Talk:.17 HM2

This article is rated Start-class on Wik.ipedia.Pro's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Firearms Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of firearms on Wik.ipedia.Pro. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FirearmsWik.ipedia.Pro:WikiProject FirearmsTemplate:WikiProject FirearmsFirearms Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. United States Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wik.ipedia.Pro. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWik.ipedia.Pro:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

I have shot the cartridge extensively in Montana at prairie dogs at ranges beyond 150 yards with quite accurate results and terminal performance. I would suggest, but have no concrete data to back it up (such as exactly measured distances, etc.), that the effective range is closer to 250 yards. Jesusplayedwithwood 15:28, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've shot it at rabbits, and no way would I use it at that distance. I once hit a rabbit with a .17 HMR with it's higher velocity at about 300 yards, and it was not even close to a clean kill. FYI with a BC of .125 at 2100 fps sighted at 100 yards, this would give a drop of 30.4 inches at 250 yards, with energy of just 39 ft/lbs (compared to muzzle energy of 166 ft/lbs) and a 16" wind drift in just a 5 mph wind. Seems like a pretty big stretch to me. Arthurrh 22:40, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://www.eley.co.uk/home.htm
  • In .17 HM2 on 2011-05-20 21:28:26, 404 Not Found
  • In .17 HM2 on 2011-05-31 04:41:01, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 04:41, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://www.hornady.com/shop/?page=ballistics/popup&product_sku=83177
  • In .17 HM2 on 2011-05-20 21:28:48, 404 Not Found
  • In .17 HM2 on 2011-05-31 04:41:09, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 04:41, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell, nearly all the gun manufacturers have dropped the .17HM2 from their chambering lists. This is probably due to a) lack of consumer acceptance, since the ammo is almost as expensive as its magnum big brother, and b) technical problems with autoloader bolts and tubular magazines. Perhaps the Market section should be updated to reflect this. See http://www.handgunrepairshop.com/17_Mach_2.htm for more information. -- Craig Goodrich 68.58.132.176 (talk) 11:48, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is also the unfortunate fact -- in our lawyer-ridden society -- that a .22 Short can be chambered and fired in a .17HM2 gun, with generally bad to catastrophic results. -- Craig Goodrich 68.58.132.176 (talk) 11:56, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I edited the market acceptance part. I went to my small hometown gun store the other day. I asked for 17 Mach 2 and the guy behind the counter thinks a bit and says, "Oh yeah, we got some! There is no limit, buy it all, please!" He produced a big box with at least thirty or more boxes of ammo from the bottom shelf. He literally had to blow off a thick layer of dust off the top. They were $9/box but he gave them to me for $7/box. He said no one has ever asked for Mach 2 and I am the only guy out of hundreds of customers that buys it. Competing against .22LR which is the cheapest and most mass produced ammo ever is impossible. The 17HMR is more useful for bigger game and competes with the 22WMR which never had a market like the .22LR anyway. I see the rimfire magnum rounds as equally competitive. The Mach 2 though, it will do everything the .22LR will do just faster and straighter. I think cost and the fact it is hard to adapt to semi-auto's is the Mach 2's downfall. Savage Arms still offers Mach 2 bolt actions, though you may have to call in and 'custom' order one. Someone custom ordered my Savage MkII in 17HM2Even the 17HMR doesn't seem as popular as it once was. The cost of ammo is close to that of more powerful .17, .20, and .22 centerfires. I haven't seen many 17HMR's lately. --Russ Beck 13 Jan 2013 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ushawk1 (talk • contribs) 22:07, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article had a lot of unsourced material, much of which appeared to be original research. It had been tagged in 2013 as needing more sources for verification. I cut that material and the inappropriate pricing info. Felsic2 (talk) 20:41, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]