17HMR Vrs 22Lr For precision shooting practice. Am I off target?

Canadiankeeper

Canadiankeeper

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
58   0   0
Location
Alberta
I will try and keep this short. My center fire rifles are starting to hurt(the wallet). I dont want to go shooting because of it. An average range day runs me about 500-600 bucks.
So back looking into rimfire trainers.

I have owned annie rimfires, custom build kidd rifles ect in 22. I spent thousands on the chase of 1/2" at 50 all day long challenge. It drove me up the wall pulling the trigger and seeing that little hole appear somewhere NOT behind my crosshairs.
If you want to get a rifle under $1000 it seems like 17 hmr might be the best bang for your buck for printing groups at 100 and under and varmint hunting.

Why do I not see more people using 17 hmr to practice and shoot with? Is there some big thing im missing?
Whats your thoughts? What's the better trainer rifle?
 
Canadiankeeper said:
I will try and keep this short. My center fire rifles are starting to hurt(the wallet). I dont want to go shooting because of it. An average range day runs me about 500-600 bucks.
So back looking into rimfire trainers.

I have owned annie rimfires, custom build kidd rifles ect in 22. I spent thousands on the chase of 1/2" at 50 all day long challenge. It drove me up the wall pulling the trigger and seeing that little hole appear somewhere NOT behind my crosshairs.
If you want to get a rifle under $1000 it seems like 17 hmr might be the best bang for your buck for printing groups at 100 and under and varmint hunting.

Why do I not see more people using 17 hmr to practice and shoot with? Is there some big thing im missing?
Whats your thoughts? What's the better trainer rifle?
Click to expand...

Ammo is probably not match level. Mostly though, it destroys targets that 22 will not. Stop shooting 22 at 50. Shoot it at 250+ from standing, 2 knees, and 1 knee, on the clock.
 
In our 100/200 metre shoots the 17 HMR fails to show much advantage . . . won once though at 100.
They are actually in a class by themselves. At 200 the hits cannot be seen.
 
Hey CK!

Good question. In my opinion, 17HMR is inherently accurate but should you wind-up with a rifle that doesn't shoot it well, there isn't a whole lot you can do about it ammo-wise. There are still dreamers who for years, would brag about loading 223 for the same cost of factory 17HMR, but not according to my math. Not sure how many kegs of powder or cases of primers/bullets you'd have to buy for that to become true...but that type of talk has gone quiet in these inflationary times. What IS probably true is that you could maybe cut that $500-$600 a day in half by loading .223, but the # of rounds factors in heavily...and I don't know how many rounds a day you shoot.

There IS another option if you reload, something like 17 Hornet. Doesn't run hot, you can get allot of rounds from a pound of powder, bullet availability is seldom an issue, not as loud, you can buy caliber-specific funnels (for example) that take some of the fussiness out of working with small cases, etc. etc.

The most accurate 17HMR I ever owned was a CZ452 Varmint, shot 20gr. Hornady amazingly well. Under 3/8" @ 100 if I did my part, and under 1" all day long. One of the few guns I regret selling.
 
Canadiankeeper said:
I will try and keep this short. My center fire rifles are starting to hurt(the wallet). I dont want to go shooting because of it. An average range day runs me about 500-600 bucks.
So back looking into rimfire trainers.

I have owned annie rimfires, custom build kidd rifles ect in 22. I spent thousands on the chase of 1/2" at 50 all day long challenge. It drove me up the wall pulling the trigger and seeing that little hole appear somewhere NOT behind my crosshairs.
If you want to get a rifle under $1000 it seems like 17 hmr might be the best bang for your buck for printing groups at 100 and under and varmint hunting.

Why do I not see more people using 17 hmr to practice and shoot with? Is there some big thing im missing?
Whats your thoughts? What's the better trainer rifle?
Click to expand...

Almost any out of the box T1X or CZ .22 will meet the 1/2" challenge at 50 and shoot 1 moa at 100 with a decent optic and some good match ammo. Then work your way out from there. I'm not sure what the issue is but .22 is a pretty good trainer.
 
Walterfisher said:
Canadiankeeper said:
I will try and keep this short. My center fire rifles are starting to hurt(the wallet). I dont want to go shooting because of it. An average range day runs me about 500-600 bucks.
So back looking into rimfire trainers.

I have owned annie rimfires, custom build kidd rifles ect in 22. I spent thousands on the chase of 1/2" at 50 all day long challenge. It drove me up the wall pulling the trigger and seeing that little hole appear somewhere NOT behind my crosshairs.
If you want to get a rifle under $1000 it seems like 17 hmr might be the best bang for your buck for printing groups at 100 and under and varmint hunting.

Why do I not see more people using 17 hmr to practice and shoot with? Is there some big thing im missing?
Whats your thoughts? What's the better trainer rifle?
Click to expand...

Almost any out of the box T1X or CZ .22 will meet the 1/2" challenge at 50 and shoot 1 moa at 100 with a decent optic and some good match ammo. Then work your way out from there. I'm not sure what the issue is but .22 is a pretty good trainer.
Click to expand...

To add to Walterfisher's comment, I would say that .17HMR is inherently more accurate, flatter and hits further than any .22LR. However, if the objective is to train precision rifle shooting, and therefore practice and understand ballistics, reading environmental/weather impacts, observing and such, then .22LR offers arguably a more effective (and less expensive) means of training. Its akin to training with a handicap because of all the other factors apart from lining up sights/optics and squeezing a trigger.

Anyone can shoot a laser beam.
 
Been noticing the range brass buckets not as full as before - the 17HMR has the zip factor - however 50 rounds can reach $30 bucks. I would lean more on .22 if your looking for a trainer.
 
.22LRGUY said:
Hey CK!

Good question. In my opinion, 17HMR is inherently accurate but should you wind-up with a rifle that doesn't shoot it well, there isn't a whole lot you can do about it ammo-wise. There are still dreamers who for years, would brag about loading 223 for the same cost of factory 17HMR, but not according to my math. Not sure how many kegs of powder or cases of primers/bullets you'd have to buy for that to become true...but that type of talk has gone quiet in these inflationary times. What IS probably true is that you could maybe cut that $500-$600 a day in half by loading .223, but the # of rounds factors in heavily...and I don't know how many rounds a day you shoot.

There IS another option if you reload, something like 17 Hornet. Doesn't run hot, you can get allot of rounds from a pound of powder, bullet availability is seldom an issue, not as loud, you can buy caliber-specific funnels (for example) that take some of the fussiness out of working with small cases, etc. etc.

The most accurate 17HMR I ever owned was a CZ452 Varmint, shot 20gr. Hornady amazingly well. Under 3/8" @ 100 if I did my part, and under 1" all day long. One of the few guns I regret selling.
Click to expand...
My Dad has a 452 varmit he bought receintly, sighting it in with 17? gr CCI FMJ, the bullets where touching each other.
 
.22 much better option solely based on price. My .17hmr has been gathering dust as it’s so dang expensive to shoot. So if we’re plinking at <50 or less I’ll use .22 . I’ll shoot it out to 150-200 with my .17 tho if that’s what we’re doing that day haha.
 
Lots of good comments!

It would seem if my goal is to primarily practice on learning how to compensate for drop and windage then the 22 would be better.
If I just want something accurate for shooting the 17hmr would be best.

Im by no means a competitive shooter, I just like to shoot. I can confidently push out to 800 with no issues and now have started to do some PRS match style practice. Shooting from tripods, difference barricades and positions to keep it interesting.
I dont think I will ever compete.

All good stuff to hear, I think that the 17 hmr is likely going to beat out the 22lr on my next rifle purchase. Its cheap (in comparison to my current CF rifles) and will just provide decent consistent accuracy. between 50-150 yards.
 
horseman2 said:
In our 100/200 metre shoots the 17 HMR fails to show much advantage . . . won once though at 100.
They are actually in a class by themselves. At 200 the hits cannot be seen.
Click to expand...

Thats super interesting, did they shoot subsonic at that distance to prevent the wobble from traveling through sound barrier. I had some guy telling me about how subsonic 22lr is better for long distance because of that. Seems like its logical.

I dont see myself pushing out to 200 unless im really trying to stretch out to a prarie dog or something.
 
$500? Are you buying a new Axis every time you go? Your shoulder can deal with 150+ rds fired of center fire?

22 obviously. If you can't get the 1/2" challenge, practice more. I recommend a 12x+ optic and SK or better Ammo off a bench. 17 is even more expensive so why go there?

People confuse flatness with accuracy.
 
There's a simple reason why the 17hmr isn't used for target shooting. Unlike .22LR, there is no such thing as 17hmr match ammo. The 17hmr ammo that's available has many of the problems relating to lack of consistency that plagues .22LR high velocity ammo. They often have wide ES and bullet seating issues. For all that, 17hmr costs the same as a box of top tier .22LR match ammo.
 
Jahnj0584 said:
$500? Are you buying a new Axis every time you go? Your shoulder can deal with 150+ rds fired of center fire?

22 obviously. If you can't get the 1/2" challenge, practice more. I recommend a 12x+ optic and SK or better Ammo off a bench. 17 is even more expensive so why go there?

People confuse flatness with accuracy.
Click to expand...

Haha, damn near buying a new axis every time!
Yea man, Ill run about 100 rounds. Usually costs around 300 bucks. The other 200-250 bucks is usually in 9mm.
100 rounds on a 12lb rifle shooting 6.5 CM with a pretty aggressive muzzle device really makes shooting that much super easy. If I was shooting 308 or 300 WM ect with no break I would not be having fun lol.
The biggest thing stopping me from reloading is space. I don't have a spot to put a reloading set up... Yet... So for now I have a TON of 6.5 CM Brass lol.

Oh I had a couple rifles I was able to complete the 22 challenge with. I always did use match ammo, would test different brands and lot numbers to find what my rifles liked to shoot.

grauhanen said:
There's a simple reason why the 17hmr isn't used for target shooting. Unlike .22LR, there is no such thing as 17hmr match ammo. The 17hmr ammo that's available has many of the problems relating to lack of consistency that plagues .22LR high velocity ammo. They often have wide ES and bullet seating issues. For all that, 17hmr costs the same as a box of top tier .22LR match ammo.
Click to expand...

That checks out, Its wild how many people can speak towards really good accuracy with the 17 though.
Im guessing the reasons you stated are why at 150-200 yards ect it isnt printing as well as 22lr match ammo.
Also you are very right, that makes total sense and was the thing I was missing. People who are competing want consistency. So if they cant get match ammo... There it is...
 
I had one for a while; CZ452 Canadian. Great rifle but so much variation in ammo.

It is a caliber that is good for a few things, but not many. If you find an ammo that works well for you (for me it was Remington that shot the best) you need to stick with it. When ammo was plentiful not a problem, but lately, it has been a challenge. I spoke with an older gentleman last week at our club, and he is going to sell or trade his because of ammo issues.

When I traded mine I already had some really nice accurate .22s, but wanted something more devastating for ground hogs that could reach farther, so I sold it and bought a new Zostavax 6.5 x 55, I am very happy with it..

.22 ammo may or may not be cheaper; some of the match grade stuff is more per box than the .17; a lot of of good stuff is cheaper than .17.

Shooting accurate .22s is a joy for me; spent 4 hours at the range last Monday shooting 100 yards with an old Brno Mod 4. 452 next trip.
 
Canadiankeeper said:
Thats super interesting, did they shoot subsonic at that distance to prevent the wobble from traveling through sound barrier. I had some guy telling me about how subsonic 22lr is better for long distance because of that. Seems like its logical.

I dont see myself pushing out to 200 unless im really trying to stretch out to a prarie dog or something.
Click to expand...

I shoot 300m pretty well every time I go to the range! Always subsonic ammo. I don't know of too many PRS shooters that would shoot high velocity stuff either, at least noone who is winning... I am aware that there are some match ammo that are slightly higher velocity but usually designed to cycle semi-autos or they just barely break the barrier just at the muzzle in the 1100fps area. (Eley Force, SK LRM, etc)
 
sk8snwmx said:
I shoot 300m pretty well every time I go to the range! Always subsonic ammo. I don't know of too many PRS shooters that would shoot high velocity stuff either, at least noone who is winning... I am aware that there are some match ammo that are slightly higher velocity but usually designed to cycle semi-autos or they just barely break the barrier just at the muzzle in the 1100fps area. (Eley Force, SK LRM, etc)
Click to expand...

You may well be aware, but readers in general should know that high velocity .22LR ammo isn't accuracy impaired because of MVs faster than the speed of sound.

It's got everything to do with the poor and inconsistent ammo quality in the vast majority of HV .22LR ammo. Subsonic .22LR ammo isn't necessarily more accurate as it can be equally poor and inconsistent in quality. Most .22LR match ammo (and even entry level match ammo) is made to higher quality standards which allows it to be more accurate than regular standard and high velocity varities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom