Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > Firearms Forum > Guns
.17 HMR vs. .17 WMR >

.17 HMR vs. .17 WMR

Guns Like firearms themselves, there's a wide variety of opinions on what's the best gun.

.17 HMR vs. .17 WMR

Old 11-01-2014, 03:05 PM
  #11  
LBR
Boone & Crockett
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mississippi USA
Posts: 15,296
Default

Problem solved. My little (younger) brother surprised me with an early Christmas present--a .17 HMR. How I just have to decide on a scope for it!
LBR is offline  
Old 11-07-2014, 05:05 PM
  #12  
BTM
Fork Horn
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Altadena CA
Posts: 494
Default

Originally Posted by Sheridan
I would ask myself one question........................


Which one will still be around 10 years from now ??

I brought a HMR !
Ditto! Ditto!
BTM is offline  
Old 11-09-2014, 09:18 AM
  #13  
Nontypical Buck
 
Nomercy448's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kansas
Posts: 3,907
Default

So is it going by WMR or WSM? When I see WMR, I think of the 22WMR, which is akin to the HMR, whereas the 17WSM is a unique cartridge not related to the 22WMR.

Sounds like the point is moot since LBR got a "Hummer" already, but I'd comment that I'm not quite sure that I think the 17WSM is going to go away. As long as we can get out of this Rimfire shortage, I think it fills a perfect niche that will give it staying power. I'm really sad to see the 17HM2 go away, as I REALLY loved that round - I'd LOVE to have a Ruger SP101 6" or a Mark II (not III, but I'd take it) in .17HM2.

The 17WSM stands above all other rimfires, quite likely at a level that can't be accomplished in heavier caliber rimfires. It still doesn't quite reach centerfire level numbers, but it's certainly far enough ahead of the other rimfires to make a difference.

If it weren't for the feeding issues that I'm hearing about the B-mags, the fact that they don't have one in Stainless/laminate yet, and the fact that I 'need' about 3 other rifles first, I'd have a 17WSM myself!!! (That being said with a 17HMR and 22WMR in the safe already).

Last edited by Nomercy448; 11-09-2014 at 09:21 AM.
Nomercy448 is offline  
Old 11-09-2014, 09:30 AM
  #14  
Typical Buck
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 749
Default

From what I read and herd first hand from people that have a 17 wsm it is not vary accurate. The 17 hmr shoots circles around it. Last week at cabelas in Delaware they had problems 50 box's of winchester 17 and 17 gr ammo but no rifles.
Bbj270 is offline  
Old 11-09-2014, 04:13 PM
  #15  
Nontypical Buck
 
Nomercy448's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kansas
Posts: 3,907
Default

Originally Posted by Bbj270
From what I read and herd first hand from people that have a 17 wsm it is not vary accurate. The 17 hmr shoots circles around it. Last week at cabelas in Delaware they had problems 50 box's of winchester 17 and 17 gr ammo but no rifles.
If a 17WSM isn't very accurate, and a 17HMR "Shoots circles around it," then doesn't that mean the 17HMR is LESS accurate?

What specifically is wrong with the 17WSM's that's causing the problem? I only know one fella with a B-Mag, he says when it feeds, it shoots lights out, just that it has a bit of a problem repeating. I'd be pretty surprised to hear the Savage is putting out rifles that aren't accurate, even if it is a new cartridge and new action.
Nomercy448 is offline  
Old 11-10-2014, 02:45 AM
  #16  
Typical Buck
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 749
Default

I read from outdoorlife don't remember which month but they did a review on the winchester low wall and it was not accurate for what the rifle was. They also stated that the Bmag they used was not that accurate either. The person I talked to had a savage and got ride of it because it shoot real bad compared to his savage 17 hmr. He had no feeding problem with the mag.
Bbj270 is offline  
Old 11-10-2014, 11:32 AM
  #17  
Nontypical Buck
 
Nomercy448's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kansas
Posts: 3,907
Default

Originally Posted by Bbj270
I read from outdoorlife don't remember which month but they did a review on the winchester low wall and it was not accurate for what the rifle was. They also stated that the Bmag they used was not that accurate either. The person I talked to had a savage and got ride of it because it shoot real bad compared to his savage 17 hmr. He had no feeding problem with the mag.
I assumed that this article would be one that you were referencing...

The "poor accuracy" of the 17WSM in the 1885 Low wall was this:

"Accuracy at 100 yards with the 25 grain bullet was a bit over an inch"... "Average 5-shot group at 100 yards with Winchester’s 25-grain load was 1.197 in.; the smallest group was .942 in."...

Pretty hard to complain about a ~1MOA RIMFIRE RIFLE, especially considering that the B-mag is still south of $400 for a stainless model.

They don't state how poorly the 20grn load shoots, but if they're complaining about 1MOA at 100yrds, I'll take it.

It is, however, one of the uglier rifles I've seen, even for a Savage. Right up there with a BLR in my book.

Last edited by Nomercy448; 11-10-2014 at 11:36 AM.
Nomercy448 is offline  
Old 11-22-2014, 07:37 AM
  #18  
Nontypical Buck
 
Nomercy448's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kansas
Posts: 3,907
Default

Picked up a Stainless Savage B-Mag 17WSM last night and 500rnds. Range and field reports to follow.

(And for the record, yes, I still think it's one of the ugliest rifles ever conceived...)
Nomercy448 is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.