Rimfire Central Firearm Forum banner
1 - 20 of 50 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,221 Posts
Had big plans for the slightly bigger varmints, but early results are indicating the need for a 17 rem or 204.

But it will get serious play time on sage rats. The urban sprawl and mini farms means lots of my hunting is on smaller places and the 17 wsm is about the perfect thing for it. Fully expect to do about as many rounds as I can get my hands on this spring in Eastern Oregon, Washington and Idaho.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
37,650 Posts
No dust in my safe but 1K rds of ammo needs dusting. :( Big plans but... the body and a new year round neighbor at the fish shack say otherwise. Someone importing feral pigs and gophers might swing things my way tho. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,700 Posts
Just sage rats/Belding's ground squirrels for me. I suppose if all I had with me was my 17 WSM and a rockchuck, badger, fox, or coyote presented itself and the distance was right I'm sure I'd take a poke at them. I have better tools for those jobs so it wouldn't be my first choice but ground squirrels and PD's, ohhh yeah.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
165 Posts
I use mine for target shooting and taking out the occasional pesky critters like muskrats in my pond.



Here is one taken out at 60 yards with my .17 WSM. (Somehow mistaken for a muskrat with his back out of the water in the shadows under my dock)



Somehow my '73 Bonneville got in this thread....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,546 Posts
It will be PDs and sage rats for me...the key words being "will be." In actuality, I use mine to shoot eggs at 200 yards. Only the most compatible lots of ammunition will make the grade on eggs @200 yds, but that's probably true of most applications other than larger vermin. One lot of 20 gr. ammunition, in American Eagle boxes, shoots lights out on the white orbs. A miss would be shooter error or crosswinds. The worst lots will seldom connect...maybe 25% hits?

TBR
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,888 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
It will be PDs and sage rats for me...the key words being "will be." In actuality, I use mine to shoot eggs at 200 yards. Only the most compatible lots of ammunition will make the grade on eggs @200 yds, but that's probably true of most applications other than larger vermin. One lot of 20 gr. ammunition, in American Eagle boxes, shoots lights out on the white orbs. A miss would be shooter error or crosswinds. The worst lots will seldom connect...maybe 25% hits?

TBR
Yeah on that, TBR. For a long time we had wild variations of accuracy. Tree squirrel heads are not a big challenge at 200 yards, either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,626 Posts
The .17 WSM is a special purpose cartridge useful on non-edible varmints. It way too destructive on game like Squirrels. Would have been better if Winchester made a: .22 WSM rimfire or .25 WSM instead of another .17 caliber.:rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,700 Posts
The .17 WSM is a special purpose cartridge useful on non-edible varmints. It way too destructive on game like Squirrels. Would have been better if Winchester made a: .22 WSM rimfire or .25 WSM instead of another .17 caliber.:rolleyes:
I think a lot of us would have been thrilled if it were a 20 WSM shooting something like the Hornady 24gr NTX bullet at 3000FPS but like I used to tell my kid, you get what you get and ya don't throw a fit. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,221 Posts
I think a lot of us would have been thrilled if it were a 20 WSM shooting something like the Hornady 24gr NTX bullet at 3000FPS but like I used to tell my kid, you get what you get and ya don't throw a fit. :D
I'd put myself squarely in this camp.

While it's an improvement on the 17 hmr for about an extra 75 yards on the sage rats, I wasn't really looking for another 17. I hate loading small cartridges, as my neuropathy progresses little fiddly things become irritating. Like stuffing 17 and 20 caliber bullets into tiny little brass necks.

This combined with some rimfire only hunting areas I hunt, a 20 cal could have provided a tad more oomph to get it closer to the hornet type cartridges without the need for me to sit in my office and grumble at the cruel march of time and lousy fingers. While I've used the 17 hmr successfully over the years up to coyote, it always felt like using a Honda civic to haul home plywood. You could pull it off, but there was always better options. Last year my vq eneded up going hunting without me on a beaver/fox hunt on the island. The feedback was it was still just a little underwhelming, the hornet based cartridges still had the edge without blowing up hides. I think a 20 wsm would have helped it be just a smidgen better on those size varmints.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,700 Posts
Not that I'm complaining, ok well maybe I am a little, but a 20 WSM and 20 Hornady Hornet would have made me much, MUCH, happier than yet another 17 cal.

Lets see, there's only one commercially available 20 caliber and multiple 17's, both RF & CF, but hey lets make another 17 cal because there aren't enough of those already. :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,221 Posts
B23, I'm wholly in agreement with you on the 20 cal front.

My problem is my current gap between 17 wsm and now my 270 wsm in my walking weight rifles. My 223wssm being out for a rebarrel, and my 243ai is a boat anchor. Finding a sporter weight stainless 204 has proven difficult, as has a 22 hornet. Heck it's hard to find a decent sporter stainless 223.

The argument is buy 223 and load it down to hornet velocities to be more pelt friendly. I've just never found cartridges to work best loaded down, at least ones with a bottle neck.

Problem is the current trend is prs, or to pretend your capable of shooting an elk in the butt at 1000yards.... so for now we'll get another 6 pseudo magnum cartridges to fill that "void"..... rant hat off.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,226 Posts
It is a wonderful cartridge in my rimfire only jurisdiction. It knocks the Woodchucks down hard and reaches very well out to 200 yards. I may get it out to smack some Racoons, Fox and Coyote. I just don't carry it with me while going after Squirrels and Rabbits. I often see a Fox, but rarely within .22LR range.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,546 Posts
You guys may be right about a .20 WSM. Something like that could have really taken off, but I think we would still have the usual suspects whining, "The ammunition sucks; the rifles suck, and the ones that don't suck are too expensive; the ammunition is going to disappear; it's dead on arrival,” blah, blah, blah. And we would still have, "I'd buy it if it were a .22 WSM...or a .17 WSM...now, a .17 WSM would be something! That thing would probably break the 3000 FPS barrier, in a rimfire!"

So, in the end, we would have the same complaints, but it would be an even bigger oddball (to most US shooters, anyway) with fewer bullets suitable for the lower velocity, fewer cleaning rods, probably fewer manufacters and barrel makers willing to take a chance. And there still would not be that nice CZ 527-like, or enlarged 452-like, bolt action rifle in the $500 to $650 range that is what the .17 WSM really needs.

Personally, I would absolutely buy a 20 WSM, or a 22 WSM, but neither will likely happen. Why would anyone take the risk now after the cold, collective yawn from most people to the .17 WSM?

JMO

TBR
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,700 Posts
Finding a sporter weight stainless 204 has proven difficult
Oh heck this is a super easy peasy fix, just buy a stainless Tikka 223 unscrew the barrel and sell it then get which ever length and contour 20 cal barrel suits your fancy and have it chambered in 204 Ruger, 20 Practical, 20-222, or 20-221 and you'll be off and running with a tack driver and not a great deal of money invested in a nice semi custom. :bthumb:

You guys may be right about a .20 WSM. Something like that could have really taken off, but I think we would still have the usual suspects whining, "The ammunition sucks; the rifles suck, and the ones that don't suck are too expensive; the ammunition is going to disappear; it's dead on arrival," blah, blah, blah. And we would still have, "I'd buy it if it were a .22 WSM...or a .17 WSM...now, a .17 WSM would be something! That thing would probably break the 3000 FPS barrier, in a rimfire!"

So, in the end, we would have the same complaints, but it would be an even bigger oddball (to most US shooters, anyway) with fewer bullets suitable for the lower velocity, fewer cleaning rods, probably fewer manufacters and barrel makers willing to take a chance. And there still would not be that nice CZ 527-like, or enlarged 452-like, bolt action rifle in the $500 to $650 range that is what the .17 WSM really needs.

Personally, I would absolutely buy a 20 WSM, or a 22 WSM, but neither will likely happen. Why would anyone take the risk now after the cold, collective yawn from most people to the .17 WSM?

JMO

TBR
TBR, all valid points, couldn't really argue with you on any of them if I wanted to. Kinda brings us back to what I said earlier about what I used to tell my kid, you get what you get and ya don't throw a fit. :F
 
1 - 20 of 50 Posts
Top