which is better .17 hmr or .17 mach 2

Discussion in '.22-Rimfire Forum' started by pdbsa, Apr 13, 2007.

?

which is better .17 hmr or .17 mach 2

  1. .17 hmr

    78.4%
  2. .17 mach 2

    21.6%
  1. pdbsa

    pdbsa New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2007
    Messages:
    37
    :D well which is better .17 hmr or .17 mach 2. i need to know because i want to buy a new gun.
    Last edited: Apr 13, 2007
  2. southernshooter

    southernshooter New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    5,956
    Location:
    Deep South Mississippi
    P, Me personally I would go with the HMR cause it's a little bigger. That and in the future I feel their will be a LOT more Hmr types and grains a bullet types available for the HMR
    Just my .02
  3. rangerruck

    rangerruck New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2005
    Messages:
    449
    if you targtet shoot every weekend like I do ,and am totally obsessed with what a 17 can do downrange, then the mach 2. If you wanna zero at 100 yards, and be able to hit a pdog with a dead on hold out to 150 yards, or if you wanna just absolutely blow small game up, then the 17hmr.
    Also with the mach2 , you can shoot 17 aggies or pmc through them.
    If you think you may come across coyote while hunting, then the 17hmr.
    if you are not going to target shoot with it past 150 yards, then the m2.
    you wanna try for 200 yard targets on a calm day? the hmr.
  4. 300 H&H

    300 H&H Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2007
    Messages:
    1,855
    Location:
    Iowa
    personally I would not shoot a coyote with a anything less than a .22 Hornet. They are tough animals, and unless you like to wound and cripple don't do it.
  5. TreeRatKiller

    TreeRatKiller New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    Messages:
    15
    Good advice,I've had a bad experence with the HMR on a fox,so I stick to the .17 REM for any thing bigger than a hare.The HMR is a good round for rabbits and crows.
  6. Jake

    Jake Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2006
    Messages:
    180
    Location:
    Illinois
    Go with the HMR. The mach 2 shoots like a laser but if you nick anything with the bullet they explode.
  7. DWARREN123

    DWARREN123 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2003
    Messages:
    764
    Location:
    BETWEEN TN & KY
    Depends on use just as with the .22 lr and .22 wmr.
  8. 358 winchester

    358 winchester *TFF Admin Staff*

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Messages:
    7,335
    Location:
    Pensacola Fl. area
    I have gone with the 17HMR and I am happy with it for small wild animals:) as for target shooting I stick with the 22 long rifle because of the cost. ;)
    But lots of folks claim I am different :D :rolleyes: :D
    Ron
  9. Millwright

    Millwright Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2005
    Messages:
    1,847
    Well, buy one of each for me first, and I'll give you a report in a few months..... ;) >MW
  10. stash247

    stash247 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2003
    Messages:
    2,811
    Location:
    Central Texas
    358, you are different, absolutely special (Ed)!
    I'm toying with the mach II, in a single shot, and, having a bunch of time in little CF .17's, know the drill. Barrels are the issue, and few barrel makers will tool for the caliber, more the pity, because a good one is a worshipful thing; I have pestered Bartlein barrels for a couple of tubes, in the caliber, for a couple of years; everything they do is computer managed, and cut rifled, which IMHO is the way things oughta be!
    To the point of the thread, I think the HMR is over rated, and the Mach II is caught in the shadow.
    At the point in time where Remington 'legitimised' the caliber, with the .17 Rem , I had several .17 Acklley Hornets, and Bee's, making meat daily, with lots less powder, and noise.
    I think their effort was too much, then and now, as barrels are not cheap, and hold the same stance, with the newer rimfire rounds: all things, in moderation.
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2007
  11. gary0529

    gary0529 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2007
    Messages:
    82
    Location:
    Northwestern Va.
    I went with the Mach 2 just for the cost of the ammo. You should be able to buy 50 rounds for 4 bucks on sale-have stocked up with a few thousand rounds at that price.

    Just a flat out fun gun at ranges up to 125 yards- spot on with .75" groups at 100 yards with a cheapie Savage and an Accu-Trigger-scoped.

    Pigeons, crows and small vermin in the cone of death at 125 yards don't have a prayer.:) .

    Looked at the HMR but the ammo cost scared me away and besides I have a couple of 22 CF's to reach out and touch at longer ranges and larger game.

    Gary
  12. stash247

    stash247 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2003
    Messages:
    2,811
    Location:
    Central Texas
    Gary, welcome to TFF!
    Lad, I like the way you think! You mirror my thoughts, in many ways; never had a .22 Magnum, because .22 LR ammo was more accurate, even out beyond 100, if the rifle was 'right' and there are far more rifles, in the smaller case, that are!
    Ditto, my feelings on the .17 cal rimfires; Start with an accurate platform, rebarrel, we're done!
    Now, if I absolutely needed more power, and equivalent, or better, accuracy, there are the (Kinda Pricy) Cooper CCM calibers, or the simple 'Ackley Improved' .22 /.17 Hornet Calibers, which will more than double the RF Magnum range and power, for the same price in ammo,if you reload, as case attrition is a 'non factor' in these calibers, except at 'Max' loads.
    Waiting on a barrel, right now, for a Stevens 44 1/2, presently in .22 LR, that shoots under a dime, at 100 yds, (actually, 2 barrels, one will be chambered in the Mach II, the other in .17 Ackley Hornet, as I also have a centerfire breechblock, fitted to the action), but this a 'proven' rifle, having 'had it's way' with a lot of, according to 'conventional wisdom', far more accurate bolt guns, from Anschutz, Remington, and Winchester!
    The Shilen barrel, presently in this rifle, has shot consistantly in the threes, often in the twos, off a rest, in any weather.
    Now, we all know, according to 'conventional wisdom' a 'take down, single shot' rifle, cannot do these things, so if it would not, I suppose I would fall back in line, but have yet to do so, because it continues to perform.
    I will allow, this was not a 'cheap' rifle, then, or now; I bought it for the action, replaced, or re-created, most every thing else, in better material, and far closer tolerance, than the original; part of the game!
    But, with experience in both calibers (.22 Ackley Hornet, and .17 Ackley Hornet) you cannot compare them to any rimfire; If you are gomma 'move up', then, get what you paid for; these are among the finest on the planet!
  13. billr

    billr New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2004
    Messages:
    44
    Location:
    oregon
    I think it boils down to money, usally does.I have a bit of all the guns in question., I would pick the 22 Hornet over all of them.You have enough gun for all small animals , can obtain wonderfull acuracy.once your set up cost is not that bad in reloading.
    Bill
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2007
  14. Smokin Guns

    Smokin Guns New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2002
    Messages:
    4,462
    Location:
    "Gun Culture Members Clubhouse"...
    I voted...a bit biased though...ain' got no Mach 2 shooters...;)
  15. COMMNORTH

    COMMNORTH New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2007
    Messages:
    6
    I've got a Savage 93-BTVS in .22 Mag that can hit a dime/nickel @ 100 yards consistantly, and also has decient energy and that range. They are all fun though.
  16. LDBennett

    LDBennett Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    6,518
    Location:
    Hesperia, CA
    It simple: Your choice should to be based on your needs. Hunting needs the 17HMR in most cases. Target shooting the 17HM2 works fine and you can do some small game hunting too.

    My decision for target shooting was based on ammo costs. Like 22WMR, on which the 17 HMR is based, the 17HMR ammo is outrageously expensive compared to 22LR and 17HM2. If you need that power for hunting fine, pay the ammo cost. But if it is targets you are shooting at that don't need power to penetrate then the 17HM2, like 22LR, makes the most sense.

    Beware! the 17HM2 has suffered case bulging, case head ruptures and other high pressure maladies in some guns. Semi-autos are the worst for this as the blowback design is so critical in its timing that any little thing goes wrong and the bolt opens (or fails to close) during the pressure cycle of ignition of the cartridge. This is especially problematical with the Ruger 10/22 conversions. Even Ruger has stayed away from offering a 17HM2 semi-auto, probably because of this very thing. The 10/22, when extended to 17HM2 service, is too crudely made and suffers under the pressure cycle of the 17HM2. Others manufacturers may have solved this in their semi-autos but the Ruger 10/22 conversion to 17HM2 CAN be a big problem if all is not perfect.

    I've not found the 17HM2 to be any better for accuracy than a good 22LR gun that is shooting premium ammo (in the same price range as 17HM2 ammo). With limited choices of 17HM2 ammo you may or may not find the ammo the gun likes. With 22LR the choice are nearly infinite. If I had it to do over again I'd go for a better 22LR gun and forget the whole 17HM2 fad. Some day, I think the ammo will be even harder to get and maybe impossible to get since the popularity of the 17HM2 seems to be declining (a lot has to do with the 10/22 conversion problems!).

    This is just my opinion and take it for what it is worth to you. Others may differ.

    LDBennett
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2007
  17. RimfireRat

    RimfireRat New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2006
    Messages:
    141
    And why would that happen when the Mach II is slower than the HMR. your theroy would mean the HMR would blow up easier yet. Considering they are both shooting 17 gr like bullets. I have two HM2s and don't need a HMR My 22WMR will do most of what the HMR will do and maybe even better out to 150yds.( more down range energy) I'll grant ya over all most HMRs are more accurate than the average 22WMR but mine is a shooter.:D--JMJ--
  18. stash247

    stash247 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2003
    Messages:
    2,811
    Location:
    Central Texas
    LD said it well, the .22LR is a hard act to beat!
    The .17 Mach 2, as mentioned, is slower than the HMR, but shares the same bullet; stuff this bullet into a small centerfire case, like the .17 'Ackley Improved' Hornet, and now, you have something!
    I have killed, deader than stone, a bunch of deer, with the round; and using lesser bullets!
    The Hornady bullet only makes for better results!
    In the AI Hornet, we are talking about 3500+ fps velocity, and 200+ yd performance, not too shabby!
    Give it a thought!
    Shortly, I may have some info on an 'equivalent' alternative, to the .17 fireball, formerly the .17 Mach IV, based on the .357 Max case, for the 400 yd shooters, out here!
    I've only been working on the project, for five years, so, be patient!
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2007
  19. 1majicman

    1majicman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2007
    Messages:
    2
    Location:
    Upstate NY, between Buffalo and Rochester
    Evening guys,
    I'm new to this forum, but I dont believe there's a "Fit all" answer to this question!
    1st I would ask myself, what do I plan on doing the "Most" with this gun. As i love both rounds as much as shooting in general.
    I've got a Magnum Research Magnumlite .17MH2, with the carbon fiber 17" barrel, and Barracuda thumb-hole stock. Its a tack driver all day long as fast as i can holder steady, and reload! The rifle spec's said, .375" groups at 50yrds, and if (0)ed at 100yrds it should be aprox,(depending as we all know on ammo) .50" high at 50yrds. However I found useing remmy ammo, that .375"- .500" 5 shot groups off a good cement bench at 100yrds is typical, and where you touch it off at 100yrds when zeroed at that range, is where it exactly is at 50yrds.
    I also have a Magnumlite 17hmr (newly purchased) and the accuracy results are almost identical, (17hmr accutally pounds .050"- .120" larger groups than .17mh2).
    One round is by no means "better" than the other, however, one may fit your "Root" intended purpose better than the other.
    So I sugest, taking the time to think about what you're guna primaraily use this gun for and make your choice based on that.
    Also, remember that bigger isnt always badier! Cause if you dont hit what or where you want, when you want, then all you got is a bigger hole in your wallet!
  20. 1majicman

    1majicman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2007
    Messages:
    2
    Location:
    Upstate NY, between Buffalo and Rochester
    I think your spot on! Well said. In comparing 22lr to 17hm2, I pick 17hm2, hands down!
    Bullet drop, accuracy, and impact damage are definetly better with the 17hm2.
    But when choosen between 22wrm and 17hmr I think the old stand by 22wrm is the winner. Because of exactly what you said, down range energy!
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
.22-Rimfire Forum Better front sites for Henry 22 magnum Golden Boy?? Jul 8, 2012
.22-Rimfire Forum which is better Oct 5, 2010
.22-Rimfire Forum could use advice, tips to shoot better! Jul 14, 2009
.22-Rimfire Forum Better quality 22 caliber rifle Oct 14, 2008
.22-Rimfire Forum what is the better 17hmr round? Jun 7, 2005

Share This Page