17 HMR vs 223 as a trainer

[Marbles]

Any opinions on 17 HMR for cheap long range training instead of a 223. Obviously one cannot reach out as far, but the 17 HMR would be much closer to centerfire ballistics than a 22LR and cheaper than a 223.

Plus, I need a new full sized remfire and am thinking about 17 HMR or 22 WMR instead of another 22LR. So, can I kill two birds with on stone?

 

[Lawnboi]

I have both and do not see them as interchangeable.

About all the 17 does really well is kill vermin out to 200 yards.

The shooting experience with the 17 is nearly the same as the 22, especially with a suppressor

 

[justinspicher]

For me, I’d go 223 every time without hesitation. Its a much more versatile round than a 17HMR for what I do/go.

 

[Bluumoon]

Recoil is just enough to keep you honest trying to spot shots w the .223. I can’t see a purpose for the .17 unless richocet is a big concern. I shoot praire dogs easily w a fixed 6x on a .22LR at 200 yards. 300 yards is a challenge.

 

[Brontosaurus]

This is super interesting to me...
Technically you could put more rounds downrange due to the cheaper ammo.
The price difference isnt crazy though. On ammoseek the cheapest 17 HMR was running like 24¢ while the cheapest 223 was 31¢

 

[Bluumoon]

This is super interesting to me...
Technically you could put more rounds downrange due to the cheaper ammo.
The price difference isnt crazy though. On ammoseek the cheapest 17 HMR was running like 24¢ while the cheapest 223 was 31¢

Maybe I’m just not seeing it (having not owned a .17) but why not shoot a .10c .22LR shell vs a 24c .17? I can reach out to 200 w the .22, jumping to .223 keeps things sporty to 500 plus.

 

[Brontosaurus]

Maybe I’m just not seeing it (having not owned a .17) but why not shoot a .10c .22LR shell vs a 24c .17? I can reach out to 200 w the .22, jumping to .223 keeps things sporty to 500 plus.

I see it man...
And if you get picky about accuracy

Lapua Long Range .22 LR Ammunition

Lapua Long Range .22 LR Ammunition (50 Ct) Lapua quality has been around for 100 years, and we celebrate by presenting the very best new new rimfire cartridges designed for ranges at 100 m/yds and beyond: The Lapua Super Long Range .22lr cartridge. The result of extensive...

www.creedmoorsports.com

 

[Turkeytider]

I have both. For long range training for larger calibers .223 would be the way to go. A .223 with a decent scope can work out to 500 yards in and of itself. Maybe even a little further.

 

[Desk Jockey]

Do you own a 223 already?

I did and I was debating the same choice a while back. I thought about a 17 and shot a buddy's and went 223. It just felt like more of a jump up in performance over my 22lsr, plus I wasn’t stoked about buying a new caliber when I already had ARs, a ton of brass and 223 reloading dies. The 223 is good medicine for larger pests, including PA groundhogs, which are tougher than you think. I haven’t done a ton of reloading for mine yet, but it is nice to have the option without having to buy a new set of dies.

 

[Marbles]

Do you own a 223 already?

I did and I was debating the same choice a while back. I thought about a 17 and shot a buddy's and went 223. It just felt like more of a jump up in performance over my 22lsr, plus I wasn’t stoked about buying a new caliber when I already had ARs, a ton of brass and 223 reloading dies. The 223 is good medicine for larger pests, including PA groundhogs, which are tougher than you think. I haven’t done a ton of reloading for mine yet, but it is nice to have the option without having to buy a new set of dies.

I do own a 223 (well technically a 5.56 NATO, and most of my ammo on hand is 5.56).

The 17 HMR would primarily be for small game hunting, going for head shots on squirrels, hares, and ptarmigan/grouse. I have thought about doing the same with a 223.

The 223 is probably the better choice. I just dropped my adult sized 22LR off under consignment as I'm tired of the rough feeding and stuck magazines of the Christianson Ranger 22, I may stick with the Savage Rascal being my only remfire, just not sure.

 

[Bluumoon]

I do own a 223 (well technically a 5.56 NATO, and most of my ammo on hand is 5.56).

The 17 HMR would primarily be for small game hunting, going for head shots on squirrels, hares, and ptarmigan/grouse. I have thought about doing the same with a 223.

The 223 is probably the better choice. I just dropped my adult sized 22LR off under consignment as I'm tired of the rough feeding and stuck magazines of the Christianson Ranger 22, I may stick with the Savage Rascal being my only remfire, just not sure.

The Tikka T1x is stupid fun w a $10 trigger spring and a scope that reliably dials. Head shots for leaving meat I could see being a good argument. Under a 100 yards the .17s are supposedly laser beams

 

[Marbles]

So, both 17 HMR and 223 would need head shots to avoid destroying too much meat (though even a hollow point 22LR can destroy a lot of meat with body shots on small critters).

The 223 would be noisier and only a little more expensive on ammo.

The 17 HMR cannot replace the 223 for training.

The 223 would be accurate to longer ranges. It would also be capable of taking a big game animal if I happened to cross one I had a tag for.

Less worry with a 17 HMR if I shoot a squirrel in a tree than with a 223.

Perhaps I should just get another 22LR and add a Tikka 223 latter. Or perhaps I should get a 223 barrel for my TC Encore. Regardless, the 17 HMR is not sounding appealing.

 

[PredatorSlayer]

I have both and both are fun to shoot. I shoot the 17hmr out to 300 and the 223 out to 500.

 

[Axlrod]

Reminds me of a newlywed buddy of mine. His only rifle was his hunting rifle. Told his wife he was buying a 22/250, and she said "Don't you already have a rifle!"

 

[Eleven]

@Marbles is that 5.56 an AR? You could just get a .22lr upper for it if it is.

 

[Lawnboi]

The 17 is a little much for a round you plan on eating small game with. Although they do make FMJ rounds for that very purpose.

The thing will blow a prairie dog nearly in half out to a hundred or so.

It is a stupid fun rifle to shoot though, suppressed it’s significantly quieter than a suppressed center fire, but you still have a little sonic crack.

 

[atmat]

Reminds me of a newlywed buddy of mine. His only rifle was his hunting rifle. Told his wife he was buying a 22/250, and she said "Don't you already have a rifle!"

I joke that this is why all my rifles are the same stock/color: my wife thinks it’s all one rifle.

But seriously, my wife was the same way when we met. I asked her why she has so many different shoes, and she said they each had a specific purpose. She saw my point after that.

To answer OPs question: my 223 seems much more of a training exercise for my centerfires than my rimfire does. Plus I can actually hunt large game with it.

I’m not sure I see the point of a 17 HMR. To me it sits in no man’s land between a capable 22lr and a 223

 

[AZ_Hunter_2000]

It really depends on your training goals. All options are 100% viable if working on fundamentals is your primary driver. While all can work for doing "wind" work, the 223 takes the cake as it allows you to work your wind calls further out and still get a positive reaction on a hit.

22 LR: Great for fundamentals but unless you buy match ammo, group size can be hit or miss especially with a "bucket" which makes reliable shooting at distance difficult. Even for hunting small game, match ammo may be required.

17 HMR: Pricier but can be had for less than some 22 LR match ammo. No issues taking mine to 300 (bounce between 100-300). Great for fundamentals, stretching the legs a bit (dialing), and also working the wind. Can be used for some small game and small predator hunting.

223: Great for fundamentals and can be good for distance (depending on quality of ammo). Can stretch the legs more than the 17 HMR to better work the wind. No issue going from a trainer to a predator rifle (may require a change of ammo depending on hunting goals).

I have all three. My 22 LR is a dust collector, my 17 HMR kills small stuff and is my primary practice rifle, and my 223 is my in-field conditions practice rifle (i.e. kills rabbits, coyotes, etc).

If I were to only have one, it'd be the 223 in the same rifle as my primary hunting rifle purely for muscle memory.

 

[loganwayne]

For where I shoot alot I only have a 300 yard range. I have a .22 mag and getting another .22lr. Both can shoot out to 300 yards pretty easy but take enough concentration and control of the rifle to be accurate at that range. I hit a 4"x4" square about 90% of the time with them.

 

[Agross]

For what u describe, I think the 17 hmr would be great. U already have a 223/5.56 so why not go 17. I have a 22,17 and 223. They all serve a purpose and are fun to shoot. The 17 is used for squirrel sized game on up to varmints, and a lot woodchucks. It’s become my son’s favorite gun also because of how accurate it is.