accurate and lethal rang of .17hmr?

[/\/057]

looking for a good calibre for small game, but would like one thats cheap to shoot, but accuate and lethal for ~300-400 yards.

ive been thinkingabout .17hmr or .223.

thinking .17hmr because becauses its cheap, but maybe not powerfull enough?

 

[Grantmac]

.223 for sure, or one of the .20 cartidges. If you reload (and you should) the centerfire is damn near as cheap as these magnum rimfires.
Cheers,
Grant

 

[Grtwhthntr]

Like Grantmac said, lots use .223 on coyotes and such, and is well proven. The .17 hmr is only good out to about 150-200yds. One caliber becoming quite popular is the .204, just bought one myself and they offer the fastest=flattest factory ammo available. Given a point blank 1.5" rise and drop for coyotes sighted at +1.1" high at 100 yds, bullet is +1.5" at about 150 yds and +1.1" again at 200 yds, -1.5" at about 275 yds. What that means is you can basically aim dead on out to 275 yds and make your mark. Only problem is will run you about $1 every trigger pull unless you reload yourself.

 

[/\/057]

sounds like a good cartridge but i was looking for something cheaper to fire

 

[gommee]

For what you are wanting to shoot, look at the 22-250 or .223.

 

[Smokepole]

The .17 is a great little cartridge, but it runs out of steam a little past 200yards and is too small to dump coyotes unless you use headshots. I too want a centerfire rifle that can keep up with it accuracy wise. I'm spoiled by the one hole groups of my .17 @ 100yrds.

 

[Bobby Ironsights]

looking for a good calibre for small game, but would like one thats cheap to shoot, but accuate and lethal for ~300-400 yards.

ive been thinkingabout .17hmr or .223.

thinking .17hmr because becauses its cheap, but maybe not powerfull enough?

400 yards is pretty damned far for small game. Do you live on the prairie?

I'm wondering, because often people want far more than they need, and then get upset because it's far more than they want to pay for. It's also a helluva lot different with a number on a page than it is in real life. I don't want to be condescending but try dropping your gf'd on the sidewalk on a level stretch of road, driving 400 meters on the odometer, and then stop, get out and wave at the small blob in the distance.

I tried this at 250, 500, and 1000 yards last year and was suprised at what it looks like over iron sights (I used my crosman 760 airgun and also tried it with my 4x scope-handheld). I figured out that even at "only" 500 meters, I'd require a small miracle to hit a man (woman) sized target, standing offhand.

Prairie dogs, coyotes, and other small game at 400 yards sounds like varminting to me, and it's not a cheap+easy pursuit. It's also far beyond the capability of a .17 caliber rimfire.

A .223 can do what you are asking (small game at 400 yards), but you better be a damn good shot, use a very good rifle and scope combination, handload carefully with quality bullets after developing a good load, and be a range and wind estimating wizard.

P.S. Don't forget your eye protection

Good luck,
Bobby.

 

[lone-wolf]

What Ironsights said. A rimfire isn't going to cut it if you do need that range.

 

[Covey Ridge]

looking for a good calibre for small game, but would like one thats cheap to shoot, but accuate and lethal for ~300-400 yards.

ive been thinkingabout .17hmr or .223.

thinking .17hmr because becauses its cheap, but maybe not powerfull enough?

the .223 would be my choice of the two. With a good rifle 300 should be no problem and if you are a good shot 400 should be no problem with easy to kill critters. The .17 hmr is good for big splash on gophers out to about 150 yards but just does not have what it takes to kill past 200.

 

[/\/057]

400 yards is pretty damned far for small game. Do you live on the prairie?

I'm wondering, because often people want far more than they need, and then get upset because it's far more than they want to pay for. It's also a helluva lot different with a number on a page than it is in real life. I don't want to be condescending but try dropping your gf'd on the sidewalk on a level stretch of road, driving 400 meters on the odometer, and then stop, get out and wave at the small blob in the distance.

I tried this at 250, 500, and 1000 yards last year and was suprised at what it looks like over iron sights (I used my crosman 760 airgun and also tried it with my 4x scope-handheld). I figured out that even at "only" 500 meters, I'd require a small miracle to hit a man (woman) sized target, standing offhand.

Prairie dogs, coyotes, and other small game at 400 yards sounds like varminting to me, and it's not a cheap+easy pursuit. It's also far beyond the capability of a .17 caliber rimfire.

A .223 can do what you are asking (small game at 400 yards), but you better be a damn good shot, use a very good rifle and scope combination, handload carefully with quality bullets after developing a good load, and be a range and wind estimating wizard.

P.S. Don't forget your eye protection

Good luck,
Bobby.

I live in South Western ontario and have a lot of big fields around me
your probably right, ill stick to 200 yards

thanks for the advice!

 

[/\/057]

would the 22 magnum be powerful enough at 200 yards?

 

[ben hunchak]

Neither of those rimfire calibers will consistantly kill a varmint cleanly at 200 yds., they are okay for target work at 200 yds. and maybe our western ground squirrels or Gophers but definitely not groundhogs or coyotes, or any of the larger varmints. While they won't laugh at you when hit, you won't see them again, as the coyote will vacate quickly and the groundhog will dive down his hole wounded to possibly die a slow death. Varmint or not, you owe it to your quarry to provide as quick a kill as possible, something not possible for rimfires at 200yds.