I am looking at a new Henry lever action rifle, and am tossed between the .17 and a .22. I just want it for squirrels, cans and paper targets. Is there a benefit to a smaller bullet? Is one louder than the other by a significant amount?

The .17 has longer range advantage and possibly a tad more accurate.
I would reccomend .22lr because of ammo cost. The .17s are 2-4 more expensive than .22lr. You will experience no loss in "killing power" at normal responsible hunting ranges.

I'd go with the 22 for cost reasons alone. I've heard the .17 is not very great if there is any wind. Not that you have to worry about that with most critters in a tree at 25 yards or in at close ranges in the woods.

Seems like you're only looking for some fun. I'd go with a .22lr simple because of the ammo price. I've priced a few .17 caliber rifles for the same uses you mentioned and ended up just continuing to use my 10/22. No second thoughts yet. You just can't beat 550 rounds for 8 or so bucks unless your shooting bbs.

The .22 LR. Loads of fun and loads of value. I have a Henry lever action in .22LR and it's a blast to shoot. You won't be disappointed.

I wasn't even taking the cost of shooting it into consideration, I probably would have realized that after the fact.
Ihave a borrowed Marlin lever action .22 here right now, thats is what sold my on that style of gun, I hope the Henry shoots as nice.
Thanks for the opinions guys!

I would go with the .22 as well unless you are intending on doing some longer range varmint hunting. The 17 is basically a necked down 22 mag with a lighter bullet so it's faster and flatter shooting. They do some serious damage to small animals though. I would not hunt small animals I intended to eat with one, unless you kept it to head shots.

The 17HM2 is supposed to be pretty good on them though and gives you more range than a normal 22LR. Ammo cost about the same as really good .22 ammo I think.

I used to own a Henry .22, great gun wish I would have kept it. One of the most accurate .22's I have shot out of the box. The triggers are kind of icky though.

The 17's do have some problems in the wind, but it's better than the other rimfires if you look up the numbers. Wind won't effect the 17 until it's much past were a 22LR will shoot well, and then it has less wind drift than a 22 long rifle or 22 mag.

In my area the 17HMR is about $10 for 50 rounds. Not something I would want to plink with. CCI voleciters are about half that and pretty darn peppy if your gun likes them. Plus they won't blow a tree rat in half when you shoot it.

Paul

.22 it is then!
i sure keep hearing good things about these Henrys.. Hope it compares to the Marlin I have now..

I don't think henry'll compare to marlin model 39a or a winchester 9422 but they are good rifles for the price. Another damn goos lil rifle to consider is the excellent browning blr22. Those are top notch in my book.
The only reason I'm bringing up different rifles is because I think you might be happier with 1 of em in long term. Sometimes it's better to save a bit more and buy something that you'll never feel need to upgrade from.

I am a HUGE fan of the Henry standard model .22
For the money they can't be beat.

The only fault I have experienced in over 10,000 rounds through mine is they don't chamber well unless you hold the rifle level.

Good Hunting,
Bowflex