17 Hornet

[25 Sharps]

My intention for the 17 hornet is to use as a back up for my 22 hornet, having had my 22 hornet out of action due to a bolt fault, I got a WMR which was ok but not 100 % like the hornet, I didn’t want 2 22 hornets so after checking around I settled on getting the 17 hornet, on paper it appears ( with proviso) using a light round the 17 is quicker and has a longer flatter trajectory that as I understand will give a better true shooting distance

I don’t do elevation as it brings in another reason to miss or wound and I like to point and shoot and be precise as allowed, I’m going to keep a permanent Swaro day scope on the 22 hornet and a permanent NV pard 08 on the 17 if the 17 gives me a true shot to to 120-140 yds I’ll be chuffed if I can’t find a accurate round for that I’ll probably keep it to a 100 with a 30 grn round either way it’s a decent calibre

Looking forward to getting the rifle and have a play around to source a accurate round, trying to get a Annie or Weihrauch but the waiting time ex factory is getting longer everyday it seems

17 will be true to that range easy do you’ll be fine.

My 35gr load out of a .22 is point and shoot on a 3” fox kill zone to 160 yards or so.

They are both as capable as each other and fill the same niche imo. At least if you have one of each you double your options on available ammo too!

 

[old keeper]

It really doesn' matter what calibre you use, they'll all kill foxes, it's the range that governs our success. At present, I have both a 22 and 17 Hornet but don't use the 22 version any more as I really like the 17H. Most of my fox control is done at night and I'm not a good enough shot after dark to guarantee a lethal headshot every time at ranges over 150 yards. However, as an old man who used to shoot a lot of foxes with a lamp and 12 bore at 30 yards I wonder why with the equipment available today there is a need to shoot foxes after dark at some of the ranges suggested here.
I would have thought with the cost of the various forms of night vision the whole point was to be able to get closer to the quarry rather than take shots at silly distances. After all, despite what is often stated, the vast majority of foxes shot nowadays are shot for sport not of necessity, unlike when I was keepering, so why risk injuring rather than killing?
Since I got the 17Hornet I've shot quite a few foxes with it and just one was a runner but didn't go far. I've had more clean kills with the 17H than the 22H and while I liked the 22 version I think that from all points of view the 17 for me is a more enjoyable and efficient rifle to shoot. Over the years I've shot foxes with probably six different calibres and I've had runners with all of them, even the 308. it happens, as has been said before head shooting is fine in daylight at longer ranges but at night it's a very imprecise science indeed and having once removed a fox's jaw with a "head" shot I don't intend to do it again.
You do get varying entry wounds with the 17H but I've not yet had an exit wound, even the "splash" entry wounds do more than enough damage to kill a fox at 100-150 yards but these type of wounds are few and far between.

 

[hammo]

Hi 'Old Keeper'

I bought your unwanted .17 Hornet ammo off you a couple of years back, just wondered what made you return to the caliber?

I still have my CZ 527 17H, and still thoroughly enjoy using it with nv for fox, and daytime for crows etc. Personally wholeheartedly agree with your comments above - self imposed sensible night time limit of @ 150m. If its windy out then I use the .243. Thermal spotter, tubed nv add on and fieldcraft mean I can usually stalk or call fox in to me and shoot.
I reloaded the spent cases after shooting your rounds, and have not bought any factory ammo at all.
Hammo

 

[old keeper]

Hi Hammo,
If I remember rightly, at the time I had a quantity of 17Hornet ammo but no rifle!
I will drop you a pm.

 

[Overlay]

17 will be true to that range easy do you’ll be fine.

My 35gr load out of a .22 is point and shoot on a 3” fox kill zone to 160 yards or so.

They are both as capable as each other and fill the same niche imo. At least if you have one of each you double your options on available ammo too!

Thanks Sharps

Greatly appreciated

Phil

 

[25 Sharps]

It really doesn' matter what calibre you use, they'll all kill foxes, it's the range that governs our success. At present, I have both a 22 and 17 Hornet but don't use the 22 version any more as I really like the 17H. Most of my fox control is done at night and I'm not a good enough shot after dark to guarantee a lethal headshot every time at ranges over 150 yards. However, as an old man who used to shoot a lot of foxes with a lamp and 12 bore at 30 yards I wonder why with the equipment available today there is a need to shoot foxes after dark at some of the ranges suggested here.
I would have thought with the cost of the various forms of night vision the whole point was to be able to get closer to the quarry rather than take shots at silly distances. After all, despite what is often stated, the vast majority of foxes shot nowadays are shot for sport not of necessity, unlike when I was keepering, so why risk injuring rather than killing?
Since I got the 17Hornet I've shot quite a few foxes with it and just one was a runner but didn't go far. I've had more clean kills with the 17H than the 22H and while I liked the 22 version I think that from all points of view the 17 for me is a more enjoyable and efficient rifle to shoot. Over the years I've shot foxes with probably six different calibres and I've had runners with all of them, even the 308. it happens, as has been said before head shooting is fine in daylight at longer ranges but at night it's a very imprecise science indeed and having once removed a fox's jaw with a "head" shot I don't intend to do it again.
You do get varying entry wounds with the 17H but I've not yet had an exit wound, even the "splash" entry wounds do more than enough damage to kill a fox at 100-150 yards but these type of wounds are few and far between.

Agreed.

With thermal and NV getting on to all but the jumpiest foxes you can bring them in close, often getting on to them and getting a shot off even before they are aware of you being there. The longest fox I've shot is 257 yards, I got on to him at 80 but its in an area where we get dog men poaching at least once a week so everything is very jumpy at night. He saw me, ran and only stopped when he thought he was far enough from danger to look back, my 0.223 AI is point and shoot to 250 yards so aim back on and he dropped to the shot. Not a shot I would take with a 17 hornet, and I have shot with a 17 as a couple of mates have one. 90% of the foxes I shoot are under 150 yards and those that are further are the jumpy ones so the energy of the AI means I can make the most of any opportunity they give for a shot rather than waiting for the time to take a carefully aimed head shot.

I too have shot the jaw off of a fox, just after I got my first rimfire a WMR, Squeaked the 3/4 grown cub and it nearly ran into me it came in so fast, shot at about 10 yards and stupidly went for a head shot, blew the jaw off and the sight of it trying to push whatever was hurting it off its face sticks with me - next shot to the chest dropped it but it was a horrible lesson to learn.

 

[Effnjeff]

Not looking to argue just interested, why do you think the 0.17H will be more suitable at say 150 metres than the 0.22H? It is a smaller bullet, smaller cross sectional area and the 0.22 starts with 50% more energy than the 17 version, it can also shoot 40 gr poly tipped bullets a long way accurately which hold their energy well and deflect the wind more.

A mate of mine has the 17, we were discussing this thread at Bisley Sunday, his opinion is it is far less capable than 0.223 and really restrict your options in terms of shot placement. He and I have debated .17H vs 0.22H until the cows come home, we've had a shoot off at 300 metres which he won with a group of about 5" as I had one bad flyer open my group up to 12" with the other 4 inside 4" but that is the rifle (pitted to hell), shooter or ammo, not the calibre.

That was me, and you're report is close, but my 300 yard group was 3" not 5". But as you mentioned at the time, I was using a high mag scope and your barrel is pitted so groups could not really be compared.
We haven't tested which deflects more in the wind and stated BC figures between manufacturers cannot be compared accurately, but it can definitely be stated that the 17 trajectory is much flatter and the 22 has a lot more muzzle energy.
I haven't shot any foxes with my 17 as my gut feeling is that it will require perfect shot placement, so I always pick up my 223 which should be far more forgiving.

 

[Remmy6.5]

I've taken fox past 200yrds with my 17h and had runners so head shots are the only course of action with the round,but don't under estimate the caliber as it's a very capable round and it's super accurate even with factory ammunition but reloading will just increase that accuracy even more.
Rabbits are easy out to 300yrds aslong as you don't want the meat for eating.
It bucks the wind alot more than the 17hmr

 

[25 Sharps]

That was me, and you're report is close, but my 300 yard group was 3" not 5". But as you mentioned at the time, I was using a high mag scope and your barrel is pitted so groups could not really be compared.
We haven't tested which deflects more in the wind and stated BC figures between manufacturers cannot be compared accurately, but it can definitely be stated that the 17 trajectory is much flatter and the 22 has a lot more muzzle energy.
I haven't shot any foxes with my 17 as my gut feeling is that it will require perfect shot placement, so I always pick up my 223 which should be far more forgiving.

Sorry mate, stand corrected on the group size, was a while back, your group was smaller either way.

 

[Effnjeff]

Sorry mate, stand corrected on the group size, was a while back, your group was smaller either way.

No worries mate. I can't have the the SD collective thinking that I have ever shot a group over MOA!
I just checked notes and it was actually 2 3/8", which I was delighted with, but I'm not letting on in case anyone realises...

 

[Overlay]

nice thread guys, constructive answers

enjoyable to read and learn as a new caliber to me

cheers

phil

 

[RCS Deer Management]

You would struggle dropping foxes consistently with a .17h on my ground in the lamp. We lamp 4/5 nights a week and most of my shots are at foxes either facing or quartering away at longer ranges. If you are lucky enough to have foxes that stand face on or broadside to you then I bet you would have no problem pushing the .17 out a little past 200 in good conditions. But as foxes get more clued up this becomes rare, and they tend to not offer you a good angle for a shot, hence the reason I tend to use heavyish bullets.

 

[Crosshair243]

I love my .17 hornet for foxes. It’s so easy to shoot that it makes perfect bullet placement a doddle. Had a brace of vixens this evening, neither of which flinched with h/l shots. Shot a tough old dog fox at 208paces the other evening leaning off the side of the Landy roof with the lamp in one hand and the rifle on the crook of that arm.
Furthest fox was 254 or so in long grass. Up 6 clicks and shot in the head.
I’ve had a few need a second shot- mostly when front on. But no more or less than with my other rifles.
It’s been everything I hoped for and if I had another one with NV- I’d happily ditch my .223.

 

[Overlay]

Going on the ballistic chart - zeroing .50 of an inch high at a 100 yds would that lend itself to good shot placement from 60 to 130 yds that will really be my range for the 17 hornet I guess

 

[Crosshair243]

Yes that works well. Or a 75y zero gives you 1/4” high at 100 and just 3/4” low at 200.

 

[25 Sharps]

Yes that works well. Or a 75y zero gives you 1/4” high at 100 and just 3/4” low at 200.

Only if its the secondary, not the primary zero

 

[Crosshair243]

Only if its the secondary, not the primary zero

Well call it a 150y zero then if you like...
And sorry, that will be 1.5” low at 200- I read the moa column oops- shows why you should double check lol.
Still point and shoot on Fox mind you.

I’ve had the .308 out for a spin this week and the foxes I’ve shot with 110g Noslers conformed my appreciation for the .17hornet as a fox gun- just a far more civilised option in every respect. Especially the mess in the back of the truck!

 

[Sonicdmb73]

Well call it a 150y zero then if you like...
And sorry, that will be 1.5” low at 200- I read the moa column oops- shows why you should double check lol.
Still point and shoot on Fox mind you.

I’ve had the .308 out for a spin this week and the foxes I’ve shot with 110g Noslers conformed my appreciation for the .17hornet as a fox gun- just a far more civilised option in every respect. Especially the mess in the back of the truck!

Nothing worse than landing home at two in the morning. Then next door neighbour seeing the blood and snot down the back of the truck you didn’t see in the dark.
My 20 Tac is fairly impressive as far as point and shoot. Not shot enough foxes with it to confirm if it is more destructive than say my 222 with virtually the same weight bullets. But it is less drop over the same distances.

 

[25 Sharps]

Nothing worse than landing home at two in the morning. Then next door neighbour seeing the blood and snot down the back of the truck you didn’t see in the dark.
My 20 Tac is fairly impressive as far as point and shoot. Not shot enough foxes with it to confirm if it is more destructive than say my 222 with virtually the same weight bullets. But it is less drop over the same distances.

@kennyc any photos of our shooting wagon bonnet after a night out?? (none with the plate mind!)

 

[25 Sharps]

Well call it a 150y zero then if you like...
And sorry, that will be 1.5” low at 200- I read the moa column oops- shows why you should double check lol.
Still point and shoot on Fox mind you.

I’ve had the .308 out for a spin this week and the foxes I’ve shot with 110g Noslers conformed my appreciation for the .17hornet as a fox gun- just a far more civilised option in every respect. Especially the mess in the back of the truck!

Yeah fair one, I like the 0.22 hornet with 35gr v-max at <150 yards for the same reason, very tidy carcass, the .223 AI often leaves quite a mess on smaller foxes!