| .17 for Benchrest Competition - Why Not? |  | ||
| Archive | |||
|
Posted by: Doug Rumbaugh ® 03/24/2002, 10:21:13 Author Profile |
Everyone says that the .17 is not an acceptable caliber for 100/200 yard benchrest competition. Why? The low recoil should be ideal. I don't think .17s are as much affected by the wind as .224s which sometimes beat the 6mms. Is it the quality of the bullets or has an appropriate case not been found yet? I want to build a short range bench gun but don't want to follow the crowd. I want to be different but I want to have a chance also. Any insights? |
| | Recommend | Alert | Previous | Next | Current page |
| Replies to this message |
| Pretty sure it's the lack of custom bullets | | ||
| Re: .17 for Benchrest Competition - Why Not? -- Doug Rumbaugh | Top of thread | Archive | |
|
Posted by: Nick B 03/24/2002, 21:21:06 |
Even the best varmint-style bullets aren't acceptable as competitive bullets to the most accuracy-minded shooters. I know that Starke and Kindler make great bullets, but I doubt even they could compare in concentricity to the .22 and 6mm custom bullets available. Try asking over at Benchrest.com, these guys are really good. peace |
| | Recommend | Alert | Where am I? Original Top of thread | Previous | Next | Current page |
| Re: .17 for Benchrest Competition - Why Not? | | ||
| Re: .17 for Benchrest Competition - Why Not? -- Doug Rumbaugh | Top of thread | Archive | |
|
Posted by: Dan C ® 03/24/2002, 21:36:52 Author Profile |
Talk to Bud Tanner, who advertises here and sells his own 22.5 gr. 17 bullets. I believe he told me his is a Panda, and I have one of his cartridges. It's a 17 Mach IV run in .250" short! He calls it a 17 Mach III. Cute little bugger. Dan C |
| | Recommend | Alert | Where am I? Original Top of thread | Previous | Next | Current page |
| Re: .17 for Benchrest Competition - Why Not? | | ||
| Re: .17 for Benchrest Competition - Why Not? -- Doug Rumbaugh | Top of thread | Archive | |
|
Posted by: Fergus Bailey ® 03/24/2002, 22:02:22 Author Profile |
Doug If you didn’t want a 6mm, I’d be more inclined to go with a 22 than a 17 for a BR gun. I’d expect 17 bullet availability to be one issue and I wonder about barrel supply too. Berger lists a 17 match bullet, but not sure who else is supplying them. When I ordered my last 17 barrel from Shilen, the biggest profile I could get was a 5.5 which is not really enough for a bench gun, though there may well be other good barrels from other makers that would be more suitable. If you do go down the path of a 17 BR gun, I’d suggest a shortened PPC case, as that way you could just pull the barrel and try a 22 or 6mm if the 17 was not competitive enough. It would still be a costly experiment though as you would have a barrel, set of custom dies and maybe a reamer invested at that point. Let us know the outcome. Fergus |
| | Recommend | Alert | Where am I? Original Top of thread | Previous | Next | Current page |
| Doug I think bullets have been it up till know...... |  | | |
| Re: .17 for Benchrest Competition - Why Not? -- Doug Rumbaugh | Top of thread | Archive | |
|
Posted by: 17VLD 03/24/2002, 22:54:08 |
The ppc is a great case,although probably a little much for 17 BR comp.Lilja and Shilen will make you a great BR barrel among others.Berger and Starke are good bullets ,but I would not really consider them for BR comp,at the risk of sounding like a commercial I did shoot an .048" group at 100yds with Todds new 17 Gold bullets the other day with my 17ppc.To say I am impressed with Todds new offering is an understatement!!If it was me I would build a 17-222 improved along the lines of Fergus Baileys little beauty,or if Todd ever brings out a 17 VarTarg Turbo you could shoot thru the wind and not disturb your bags our your sight picture at all.Good brass is the last part of this recipe and you know lots of good 222 brass is out there,remember the 3 B's Barrel-Brass-Bullets.
Regards Matt |
| | Recommend | Alert | Where am I? Original Top of thread | Previous | Next | Current page |
| Re: Doug I think bullets have been it up till know...... | | ||
| Re: Doug I think bullets have been it up till know...... -- 17VLD | Top of thread | Archive | |
|
Posted by: jim saubier 03/25/2002, 20:10:19 |
I agree with Matt. I have been tempted to screw on a .17 barrel on my Benchrest gun and give it a go. BUT the only problem for me is the type of Benchrest competition in these parts is Score shooting and the disadvantage of the small hole that the .17 cuts would not make it remotely practical. If for group shooting, I would give it a harder look. The other problem is that I'd have to get a bolt with a .223 boltface to accomdate the cases that would be most appropriate for the .17. The cost of a new bolt for my Nesika action is outlandish and almost the cost of a new action. |
| | Recommend | Alert | Where am I? Original Top of thread | Previous | Next | Current page |
| Re: .17 for Benchrest Competition - Why Not? | | ||
| Re: .17 for Benchrest Competition - Why Not? -- Doug Rumbaugh | Top of thread | Archive | |
|
Posted by: Kurt Achenbach ® 03/25/2002, 09:16:31 Author Profile |
In a back issue of SMALL CALIBER NEWS, in an interview, that question was asked. The reply was - "its hard to see those .17 caliber holes at 100+yds!" Buy a POWERFUL spotting scope. It might become its own class. If WE build it WE will come. |
| | Recommend | Alert | Where am I? Original Top of thread | Previous | Next | Current page |
| Re: .17 for Benchrest Competition - Why Not? | | ||
| Re: .17 for Benchrest Competition - Why Not? -- Doug Rumbaugh | Top of thread | Archive | |
|
Posted by: Al Nyhus ® 03/27/2002, 07:12:04 Author Profile |
Doug, this has been tried. There are a couple of problem areas with the .17's for BR that need attention, at least in my mind. They are:
(1) Brass. I think that any serious attempt at .17 cal. BR mandates the use of a small flash hole case. A shortened (by .100-.125) 220R case with the shoulder angle changed to 30 degrees would make a good starting point. Body taper would remain unchanged, as the shortening would eliminate some of it. (2) Consistent avaiability of BR quality bullets (3) Velocity for accuracy. This is the real kicker....there is ample evidence to show that best accuracy in the .17's is obtained at velocities that are considerably lower than what most .17 shooters are used to. If in fact best accuracy comes at 3500-3600 fps. (for example), the .17's give up a huge amount of B.C. (4) Consistency. The ability to shoot small groups ALL THE TIME is where the .17 falls down. In competitive BR shooting, it's not about shooting the absolute smallest groups, but it's about shooting REASONABLY small groups all the time. This is how you win the Grand Aggregates...consistency. If recoil reduction is why you are leaning toward the .17 for BR, I think you're barking up the wrong tree. The 6PPC's in these 10.5 and 13.5 guns give nothing more that a 'tap' during recoil, so it's not like you would be making a major advancement in recoil reduction. It would sure be a neat experiment, if you have the resources i.e., adequate finances, a good temperment for experimenting, a good 'smith committed to helping you through several case designs and barrels, and a bullet maker that would be willing to help. Good shootin'. -Al. |
| | Recommend | Alert | Where am I? Original Top of thread | Previous | Next | Current page |