First Rifle

Dossy

Hey guys, new to the Hunting / Shooting side of the forum

Thinking of getting a rifle and basically what it would be for it vermin control.....crows, rabbits and maybe a fox or two.
Mainly criws and rabbits

Iv looked at few reviews but would like to get some info from local lads.

It will be my first gun but i have shot a .22 rifle before on holidays....

The thing is im not sure should i go for a .22 lr or .17 hmr

Iv looked at the noise difference etc but need advice.

Thanks in advance for any info

Cass

The .22lr is a great first time gun. It's good for vermin and other small game out to distances of 100 yards if you have good shot placement. It is also a good rifle and caliber if you fancy doing some target shooting as there are lots of competitions for it.

The .17 hmr has its own qualities. It's flatter, more powerful, and can reach at least twice the distances of the .22lr. I done a comparison between the two a while ago. Have a read and see what you think.



Comparison.

Most .22lr rounds are subsonic. With or without a suppressor they will be quieter because the bullet does not break the sound barrier and hence does not create as much noise. The .22lr is a great gun and excellent for bunnies and the occasional fox, but only to a certain distance.

The .17hmr rounds are supersonic. This means they will create a bang when fired. However if you were to fire a stinger or other such supersonic round in a .22lr then you'd get the exact same noise, the same instability in flight (in wind) as a hmr. The hmr ammo is more expensive, but when you are talking €17 for 50 hmr and €8 for 50 .22lr it's not going to break the bank.

Some comparisons (most are averages).

Cost | .22lr | .17hmr |
Per 50 | €8 | € 17 |

Speeds | .22lr | .17hmr |
fps | 1,050 | 2,200 |

Energy | .22lr | .17hmr |
Muzzle |

98

|

217

|
50 yd |

86

|

181

|
100 yd |

78

|

147

|
150 yd |

71

|

120

|
200 yd |

65

|

97

|

Drops | .22lr | .17hmr |
50 yd |

0"

|

-0.25"

|
100 yd | 6.5" - 8" |

0"

|
150 yd |

24"

|

1.75"

|
200 yd |

52"

|

5"

|


Side by side comparison with both set at 50 yard zero (instead of the above where the .17hmr has a 100 yard zero)




As can be seen from the tables & Ballistic chart above, the .17hmr:

• Drops less over 200 yards than the .22 does from 50 to 80 yards.
• It carries a minimum of double the impact energy of the .22lr.
• In a 10mph, 90 degree crosswind, it has slightly less but almost the same wind drift as the .22lr.
• Has up to 3 times the accurate distance of the .22lr.
• For whatever use it is the 17hmr will cover the distance in half the time of the .22lr.

The only real different is noise. However comparing a supersonic round against a subsonic one is like comparing a Fiesta and a Ferrari because they are both cars. Plus i have a CZ in .17hmr, and a Savage 93r17 in .17hmr. The CZ uses a SAK mod and it quietens the crack but it's still fairly loud. The Savage has a T4 AR suppressor and it is VERY quiet. Much quieter than the CZ. Still not as quiet as a ,22lr with subsonics, but much quieter than i thought it would be.


Plus, as said above, if you do day time shooting where your distances can be much longer as you can see backstops, and shoot safer, you want something that'll not only reach the distance, but do it without having to sit down for 5 minutes and do maths, and then wonder if it'll do much more than tickle the animal when you hit it.


Lastly, if you are interested in target shooting then the .22lr is a necessity as .17hmr have no place in comps (rimfire ones). If this is not a concern then i'd be looking at the .17hmr. It's so good i bought two.

Savage 93r17




CZ 455

Dossy

Thanks for the post.
That 93r17 is a very tidy looking rifle.

As i said its mainly crows and rabbits so the .17 looks like a better option. Would be getting a Mod for it anyway

yubabill1

A .22 is a great starter gun to hone your shooting technique on.

Nearly everyone here would have started with a .22.

The problem with a .17 HMR is recoil - for guys with heavier calibre rifles, the difference in recoil is not noticeable between .22 and .17, but for a beginner it may be.

The main thing I noticed was the recoil was much snappier and a lot louder, the first time I shot a .17

I'll let you in on a secret - nobody - and I mean nobody - likes recoil.

tac foley

.22 v .17HMR recoil?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwTYQzcyics

Let's be sensible about this, both rimfire calibres recoil like an electric toothbrush. In this case, the shooter is wearing suitable clothing and is holding the rifle in as he was taught to do.

He never shot ANY kind of a centrefire rifle of ANY calibre before yesterday, and prior to that movie being made, had shown his dad the way home shooting one of my 7.5x55 Swiss rifles - recoil about the same as a good stiff .308Win load.

tac

Cass

yubabill1 wrote: »

The problem with a .17 HMR is recoil - for guys with heavier calibre rifles, the difference in recoil is not noticeable between .22 and .17, but for a beginner it may be.

Really?

Not being a dick, i'm genuinely surprised you think there is recoil. Not just think there is but enough that you'd post solely about it being an issue.

I've often fired my hmr in a free recoil shooting position at a bench exactly like i can with my old .22lr. Even a light gun at around 7lb with scopes, etc. would not move in the slightest with a gun being fired (hmr or .22lr). I taught my young lad to shoot on the hmr as he preferred it because there was no recoil (the little sh*t can shoot better than me too ).

tac foley

Young beginners of either sex in shooting sports often shoot better than their mentors, I've found over the last thirty-something years as an instructor. It's because coming to it completely new, they have no preconceived notions about what to expect when they squeeze that trigger, and if they have been properly instructed to hold the firearm firmly, take control and concentrate on the shot release, the recoil is over and done before they realise that, hey, shouldn't that have hurt me? As you can see on the lad's face in my little movie...it doesn't seem to have bothered him one little bit. And by the way, if he weighed in at 100 pounds I'd frankly be surprised.

He went on to shoot me out of .45-70 Gov, too, the little blighter.

tac

aaakev

yubabill1 wrote: »

A .22 is a great starter gun to hone your shooting technique on.

Nearly everyone here would have started with a .22.

The problem with a .17 HMR is recoil - for guys with heavier calibre rifles, the difference in recoil is not noticeable between .22 and .17, but for a beginner it may be.

The main thing I noticed was the recoil was much snappier and a lot louder, the first time I shot a .17

I'll let you in on a secret - nobody - and I mean nobody - likes recoil.

Did you say hmr and recoil in the same sentence??!! There is so little recoil its not worth mentioning

Dossy

Well the fact i havnt shot a .22 in 2yrs I wont remember the recoil so either rifle will feel the same really

It will be my first rifle obviously but want to avoid buying type A when type B would benefit more long term. I dont want to get one where after a year need to change up to something else.....if that makes sense
(Im basing this off previous experience with something else, not gun related)

hedzball

As I told ya..

Get the sako quad with both barrels..





'Hdz

yubabill1

yubabill1 wrote: »

The problem with a .17 HMR is recoil - for guys with heavier calibre rifles, the difference in recoil is not noticeable between .22 and .17, but for a beginner it may be.

QED

C'mon, guys.

This fella is a beginner; he may have a basic set-up and without a moderator or a well-designed rifle, he may notice a difference in recoil.

tac foley

We have seven-year olds in our club shooting .223 all day long. I'm assuming that you took the trouble to watch that 100 pound young man in my movie who was shooting a rifle with 38ft lbs of recoil energy?

Take a look at this table by Chuck Hawkes...........

http://www.chuckhawks.com/recoil_table.htm

tac

rsole1

tac foley wrote: »

We have seven-year olds in our club shooting .223 all day long. I'm assuming that you took the trouble to watch that 100 pound young man in my movie who was shooting a rifle with 38ft lbs of recoil energy?

Take a look at this table by Chuck Hawkes...........

http://www.chuckhawks.com/recoil_table.htm

tac

When I first started reading this post I thought it would be the same old stuff - not to be though when ya man said recoil could be a problem between .17hmr and 22lr. Thanks for putting up the recoil table, i didn't think there was much difference between the two calibres and it shows there is no difference at all.

yubabill1

Didn't look at the table until rsole came along.

Have to admit they come out substantially equivalent on paper.

Might have felt different because I shot a 5.5lb H&R handi rifle in 17HMR for a couple of years after a long spell with a nearly 7lb Marlin 39A .22LR

dodderangler

Is the shooting of crows and such not illegal with a rifle?
Not having a dig but thought it was

Vegeta

dodderangler wrote: »

Is the shooting of crows and such not illegal with a rifle?
Not having a dig but thought it was

No it's perfectly legal under the derogations. The legislation allows the Minister to make changes or exceptions and that is what the derogations do.

hedzball

Vegeta wrote: »

No it's perfectly legal under the derogations. The legislation allows the Minister to make changes or exceptions and that is what the derogations do.

legal as long as the rifle is UNMODERATED

I believe it says "use of a silencer prohibited" or some shîote



'hdz