Alpha Mule Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 On a slightly different vein: I’m dreaming about getting my FAC and moving on from an (12ft/lbs) air rifle but I have one or two questions. Assuming I will be able to get either or both of .17 or .22 (large, long fields with good backstops/fields of fire): I understand that the .17 has a flatter trajectory and will reach further, but is louder than the .22. I foresee that I will be using over the counter ammo in bog standard format (being a bit on the skint side at the mo). My main question about the use of a .17 against rabbits is, is there much left of the rabbit once the .17 has done its work? I quite like the taste of rabbit, but from some of the pictures / videos I’ve seen, the .17 can be a bit, shall we say “thorough”. I do want it for vermin control, but I always pick up and eat what I kill (there’s not that large a population around here). My next question is about how loud the two calibres are. I intend to use a moderator, but how substantial is the crack from either calibre? I shoot mainly at night and don’t want the locals getting upset (some of my permission is next to a village, with some gardens backing onto ‘my’ land [all in South Wales hill country]). I also don’t want the first shot to clear the fields for the rest of the night. How does the recoil compare? I appreciate all the above are subjective and don't want to start a flame war, so info stylee replies only please Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docholiday Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 If you head shoot them with a .17 then the meat is fine. If shoulder shot then you can bin the front legs, anything else and the meat is destroyed, .22 is much quieter than the .17 You will wound more animals with a .22 than a .17 bullets are much more expensive for the .17 Doc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wookie Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Recoil... Ok, the .17 has a _bit_ of recoil, but the level of that is only such that you can see the crosshairs of your scope move a touch from the target after firing. Seriously, it's not a thing to be worried about, it's just a fraction more than a .22. Sound... .17 makes a crack. No two ways about it, it's louder than a .22, but again, it's not a loud bang, just a crack. Rabbits can hear it, so can people. I use my .22 if I want them to _not_ hear things, but the .17 is not exactly a loud shot. Damage... If you hit the rabbit in the head, there is no damage to the meat. There is usually a lot of damage to the head, sometimes no head, but meat damage is limited. Go for a body shot and you can have a small crater or maybe a missing leg. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berthaboo Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 You will wound more animals with a .22 than a .17 sorry but that will be down to the man behind the rifle and shot placement not the cal your using Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docholiday Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 well now that would be true if we were all olympic shots but after 20 yrs shooting with both calibres and any number of people I will repeat you will loose / injure more with a .22 than a .17 its a fact. simples Doc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alpha Mule Posted October 5, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 If you head shoot them with a .17 then the meat is fine. If shoulder shot then you can bin the front legs, anything else and the meat is destroyed, .22 is much quieter than the .17 You will wound more animals with a .22 than a .17 bullets are much more expensive for the .17 Doc Is that because it is less acurate, or less destructive? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 You will wound more animals with a .22 than a .17 sorry but that will be down to the man behind the rifle and shot placement not the cal your using It will but its still true, chest shot with an HMR and its down every time on the spot, with a .22lr you won't get the same. Secondly you're more likely to not place the shot as well with a .22lr because they are inherently less accurate. If you're lamping you just point and shoot with the HMR, with the .22lr you have to account for drop and judging range can be tricky at night. Even if you pull a shot and gut shoot a rabbit with an HMR it will be down and out which is the great thing about the little bullet as long as you use the 17g vmax rounds. I'd have a 17 every time and put up with a little extra noise just so I don't have to hear that zing of bullets bouncing off grass which we used to get repeatedly with .22lr's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docholiday Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 its less destructive so if your shot placement is off you will stop them more times than not with a .17 but often wound them with a .22, I suspect most will die with the .22 but will often get back to their hole or hedge. Doc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunkield Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Secondly you're more likely to not place the shot as well with a .22lr because they are inherently less accurate. They are all coming out today, keep them coming Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 They are all coming out today, keep them coming I'd place money on a better grouping at 150 yards with an HMR than a .22lr Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MC Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 I'd put money on better grouping @ 1000 yards with my 7.62 than your HMR, doesn't make either less or more accurate. I have shot 20 times more rabbits with a .22 than I have an HMR but they both have equal space in my cabinet. I use both for lamping and have got so used to my .22 that I just point and shoot with it. Anything out to 120 yards is dead with either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docholiday Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 wow MC you must be good never to miss up to 120 yds and kill em stone dead with your .22, wish I was that good. Doc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunkield Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 I'd place money on a better grouping at 150 yards with an HMR than a .22lr Distance wasn't mentioned, neither was cross wind Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MC Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 It is only a case of using a mildot scope and knowing your holdover. I have shot thousands of rounds at various distances and you just get a feel for it. It is just practice, practice and a bit more practice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docholiday Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Ok have offered to take my .22 and .17 to Alpha in South Wales and he can try both if he has land cleared for there use. (see PM ) Alpha Hope this helps Doc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunkield Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Never been a better time to buy a .17 the for sale sections of the forums are choka block with them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Distance wasn't mentioned, neither was cross wind at 50 yards with a strong wind I know which I'd still have my money on yes they move more than a centrefire but they still move less than a slow moving 40 grain lump of lead. I just find them extremely humane on rabbit control and an easy caliber to shoot so to my mind better for a beginner than a loopy .22lr with less put down power and the ability to bounce off dry surfaces in a rather alarming fashion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wymberley Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Hi, Note your brackets at the end of your first paragraph and your final sentence. Its all down to personal preference really. There are loads of reasonably priced 22s about at the moment and the ammo is cheap but you do have to get a round that suits your rifle. Therefore for you initially, a 22 may be best; if nothing else, it'll teach you to shoot. Good luck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAULT Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Never been a better time to buy a .17 the for sale sections of the forums are choka block with them if the .17 is so good why are there so many for sale there is quite a few just on this site Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunkield Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Ammo price hike apparently people giving them up, and maybe slightly disappointing 306 yard performance too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 if the .17 is so good why are there so many for sale there is quite a few just on this site people not having the need for them would be my guess, you need a pretty good rabbit population to keep one going, they are a first gun on peoples FAC and less suited to plinking with than a .22lr, Interestingly though i'm not sure how many people sell them to get a .22lr Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAULT Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 people not having the need for them would be my guess, you need a pretty good rabbit population to keep one going, they are a first gun on peoples FAC and less suited to plinking with than a .22lr, Interestingly though i'm not sure how many people sell them to get a .22lr thats a good point i would never sell my 22 for a 17 to me to be a good shot you need to practise a lot 22 ammo lapua 20 for 500 what is the price of 500 17 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docholiday Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 (edited) .22 certainly cheeper to run with the cost of ammunition but I use my .17hmr on land with lots of stone to avoid the .22 bouncing off everywhere so guess they both have there place and I get lots of use of both. Doc Edited October 5, 2009 by docholiday Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunkield Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 so guess they both have there place And there you have it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MC Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 .22 certainly cheeper to run with the cost of ammunition but I use my .17hmr on land with lots of stone to avoid the .22 bouncing off everywhere so guess they both have there place and I get lots of use of both.Doc Have you never had a .17 ricochet then? I have had several and the sound is worse than a .22 and it probably goes a lot further as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.