Ricky Bobby
New member
Anybody know anything about the new 17Hornet or know what manufactures will be offering rifles chambered in this new caliber?
17 Hornet
- Thread starter Ricky Bobby
- Start date
sc outdoorsman
New member
According to this http://consumer.gzanders.com/itemlist.php?classid=S06&ilimit=150&sort=sortword,itemnumber Savage will be offering for 2012.
Ideal Tool
Moderator
Hello, micksis86. Your right..my guess it's so old it has become "new".
Good to see they are finally making an "honest" lady of her!
Good to see they are finally making an "honest" lady of her!
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
I'm not sure I understand the attraction of this round.
Is it "quiet"? That might help.
Otherwise, I don't see why someone wouldn't buy a .204Ruger instead.
The 17 seems to be capable of only around 3,000 fps with a 30gr bullet. The 204 will do 4,000-4,200 with a 32gr and 3,900 with 40gr.
If you handload, that little 17 caliber bullet is going to be a MAJOR pain in the butt and no matter how hot you load it you're not going to get close to .204 performance. Yet, the 204 could easily be loaded down to 17Hornet levels. I load .204 with Trail Boss and can get as low as 2,200 fps with 32gr bullets. It literally sounds like a cork gun.
The 17HMR is the perfect rimfire round but I don't see the attraction of stepping the 17 into the centerfire world.
Is it "quiet"? That might help.
Otherwise, I don't see why someone wouldn't buy a .204Ruger instead.
The 17 seems to be capable of only around 3,000 fps with a 30gr bullet. The 204 will do 4,000-4,200 with a 32gr and 3,900 with 40gr.
If you handload, that little 17 caliber bullet is going to be a MAJOR pain in the butt and no matter how hot you load it you're not going to get close to .204 performance. Yet, the 204 could easily be loaded down to 17Hornet levels. I load .204 with Trail Boss and can get as low as 2,200 fps with 32gr bullets. It literally sounds like a cork gun.
The 17HMR is the perfect rimfire round but I don't see the attraction of stepping the 17 into the centerfire world.
First off, this thing is pushing another 1000+ fps over the HMR but only 600 less than the 17 Remington...with half the powder and nearly one third of what the 204R does. (Of which I have both.)
This 17 Hornet will likely be a great 300+ yd gopher gun. It is said to scoot a 20 grn pill at 3650 fps which may not be as blistering as pushing the same pill through the 17 Remington's & .204R's 4200+ fps but 600+ fps faster than the fastest and heavier 22 Hornet...(Some reloading friends tell me they are pushing their 17 AI Hornets nearer to 4000+ fps.) It should have little drop even out to nearly 300 yds...basically point and shoot laser just like the HMR/HM2's to their effective ranges.
As noted in the video below...it has the "recoil of a 22 WMR"...or nearly no recoil at all. :t It likely has the same hydraulic effect of all 17's. I.E. Explosive on small animals and one hole in...usully no exit...on larger animals. BUT...it does this with half the powder of the 17 Remington and nearly a third of 204R...sipping 10-12 grns of powder. This also means you can get 575-700 rounds per pound of powder.
Obviously the miserly usage of powder will likely interpret to being easy on barrels, less recoil and allows multiple shots without loss of accuracy due to the barrel heating up. I'm betting you could shoot 20-25 rounds consecutively before the barrel is very warm. If CZ comes out with it. (LOVE my 204R but it does get hot if shooting multiple successive shots. I.E. 3-5 out of a pencil barrel.)
Don't get me wrong though, I think the 204R's are awesome and my nephew regularly pops coyotes at 400+ with them. But I think of this little 17 Hornet as an awesome rapid-multi-successive-shot-ground-squirrel-gun that I will be able to buy factory ammo for and much easier to load for than a 22 hornet. Shooting one of these K'd/AI'd 17 Hornets, I'm betting you can shoot 20-25 successive shots before the barrel is even warm. As I understand it, heat is function of friction which is a function of weight & speed with everything else being equal right? Well, with everything else being equal, that really comes down to how much powder is used. The .204R uses 28-30 grns to get their 4200+ fps. The 17 Hornet scoots at 3600+ fps with around 10 grns or less. That also means you can reload about 575-700 rnds per pound of powder vs the .204 R's about 225 rnds. So do I think this neat little new round is the end-all-be-all? Heck no! I just think it might be a phenomenal gopher shooting repeater that is easy on barrels and easy on powder and even less jump and recoil. Besides...I already have a 527 in .204R...that won't be going anywhere...but not a 17 Hornet.
My favorite hunting is varmint hunting...basically chucks, badgers coyotes & of course ground squirrels. So, I have CZ's & Brno's in: 17 HM2, 17 HMR, 17 Rem, 22 LR, 22 Mag, 19 Badger, .204R, 22 Hornet, .221 Fireball, .222 Rem, .223, 7.62x39...and eventual plans for a 20 VarTarg and maybe a 17 Fireball. (IMHO, with the advent of the .204R I have no desire to ever get 22-250 or 220 Swift.) So do I need something like this? Heck no, I just to try one in my quest to seek the most efficient cartridges for my needs. (Hence, why I have a 19 Badger and want a 20 VarTarg which are probably nearly equivalent in most regards.)
Here is the video released yesterday morning on YouTube...(Please note: somewhat graphic to the feint in heart.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTWrstCABMs&feature=digest_thu
Did you see how well it fed? I loved the gopher magic show! What a perfect walk-a-about varminting rifle!
This 17 Hornet will likely be a great 300+ yd gopher gun. It is said to scoot a 20 grn pill at 3650 fps which may not be as blistering as pushing the same pill through the 17 Remington's & .204R's 4200+ fps but 600+ fps faster than the fastest and heavier 22 Hornet...(Some reloading friends tell me they are pushing their 17 AI Hornets nearer to 4000+ fps.) It should have little drop even out to nearly 300 yds...basically point and shoot laser just like the HMR/HM2's to their effective ranges.
As noted in the video below...it has the "recoil of a 22 WMR"...or nearly no recoil at all. :t It likely has the same hydraulic effect of all 17's. I.E. Explosive on small animals and one hole in...usully no exit...on larger animals. BUT...it does this with half the powder of the 17 Remington and nearly a third of 204R...sipping 10-12 grns of powder. This also means you can get 575-700 rounds per pound of powder.
Obviously the miserly usage of powder will likely interpret to being easy on barrels, less recoil and allows multiple shots without loss of accuracy due to the barrel heating up. I'm betting you could shoot 20-25 rounds consecutively before the barrel is very warm. If CZ comes out with it. (LOVE my 204R but it does get hot if shooting multiple successive shots. I.E. 3-5 out of a pencil barrel.)
Don't get me wrong though, I think the 204R's are awesome and my nephew regularly pops coyotes at 400+ with them. But I think of this little 17 Hornet as an awesome rapid-multi-successive-shot-ground-squirrel-gun that I will be able to buy factory ammo for and much easier to load for than a 22 hornet. Shooting one of these K'd/AI'd 17 Hornets, I'm betting you can shoot 20-25 successive shots before the barrel is even warm. As I understand it, heat is function of friction which is a function of weight & speed with everything else being equal right? Well, with everything else being equal, that really comes down to how much powder is used. The .204R uses 28-30 grns to get their 4200+ fps. The 17 Hornet scoots at 3600+ fps with around 10 grns or less. That also means you can reload about 575-700 rnds per pound of powder vs the .204 R's about 225 rnds. So do I think this neat little new round is the end-all-be-all? Heck no! I just think it might be a phenomenal gopher shooting repeater that is easy on barrels and easy on powder and even less jump and recoil. Besides...I already have a 527 in .204R...that won't be going anywhere...but not a 17 Hornet.
My favorite hunting is varmint hunting...basically chucks, badgers coyotes & of course ground squirrels. So, I have CZ's & Brno's in: 17 HM2, 17 HMR, 17 Rem, 22 LR, 22 Mag, 19 Badger, .204R, 22 Hornet, .221 Fireball, .222 Rem, .223, 7.62x39...and eventual plans for a 20 VarTarg and maybe a 17 Fireball. (IMHO, with the advent of the .204R I have no desire to ever get 22-250 or 220 Swift.) So do I need something like this? Heck no, I just to try one in my quest to seek the most efficient cartridges for my needs. (Hence, why I have a 19 Badger and want a 20 VarTarg which are probably nearly equivalent in most regards.)
Here is the video released yesterday morning on YouTube...(Please note: somewhat graphic to the feint in heart.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTWrstCABMs&feature=digest_thu
Did you see how well it fed? I loved the gopher magic show! What a perfect walk-a-about varminting rifle!
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
Personally, I consider those things very minor.
The 204 already has near on zero recoil. It already shoots "laser flat". It's already quieter than larger caliber rounds like 22-250.
The difference in powder use might save 5 cents a round. If you shoot 1000 rounds a year, that's $50 or $4.16 a month. I shoot closer to 100 rounds a year than 1000.
Barrel life is largely a function of temperature and pressure. The 204 is not a barrel burner. I would never wear out a barrel on either gun.
"Only 600 fps" off the 17Rem is a loss of almost 25% of the energy and a 204 produces more than double the energy of a 17 hornet.
I'm not saying it shouldn't be made or some one shouldn't buy it or whatever. I'm just saying I don't see the point, I would never buy it.
The HMR is entirely adequate for small animals out to 200 yards. The Hornet isn't going to kill them any deader.
Beyond 200, the Hornet is not "laser flat"...
Sighted for max PBR, 2" high at 125 yards, it is 5.8 low at 300 and 21.2 low at 400, with 14.7" wind drift in 10mph at 300, with 179 ft/lbs at 300.
Comparatively, the 204 at max 2" high 175 yards, is just 1.6 low at 300, 9.9 low at 400, with 10.0" drift at 300 and 500 ft/lbs.
The 204 has 50% less drift, 75 % less drop and 3 times the energy.
To each his own, I see no advantage and several disadvantages.
The 204 already has near on zero recoil. It already shoots "laser flat". It's already quieter than larger caliber rounds like 22-250.
The difference in powder use might save 5 cents a round. If you shoot 1000 rounds a year, that's $50 or $4.16 a month. I shoot closer to 100 rounds a year than 1000.
Barrel life is largely a function of temperature and pressure. The 204 is not a barrel burner. I would never wear out a barrel on either gun.
"Only 600 fps" off the 17Rem is a loss of almost 25% of the energy and a 204 produces more than double the energy of a 17 hornet.
I'm not saying it shouldn't be made or some one shouldn't buy it or whatever. I'm just saying I don't see the point, I would never buy it.
The HMR is entirely adequate for small animals out to 200 yards. The Hornet isn't going to kill them any deader.
Beyond 200, the Hornet is not "laser flat"...
Sighted for max PBR, 2" high at 125 yards, it is 5.8 low at 300 and 21.2 low at 400, with 14.7" wind drift in 10mph at 300, with 179 ft/lbs at 300.
Comparatively, the 204 at max 2" high 175 yards, is just 1.6 low at 300, 9.9 low at 400, with 10.0" drift at 300 and 500 ft/lbs.
The 204 has 50% less drift, 75 % less drop and 3 times the energy.
To each his own, I see no advantage and several disadvantages.
Its all good Peetzakilla...to each there own and we votes with our monies. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE 204R's and will NOT be getting rid of mine either. This 17 HH is plain and simple a varminters cartridge. Admittedly I have not had its Wildcat sister the 17 AH which has been around as a Wildcat for half a century. I have several friends who do. I also haven't had the pleasure of shooting one yet (I think my 19 Badger is pretty close though.) But...I sure want one.
However...
Yes & no. I agree I doubt you will shoot out your barrel in your lifetime. So you don't think that powder burnt is a factor at all or rapid consecutive shooting...everything else being equal? How hot is your barrel after 5-6 consecutive rounds if a pencil barrel...or 9-10 if a HB? I can tell you if running a pencil barrel that a 204R's accuracy falls off if you take more than 3-5 consecutive shots. You need a 3/4" HB just to get to 9-10 rnds at best...and I find it sure is LOUDer than my 19 Badger or Hornets.
Next, the more powder the more opportunity for residue. I know with a 17 Remington, unburnt powder residue has always been considered a concern for multiple multiples. It effects accuracy and requires more cleaning.
On the energy...agreed. But, how much do I really need for squirrels, badgers, chucks or even coyotes under 300 yds...its intended purpose. On that note, I have a 300 Win Mag which I only shoot a couple dozen rounds a year out of at best...but I sure don't squirrel hunt with it.
Now if all I was hunting was coyotes...at longer shots (250-500 yards) its a 204R all the way.
However...
Understood...Absolutely true but it sure isn't WMR recoil and it sure isn't as quiet.Peetzakilla said:
Fair enough...while the last few years time has been a premium for me in regards to varminting, in years past I used to shoot 7000+ grounds squirrels in a season alone. I have shot as many as 300 in a day. For 100 rounds a year I too doubt I could justify buying one. If that is all I shot, it would probably stick with a 22 LR, a WMR/HMR and a 204R. So for your needs, this is likely not even marketed to you.
Yes & no. I agree I doubt you will shoot out your barrel in your lifetime. So you don't think that powder burnt is a factor at all or rapid consecutive shooting...everything else being equal? How hot is your barrel after 5-6 consecutive rounds if a pencil barrel...or 9-10 if a HB? I can tell you if running a pencil barrel that a 204R's accuracy falls off if you take more than 3-5 consecutive shots. You need a 3/4" HB just to get to 9-10 rnds at best...and I find it sure is LOUDer than my 19 Badger or Hornets.
Next, the more powder the more opportunity for residue. I know with a 17 Remington, unburnt powder residue has always been considered a concern for multiple multiples. It effects accuracy and requires more cleaning.
On the energy...agreed. But, how much do I really need for squirrels, badgers, chucks or even coyotes under 300 yds...its intended purpose. On that note, I have a 300 Win Mag which I only shoot a couple dozen rounds a year out of at best...but I sure don't squirrel hunt with it.
Again, were good, and I agree it probably doesn't fit for your needs.
Its probably a fun factor more than anything and allows you to shoot for the same price as an HMR if you reload it while being able to shoot another 100 yards or so further.
Correct, its pretty much a 300 yd and under round but it is plus or minus 2" for the first 250 yds...laser enough for me.
Sigh. Honestly it is an apples and oranges conversation. As noted, if you are trying to minimize the number of arms in the safe, this is NOT for you and you should go with the 3 calibers I mentioned earlier for your varmint needs. I already have all those and several others. But I want this as a factory offering, walk-a-about that sips at powder that allows multiple multiples out to 300 yards that is a pleasure to shoot with only the occasional shot at Coyotes. I think this is it.
Now if all I was hunting was coyotes...at longer shots (250-500 yards) its a 204R all the way.
Fair enough...good discussion. Take care!
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
7000 a year!? 
Holy smokes! Don't I wish!
That would be a blast. I got almost 100 woodchucks one year and that was phenomenal for me.
I appreciate the civilized exchange of opinions. Unfortunately rare, particularly online.
Holy smokes! Don't I wish!
That would be a blast. I got almost 100 woodchucks one year and that was phenomenal for me.
I appreciate the civilized exchange of opinions.
Unfortunately rare, particularly online.Yeah...those were great years. (7000+ in Southern Alberta & Northern Montana) Haven't had near the time the last few though. Hopefully will get a few more in this next year....I sure want to. And I guess with 30+ firearms that are .224 and below that is what this caliber really is to me...a want more than a need. I have a feeling though, that it may quickly become the mainstay and make my others feel left out.
BTW, don't sell yourself short...100+ chucks in a year IS phenomenal! I have NEVER shot more than a few hear and there...we just don't seem them that much. I have seen more badgers & coyotes and of course gophers (Richardson Ground Squirrels.)
Enjoyed the conversation!
Cheers,
BTW, don't sell yourself short...100+ chucks in a year IS phenomenal! I have NEVER shot more than a few hear and there...we just don't seem them that much. I have seen more badgers & coyotes and of course gophers (Richardson Ground Squirrels.)
Enjoyed the conversation!
Cheers,
Not to hijack, but have been getting interested in the whole .17 thing, just purchasing a .17 HMR.
What are all the .17s?
.17 Mach II
.17 HMR
.17 Hornet
.17 Remington
.17 HH
.17 AH
.17 HB
.17 ???
And what do the letters stand for? (HH, HB, HH, etc)
And what is the relationship on each rounds power?
What are all the .17s?
.17 Mach II
.17 HMR
.17 Hornet
.17 Remington
.17 HH
.17 AH
.17 HB
.17 ???
And what do the letters stand for? (HH, HB, HH, etc)
And what is the relationship on each rounds power?
DeeDubya said:
When you resize the neck to a smaller caliber, the metal has to go somewhere, so the case mouth tends to become thicker, and possibly a little longer.
However, I'm sure the Hornady ammo will use cases manufactured as .17 Hornet cases, not .22 Hornet cases resized into .17 Hornet cases.
I'm pretty sure that the .17AH is the .17 Ackley Hornet which is a .22 Hornet case necked down to .17 developed as a wildcat cartridge by P.O. Ackley back in 1950.
Whether or not it is or is not identical to the .17 Hornady Hornet, I don't know, probably not or not enough to matter performance wise. It may be that Hornady has decided to make this wildcat cartridge a commercially available round and gave it the Hornady name.
.17 Mach II = Factory ammo, 22 Stinger rimfire necked down to 17. 2100 fps
.17 HMR = Hornady Magnum Rimfire= Factory ammo, 22 WMR (Winchester Magnum Rimfire) rimfire necked down to 17. 2350-2550 fps depending on weight of bullet
.17 Hornet = .17 HH (This is just what shooters are referring to it as . I.E. HH = "Hornady" Hornet to distinguish it from its near equivalent Wildcat sister cartridges 17 AH and 17 K-Hornet. This the just released by Hornady cartridge we are talking about as a factory ammo centerfire. As is the 19 Calhoon, 17 AH & 17 K-Hornet, this is a 22 Hornet necked down to 17. The .17 Hornet (HH) has a 25 degree shoulder...3650 fps where as the 17 AH & 17 K Hornet have maybe another 200+ fps or so.
.17 Remington = 4000-4200+ fps. Came out in 1971 as a factory round1 as a necked down .223 Rem.
.17 HH = .17 Hornet or .17 "Hornady" Hornet
.17 AH = See above. "Ackley" Hornet
.17 HB = Hmmm...can't remember right now. Maybe a 17 FB =Fireball? Which is .221 Fireball necked down to 17 and the factory version of the 17 Mach IV
.17 ???
Bare in mind "power" and fps are not the same thing.
Here is a great post you might enjoy by an aquaintance of mine from another forum.
Ok here is most of my 17s, won’t bore ya with the 20s so much right now
l-r
17 Rem/17-222/17 Jav Imp/17 M-IV/ 17-M-iv rimmed/17 Wenzl Special/17 Jet/17 Killer Bee/17 AH/17 Squirrel/skip/17 CCM/17 short mag
I said skip because I don’t shoot Shorty and I forgot to include a 17 Mink (between the 17 Hornet and the 17 Squirrel
This was pretty quick, I may have forgot one or two??? Aint like I get to shoot em as much these days….
Most are scrap cases and was not made to show off
Here is a link I recommend you read...
http://www.6mmbr.com/17wildcats.html