Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Opinions on .17WSM Rimfire

Matt,

Thanks for the info, and I'd be very interested in hearing how the A17 works for you!

I like the idea of a faster more powerful RF cartridge. However, the 17 cal is my hang up. I know what the converts have and will say. But..... until they neck it up to 22 cal I will not even consider it. I like my 22mag Sav. 93 Hornady V max, I know the comparisons and arguemnets are never ending, but it works for me and my 100yd ideal range G-hog death stick. Again, until it is a 22 cal WSM, I will not even consider it. My 2 cents.

cs2blue,

I've found the .22 Magnum a little more effective on varmints in the 10-pound range than the .17 HMR (though not as much as many people who've never tried the .17 HMR might think).However, for smaller varmints the .17 HMR is superior to the .22 Magnum in every way: more accurate, flatter-shooting and drift less in the wind.

Haven't tried the .17 WSM on any varmints yet, uut based on plenty of experience with other .17's, both rimfire and centerfire, would put my money on the .17 WSM over the .22 Magnum.

What might be interesting is necking the .17 WSM up to .20 caliber.

Muledeer, I agree, the 17 has much to offer over the 22mag. but not enough in its present forms to sway me. I could see the WSM in larger calibers, 20, 22, but what kind of performance upgrade would it gain, faster, heavier bullets, yes, market demand,affordable rifles that shoot? who knows? I would think the performance would be right on the heals of the some of the milder 22 hornet loads out there at present.

Yeah, I bet it would!

And the rifle question is always out there. Right now that's one of the problems for any new rimfire round--the .17 HMR and .22 Magnum have such a head start.

It seems like every time something comes along that I 'want' the puck up the build.

Hey, 17WSM, lets make it a 9 pound rifle.


Hey, new 22/250 with a 1-40" twist

OK, if a guy is forced to use a rimfire on coyotes this may go somewhere. But, difficult to see this coyote factor as a "major reason" why a fellow would spend several hundred dollars setting up a .17 WSM rifle, particularly when availability of ammo seems to be so iffy. Why difficult to see?

Coyotes are tough - tougher than many would suppose. Guys out west who shoot them a lot at some distance can tell you that even a proper whack with a .17 Remington does not mean anchoring a coyote - and the .17 Rem at over 4k ft. per sec. with the 25 gr. imparts three or more times the energy of the .17 WSM. The all too frequent case is maiming and non-lethal immediate damage. A maimed and possibly escaping coyote is not the favored outcome, not to mention inhumane.

The temptation to convert a Hornet to .17 is a good one - in my view better than putting $$ into a .17 Rimfire rifle and the sometimes evasive/expensive ammo for those - but once again, would not see the .17 Hornet as coyote medicine. Indeed, it would be a pain to live where the "authorities" rule out centerfires for varmint purposes and maybe that would mitigate a guy toward the rimfire .17. As for coyotes, looks like maybe I appreciate the .22/250 and .220 Swift too much.

Don't know why Remington didn't bring back the 5mm Rem Mag, it just seems like too good of a round not to sell well these days. You could say it might combine the best of both the 17 HMR and 22 Magnum. Sent a message to Remington a couple years back about it and they say others had suggested it too but nothing ever came of it.

One thing I've long suspected about the 5mm was Remington's original concept was for a direct competitor to the .22 Magnum, because the original load of a 38-grain bullet at 2100 was very similar to the .22 Magnum's 40-grain at 2000 fps. Which is probably why not many people bought 5mm's, along with the "odd" bore size. This was back in the day when "rimfire" meant "twenty-two."

If the original 5mm factory load had been more like the present Aguila ammo, with a lighter bullet at higher velocity, then the 5mm might have had a chance. But to most shooters it sounded too much like the .22 Magnum, which already had a 10-year head start, so not only was already chambered in a pile of rifles and handguns, but .22 Magnum ammo was widely available. I know this because of purchasing my first .22 Magnum in 1969, the year the 5mm was introduced. I could buy .22 Magnum's in any store that sold ammo--including the small-town Montana hardware store where I bought the gun itself.

The same wide availability of both firearms and ammo is what makes the .17 HMR so hard to beat now. In 2006, only four years after the .17 came out, I was in southern Wyoming shooting prairie dogs, and one of my rifles was the CZ .17 HMR I'd purchased in 2003. The dogs on the two ranches we hunted hadn't been shot at that year, and the .17 got used so much I started running low on ammo. The local town's population was less than 1000 people, but even then I could buy .17 HMR's there--at one of the local bars, that also had a small sporting-goods section in one corner.

One of the other reasons Remington probably hasn't bothered to bring back the 5mm is that a lot people remember when they quit offering ammo the first time.

Neither of which brand is a Ruger. A larger Hawkeye in a center fire caliber can easily be had cheaper than the rim fire 77's. What sense does this make?

Thought I would just do a update on the BMag. I found a used one with a Nikon Buckmaster scope on Gunbroker for $222. The cost was local due to the seller was local and I did not have to pay shipping or the FFL transfer fees. The seller also stated the scope was a no name brand when in fact it was a buckmaster. I took the gun to the range and had below average results. After further investigation I believe the toy like stock was the culprit. I installed a boyds stock and this made a huge difference. The gun is now a good shooter.

The only other issue I have is you have to make sure the mag is lock into place. I'm not sure if a new mag will fix this problem but for now it's just a minor issue. I tried all three brands of ammo and my gun likes the 20 grain Hornady's the best and the American Federals the least. Ammo here is very easy to find and runs $14-$16 for a box of 50. My Bmag may not be a tack driver but it is good enough to go hunting with. The 17wsm is wonderful round and my 22 mags may never get out the gun cabinet. I wish someone made a mid level 17wsm but until then the Savage will have to do. It appears Savage has worked out most of the kinks with the newer guns but understand a new stock is going to be needed if you get the cheaper model. A stainless heavy barrel is in my future.

I would've liked to see the 5mm Rem mag make a comeback too, especially with the bullets today like the 24 gr NTX or 32 gr Vmax. Put it in a classic style rifle and give it a cool new name, but it ain't gonna happen.
I'm sure the folks at Hornady, CCI and Winchester crunched the numbers every which way and the 17 caliber came out on top.
But I would still like to see a 20 caliber version of the WSM.

What I read was that they really wanted to get to 3000 fps for marketing purposes, and that meant itty bitty bullets. .20 or .22 wouldna dunnit, regardless of how effective those calibers may or may not have been on game.

I wouldn't necessarily see the point of doing it in .22, as you can always download a .223 (that everybody has) to get there, but I can see a niche in .20 for people who don't want to invest in a .204 Ruger and then download it.

I would be all over a 22 WSM. A lot of the public land here, you're allowed to hunt hogs during small game seasons. However, you must use a rimfire or a shotgun. That may be a small market, I don't know if any other states have the same law. A 22 WSM with a 40 grain bullet would be just the ticket. It would do everything a 22 mag would do and then some.