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

  2. .17 mach 2

  1. LDBennett

    LDBennett Well-Known Member

    Dec 20, 2003
    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.

    Last edited: Nov 7, 2007
  2. RimfireRat

    RimfireRat New Member

    Sep 23, 2006
    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--

  3. stash247

    stash247 New Member

    Oct 18, 2003
    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
  4. 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!
  5. 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!
  6. tonygrz

    tonygrz New Member

    Jul 13, 2007
    Cross Plains, Tx
    Had made up my mind to give myself a 17 Mach 2 for Christmas. I went to Wally World aka China-Mart, and they could special order a savage for me. When I asked about the 17 Mach 2 ammo, they told me that Wally World would not be carrying any 17 Mach 2. The manager said that calls for 17 Mach 2 ammo has been almost non-existant.

    Anyone hear that the 17 Mach 2 is being left behind the 17 HMR ?? Will the 17 mach 2 go the route of the 5MM ?? I see where the poll results show that the 17 HMR is favored by 3 to 1. Will hold up buying anything until I hear some opinions/ideas.

    Thanks for your thoughts,

  7. rangerruck

    rangerruck New Member

    Oct 16, 2005
    what do I like mcuh better? the mach 2, what is funner the m2, much cheaper, m2, what is a better hunting round? 17aguila/pmc- which can be fired through a m2. What is a more flatter, hard hitting, knock em dead round , out to even 200 yds? 17 hmr. what will drop a coyote out at 100 yds? 17hmr.
  8. stash247

    stash247 New Member

    Oct 18, 2003
    Central Texas
    Ranger, well said!
    I've been a rimfire 'nut' for many years, and now own several that I almost cannot feed, for the scarcity, and price, of ammo (.22 auto, 5mm rimfire), but I like the rifles.
    I don't see the 17M2 'going away', anytime soon; just look at the 'fan club', it has here!
  9. The HMR came first and it was great for drilling holes in paper - provided the wind wasn't blowing. Unfortunately, the bullets exploded on small game and people started to complain that they were wounding prairie dogs. About that time Hornedy came out with the M2, which has less muzzle velocity and costs less too. The M2 is a better choice for hunting tree rats and the like, but nothing larger. Personally, I'll pass on both.
  10. chim

    chim New Member

    Dec 18, 2007
    united kingdom
    hi guys
    i am from the UK and a newbie to boot over hear we love our .17hmr and the .22lr has a big place in our cabinet .As for the mach 11 it never caught on as the caliber fitted in between the .17hmr and the .22lr ? what for i ask the .17hmr has a crack down range and the .22lr is as quite as you want bearing in mind we only shoot rabbit and fox with these guns only my opinion
    rgds chim
  11. RimfireRat

    RimfireRat New Member

    Sep 23, 2006
    The only reason the MachII is the unknown and the HMR is the BIG Boy is the marketing. all the marketing went to the /hmr ,then ignorant gun writers followed by ignoring the HM2 or misrepresenting it as a lesser needed rd. It's a super tree or grd squirrel etc rd thru 100+ yds. (out to 100 almost flat) I relined an old 340 mossberg for my first experiment with the HM2 and have since purchased a Sav BVSS and a CZ American in the HM2 . Retailers don't want to stock stuff they are afraid won't sell, and the advertizing has been 4 to 1 on the HMR .any of my friends I've shown my HM2 to have all been impressed and bought one for theirself . I wouldn't trade mine for a HMR on a good day. my 22WMRs cover anything+ that the HMR can do. the marketing of the two 17s has suffered from the Bigger /faster is better mindset. thats is not always true when all is considered. Find some guys with the HM2 and they will be happy with it.--JMJ--
  12. stash247

    stash247 New Member

    Oct 18, 2003
    Central Texas
    Rimfire Rat, check my prior post, about small centerfire .17's.
    I just sent a bunch of money for another barrel, in the caliber, for a rifle for a grandson, in the works, which will be a .17 Ackley Improved Hornet, a caliber that can be loaded cheaper than buying rimfire ammo, and will double, or more, the .17 HMR numbers, and safely.
    I like the MachII idea, because it fits into a lot of already accurate platforms; the 22 mag/.17 HMR does not have such a base; but what will the MachII do that a good .22 LR cannot?
    Also, I am working on a rimmed equivalent of the new .17 Fireball, based on .357 Max brass, with the potential for 4300 fps velocities, and support enough to not expand the primer pocket; the rim, to work in single shot rifles, with more or less 'standard' extractors.
    While I am a rimfire 'freak', I think the .17 is best in a center fire case.
  13. lb969

    lb969 New Member

    Mar 1, 2008
    One of the advantages to the .17 HM2 is that its based off a .22 cartridge, and therefore you can get refit kits to change a .22LR to a .17HM2. I think Ruger has some for their 10/22.

    Just in case yall were wondering...

    .17 HM2 vs. .17 HMR

    I'm waiting on buying a .17 myself (until a clear winner between all the different .17's are settled), but I was wondering what the opinion of the .17 Fireball is?
  14. stash247

    stash247 New Member

    Oct 18, 2003
    Central Texas
    ib969,you are a bit off topic, but let me offer this: The .17 Fireball is the legitamised version of the .17 Mach IV, a totally competent wildcat, for a lot of years; a lot more than either of the rimfire offerings.
    As Remington's authoring of the .22-250, as a production number, so have they done, again, and God Bless them, with the .17 Fireball.
    I am fascinated with the little .17's: the .17 Ackley Improved Hornet, and the .17 Bee, but may well buy a new Remington rifle, for the benefit of 'storebought' ammo, being available; we'll see about that.
    I am, as well, working on a cartridge, based on the .357 Maximum, necked to .17, the rimmed equivalent of the fireball, with better case head strength, for use in single shot actions; again, time will tell.
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2008
  15. CampingJosh

    CampingJosh Well-Known Member

    Sep 25, 2007
    Will lead even hold together at 4300 fps? I don't really know anthing about wildcats, or reloading at all for that matter, but I do know that 4300 fps is fast!
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
.22-Rimfire Forum Beretta Neos, better than S&W Victory or Ruger Mark IV--?? Dec 27, 2016
.22-Rimfire Forum Better of the two? Aug 6, 2016
.22-Rimfire Forum Which is better? Aug 3, 2015
.22-Rimfire Forum Better front sites for Henry 22 magnum Golden Boy?? Jul 8, 2012
.22-Rimfire Forum which is better Oct 5, 2010