.17 HMR vs .223

T

TrueBlue711

New member
So I've been eyeing Savage's new A17 rifle for awhile. Always been interested in the .17 HMR. But a question came to mind as I'm debating whether or not to spend the money on it: what can the .17 HMR do that the .223/5.56 can't do already? Aside from recoil and noise, I can't think of anything. The ammo is cheaper, but not by much. Not enough to be worth it at least. I haven't checked, but I'm assuming the .223 is better at longer ranges. For those who have a .17 HMR, what do you use it for? Was it a for a purpose like prairie dog hunting? Is it better for leaving smaller holes in pelts (for pelt selling purposes?) Or was it a impulse purchase that turned into a gun safe queen?
 
That's kind of an odd choice to compare.
Like choosing between a four cylinder economy car and a six cylinder sports car.
Personally, I'd pick the .223.
With bullet choices from 35 grains up to near 80 grains, it would seem to be more versatile.
 
The .223 is a way more capable round for varmints and larger predators like yotes on out past 500 yards with the right load.

The .17 HMR is a 200 yard and closer varminter made for things like prairie dogs etc. Wicked little round, with hardly and recoil at all. I love m Dad's Ruger American Rimfire carbine in the cartridge. .22 LR recoil but with a very flat trajectory and with the ballistic tip rounds devastating on small animals.

But a .223 it is not, it's an apples and oranges comparison. The .223 has just way more power but it comes at a cost like a larger heavier weapon and too much power for some jobs the .17 HMR was born to do. Both are sweet rounds and .17 HMR is pretty reasonably priced these days.
 
True, this is a very apples and oranges comparison. I'm just getting more picky on what guns I buy and if I already have a gun that will do what the intend-to-buy gun can do, then I'll look at moving to another gun to buy. I already have 4x .223/5.56s of different variants and I don't hunt varmints that often. I was just looking to see if people have the .17 HMR for other reasons I'm not thinking of. It is a sweet round and I would like to own one someday still, but I think I'll skip it for now and spend the money on a different gun. Thanks for the input!
 
I have and use both and enjoy shooting all of them!

My .223's are used for multiple purposes and as someone else has already stated they are very versatile. I have AR's and bolt guns in .223 that have heavy barrels and lighter weight barrels for use as a patrol carbine(s) etc. I use them frequently for many shooting activities, work and training.

The .17's I have are heavy barrel "varmint" guns that see primary use for prairie dog eradication and other small critter uses. Depending on conditions I can get a bit further than 200 yards out of them. As far as heavy barrel rifles go, they are noticeably lighter than the heavy barrel center fire rifles and do a great job when you are out on a walkabout.

Pros for the 17 are accuracy, flat shooting, quiet (I usually don't wear hearing protection with the 17 and they are less likely to scare your targets away) and for lack of better verbage...plain ole fun!

If you are only getting one, the choice is obviously .223 because of the stated reasons (more range, more projectile options, ammo is easy to find and relatively inexpensive).
 
As a lot of others, I have both rifles. The .17 HMR is a Marlin Model 917V and the .223/5.56 is a S&W M&P Sport. They are both good firearms in my opinion and both enjoyable to shoot.

I shoot the .223 more since I can reload rounds for it at about the same price point as buying .17 HMR.

The .17 HMR was really handy back when there was a severe shortage of .22 rimfire. I could find the .17 HMR readily available on the local store shelves.

The .223 is your better choice in case the threat is human size or the game is larger.

I would say accuracy at 100 yds. is about the same.

The .17 HMR is better on small game (rabbit/squirrels).

Longer distance shooting, go with the .223.

I know there is a difference in recoil, but most of us do not consider the .223 as much in the way of recoil.

Initial Investment - The Marlin was less expensive.

The advantage as far as weight goes to the .223 rifle. Magazine capacity also goes to the .223.

Otherwise, there are not too many other areas to even compare the two rounds/rifles.

I do like having both.
 
I'm a bit different but I've rabbit hunted with my .223. I'm limited to head shooting if I want to eat them but it works great. Is it overkill? Sure, bit it's also great practice. A rabbit head at 25-50 yards is harder than a coyote's vitals at twice that range. I'd like to have a 17hmr one day but between my .22lr and .223, I fear it'd serve me no purpose, hear they are really fun paper punchers and squirrel guns however.
 
Most of the differences have been touched on. The diminutive 17 sheds its energy very quickly. It's a good choice for shooting in areas where there may be a little more congestion.
 
The .17 is great for 100-150 yard practice that will make you really work your fundamentals (ranging, bullet drop, wind calls). Its also pretty spectacular on small varmints and just a lot of fun to shoot. I'd put it in a different category than the .223 though, it just doesn't have that kind of versatility or range.
 
First off: the 17 HMR is louder than you might expect.
Second: the HMR is basically a small varmint round and (in my experience) somewhat inadequate for animals bigger than groundhogs/coons.
Third: The HMR is far more susceptible to wind drift than a .223 and looses energy much quicker.
Fourth: HMR ammo is about 1/2 the cost of quality .223 ammo.
Fifth: I wouldn't haul one of the Savage A-17 rifles home as a gift.
That said, I use a 17 HMR for nuisance animal removal and it works well within it's niche performance range. The 17 is more accurate than most 22's and is capable of making hits at longer ranges than a 22. I recently used a suppressed 17 HMR to remove critters from a wetland in preparation for a rebuild and it worked extremely well for the target animals I was working on. I'm waiting for appropriate weather to start another similar job close to some houses and expect the suppressed 17 will do the job w/o upsetting the landowner's spouse or neighbors.
The 17 HMR has it's place as does the .223 and there can be some overlap.
 
I got my .17 HMR bolt action Savage 93R17TR specifically for shooting ground squirrels in vineyards with houses nearby. A rimfire only opportunity. When I go to Montana, I still use it for the short range ground squirrels, but for anything over 125 yards or so, the .223 is far more effective (and entertaining). The .223 is also much better in the wind, which is almost always blowing in north central Montana.

I consider the .17 HMR a hunting round, exclusively. The only time I shoot it at the range is to verify the scope zero.
The .223's, on the other hand are always on the bench, experimenting with different handloads shooting for groups. Of course it is also my Varmint Master Blaster, particularly the Remington 700 SPS Varmint Special with 26" heavy barrel and 40 gr tipped bullets at 3700 for or so. I would use the AR's more, but finding brass in the
long grass is a pain, and I am too cheap not to look.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top