Author Topic: New Ruger .17HMR/.17M2 Convertible announced! (Read 1679 times)

Uncle Howie · « **on:** November 11, 2004, 03:57:36 PM »

Check it out, Ruger appears to be listening! :toast:

.17HMR/.17M2 Convertible announced!

Got... to get... to my dealer... :cb2:

44 Man · « **Reply #1 on:** November 13, 2004, 06:24:03 AM »

Ruger seems much more responsive to the market since Bill has been gone. This is one I need to have!!!! 44 Man

Greeenriver · « **Reply #2 on:** November 14, 2004, 04:10:07 PM »

I want the Ruger but I want it in a 4&5/8 fixed sight version. The same as the "Baby Vac" in 32H&R that I use for Cowboy Action Shooting. Hopefuly, it will be offered later.

I can only hope.

Greeenriver(Waiting......................Still waiting........................Any time now....................Well?

)

unspellable · « **Reply #3 on:** November 18, 2004, 01:41:10 AM »

Am I missing something here or what? I don't see the point of this convertible as it doesn't sound like the 17 MII is going to sell much cheaper than the 17 HMR. Both of these cartridges are expensive compared to the 22 rimfires beacuse of the more complex bullet.

Doc T · « **Reply #4 on:** November 19, 2004, 05:29:03 AM »

Don't see the need for it myself. I usually limit my shots to 40yds (usually MUCH less) with my Single Six. At that range, the .22 bullets are fine. The 17s were made for targets way out there. I guess if you were going to put a scope on the Single Six you could make use of its real potential.

DennisB · « **Reply #5 on:** November 28, 2004, 10:32:10 AM »

I dunno if I NEED one, but sign me up anyway.

coldmold · « **Reply #6 on:** December 25, 2004, 02:10:18 PM »

dI just got a nice christmas bonus so I think one is in my future. Will go nice with the nef sporster with three barrels coldmold

Spyro Andes · « **Reply #7 on:** January 06, 2005, 07:05:40 PM »

Quote from: Doc T

Don't see the need for it myself. I usually limit my shots to 40yds (usually MUCH less) with my Single Six. At that range, the .22 bullets are fine. The 17s were made for targets way out there. I guess if you were going to put a scope on the Single Six you could make use of its real potential.

Ding Ding Ding... We have a winner!

Doc,

I agree with you. With the 22lr/22mag, it made sense because 22lr is dirt cheap and 22mag is expensive comparitively.

However, with the 17m2 & 17hmr, they are just about the same price and the recoil of the 17hmr isn't so harsh that I want lighter recoil. Why would you use the 17m2 cylinder?

Don't get me wrong, I probably own 3 dozen various rimfire pistols and I can justify them all. I love my Ruger Single Six Hunter in 17hmr but I just don't see the advantage of having a 17m2 cylinder for it.

But heck, I could use a shorty Single Six in 17m2 for something

Uncle Howie · « **Reply #8 on:** January 07, 2005, 05:52:06 PM »

I'm looking at this one for small game hunting, and it will be scoped.

My desire for the .17M2 cylinder is to keep meat damage to a minimum, while keeping the more powerful .17HMR cylinder available for varminting.

I'm a "head shooter" for edible small game. With the .17HMR, there seems to be no problem with broadside headshots. However, when I've taken headshots where the squirrel is "quartering toward" me, I've taken out a couple of shoulders- through the head, and off with the shoulder! :cry:

I'm hoping the slightly slower .17M2 will keep this to a minimum.

Admittedly, the .22LR/.22WMR Convertible Hunter would do much the same thing, with cheaper plinking ammo. I've got lots of .22s in various guises, and am looking for a dedicated small game hunting revolver. As it stands, I REALLY like the flat shooting characteristics of the .17s. Aim and squeeze, w/o giving too much though to just how far away that squirrel head is...

bgjohn · « **Reply #9 on:** January 08, 2005, 01:58:49 AM »

They are overpriced. I'll pass and keep my 22.
JM

Doc T · « **Reply #10 on:** January 19, 2005, 04:23:24 AM »

See my post dated Nov. 19 above. Looks like I'll have to eat my words. Since that time I have gotten a replacement barrel for my 10/22 and have been shooting the short 17 quite a bit. I am now a true convert. I have just got to have a handgun in 17 HM2. I still am not a big fan of the HMR though. I am really thinking about Ruger's MKIII in 17HM2.

BlkHawk73 · « **Reply #11 on:** January 20, 2005, 02:37:46 PM »

Quote from: Doc T

I am really thinking about Ruger's MKIII in 17HM2.

Better hold that thought for a bit as the MKIII.17M2 has been indefinately pulled from any production due to changes required from the cartridges characteristics upon firing. It's not just a simple bbl swap. The pressure curve is vastly different than that of the .22lr and therefore a rethink was required.