Dunkield Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 Just out of interest I set a can up at the farm last night on a field thats about 270 yards with my 14X scope I could not really see it let alone take aim! It wasn't dark was it Pav? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axe Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 The longest shot i've had with mine was 175yards, It was a one off and I wouldn't normally take that sort of shot. I've shot mine on the 200 at Bisley and in still wind I was getting a fairly good group. That said, I wouldn't call it tight enough to aim at live quarry. I have also shot the 200 in windy conditions and that was almost pointless. The round works best for me up to 120yards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wannabefisher Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 Sorry Sparkie, Perhaps it was you not Ive, But I rest my case m'lud i do concede that real world experience is more important than theory, however I do believe a "cross wind" was mentioned above? Still no answer I see. would it make you happier if I had not abbreviated .177 to 17? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MC Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 i do concede that real world experience is more important than theory, however I do believe a "cross wind" was mentioned above? would it make you happier if I had not abbreviated .177 to 17? It is about time, There is no such thing as a perfectly still day. Wind and other factors will always affect your ability to shoot accurately. All we can do it try to eliminate as many as possible by controlling breathing, heartrate, using a bipod etc etc. THEORETICALLY there is no reason why any rifle shouldn't be shot after shot accurate but they just aren't. I have only just bought a .17 and am yet to fire it but I know with a .22 rimfire that out to probably 80 yards I can make a clean kill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackbart Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 i do concede that real world experience is more important than theory, however I do believe a "cross wind" was mentioned above? would it make you happier if I had not abbreviated .177 to 17? If you did actually concede real word experience over theory then you wouldnt be arguing your case which is based entirely on theory ! Theoreticaly speaking a .22 rimfire travels up to 2.5km so on your theory i should be able to put a nice group down on paper at this range if there is no wind.Meanwhile back in the real world you would be lucky to land your group within a 20 metre radius. So i would conclude that you have no field experience and therefore are talking hypothetically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wannabefisher Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 (edited) It is about time, There is no such thing as a perfectly still day. Wind and other factors will always affect your ability to shoot accurately. All we can do it try to eliminate as many as possible by controlling breathing, heartrate, using a bipod etc etc. THEORETICALLY there is no reason why any rifle shouldn't be shot after shot accurate but they just aren't. I have only just bought a .17 and am yet to fire it but I know with a .22 rimfire that out to probably 80 yards I can make a clean kill. I'd counter that there is such a thing as a still day, but that drum is getting tired of being banged. I'm still waiting to hear about the factors affecting accuracy that do not increase on a linear scale? So i would conclude that you have no field experience and therefore are talking hypothetically. ouch, what a cutting remark Edited March 3, 2009 by wannabefisher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pavman Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 (edited) It wasn't dark was it Pav? Well spotted Stu, it was dark and I had a Lightforce 170 because strangly enough thats how I shoot Rabbits! the can sat like a bunnie in short grass and taking the lie of the land and the lenght of grass into account at 300 it was just about hidden from view, I realise some Rabbits will sit up on a podium on a still day to present a nice target if you happen to have a 24X56 scope on your HMR, but sadly not on the Farms I look after Edited March 3, 2009 by pavman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunkield Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 Crikey, there some shocking real world revelations in this thread I am sure some owners will be along soon to reassure us that the .17hmr can stop a bull elephant out to 1,000 yards and not to believe any of the above. It sheds a bit of light on this question at least: http://forums.pigeonwatch.co.uk/forums/ind...showtopic=80922 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deadeye ive Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 Sorry Sparkie, Perhaps it was you not Ive, But I rest my case m'lud MC If my memory serves me well I think Dougy was scoring my target as i remember him commenting over the radio that the first shot went smack bang in the centre of the bull .Using a Leupold vari x III 6x24x40 c/w a premier ballistic reticle I think I managed a 10 shot group around 3-4"@200 yds I was very fortunate to have a cracking batch number of remmington ammo in my possession and to which I have just started the last box .Previous 500 grouped like a shot gun at over 125yds @100yds using a standard .17 hmr the average consistant group of 5 shots is 1" .I have grouped less than .5" but those occasions I can count on 1 hand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPARKIE Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 The 200 yards groups quoted on here can't be right surely?Are we not led to believe that the .17hmr can knock rabbits down all day long at 200 yards, how can it do that if it is grouping into 8"? just remembered ignore my post it was the sat after me and wickedandlazys drinking sesh and we were both hammered you know the sesh the throwing up the death by goped one it was wicked and lazy scoreing for me there was definately some shakes and feeling hungover .maybe next time i will do better..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 so it will do an 8" group when you're ****** I can hit a stella can consistently at 200 yards and be in the top portion of it so whatever that equates to, certainly in my mind good enough for bunnies if it is still. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wannabefisher Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 so it will do an 8" group when you're ****** I can hit a stella can consistently at 200 yards and be in the top portion of it so whatever that equates to, certainly in my mind good enough for bunnies if it is still. i reckon it's because you have a custom ogive ratio which allows the pre engagement of the lands to enable great accuracy when the p-state of the electrons flips to 0. Otherwise hitting a can of stella would be impossible because of the bullet wobble. Maybe if you had said a can of strongbow then you would have had some credibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 that must be true as the guinness can prooved unhittable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wannabefisher Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 that must be true as the guinness can prooved unhittable hooray for real world experience - lucky you have enough for both of us! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MC Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 hooray for real world experience - lucky you have enough for both of us! Ah but then surely in Theory a guiness can is the same size and shape as a stella can as they both hold 440ml so therefore one cannot be more hittable than they other. My guess would be that there was a crosswind when shooting at the guiness can. Or you just weren't trying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 Ah but then surely in Theory a guiness can is the same size and shape as a stella can as they both hold 440ml so therefore one cannot be more hittable than they other. My guess would be that there was a crosswind when shooting at the guiness can. Or you just weren't trying. I think it was the Irish Energy field surrounding said can that was deflecting the bullet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazooka Joe Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 I'm still waiting to hear about the factors affecting accuracy that do not increase on a linear scale? RimFire Ammunition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wannabefisher Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 (edited) Ah but then surely in Theory a guiness can is the same size and shape as a stella can as they both hold 440ml so therefore one cannot be more hittable than they other. My guess would be that there was a crosswind when shooting at the guiness can. Or you just weren't trying. Edited March 3, 2009 by wannabefisher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wannabefisher Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 RimFire Ammunition. interesting. And for what reasons? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harnser Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 What i have learnt from this thread . Well the .17hmr is indeed a magical calibre straight from the forge of the devil himself . Oh , and it seems to bring out the walts and the billys . Harnser . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy. Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 Ah but then surely in Theory a guiness can is the same size and shape as a stella can as they both hold 440ml so therefore one cannot be more hittable than they other. Stella Le Grande, 568ml can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazooka Joe Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 (edited) interesting. And for what reasons? What......! You don't Know ? Edited March 3, 2009 by Bazooka Joe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MC Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 What you don't Know ? He hasn't got to that page yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wannabefisher Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 What......! You don't Know ? enlighten me as to what about rimfire ammo makes its accuracy drop off NON LINEAR up to 300 yards? Let's make it easier, give me 1 example, and tell me why it is NON LINEAR? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunkield Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 What i have learnt from this thread . Well the .17hmr is indeed a magical calibre straight from the forge of the devil himself . Oh , and it seems to bring out the walts and the billys . Harnser . We have all been learning from this one Harnser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts