22 mag vs 17wsm vs 22 hornet

I am a Hornet fan and have shot a lot of stuff with it....mostly rabbits, squirrels, and turtles. I had a friend that was prolly 7-8 yr old at the time that shot deer with his. That was the gun his dad designated for him. His brother shot deer with a 218 Bee. Same reason.We also had some good days with the 22LR.

BIL had a 22 Mag in a lever. Accurate as any I have seen. He sold it because the ammo was too expensive for his tastes.
 
OK, longish story here.

Back in 1981, I picked up a nice little Krico rifle in 22 Hornet. I had wanted a 22 Hornet because I had read about how much more powerful it was than a 22WMR, how much flatter shooting it was than a 22WMR, and how much cheaper it was going to be to shoot because you are reloading the brass and so that reduces the cost. So I picked up this little Krico rifle, beautiful little rifle with a 3X Kahles scope on it. I was pretty happy. Then I went to buy ammo. I was shocked at the cost of the ammo, it was $20 for 50 rounds, literally 5X-6X the cost of 22WMR ammo and 30X the cost of 22LR ammo (this was the early 1980s, so don't get all excited about cheap ammo, we made a lot less money then). So I went out hunting with my buddies who shot 22LR and 22WMR rifles. Out to 100 yds, there was no advantage over the other two rifles. None. Sure, when I fired it was louder and a little more spectacular when I hit a rabbit, but no real advantage. 150 yds, and the 22WMR and I were neck and neck, but the 22LR shooter would sit it out. 200 yds and both the 22WMR and the Hornet were biting the dust but I still had a little oomph. So OK, I was still in the game. Except the Hornet cost 5X more to shoot. No problem, I thought, because when I start reloading the cost will be really low! When I bought dies, I was shocked at the cost of the Hornet dies, they cost 25% more than any other dies. But I bought a pound of 2400 powder for $9 and a box of 100 little Hornet 40 gr bullets for $5 and started loading (already the price of 4 boxes of 22WMR ammo before I loaded the first round). First, size the cases then trim because you have to crimp and you want them all the same length. But during sizing, I lost about 10% of the cases because they are paper thin. Trimming is also a challenge because the case mouth can tear because they are so thin, but I only lost a few. Then flare the case mouths because if you don't you'll crush the case necks (did I mention they are paper thin?). Lost another few cases. Started out with 150 cases, ended up with about 120 or so loaded rounds. No problem, I thought, I'll get better. And I did, but still lost about 5-10 cases per loading session. Finally gave up on jacketed bullets because of the cost and started casting and gas checking lead. Yes, a pain. One day a friend of mine was all excited about the 22 K-Hornet, and mentioned it to me, so I sold him my Krico, and he took it to the smith to rechamber while I went down and bought a Ruger 77/22 Magnum and never looked back. Lessons learned? Go for convenience. Chrono tests later proved what I had learned the hard way: 22WMR launches a 40 gr at 2,100 fps, 22 Hornet launches a 40 gr at about 2,300 fps, so 10% faster. 5X the cost. That's what I learned, YMMV. So if you fall in love with a Hornet, sure, load for it and enjoy it. But I wouldn't go looking for one just to have one.
 
Last edited:
Really?? how much more? Not very much I'd think. Hornet rounds aren't THAT much fatter or longer than .22WMR.
I was wondering who would be the first to object to that statement.
My estimate is about 15-20% more.
Or, looked at from another perspective: You can put just as much in your pocket, but the .22 WMR won't take up as much room or weigh as much.
Click to expand...

I went and looked at some specs, and I think your estimate of 15-20% more WMR rounds over Hornet is..overly generous.

Loaded, the Hornet is approx. 0.37" longer than the .22WMR. And the widest part of the case (the rim), the Hornet is 0.056" larger in diameter than the WMR. I don't think those small differnces (especially in diameter) will allow 15-20% more WMR than Hornet in the same space. 2-3%, maybe, which is kind of minor, to my way of thinking.


Scorch, my experience with the Hornet is a little better than yours, at least I've lost fewer cases during reloading. But my situation is a bit different. I don't crimp them. There's no need, as I shoot a Ruger No.3 and a Contender. SO, no trimming (all are still below max length), I don't flare the case mouths, but I did learn to add a generous chamfer. I don't recall my Hornet dies (RCBS) being any more expensive than "regular ones". And I wonder at your data,
22WMR launches a 40 gr at 2,100 fps, 22 Hornet launches a 40 gr at about 2,300 fps,
Click to expand...

I checked a couple sources and one said 40gr .22WMR was 1875fps, and another said 2000fps, so 2100fps is not too far off, I suppose, but no source I could find lists the .22 Hornet 40gr an less than 2600fps, and one said 2790fps for factory. Hornady list a 40gr Hornet load that hits 2900, though most powders top out at 2800fps, some a bit less, but everything they list does 2600fps or more. Even taking the WMR at 2100 (a high number) and the Hornet at 2600fps (a low number) that more than a 10% difference.

Does that justify the difference in price between the two? No. Nor does the performance difference between the .22WMR and the .22 LR justify the high cost of the WMR to me, either. I didn't think the WMR was worth $6 a box when .22lr was less than a buck. (yes it was that long ago the last time I bought WMR). They are "niche" rounds, and have always been expensive,
much more so than the materials used seem to justify.

Hornet cases are "paper thin" at the mouths, and even being careful, gentle and slow a few will still buckle very easily. I've only lost 2-3 since I figured out a generous chamfer made the difference for me, with jacketed bullets.

Someone mentioned "why not the .223?" and pointed out the advantages of cost and availability of ammo, etc. And this is true, but the .223 is a more powerful round, and if you want WMR or Hornet speeds, you have to download it further, and there can be issues with that, including possibly needing a filler. Also, even the smallest lightest .223 rifles have to be a bit bigger than WMR or Hornets have to be. If you're looking for the lightest possible "walk around rifle" this might make a difference, too.

Just my opinion, but I consider the WMR a waste of money, for me, and while the Hornet is more expensive, I feel less of the money is wasted.
 
I have a .22K Hornet and I can load ammo for close to the same price as .22 rimfire mag. That hasn't always been the case. The .22 rimfire mag took a long time to become common enough for economies of scale to kick in and bring the price down. It used to be considerably cheaper to load your own Hornet rounds...

That said, with all the rounds that come and go, I'd be concerned that the Winchester .17 rimfire mag will not go out of production in 5 or 10 years...

I also have a .17 Hornady Hornet single shot rifle. I got it for no other reason than I wanted one. It's pretty cool to shoot and I plan to load for it when I use up the 6 boxes of factory ammo I have. Funny, loaded ammo was only pennies more a box than new empty cases...

I recommend a .22 Hornet if you plan to reload. It has 2/3s the power of a .223 Rem but uses less than half the powder. If reloading isn't your thing, a .22 rimfire mag would be the way to go.

Tony
 
I'm a .17 dissenter. I have a Savage in .17 WSM
Click to expand...
I forgot about the WSM. It's decent, and probably the cartridge I would choose if I decided that I did want a rimfire .17.

However, I would by a Ruger or CZ. I don't like the Savage B.Mag.

Loaded, the Hornet is approx. 0.37" longer than the .22WMR. And the widest part of the case (the rim), the Hornet is 0.056" larger in diameter than the WMR. I don't think those small differnces (especially in diameter) will allow 15-20% more WMR than Hornet in the same space. 2-3%, maybe, which is kind of minor, to my way of thinking.
Click to expand...
I agree that 2-3% would be insignificant.
But I think that estimate is grossly conservative.

The length of .22 Hornet, alone, accounts for a 27% increase in volume, if only considering a straight cylinder. Add the larger body and thicker, wider rim, and the number only increases.

Here's a good visual representation: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a1/22_short_22_long_rifle_22_magnum_22_hornet.JPG/1200px-22_short_22_long_rifle_22_magnum_22_hornet.JPG
 
Perhaps 2-3% is too conservative, based on volume alone (its early for me I am just having coffee and I'm not doing that math in my head :p) So shall we say 10% or so?? And I'm thinking that would be loose rounds, not in factory packaging.

If you're talking about the size difference packed in the box, the box makes more than a bit of difference. I don't have one handy to measure, but I'm thinking 50 WMR rounds in one of those lovely CCI plastic "boxes" each round in its own spot , compared to 50 Hornet in an old Winchester box, rounds packed nose up/nose down touching each other in an open cardboard "tub" is not a huge difference in size, other than one box being "taller".

Not trying to turn this into "how many Hornets can dance on the head of a pin" thing, just thinking the size difference isn't enough to be something important.
It's not like 5/56 vs 7.62NATO. Even if you're right and it is as much as 20%, how is that anything important?

There's no free lunch, you pay for performance, both with $ and physical size. The Hornet costs more, and is bigger, but you get significantly higher velocity. Is it worth it? Personal judgement call.

With the rimfire, you get what you get, once it fires the case is scrap metal, and if it doesn't shoot as well as you like in your gun, the only option is to get a different brand and see if it does better.

With the Hornet, and reloading, you can adjust the load down if desired, and all the handloading tricks to make it shoot better in your gun are possible options. Different bullets, different powders, different charges, different seating depths, etc. all these are possible reloading the Hornet, where they aren't an option at all with rimfire rounds.

Again, is that worth it? Up to you. For me, it is.
 
Not trying to turn this into "how many Hornets can dance on the head of a pin" thing, just thinking the size difference isn't enough to be something important.
Click to expand...
Same here.
Just friendly banter.

I love the Hornet. I think it's a great cartridge.
But I started with the .22 WMR and just can't convince myself that the additional 800 fps is necessary (especially now that I have multiple .223/5.56 options available - including one that only achieves about 2,600 fps, due to barrel length).
There is absolutely nothing wrong with the Hornet. I just came to prefer the .22 WMR because that's what I bought first.

But, as I mentioned in my initial reply, if I were in the OP's position and intended to shoot 200+ yards fairly regularly, the Hornet would be my choice. The WMR just doesn't have the performance that I want at that range.

My mention of how much ammunition could be carried in a pocket wasn't meant to be presented as important. Rather, it was intended as a minor note for people that do such. (Yes, the intent was loose ammunition.)

When I grab my old friend, a Marlin 882SS .22 WMR used primarily as a 'walkabout' rifle, I stick a 4-round magazine in the rifle and two more magazines in a back pocket - usually 7-rounders. In a front pocket, I dump the remainder of the box of ammo.
Unimportant note about the above: The 4-round magazines are nice in the Marlins, as they sit almost flush and allow sling-carry without stabbing the person in the back, like the 7-rounders do. But once the shooting starts in situations like scattering jack rabbits, it's nice to have a 7-rounder, or two, handy.

(If I'm just out after squirrels or eatin' bunnies (cottontails, hares), I may only take two 4-rounders and just a few loose rounds for topping off; since encounters are less frequent, shots are at stationary animals, and shot opportunities are more limited.)


Just one additional note on the overall topic of the thread, since I find it funny: Cornbush, also one of my brothers, had a Marlin in .17 HMR. Fun rifle. He really enjoyed it. None of us had anything bad to say about it or the cartridge, except that ammunition was running $20+/box at the time.
But he didn't own a .17 caliber cleaning rod, jag, or brush; and accuracy was dropping off. He didn't want to buy the cleaning tools, either. So, he traded the rifle for a Bubba'd 03A3 Springfield. :D
 
My shooting buddy had a few .17 cal and a .22 hornet that I shot from time to time. I wasn’t very impressed by either cartridge. The .17 is accurate but lacks punch and the small diameter makes bore cleaning difficult. It used to be hard to find brushes and rods for the .17. I don’t know if that is still the case.

Shooting my friends .22 hornet, my thoughts were that a .223 would make a lot more sense.

My vote would be for the .22 magnum. I really like the cartridge. It’s not quite as accurate as the .17 but will shoot MOA in my rifles and hits harder than the .17 does. My buddy used to need two hits with his .17 to anchor a big jackrabbit whereas my .22 mag would put them down with one shot.
 
Easy choice for me and I made that choice way back around 1981. A few years before that an older guy told me if I liked shooting to try out a 22 magnum. A few years later I did. Walmart had a Marlin model 783 bolt action tube fed 22 mag for $115.00. So I bought it and a couple of boxes of Winchester ammo.

It was love the first time I shot it. It was a step up from the 22 I normally shot and worth the extra cost to me. In shooting small game it was almost too effective. It is not a squirrel or rabbit round. Not if you plan on eating them. I still have that first 783 and added a stainless laminated stocked 883 I found in a pawn shop for $135 OTD. I don't think they knew what they had.

I have only shot one 17RF rifle and it was OK but not something I cared to invest in. I have never shot a 22 Hornet but would consider buying one if I found a smokin' deal on one. But since I reload 223 I can reproduce the Hornet round. I have a very accurate H&R Handi in 223 with a 1/9 twist that would work great for Hornet sub loads. And since I have been known to carry 50 rounds of 12ga ammo when hunting a ways away from the truck on a dove hunt I don't think the weight of a load of centefire 22 ammo would be a big deal.

I agree with the idea of just having a RF round I don't have to worry about finding and keeping the brass to reload. I reload for everything else and having a decently powered round I don't have to chase brass for is a plus to me.

I really like the 22 mag ammo loaded by Armscor. I have shot a bunch of it and it shoots right along side of the Winchester 22 mag ammo. Armscor also loads 22 mag ammo for Fiocchi and they have a great reputation. I bought 4,000 rounds of Armscor from Sportsmans Guide a few years ago for $5.65 a box. You can still find it for around $6.50 a box if you shop on line.

https://www.outdoorlimited.com/rimf...jhp-40-grain-jacketed-hollow-point-50-rounds/
 
Last edited:
Thank you for all the input. After all things considered I believe I'll be going with the 22mag. Ive had one in the past and it served me well. I don't reload at present, so that puts the 22 hornet outta the equation. 17 wsm may be harder to find in the rural areas I visit.
 
^If I did it over again FrankenMauser, I'd buy a CZ as well. Love the trigger on the Savage, but the CZ I believe would be a better rifle out of the box
 
Mine is a Browning Micro A bolt. Left handed of course.

I had heard about how hard it was to load the Hornet way before I ever had one. I was naturally a little leery of loading it.

After some years under my belt with it, I have never lost a case due to a sizing or bullet seating error. I have RCBS dies and I never crimp.

I have gotten good results with the Barnes 30 gr Varmint Grenade. They will come out of the barrel at 3000+ a little. I have also used the Hornady 35 gr Vmax, but I don't care for it too much although they are as accurate as the Barnes are. I never chronographed the Hornadys.

Using small pistol primers, I can do a 10 shot group at 100 that measures 5/8" C to C. To date the longest shot I have made (not a target) was 187 yd leaning against a tree.
 
Gulfcowboy said:
Hello out there. I'm looking some input on a new small bolt gun. I've narrowed down to three. The 22 mag, 17 wsm, and the wild card 22 hornet. Im looking for a walk about rifle. Something to put in truck when messing around in the country. Something with low recoil and low noise, and has more power than a 22lr and a 17 hmr. That can handle varmints relatively well. So anyone with experience with any or all these calibers your input would be be much appreciated. I would also factor in cost and availability.
Click to expand...
Last line: Cost and availability. That eliminates all but the 22mag right there. why? The 22mag ammo can be found anywhere and price is right.

The hornet ammo is hard to find. AFAIK it is currently only offered in the CZ 527. An excellent gun. it is not a choice of caliber. it is a choice do you want this rifle. And then you search and pay up for ammo as compared to 22mag or 223. I do not see where the OP wants to waste a lot of time reloading when he can be shooting. I do reload 450/400, life is too short to buy a 22hornet so to have an excuse to reload! The "small" 527 is the carbine. Can you even find a 527 carbine in hornet. I doubt it. Mine is a 223.

The wsm is only available in the the savage. The savage has bad reviews. Maybe the Ruger 77/wsm is still an option. The 77 is a heavy gun or was. All I ever saw was a varmint model 77/17wsm. That is not "small". That is it, 17wsm only two guns. the 17 wsm may be on the way out or we need some guns like CZ or Ruger American to step up and build a rifle.

The 22mag is offered in untold dozens of readily available rifles? To many to list, semi auto, bolt, single shot and lever action! Ammo is an easy find and many good loads to choose from. Dozens of ammo choices with dozens of rifle choices. Bargain price gun to high end. Many "small bolt gun" The Ruger American carbine would fit the bill perfect.
 
Last edited:
The Ruger 77/17 is available in .17 WSM as a 'sporter' configuration, in addition to the varmint/target. (I believe there are also "tactical" and "compact" versions.)

Also available, or possible to find used, for .17 WSM: Browning T-bolt, Winchester 1885, Volquartsen Deluxe, Franklin Armory F17 (AR-15), Chiappa Little Badger, and more...
Someone announced a pump action rifle chambered for .17 WSM at one time. Rossi, perhaps? But I don't think it ever made it to market.
 
I am interested in the TBolt. I will look into this. Huh, good info here.

SHAME SHAME, atfer wasting a heap of time. I find there is NO tbolt in `17 WSM.

huh! Bad Info on this forum.
 
Last edited:
This piss me off so much, I have to bump this up:

SHAME SHAME, atfer wasting a heap of time. I find there is NO tbolt in `17 WSM.

huh! Bad Info on this forum.
 
I think Henry at one time offered a 17HMR in a pump rifle but now all they show is a 22 mag. It must not have sold well.
 
If you reload...The Hornet

If you don't reload ... I would choose the 22 Magnum . Easier to find ammo for it in my neck of the woods. 17 wsm is not a big seller..low demand = not every store stocks it.

Might be a good time to think reloading... a little Lee hand press and a set of 22 Hornet dies will put you in ammo business...no worry about what a store stocks !
Gary
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top