.17 Centrefires, Fireball etc, PLEASE, Nothing to do with HMR

[Dekers]

The .17CF's intrigue me, what do people actually use them for where they excel and come into their own over the more common calibres?

[lewis2012]

I would guess longer range effectivness I have read people hitting bunnies up to 350 yds with 17 rem

[barrelsniffer]

I use 17Rem along other cals i fnd the 17 less recoil very accurate out to 300 yds and less prone to any ricochets due to the very light bullets which do fragment well when hitting ground.

[Dave-G]

Point and shoot vermin control from about 50 yards to 250 yards and you see the strike because recoil didn't move the scope off the line of sight.

[CharlieT]

Dekers

 

A .17c/f will do nothing a .20 or .22 will do and your quarry will not notice the difference. As has been said the only practical difference when compared with a .22 is in recoil or rather lack of it.

 

However, having said that they have a much flatter trajectory which may be of benefit. For my type of shooting, where every poult saved counts, I need to take every oppertunity I can to nail them and don't have the time or luxary to lazer rangefind or mess about with drop. A flat trajectory means I can point, shoot and kill within the smallest time envelope and I must say that these small calibers, for my needs are really on the money.

 

They are also sweet to shoot and to be honest are just plain fun, I have also found them to be extreemly accurate. Over the years I've gone through phases including bigger is better but now I've developed a love affair with small calibers. If I could only have one musket it would be a 17 or 20.

[kent]

Dekers

 

A .17c/f will do nothing a .20 or .22 will do and your quarry will not notice the difference. As has been said the only practical difference when compared with a .22 is in recoil or rather lack of it.

 

However, having said that they have a much flatter trajectory which may be of benefit. For my type of shooting, where every poult saved counts, I need to take every oppertunity I can to nail them and don't have the time or luxary to lazer rangefind or mess about with drop. A flat trajectory means I can point, shoot and kill within the smallest time envelope and I must say that these small calibers, for my needs are really on the money.

 

They are also sweet to shoot and to be honest are just plain fun, I have also found them to be extreemly accurate. Over the years I've gone through phases including bigger is better but now I've developed a love affair with small calibers. If I could only have one musket it would be a 17 or 20.

 

Other than a love of of smaller guns (which is a situation i am finding myself slotting more into these days also), this dont add up coz there are loads flatter guns than a small .17 at range that also take less wind (the real long range issue) and fox capable at longer ranges.

[CharlieT]

Other than a love of of smaller guns (which is a situation i am finding myself slotting more into these days also), this dont add up coz there are loads flatter guns than a small .17 at range that also take less wind (the real long range issue) and fox capable at longer ranges.

 

I would agree, they would not be my choice for a long range caliber but for medium plus a bit they excell.

[kent]

I would agree, they would not be my choice for a long range caliber but for medium plus a bit they excell.

 

how do you class long and medium range? perhaps that might explain your thoughts better? I aint a clue what medium plus a bit is LOL

[bedwards1966]

On paper I can certainly see a use for them. I've thought about a .17 Remington for crows, pigeons and rabbit head-shots, perfectly flat shooting to an easy 300 yards, and ricochet risks must hardly exist.

 

I've no idea how good they are in real life, as there don't seem to be many around and I've never had a go with one one seen one used.

[Alycidon]

Dekers

 

A .17c/f will do nothing a .20 or .22 will do and your quarry will not notice the difference.

 

Agreed

 

As has been said the only practical difference when compared with a .22 is in recoil or rather lack of it.

 

This does depend on the cartridge and load and of course rifle weight but is a fair comment.

 

However, having said that they have a much flatter trajectory which may be of benefit.

 

Thsi depends on cartridge and velocity, my flattest round is my 20 cal.

 

For my type of shooting, where every poult saved counts, I need to take every oppertunity I can to nail them and don't have the time or luxary to lazer rangefind or mess about with drop. A flat trajectory means I can point, shoot and kill within the smallest time envelope and I must say that these small calibers, for my needs are really on the money.

 

You need a 20BR !!. I have been protecting my poults with one for 4 years now.

 

They are also sweet to shoot and to be honest are just plain fun, I have also found them to be extreemly accurate. Over the years I've gone through phases including bigger is better but now I've developed a love affair with small calibers. If I could only have one musket it would be a 17 or 20.

 

Same here, but a 20 cal.

 

I carry a 17AH on my spring trap round till about July, its ideal for crows, magpies etc out to over 200 yards. It will do foxes yes but I do currently have reservations when one walked away this summer. Cant see how I could have missed one crow before and one after at similar distances blew up. My main fox rifle is a heavy 20BR using 50 gr Bergers and 39gr SBKs, zero at 170 yards, point and shoot out to just over 200, further on chest shots. Most of my foxes are 80-150 yards. I also run a small 6mm but its almost redundant now other than stalking deer.

 

I do have a friend who looks after a lot of birds who uses at 17Rem and a 22.250 as his vermin rifles, he likes both but where there is any wind much he takes the 22.250.

 

A

Edited September 27, 2012 by Alycidon

[CharlieT]

Kent

I call medium range about 225 - 250 yds.

 

Alycdion

Yes, I to favor a 20 cal for most of my work. The .243 now only comes out when the wind is really blowing or I just fancy a change.

I'm looking forward to trying out the .17HH when it comes, like you I intend to use it on my rounds in the summer and early autumn, it may just prove to be the ideal tool for the job.

[kent]

Kent

I call medium range about 225 - 250 yds.

 

Alycdion

Yes, I to favor a 20 cal for most of my work. The .243 now only comes out when the wind is really blowing or I just fancy a change.

I'm looking forward to trying out the .17HH when it comes, like you I intend to use it on my rounds in the summer and early autumn, it may just prove to be the ideal tool for the job.

sorry i wasnt being serious, hence LOL

[kent]

On paper I can certainly see a use for them. I've thought about a .17 Remington for crows, pigeons and rabbit head-shots, perfectly flat shooting to an easy 300 yards, and ricochet risks must hardly exist.

 

I've no idea how good they are in real life, as there don't seem to be many around and I've never had a go with one one seen one used.

 

ricochet risks hardly exist? Wrong assumption, very wrong. Less likely than a .308 with heavy deer bullets perhaps but the shot taken must still forfill all the criteria

[bedwards1966]

ricochet risks hardly exist? Wrong assumption, very wrong. Less likely than a .308 with heavy deer bullets perhaps but the shot taken must still forfill all the criteria

 

Don't worry, I made an assumption based on what little I know. I wouldn't use that as enough to do anything daft with it. It's simply that, to my mind, 20gr bullets at somewhere near 4000 fps aren't likely to ricochet much.

But that's just my thoughts, it's not based on any practical experience of the round.

[Dekers]

The .17 CF are a bit of an unexplored territory for me, and I have very little personal experience of their use.

 

Ok, I'm getting an idea, I can see the use for a .17 when taken out as a general calibre that will deal with most things out to good distances for the occasional shot. Or for head shots on corvids etc 300 yards away, still takes some doing I'd say, very little margin for error, and not something I have any particular requirement for, although I did have a go at a golf ball we found in a field a couple of years ago, quite a long way, about 300-400 yards I think it was, I got lucky with the .223 after a couple of tries!

 

Help me a little more if you can please, just what is the crosswind situation with the Fireball, is it a big problem? Also, how would ammo costs for the Fireball say, compare to the likes of a .204 or .222, or.223, factory or home brew, and do you .17 CF owners tend to buy factory or reload? The .204 is pretty fussy from my general experience/understanding, and would commonly benefit from a developed load to get the best out of the rifle, is the Fireball perfectly happy with factory or do you really need to develop a load for that to?

 

Cheers

[Rem223]

I haven't priced up factory ammo for some time. I only ever bought one box and at £25 for 20 rounds (ten or more years ago) I decided the best option was to reload. I would also be a bit concerned about getting hold of Fireball brass. The 17 Remington is probably going to be easier to find. It looks like Remington has pulled the plug on the Fireball, so unless you are prepared to roll your own, you may have trouble locating a consistent supply of Fireball brass. I haven't really had much of a problem with crosswinds using 25gr bullets in a .17 Remington. It doesn't seem to be any more prone to drift than a .223, but like everything it takes practice and a degree of guess work. As far as ricochets go. Most 17 barrels are 1:10 or 1:9 twist so the bullet is turning a lot of rpms and in my opinion this is a factor which makes the bullet extremely frangible. I have had Berger bullets come apart en route to the target. The 20gr bullets work well on corvids and rabbits, but as others have said they can break up on bone and lead to nasty splash wounds on foxes. In that respect the 25gr hollow point is probably a better option.

 

I cant see the .204 Ruger being any more fussy than a .17 Remington/Fireball, they are both a bit more expensive for components and cleaning rods etc. Realistically most rifles will benefit from developing a load that suits it. The .204 is probably going to be easier to locate ammo for and possibly a bit cheaper to reload. You wont beat a .223 for cost though simply because of its relative popularity. As for a 300yd head shot on a corvid. Well if you can do that regularly then I take my hat off to you . The 17 is always going to be somthing of a niche but the lack of recoil and lower noise levels compared to a .223 or 22-250 are worth having.

[Olliesims]

I would love a .17 rem for long range crows as I get a lot on my permission to far for the hmr and to expensive for the .223, and shotgun is completely out the question, I take it tho you have to home reload the .17 rem?

[kent]

I would love a .17 rem for long range crows as I get a lot on my permission to far for the hmr and to expensive for the .223, and shotgun is completely out the question, I take it tho you have to home reload the .17 rem?

It will not be cheaper to reload or buy factory for than a .223 rem i promise you that and everything will be harder to get

[Sheldon Cooper]

i could be wrong but i think with some police forces .17 rem is the "biggest" cf allowed for vermin. The .17 rem was/ is popular with hunters in the u.s and australia when shooting fox for the skins to minimise pelt damage (tiny entrance hole and no exit hole)

Edited September 30, 2012 by Sheldon Cooper

[Alycidon]

Kent

I call medium range about 225 - 250 yds.

 

Alycdion

Yes, I to favor a 20 cal for most of my work. The .243 now only comes out when the wind is really blowing or I just fancy a change.

I'm looking forward to trying out the .17HH when it comes, like you I intend to use it on my rounds in the summer and early autumn, it may just prove to be the ideal tool for the job.

 

Its lovelly for crows out of the landy window, and maggies.

 

A

[coyotemaster]

I really like the .17s, the Remington is probably the biggest usable case for a 20-30 grain bullet. The .17 Predator has a larger capacity and is well suited to pushing the 30 grainers at 4100 fps. with Big Game or VVN 550. As far as ricochets go, I have not heard any where I shoot and the light jacketed bullets come apart fast.

I read that .17 Remington brass a easy to make from .204 Ruger brass and the Winchester .204 brass is much better than factory Remington .17 brass. The inside capacity is a little less with the .204 sized down so loads should be worked up.

It is a very fur friendly cartridge and is used by the guys that shoot coyotes seriously for the fur up in the Rockies. I would not hesitate to shoot out to around 300-350 with a 30 grain bullet in either caliber, though you pretty much need a 9 twist for the heavier bullets.

[JRDS]

I have a 17 Fireball and love it. Superb Fox and Crow rifle and such a pleasure to shoot. I am using 25 Berger HP and they flatten Foxes with authority.