-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
.22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
- Thread starter i5939
- Start date
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
I think it depends on what kind of conditions you're shooting in. I live in West Texas, and we get LOTS of gusting wind. When the wind is gusting and blowing hard (which it usually does here), the .17 HMR doesn't hold a candle to the .22 WMR. In my humble opinion, sometimes in bad wind, the .22 LR will outshoot the .17 HMR. So I think it depends on what you want to do with it, and what kind of wind conditions you're talking about. That little bullet might be moving fast, but not fast enough to make up for how bad the gusts push that light little bullet.
I think it depends on what kind of conditions you're shooting in. I live in West Texas, and we get LOTS of gusting wind. When the wind is gusting and blowing hard (which it usually does here), the .17 HMR doesn't hold a candle to the .22 WMR. In my humble opinion, sometimes in bad wind, the .22 LR will outshoot the .17 HMR. So I think it depends on what you want to do with it, and what kind of wind conditions you're talking about. That little bullet might be moving fast, but not fast enough to make up for how bad the gusts push that light little bullet.
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
On smaller game under 150yd the .17. If you look at the federal ballistics for wind and drop the .17 beats the 22 wmr hands down, even the 50gr 22 wmr has more wind drift than the .17 at 150 yards.
The wind is very close on the 50gr 22wrm to the .17hmr (9"/10") but the drop on the 50gr 22 wmr then is 3x more at 150 yards with a 50yd zero (3.5"/12"). If you go to a 30gr 22 wmr the drop is still twice as much at 150 yards (3.5"/7")and the wind drift is worse with the 22 wmr (9"/15"). That said I'd probably rather have a 30/40gr bullets hitting power and mass and deal with the extra drift and drop.
So unless the ballistics charts are wrong (winchester and remington show similar comparisons) the 17 has significant advantage trajectory wise in both wind and drop to 150 yards.
That said, for anything larger than a prairie dog I'd rather have the heavier bullet of the 22 wmr. Both in a good gun are accurate enough to make hits to 150 yards on critters. Ammo costs are similar.
Frankly for the ammo cost, unless it's come down last I checked a good box of either was $12-15, I'd rather have a 223 that can be reloaded cheaply and will spank either of them in ballistics and be effective on much larger game at much longer ranges. A good 22LR will crush critters to 100 yards, spending that much money for ammo to get another 50-75 yards of effective range is a waste to me. Better off stepping up to a small centerfire that can be reloaded cheaply that will give much more range and versatility.
On smaller game under 150yd the .17. If you look at the federal ballistics for wind and drop the .17 beats the 22 wmr hands down, even the 50gr 22 wmr has more wind drift than the .17 at 150 yards.
The wind is very close on the 50gr 22wrm to the .17hmr (9"/10") but the drop on the 50gr 22 wmr then is 3x more at 150 yards with a 50yd zero (3.5"/12"). If you go to a 30gr 22 wmr the drop is still twice as much at 150 yards (3.5"/7")and the wind drift is worse with the 22 wmr (9"/15"). That said I'd probably rather have a 30/40gr bullets hitting power and mass and deal with the extra drift and drop.
So unless the ballistics charts are wrong (winchester and remington show similar comparisons) the 17 has significant advantage trajectory wise in both wind and drop to 150 yards.
That said, for anything larger than a prairie dog I'd rather have the heavier bullet of the 22 wmr. Both in a good gun are accurate enough to make hits to 150 yards on critters. Ammo costs are similar.
Frankly for the ammo cost, unless it's come down last I checked a good box of either was $12-15, I'd rather have a 223 that can be reloaded cheaply and will spank either of them in ballistics and be effective on much larger game at much longer ranges. A good 22LR will crush critters to 100 yards, spending that much money for ammo to get another 50-75 yards of effective range is a waste to me. Better off stepping up to a small centerfire that can be reloaded cheaply that will give much more range and versatility.
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ToddM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">On smaller game under 150yd the .17. If you look at the federal ballistics for wind and drop the .17 beats the 22 wmr hands down, even the 50gr 22 wmr has more wind drift than the .17 at 150 yards.
The wind is very close on the 50gr 22wrm to the .17hmr (9"/10") but the drop on the 50gr 22 wmr then is 3x more at 150 yards with a 50yd zero (3.5"/12"). If you go to a 30gr 22 wmr the drop is still twice as much at 150 yards (3.5"/7")and the wind drift is worse with the 22 wmr (9"/15"). That said I'd probably rather have a 30/40gr bullets hitting power and mass and deal with the extra drift and drop.
So unless the ballistics charts are wrong (winchester and remington show similar comparisons) the 17 has significant advantage trajectory wise in both wind and drop to 150 yards.
That said, for anything larger than a prairie dog I'd rather have the heavier bullet of the 22 wmr. Both in a good gun are accurate enough to make hits to 150 yards on critters. Ammo costs are similar.
Frankly for the ammo cost, unless it's come down last I checked a good box of either was $12-15, I'd rather have a 223 that can be reloaded cheaply and will spank either of them in ballistics and be effective on much larger game at much longer ranges. A good 22LR will crush critters to 100 yards, spending that much money for ammo to get another 50-75 yards of effective range is a waste to me. Better off stepping up to a small centerfire that can be reloaded cheaply that will give much more range and versatility.
</div></div>
I'll retract my previous statement. I had never actually run the numbers in a ballistics program. I just did and it backs exactly what you said. I guess it just "felt" like the .22 WMR didn't quite get blown as much with the gusts. Either way, the ballistics don't lie, and .17 HMR it is.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ToddM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">On smaller game under 150yd the .17. If you look at the federal ballistics for wind and drop the .17 beats the 22 wmr hands down, even the 50gr 22 wmr has more wind drift than the .17 at 150 yards.
The wind is very close on the 50gr 22wrm to the .17hmr (9"/10") but the drop on the 50gr 22 wmr then is 3x more at 150 yards with a 50yd zero (3.5"/12"). If you go to a 30gr 22 wmr the drop is still twice as much at 150 yards (3.5"/7")and the wind drift is worse with the 22 wmr (9"/15"). That said I'd probably rather have a 30/40gr bullets hitting power and mass and deal with the extra drift and drop.
So unless the ballistics charts are wrong (winchester and remington show similar comparisons) the 17 has significant advantage trajectory wise in both wind and drop to 150 yards.
That said, for anything larger than a prairie dog I'd rather have the heavier bullet of the 22 wmr. Both in a good gun are accurate enough to make hits to 150 yards on critters. Ammo costs are similar.
Frankly for the ammo cost, unless it's come down last I checked a good box of either was $12-15, I'd rather have a 223 that can be reloaded cheaply and will spank either of them in ballistics and be effective on much larger game at much longer ranges. A good 22LR will crush critters to 100 yards, spending that much money for ammo to get another 50-75 yards of effective range is a waste to me. Better off stepping up to a small centerfire that can be reloaded cheaply that will give much more range and versatility.
</div></div>
I'll retract my previous statement. I had never actually run the numbers in a ballistics program. I just did and it backs exactly what you said. I guess it just "felt" like the .22 WMR didn't quite get blown as much with the gusts. Either way, the ballistics don't lie, and .17 HMR it is.
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
I like the 22 mag because its just got more umph when it hits something within a 150 yards
I like the 22 mag because its just got more umph when it hits something within a 150 yards
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
I had the Savage 93 .22 WMR. Everyone has their own preferance, but I love my .17 HMR a LOT more. It's my most favorite caliber. Just one man's opinion.
I had the Savage 93 .22 WMR. Everyone has their own preferance, but I love my .17 HMR a LOT more. It's my most favorite caliber. Just one man's opinion.
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: msuhunter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I like the 22 mag because its just got more umph when it hits something within a 150 yards </div></div>
Wrong.
I'll show Hornady's terminal ballistics (17 HMR 17 grain V-Max v 20 WMR 30 grain V-Max)
They are virtually identical at 100 yards - the 17 has 136 ft/lbs while the 22 WMR has 134 ft/lbs. At 200 yards the 17 has 72 ft/lbs while the 22 WMR has 67 ft/lbs.
The 17 HMR carries better terminal ballistics until they both reach over 400 yards, well out of their effective ranges.
The 17 is a superior round for any application than a 22 WMR or LR in every case. It is more accurate for paper punching, and has more power for hunting.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: msuhunter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I like the 22 mag because its just got more umph when it hits something within a 150 yards </div></div>
Wrong.
I'll show Hornady's terminal ballistics (17 HMR 17 grain V-Max v 20 WMR 30 grain V-Max)
They are virtually identical at 100 yards - the 17 has 136 ft/lbs while the 22 WMR has 134 ft/lbs. At 200 yards the 17 has 72 ft/lbs while the 22 WMR has 67 ft/lbs.
The 17 HMR carries better terminal ballistics until they both reach over 400 yards, well out of their effective ranges.
The 17 is a superior round for any application than a 22 WMR or LR in every case. It is more accurate for paper punching, and has more power for hunting.
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
^It's high velocity makes it more accurate too. I always say I could shoot at 100 yards with it during a freakin hurricane. As far as 200 yards, It has to be fairly calm, but I have put 10 rounds inside 2.24", and 25 rounds inside 4" with this rifle. Love it.
^It's high velocity makes it more accurate too. I always say I could shoot at 100 yards with it during a freakin hurricane. As far as 200 yards, It has to be fairly calm, but I have put 10 rounds inside 2.24", and 25 rounds inside 4" with this rifle. Love it.
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
Actually that's incorrect and a common misconception/problem in the method they use to compute ft/lbs and how it related to actual killing/stopping power when tissue/bone is encountered. At best the ft/lbs numbers make very broad generalizations or are good to compare very similar loads in the same bullet weight/caliber to evaluate power. They are only used because there's no better option that's easy to calculate for a standard "power" number to put in a catalog.
More bullet mass does more tissue damage, has better penetration, especially when bone is encountered. Ask any archery hunter that hunts bear if they'd rather have a 500 grain arrow doing 250 fps or a 250 grain arrow doing 400 fps they will take the heavier arrow every time.
As another example, a 22wmr in a 30gr round has 322 ft/lbs at the muzzle. A 9mm 147gr slug has very similar numbers (326). Now those numbers make them look identical, and I don't want to be shot with either, but there's no WAY a 30gr 22wmr round is doing as much tissue damage and penetrating to the level that a 147gr 9mm round is a few feet in front of the muzzle.
Actually that's incorrect and a common misconception/problem in the method they use to compute ft/lbs and how it related to actual killing/stopping power when tissue/bone is encountered. At best the ft/lbs numbers make very broad generalizations or are good to compare very similar loads in the same bullet weight/caliber to evaluate power. They are only used because there's no better option that's easy to calculate for a standard "power" number to put in a catalog.
More bullet mass does more tissue damage, has better penetration, especially when bone is encountered. Ask any archery hunter that hunts bear if they'd rather have a 500 grain arrow doing 250 fps or a 250 grain arrow doing 400 fps they will take the heavier arrow every time.
As another example, a 22wmr in a 30gr round has 322 ft/lbs at the muzzle. A 9mm 147gr slug has very similar numbers (326). Now those numbers make them look identical, and I don't want to be shot with either, but there's no WAY a 30gr 22wmr round is doing as much tissue damage and penetrating to the level that a 147gr 9mm round is a few feet in front of the muzzle.
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
Todd and a couple others make good points. I read in another thread similar that the .17 was not a good round to use for turkey that the .22wmr was better (.17 vs .22wmr for turkey hunting). The reasoning if I remember correctly was bullet mass. The 17 would mushroom too early or com apart by the feathers where the 22wmr went through them to penetrate deeper. I think it was on here I read this. HTH
Todd and a couple others make good points. I read in another thread similar that the .17 was not a good round to use for turkey that the .22wmr was better (.17 vs .22wmr for turkey hunting). The reasoning if I remember correctly was bullet mass. The 17 would mushroom too early or com apart by the feathers where the 22wmr went through them to penetrate deeper. I think it was on here I read this. HTH
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
Actually, I only paper punch with my .17 HMR. If you're looking to go turkey hunting then yes, I would choose the .22 WMR. I used to use hollow points in mine that would shred a filled soda can into pieces at 150 yards. I know those feathers are thick, but it would do the job.
Actually, I only paper punch with my .17 HMR. If you're looking to go turkey hunting then yes, I would choose the .22 WMR. I used to use hollow points in mine that would shred a filled soda can into pieces at 150 yards. I know those feathers are thick, but it would do the job.
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
eleaf, the ballistics is why I decided to buy a 17HMR and have thoroughly enjoyed having it because it is extremely accurate. However in my experiences the 22 mag seems to pack more punch, but you are right the 17 has the 22 mag beat on paper
eleaf, the ballistics is why I decided to buy a 17HMR and have thoroughly enjoyed having it because it is extremely accurate. However in my experiences the 22 mag seems to pack more punch, but you are right the 17 has the 22 mag beat on paper
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SmallBoreSniper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Actually, I only paper punch with my .17 HMR. If you're looking to go turkey hunting then yes, I would choose the .22 WMR. I used to use hollow points in mine that would shred a filled soda can into pieces at 150 yards. I know those feathers are thick, but it would do the job. </div></div>
For turkey use a shotgun.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SmallBoreSniper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Actually, I only paper punch with my .17 HMR. If you're looking to go turkey hunting then yes, I would choose the .22 WMR. I used to use hollow points in mine that would shred a filled soda can into pieces at 150 yards. I know those feathers are thick, but it would do the job. </div></div>
For turkey use a shotgun.
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
The turkey actually brings up another good point and that's bullet design and velocity and how they interact as well. A thin jacket bullet going very fast tends to expand very rapidly and fragment with little penetration.
Now for a prairie dog or rabbit that's great, we all love to see them explode. But when that same round gets to a heavier animal say a coyote it starts expanding too early and may not be as effective. It's the same reason a bullet that is devastating on say antelope is not the ideal bullet to use on elk.
I would guess most of the 17 bullets are made to expand quickly and explosively to be used on small very light skinned game and expand very quickly. If there is a heavy bonded type bullet choice for the 17 it may do better.
The turkey actually brings up another good point and that's bullet design and velocity and how they interact as well. A thin jacket bullet going very fast tends to expand very rapidly and fragment with little penetration.
Now for a prairie dog or rabbit that's great, we all love to see them explode. But when that same round gets to a heavier animal say a coyote it starts expanding too early and may not be as effective. It's the same reason a bullet that is devastating on say antelope is not the ideal bullet to use on elk.
I would guess most of the 17 bullets are made to expand quickly and explosively to be used on small very light skinned game and expand very quickly. If there is a heavy bonded type bullet choice for the 17 it may do better.
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eleaf</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SmallBoreSniper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Actually, I only paper punch with my .17 HMR. If you're looking to go turkey hunting then yes, I would choose the .22 WMR. I used to use hollow points in mine that would shred a filled soda can into pieces at 150 yards. I know those feathers are thick, but it would do the job. </div></div>
For turkey use a shotgun. </div></div>
Yup. You have to use slugs though if I'm not mistaken.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eleaf</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SmallBoreSniper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Actually, I only paper punch with my .17 HMR. If you're looking to go turkey hunting then yes, I would choose the .22 WMR. I used to use hollow points in mine that would shred a filled soda can into pieces at 150 yards. I know those feathers are thick, but it would do the job. </div></div>
For turkey use a shotgun. </div></div>
Yup. You have to use slugs though if I'm not mistaken.
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
Nope, that's deer, in some states. A slug would make turkey pate.
1911fan
Nope, that's deer, in some states. A slug would make turkey pate.
1911fan
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
Cool. I'm not a hunter or anything but someone told me you have to use slugs and aim at the head.
Cool. I'm not a hunter or anything but someone told me you have to use slugs and aim at the head.
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
You head/neck shoot turkeys with 4s, 5s, or 6s, and a tight choke.
Turkeys heads rarely hold still long enough for a head shot with a single projectile.
For spring turkey, slugs would be illegal for safety reasons. Full camo, decoys, making sounds like game, baaad juju.
And like the man said: turkey pate'. Geez, you can throw a rock through them.
Where legal, .22LR, WMR, Hornet are superb for turkey (usually autumn). Solves all those problems of birds that hang up about 80yds out, twice the effective shotgun range. The .17s ought to be effective, but you really don't want to shoot edible game with exploding bullets. (headshots on small mammals excepted).
You head/neck shoot turkeys with 4s, 5s, or 6s, and a tight choke.
Turkeys heads rarely hold still long enough for a head shot with a single projectile.
For spring turkey, slugs would be illegal for safety reasons. Full camo, decoys, making sounds like game, baaad juju.
And like the man said: turkey pate'. Geez, you can throw a rock through them.
Where legal, .22LR, WMR, Hornet are superb for turkey (usually autumn). Solves all those problems of birds that hang up about 80yds out, twice the effective shotgun range. The .17s ought to be effective, but you really don't want to shoot edible game with exploding bullets. (headshots on small mammals excepted).
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
Bullet design is more important than mass. Archery examples are not relevant to this discussion, especially ones are the extreme margins. Mass IS important BUT not as important as bullet design unless you pick extreme examples to prove a point.
.22mag VS 9mm is again not relevant or as simple as it seems.
I would pick the .22Mag. In 10-15 years I will still be able to buy cheap ammunition. If I want more power I will step up to a bigger gun, load it cheaper than I can buy .17 ammunition and get more from it.
While the 17's do have a place, that place is not in my safe
Like the .204, this will end up being just another market turn over to make the ammunition and gun makers more money.
Bullet design is more important than mass. Archery examples are not relevant to this discussion, especially ones are the extreme margins. Mass IS important BUT not as important as bullet design unless you pick extreme examples to prove a point.
.22mag VS 9mm is again not relevant or as simple as it seems.
I would pick the .22Mag. In 10-15 years I will still be able to buy cheap ammunition. If I want more power I will step up to a bigger gun, load it cheaper than I can buy .17 ammunition and get more from it.
While the 17's do have a place, that place is not in my safe
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
If I was gonna buy a .17 HMR I would probably just go ahead and spring for a .223 . In the end the ammo isn't all that much different in price and the .223 is definitely the superior round in my mind . If you have to choose between the 2 you have listed then I would go .22 Magnum . I think that they will eventually offer some better projectiles in .22 Mag ammo and you can find it anywhere .
If I was gonna buy a .17 HMR I would probably just go ahead and spring for a .223 . In the end the ammo isn't all that much different in price and the .223 is definitely the superior round in my mind . If you have to choose between the 2 you have listed then I would go .22 Magnum . I think that they will eventually offer some better projectiles in .22 Mag ammo and you can find it anywhere .
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
This is the most comprehensive site I have seen on the 17hmr, lots of charts and
graphs.
http://www.varmintal.com/17hmr.htm
A good link for 22 mags
http://www.jesseshunting.com/articles/guns/category16/92.html
a good comparison link
http://www.chuckhawks.com/compared_17HMR_22WMR.htm
I will say I shoot the cci 30 grain tnt's out of my annie and get 2300+ on
the chrono. I don't own a 17 but there is no way I can argue the facts, it
just looks better for everything over 125 yards and it's accuracy advantage
has been demonstrated more than a few times.
This is the most comprehensive site I have seen on the 17hmr, lots of charts and
graphs.
http://www.varmintal.com/17hmr.htm
A good link for 22 mags
http://www.jesseshunting.com/articles/guns/category16/92.html
a good comparison link
http://www.chuckhawks.com/compared_17HMR_22WMR.htm
I will say I shoot the cci 30 grain tnt's out of my annie and get 2300+ on
the chrono. I don't own a 17 but there is no way I can argue the facts, it
just looks better for everything over 125 yards and it's accuracy advantage
has been demonstrated more than a few times.
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ToddM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I would guess most of the 17 bullets are made to expand quickly and explosively to be used on small very light skinned game and expand very quickly. If there is a heavy bonded type bullet choice for the 17 it may do better. </div></div>
Both of the 17 gr. bullets do; every groundhog I have shot in the chest cavity with them (out to 186 yards) has dropped on the spot. It wasn't the case with the 20 gr. HP bullets though. I only shot one groundhog with them and he ran about 4 yards before dropping. They don't explode like the 17 grainers do...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ToddM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I would guess most of the 17 bullets are made to expand quickly and explosively to be used on small very light skinned game and expand very quickly. If there is a heavy bonded type bullet choice for the 17 it may do better. </div></div>
Both of the 17 gr. bullets do; every groundhog I have shot in the chest cavity with them (out to 186 yards) has dropped on the spot. It wasn't the case with the 20 gr. HP bullets though. I only shot one groundhog with them and he ran about 4 yards before dropping. They don't explode like the 17 grainers do...
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
^ yeah it's kinda fun to watch. i have a 1/4" thick 1" wide steel flat bar that I stick in the ground and shoot sometimes. at 150 yards the 17 actually bends it. when the bullet hits all you can see is what looks like a puff of smoke about the size of a softball.
^ yeah it's kinda fun to watch. i have a 1/4" thick 1" wide steel flat bar that I stick in the ground and shoot sometimes. at 150 yards the 17 actually bends it. when the bullet hits all you can see is what looks like a puff of smoke about the size of a softball.
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
.17HMR
I've shot prairie dogs with both, and the .17 has dropped every one on the spot, with proper shot placement all the way out to 200 yards. Not so, with the .22 magnum.
I still prefer a centerfire for varmints, because they just explode, and there's no doubt that it was a humane kill.
.17HMR
I've shot prairie dogs with both, and the .17 has dropped every one on the spot, with proper shot placement all the way out to 200 yards. Not so, with the .22 magnum.
I still prefer a centerfire for varmints, because they just explode, and there's no doubt that it was a humane kill.
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
I sold my 22mags and 17 HMR.
Good ol 22Lr's for precision target,plinking and hunting small game.
Centerfire for all the rest.
Steve
I sold my 22mags and 17 HMR.
Good ol 22Lr's for precision target,plinking and hunting small game.
Centerfire for all the rest.
Steve
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
You 17 guys should compete. I'm the only 17 that does. Need some more competition.
You 17 guys should compete. I'm the only 17 that does. Need some more competition.
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SmallBoreSniper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You 17 guys should compete. I'm the only 17 that does. Need some more competition.
</div></div>
Compete?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SmallBoreSniper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You 17 guys should compete. I'm the only 17 that does. Need some more competition.
Compete?
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
No, but I wouldn't mind it. I'm competitive by nature, though not ultra "I must win or else I have been a complete failure" kind of competitive. I like to win, but I like what competitions (of all kinds) bring out as much.
No, but I wouldn't mind it. I'm competitive by nature, though not ultra "I must win or else I have been a complete failure" kind of competitive. I like to win, but I like what competitions (of all kinds) bring out as much.
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
Yeah it's fun as hell. Check out the competition stickies at the top of the rimfire section. Rules and everything you need to know is there. I've only been competeing for a few months and I love it.
Yeah it's fun as hell. Check out the competition stickies at the top of the rimfire section. Rules and everything you need to know is there. I've only been competeing for a few months and I love it.
Re: .22 WMR vs. 17 HMR
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SmallBoreSniper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yeah it's fun as hell. Check out the competition stickies at the top of the rimfire section. Rules and everything you need to know is there. I've only been competeing for a few months and I love it. </div></div>
Will do.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SmallBoreSniper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yeah it's fun as hell. Check out the competition stickies at the top of the rimfire section. Rules and everything you need to know is there. I've only been competeing for a few months and I love it. </div></div>
Will do.
