Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum
Trigger Mike

17 verses 22 in revolver

Recommended Posts

Ruger makes a single six in 17 hmr and one in 22.  How do they compare in a revolver?  I've researched rifle ballistics for them and the 17 is flatter but in a revolver that would not be a factor,  I imagine. 

 

I ask as I got a 17hmr for small predators and thought a pistol to match may be neat.

 

Along with that chiappa makes one too but I read a review that says it sometimes fails to fire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, .17 is a rifle cart.

 

but in a revolver that would not be a factor,

 

Agreed- I see no advantage when considering pistol range limitations.

I find wind, brush etc. affects accuracy of the .17 cal. more than .22 cal.

The .17 cal explodes on impact (with about anything), which is nice if you need control with what is down range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the first thing I think of. Maybe I'm cheap, but $3 a box vs 10 or $12 a box.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay stupid question alert: Why would the 17 not be flatter in a revolver. Educate me please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Okay stupid question alert: Why would the 17 not be flatter in a revolver. Educate me please?

 

Diameter, weight and Concentric variables are more precise with the .22 at 'X' distances, within a confined velocity

range.

The 17 is a good 'flatter' in a rifle given its caliber/weight and velocity.   But just doesn't have those

good variables that match the .22 when lower velocities are involved, such as shooting in a short

barreled pistol.

 

P.S. - Just so you know, I made all that stuff up cause it sounded good.   But honestly, I would

be surprised if my answer is close to being right..... :D

 

Merry Christmas Rye.

 

..........Widder

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

 

Diameter, weight and Concentric variables are more precise with the .22 at 'X' distances, within a confined velocity

range.

The 17 is a good 'flatter' in a rifle given its caliber/weight and velocity.   But just doesn't have those

good variables that match the .22 when lower velocities are involved, such as shooting in a short

barreled pistol.

 

P.S. - Just so you know, I made all that stuff up cause it sounded good.   But honestly, I would

be surprised if my answer is close to being right..... :D

 

Merry Christmas Rye.

 

..........Widder

 

Merry Christmas to you too and thanks for the info..... I think:o??

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably comes down to bc.  Larger bullets have better bc.  I have not checked the bc’s to verify they are substantially different.   At higher velocity from a rifle the lower bc isn’t as much of a factor since it starts faster.  From a pistol where the velocity is closer to the same, the smaller round will slow down faster.   Since drop is related to time of flight, The faster the total flight time the lower the drop.  I would guess the 22 starts slower, but is faster at the target, so flight time is less.  The 17 is probably faster at the muzzle, but slows down faster, longer flight time. 
 

The best example of this is the 50 bmg. It only starts at 2700 fps, but is still sonic at almost a mile.  A 308 at 150g has to be 2950 at the muzzle to be sonic at 1000 yards. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TM,

Here is a Chuck Hawks write on it. 
 

Oh Jeez h Freakin Crap! When are they going to fix this site so one can properly post links on an iPhone? :angry:
 

Search .17 HMR vs .22 revolver. A Chuck Hawks article will be a few selections down. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

 

Diameter, weight and Concentric variables are more precise with the .22 at 'X' distances, within a confined velocity

range.

The 17 is a good 'flatter' in a rifle given its caliber/weight and velocity.   But just doesn't have those

good variables that match the .22 when lower velocities are involved, such as shooting in a short

barreled pistol.

 

P.S. - Just so you know, I made all that stuff up cause it sounded good.   But honestly, I would

be surprised if my answer is close to being right..... :D

 

Merry Christmas Rye.

 

..........Widder

 

   Back when I was heavy into rimfire and target shooting I did some comparisons. In comparable rifles, the .17 was hands down the more accurate and punched harder. At 100yds the 17 would poke holes in all the quarters I wanted to spend. I could hit them out to 200 consistantly. 

It's true the 17 is a lot lighter bullet often only weighing in at 17 grains also. People will say the wind will carry it away compared to a heavier .22. It IS affected by the wind but not as much as you'd expect because the cross section is also smaller than the .22 so not as much wind hits it comparatively and it comes in a pointed bullet.

   You hit the nail on the head about the shorter barrels. In a pistol with up to an 8" barrel the .17 doesn't burn all of the powder. The .22 may not burn all of the powder either, but it burns a lot more of it than the 17. Can look at it hypothetically like this. If the 17 is burning 70% of its powder and the 22 is burning 98% of its powder, the 22 will be more consistent regardless of how aerodynamic the 17 is. 

When you get into the longer barrel pistols like the smith and wesson performance center .17 it's another story. Those barrels must be long enough to burn all of the powder because you get rifle accuracy out of them. Of course it's a 12" barrel so there ya go. Must be nice to be right even when you try to be wrong:D

 

Edited by Tennessee williams
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read a article where they claimed 22 Mag from a handgun would roughly equal a 22 LR fired from a rifle powerwise.   17 HMR, I would think should equal this idea....   Any opinions to this as a reason to bear the extra expense of the Mag rounds?.    All truth told, I am in the too cheap to shoot the more expensive ammo anyway           GW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never compared 22mag/pistol to 22lr rifle. I can see where that would hold water though. 

To me if a 22lr wont do it, I go way up in caliber. Not just to mag. Ain't much difference in price between a 22mag and a 38.

That being said, the little 17 will poke a hole in a cast iron skillet lid. 22 ain't gonna do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A 22 mag round , I am told, will zip and ricochet all over the body, bouncing off bones etc, and turn you into butter.  A 22 lr is softer and won't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is more about the difference between a rifle and a pistol than .22 vs .17. Both will  work fine at pistol ranges. But when you get past pistol distances you gain very little from the pistol.

The .17 extends the max effective distance of a .22 (we all know how far we can effectively shoot with a .22 rifle or pistol). If you can shoot 50% further with a .17, that distance in a rifle is significantly further than the same 50% out of a pistol. Also you must subtract the performance factor between bbl lengths in rifle vs pistol. Any advantage you gain with a .17 in a pistol is hardly worth it. Once you get past the max effective range of a .22 pistol your sights start to get in the way at greater distance and accuracy degrades because of the sight picture negating advantages you picked up with the .17.

 

We are talking about a Supper Six.

Now if you use a scoped long bbl pistol in .17, things start to change for the better.

Think of a 30-30 rifle vs. pistol. You load from rifle powder to pistol powder and your using a long single shot pistol.

.22 to .17 your using the same load designed for a rifle.

 

If you really want to blow stuff up, the little high speed .17 will do that for you better than a .22.

 

BTW: are we talking .22 mag vs .17 ?

 

Like Widder, I'm making this stuff up. I own a .17 but I would never buy a .17 revolver. My experience is with rifles in these calibers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

A 22 mag round , I am told, will zip and ricochet all over the body, bouncing off bones etc, and turn you into butter.  A 22 lr is softer and won't. 

 

Don't believe that nonsense for a moment. 

OLG 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

A 22 mag round , I am told, will zip and ricochet all over the body, bouncing off bones etc, and turn you into butter.  A 22 lr is softer and won't. 

The 22LR was the assassins choice because it scrambled the brain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 17hmr revolver is less impressive than a rifle but still better than the 22lr revolver.  Look at the Single Six or the Taurus Tracker.  I’ll not buy another Chiappa SAA 17.  Chiappa did well to stand behind it but the Single Six and Tracker stood on their own without multiple trips to the factory.

 

Shorter barrel length and cylinder gap hurt you with a revolver.  From reading: 22LR acceleration drops off sharply at 8” while 17hmr drops sharply at 11” barrel length.  Peak velocity is 15-17” from the 22lr and 18-21” with the 17hmr.  Those lenths are in bolt action rifle barrels, the length will shorten in a revolver with cylinder gap.  These numbers will vary with the ammunition used.

 

The BC of .17 and .22 can be in compared and supported any way you prefer.  Put the 15.5gr 17 against the 60gr 22 and the 17 might as well be a ‘67 beetle.  Compare the 20gr 17 to the 30gr 22 and you can change that.  

 

If you want rifle/revolver set, buy it.  You can always sell it later and the Single Six 17 seems to hold its value well.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know the 22 mag zips around from watching it unfold on a police camera but did guess the 22lr would not zip.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish ruger made the wrangler in 17, then it would be worth it.  Chiappa is unreliable from experience I had with the 1911-22. Ruger always gets it right or fixes it from my experience 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 17 will develop it best trajectory curve and speed from a rifle length barrel which allow to burn all powder before the projectile exit.

 

czhen

FL 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.