.17 Remington VS .204 Ruger

[jackslayer]

I recently got interested in really fast flat shooting varmint cartridges. Don't know much about these two cartridges. Main question is what can the .17 Remington do that the .204 can't? Is it any cheaper (factory and reload)? Faster? etc

 

[eitrheim31]

17 remington is a little faster with the lightest bullets from hornady but at over 4000 fps i don't think it makes much difference. 204 will shoot much heavier bullets so if you want to hunt coyotes with it i think the 204 is a better choice.

 

[Whitman31]

204 wins. I can't really think of anything that the 17 can do that the 204 isn't better at. I guess technically it might reload slightly cheaper...

I own a 204, and have enjoyed a lot of shooting with the 17. Both are a lot of fun, but the 204 just has more upside...

 

[MachIVshooter]

I have a .17, my sister has a .204. Both are lightning fast and very flat shooting. The .204 holds energy and velocity better. The big advantage with the .17 is that you do not ever lose you sight picture in the scope-even on 20x. There is just no recoil.

 

[cal74]

Factory ammo for the .17's run 23-25.00 bucks a box around here, although I did find some .17 fireballs for 15.00 a box recently.

.204's run around 16-18.00 around here, .17's will be a tad cheaper to reload after you have the brass, but the brass is almost twice as much as the .204

I have both, haven't even shot my .17 yet though.


I basically bought the .17 because it's a cool little cartridge and as mentioned there's no recoil so you can see your hits.

 

[Whitman31]

My 204 is in an AR platform, so I didn't think of recoil. I suppose in a bolt gun the 204 may have more recoil than the 17...

Hard to believe we're comparing the recoils of two of the lightest hitting centerfires still in production...

 

[jackslayer]

So it looks like I got the answer I anticipated. The .17 sounds very interesting and attractive until application and functionality are put in the discussion. Less recoil is a plus for visible hits but I don't even know if that would be much of an issue with the heavy varmint rigs. Thanks for the input

 

[jackslayer]

So how much should I anticipate spending on a Bushmaster Varminter .204 upper?

 

[rangerruck]

if handloading, I would go with a 17 fireball, nearly all the performance of the 17remmy, but with way less powder, and even less recoil. and any varmint you hit out to 300yds, will be dead as Dillinger. if staying factory, I would do the 204.

 

[jackslayer]

Fireball VS .17 Remington

So what are some stats on these rounds? Fps, bullet weights etc. Are they just other cartridges necked down?

 

[P.B.Walsh]

Why bother with em' get something .223+ those are small enough as it is, the only .17 caliber I'll ever own is a .177 pellet gun, and for a .204 I'll stick to a .22lr or a .223 caliber, why, because their common, espesially the .22lr

 

[jackslayer]

Fireball VS .17 Remington

Just curious about my options. My collection will always include a .223 and .308 rifle.

P.S. I have a .17 HMR and I love it. Somehow shooting a round the same diameter as the old pellet gun I grew up shooting feels good. It feels even better shooting a projectile at more than twice the weight and twice the speed.

 

[Alchymist]

I've been told that the .17 is prone to fouling, moreso than the larger calibers. Anyone know if this is true?

 

[rangerruck]

a 17 fireball is the old 221 fireball, necked down to 17. It was originated about 50 years ago , by a wildcatter, who was pretty famous , I don't remember his name now. It was then called the 17mIV, or 17mach4. It will do 4000 fps with a 25 grain bullet, and it uses of course a small case, with very little powder. the 17 remmy is famous for fouling bbls, but not the m4. I have a friend who has a m4 rifle, and has been shooting it , for about 40 years now, he says it is absolutely the best varmint getter he has ever shot; 22 mag recoil, with a straight line laser shot out to 300 yds. If I reloaded, this would be my round of choice; very inexpensive to reload. lots of 20 and 25 grain bullets, lots of cases to be had.
http://www.saubier.com/smallcaliber/which17.html
http://www.chuckhawks.com/17Fireball.htm

this data is a bit old, and not handloading type, but safe 'remington' figures.
If you handloaded , you should be able to get the 25 grain pill to do 4000.
plus there is a new powder out, made almost specifically for tiny bullets; I think it is
called reloader 17, and it is hotter and faster than the origional powder.

 

[Pokyman]

I have both the 17 Mach 4 and 204. Because of minimal recoil and relatively light muzzleblast created by the 17, I rarely shoot my 204. I have nothing bad to say about the 204 except for the nasty crack from the muzzleblast. Both cartridges are superbly accurate.

The comment about the 17's being bad to foul does not apply to the Fireball. I have shot over 100 rounds through my 17 Mach 4 without cleaning. Accurace after the 100 rounds was still very good. The Fireball and the Mach 4 are almost identical cartridges.
I know 5 different people that either own or have owned the 17 Reminton. One of the 5 has nothing but good to say about the 17 Rem., the other 4 have nothing nice to say about that cartridge and have sold their rifle. Fouling was the major compaint. After about 25 rounds it was mandatory that the rifle be cleaned (according to them).