.22 Mag vs .17 Mag...As promised! Ballistic Charts!

[stuporman]

As promised!
I guess I would make a bad politician.

http://www.itsabouttime-la.com/22_vs_17.htm

Note a few things right off...
Look at the windage drift potential @ 5mph crosswind.
This isnt charted, but its highlighted on the tables.
The .22 mag has twice the deviation of the .17!

DEFINITELY a flatter trajectory on the .17, .32" peak vs 1.2" peak.

Both rounds have the same "slap" at 100 yards, but the .22 mag kicks the .17s butt up close.

They both seem to lose velocity at the same rate.  The "spitzer" style bullet of the .17 is more aerodynamic than the JHP .22 mag, but has less inertia to push it along.

My 2 cents...
 :shock:
I still like the .223.  And, the bullets are 1/3 the price.

[KN]

yeah the wind drift difference is caused by the longer travel time of the 22 mag. I just posted about shooting my 17 in the wind up on the TC pistol forum. Wasn't as bad as I thought it would be.   KN

[jh45gun]

Another great job Stuporman!! could you do a comparison using the CCI maxi mag+V (30 gr) and the Remington premier V Max rounds VS the 17 these 22 mag rounds have more velocity and lighter bullets around 30 and 33 grains respectfully  and the Remington has a polimar tipped bullet like the hornady 17 round. these rounds might be a bit closer to the 17. Jim

[stuporman]

I seem to be running out of hosting space...

I will have to delete some of the older ballistic tables.

When yaull see one you like/need, you should copy it to your HD.

Never know when I might have to consolidate space!

.17 seems to be a nice round.  I just wish the ammo wasnt so frikin expensive.  I saw a Savage .17 bolt action for $170, think I could get it cheaper if I looked.

 :shock:

[jh45gun]

Stuporman, I thank you for what you already have done and I have copied the info down you already have posted. I feel that the 2 rounds I have asked about the CCI Maxi V and the Remington Premier V Max would be closer ballistically to the 17 than the 40 grainers. I talked to the guy who owns the local gunshop today  and he said he tried the Maxi V and it shot 5" higher than the 40 grain bullets he was shooting. So I think these would make a interesting comparison. Jim

[redial]

Hey Stuporman,

I spent the weekend traipsing around muddy fields with onna them $170 Savages, and lemme tell ya what - a better bargain you'd be hard pressed to find.  Furthermore, the Hornady load EXPLODES gophers. I was amazed! Never seen a rimfire flip 'em airborne trailing guts. No real trick hitting them either since the round shoots so flat out to 150 or so and I can't hold well enough to hit them past that anyway.

For high-volume shooting, it's pretty spendy ammo, but for walk & stalk outings of 50 rounds a day at most, man you can't beat it.

Redial

[stuporman]

thanks for the feedback on the savage.  Im gonna get one.

 :shock:

[DannoBoone]

Sounds like the gun manufacturers are creating more and more of a need
for ammo much faster than the ammo manufacturers can keep up with it.
One of the guys over at rimfirecentral who knows a "Wheel" at CCI says
he was told that CCI and Hornady together have a back-order of no less
than 65 MILLION rounds! Complicating matters is that too many of us are
seeing the shortage, and attempting to buy ammo by the brick to bring our
personal supply up. At present rates of more 17 caliber guns being bought
and more ammo being ordered, that back-order could get a LOT worse
before getting better. And the prices will remain high until a few months
after there are no longer back orders.

[stuporman]

This 17 ammo shortage reminds me of the gas shortage in the 70s my dad tells me about.

Seems somebody overestimated supply, and underestimated demand somewhere...and then gas companies were not letting go of their reserves and buying up all the barrels of oil they could and sitting on them.

Kinda like the 17 ammo thing!
lol
 :-D

[DannoBoone]

stuporman - Good analogy, at least on the theory.

The demand of the 17hmr rounds has gone far beyond Hornady's wildest
dreams, that's true.

A little off topic on the oil shortage of the '70's, BUT.......My parents were
visiting my unlcle in San Diego during that "oil shortage". At first, they
about cancelled because of the horendous shortages and lines to gas
stations. But my uncle assured them that they could get gas easily as long
as they got it during "slow" times of the day. During their visit, he took
them to the ocean to view the oil tankers, of all things. On the horizon of
the ocean, for as far as they could see, there were oil tankers lined up,
one right after the other. Their local news media tried to find out why they
were just sitting out there, but could get no answers -- the national news
media didn't seem interested in the story. Whether it was the government
or the oil comanies pulling that stunt, I don't believe it was ever explained,
or even known, to the general public.

[ReedG]

I think the chart shown by Stuporman, and other promotional info I've seen, is more advertising hype than accuracy. The figures below, taken from the Remington site (http://www.remington.com/ammo/ballistics/rimfire/22winmbal.htm) and hard to read here, but go to the site, shows that the .22 Mag. with the 33-gr. V-Max bullet has much higher energy figures than the 17HMR. The 17-gr. bullet is 50% lighter and only going 20% faster.
 
.22 Win. Mag.         Velocity (ft./sec.)          Energy (ft.-lbs.)
Cartridge Type Muzzle 50 yds. 100 yds. Muzzle 50 yds. 100 yds.
33-gr. V-Max™   2000  1730    1495       293       219       164
40-gr. JHP          1910  1610    1350       324       230       162
40-gr. PSP         1910  1600    1340       324       230       162

[KN]

From my personal experience STUPORMANs chart is pretty much right on the money. At 50,75, and 100 meters there was VERY little rise and fall to the 17 HMR. So little that I didnt even measure it.  KN

[stuporman]

ReedG,

Mass and velocity do dictate energy of a projectile.
However,
Velocity is squared and mass is not.

Ke=MxV(squared)

the 20% increase in velocity does more than make up for 50% mass reduction.   At least on paper...
the .45 at point blank range and the 9mm have about the same energy levels.  I would not like to be shot, but if I had my choice...the 9mm does less damage.

 :shock:

[corey]

stuporman could you please post a link that works I would like to see those tables. thanks

[stuporman]

I have to delete my published spreadsheets regularly, as I do not have much webspace.

I can repost these for a while...give me a minute!

 :shock:

http://www.itsabouttime-la.com/22_vs_17.htm