Home Forums Reloading Varmint Rifles 17 Hornet vs 17 Ackley Hornet

I've decided to build a 17 Hornet. Likely will be a single shot (Ruger #1 or Browning Low Wall) and I'm not decided on whether to Improve the caliber or just leave it as is. This will be a prairie dog (and ground squirrels if I ever get a chance to shoot one) gun. Other uses might be small furry varmints. Two main bullet weights are 20 & 25.

Thoughts?

Hornady version. You may want factory ammo, or shoot factory for the brass. Forget the 25 grainers, the 20's are all ya need.....

Me? I'd forget the singleshot....PD's and skwirkles are a repeaters dream.

The issue is that I'm a lefty and finding a LH bolt gun with a hornet bolt face is not so easy. I guess I could go with a RH and just hold my nose...

Even with a single-shot I'd go with the Hornady. It's a little shorter than the Ackley version, I'd guess because to allow it to work better with plastic-tipped bullets in standard Hornet magazines, so has slightly less powder room. But the difference in potential velocity is so inconsequential it can be ignored, and Hornady factory ammo and brass is cheap, abundant and very good. I've converted .22 Hornet cases to .17 Hornets, and it's something of a PITA, though exactly how much depends on the .22 Hornet brass.

In my experience Huntsman's exactly right about sticking with 20-grain bullets for PD's and the gophers you hope to shoot someday.

Thanks. I appreciate the guidance from both of you.

A couple of questions, please. This will be used as a bench gun and not a walk around sporter.

1. What barrel length and contour would you recommend?

2. Bolt gun?

3. Single shot?

I really like my Ruger bolt gun and barrel contour, but think a 18 inch barrel threaded for a suppressor would be perfect...

Mine's a CZ American, which has a 22-inch barrel that's supposedly a "sporter" contour. However, it's the heaviest sporter barrel I've seen on a small-caliber rifle, measuring .75 at the muzzle, yet the total weight of the rifle with a 4-12x scope is still only a little over 8-1/2 pounds. The relatively heavy barrel reduces muzzle jump (which isn't much anyway) so much that it's easy to watch the bullets hit at any range--even on paper targets, when close enough to see the little holes through the scope.

I wouldn't want it much longer since some of my shooting is done from a vehicle, but on a rifle only shot from the bench extra inches wouldn't matter. Muzzle velocites with my handloads run 3700-3780, depending on the 20-grain bullet. I also like the single-set trigger, which when set breaks cleanly at 9 ounces, pretty nice for shooting small varmints.

Have thought of getting a Ruger No. 1 rebarreled to .17 Hornet, as another of my favorite small-varmint rifles is a 1B in .22 Hornet--also extremely accurate. I often single-load rounds when shooting burrowing rodents anyway, and have the ejector set so empties bump the tang safety gently, remaining in the "trough" in front of the safety where they can be plucked out and saved easily, rather than ending up on the ground. If Ruger offered a No. 1 in .17 Hornet I'd already have one, but the CZ works more than well enough.

I like the threaded barrel idea and a suppressed pd rig is almost within reach, as soon as mine comes out of purgatory.

JB, one of the reasons for a single shot consideration was exactly what you said about empties. Being able to handle empties without moving is a clear benefit to me.

Do either of you have any recommendations of a gunsmith for doing a barrel swap on a Ruger 77/22H? I have one in my safe that was purchased with this in mind

I have a LH Browning A-Bolt in 22 Hornet but don't want to swap to a new barrel for it, due to market value. Am I thinking wrong?

yes.......


Once you use the 17 version, the 22 version will just gather dust. Might as well get some use outta it.

fun factor beats 'market value'....

I had a suspicion that was going to be your answer.
Thanks.

anytime.....grin

I know it won't take the pressure...

But something about the size of a Ruger 77/17 in a 17 Rem Fireball was always my
thoughts of the rifle size I would love in that caliber.

That Ruger 77/22 or 17 was a fine sized balanced rifle in that bore size.

I always enjoy when Don posts pics of the varmints dispatched with his.

I often wonder if her owns the most deadly 77/17 Ever made...

He's certainly dispatched a boatload of varmints around the ranch site with his.

Big +1. Not much fun to look at a gun in the safe you wish was something else.

I built a .17 Ackley Hornet about 20 years ago on an Anschutz action, pre-Ruger of course and killed quite a bit with it, but always wanted more power. I would look at a .17 Fireball. With Rugers cartridge now standard, I would never build an Ackley version. What a PITA forming brass when it's not necessary!

Fireball,

I shot a .17 Fireball for several years before buying my .17 Hornet. The difference between them in the field is so small so almost unnoticeable when using the same bullets. I also grew weary of trying to find .17 Fireball brass--or .221 Fireball to be necked down--and when I did find it the price was MUCH higher than .17 Hornet brass. In fact, you can often buy .17 Hornet factory ammo as cheaply as .17 Fireball brass (when Fireball brass can be found) and it's excellent.

My factory 700 in .17 Fireball shot very well, but after shooting my CZ .17 Hornet for a year I sold the 700, partly because the Hornet was even more accurate.

John, well that's interesting. I guess I should note I did not run my Ackley .17 hot at all. It was the most accurate rifle I had ever owned. I remember one squirrel shoot I was picking them off by spotting the little shiny black eye in the grass and shooting it out. But just shy on power for anything much above small game.

I mostly use my .17 Hornet on ground squirrels and prairie dogs, but didn't use the .17 Fireball very much on anything larger either--though on the occasions I have found they work pretty much the same.

One of the major factors in performance in the past 20-some years has been plastic-tipped bullets. In small calibers they not only shoot considerably flatter but drift less in the wind, enough that both effects are easily observable to anybody who uses both on the same days beyond 150 yards. And when they hit stuff, plastic-tips kill far better. Dunno what you were using in your .17 Ackley Hornet, but would bet they were mostly hollow-points, which limit performance considerably.

I don't run the .17 Hornady Hornet hot, just use the standard powders with standard data. It's SAAMI maximum average pressure is 50,000 PSI, and with published data and 20-grain Hornady V-Maxes or Nosler Tipped Varmageddons my rifle gets around 3650 fps--just about like factory ammo. Sighted in an inch high at 100 yards, holding dead-on works to 250 yards, and a head-high hold on standing ground squirrels or PD's works at 300. Either bullet kills very well out to that range, and sometimes lifts them a foot or two.

During the five or so years I used the .17 Fireball considerably with the same bullets at 4000 fps, I killed prairie dogs out to 600, but I was far more into "expensive" dogs back then. Toward the end of those five years I regarded the .17 Fireball as a reliable 300-yard prairie dog round, switching to something bigger for longer ranges.

But I also eventually realized that very few people can consistently hit prairie dogs much beyond 300, and then only when the wind is very calm--and it rarely is in prairie dog country. In fact have shot PD's with several world-record benchrest shooters, big-time military snipers, and successful long-range target competitors, and have yet to shoot with anybody who hits PD's more often than they miss in typical wind conditions beyond 300. In calm conditions its possible to hit more than miss well beyond 500 yards, but those conditions are unusual. Most people only count hits and forget the misses.