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.

John I believe my AI Hornet was only running 3100 fps, very mild. I sold that rifle many years ago and put it out of my mind then when the new wave of .17 Hornet interest came around I was surprised to see the reported velocities. I just never pushed mine hard, but apparently I was leaving a lot on the table.
The bullets that shot best for me were the 25 gr Rem HP and the 20 gr with red tip, V max I assume. I killed quite a few coyotes with it as well, some spectacular throat shots and instant kills but some terrible disasters too. Death-by-a-thousand-cuts type kills. Maybe if I had pushed it harder the results would have been different? At any rate, I had a Sako Vixen .222 magnum barrel set back and rechambered to .221 Fireball so the Hornet became less critical to my success.

In the back of my mind I always wondered if the .17 Fireball would have been the one. The thing I needed when I built the .17 Hornet was a QUIET round for calling coyotes in settled areas. It not only worked on the neighbor issue, it worked on coyotes that were gunshy when they heard my 22-250 blasting away. I was calling and killing multiples like never before, seemed to not alarm the coyotes at all. It just makes a pop, kind of like a noise you'd hear on a farm every day. Chain clattering, truck door slamming, tractor backfiring, etc. But it wasn't the best round for killing coyotes in the heat of a fast calling session. Shots had to be just right for quick kills, and I'm not that cool calm and collected.

Do you think from my description above I would have gained anything with a .17 Fireball over the .17 Hornet for what I did?

Except the fact that one heats up a barrel about twice as quick as the other, of course burning about twice the powder, it's obvious why.
After seeing 20 gr. v-max fail to fully penetrate full grown prairie dogs from time to time, it's easy for me to see the hornet lacks the umphh needed to kill coyotes reliably. On The other hand, load a fireball with 25 gr. hp's and it would do quite well on coyotes.

You wouldn't have gained a lot from the .17 Fireball--but maybe not as much, since the .17 Hornet's a little quieter.

The bullet situation hasn't changed vastly, but there's a little more selection. Nosler getting into .17's with their Varmageddon line helped, but what would really be great (especially for larger varmints) is a .17 caliber Ballistic Tip or two. The heavy base helps them penetrate deeper, but all Ballistic Tips are boattails, and very few .17's are--which may be why there isn't a .17 Ballistic Tip!

Until relatively recently, powders were the problem with all the Hornet-based rounds. Basically, the powders that burned slowly enough to get higher velocity were too bulky to get enough in the case, and the smaller-granuled powders were too fast-burning. These days there's a wider range of suitable powders. I usually use Accurate 1680--which Hornady's manual lists as the powder getting the highest velocity with 20-grain bullets, 3750 fps from a 24" barrel. In the 22" barrel of my CZ, 12.0 grains of 1680 (.4 grain under the Hornady max) gets 3600 with the 20-grain V-Max and 3680 with the 20-grain Tipped Varmageddon. The V-Max groups a tiny bit better but the Varmageddon shoots a tiny bit flatter. In reality I can't tell the difference in the field, since they both shoot to exactly the same place at 100 yards.

But several other powders also work well. Both Accurate 2200 and LT-30 get around 3500 with 20's, and H4198 gets 3600. With 25's, Accurate 2200 gets 3100, and since the standard twist for the .17 Hornet is 1-9, it also stabilizes the 30-grain Berger. In my rifle H322 gets 2900 with the 30, and very fine accuracy. That might be the bullet for bigger varmints, but I mostly use my .17 Hornet for rodents.

I find the .17 Hornet intriguing, couple of questions (off track a little, sorry) First, what is the noise like in a sporter rifle? .223 loud or 22 loud? Curious because much of my shooting happens is semi-urban areas where a rimfire goes unnoticed but a centerfire gets people looking around. Second, in the end is the .17 Hornet a lot better/enough better than the .17HMR rimfire to be worth reloading, etc? I currently regard the .17HMR as the best semi-urban rock chuck slayer I have ever tried. And last, what rifles is it even available in? Thanks.

centershot,

The report's between a .17 HMR and .223, but to me closer to the HMR, not surprising because of the small hole and using about half as much powder as a .223.

It's also definitely more than the .17 HMR on animals. I use the .17 HMR with the A17 ammo to open festivities on prairie dog towns, because while it will reach out to 200 yards the report's mild enough not to spook every PD within sight. But after all the dogs within 200 are either shot or down their holes, I get out the .17 Hornet because it's good to 300+ yards, and doesn't just kill them like the .17 HMR but often lifts them a foot or two.

Dunno what other models it's available in but mine is a CZ American, which they still offer, and I believe CZ also chambers at least one other rifle for it as well. Mine's very accurate, and I also like the single-set trigger, which breaks at 9 ounces when set.

Doesn't take much more than a look at muzzle velocities to see that there is quite a margin between the hornet and hmr. About 1000 fps, depending on load. Zeroed at 100 yards the hmr will drop about 8" at 200 yards where as the hornet can hit a bit over an inch at 100 and hit zero at 200 yards. The hornet is available in CZ, Ruger, Cooper, to name a few.
You can reload the hornet for way less than you can buy hmr ammo. Very economical to reload for the hornet.

I sold my hmr a few years ago. It just underwhelmed me, once I got the hornet.

TRnCO,

Well, you can handload .17 Hornets for "way less" than the .17 HMR if you use inexpensive hollow-points, but as I noted above, 20-grain HP's do not shoot nearly as flat, and drift a lot more in the wind, than 20-grain plastic tips, whether the V-Max or Tipped Varmageddon. If handloading plastic-tips in the .17 Hornet, it's hard to beat the price of HMR's. Also, the newer A17 ammo for the Savage semiauto .17 HMR usually gets around 2850-2900 fps in bolt actions. This ups the performance of the .17 HMR considerably, since it comes very close to the .17 WSM in performance.

I also live where about half the "small rodent" varmint shooting is Columbian or Richardson's ground squirrels, which are rarely shot beyond .,17 HMR range--which is why I've never even considered giving up my .17 HMR, and with the advent of A17 ammo am even happier.

But I also spend enough time handloading all sorts of other cartridges that it doesn't make sense to handload when I don't have to--and with the .17 HMR I don't have to for a BUNCH of my rodent shooting.

I must say I'm intrigued about these bitty .17's, but with the paucity of gophers, prairie dogs, and ground squirrels around here I don't know what I would use one on. How do they perform on gnarly tough old groundhogs? I guess I could load one down to very mild velocities and use it on edible gray squirrels along with all the other squirrel killing machines in my arsenal. Coyotes are showing up in my environs but keep mightily to themselves and/or hide out behind suburban neighbor's houses. Transient black bears?

gnoahhh,

Have killed enought "grarly tough old groundhogs" with various cartridges in the East (along with rockchucks in the West) to have full confidence in the .17 Hornet out to 250-300 yards.

In my CZ 527, 7.0 grains of 5744 gets around 2100 fps with 20-grain bullets, with head-shot squirrel accuracy out to 100 yards. With hollow-points (which are less explosive than plastic-tips) it works fine for small game. Essentially it's a centerfire version of the .17 Mach 2.

I'm sold. Now to find someone to re-barrel a 22 Hornet for me.

I wasn't aware of the newer higher velocity hmr ammo. offerings.
But I just bought another 400 20 gr. v-max bullets for $14./100. I use lil'gun powder at 9.5 grs. I figure a 100 rounds if I just get 6 reloads out of a case, cost me around $20. Don't think you can buy hmr ammo. that cheap, but then again, I haven't shopped for hmr ammo for some time, so I could be all wet.

I only buy .17 HMR's on sale, because already have a bunch. Haven't paid over $11/50 for a long time, with a low of $9, so they've probably averaged around $20/100. Just saw some A17 ammo for $44/200 today on an Internet site, but passed, guessing it might go lower. It costs a little more than standard ammo, but I only used it on prairie dogs, not ground squirrels, where the regular stuff works just as well.

One of the reasons .17 HMR is reasonably cheap is popularity: Manufacturers can make big batches.

I finally got my CZ out to the dog town behind the house.

My friend has one as well and we did quite a good lick of business on them. We found that we really had to pay attention to which way the dust drifted after the first miss......payed better attention after the second and third miss!

Pretty pleased with the gun and cartridge. Cheap to shoot. Cheaper to reload.

No recoil and pretty quiet. Noticeably quieter than the .221's we had with us.

I dont have a .17 HMR, but my hunting partner does. And he likes the Hornet better.

Oops. I am a page off!

Still like the idea of a 17 fireball, but reading that they heat up much faster and use twice the powder hmmm...

Jim,

An older friend of mine came to Montana for his first prairie dog shoot last year, bringing his only suitable rifle, a .22-250. A lot of people unacquainted with PD shooting bring a .22-250, but like most he found it kicked too much, the barrel really heated up quickly, and he didn't get to observe the immediate results of most of his shots--partly because he's old enough that he had a hard time seeing dogs, even through binoculars, at much over 150 yards. Of course, I'd brought a bunch of other rifles, including a .17 HMR, .17 Hornet, .22 Hornet and .204 Ruger, and he shot them all as well.

He's coming again next month, and bought himself a .17 HMR, since out to as far as he can see PD's mine worked very well--and he doesn't handload. Of course, he'll also be shooting some of my other rifles again. :-)

That sounds like a good compromise. Might as well not tote a super magnum hell blaster if you cant see that far anyway.

We found that anything past 400 hundred yards was a lucky hit if it was first round. Hell, much past 300 was lucky most of the time.

I might have had a better average if I had my 25-06 AI with me on the long ones, but the 17 Hornet was a lot of fun.

I've hunted PD's with many superb shooters, including world-record benchresters, top military snipers, and long-range target shooters. None have been able to hit dogs more often than they miss 'em beyond about 350 unless it's close to dead calm--which is rare on the high plains!

We actually had a lot of fun trying to figure out the wind.

We were shooting off a card table from bipods.....not very steady to begin with. Shooting north, up a slope with what appeared to be a steady north north east wind.

Often three consecutive shots with three different wind holds produced three different dust clouds. We had the best luck just holding a bit high for the first round and making wind adjustments with the next round.


No vegetation to watch sway in the breeze for a make shift wind flag!

I'm familiar with that "wind condition!"

Any comments on how the 17 WSM compares to the 17 HMR with A-17 ammo or the 17 Hornet? I asked in the rimfire forum with out much input. I just returned from an Eastern MT prairie dog shoot and was very impressed with the 17 WSM compared to the 17 Hornet and the 17 HMR with regular ammo.

The .17 WSM I owned for a while had a 22" barrel, and all the 20-grain factory ammo tried got around 2950 fps. My CZ .17 HMR also has a 22" barrel and, depending on the batch of A17 ammo and the temperature, velocities run from around 2825-2900 fps.

My .17 WSM was jackrabbit/coyote accurate but not consistently prairie dog accurate, so I didn't shoot it all that much on PD's. From what I did see, there wasn't all that much difference between the A17 HMR ammo and the .17 WSM. At least not enough for me to keep that particular .17 WSM.

John, if you were going to build a 17 Hornet, would you use a heavier contour than your current CZ? I believe you said .75" at the muzzle. Also, mine will be threaded for a rimfire suppressor.

Don't think I would want it any heavier. It's pretty thick barrel for such a tiny hole, and the rifle weighs 8 pounds 10 ounces with scope, balancing pretty perfectly for me.

That's the information I needed to hear. Many thanks.

I ran a 17 Ackley Hornet for several years in a 77/22 Hornet rifle. It was an accurate rifle, but the gunsmith botched the chamber on me and brass didn't last but about four firings due to a "bulge". I never had to trim it though. The rotary magazine didn't feed all that well with the case shape. It was cheaper to shoot than HMR and more accurate. I managed several kills on p'dogs in the 300-400 yard range and numerous varmints around the farm. Unfortunately, like an idiot, I traded it off for a custom 1911. I wish I still had that gun.

I think all the time I'll run into a good used .22 hornet in a CZ or another Ruger and rebuild it. We'll see. I miss that round. I was smart enough to save my forming dies and reloading dies. I've also got about 600 pieces of brass for it that are 1x fired with a forming load.

Either round will suit and enjoy the new rifle!