Looking for a Step Up From .17 HMR

[Swifty Morgan]

After being mired in the 3-MOA bog for years, I finally got to where I can pretty much do 1 MOA at 100 yards. Problem: now I'm spoiled. I really like accurate guns. I want a bigger bolt gun to fit between .17 HMR and .308, and I want it to be capable of sub-MOA shooting.

I have a .17 HMR (Savage with a stainless bull barrel), and that's the gun I've been shooting lately. As long as there is no wind, it does whatever I tell it to. But I would like to have something with comparable accuracy which is less subject to being blown off course. And I want something cheap to shoot, without much recoil. Whatever it is, I want it to be able to bring down coyotes and raccoons.

I have considered .17 WSM. It looks like it will do what I want, but the selection of guns is very small, and it looks like Savage makes the only one that will shoot well without expensive work. People say the Savage .17 WSM is kind of half-baked, however, and that it has a crappy magazine and a bolt that fools you into thinking it's closed when it's not.

I considered .22 WMR, but I read that it was considerably less accurate than .17 HMR, and it would hurt to go backward.

I also thought about .204 Ruger. Looks like it will do fine, but the ammunition costs around twice as much as .17 WSM. I suppose I could bring the price down by rolling my own. Don't know if it would be as cheap as .17 WSM, though.

The nice thing about .204 Ruger is that I would have a lot of good rifles to choose from.

Finally, there is always .223.

If anyone wants to offer tips I am all ears.

 

[Bigmike79]

223

With the description of what you're looking for how is this even a question?

I suppose you could get one of those new 7.62 x39 Ruger bolt Ranch rifles. Word on the street is that they shoot about 1 MOA with steel cased ammo just like the CZ 527.

 

[edwardware]

You've spent a sizeable portion of your post describing a .223 bolt gun. For cost, availability, and the performances you're asking for, you can't beat it.

If you want eclectic for it's own sake, find a .222 and form your own brass.

 

[Swifty Morgan]

223

With the description of what you're looking for how is this even a question?

I suppose you could get one of those new 7.62 x39 Ruger bolt Ranch rifles. Word on the street is that they shoot about 1 MOA with steel cased ammo just like the CZ 527.

You're not the first person to observe that I ask stupid questions.

I know nothing about the Ruger 7.62 rifles. Now I have something new to read about.

 

[Goosey]

There's the .22 Hornet to throw into the mix as well.

 

[somethingbenign]

So I'm still getting used to the whole MOA thing (someday I'll have enough free time to read up on it) but I know my step dad uses a 22-250 for coyotes and swears by it. Even went and had a custom built rifle in 6 ppc made for him just to turn right back to the 22-250 after one season.

 

[Bigmike79]

You're not the first person to observe that I ask stupid questions.

I know nothing about the Ruger 7.62 rifles. Now I have something new to read about.

They're neat little rifles.

7.62 x39 doesn't really kick, and one of the cool things about the round is that it will take out any large game in North America inside 200 yards with the right ammo despite what people may say.

Go on YouTube and watch a video of cheap steal cased154 grain soft point ammo being tested in ballistic gel. Talk about bang for your buck....... no pun intended

 

[Sniper66]

I have 17 HMR, 22 Hornet, .204, and 223. All of my centerfires will shoot sub-moa with my reloads. Of the 3 centerfires I listed, the cheapest factory ammo is the .223 and the variety of ammo for it is almost infinite. If you are looking to inch up gradually in power and range from the 17HMR, the .22 Hornet will be good. But, there is very little variety of ammo available and not cheap. I can reload the 22 Hornet for really cheap...about 20 cents per round. My .204 and .223 about 25-30 cents. As others had advised, I think your best bet is .223.

 

[redneck2]

I wouldn’t get real fixated on caliber. If you hand load, fixate on quality bullet/ammo and the barrel.

I’ve got three rifles that easily shoot 1” groups. A CZ in .204 Ruger, a Varminter .223 AR, and a .358 WSSM AR. Accuracy is far less dependent upon case configuration than the name on the head stamp.

 

[Swifty Morgan]

I looked over the alternatives, and I want to try .204 Ruger. My understanding is that it's a good choice if I start taking longer shots, so maybe it will have versatility that will allow me to avoid buying another gun later. Thanks for the help.

 

[Varminterror]

The 204R won’t run as far as 223rem. It’s faster, so it’s flatter shooting in early trajectory, but you can’t outrun aerodynamics and wind does terrible things to a tiny bullet. It also costs more to feed and has less options for ammo on the market - and less bullet options for reloaders. I like the 204R, but in a class with the 223rem, 204R only takes home a participation ribbon.

I ran many years with a 17HMR, but I did pick up to 17WSM a few years ago, and my HMR’s haven’t hardly been touched since. If I want more than my WSM, I don’t reach for my 204R, I go for my 223rem. The 17HMR or WSM aren’t ideal for coyotes, whereas the 204R and 223r are in their sweet spot hunting coyotes, but under certain conditions, the 17 rimfires work well enough. I thoroughly enjoy all of the above, but when I need to know my round is going to perform as needed at longer range or on game, the 223rem is the one I take.

 

[Sniper66]

I shoot praire dogs with all the rifles I listed in my first response (17HMR, 22Hornet, 204, 223). The 17HMR out to 100-125 yards, 22Hornet 125-175, 204 and .223 on out to 300+ yds. I switch back and forth between the .204 and 223 on those longer shots depending on conditions. I shoot 39 gr Sierra BKs in my Kimber .204 which handles the winds a bit better than 32 gr. And I shoot 50 gr Sierra BKs in my .223. My longest shot with my .223 is 326 yds, measured with lazer range finder. Had to walk that shot in and the 5th shot, which I held a foot high and a foot left, finally nailed him. In general, I don't like taking really long shots...too many misses. If I was to pick a favorite between the .204 and .223, I couldn't really do it. There are many options for both. I have two .204s and will soon have two .223s. Almost bought a Cooper Model 21 last week. The number of options drives me a little nuts, but that's a good problem to have. Let us know what you buy.

 

[Bfh_auto]

I looked over the alternatives, and I want to try .204 Ruger. My understanding is that it's a good choice if I start taking longer shots, so maybe it will have versatility that will allow me to avoid buying another gun later. Thanks for the help.

204 still gets blown around too. 223, 22-250, 243 would be better.
Choice would depend on if I wanted to reload.

 

[Swifty Morgan]

I looked around at what other people saying, and I saw a lot of folks saying the .204 is better for long distances, and that it is less affected by wind. Now I'm being told the opposite. I'll keep researching. It would be nice to use a common round with cheap brass and so on, but so far, .204 looks better.

 

[doubleh]

If you are a reloader you can tailor the 223 to do most of what you seem to want. I love my 17HMR and it's capable of 1/2 minute of angle accuracy with 17 gr. ammo if the conditions are really good meaning no wind and a good steady rest. The 223 takes over where the 17 is finished.

 

[Charliefrank]

The 22 Hornet is very cheap to reload for. If your using 10 or 11 grains of powder and there's 7000 grains in a pound, well.

 

[Swifty Morgan]

One of the things I've learned is that if you buy compromise guns, you end up buying more guns later. If 17 WSM had been available, I would never have bought a .17 HMR. I can see myself buying a .223 because it's almost what I want, and then having to buy something else in a year or two.

 

[rayatphonix]

I have rifles in 17HMR, 204 R and 223. 204 is a varmint and target round. The 223 is target, varmint and small deer round mainly due to the huge variety of available bullets.

My 204 is my favorite. It's accurate with everything I put in it. My 223 is accurate with some bullets and not so with others. I attribute this to bullets ranging from 40 to 80 grains. Barrel twist is likely a factor.

If you shoot a lot, and don't have plans to reload, I'd probably go 223.

 

[Bfh_auto]

If you want 0-200 yds, cheap factory ammo and low recoil for easy shooting 223 rules.
I don't have one because I have a 22-250.

Check Nikon's spot-on website. It has most of your cartridges and you can compair them with factory ammo.

 

[roscoe]

CZ 527 in .223/5.56.

 

[ScrapMetalSlug]

Buy a savage bolt gun in 223. If you want something different in a year or two, just rebarrel it. You can rebarrel a savage at home on your kitchen table in no time.

 

[Varminterror]

I looked around at what other people saying, and I saw a lot of folks saying the .204 is better for long distances, and that it is less affected by wind. Now I'm being told the opposite. I'll keep researching. It would be nice to use a common round with cheap brass and so on, but so far, .204 looks better.

Jump onto Hornady’s website and run the ballistic calculator yourself. The 40grn Vmax in the 204R has a BC of .273 vs. .398 of the 73 ELD in the 223. I get the 40 in the 204R up to 3670fps out of a 24” barrel, getting the 73 ELD in 5.56 up to 2790 out of the same length. 750yrds, 10mph crosswind, 8-10” more drift on the 204R.

Guys who think “long range” is 300yrds think the 204R drifts less than 223rem. It’s a wash at best, and in most cases, the 223rem drifts notably less.

 

[someguy2800]

For what your looking to do, 223. Savage, ruger american, tikka, ect...

 

[Armored farmer]

I have both .204 and .223, and would also suggest the .223.

 

[Stevenvalleyky]

As stated by many above, 223rem is a good option over the smaller rounds listed if you want less wind drift at long range. 243 win would be even better.