sing all the praises I have for them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top