New .17 cal. rimfire mag rifle

J

John Andrews

Joined
Jan 24, 2003
Messages
2,767
Anybody tried one of these yet? I am interested in getting one,but some shooting buddies are telling me .22 Hornet would be better for squirrels.I head shoot them,just want something a little hotter than my .22LR.
 
Ammunition selection and availability will be better for both the 22 RF Magnum and 22 Hornet.

There have been other similar cartridges to the .17 RF Magnum that are now obsolete. I wouldn't want to own a rifle that I couldn't get factory ammo for easily and cost effectively.

What will the .17 RF Magnum do that the 22 RF Magnum or 22 Hornet won't?
 
Good point,sid.I can reload Hornets for half the cost of .17 rimfire ammo,but from what pics of .17 rimfire I've seen,the .17 rimfire looks like a lot of fun to hunt with. I just wonder about the .17 rimfire performance.
 
one of my customers in Ohio has one (a Dakota I believe) and he says the accuracy is phenomenol!! He sent me a round, it is REALLY a nice looking cartridge!
 
its a great gun, the accuracy is unbeatable. the ammo is a little hard to come by as stated above, but being a little cost prohibitive .22 cal might be a better bet. if you want a little more flair go for the .17 i dont think you will be disapointed, and if you do get it, i would at give the squirels some sort of advance warrning :) just to be fair.

billyp
 
Originally posted by Sid Post
What will the .17 RF Magnum do that the 22 RF Magnum or 22 Hornet won't?
Click to expand...

Generate more profit for gun manufacturers, ammo makers, distributors and gun writers.

I skimmed a side by side comparison of the .17 RF and .22 Mag. The only point that really stuck out was that the .17 drops off very quickly.
 
I like the 17HMR, and have used it before, but still suggest a 22mag or a 223 in most cases. Main reason I do this is because the 17hmr isn't going to be as wide spread, and it may be hard to find ammo at times.

The 22mag and the 223 are around the same price level(ammo-wise), but the 223 has the advantage of being reloadable, something you don't get from the 17 or the 22mag, since they're rimfires.


TC
 
what was the remington rimfire round that went under, the 5MM or something, at least ya know 22 mag will be around a while (maybe)

greg
 
I beleive you are right about the 5mm, I'm sure they thought it would stay around.All the "expert" gun writers seem to beleive the rimfire .17 is here to stay.What I shoot are eatin' squirrels,so I want to just take off the head.I use Stingers in my squirrel rifle,which does a pretty good job,but the Marlin action is just about worn out.
 
I think a .223 is a bit much for squirrels. A .22 mag is even more than I really want for squirrels. It destroys too much meat. The plain old .22 LR is a good choice for bushytails, IMO.
 
Hehe- what ever happened to "barkin'" squirrells with your .50 muzzleloader?

I seem to recall back when they brought out the first round of .17 centerfire cartridges, that the gun writers couldn't find a cleaning rod that would fit!

Naturally, that super-light bullet would shed velocity quickly- I believe that was supposed to be part of the appeal. Less noise, less danger of long-range damage; therefore better in more "built-up" areas.
 
Kinda like you are saying,mwerner,and I reckon that .17 will vaporize instead of just glancing off a limb,ect.And I know what you mean by "bark".Be neat to vaporize a .17 right under a squirrel's chin!
 
Just get a .577, shoot the trunk of a tree, and collect as many dazed squirrels as you want off the floor :D
 
Go out and get the worst, ugliest most inaccurate rifle you can find. Go out and shoot it.

Every day shooting is better than any day working.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top