Testing the water here...thinking about a .17
.17 rem or .17 Fireball.....????
Pros and cons?...think extended shooting sessions....
Mag mod needed on a 700 for the Fireball, or just a block and small follower?
Talk me into it or talk me out of it....
If you're building, for .17 FB you want an action that was either a FB to begin with or possibly .300 blackout. The extractor is "clocked" a little from the std .222/.223/.204/.17 Rem, I think to clear the action on extraction. I believe a Sako / M16 extractor conversion will fix it as well.
Mag parts ... sheet metal and follower are available pretty cheap through Remington's service center. I might have a spare mag, don't think I have a spare follower. PM me if you need it.
.17 FB was easy-peasy for me. I had a blued SPS. 20 grains of H335 under a 20 grain VMAX, Rem brass, Rem 7-1/2 primers, 3/8ths inch groups, no recoil, and after the first 100 rounds or so, no copper fouling.
.17 Remington .. love it. The 25 grain VMAX gives it delusions of being a .22-250 with less blast and recoil. I've had good luck in various rifles with MR4320, Varget, AA 2520, H380. Some rifles shoot the Hornady 25 grain bullet well, most seem not to. The VMAXes are consistently good, at least with a 1-9" twist.
I would say "do it." I think the .204 Ruger is possibly more practical but the .17s are just friggin' addictive.
Given how much more fun the .204 is than the .22 calibers, and given how much more I like the .17 than the .204, someday I want to take the next step and try a .14.
I'm not sure which .17 I'd recommend more. If you're only doing one, I'd let action availability guide the choice. If you're starting with a .223 action, do the .17 Remington, if you've got a .300 blackout action, go .17 FB. .17 Remington is probably going to feed a little smoother if that's an issue for you.
Tom
