Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters dogzapper .17 question

well I'm glad this thread showed up, last year I bought a 17-223 used at my local gun shop. Figured the low ricochet factor would be a good idea around here.

Blown primers with starting loads w/ cci 400 primers so switched to rem 7 1/2. fixed that.
But still couldnt get get her to shoot, jb paste in the bore, soak overnight. Tried bedding, etc, etc.

I though I was losing my mind.
Makes me feel a little better, I'm not the only one having trouble.

I'm still not done yet but am thinking about rebarrel to 223 and done with it.

Guys that have a 17 that really shoots really have a great thing , but it seems like it takes a lot of money and time to get there.

I think guys like Todd Kindler really like to tinker, and thats half the fun with them, but if you watch his recent writing he seems to have moved on to the 20 cal thing now, so maybe thats saying something too.
I still think its the ultimate caliber for around here with housing developments moving in,....if I could get it to shoot.

Travis, try this little experiment if you would:

-Take 10 fired cases and anneal the necks. Or 10 new cases if you're wooried about annealing.

-Take 10 cases that have been fired quite a few times.

-Load both case 'lots' with a powder/primer/bullet combo that's given you good accuracy in the gun before.

- Also load up 6 'fouler' shots..any old cases will do here.

- With the barrel clean, fire 3 'foulers'.

- Fire two 5 shot groups with one of the case 'lots'.

- Clean the barrel.

- Fire 3 'foulers'

- Fire two more 5 shot groups with the other case 'lot'.

If you're shooting in mild conditions (hopefully using a windflag of some sort), you should see a difference in how the different 'lots' group.

Interesting test that can tell you a lot w/o much time involved.

Good shootin'. -Al

Thanks Al,

I'll try the primers and the standby 4320 and then I may try annealing and other stuff.

I honestly hope it doesn't come to that. I think we all like tinkering but damn, I want get to the huntin' part!!!

Travis.

Hi guys! First post here. I had a friend call me about this thread and having 7 .17 cals and 6 .20 cals combined with having read "Small Caliber" news a time or two I guess I'm one of those "Dick Heads" the "Kahuna" labled. I wouldn't be surprised what with being retired and hunting varmints near full time when I ain't fishing that the 3,000ish to 5,00ish rounds a year I shoot at varmints wouldn't also make me an arm chair gunny I believe the term was.
Dick Head though I am I sure didn't come here to scrap, in fact reading the forum rules I was confused into thinking that labeling a large group of shooters who don't happen to be involved in the particular shooting discipline you prefer as "Dick Heads" would be frowned upon. Guess not.
Be that as it may I felt compelled to jump into the fray as it were, must be the old JarHead in me.
First I'm not a big fan of the .17 Remington and the Big Green version of em in particular. I don't care for the case design and the amount they are overbore puts me off, (what other round does a guy shoot where the powder charge frequently out weighs the projectile?). I also believe that the initial offerings back when had inferior barrels, inferior bullets and reloaders weren't blessed with the plethora of fine powder choices closely stair stepped up the burn rate we have to day.
That said I too remember all the original articles written by real gun writers that flayed the .17 Remington. Similar articles flayed the venerable old .22 Hornet (flyers, inaccurate Remember?), they trashed the .220 Swift and others as well etc etc.
Long story short for years I followed along like a sheep avoiding the ones deemed "BAD" be the rag writers and truly believing these guys tested everything extensively and their personal "opinions" meant a lot more than my personal "experiences".
Cut to the chase, years pass, Lil'Gun powder comes out, I buy an Anschutz Meister Grade .22 Hornet against everyones sage advice and low-and-behold it shoots in the .3's and .4's. The earth had shifted!
At this point I live in an area rich with gun writers and have come to discover as great as some of em are they are all just guys that get up every morning and put their pants on before going to the range just like I do. I started to reevaluate all the vicious gossip, rumor and hearsay that I'd been reading for years passed from one arm chair gunny to the next and put forth like it just came down off the mountain from the burning bush.
Personal opinions "I've" developed since that time are in no particular order: barrels are MUCH better now, powders are MUCH better and CLEANER now, bullets are in a TOTALLY DIFFERENT LEAGUE!
From there I ordered a Cooper .17MachIV. 25 grain V-Max's at 3,800+ into the .2's to .4's. 100 to 150 rounds between cleaning with no appreciable "varmint shooting" loss of accuracy (might be able to shoot more between cleanings but the old JarHead in me won't allow it). See every hit(or miss)in the scope. (Imagine that last one for a minute), pretty cool huh? Doesn't use much powder, doesn't heat much in the dog towns or gopher fields, turns a p-dog inside out to 300 yards, will kill em a lot farther.
The Genie was out of the bottle!
Take the BC of a 25 grain .17 cal V-Max Hornady at what they claim is .230 and run it on a ballistics program at 3,850ish and then do the same with a 40 grain V-Max in .224 .200BC out of a .223, (mine chronos 3,680ish with that bullet), compare em. Not opinion, not old wives tales from guys that have never shot em, "ballistics".
I live in Montana and as I've said have a lot of time on my hands we have huge infestations of Richardsons Ground Squirrels we call gophers, p-dogs, rock chucks etc etc. The most fun I've had in my 45 year shooting career have been the last 15 since I became a "Dick Head" and took up sub.22 caliber varminting!
I post this only that if any of you have an open mind and perhaps had an opportunity to whack some ground squirrels with someones HMR and might possibly be thinking (Could they possibly have been wrong all these years? Well the answer is YES!!!).
That's my defense spoken for the "Dick Heads" of the world ashamed to speak out for fear of "outing themselves".Me I don't care, I been called worse.

As to an older .17 Remington that is just a curse as some rifles in all calibers can be, Re-Barrel it and move on. If you do opt to possibly have the action trued and gut up enough to go with another .17 cal barrel like a Pac-Nor, Lilga, Shilen etc etc you might just be amazed at how well even the .17 Rem can do when done right and with the newer components.
I'd suggest starting around 23ish grains of Varget with a 25 grainer and working up a couple tenths at a time as suggested to a max of 24.5ish. Ya never know, ya might just like it. Oh, and I'd try Old Spice.
By the way, Howdy guys, glad to meet ya!

Montdoug,

Absolutely no insult intended, my friend. Please let me try to explain my offhand comment.

When I wrote my article for the VHA, I was trying to give members a bit of my shooting experience. My statement was that the sub-calibers, .17s and such, were fairly impractical for high-volume prairie dog shooting. I would stand by that statement today; given rapid-fire shooting in a target-rich environment, shooting in the 20-mile crosswind at 200-, 250-, 300- and 350 yard prairie dogs ... and reaching out for the 450-yard dog that seriously needs killing. The .223 or .223 Ackley is KING.

For low-volume and just funning around, or for shooting coyotes and foxes, the .17s are fine.

I was simply not of the opinion that the 17s are as suitable as, say a .223, for those 500, 600 and 700 round days on the windy Wyoming prairie.

These statements brought me a bunch of grief. Todd Kindler and his buddies called the VHA and commenced a battle to get me fired. And a certain lawyer with the initials JF, wrote letters that were the nastiest venom I've ever read. To their everlasting credit, the VHA backed me to the hilt and stood firm.

Basically, I was personally attacked for trying to help shooters that were beginning or were of intermediate skill level.

Hey, if you want to have fun with a .17, that is great. You're just having great time and that is what shooting is all about. Heck, I played a bunch with the .17 Mach IV back in the Kimber of Oregon days and even wrote a few articles about it. Having fun with the.17 surely does not make a fella a dickhead.

The problem is that some folks get super-polarized on a particular bore-size and come to believe that it is the end-all and be-all. Then, when a writer opines that in some instances it isn't, they attack waaaaay out of proportion to the supposed insult.

None of my writing was meant as a personal attack, but the response was very personal. I have never really understood why their response was like that. It truly went beyond normal reasoning.

My friend, if you had Todd and his little gang, plus the nasty, nasty lawyer, on your tail for just trying to help folks, you would use the term "Dickhead" as well. Trust me on that.

Have fun with the .17. And if I insulted you, I wholeheartedly apologize.

Steve

Steve I can understand your feelings in that situation I was unaware of it by the posting however. Thanks.
I do however have to respectfully disagree with "Some" of your points. I do agree that the .17 Remington isn't my choice for high volume p-dogging if a fella only takes one rifle, it over heats too fast. Personally I adhere to the golf bag theory when the wife and I or buddies go camping for several days or a week in big dog towns. The golf bag theory involves having assorted rifles to be used for a given circumstance or when heat build etc. Like a bag of golf clubs.
I do have to vary from your opinion on the smaller capacity sub calibers be they .17 as in a MachIV or the new Fire Ball or the .20's like the .20 Tactical, .204 or especially the .20 VarTarg or a Wild cat a friend developed on the .218 Bee case with 40 degree shoulders called the .20 Killer Bee. I digress.

As to the .223 being vastly superior for Wyoming p-dogging (which I've done my share of when I lived there) over the .17 Remington (which as stated isn't a personal favorite). I took the liberty of running my personal loads for both my .223 and my last .17 Rem over the point blank ballistics program. Here they are.
My favorite .223 load first. It uses a 40 grain V-Max with it's .200BC at 3,680ish fps. Both rifles were CZ 527's by the way.

Load Data
~~~~~~~~~

Name: .223 Remington with 40 gran V-Max at 3,680
Ballistic Coeff: 0.200
Bullet Weight: 40
Velocity: 3680
Target Distance: 250
Scope Height: 1.500
Temperature: 70
Altitude: 4500

Ballistic Data
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Range Elevation Velocity Energy ETA Drop Max Y 10mph Wind Deflect
0 yds -1.50 in 3680 fps 1203 fpe 0.000 sec 0.00 in -1.50 in -0.00 in
25 yds -0.42 in 3563 fps 1127 fpe 0.021 sec 0.08 in -0.58 in 0.06 in
50 yds 0.49 in 3449 fps 1056 fpe 0.042 sec 0.33 in -0.51 in 0.23 in
75 yds 1.21 in 3338 fps 989 fpe 0.064 sec 0.77 in -0.40 in 0.53 in
100 yds 1.74 in 3230 fps 926 fpe 0.087 sec 1.40 in -0.23 in 0.97 in
125 yds 2.06 in 3124 fps 867 fpe 0.111 sec 2.24 in -0.00 in 1.55 in
150 yds 2.16 in 3022 fps 811 fpe 0.135 sec 3.30 in 0.29 in 2.25 in
175 yds 2.03 in 2921 fps 758 fpe 0.160 sec 4.59 in 0.65 in 3.09 in
200 yds 1.63 in 2823 fps 708 fpe 0.186 sec 6.15 in 1.09 in 4.10 in
225 yds 0.96 in 2728 fps 661 fpe 0.213 sec 7.98 in 1.61 in 5.29 in
250 yds 0.00 in 2634 fps 616 fpe 0.242 sec 10.10 in 2.23 in 6.64 in
275 yds -1.26 in 2542 fps 574 fpe 0.270 sec 12.53 in 2.95 in 8.14 in
300 yds -2.86 in 2452 fps 534 fpe 0.300 sec 15.28 in 3.79 in 9.82 in
325 yds -4.81 in 2363 fps 496 fpe 0.331 sec 18.40 in 4.74 in 11.70 in
350 yds -7.18 in 2277 fps 461 fpe 0.364 sec 21.92 in 5.83 in 13.82 in
375 yds -9.98 in 2193 fps 427 fpe 0.398 sec 25.88 in 7.08 in 16.17 in
400 yds -13.23 in 2110 fps 395 fpe 0.433 sec 30.29 in 8.49 in 18.74 in
425 yds -16.93 in 2029 fps 365 fpe 0.469 sec 35.15 in 10.07 in 21.50 in
450 yds -21.15 in 1949 fps 337 fpe 0.506 sec 40.53 in 11.85 in 24.51 in
475 yds -25.93 in 1871 fps 311 fpe 0.545 sec 46.48 in 13.84 in 27.78 in
500 yds -31.44 in 1796 fps 287 fpe 0.586 sec 53.15 in 16.10 in 31.43 in

My .17 remington load using the 30 grain Berger at 3,850ish fps with it's .257 BC.

Load Data
~~~~~~~~~

Name: .17 Remingtom with 30 grain Berger
Ballistic Coeff: 0.257
Bullet Weight: 30
Velocity: 3850
Target Distance: 250
Scope Height: 1.500
Temperature: 70
Altitude: 4500

Ballistic Data
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Range Elevation Velocity Energy ETA Drop Max Y 10mph Wind Deflect
0 yds -1.50 in 3850 fps 987 fpe 0.000 sec 0.00 in -1.50 in 0.00 in
25 yds -0.55 in 3755 fps 939 fpe 0.020 sec 0.07 in -0.58 in 0.05 in
50 yds 0.24 in 3661 fps 893 fpe 0.040 sec 0.30 in -0.52 in 0.19 in
75 yds 0.87 in 3570 fps 849 fpe 0.061 sec 0.70 in -0.42 in 0.41 in
100 yds 1.34 in 3481 fps 807 fpe 0.082 sec 1.26 in -0.27 in 0.72 in
125 yds 1.62 in 3394 fps 767 fpe 0.104 sec 1.99 in -0.08 in 1.12 in
150 yds 1.72 in 3308 fps 729 fpe 0.126 sec 2.92 in 0.17 in 1.63 in
175 yds 1.61 in 3225 fps 693 fpe 0.149 sec 4.05 in 0.48 in 2.26 in
200 yds 1.29 in 3143 fps 658 fpe 0.173 sec 5.39 in 0.85 in 2.98 in
225 yds 0.76 in 3062 fps 625 fpe 0.197 sec 6.95 in 1.29 in 3.81 in
250 yds 0.00 in 2983 fps 593 fpe 0.222 sec 8.73 in 1.79 in 4.74 in
275 yds -1.00 in 2906 fps 562 fpe 0.247 sec 10.75 in 2.37 in 5.77 in
300 yds -2.26 in 2829 fps 533 fpe 0.273 sec 13.04 in 3.03 in 6.95 in
325 yds -3.80 in 2755 fps 505 fpe 0.300 sec 15.61 in 3.78 in 8.27 in
350 yds -5.63 in 2681 fps 479 fpe 0.328 sec 18.46 in 4.63 in 9.71 in
375 yds -7.76 in 2609 fps 453 fpe 0.356 sec 21.61 in 5.57 in 11.28 in
400 yds -10.19 in 2537 fps 429 fpe 0.385 sec 25.07 in 6.62 in 12.97 in
425 yds -12.97 in 2467 fps 405 fpe 0.415 sec 28.86 in 7.78 in 14.80 in
450 yds -16.07 in 2398 fps 383 fpe 0.446 sec 32.99 in 9.06 in 16.77 in
475 yds -19.59 in 2330 fps 362 fpe 0.478 sec 37.53 in 10.49 in 18.93 in
500 yds -23.53 in 2263 fps 341 fpe 0.510 sec 42.50 in 12.06 in 21.27 in

All distances, temps, elevations are the same. The cross wind only goes to 10 MPH which as we both know is a mild breeze out there but it's enough to get the idea.
Look at 500 yards and compare the drop, foot pounds of energy and wind drift. Now again with all due respect where is that advantage you speak of?

Steve I appreciate your thoughtful response and anyone that would get an attorney over differences in firearm opinions gotta have something weird going on. I might well call em worse than that. Sure can't figure that one. Can you imagine Warren Page and Jack O'Connor hiring lawyers over the which is better 7MM or .270 Wars?

Montdoug,

I'll bet that it would have been fun to watch Jack O'Connor's and Elmer Keith's lawyers battle it out. Life is way too short for such silliness.

If anyone wanted to knock my beloved .280 Ackley, I'd simply have to think that his field experience was different than mine. For Heaven's sake, I wouldn't get mad and I surely would not enlist friends and a lawyer to force the issue.

To top it off, if we both have equal field experience, given level heads, we could learn from each other. That is what reasonable folks do.

Personally, I was blown away by the entire event. The lawyer's horribly nasty letter was beyond belief. Folks simply are not like that and to act in such a way simply shows no class.

No bore diameter is magic, but some are better at some applications. My job as a writer was to simply point out the good points and bad points and help the reader to make a well-reasoned decision.

I retired from writing just as the .204 was coming out. Because of this, I have not fired one. I'll bet that it is pretty cool.

My favorite prairie dog combination, by the way, is the .223 Ackley with a 40 Ballistic at a cool 4,000 fps. I have three rifles so-chambered and they surely do the job on p. dogs, foxes and coyotes. It's pretty simple in that the single bullet does it all.

Anyway, welcome to the 24HourCampfire. I'm awfully sorry that we kinda got off on the wrong foot, but I believe we are fine now. Welcome, my friend.

Steve

PS. Could it possibly be that Todd Kindler had a financial interest in the sub-bores? After all, he had his business, the Woodchuck's Den (or whatever it was called) and his magazine. Maybe he felt financially threatened my me, the least-known of all outdoor gunny writers, writing for a very small and unknown magazine. Maybe he felt somehow threatened and had to strike back.

If so, I truly feel sorry that this had to be his response because the entire issue is a black mark on our sport.

Now, I'm off to other adventures and Todd has made his bed with Charlie K and the fun bankrupture of Dakota/Nesika Bay. Good luck with that, Todd.

ST

I have never had a problem with mine. Maybe I got lucky. It shot factory 25 grain remingtons great, and my first reload batch were at a constant 1/2 MOA, so I never bothered to change. I do run a bore snake through it every 5 or so shots and deep clean it the old fashioned way after every 20 or so rounds. It is my coyote gun though, so I don't put several hundred rounds through it daily like on praire dog hunts. The wind does catch it badly though. I am now curious to see if different primers and charges will effect it's accuracy.

Dog,

The .17s are GREAT for coyotes. Really fur-friendly, too.

Steve

Hello there Steve, another "DH" here. I have to admit I was more than a little miffed at your initial reponse concerning the blanket statement covering what seemed to be all SCN readers and 17 caliber shooters. I see that you have explained your reasoning for that statement pretty well and I no longer feel the need to return the same sentiments your way. If you don't mind however, I would like to perhaps bring you, and other shooters who have little real world experience with 17 calibers, up to speed on what is currently possible.

I grew up in Wyoming, and while I enjoy all sorts of varmint shooting, my favorite target is the prairie dog. In the last 35 or so years I've been shooting them, I've tried just about all the popular varmint cartridges. It is telling that my gun closet nowadays contains no varmint rifles with bores larger than .204".
Take a look at just a couple of examples...I apologize for straying from strictly 17's.

The 20 VarTarg, which is a 20/221 Fireball more or less, drives a 32 gr. bullet at 3800 fps. If you are interested, run the numbers on your ballistics program of choice. The 20 Killer Bee offers the same performance on a measly 17 grains of powder. Real world performance in the prairie dog fields, in Windy Wyoming, is fully up to the majority of much larger cartridges. Granted, terminal results are not equal to a really fast .22 cal, but I much prefer the easy to see visual 'movies', non-existent recoil, and slow barrel heating. They are simply FUN to shoot.

Another favorite is the 17 Killer Bee, which drives the new, efficient, Hornady 25 gr. Vmax bullet to 3800 fps or so. Again, run the ballistics. The 17 Mach IV or 17 Fireball will do the same thing.

Steve, we're talking high volume, shoot all day, clean every 200 rounds rifles here. These, and similar cartridges are a complete hoot in the field and effective way beyond their size. I would just hate to see someone deny themselves the pleasure of experiencing them simply because they read from a popular gun writer that they were "A pain in the ass".

Travis, don't give up on the 17 Rem. Big Green factory barrels in 17 caliber don't have the greatest reputation. It's the tube, not the cartridge. I've had a few good ones, certainly adequate for predator hunting. You've had good advice here and I won't rehash it, but if you want an easy to maintain tack driver, stick a Lilja (or any top name barrel) on it and don't look back. Copper fouling is your enemy and a nice custom barrel will eliminate that problem. The 17 Rem is certainly no more difficult than any other cartridge; today's components and hardware are a whole new ball game compared to even a decade ago.

Sorry about the off topic fellas.

Regards,
Dan C

HEY DOGZAPPER AND MONTDOUG,

This thread is supposed to be about MY problems. (grin)

.17 fans,

Have no doubt that I will do what I can to get this thing the way I want it. I'm no quitter. But I will say this, I haven't owned or tinkered with a rifle yet that was as finicky as this little lady. Also, I bent a cleaning rod on this caliber. That is another first. My fault of course, but those Dewey's cost $30.00 and I'll be damned if I take ALL the blame. I have to blame the bore size too.

I'll post later this week how things are with it.

Travis.

P.S. Dogzapper,

I was attempting that tongue in the chamber move you suggested and the wife busted me! I tried to explain it was professional advice and she told me I had to see a therapist. Women can be so strange sometimes.

Travis,

The relations between a fella and his rifle should only happen in total privacy. Also, it's an ugly gun, darkness helps.

Wives sometimes do not understand. Sadly, a therapist would think you're NUTS, so that will not help.

Steve

Steve, I let my wife read your 'Rifle Relationships Revealed': She told me if she ever saw any part of my anatomy in that "thing on the side" (loading port), she'd "push that one thing foward..real hard" (the bolt).

Now that'll make 'ya sweat!

Laughing in The Forbidden Zone. -Al

And you never know when it's gonna happen.

Seriously, I really like your wife's sense of humour. She and Karen think very much alike.

After pissing off some folks during the last couple of days, I'm seriously thinking of joining you in Lurkdom. For some reason, I came out and it wasn't a good idea.

Your buddy Steve

Travis I apologize for hijacking your thread! I understand your feelings completely. For me it's clear as glass that while I'm not much I'm just about all I ever think about! Kidding of course, nothing is more nerve wracking than a firearm that doesn't respond as desired or expected.
You mention it sometimes seems to shoot well then throws a pattern. My thought on that is if the bedding, scope etc is all good possibly it could be inconsistent neck tension? Perhaps if you get a couple three good groups take those same cases and try em again to see if you get the same result. Segregate the bad group cases and check that out as well. I do buy brass in bulk and weight segregate in MTM boxes of 50. Did you mention how many time your brass has been fired? What bullets have you tried?
At the risk of causing World War Three, if copper fouling is present as I've heard some of those older Remington tubes are prone to I might consider a careful cleaning to bare metal then a real judicious (Don't everybody freak) firelapping treatment. I've had a couple rough factory barrels respond well to that if done extremely carefully. I know its way controversial but what do you have to loose? I bought the big NECO kit years ago from Roger Johnson at NECO and have used almost none of it. (only done three rifles I believe, one was a big improvement, one was a noticeable improvement and one didn't do much but make it easier to clean). If it got to that email me and I'd be glad to impregnate enough slugs for you to do it. Doesn't take many bullets but sure is time consuming to do the process right. Just a thought.
As to bent Deweys which most .17 cal guys have a few of, always hold the rod as close to the action as possible when applying force, tweaky lil suckers ain't they?
If all else fails my favorite .17 cal barrel for it would be a 1 in 9 twist Pac-Nor 3 groove Super Match. Good luck.

Steve, your honesty is what people enjoy most about your posts. Keep 'em comin', pal. -Al

Steve just to make it perfectly clear, after my initial misunderstanding of the situation I sure as heck ain't PO'D. That's the strangest thing I've ever heard of. I understand your feelings completely and the statement as well now.
As to opinions which vary, that is exactly as you called it! It's how we learn hopefully. We sure see eye to eye on the .280AI it appears, an all time great! Shoulda been standardized years ago! Interesting aside on that I hear that Cooper brought out a magazine rifle called a Model 52 and .280AI is one of the calibers it'll be available in. Drool, Drool. I better start being "special" nice to my beloved bride in advance.
Sorry again for the hijack.

I have a 17 rem BDL that I rescued from a pawn shop. I must have got lucky because mine shoots great with 25g Hor HP's and 20g Vmaxes. 1/2 MOA are the norm and I sometimes go 40 or more shots before cleaning. I noticed the CCI 400's were too soft and switched to CCI NATO 41's, the military primer. I use benchmark or AA DATA 79. I Run the 25g HP's at 4000fps and the 20g Vmaxes at 4400fps. I prefer the 25g HP on anything bigger than a ground squirrel. The 20 grainers don't penetrate much. I think my BDL is a more recent one, guessing early to mid 90's.

Bb