Help. .17 hm2 .17hmr 204ruger, .223

suckerfish · 01-23-2005, 12:41 PM

Looking for a new rifle. Can't decide between the above. I know very little about the 204ruger. I see there is only a couple of dollars diffrence in the CCI ammo between HM2 and HMR rounds.

Who builds the most accurate HMR, HM2

Whatr advantages does the Ruger 204 have over a .223

Looking at bolt action in the 204 and 223

Semi auto in the .17HM2 .17HMR rounds.

Thanks

suckerfish

Streamer · 01-23-2005, 01:46 PM

Post deleted by Streamer

duckdog310 · 01-23-2005, 01:50 PM

If you're plinkin' or shooting lots of rats, you can't beat a .22LR. If you're shooting bigger varmints or paper punching, I'd say get the .223. There is an infinite amount of factory ammo available, numerous offerings (pretty much every gun company makes one, some many more than one!) and its pretty darn accurate.

Still. . .it IS kinda fun to mess around with "off" calibers. I own a .17HMR in the Savage bull-barreled offering and love it.

TonTo · 01-23-2005, 04:58 PM

I have been thinking about getting a mach2 barrel,simply so I can convert my 10/22 with a few simple screws.But for the time being 22lr is about all I can afford to shoot as much as I like to,so I think I will stick with that for now

Skilz · 01-23-2005, 05:08 PM

I'm trying to make the same decision about the 204 Ruger or go with a 223!

I do have a .17 HMR and it's a blast to shoot. I have shot rats in the 225-250 yard range but it's a little more suitable for the under 200 yard range IMO...wind plays a big factor in the longer shots. That's why I'm looking at something a little bigger to compliment the .17.

So it comes down to want you plan on shooting with it at what distance when selecting your next rifle.

Good Luck and let us know what you decide!

Skilz

SLEDDER · 01-23-2005, 08:09 PM

.223 is proven. No barrel erosion due to hot loads. Cheaper ammo, does the job just as well as the new calibers. My opinion only.

Norski · 01-23-2005, 09:47 PM

I kicked it around when they first came out the .17, and at the time I have a .223 Bull Barrel 2.5X14X40 and it well knock down yoties real easy, and the plunking is cheap, If I was trying to make up my mind on a .17 or a .204 or the .223, I would go with the .223, cant go wrong.

pythonwill · 01-23-2005, 11:00 PM

I got the Marlin model 917vs 17HMR & its a blast to shoot, but I think if I were to choose between what you listed I would go with the .223 because of the price of ammo and all the different models of guns to choose from

Chukrchaser · 01-24-2005, 06:39 AM

The economics of the new Ammo:
17HMR 8.99-10.99/bx 50
17Mach II -- 5.99-6.99/bx 50
204 Ruger -- about 15.99/Bx 20 (can not reload to factory 4250fps because the powder they use is not available yet.)

There are some large quantity discounts out there. (Just ordered 17HMR Hornady Vmax for 7.75/bx.

Just a tip -- don't bother with the hollow points (CCI) (they are cheaper)but I have not nor have I heard of any one that is happy with them.

The guns -- I own a CZ in 17HMR and it is one accurate little gun -- I have not heard of any that are particularly "bad" -- Do get a bull barrel -- My CZ doesn't have one so I have to let it cool sometimes.

On the 204 side -- too new to rate -- but the Remington VLS and the Savage Low profile are really nice -- the Ruger -- sorry don't know (personal thing I have with ruger), CZ and Browning are also in the mix . Also stay with the Varmit guns -- and 26" barrel --.

The 22 centerfire calibers do have advantages -- but the 204 -- in the right application (rats, rockchucks, and coyotes)-- will be a mist -- er blast -- I mean fun.

Sorry that probably is a whole 5-cents worth.