Author Topic: 17 HMR in Revolvers (Read 1175 times)

v-man · « **on:** February 11, 2005, 01:43:11 PM »

I've read of some case setback/headspace issues with tapered or bottleneck cartridges in revolvers. Does anyone have any first hand experience or reliable input on the matter that could help me if I were considering such a purchase.

WNY_Whitetailer · « **Reply #1 on:** February 14, 2005, 07:46:21 AM »

Hmmm...Interesting question...I saw a Taurus 17hmr revolver on sale for low $200's at Gander Mtn...I was wondering how it shot. Hopefully someone will have an answer to your question.

Kevin A. · « **Reply #2 on:** February 16, 2005, 10:38:32 AM »

I have single six 17 HMR it functions quite well.Did see an old 22 S$W jet at the pawn shop the other day, far as I know this was the revolver to suffer the problems you suggested.Many 22 mag shooters out there and you never here of setbacks freezing the cylinder.
Kevin

unspellable · « **Reply #3 on:** February 17, 2005, 02:32:51 AM »

I have a six inch Taurus Tracker in 17 HMR. No problems with setback. Velocity is about 1975 fps, not what you'd get out of a rifle but you can't expect that out of a revolver.

I also have a Smith & Wesson in 357-44 B&D and no setback problems.

The Smith & Wesson 22 Jet was notorious for setback. Largely because the idea was inspired by the 224 Harvey K-chuck wildcat, but as always when the factories adopt a wildcat they have to fix what ain't broke. The 224 harvey K-chuck was based on the 22 Hornet case with straight sides aside from the shoulder. Remington & Smith & Wesson necked down the 357 Mag case with a vey long tapering shoulder and all the problems were born! The case barely even has sides, the shoulder is almost as long as the case.

With any bottled necked cartridge in a revolver you should be careful to have dry chambers when shooting. Oil o nthe chamber walls will aggrevate the setback problem.

Old Griz · « **Reply #4 on:** March 26, 2005, 09:16:01 PM »

:cb2: Please, please don't take this the wrong way. I am not trying to insult anyone, or "flame" them at all. I am really, truly having a hard time figuring out this 17 HMR and 17 M2 craze.

This ammo ain't cheap. You can buy a brick of .22LR for about the same price of one box of .17500 v. 50. So it's not for general plinking or killing cans.

Also, for the price of the .17s, I could be shooting 9mm, or .38s in my handgun or .38s in my rifle with money to spare. And for about $1 more, .357s. Any of these are bigger, more effective bullets. Sorry, I wouldn't use a 17-gr bullet on anything larger than a rodent. (I knowsomeone is gonna say they kill coyotes, deer, and black bear with 'em all the time. Some kill coyotes with rubber band guns, but that's another story.)

Enlighten this tired old brain. Please tell my what the excitement is all about. Again, don't get me wrong. I'm glad the industry is selling more guns, and people are enjoying it. I just don't understand this one. Yet.

(And please don't say simply because people enjoy it. That doesn't tell me anything. That's like saying August 2, 1776 was an important date in American history and not explaining why?)

Flash · « **Reply #5 on:** March 27, 2005, 03:27:33 AM »

Well, I thought the same thing Griz until I bought a 17 HMR barrel for my Contender Carbine. I shot a crow at around 100 yards or so and vaporized it with a 17 grain bullet and aimed right on it. I can hear a 22 rimfire bullet hit the backstop at my shooting range and it's trajectory is 3 1/2". Now, the 204 ruger is one I struggle with.