Author Topic: 17 HMR vs 17Mach2  (Read 944 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline goodtime7

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 20
  • Gender: Male
17 HMR vs 17Mach2
« on: January 10, 2010, 03:30:40 PM »
For those of you that have one of these calibers, I am curious how you chose between the two?  I have a CZ rifle in 17 HMR that is really accurate, and I thought I would get a contender barrel in the same caliber.  However, the more I have thought about it, I'm not sure I really need the extra muzzle blast, $$/round, etc of the 17 HMR.   thoughts??

Offline spinafish

  • Trade Count: (24)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1161
  • Gender: Male
Re: 17 HMR vs 17Mach2
« Reply #1 on: January 11, 2010, 03:28:32 AM »
I believe if I were going to hunt edible game with the T\C, I would choose the Mach2 version..but for crows and such..I think the 17 HMR's longer reach would be the ticket.I don't know what the $ difference in ammo is..would have to research that aspect.
the most heartwreching words any man will ever hear
"depart from me, I never knew you"  Jesus
We may ignore, but we can nowhere evade the presence of God. The world is crowded with Him. He walks everywhere incognito.” C.S. Lewis

Offline G Curtis

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 40
Re: 17 HMR vs 17Mach2
« Reply #2 on: January 11, 2010, 05:14:23 AM »
For best $ per shot the Mach II was my choice. I find bricks (500) of ammo for $40.00 each in the stores and at gun shows.

Offline scratcherky

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (7)
  • Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 350
Re: 17 HMR vs 17Mach2
« Reply #3 on: January 11, 2010, 05:37:29 AM »
I have both in rifles and prefer the 17HM2.
Don & man's best friend
Still looking at the green side of sod

Offline Doc T

  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 416
Re: 17 HMR vs 17Mach2
« Reply #4 on: January 11, 2010, 06:36:55 AM »
     For small game, the Mach 2 is the way to go.  It is the perfect squirrel rifle.  What ever you would shoot with the 22lr can be shot with the Mach 2 but at twice the range.  A body shot on a squirrel at normal ranges (35 yds) will not tear them up unless you hit the spine, just like a 22lr HP.  If you aren't going to eat what you shoot, the HMR is the hands down choice.  I have several rifles in both calibers.

     Doc T

Offline chiefs50

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 134
  • Gender: Male
Re: 17 HMR vs 17Mach2
« Reply #5 on: January 11, 2010, 07:58:13 AM »
I have the HM2 Super 14 and would recommend it over the HMR unless you are going to use it for varmint hunting - in which case the HMR would be preferrable.  My HM2 is extremely accurate and doesn't cost much to feed.  Ammo for the HMR can be a little spendy.

Mike
I appreciate those who refrain from inserting their partisan political beliefs here.

CSM (Ret.), U.S. ArmyI Corps Area, RVN 65/66

Offline David D.

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 680
  • Gender: Male
Re: 17 HMR vs 17Mach2
« Reply #6 on: January 11, 2010, 01:53:31 PM »
I love my 17MACH2, extremely accurate. Purchased for hunting tree rats and small game and target. I did kill a gray fox with it. Shot at about 70yds it ran about 30 yds before dropping. But comparing it to the 17HMR is like comparing the 22LR to the 22Magnum.
Dave D.

Offline goodtime7

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 20
  • Gender: Male
Re: 17 HMR vs 17Mach2
« Reply #7 on: January 11, 2010, 02:33:56 PM »
Thanks for all the replies.  I appreciate the practical advice from those with experience with both of these calibers.   Leaning toward the Mach2, since this would be primary a small game proposition.

Offline S.S.

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2840
Re: 17 HMR vs 17Mach2
« Reply #8 on: January 16, 2010, 05:23:00 PM »
There is really not much of a comparison between the two cartridges
except the bullet diameter. Kind of like putting a .30-30 up against
a 300 win mag. As for choosing between the two, I have both and the
17 HMR rarely leaves the safe. The hm2 is still pretty explosive
on small game. A head shot on a squirrel normally leaves a .17
cal hole on one side, an empty head and tattered fur on the other.
I know this is going to draw fire but I have to say it. If ammo prices were comparable,
the 17 hm2 would make the .22LR obsolete. I hope it doesn't because
I have "Several" .22LR firearms. But, to me the HM2 is simply a better round.
Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit
"A wise man does not pee against the wind".

Offline Oldshooter

  • GBO subscriber and supporter
  • Moderators
  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6426
Re: 17 HMR vs 17Mach2
« Reply #9 on: January 16, 2010, 06:37:50 PM »
I dont have both but I do like the Mach 2,  As said above, it would  replace the 22 lr "if" ammo price was comparable. I wanted a hmr but had an extra 10-22 and converted it to mach 2. My old tired eyes dont like small game past 100 yards anyway, and the Mach 2 will do what I need at that range and a little farther, I have killed crows at 130 with it. 
“Owning a handgun doesn’t make you armed any more than owning a guitar makes you a musician.”

"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."

Offline Ladobe

  • Trade Count: (91)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3193
Re: 17 HMR vs 17Mach2
« Reply #10 on: January 16, 2010, 06:43:39 PM »
I have 3 of each... 2 rifles of each and a 14" Contender barrel for each of them.   Long experience hunting with both of them has proven over and over that they both have their place for specific uses.   So I can't see ever being without both of them.   FWIW, the HMR retired all of my 22MAG's when it came out, and the HM2 retired all of my 22LR rimfires soon after it came out.
Evolution at work. Over two million years ago the genus Homo had small cranial capacity and thick skin to protect them from their environment. One species has evolved into obese cranial fatheads with thin skin in comparison that whines about anything and everything as their shield against their environment. Meus

Offline David D.

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 680
  • Gender: Male
Re: 17 HMR vs 17Mach2
« Reply #11 on: January 17, 2010, 01:19:37 AM »
I love the 17MACH2 and shoot a 14" full bull barrel. I have plans on another MACH2, 11" tapered MGM. As far as the 22L.R. ever going obsolete I don't think so!!!! ;D Look at the ole 30-30Win, with all the cartridges there are in 30cal. that will knock it in the dust its still here and going strong!!! I'd bet the 22L.R. is here to stay no matter what!!!!
Dave D.

Offline jlwilliams

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1321
Re: 17 HMR vs 17Mach2
« Reply #12 on: January 17, 2010, 02:09:30 AM »
  I have to agree about the 17's being in many cases better than the 22's.  I love my 22lr guns, and I love the economics of feeding them.  22lr is so cheap because of history, and it could easily have been a different bore size that caught on.  Had the 17 bottle necked rimfires been devised long ago they may have won the race.  22lr has the advantage of a slower than the speed of sound option, which makes for much less 'CRACK", which is a nice option to have sometimes.

  I just finally bought into my first 17 rimfire.  I went 17hmr because I didn't see much 17m2 ammo on the shelves around here, and of course it's 'magnum'.  If the M2 starts being on the shelves, I'll get one.  It took me a long time and much self struggling to make the big step of the small bullet.  I knew I wanted one as soon as I saw the 17 Aguilla at SHOT back in the mid or late '90s.  I thought "Great idea!".  It just never caught on, never making it to store shelves.  There were some of the mail order ammo suppliers with it but it just never caught on.  Made me think of those guys who had bought into the 5mm rimfire magnum back in the early '70s.  Those guns were useless untill the ammo became available (again) just recently.  The whole thing just underlined the addage that you don't buy a round that's too young to buy itself a beer.  New whizz bang rounds come and go.  Look at the book "Cartridges of the World" and see the rimfires and centerfires that just died off.  There were 40+ rimfire cartridges at the turn of the last century, and 22 short, long and long rifle by the end of WWII.  Anyway;the new breed of 17 rimfires seems to be ragingly popular and I hope that translates to 'here to stay'.  22 magnum caught on, and I think we're better off with it than without it.  Some guys don't want to reload, and want to shoot small stuff.  Rimfire is our friend.  Save the reloading for the 45 and the high power rifles.

  The 17 really has a lot to offer.  22 cal bullets are not really powerful medicine in the velocity that you get from 22lr.  It's all about shot placement.  I know I'm not the only one here who has killed plenty of stuff with a 22 (far from alone on that charge ;D) but we all know it was because we hit it where it counted.  None of those kills wouldn't have happened withh a little less bullet.  The flatter trajectory and therefor easier placement makes for more shots that count.  That's the kicker.  Better accuracy= more hits.  Simple math.  Now we have two options in widely available 17's.  HMRs and M2s, and I apreciate those of you with both who are pointing us to the right one for our needs.

  Knowing myself as I do; now that I have broken into the 17 rimfires, I'm going to be getting more....

Offline skb2706

  • Trade Count: (5)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1428
Re: 17 HMR vs 17Mach2
« Reply #13 on: January 18, 2010, 08:22:13 AM »
I just bought my first 17 rimfire its a HMR from a fella right here on the site. Can't wait to shoot it. Carbine length with no sights.

Offline doc-and

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 438
Re: 17 HMR vs 17Mach2
« Reply #14 on: January 23, 2010, 12:36:58 AM »
Get em both, you'll love them

17HMR Now wears a Weaver 6-24scope (need to update photo file ;D)


17Mach II with Weaver KT15 scope


docand 8)