17 Remington -vs- 17 Remington Fireball

[NYH1]

I was looking at Remingtons web site and saw these two cartridges.   I don't know anything about either of them.   Remington has 2 loads for the 17 Rem. and only 1 load for the 17 Rem. Fireball.   Remington doesn't even chamber a rifle for the 17 Rem. but they chamber 8 rifles in the 17 Rem. Fireball.

Looking at the ballistics, the 17 Rem. looks better then the 17 Rem. Fireball.   Why is Remington pushing the 17 Rem. Fireball so hard?   Is it more accurate?

[Graybeard]

How do you define better? Just cuz it gets a few more FPS doesn't necessarily make it better. The Fireball which I own delivers 4000 fps with 20s and they also make a 25 grain loading for it so they offer two for it as well. The .17 Remington is tougher on barrels and in reality the difference is too small to be significant. They are pushing the Fireball because it's new and the other is old and has had its fifteen minutes of fame.

I never saw a need for the .17 Remington for me but got a Fireball so soon after it was announced that finding ammo and brass was next to impossible. I like mine which is a Model Seven Predator. With factory 20s it shoots under a half inch at 100 yards and anything I point it at inside 300 yards even prairie dog heads barely sticking above the mount is dead instantly. Beyond that the wind blows those light pills around pretty badly.

[diggler1833]

I agree, with what I've seen the .17FB is a bit easier on barrels than the .17 Remington.  Both are good cartridges for small game out to a few hundred yards, and I've even read a magazine article years back where a guy took a deer with one.  The fireball will also enjoy a bit more support with availability of brass and ammo for the time being.

The wind will play hell with that light bullet though, which will either make it fun or irritating in open, windy country (depends on whether or not you enjoy doping wind). 

I thought about one for the kids to practice marksmanship on, but I think I'll be doing a .20 Practical in a couple of years (.223 Rem necked to .20, easiest of the ones to form), but that is off topic.

[Graybeard]

I have enough brass and likely enough bullets to last the life time of my barrel and unless I get to do more PD shooting than I expect to it will all likely last the rest of my life time. I really did kinda over stock on components for it once I found them.

[eye shot]

The .17FB is just another short magnum craze that is just a selling point like all the others. Does Rem. make it in a 700BDL? The old .17Rem. is a far better round. Rem. realy droped the ball on this one just to sell rifles. The .17 Rem has about the same ballistics as a .22-.250. It shoots faster with a 25gr. bullet than the FB with a 20gr. In 71 the fist year the .17 came out and when I got mine it was a very nice looking 700BDL. I've shot hundreds of full house handloads in it and to this day it will holed a .25" group @100yds. I've taken chucks out to 600yds and it will lift them off the ground. All my buds said the wind will play heck with that little pill, but I just tell them it's too fast the wind don't bother it and that seems to be true. You can make the brass out of .223 cases. There is a big difference in velocity between the two.

[diggler1833]

Edited so as not to start a flame war.

[Graybeard]

Edited so as not to start a flame war.

I just decided not to post at all so I didn't need to edit mine. 

[sniperVLS]

You 2 are making my job far to easy 

[diggler1833]

Edited so as not to start a flame war.

I just decided not to post at all so I didn't need to edit mine. 

That is because you are wiser, and probably tend to think things out more than I. 

[roper]

I was looking at Remingtons web site and saw these two cartridges.   I don't know anything about either of them.   Remington has 2 loads for the 17 Rem. and only 1 load for the 17 Rem. Fireball.   Remington doesn't even chamber a rifle for the 17 Rem. but they chamber 8 rifles in the 17 Rem. Fireball.

Looking at the ballistics, the 17 Rem. looks better then the 17 Rem. Fireball.   Why is Remington pushing the 17 Rem. Fireball so hard?   Is it more accurate?

 

Many fans of the 17 caliber including me.  Before the 17 FB the 221 FB case was necked down to 17cal and called 17MachIV (17-221)and that was almost 10yr before the 17Rem came out and the 221 Fireball was only chamber in the XP-100 pistol back then.  I shoot the 17MachIV and the old Kimber made rifles chamber for that caliber Hodgdon had loading data for it Hornady had loading data for it with 20/25gr bullets

Back when I first started shooting the 17MachIV we shot Rem 25gr bullets @ 3600fps plus.  I started shooting the 17Rem when they first came out Rem had a recall on those first barrels and they replace mine I been shooting custom long time now.

The 17Rem had alot of bad press (fouling)the gun rags just about killed it off.  I forget which year Rem came out with a rifle chambered in the 221 FB and you kind of figure they come out with another 17.  Rem quit making 25gr 17 cal bullet and that open the door for Hornady and their 20gr bullet and they loading data for the 17-221 fireball case.

Before the 17Rem I shot the 17-222 and 17-223 beside the 17MachIV.

[diggler1833]

Off Topic:

I got a chance to shoot a 17-223 the other day.  Nice older gentleman who had a Remmy action with Pac Nor barrel in a McM HTG stock.  He actually had three Pac Nor barreled Remingtons out there in McMillan stocks, guess I know what he was comfortable with.

Anyways, it was a neat little round.

[NYH1]

Do you guys think the 17 Remington Fireball will be around in factory form (I don't reload) for a long time to come?   Or do you think it will die off?   I'm not in the market for one right now.   I was looking through some old Remington catalogs at work and saw the 17 Remington listed in a few of them.   Now Remington doesn't chamber any rifles in it.   The catalogs aren't that old either.

[woodchukhntr]

I was looking at Remingtons web site and saw these two cartridges.   I don't know anything about either of them.   Remington has 2 loads for the 17 Rem. and only 1 load for the 17 Rem. Fireball.   Remington doesn't even chamber a rifle for the 17 Rem. but they chamber 8 rifles in the 17 Rem. Fireball.

Looking at the ballistics, the 17 Rem. looks better then the 17 Rem. Fireball.   Why is Remington pushing the 17 Rem. Fireball so hard?   Is it more accurate?

Think "new" and you will have the answer.  .17 Fireball = new, .17 Remington = old.  Since "new" is always better (for the corporate bottom line) than "old", "new" wins.  Only time will straighten things out.

[diggler1833]

New York Hunter,

I think that if one were to get a .17 FB it wouldn't hurt to stock up on ammo it liked, or purchase a bunch of brass for it.  Powder, primers, and bullets for the round will be around for quite a long time, but the brass may eventually become scarce.

[Graybeard]

There is really no way to answer such questions. It has been around already a really long time in wildcat form as the .17 Mach IV and finally gained legitimacy as the .17 Fireball. It seems to be real popular for now but who knows what the future holds. If you absolutely refuse to consider reloading then you might wanna but a huge supply of factory ammo if you buy a rifle. Really tho it's easy enough to load for I'd not let it make the decision for me. If they stop making ammo then just start reloading the brass you've kept after shooting it.

I have more than a life time supply of components for mine now. I doubt the barrel will last thru all the bullets and ammo I already have on hand for it so I'm not worried about its future.

[JonJon]

Curious,
What is the "report" like on the two calibers?
Similar to the 20 cal.'s in similar cartridges?
Smooth-calm & retaining visual contact thru the glass at impact?....I assume?

JonJon

[diggler1833]

Loud.  You still get the ballistic crack from going about 3.5 times (give or take a hundred FPS or so) the speed of sound at sea level.  You wouldn't be able to really tell much of a difference in report between that and one of the .20's.  Yes, you can spot your own hits, even at closer ranges, and especially with a heavier rifle.  Recoil is almost non-existant at worst, somewhere in the neighborhood of half that of a .204.

[Drilling Man]

  Back in the day, i bought a 700BDL in 17 Rem...  I guess i did just about everything wrong, cause i didn't break in the bbl., shot a couple thousand full power loads (25 grain Hornandy bullet) in it, and rarely cleaned it.

  Yes the wind blew it around some, but accuracy was never a problem, and mine even shot well when it wasn't given a regular scrubbing.  And, no the bbl wasn't shot out after 2 + thousand rounds.

  Then when i took a job, to clean out some dog packs for a city, i learned what it really would or wouldn't do.  I could clearly see it started running out of steam much past 150 yards, and proclaimed it an "under 200 yard gun" for beagle on up sized animals.  I never thought of it as a failure though, it just wasn't up to taking bigger animals at longer ranges.

  I also owned several CF 22's and used them too, but the BEST long range kill-em dead dog catcher was my .243 Win.  All that "testing" is what made me decide to have P.O. Ackley build me a 240 Wby. on a Rem. 700 action for my "kill those coyotes/wolves as far away as you can see them" rifle.

  DM

[JonJon]

Diggler - Drilling Man,

Enjoyed the info...
Interesting and Thanks,

JonJon