17hmr the truth

[markbivvy]

You have seen it knock bunnies down mate.

 

 

i have and cant and wont argue with ya.

and you forgot to say most where past 100 yds, of my shoulder.

[hawkeye]

You have seen it knock bunnies down mate.

 

 

i have and cant and wont argue with ya.

and you forgot to say most where past 100 yds, of my shoulder.

 

 

thought i would let you say that when are we out again im free after wednesday.......

[markbivvy]

im free after wednesday.

just give me a ring and weather permitting we should be OK anytime.

will you need your walking stick.

[hawkeye]

im free after wednesday.

just give me a ring and weather permitting we should be OK anytime.

will you need your walking stick.

 

 

 

YES

[Graham M]

personally i think it's a round with out a purpose ! its useless even in the smallest amount of wind, for a rimfire it's too expensive to run its too noisey and i think it is pointless to shoot rabbits or blow rabbits to bits should i say at 200 yards why not just get with in 100 yards of them and cheaply and quietly shoot them with a .22lr then if your hungry you can go pick the rabbit up and take it home to eat rather than goin over and scraping wot ever is left off the floor and hopeing the local chinease will buy it from you

I shoot a lot of match rifle at 100yds and I can assure you a .22 subsonic will move over 2 inches at 100yds if the wind is blowing.

I have heard so much nonsense over the years from people who claim to shoot rabbits at 125yds with a .22rf. And then when you go with them you find that they have trouble hitting anything over 70yds….because they think that they are shooting further than they are.

I had one chap who was adamant that he was grouping into 1 inch at 100yds with his .22 rimmy only to find that his idea of 100yds was a little over 50 paces.

The .17hmr has a purpose and if you owned one then you would realise what this purpose was.

As for blowing them to bits…….well, this is another fantasy invented by someone who has never shot a rabbit with one, because I can assure you that a headshot rabbit at 150yds has hardly any noticeable difference from one shot with a .22rf at 60yds.

And if you body shoot a rabbit with a .17hmr then you will be in the same boat as body shooting one with a .22rf…..both will cause enough damage to bruise all the surrounding tissue. Anyway, I only use the saddle and the rear legs so it doesn’t make a jot of difference either way.

And as for noise….yes of course it’s noisy; so is a centrefire, which is why you stick a sound moderator on the end, which quietens it down to a level comparable to a .22HV.

As has already been said, most of the adverse comments about the .17hmr seem to come from people who don’t own one. It’s a bit like rubbishing a certain make of car because you have been told it’s **** by someone down the pub.

If you own one, and don’t like it, then fair enough. But if you don’t own one, and simply go by what others are saying, then you shouldn’t give such an opinion as you have no first hand knowledge and shouldn’t therefore put forward an opinion based on hearsay and gossip.

G.M.

[badsworth]

I have shot foxes out to 185 yards with my .17 but I would not claim it to be a purely foxing round - for that I will be getting a .223 soon.

 

.17 is great except when the wind blows - then I tend to leave it at home.

 

I like it because it will do just about anything. I wouldn't say the same about .223 because of the meat damage.

 

I'd happily use my .17 on foxes out to 125 yards - the 185 yard shot was a a unique opportunity on a totally static fox shot at my leisure on a downhill incline. I would not have taken the shot in any other cicumstances.

 

i won't be selling my .17 when I get the .223.

 

B

[verminer]

the .17hmr is a excellent round for rabbits, i have dropped them at 175/180yds no problem at all providing there is no wind about. As for foxes, i would never attempt to shoot one over 100yds and also you must hit it in the boiler room. If i were you i would keep your .223 for the fox population.

[sussex lad]

I have shot foxes out to 185 yards

 

[varget]

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm, here we go again.

 

****** u off dun it mate

"its all about ethics init"

[Browning]

Varget,

 

I'm one of the 'Don't have one' crowd.....BUT......I have been shooting a pals since he got

his approx 6 months ago, and since I first zeroed it for him I haven't had my .22 out of the cabinet.

 

It is definitely a superbly accurate round when used under the right conditions (i.e. very little wind)

and is more than capable of outshooting me.

 

Between us we reckon we've put 1500 rounds through it, and it still performs better than either of us can.

 

I've only ever shot one fox with it, called in to 45 yards, and it died on the spot.

 

The only things that is stopping me from buying one is funds........hopefully that will be resolved soon.

[deadeye ive]

i'm seriously thinking about putting in for a 17hmr but need to know the truth

i have a 223 but think that its tooo-much gun for some of my land and come across foxes on there.

this is where i would benifit from having such a small cal

has anyone got a bad word to say about this call?

have you had one and got rid coz it was not what you thought it would be???

i know every one who has one will praise the hell out of them but im realy interested in hearing the comments from people who have but dont own one now

 

Are your permissions flanked by outbuildings ,barnconversions the odd farm house etc! because you could end up being unpopular .This rifle is loud even when moderated and if you ,ve got a serious rabbit problem then a quieter tool would be more advisable to start with leaving the HMR for the lampshy ones which are normally over 100 yds + out where by you'll only be shooting now and then and not one after the other .

 

BTW .........I speak from a recent COUPLE of experiences

 

 

On the plus side it is a wonderful little calibre but has it's place along side other small calibres where pest control is concerned as my other option is a FAC Air rifle ..........A fine combination IMO

[kirky640]

leaving the HMR for the lampshy ones which are normally over 100 yds + out where by you'll only be shooting now and then

 

 

lamp shy leg it as soon as the spotlight shines on them up here!!!!

 

if they are between 100yrd and 250yards they are dead 222 or .17 whatever is required

[deadeye ive]

lamp shy leg it as soon as the spotlight shines on them up here!!!!

 

Not if you use a red diffuser and a dimmer switch set low on your lamp you'll be surprised at how near you can get ................ .....Oh! and you'll need some half decent optics as well

[DaveK]

Varget,

 

I'm one of the 'Don't have one' crowd.....BUT......I have been shooting a pals since he got

his approx 6 months ago, and since I first zeroed it for him I haven't had my .22 out of the cabinet.

 

It is definitely a superbly accurate round when used under the right conditions (i.e. very little wind)

and is more than capable of outshooting me.

 

Between us we reckon we've put 1500 rounds through it, and it still performs better than either of us can.

 

I've only ever shot one fox with it, called in to 45 yards, and it died on the spot.

 

The only things that is stopping me from buying one is funds........hopefully that will be resolved soon.

 

 

Have you got your pals rifle on your ticket Browning? If not you may be admitting to a firearms offence on a public forum

 

Varget, the only thing I can suggest other than whats already been said is to check with your FLO that your constabulary will allow a condition for fox on a .17hmr. Some don't.

 

Dave

[Evilv]

Have you got your pals rifle on your ticket Browning? If not you may be admitting to a firearms offence on a public forum

 

How's that? Is he not entitled to fire the rifle under the direct supervision of the certificate holder? I don't know, but that is my feeling. I base this on the fact that in the 1980s when I joined a shooting club, which had many police among its members, I was allowed to hire a variety of weapons and shoot them under supervision without any certificate except my shotgun license. Many there hired all kinds of pistols and long arms that were not on their certificates and blazed away two afternoons a week without incident or question, including members who were policemen.

 

Also, since when did the police have power to decide that you can't shoot a fox with an HMR when they granted permission for you own it to shoot vermin. Is not the common fox vermin? Of course, as with any species and any rifle caliber, no sensible man would shoot at an animal at ranges where he was unsure that he could kill it outright. While a fox should certainly not be shot with an HMR or a .22LR at long ranges, a fox can clearly be killed humanely by a shot to the head at a suitable range with either of these calibers. I would suggest that any fox shot in the head at shotgun range with a .22 will not suffer at all, and as we all know, it is perfectly possible to find oneself close enough to kill them with a 12 bore.

 

Maybe the issue causing confusion here is that the police in some forces may not wish to grant permission to acquire a .17 for the specific purpose of shooting foxes, and hence may decline to grant it. Obviously, the centerfire .22 calibers are needed for long range fox shooting, though of course the police may decline to grant .22 centre fire for some locations.

[DaveK]

Have you got your pals rifle on your ticket Browning? If not you may be admitting to a firearms offence on a public forum

 

How's that? Is he not entitled to fire the rifle under the direct supervision of the certificate holder? I don't know, but that is my feeling. I base this on the fact that in the 1980s when I joined a shooting club, which had many police among its members, I was allowed to hire a variety of weapons and shoot them under supervision without any certificate except my shotgun license. Many there hired all kinds of pistols and long arms that were not on their certificates and blazed away two afternoons a week without incident or question, including members who were policemen.

 

Also, since when did the police have power to decide that you can't shoot a fox with an HMR when they granted permission for you own it to shoot vermin. Is not the common fox vermin? Of course, as with any species and any rifle caliber, no sensible man would shoot at an animal at ranges where he was unsure that he could kill it outright. While a fox should certainly not be shot with an HMR or a .22LR at long ranges, a fox can clearly be killed humanely at a suitable range with either of these calibers. I would suggest that any fox shot in the head at shotgun range with a .22 will not suffer at all, and as we all know, it is perfectly possible to find oneself close enough to kill them with a 12 bore.

 

Maybe the issue causing confusion here is that the police in some forces may not wish to grant permission to acquire a .17 for the specific purpose of shooting foxes, and hence may decline to grant it. Obviously, the centerfire .22 calibers are needed for long range fox shooting, though the police may decline to grant it for some locations for safety reasons.

 

Assuming that the .22 that isn't taken out of its cabinet is a rimfire, then the owner will be a certificate holder. If that is the case then, with the exception of the confines of a shooting club, he/she can only shoot the firearms specified on their cert. Even in a HO approved club technically a cert holder shouldn't shoot other peoples firearms if the club hasn't got the calibre on the club ticket (but that's only technically). Anyway the situation is different in that clubs don't have foxes to shoot at.

 

A non certificate holder can shoot the firearms of the landowner under supervision. A certificate holder can't unless they have that specific rifle on their ticket and the appropriate conditions of use. i believe it's different for estate rifles. It's been discussed a lot on here what constitutes a landowner.

 

As for fox, please find me anything in firearms law that defines fox as vermin. Again, it's something that gets discussed a lot on many of the forums. Police authorities interpret the GUIDANCE differently. Some will allow .22rf and .17hmr as a condition for fox some won't. If foxes were considered to be general vermin species there wouldn't be a condition on a ticket for "vermin and fox" (as is on mine for .22rf but only on Lorraines for .223 although she has a .17hmr and a .22 for vermin). Unfortunately there's a lack of consistency countrywide but generally the rimfires are not considered to be a suitable foxing calibre.

 

By the way, I can't shoot Lorraines .17hmr as I don't have it on my ticket. Both of us have open tickets and it still applies.

 

Hope this helps

 

Dave

[Evilv]

Thanks for your input Dave. Very helpful.

 

There is huge confusion certainly around these issues and a lot of mythology.

 

I'm not sure what specific acts of parliament say about the fox as vermin, but it is CERTAINLY regarded as vermin in common parlance. The fox is vermin therefore under the normal use of the English language.

 

Defra has fox on a list of pest species along with rats, mice and rabbits as an animal that can be killed without any form of licence - ie 'vermin' though the term that is coming into vogue is 'pest species'.

 

On the point of non- certificated people and firearms. The 1968 firearms act specifically allows for people and young people to use firearms under the direct supervision of occupiers of land to shoot firearms. Police, according to the Countryside Alliance on this matter interpret occupiers of land to mean those with shooting rights and permissions. The idea that a person checked by police as responsible and law abiding should have fewer rights to discharge a firearm belonging to the occupier of the land in his presence than ***** Joe who has no certificate at all, is simply ludicrous and I am sure that should such a case ever arrive there, it would be very quickly laughed out of court.

 

The bottom of this page mentions the matter of the exemptions in section 11 of the Firearms Act 1968:

 

http://www.countryside-alliance.org/shooti...ms_Legislation/

 

 

PS -

 

This whole area is probably a goldmine for lawyers.

[badsworth]

Fox is considered to be vermin by the firearms department here in Dorset.

 

When they say vermin they mean including foxes.

 

B

[dunganick]

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm, here we go again.

 

exactly what i thought

 

HMR: not enough gun for foxes at silly ranges, if you have done it, congratulations, dont do it again

 

Using other peoples Rifles: under direct supervision of the effective land owner (includes people carrying out a service for the farmer..... eg.... permission holder or owner of sporting rights) no problem at all.

 

Thats the short version of my views of two topics which have been done to death on most forums.

[invector]

Foxes are vermin! Even so I was required to have foxes specifically included on my FAC before I could shoot them. Northants police won't sanction the shooting of foxes with a .22, but will OK the .17HMR.

[DaveK]

Using other peoples Rifles: under direct supervision of the effective land owner (includes people carrying out a service for the farmer..... eg.... permission holder or owner of sporting rights) no problem at all.

 

 

Unless you have a FAC which automatically restricts you to only using the firearms on your ticket and for the use they're conditioned for. Basically if you use a firearm in the field and it's not on your ticket, you're actually breaking the conditions of your "grant of a certificate" and committing a firearms offence. The perversity of it is that no cert = no offence. The law is an ***.

 

The rest of your post I totally agree all this has been done to death before.

 

Anyway, I've shot a fox at 1300 miles with a .22 rimmy. I checked the distance with my Busnell pro500(?) rangefinder

 

 

AND IT WAS IN A HOWLING GALE

 

Dave

[Down South]

 

 

Anyway, I've shot a fox at 1300 miles with a .22 rimmy. I checked the distance with my Busnell pro500(?) rangefinder

 

 

AND IT WAS IN A HOWLING GALE

 

Dave

 

Oh yeh! you had it easy.

 

I've shot a fox at 5000 miles, with a catapult in a snow storm with nowt but a candle for a lamp and had to pace it out cos we never had range finders when I were a lad.

 

You tell that to folk nowadays and they won't believe ya!

[DaveK]

 

 

Anyway, I've shot a fox at 1300 miles with a .22 rimmy. I checked the distance with my Busnell pro500(?) rangefinder

 

 

AND IT WAS IN A HOWLING GALE

 

Dave

 

Oh yeh! you had it easy.

 

I've shot a fox at 5000 miles, with a catapult in a snow storm with nowt but a candle for a lamp and had to pace it out cos we never had range finders when I were a lad.

 

You tell that to folk nowadays and they won't believe ya!

 

 

You were lucky. I never had a catapult.

[dunganick]

 

 

Using other peoples Rifles: under direct supervision of the effective land owner (includes people carrying out a service for the farmer..... eg.... permission holder or owner of sporting rights) no problem at all.

 

 

Unless you have a FAC which automatically restricts you to only using the firearms on your ticket and for the use they're conditioned for. Basically if you use a firearm in the field and it's not on your ticket, you're actually breaking the conditions of your "grant of a certificate" and committing a firearms offence. The perversity of it is that no cert = no offence. The law is an ***.

 

The rest of your post I totally agree all this has been done to death before.

 

Anyway, I've shot a fox at 1300 miles with a .22 rimmy. I checked the distance with my Busnell pro500(?) rangefinder

 

 

AND IT WAS IN A HOWLING GALE

 

Dave

 

 

I know i am just putting fuel on the fire, but i happen to know that you can deffinatly use a rifle whilst under the direct supervision of the person who owns it on land they have lawful authority to shoot over. I have been in contact with the basc to confirm it and read up on the conditions in the law to the point at which i am satisfied i am doing nothing illegal. Basically the answer to this is to only do what you as an individual are happy to do when guns are involved. Dont take anyones word for it, do your own research and come to your own conclusions and base decisions upon this.

[Down South]

 

 

Anyway, I've shot a fox at 1300 miles with a .22 rimmy. I checked the distance with my Busnell pro500(?) rangefinder

 

 

AND IT WAS IN A HOWLING GALE

 

Dave

 

Oh yeh! you had it easy.

 

I've shot a fox at 5000 miles, with a catapult in a snow storm with nowt but a candle for a lamp and had to pace it out cos we never had range finders when I were a lad.

 

You tell that to folk nowadays and they won't believe ya!

 

 

You were lucky. I never had a catapult.

 

 

When I say catapult, it was more of a stick with a bit of knicker elastic!