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. stash247

    stash247 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2003
    Messages:
    2,811
    Location:
    Central Texas
    That is a maximum load in the MachIV, with a light 21 Gr custom bullet, swaged by Todd Kindler.
    Lead and copper will certainly hold together, at that velocity, assuming a quality bullet; an unbalanced one will come apart, quickly at such speed, and rotational velocity.
  2. 2704deer

    2704deer New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Messages:
    4
    Does the .17fireball not come into play when you guys are shooting small game at long ranges???
    I only ask as I am trying to decide what to get to shoot rabbit at 100m plus
    cost of ammo to a degree is not important unless it is rediculous, or we would all be using .22lr subsonics and getting closer to our game to secure a clean kill.
    Has anyone got a fireball as the reports sound good.
  3. ivanthehunter

    ivanthehunter New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2008
    Messages:
    7
    .17HMR is surpassed in kill power by the .22HMR so why bother with it if you have a 22hmr.
    The .17HM2 is completely different to the .22lr. Firstly its a further reaching flatter shooting round than the 22lr BUT its a lot louder.
    The 17hm2 has no ability to shoot subsonic with any knock down.

    If cost is to be ignored then I'd go for the 17HMR because it is the flatter of the two and i like the idea of point and shoot ammo.

    In Ireland i have heard of boyo's taking rabbits out as far 200yards with a .17HMR......Know that sounds like a bit of craic

    PS I'm new so go easy or at least be humane:D
  4. tonygrz

    tonygrz New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Messages:
    90
    Location:
    Cross Plains, Tx
    I was told by my FFL/dealer that the 17M2 was being discontinued. I bought several thousand rounds because of that statement. Is it true ???????

    tonygrz
  5. canonguy

    canonguy New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    15
    Location:
    Kalamazoo, Michigan
    I am not a big fan or either. What good does it do to hit something if no damage is done? I don't think you can even clearly see the hole a .17 leaves in a paper target without getting arms length from the paper. I like the .22WMR and I think reports of it's innaccuracy are greatly exaggerated. Mostly due to early ammo and cheap rifles and rifle variation. I know farmers that take small deer with .22MAG. The .17 craze is another example of ammo manufacturers creating a "need" to sell things we don't really need.
  6. RCGUIDRY

    RCGUIDRY New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    79
    Location:
    Southeast Texas
    I converted a 10-22 to mach 2 with a bull barrel and bolt weight. it performs very well but is a small game rifle at 100 yards. I have however bagged a crow at a measured distance of 130 yards. the rifle is accurate enough to shoot small animals in the head out to 100 yards and stop them in their tracks. But is A Small game rifle. I dont think it is neccessary to own a hmr because I only use it on small game and 100 yards is my max range. so no need for the hmr for me IMHO.
  7. thomas44

    thomas44 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2008
    Messages:
    577
    I think I'd prefer the .22 magnum over either, but that's just me.
  8. BADDOGGY

    BADDOGGY New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    2
    I am in full agreement with thomas44. I have a new .17 HMR barrel for my 10/22 Magnum. It is accurate as the devil but has zero punch (but that's just me). I refer to it as a .177 Improved (the air rifle). I have fired thousands of .22 Magnum rounds critters since 1975 and if you have an accurate rifle, it is hell on wheels for jack rabbits. BUT at the same time I have to acknowledge the.17 HMR has its hard-core followers.
  9. gdmoody

    gdmoody Moderator Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Messages:
    11,344
    Location:
    Northeast Georgia
    I voted for the Mach II, mainly because I have a Converted 10/22 in it. I bought a 17HMR when they first came out and did not like it (but it could have been just the rifle I did not like).
  10. 21bravo

    21bravo New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2008
    Messages:
    790
    Location:
    wilkes county, nc
    p,
    i personally prefer the .17 HMR. i have a Savage 93r17 with a BSA Sweet 17 3x9x40mm scope and a buddy of mine has a Marlin model 917V with a custom bull barrel from rock river arms. he has a Simmons Deerfield 3x9x40mm on his. both rifles shoot amazing. we both keep a 50 yard zero on our rifles and according to Hornady's ballistic calculator and my experience you can hold dead on at 100 yards because there is only a 0.3 inch drop. and .3 inches isnt gonna make or break a kill shot on a squirrel or fox etc. just my .02 but either one of these rifles is what id go with:cool:
  11. ivanthehunter

    ivanthehunter New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2008
    Messages:
    7
    After taking some time out to read up on this i have seen things in a new light.

    It seems that the HM2 is nearly as flat out to 100 yards and the ammo is cheaper than the HMR,
    Also it a better round for small game as it causes less damage to meat and pelts than the HMR but still with 17jacketed accuracy.

    All in all i can't understand why its not taken off with better marketing..and more information to small varmint hunters such as as increased accuracy,flat trajectory out to 120yard,value of accurate shots(less ammo more kills) and still all cheaper than its big brother the HMR but strides above its parent the 22lr..

    Is it going to be discontinued??:eek: I hope not:confused:

    JUST A NOTE:
    The poll above is similar to 22lr ver 22WMR both have a niche and one is not there to replace the other, they differ in terms of noise, energy,
    trajectory and damage to meat and over costs of ammo..
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2009
  12. ivanthehunter

    ivanthehunter New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2008
    Messages:
    7
    From what i can gather the fireball provides shooting out to 300yards but again why bother with this light bullet thats trying to fight its way out to 300yards in the wind when the 22-250 or the 220swift(poss a nice 223wssm or a 270) will do the same range with much better resistance to wind and as all these round are in the 4000 fps area they all suffer fouling. Fouling of a thousand of an inch in a 224 barrel will not amount to much as a total % of the bore diameter but this % will be much larger than with the smaller calibers of the .17's(high speed 4000 fps area only) ultimately this effect sustained accuracy unless its countered by cleaning and maybe some special cocktail to coat the inside the bore to reduce friction or sometime else in the black magic area

    The Jacketed HM2 and the HMR with their jacketed construction and lower velocities avoid this fouling.
  13. pigeon slayer

    pigeon slayer New Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2012
    Messages:
    1
    I'll approach the question from a "performance for cost" standpoint. The .22 costs about $4.50 a box of 50 and travels at 1100 to1300 feet per second. It is a decent round out to 75 yards but then, it begins to have considerable issues with gravity. The .17 Mach 2, so named because it travels at twice the speed of sound "Mach"2.(approximately 2100 fps). It is a .22 Stinger case necked down to accept a .17 projectile. This ammo also costs about $4.60 a box or 2,000 rounds for about $185.00. The .17 HMR (Hornady Magnum Round) is a .22 Magnum cartridge necked down to accept the same .17 projectile. It travels 300 fps faster for $12.00 a box of 50. I have found NO appreciable differences in 300fps! Especially for an increase of $7.50 per box ! Both rounds are excellent performers out to 120 yards. Sure, I have hit birds out to 250 yards. But there is a LOT of hold-over. I have killed skunks, possums , raccoons and squirrels out to 125 yards with the Mach 2. It is a pleasant round, not requiring ear plugs, but the HMR does ! The HMR is LOUD. If you are shooting coyotes, move up to a .223 (which cost the same as the HMR)
  14. 300 H&H

    300 H&H Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2007
    Messages:
    1,855
    Location:
    Iowa
    Or you could find a 5mm Remington mag and have the baddest rimfire on the planet. Ammo s availble again, with a 30 gr bullet at 2,500fps. It died a slow death back inthe early 80's.... But thanks to Agila/Centurian it is avilable once again. I am quite sure Steve Hornaday had one of these in his rack when he dreamed up the 17 HMR. His runs at 26,000psi, same as the 22 mag. The 5mm on the other hand runs at 33,000 and takes a special bolt action to seal the chamber to prevent cartridge rim bursting. The rifles are Remingtons 591M and 592M. They are out there to be had. I also have a contender in 5mm. 10" barrel and 2,100fps is hard to argue with!

    http://5mmforums.com/forums/index.php

    Regards, Kirk
    Last edited: May 13, 2012
  15. Freebore

    Freebore New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2009
    Messages:
    307
    Location:
    Land of the Free
    You gotta love a question like this......you'll get as many opinions as there are cartridges.

    So my opinion is:

    ...22LR, probably the best (fun,target, plinking, hunting, cost effective, etc. etc.) cartridge ever made, will most likely still be around after the human race is long gone.

    ...17HMR, a super high velocity rimfire which has excellent accuracy, good dispatching abilities (within its range), and no recoil or big bang. A fine cartridge that will be around for a quite while due to its popularity with the user base and manufactuers.

    ... 22 Mag, Nice cartridge, like the 17HMR it provides good accurcy, no recoil, or loud blast, and good performance, again, because of its popularity by the shooting fraternity and manufactuers, it is obviously holding its own in the world of rimfires.

    ...17 Mach II, kind a different story, while it may have some good points, the most negative issues are the three cartridges above, they are far more popular and effective in their respective classes, based on this I feel the Mach II is headed down the same no marketing/low sales road as many (now obsolete) fine cartridges have gone.

    Remember, Its all about sales/marketing, not performance that keeps a cartridge alive.

    As for Coyotes, (mentioned somewhere above) let's be humane, use a cartridges thats effective for the shot taken, not one that "I think will work", all of the rimfires are questionable at Coyote shooting distances, I would not take a fair shot at a Coyote with anything less than a centerfire 17 or 22 cartridge.
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