pavman Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 Set up the new scope on the .17 HMR sat, a Simmons Pro Hunter 6-24X40 and tested at various distances with 17 grain remmys to familiarise myself with its workings. I settled on Zero of 100 yards on the Rim fire and tested at 50 and 150 for hold under and over to know what would happen. It came as no surprise that the drop on the 17 grain round was bang on 3 inches (as per most charts) at 150 for the zero set of 100 with no hold over. This just re affirmed my personal view that unless you are set up for long range targets on a range if you zero the HMR at 100 a 200 yard shot needs to take account of around 8 inches of drop let alone wind, I was pushed off centre 3 inches in a blusty cross wind at 100 and off target at 150 well worth the effort of testing now and again and deffo with a new glass Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdboy Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 Very interesting. What were your findings at 50yds Pavman ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salop Matt Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 Remmington will be my first port of call with tryng out ammo with my HMR when i get it ! A friend of mine saturday morning using remington hmr rounds at 100yards put 3 shots into a 1" circle and all touching, used them that night on bunnys and they epanded well so will let you know how i get on ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pavman Posted March 16, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 Very interesting. What were your findings at 50yds Pavman ? needed about 1 inch hold under at 50 to avoid going over the top, quite nice really if you have a mildot scope, I dont have to use at much over 100 but if you do you can still set zero at 100 and hold over 1.5 for 125 and 3 for the 150 as it has the power for 150 but shots low, handy if you are in a hight seat or straw bales for bunny bashing and are fixed in one spot as opposed to mobile. Anyone tried 20 grain? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 yep and they aren't all they're cracked up to be. May sound good in principle but in practice its a very small round going very fast and doesn't expand much. Result is you get a very small hole punched straight through whatever you aim at. I've had a boiler room shot on a fox that went straight through and exited via the other shoulder blade. ran a short way despite no lungs etc definitely not as clean as the Vmax where the expansion means you impart a lot more of the energy rather than loosing it as it exits the other side. On small head shot game though you will get less meat damage but again not the very clean kills you get with the Vmax. be interesting whether you feel more confident on the longer shots with the new scope Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunkield Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 Blimey what about 306 yards? And as I was pointed out by a member on here, the round doen't travel that fast at all, even the old .303 is faster Any reason why you went for a 40mm and not 50mm scope Pav? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pavman Posted March 16, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 yep and they aren't all they're cracked up to be. May sound good in principle but in practice its a very small round going very fast and doesn't expand much. Result is you get a very small hole punched straight through whatever you aim at. I've had a boiler room shot on a fox that went straight through and exited via the other shoulder blade. ran a short way despite no lungs etc definitely not as clean as the Vmax where the expansion means you impart a lot more of the energy rather than loosing it as it exits the other side. On small head shot game though you will get less meat damage but again not the very clean kills you get with the Vmax. be interesting whether you feel more confident on the longer shots with the new scope Blimey what about 306 yards?And as I was pointed out by a member on here, the round doen't travel that fast at all, even the old .303 is faster Any reason why you went for a 40mm and not 50mm scope Pav? Guys al4x I am happy with long shots into paper but dont see the need to target practice on animals, now before we get into a debate if you do then fine that’s for you, however i would caution what you or other posters want others to see on a public forum. MOHI is that you use the right tool for the job within sensible limits to match the quarry. I will plink with anyone at any range you care to mention as long as the kit is up for it, in other words if I zero at 100 on the HMR I will be out of mildot for a hold over at around 180 without adjusting the scope. So I set mine at 100 and hold under a tad for short shots and hold over a tad for up to 125 with confidence. Out in the truck or on the ATV I don’t have to touch the scope at all not that you get time when Rabbit shooting which of course you can plinking. We can all get within that sort of range with a bunny so why would anyone want to take a longer shot? Went for the Pro-hunter as it has good room for a light bracket and on the Rimfire 40 objective is all I need, and at £175 del a lot of glass for the money Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 the time we stretch things is when lamping and its wet so we have to stick to farm tracks but then lamping its pretty much always within 150 yards. Longer shots you're refering to were daylight summers day and on a cover crop with no hedges etc and some very skittish rabbits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pavman Posted March 16, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 the time we stretch things is when lamping and its wet so we have to stick to farm tracks but then lamping its pretty much always within 150 yards. Longer shots you're refering to were daylight summers day and on a cover crop with no hedges etc and some very skittish rabbits. Q's plz What is your normal zero, what scope and do you have a mildot, are you on 17 grain remmys/Hornady? I can see the wet field thing would be a problem and farmer wants freeloaders out the way that I can understand, what I have found is the HMR is a fantastic tool on Bunnies at ranges up to 125 you can as much point and hit for a kill with a zero set at 100, however they are very sus in a wind even modest, and I am on the East coast and the last still day we had was in 1961 before my time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdboy Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 needed about 1 inch hold under at 50 to avoid going over the top, quite nice really if you have a mildot scope, I dont have to use at much over 100 but if you do you can still set zero at 100 and hold over 1.5 for 125 and 3 for the 150 as it has the power for 150 but shots low, handy if you are in a hight seat or straw bales for bunny bashing and are fixed in one spot as opposed to mobile. Anyone tried 20 grain? Thanks Pavman I went out with the HMR last night, also still experimenting and shot a rabbit (on a bipiod) at 153yds - but shot at it with no holdover. 17 Rems. So interesting when you say you personally would have used 3 inch hold over at this range. To be honest, i didnt realise it was 153yds until I picked him up ! thought it was closer to 120yds, so shot directly at it. My scopes are also zero'd at 100yds. (Leupold VXII 3x-9x50). I think your are right with the 1 inch hold-under at 50 yds as i missed a few close range rabbits at the weekend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 Q's plz What is your normal zero, what scope and do you have a mildot, are you on 17 grain remmys/Hornady? I can see the wet field thing would be a problem and farmer wants freeloaders out the way that I can understand, what I have found is the HMR is a fantastic tool on Bunnies at ranges up to 125 you can as much point and hit for a kill with a zero set at 100, however they are very sus in a wind even modest, and I am on the East coast and the last still day we had was in 1961 before my time I've a niko sterling 4-16x50, zero at 100 and like you it is point and shoot to 125, I will point out longer shots are always body / chest region to give a little more room for error. Ammo is 17's and in windy conditions I just limit the range but as I'm sure you find its far easier to get close on windy evenings with a vehicle, though our fields generally have good hedges which help. The thing is the amounts of holdover etc out to 180 or so yards is nothing compared to trying to make relatively short shots with a .22lr where drop really has to be thought about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evil Elvis Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 Im **** at judging distances at night and recently shot a rabbit at 225 yards, (measured and witnessed) I laid prone and took the shot off the pod, i shot straight at the eyes.The rabbit was front on, I didnt do any hold over, it hit it smack bang on the nose and obliterated the rear end.Cold frosty night no wind. I find it a lot easier to miss at close range than I do at longer ranges!!! We shot 2 foxes recently at 160 and 163 again **** at judging distances at night, Id have said 120 max, but both shots were bang on target and devestatingly effective, agagin, no wind. I think its a very under estimated little round!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browning Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 We shot 2 foxes recently at 160 and 163 again **** at judging distances at night, Id have said 120 max, but both shots were bang on target and devestatingly effective, agagin, no wind. I think its a very under estimated little round!! Personally I think it is a very overestimated round, and shooting at foxes at 160 yards just proves it. The .17HMR round was not developed to shoot foxes at 160 yards, or even 120 yards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leaseone Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 I have a cheap BSA Sweet 17 scope zeroed at 100 and just click the turrets to the desired range and off you go The only problem is forgeting to re set at shorter range Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave-G Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 Set up the new scope on the .17 HMR sat, a Simmons Pro Hunter 6-24X40 and tested at various distances with 17 grain remmys to familiarise myself with its workings. I settled on Zero of 100 yards on the Rim fire and tested at 50 and 150 for hold under and over to know what would happen. It came as no surprise that the drop on the 17 grain round was bang on 3 inches (as per most charts) at 150 for the zero set of 100 with no hold over. This just re affirmed my personal view that unless you are set up for long range targets on a range if you zero the HMR at 100 a 200 yard shot needs to take account of around 8 inches of drop let alone wind, I was pushed off centre 3 inches in a blusty cross wind at 100 and off target at 150 well worth the effort of testing now and again and deffo with a new glass Im **** at judging distances at night and recently shot a rabbit at 225 yards, (measured and witnessed) I laid prone and took the shot off the pod, i shot straight at the eyes.The rabbit was front on, I didnt do any hold over, it hit it smack bang on the nose and obliterated the rear end.Cold frosty night no wind. I find it a lot easier to miss at close range than I do at longer ranges!!! We shot 2 foxes recently at 160 and 163 again **** at judging distances at night, Id have said 120 max, but both shots were bang on target and devestatingly effective, agagin, no wind. I think its a very under estimated little round!! Either this thread is a wind up or some people think we are truly gullible. Pav - 1" over at 50 yards with a 100 yard zero? - very unlikely mate but might be possible with ultra odd scope mounts. EE - what's your zero set at? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 I did wonder that should be bang on at 50 and 100 and 3" or so at 150 pav you've not got that 40mm scope on high mounts have you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave-G Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 Have you considered mounting the scope OVER the barrel Pav? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MC Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 Either this thread is a wind up or some people think we are truly gullible. Pav - 1" over at 50 yards with a 100 yard zero? - very unlikely mate but might be possible with ultra odd scope mounts. EE - what's your zero set at? Someone needs to learn to read! Pav doesn't say 1" hold over at 50 yards. He says he shot at 50 and 150 to find the hold under or over. That chart pretty much confirms that along with 3" hold over at 150. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 needed about 1 inch hold under at 50 to avoid going over the top, quite nice really if you have a mildot scope, I dont have to use at much over 100 but if you do you can still set zero at 100 and hold over 1.5 for 125 and 3 for the 150 as it has the power for 150 but shots low, handy if you are in a hight seat or straw bales for bunny bashing and are fixed in one spot as opposed to mobile. Anyone tried 20 grain? or read further down the page Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave-G Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 (edited) Someone needs to learn to read! Pav doesn't say 1" hold over at 50 yards. He says he shot at 50 and 150 to find the hold under or over. That chart pretty much confirms that along with 3" hold over at 150. Someone needs to look further and read post number four... tum tee tum.... And get some field time in instead of mis-reading ballistics programs. Edited March 17, 2009 by Dave-G Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MC Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 Yep done that, Post no. 4 says 1" hold UNDER at 50 yards. I freely admit to not much field time as I have only had my HMR for a week or so. Does that make you an expert? Perhaps as you are such an expert you would like to point out where I have misread a ballistics program? I think that is TUM TEE TUM TUM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave-G Posted March 18, 2009 Report Share Posted March 18, 2009 (edited) Needed 1" hold under at 50 yards to avoid going over the top implies it would shoot 1" high at fifty yards. - Do keep up MC. The trajectory chart correctly indicates there would be insignificant hold over/under required to achieve a hit at 50 yards with a 100 yard zero using a scope height of 1.5" - so it's fairly reasonable to assume you misread it - or chose to ignore it. ------------------------------------------------- Anyway, I went to work last night feeling really guilty that I may have made an error of judgement and tried hard to think of a way it may be possible to achieve closer to 1" high at 50 yards with a 100 yard zero using 17 grain Hornadies out of a 17HMR. I think I found a way to give you the benefit of any doubt, no really, I think it would be quite close providing the rifle gets held the right way up this time B) Remove the optical scope - and fit low profile iron sights. B) Of course it could just be that Pav had a bit of brain fade like many of us older blokes (I'm 57) and wrote something down while thinking of something else. Smile - I make silly mistakes too. :yp: Edited because it didn't make much sense in the cold light of day. Edited March 18, 2009 by Dave-G Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evil Elvis Posted March 18, 2009 Report Share Posted March 18, 2009 (edited) Personally I think it is a very overestimated round, and shooting at foxes at 160 yards just proves it. You are entitled to your opinion, and my opinion is that this round is more than capable of killing foxes at that range as I have proven, I didnt shoot AT them I SHOT THEM, both were severely damaged by the shot and dropped on the spot....so if its not capable of doing it maybe they died from the shock of the bang??? oR THE DIRTY GREAT HOLES THEY HAD IN THEM? Dave G, Im not winding anyone up, I first thought when I got the hmr that the wild claIms of 200 yards were a wind up and yes they shot straight at ranges of up to 150 but now that i have used it for a while Im a lot more impressed with it.Both the foxes shot last week were witnessed and measured, I will also admit that a fox is a lot bigger target than a rabbit and while aiming at the eyes the furthest shot was in the neck and the 160 was lungs and at that range 3" wouldnt have made much difference.The end result was 2 very dead foxes! I zeroed at 100 yards and on the suggestion of a good friend whos a firearms expert, I then raised it to shoot an inch high at 100 yards, works for me, I rarely shoot anything over 150 yards but have done successfully, 225 is my record and doubt that i could push it much further personally as my eyes were at their limit on that shot........at night anyway. Edited March 18, 2009 by Evil Elvis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MC Posted March 18, 2009 Report Share Posted March 18, 2009 Needed 1" hold under at 50 yards to avoid going over the top implies it would shoot 1" high at fifty yards. - Do keep up MC. The trajectory chart correctly indicates there would be insignificant hold over/under required to achieve a hit at 50 yards with a 100 yard zero using a scope height of 1.5" - so it's fairly reasonable to assume you misread it - or chose to ignore it. ------------------------------------------------- Anyway, I went to work last night feeling really guilty that I may have made an error of judgement and tried hard to think of a way it may be possible to achieve closer to 1" high at 50 yards with a 100 yard zero using 17 grain Hornadies out of a 17HMR. I think I found a way to give you the benefit of any doubt, no really, I think it would be quite close providing the rifle gets held the right way up this time B) Remove the optical scope - and fit low profile iron sights. B) Of course it could just be that Pav had a bit of brain fade like many of us older blokes (I'm 57) and wrote something down while thinking of something else. Smile - I make silly mistakes too. :yp: Edited because it didn't make much sense in the cold light of day. It still doesn't make any sense even though you have editted it, Perhaps you editted the sensible part out. That chart shows that if you zero at 100 yards the bullet WILL be high at 50 yards so you will need to hold the crosshairs UNDER the target, or in other words aim low. After the 100 yards point the bullet is now dropping so surely you need to hold the crosshairs OVER the target? Or again in other words aim high. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted March 18, 2009 Report Share Posted March 18, 2009 Heres one with figures its .15 of an inch at 50 yards on that chart not an inch thats the HM2 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.