Yet another 17 hornet round 3,870fps

[mick miller]

Hornady have released a 15.5gn NTX tipped 17 hornet bullet now, this one with a MV of 3,870fps! That's surely going to be one helluva long range bunny round with very little carcass damage.

 

That said, I'm getting only a little bit more head damage to the rabbits I'm shooting with a 20gn trundling along at 3000fps.

 

With Federal & Winchester now both producing 17 hornet loads is the future looking bright for this domesticated wildcat?

 

(the local gamekeeper is ditching the hmr and 22lr for the 17h, two of my buddies are ditching the hmr's for the 17h - is it starting to gain a little traction here in the UK?)...

[The Mighty Prawn]

Just out of curiosity what's the buck per bang ratio on a Hornet? How does it compare to the hmr?

[snow white]

About £25 for 25. if reload about less than 40pence a round

[soulboy1957]

I'm looking at one mickmiller but the lack of rifle choice is putting me off, CZ stocks are too small and the savage looks cheap.

I've got 2 X .222 and I'm looking at putting one in (the CZ 527) for a one for one variation.

Keep thinking tikka super varmint in .222?

[tweedledee]

Loving mine,still kept the hmr tho.cheaper for plinking.ammo here twenty quid a box.

[Dougy]

There's every likelihood that my HMR will be going shortly after I get my 17 remington back.

I am sure with the amount of poor publicity and poor QC regarding the ammo HMR sales have dropped somewhat. Also confirmed by the Firearms departments receiving less variations for HMR caliber rifles, and seem to be getting more requests for the Hornet

[mick miller]

Think I worked mine out to 37p per reload. So a little bit more than the HMR, but more than makes up for it in range, consistency and reliability. Interesting what you say about the 527, I find it a bit short too but still better than the 452. I could do with another, longer stock though.

 

Still, given the agricultural nature of the CZ the trigger is okay, the bolt okay the crown looks well done, there's even a teeny weeny bit of bedding compound on the lug when you take it apart, it's no louder than the hummer and looks to soon have more choice of ammunition.

 

Just need PRIVI to get on the bandwagon and it'll be happy days price wise for reloads.

[Euget123]

Good news about the other manufactures getting on board!

I love mine too, but the hmr still has its place IMO!

The lead free ntx bullet has a B.C of a wet **** so wouldnt be too excited about that!

ET

[treetop]

I think I will stick to 20g vmax..

I don't eat what I shoot, so I'm not worried about the damage, and I like that it's capable of taking a fox, if the need arises.

 

I zero to 80yds, 2nd zero is 170yrds and it's as flat as ****, only .5" with way from 50 to 190

 

I'm getting 3555 fps out of my load and I'm as happy as a pig in poo

[mick miller]

It is a great little round, are you getting that out of formed or fire forming brass?

[treetop]

Factory Hornady Brass,

Haven't needed to form brass yet, but will do soon,

Then I'll have to see if I can get the load to fit in it

[Bewsher500]

I don't get the 17s myself

 

They market the 20gr Superformance 17 hornet as the "trajectory of a 55gr .223"....thats not the greatest claim to fame

 

 

http://www.hornady.com/store/17-Hornet

 

9" at 300yds

33" at 400yds

 

 

much prefer a 22 CF and have the flexibility to chuck heavier bullets with significantly better BC and wind bucking capabilities

http://www.hornady.com/store/222-Rem-35-gr-NTX-Superformance/

 

.222 35gr

6" at 300ys

20" at 400yds

 

 

of get a .20

[Dekers]

There's every likelihood that my HMR will be going shortly after I get my 17 remington back.

I am sure with the amount of poor publicity and poor QC regarding the ammo HMR sales have dropped somewhat. Also confirmed by the Firearms departments receiving less variations for HMR caliber rifles, and seem to be getting more requests for the Hornet

 

The main problem with HMR ammo isn't poor QC, if it was that simple it could easily be addressed, it is a basic issue with the manufacturing process and technology, no amount of QC will solve that!

 

What is the source of Firearms departments receiving less variations for HMR caliber rifles?

 

Cheers

[Dougy]

The main problem with HMR ammo isn't poor QC, if it was that simple it could easily be addressed, it is a basic issue with the manufacturing process and technology, no amount of QC will solve that!

 

What is the source of Firearms departments receiving less variations for HMR caliber rifles?

 

Cheers

Dekers, I am the buyer, call the failing of the ammo what you like, I'm not really that fussed. To me if it's a manufacturer failing that should be rectified. It's poor quality !!! It fails too often for my liking, it shouldn't !!! end of.

 

My source regarding the decline for variations and applications for HMR rifles came from my FEO during my interview.

[Dekers]

Dekers, I am the buyer, call the failing of the ammo what you like, I'm not really that fussed. To me if it's a manufacturer failing that should be rectified. It's poor quality !!! It fails too often for my liking, it shouldn't !!! end of.

 

My source regarding the decline for variations and applications for HMR rifles came from my FEO during my interview.

 

 

If you can tell the ammo manufacturers how to anneal the shoulder after the primer has been spun into the rim then you could solve the problem, they don't appear to know how, and that is nothing to do with QC, it is a basic manufacturing/technical problem.

 

Yes its a problem, I'm not suggesting it isn't, but call it what it is, an appalling technical problem, if it was QC it could easily be solved, but it isn't, and it can't be solved with the technology currently available.

 

With all due respect due you seriously expect anyone to believe a FEO about anything?

 

[Dekers]

Just to play devils advocate here, how did they make it for the first 7/8 years without these problems?

 

To the best of my knowledge they didn't.

[the enigma]

Loving mine,still kept the hmr tho.cheaper for plinking.ammo here twenty quid a box.

 

It's only a matter of time before you catch the reloading bug.

[Dekers]

Im no great lover of the calibre but my first one over ten years ago was a totally different 'animal' performance wise. I have owned or tested more than ten 17 HMR's and although I agree, it is a hard task to beat the fundamental engineering difficulties, the early ammo did it. Manufactring volume will have changed matters and the blip in recent years is hard to really catergorise as there is so much variation in old versus new stock but I have a theory as to why some guns are very susceptible to misfires and If i can see money in investigating it, I might have a look and ask a few people in the chain. I personally bought another 17 the other week and have so far had no issue.

 

I'm sure there is money to be made for a solution!

[mick miller]

I don't get the 17s myself

 

They market the 20gr Superformance 17 hornet as the "trajectory of a 55gr .223"....thats not the greatest claim to fame

 

 

http://www.hornady.com/store/17-Hornet

 

9" at 300yds

33" at 400yds

 

 

much prefer a 22 CF and have the flexibility to chuck heavier bullets with significantly better BC and wind bucking capabilities

http://www.hornady.com/store/222-Rem-35-gr-NTX-Superformance/

 

.222 35gr

6" at 300ys

20" at 400yds

 

 

of get a .20

I don't want a 223 to shoot rabbits with. It's nice if there's something left to eat, sell, or feed the dogs with. When I'm out rabbit shooting, and stumble across a fox at a sensible range, I'd like the option to take the shoot and be humane without worrying about a squib, duff round that puts the bullet a six inches to a foot either side of my aim point. This happens far too frequently with my HMR and my 17hmr rounds on rabbits, too frequently to be down to me. Likewise, when I shoot with several other people that report the same troubles, I'm less likely to question my own ability and more likely to question the reliability of the manufacturer.

 

Then there is noise. The hornet will moderate as well as the hmr, so no real issue there.

 

Then there's the cost. I can reload for around 38p a time. Can I reload the 223 for a similar cost?

 

Then there's stopping power. Compared to the HMR there is no contest (not compared to the 223 granted).

 

Finally, if I'm out for a dedicated nights foxing I'd rather take a 243 loaded with a 55gn BT any day of the week. The same rifle can be taken out the following morning with a 100gn soft point and, with a small adjustment to elevation, be bang on with that too and deer legal for fallow.

 

It's all about a minimum of rifles and flexibility/ reliability for me. Why have 5 rifles when 3 will cover almost everything I'll ever want to shoot. I can spend more on a dedicated paper puncher then!

[Dougy]

Personally I'm not fussed about them sorting out there problem. It's not as good as it was.

That's why I am moving it on.

[treetop]

I could not agree more than some of the comments on here..

 

I like a .17, I need a rifle to moderate well , shoot mainly rabbit, & be good enough for the occasional fox..

The 17 hornet does this very well.

 

The hmr, was on paper this go to round, but those that have used it over a number of years, have seen , like me, that this is not the case. I personally don't take any foxes with mine, I personally don't think it's good enough.

Rabbit, no problem, corvid, the same.. But you are thinking about range & stopping power, which is fine under glass, & less so under NV .

 

I shoot my .223 regularly to great effect with fox, but it is not a good carry Gun, on some of my permissions, so I need a good calibre smaller, lighter, and just as good, the 17 hornet does this ..

 

I tend to shoot most of my quarry under 200yrds at night, with NV, so I zero my .223 & .17 hornet to 80yrds, ( 2nd zero @ 170yrds ) this gives me a fast flat trajectory, so it's point and shoot..

 

I always believed in the hmr & still do, I have not had the issues that have been talked about, I mainly use Winchester ammo.

I am unsure if this helps, but I do know that with careful thought & shots at reasonable ranges, it works well.

[Dekers]

I'm struggling with this comparison with HMR and .17 Hornet, circa 245ft lb and 600ft lb, circa 25p and £1.00 per shot.

 

They are different things, and there may well be a place for one or the other or both for some people.

 

I just don't see them as particularly comparable.

 

For all its issues, the HMR has a place for many people, if the Hornet fits your bill then go for it.

 

[Dave-G]

A .17 CF is about the next practical upgrade of what is becoming a rather unreliable point and shoot light rabbit rifle. For the HMR to get back to being reputable it would need to get back to using reliable rounds - which would likely cost a lot more, narrowing the gap in favour of a faster flatter bullet.

 

I'll guess 17H is a lot lighter than my 17REM LVSF too - so it should be a winning choice for reliable multi range bunny bashing and happen along fox.

[mick miller]

I'm struggling with this comparison with HMR and .17 Hornet, circa 245ft lb and 600ft lb, circa 25p and £1.00 per shot

The comparison is simple 25p per shot and throw away or 38p-40p a shot and reload. Simples.

[wymberley]

This problem really highlights the massive timelag between actual manufacture and the ammo getting shot in the UK

If I'm right in thinking what you're thinking, I was wondering about that. I had a bad batch - split necks, loss of accuracy - with one make - the figures are on here somewhere - about 1 in 10 split I think. Stocked up with the same make - very accurate in my rifle when OK - but different batch number and have had no problems at all, but have tucked 200 or so away and check these occasionally - so far OK.