17 Fireball

C

Cow Town Bill

Regular
Super GunNutz
Rating - 100%
65   0   0
Location
Calgary
As most readers probably know, the 17 Fireball is similar to the 17 Remington but is a little slower and burns less powder and the supposed advantage is that it doesn't foul as quickly as the 17 Remington. From my own experience, my 17 Rem needs to be cleaned after 50 shots or so---also the barrels gets hot very quickly on a hot day. I use my 17 Rem for gopher shooting so must be careful to not overheat the barrel when gophers are popping up all over the place.
What experience have you had with the 17 Fireball or 17 Remington?
A comparison with the 204 Ruger is an interesting topic as it too can have velocities in the 4000 fps range.
 
I had a 17 rem, but I found that everything it did, the 204 did better. The 204 hits harder, fares with the wind better, and component availability was better. I use moly coated bullets, and have not ever had any significant copper fouling with it (or with the 17 for that matter).
As with any centerfire, you do have to watch for barrel heating, but none of them were any worse than a 222 or 223.
 
Unfortunately I will probably never own a .17 fireball.

ry%3D400

;)
 
"...17 Fireball is similar to the 17 Remington..." Shorter case. The only thing that really matters is local availablity of ammo, brass and bullets. Suspect the .17 Rem would be easier, but not in small places.
"...Both are based off of the .222 case..." .223. The Fireball is based on the .221 Fireball that was based on the .222. The .204 is based on the .222 Rem Mag, that the .223 is based on.
 
mwjones said:
That is correct. Both are based off of the .222 case.
Click to expand...

Sunray has it right. The .17 Rem is based off the .223 case, so a .17-204 is not the same at all, as the .204 is based off the .222 Rem Mag. The advantage for me would be the use of .204 brass, which I already have, which is then relatively easy to form. And with a 1 in 9 twist, this 'big' .17 has the ability to shoot the heavier 30 grain bullets at very nice velocities.
 
Last edited:
I have a 17 Rem Fireball and like it. It doesn't need continuous cleaning and I can comfortably shoot it without hearing protection if need be. Accurate and cheap to reload for, what's not to like.
 
As most readers probably know, the 17 Fireball is similar to the 17 Remington
Click to expand...

Only if you consider a dump truck to be similar to a Ferrari. The 17 Fireball is based off the 221 Fireball case making it similar to the 17 Mach4. The 17 Rem is a much longer case.

Has anyone toyed with a 17PPC idea? The PPC is based off of the 7.62x39 case.
Click to expand...

The PPC is based off the 220 Russian. Which also happens to be the grandfather of the 7.62x39 case. The PPC is not based off the 7.62x39. However they could be considered to be sort of half-brothers.
 
The .222 remington was not based on anything. It was introduced in 1950. 5.56x45 came out in 63, based on the .222 rem.

I've been toying with the idea of a .17 remington for coyotes. I have a 17 hmr, and i'm convinced of the rounds ability to take out a yote out to 75 yards or so, but it would be nice to reach a little farther. And really, how else are you going to get to say you worked up some 4000fps loads on the weekend?
 
Last edited:
mwjones said:
The .222 remington was not based on anything. It was introduced in 1950. 5.56x45 came out in 63, based on the .222 rem.

I've been toying with the idea of a .17 remington for coyotes. I have a 17 hmr, and i'm convinced of the rounds ability to take out a yote out to 75 yards or so, but it would be nice to reach a little farther. And really, how else are you going to get to say you worked up some 4000fps loads on the weekend?
Click to expand...

This was during some load development. The angle of the pic is misleading, I wasn't shooting down the road (to the right and into the ditch) and there isn't a house for miles.

IMG_2437Medium.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom