PDA

View Full Version : 17 hmr tactical rifle


Come and take it.
June 6, 2010, 05:17 PM
Has anyone ever considered the possibilities of a 17 hmr semi-automatic rifle with hi-capacity magazines?

Lavid2002
June 6, 2010, 05:29 PM
For the groundhog invasion?


there is a .17 belt fed gun on youtube, but for all other purposes there isnt one for a reason

*Tactical .22Lr-Cheap, fun to shoot, no practical purpose other than plinking and training
*Tactical .17-Not cheap, fun to shoot, not practical

Lavid2002
June 6, 2010, 05:32 PM
My mistake, this is a .17 HM2 not a hmr...cool non the less
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSzshkg9LJ0

Come and take it.
June 6, 2010, 07:35 PM
I read somewhere where the original design of the cartridge came from Sweden where they were looking into an assault rifle using the 4.5 x 26mm R, cartridge which was a 22 magnum necked down. I will try to find the article if possible.

http://world.guns.ru/assault/as63-e.htm

http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s286/hunterhornet/interdynamics_mkr.jpg

lewwetzel
June 8, 2010, 11:52 AM
excelarms.com, click on Accelerator rifle.

BlueTrain
June 8, 2010, 12:14 PM
Some of the early British work on their Bullpup rifle, I think called the EM2 at the time, was in one of those very small calibers but they decided it didn't have enough retained energy at longer ranges or so goes the story.

Come and take it.
June 8, 2010, 08:20 PM
It is true that the excel accelerator has a simliar layout but its pistol grip magazine is single stack and only holds 9 rounds.

Volquartsen makes a 25 round magazine that works with both 22 magnum and 17 hmr in their rifles. However none of their rifles seem to be geared toward a mall ninja appearance.

I suppose the Volquartsen platform would be the direction to go in. However all 10/22 tactical style stocks are for 22 long rifle platforms, unless there are some for 22 magnum that I do not know about.

mrawesome22
June 8, 2010, 08:37 PM
I gotta design something tacticool. It seems like it would be very easy. Hmm...

Tacticool shoe insoles! They'll never hear you coming with your new MrAwesome Tacticool Destroyer Insoles!

:::Also available in orthotic.:::

Come and take it.
June 8, 2010, 10:52 PM
For the militaries part we do not exactly see them running around with remington 7400s or Ruger mini-14s in wooden stocks do we?

Tacticool certianly makes a gun more rugged

a tan to black polymer stock is more durable than pretty wood and more resistant to swelling.It does not stand out as much. A folding stock allows the gun to be used in confined spaces and ease of carrying.

A parkerized finish is more resistant to scratches, is not a reflective and more protective of steel parts.

Although not really appreciated by me until recently picatany, rail systems are very useful.


The gun I am proposing is one that is designed for home defence, short range combat or medium range combat. Its potential to stop would not be competitive against a high powered rifle but it would certianly compete with and in some very important ways outperform pistol caliber carbines.

Its advantages over other platforms would be a light recoil and the potential of higher capacity magazines than a typical combat weapon. The 22 magnum grendel managed to contain 30- 32 rounds of ammunition in a magazine small enough to fit in the grip of the pistol. Also the 17 - 20 grain projectile penetrates hard material like bone, hide, or metal than explodes in soft tissue. Even the 17 hmr fmj rounds are likely to tumble and fragment although I have not tested them yet.

The penetration is important because many criminals are wearing body armor these days. A 17 will penetrate most any soft body armor.

At one time such a weapon would have been criticized for being a cop killer weapon. However I think the realization that the criminal element is well educated in the use of body armor has changed the debate on this issue.

jgcoastie
June 8, 2010, 11:07 PM
Didn't CCI say that .17HMR ammunition is unsafe for use in semi-auto firearms??? Hence the Remington 597 recall...

Come and take it.
June 9, 2010, 12:05 AM
Volquartsen stands solidly behind their 17 hmrs.

Alexander arms is supposed to have released a 17hmr AR15 upper and a complete gun as well. Called the Valkyrie. However I do not know the magazine capacity.

Mike38
June 9, 2010, 01:23 AM
A .17 tactical??? What's next, a Daisy Red Ryder tactical? :barf:

jgcoastie
June 9, 2010, 01:32 AM
Volquartsen stands solidly behind their 17 hmrs.

They damn well better for the $1499.99 it costs to buy one! :barf::mad:

Pinelands
June 9, 2010, 08:53 AM
Im gonna go against the grain, I think that a "tactical" .17 hmr would be kinda cool. The .17hmr is a very flat shooting, fun round with almost zero recoil, and a 20 grain bullet at 2350 fps is nothing to scoff at in my opinion.

LanceOregon
June 9, 2010, 09:14 AM
That would be a perfect weapon to defend against an attack by Jedi Squirrels. Here is a photo of some of them practicing their Jedi Arts:

http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n265/UltimatePartyBear/Misc/524618022_45d26181fc.jpg

Lavid2002
June 9, 2010, 10:40 AM
^ lol.... Where the hell do you find a picture like that :D

tulsamal
June 9, 2010, 01:55 PM
The practical problem with this sort of thing is always going to be the rim. It sticks out and makes high capacity magazines temperamental. Sure, there are designs that "make it work" but it's a lot better idea to start out with a rimless case. Plus rimfire ignition itself is a problem. I've been shooting for 40 years now and I've probably had easily 10x more "no fires" from rimfire than any centerfire.

What you are proposing seems more than adequately filled by the 5.7 and the PS90. Plus 5.7 uppers for AR's. (I suppose you could even make a wildcat by necking the 5.7mm down to .17 if that is important to you.)

http://www.57center.com/

Or get an AR upper in 7.62x25 Tok!

http://www.cncgunsparts.com/home

Gregg

jgcoastie
June 9, 2010, 01:59 PM
While I agree that rimfires are very well known for thier inherent reliability problems, the .17HMR seems to have escaped most of this. I had a Marlin .17HMR for a few months and put at least 800 rounds down-range with it and didn't have one single misfire.

Bulk .22lr? Yeah, be prepared for reliability problems.

Hornady .17HMR? A much safer bet.

But I agree that there would be a very small niche for such a rifle because there are multiple tacti-cool .22lr's and 5.7mm & 5.56x45mm already out there.

Come and take it.
June 9, 2010, 02:10 PM
I was impressed that the German made 4.6 x 30 mm has very close to the same ballistics as the 17hmr. The 17 caliber bullet is not to be taken lightly.

I like the idea of the 17 hmr because it is now a common domestically produced caliber.

It is cheaper than 5.6 x 28mm.

I have never experienced misfires through my rifles in 17hmr.

Rimmed cases do not inherently reduce reliability. That is mostly a myth. One of the most reliable machine guns in history was a Russian designed one that used 7.62 x 54 R. Also the British Bren was a highly reliable box fed machine gun in .303 British. The most notable concern is that more care needs to be taken to assure each rim is ahead of the one beneath it in a box magazine.

L_Killkenny
June 9, 2010, 02:59 PM
A .17 tactical??? What's next, a Daisy Red Ryder tactical?

Agreed. A tactical .17hmr? OMG. It sure takes a mighty poor understanding of balistics, bullet design, etc etc to like this idea. Not too mention the tacticool side of the idea.

LK

tulsamal
June 9, 2010, 04:04 PM
The most notable concern is that more care needs to be taken to assure each rim is ahead of the one beneath it in a box magazine.

I would say that your quote demonstrates that rimmed cases ARE "inherently less reliable." If we treat the guns and ammunition the same, the rimmed variety will have problems. If we give the rimmed cases special care and techniques, we can address that. But that special care means the issue IS there! I have four Mosins, I'm well aware of how they are to be loaded. As well as my Enfield Jungle Carbine.

Problematic as rimmed centerfire cases can be, the issue is worse with rimfire. Not just from an ignition standpoint. The rimfire rim is fat and rounded and made of thin hollow metal. Very easy to damage in a fast moving mechanism. The "inherent problems" with .22 LR are exactly why John Browning invented the .25 ACP. Ballistics are about the same. But a reliable action for the rimless centerfire is much simpler to design. The Baby Browning wouldn't work right with .22 LR.

Gregg

loverme85
June 9, 2010, 05:10 PM
Agreed. A tactical .17hmr? OMG. It sure takes a mighty poor understanding of balistics, bullet design, etc etc to like this idea. Not too mention the tacticool side of the idea.




Thanks for making me not have to say that lol. This tacticool craze is so corny to me. It reminds me of when the fast and furious came out and every 16-20 yr old kid put a big spoiler on there grand am.

Come and take it.
June 9, 2010, 08:42 PM
I suppose a tactical 17 hmr is just as silly as using a 45 acp to kill an intruder with body armor.

or hitting a target at 250 yards with a 45 acp.

or getting a 45 acp bullet to do anything but be ready to reloaded into a case a second time after hitting a target.

ronl
June 9, 2010, 11:07 PM
Take a 30-35 gr. .17 bullet and dump it in a .223 case and you might have something.

Lavid2002
June 9, 2010, 11:16 PM
Like the .17 remington fireball?


The military has already tried going smaller and faster. That was the whole ideology behind the .223, yeah its smaller....but its faster and we can carry a lot more of it was the argument.

It has turned out to be what many consider a failure and the military is looking to upgrade in beef again. I highly doubt they look at the .17 and make the same mistake again on a 10x scale.

bennnn
June 9, 2010, 11:30 PM
Called the Valkyrie.

That should pretty much sum it up right?

Pinelands
June 10, 2010, 08:28 AM
I dont understand how a tactical .22lr is somehow ok, but the idea of a tactical .17 hmr gets laughed at. The .17 has twice the velocity and almost twice the energy of a high velocity .22lr.

All im saying is that it would be a fun gun. I am far from being a tacticool type, I just like unique guns.

johnbt
June 10, 2010, 09:45 AM
Ooooh, is a .17 HMR with a red dot on it tactical? Does it have to be black?

http://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj80/JohnBT3/12153DSCN0118-1.jpg?t=1276180807

I put this UltraDot MatchDot on a S&W 647 for my father when he was in his 80s. Lightened the SA trigger pull to 2.25# too with a new rebound slide spring.

An article in Shooting Times chrono'd 3 kinds of ammo at 2100 fps. Fwiw.

Come and take it.
June 10, 2010, 01:46 PM
Does it hold more than 10 rounds?

jgcoastie
June 10, 2010, 01:49 PM
I dont understand how a tactical .22lr is somehow ok, but the idea of a tactical .17 hmr gets laughed at. The .17 has twice the velocity and almost twice the energy of a high velocity .22lr.

Because the intent behind the design of "tacti-kool" .22lr's is cheaper ammo for practice, but being able to use the same type of weapon with the same controls.

.17 HMR ammo isn't cheap enough to justify a "tacti-kool" in that chambering... Around $16 for a box of 50rds up here...

TRguy
June 10, 2010, 01:58 PM
Just call on Savage, they answer the problems, with solutions:

http://www.savagearms.com/firearms/models/

93R17 TRR
http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj131/TRguy/Guns/SavageTactical93r17tr1.png

93R17 TR
http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj131/TRguy/Guns/SavageTactical93r17tr.jpg

and if you want to stay 22LR, don't forget Savage's Mark II FVT

http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj131/TRguy/Guns/markiifvt.png

Microgunner
June 10, 2010, 02:17 PM
Volquartsen makes a 25 round magazine that works with both 22 magnum and 17 hmr in their rifles. However none of their rifles seem to be geared toward a mall ninja appearance.

I suppose the Volquartsen platform would be the direction to go in. However all 10/22 tactical style stocks are for 22 long rifle platforms, unless there are some for 22 magnum that I do not know about.

I own (2) Volquartsens. One in .22lr, the other in 17HM2. They are some well built, accurate rifles, easily worth their price.

johnbt
June 10, 2010, 02:49 PM
"Does it hold more than 10 rounds?"

Why? You figuring to miss with the first 10? ;)

Come and take it.
June 14, 2010, 04:31 PM
I thought this was an interesting demonstration of the 17hmr abilities. The caliber is far beyond the capabilities of the 22 long rifle or event the 22 magnum. It would defeat a hostile target behind that helmet that a pistol in 9mm or 45 acp would not have been able to do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32S42bE47x0

Refer to box o truth for his tests on various rounds used on the K-pot. It stopped hot loaded 357 magnum rounds.

Come and take it.
June 17, 2010, 06:10 PM
I decided on an excel arms accellerator rifle. I should get it next week sometime. only 9 round magazine but at least more rounds than a bolt action savage. According to rimfire forums 18-20 inches is the premium barrel length for 17 hmr velocity. That was surprising as I figured on 22-24 inches myself.

Come and take it.
June 24, 2010, 06:39 PM
I got my gun and am pleased with it. Did some rapid fire shooting and accuracy testing and appears to be pretty accurate.

I did a test on a milk jug using fmj ammo. There was a full energy dump and jug left the ground like it had been hit by a 40 s&w jhp.

I am theorizing that the bullet entered the jug and due to its nature began to yaw for a few inches and than fragment.

I wonder what a fmj would do against a deer or man target if it has those attributes, to penetrate initially and than fragment in the vitals.

.300 Weatherby Mag
June 24, 2010, 06:47 PM
I've found the need to spew bullets with my .17HMR so great that I'm having a single shot adapter made for it!!!

HKFan9
June 24, 2010, 08:41 PM
People knock a .22lr as a defensive round, and your asking them to recommend a TACTICAL .17HMR, the word tactical alone offends most users on here. Don't get me wrong I like tricked out AR's as much as the next, and my .17HMR does nicely against ground hogs out to 200 yards, but semi auto, high capacity or not... I would not use it for home defense. Not saying it wouldn't work, but I would not bet my life to it, you can probably spend less and get a 870 shotgun which is much much better suited as a HD gun. I am not trying to offend you but your question and people comments made me laugh quite well.:rolleyes: I don't even recomend a handgun as a HD weapon, but in this case you are better off IMO with a handgun as well.

I'd also like to ask exactly who are you planning on breaking into your house? I really don't loose sleep at night knowing my 9mm or .45's wont stop a bad guy wearing a Kevlar helmet. I am just at a loss for words on that one, I understand your point of penetration but from shooting MANY MANY ground hogs with my .17HMR none of the bullets even penetrated through, because they are not designed too. They are too small and too fast, and shatter apart. I want to be making sure I am hitting vitals against a criminal in my home, not doing soft tissue damage and most likely bouncing off bones.

Come and take it.
June 24, 2010, 09:02 PM
different strokes for different folks.

HKFan9
June 24, 2010, 10:32 PM
I am a strong believe in if you want a gun for fun, GET IT, semi auto high cap .17HMR sounds like a lot of fun to me, but the whole premise of "tacticalizing" it and using it for home defense I am wary of. I usually settle for larger bore flavors for that. I love 9mm's but even those have a lot of cases of not stopping an attacker.

Come and take it.
June 24, 2010, 10:53 PM
your right.

Only the good guys wear kevlar helmets and body armor.

my bad

HKFan9
June 24, 2010, 11:39 PM
Well I don't know about you, but last time I checked I didn't live in a combat zone.... My point is do you REALLY fear someone coming into your house in Kevlar vests and helmets? The only documented case I ever saw was the North Hollywood shoot out where the bank robbers wore home made plate armor. I think the greater threat then a BG with body armor on would be one hopped up on PCP, in that case I am glad I am not in your shoes trusting my life and perhaps loved ones to such a small projectile. From reading about PCP I don't even think a .45 would be well suited.

I am not from Kentucky.... I don't know if people out there are wearing body armor while they are in the mall or grocery shopping, but throwing around the words tactical and saying you need to worry about BG's with body armor just screams mall ninja to me.

I am sorry if I come across so sarcastically its just my sense of humor, mostly I am just concerned with someone trying to defend themselves with a .17MHR, I love the round, its nothing to be laughed at, just as a ,22lr isn't either, just saying if your sole purpose is to defend yourself and your own, in your home, why risk being under gunned?

I can understand being under gunned with a small .380 or even 9mm ( some ppl feel these are too small I do not) while CCWing because of dress issues, but its your home, size and concealment isn't an issue. Not to mention if those little bullets DO pierce actual kevlar, what happens when you miss and they go through drywall? Will your loved ones be in the line of fire if over penetration happened?

Just some things to consider. Like I said it seems like a fun idea for a plinker, not a HD weapon, please don't take my remarks as me just busting your... you know, just trying to look out for a fellow gun owner.

Come and take it.
June 25, 2010, 07:10 AM
I use a 12 guage smoothbore with slugs for home defense or a mini-14 with hollowpoints. I almost never use my 40 sw.

The 17 hmr has some very unusual characteristics that definitely merits some attention.

I am not sure exactly what a mall ninja is although I hear the word from time to time. If it means someone who tricks their guns out but never shoots them, than you would be sadly mistaken.

Which by the way I have heard of people take deer down with the 17hmr with heart shots. The 17 grain bullets are too volatile, but the heavier bullets show more promise on penetration. What is interesting is that there is a significant increase in penetration once the round gets out to 150 - 200 yards after the bullet slows down a bit.

I think discussing those unusual characteristics is pretty interesting myself.

killing wise the cartridge appears to highly efficient for its low kinetic energy.

Also no gun except for big bore slug guns or elephant guns have stopping or knockdown power enough to see a significant recorded effect. Back years ago when I was not as less stupid as I am now I shot some animals with fmj rounds out of 223, 308 and 9mm. All failed horribly to kill those animals, the animals responded sometimes as if they were never hit although they were.

What about an arrow or crossbow bolt? without some way to make those projectiles perform efficiently they would have a pitiful effect on their living targets.

Consider the 5.7 fn cartridge. Although tragic, the guy in the fort hood shooting used this cartridge to devestating effect, killing most of his targets in contrast to wounding as most handgun cartridges would have done.

when you have a fmj that will penetrate a squirrel or even a groundhog without leaving noticable lethal effect because it penetrated clean through, yet when you shoot a larger target and the projectile yaws and fragments than it appears in my opinion to be very interesting as to how that bullet migh perform in a medium to large target.

all this is hypothetical of course as there isnt much data on the 17hmr used in gun fights to date. very interesting to consider all this.

HKFan9
June 25, 2010, 11:09 AM
I see your point, but I am fairly certain it is illegal to shoot a deer here in PA with anything chambered in the .17. Maybe not now, but I am pretty sure there was a caliber restriction not to mention it must be a center fire.

I had a marlin 17VS and despite the 11lbs trigger pull I think the thing had it was a nice shooter. But seeing with the CCI's and Horndys and other ammo did to wood chucks, which was great for woodchucks, I wouldn't recommend it for anything bigger than a fox or coyote or something along those lines. It is the best caliber hands down I found for woodchucks out to 200 or so yards, and a fairly flat shooting round. My gun shot dime size groups at 100 yards and I had no problems hitting chucks out to 160-170 yards with out touching the scope or holding high.

On a side note you might be interested in.... there was a website of a guy doing some penetration testing of his own when the cartridge first became mass produced. I remember he tested different rounds using some metal and alloy blocks for penetration, pretty interesting, I'll see if i can find it, but I remember just doing a Google search on the round and it came up.

All this talk about the .17HMR makes me miss mine! I am taking a look at that 93R17 TR Savage up above. Seems like it has the potential to be one hell of a 200yard chuck gun. It's like a mini tactical rifle.:rolleyes:

Don't ask me why.... but I have more fun and thrill shooting woodchucks then I do other small game, or even large game. So the .17HMR was always close to my heart, the Marlin was just too heavy a trigger pull and I needed the cash at the time.

Come and take it.
June 25, 2010, 01:31 PM
After shooting my accellerator rifle and driving around in my truck with it I feel as if the thing would make an excellent quick access truck gun. It is compact and about the same dimensions as a hi-point carbine. It weighs in at a hefty 8 lbs due to the close to an inch diameter barrel.

I plan to use it when I stalk groundhogs at close range using the heavy hollowpoints. I usually make all my long shots with the 220 Swift hiding up in the barn loft.

Where I live a person will kill twice as many groundhogs at closer than 100 yards than they will at greater than 100.

this isnt my picture but the gun in it is set up a lot like mine.

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f392/we34gde4/Excel1.jpg

I knew there was 17hm2 machine gun, however there is also a 17hmr machine gun as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaBpeTRL1QA