Advice on .17HMR

fiestaman

Well lads, im thinking of getting rid of the .22lr and getting a .17hmr. is this a good move. Lads claim you can shoot magpies and greys out to 150yrds with no holdover. Are they any good for foxing, would only be an odd fox, will be mainly used for the magpies and greys. I see theres a 20gr bullet available now, would this be better for a fox.and maybe an allrounder. I was looking at the thumbhole CZ 16" barrell. Anyone got this gun and what bullet are ye using. Would CZ be the best to go for?

Holdover with the 22 subs are annoying me and flat shooting sounds good.

Any info much appreciated

Robotack

Those lads are correct. I have shot a bunny (fluke perhaps) at 252 yards only holding at the tips of his ears. Last week I shot 1 at 195 yards with NO holdover whatsoever. CZ is deadly accurate but I have no experience of any other .17. I routinely shoot crows etc at 170+yards. But not on a windy day as the little bullets suffer badly in a breeze.

They are OK for foxing but I've had mixed results with any fox I've shot going for a nice jog before he'll drop. They are by no means a fox rifle but they'll do it and yes the 20gr round are better for that job. On bunnies they seem to just go in and out without expanding.

In my opinion (there's enough .22 vs .17 arguments already so I'm not going there), there is no comparison. I believe that the .17 makes the .22 look like Fred Flintstone's Grandad's rifle. Though I've no doubt I'll be corrected, this has been my experience.

lb1981

I have the sako quad and i love it , flat shooting and a lovely gun to use, i was going to get the .22lr barrel for it but to be honest the .17 with the lei moderator is not loud at all so im not going to bother , i stepped a rabbit out at 186 yards that moby30 shot off the roof of the jeep with it,so you can confidently shoot at that distance without hold over.
The new cz with the tumbhole is a sweet looking gun and you will not go wrong with it,very accurate gun for the money.
A well placed shot on a fox is not a problem for a .17hmr,you will love it once you get it .

garv123

fiestaman wrote: »

Well lads, im thinking of getting rid of the .22lr and getting a .17hmr. is this a good move. Lads claim you can shoot magpies and greys out to 150yrds with no holdover. Are they any good for foxing, would only be an odd fox, will be mainly used for the magpies and greys. I see theres a 20gr bullet available now, would this be better for a fox.and maybe an allrounder. I was looking at the thumbhole CZ 16" barrell. Anyone got this gun and what bullet are ye using. Would CZ be the best to go for?

Holdover with the 22 subs are annoying me and flat shooting sounds good.

Any info much appreciated

Zero the hmr 1" high at 100 yards and point and pull no bother out to 150. Its effected by wind past 100 yards but effected less than the .22 or wmr at that range.
the 20gr drop more but than the 17gr. I prefer the 17gr v-max over the 20gr hollow point as I found the hollow point unless a headshot passed straight through a rabbit and left it jumping around. Ive used both on foxes out to 150 and both were good.

Cz wont let u down.
I regret getting a heavy barrel though.

fiestaman

Im wary of this wind thing though. its always windy where i am. Thinking magnum or hornet either, would i be tearing myself with one of these. Be more expensive for bullets for hornet i suppose.

garv123

fiestaman wrote: »

Im wary of this wind thing though. its always windy where i am. Thinking magnum or hornet either, would i be tearing myself with one of these. Be more expensive for bullets for hornet i suppose.

A .22 magnum is effected more by wind than a hmr is...you'll pick up a hornet cheap as chips but ammo may be expensive for it. other options are wait for the .17hornet or the .17wsm to become popular. you'd be waiting a while though.

Robotack

fiestaman wrote: »

Im wary of this wind thing though. its always windy where i am. Thinking magnum or hornet either, would i be tearing myself with one of these. Be more expensive for bullets for hornet i suppose.

I have no experience with a hornet but I do with a .22wmr. The wind will effect a .17 past 100yards but the wmr's accuracy goes to pot over 100 yards anyway so its 6 of one and half dozen of the other.

But in calm conditions you can take 250 yard shots. There's no wmr that'll do that

fiestaman

garv123 wrote: »

A .22 magnum is effected more by wind than a hmr is...you'll pick up a hornet cheap as chips but ammo may be expensive for it. other options are wait for the .17hornet or the .17wsm to become popular. you'd be waiting a while though.

How would that be, i thought the oppisite. would the magnum be as flat shooting?

garv123

Wmr is less accurate and effected more by wind in general which is why I wouldn't go for it.

garv123

fiestaman wrote: »

How would that be, i thought the oppisite. would the magnum be as flat shooting?

See the chart above.. the magnum carries more energy to 90ish yards but the hmr is faster and carries more energy passed that and it doesnt drop near as much as the hmr..

Guess its less effected by wind because its at the target faster..

the chart above is also made by winchester so they wouldn't be favouring horndays magnum over their own.

Robotack

fiestaman wrote: »

How would that be, i thought the oppisite. would the magnum be as flat shooting?

I have found the opposite too fiestaman. The wmr bullets are around the 35-40 grain weight and I find are way less effected by wind than the .17. But they aren't as flat and are unpredictable past 100-120 yards.

By the way dont get too held up on the wind thing. It's talked up more than anything. I reckon in 2 years I've only missed 1 shot due to wind and that was a nasty strong cross wind. The round is so accurate that at distance you're not just shooting at a rabbit, your shooting at and hitting his eye.

TriggerPL

Robotack wrote: »

I have found the opposite too fiestaman. The wmr bullets are around the 35-40 grain weight and I find are way less effected by wind than the .17. But they aren't as flat and are unpredictable past 100-120 yards.

By the way dont get too held up on the wind thing. It's talked up more than anything. I reckon in 2 years I've only missed 1 shot due to wind and that was a nasty strong cross wind. The round is so accurate that at distance you're not just shooting at a rabbit, your shooting at and hitting his eye.

I've been using the WMr for years now, yes drop is worst then the .17 but billets are heavier so it expected , I use hornady 30g vmax and have shot rabbits out to 160 yards no problem, with the proper scope it doable !

Now that been said .17 is the way to go wmr's are the thing of the past .

Personally I'd buy the anshutz .17 myself or the the sako quad

yubabill1

The only reason I changed from 17 to 223 was the ammo.

You're very limited with the 17HMR, the 17gr causes a lot of meat damage and it's way overpriced IMHO.

I had to rezero mine at 100 from 150 originally, because most of my shots were 100yds or less and the inch was making a difference in longer grass, meaning I was going over their back a lot (found it difficult to plough through the grass wiith the 17). I know I could have held under, but I developed a severe aversion to aiming at grass with the 17.

The 200yd+ shots are fine, but they are the exception. I took a couple of 150yd shots from improvised field positions (my knee) and both were successful, but 2 things IMHO-

1 there was no need for me to shoot at that range

2 very hard to hold on target at that range from the knee, and they had to be from the knee because the grass was in the way. Getting down prone would improve this scenario, of course, but it's not my style.

Just my 2C

fiestaman

I was looking at a sako quad today 2nd hand with a bushnell scope 4-16x50, dont no what model it was,and sak mod. No marks on it. E850 Dosent sound to bad.

Chiparus

I have both , the got a rabbit 220mts last year, however the 17 destroys the meat unless you get a head shot, and needs far more gun care.
Prefer shooting the 22 tbh.

Robotack

Gun care as in cleaning? Don't get ya

tomtucker81

I've often been shooting with a friend that has a 17, and I have a 22wmr. I've noticed that the 17 can reach further distances than my 22wmr, much further. It would depend on what distances you are shooting at, I don't think either will be affected by wind out to 100yards.
After 100yards I've to start adjusting for some drop, whereas the 17 doesn't, so I'd imagine a normal 22 would be adjusting for drop from even closer.
Oh and cz are a fine make, really happy with it. The buddies 17 is a cz too.

lb1981

fiestaman wrote: »

I was looking at a sako quad today 2nd hand with a bushnell scope 4-16x50, dont no what model it was,and sak mod. No marks on it. E850 Dosent sound to bad.

Give tannyoky a ring they have a few at good prices .

http://www.tannyokyguns.co.uk/gunstock.htm

850 is a good price if it is in good nick.

Chiparus

Robotack wrote: »

Gun care as in cleaning? Don't get ya

Sorry, cleaning, it really needs cleaning quite regularly, like every 50-100 rounds, the 22 is much less hassle

garv123

Chiparus wrote: »

Sorry, cleaning, it really needs cleaning quite regularly, like every 50 rounds, the 22 is much less hassle

That depends entirely on the rifle. Mine shoots just as well as ever and it only gets an occasional pull through of a bore snake.

Robotack

Chiparus wrote: »

Sorry, cleaning, it really needs cleaning quite regularly, like every 50-100 rounds, the 22 is much less hassle

That wouldn't be an issue for me because I clean my guns regardless of whether they've fired 1 shot or 100, before they go back into the safe. Mind you where the rimfire's concerned that's usually just a couple of pulls of an oiled boresnake.

Chiparus

garv123 wrote: »

That depends entirely on the rifle. Mine shoots just as well as ever and it only gets an occasional pull through of a bore snake.

I had real problem with mine (anschutz) , bought second hand, It was only when gave it a good clean with sweets and Hoppes and a new single piece 17 rod ( not easy to get) that it started to shoot well, in the meantime I bought a 452 with a mod and it was totally different hunting.
I rarely use the 17.

lb1981

The .17hmr is a very dirty round ,after i bring the gun home i take off the mod and give it all a good cleaning ,some amount of crap comes out , i solely do it to stop pitting in the barrel ,on the sako varmint i dont notice any difference between when its clean and when its dirty.

fiestaman

Right lads im looking at the cz455 brand new and im woundering am i getting anything different from buying a 452 model. Is it just personal choice, any difference in accuracy. Didnt hold the 455 yet but looks a heavy gun and il be going 20" barrell as i think shorter means less accurate. Any info?

sniperman

fiestaman wrote: »

Right lads im looking at the cz455 brand new and im woundering am i getting anything different from buying a 452 model. Is it just personal choice, any difference in accuracy. Didnt hold the 455 yet but looks a heavy gun and il be going 20" barrel as i think shorter means less accurate. Any info?

both 16 and 20 inch shoot just as accurate,i like the 455 thumb hole cz 16 inch heavy barrel,but everyone is different;)

fiestaman

Anybody else any info on 452 versus 455

Kells1

I would say its a personal choice. I went in to a gunstore arounc christmas time hoping to by a 455 but ended up buying a 452 as it felt better when I held it and lifted it to my shoulder. There would be bo difference in accuracy imo. Its a personal choice. Have a look at the two of them side by side in the shop and then decide.;)

dogcityroller

If you can get a good secondhand weihrauch hw66 or hw60 go for it. I've a hw 66 with a 16 inch match barrel. The triggers on these guns are one of best out of the box 2 stage triggers out there. Have mine a few years and cannot fault it at all.

fiestaman

Traded cz452 style .22 thisevening for cz455 .17hmr thumbhole. Hope its as good as ye say lads and all the reviews, thanks for all info.