17 vs 20cal

[Con]

Guys,
Been too long ... help me find clarity (Piss off Unc Johno ... wont need your smart arse comments! )

Decided to pull a Rem700 apart and fit a fresh barrel. ONLY going to be used protecting my trees from hares, plus the local fox population and rabbits on a mates place to around 300 yards.

Criteria is simple ... 4000fps.

Thoughts on whether to go 17Rem (have dies, projectiles, brass and enjoy it other than the fiddly reloading due to fat finger syndrome... but barrel is approaching toast); or do I go the 'new' kid on the block and try a 204Ruger (somehow I have no rifle but have dies, cases and Cleavers still sells bulk 34gr ZMax ) ?

Must feed smoothly, must use easily sourced components and work with ADI powders ... must be able to sneak over the 4000fps barrier.

Thoughts?
Cheers...
Con

[Rabbitz]

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiip!

Was that the sound of a can'o'worms being opened?



Sorry Con, I have no experience with either cal so cannot make a useful comment but will watch with interest.

[Con]

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiip!

Was that the sound of a can'o'worms being opened?



Sorry Con, I have no experience with either cal so cannot make a useful comment but will watch with interest.

I know ... I hesitated a day or two before asking!

Either will likely sport a 26" (0.600" at muzzle) barrel by Swann.

Trying to get away from the 'shock and awe' that is the 22/250 at 4000fps with a 40gr VMax.
Cheers...
Con

[Camel]

I would go with the 20 cal Con, great for the varmints and can double up as a big game rifle. 32gn Zmax are great, and seeing you have dies for the 204Rug, I won't try and con you into doing a 20/222

[Con]

I would go with the 20 cal Con, great for the varmints and can double up as a big game rifle. 32gn Zmax are great, and seeing you have dies for the 204Rug, I won't try and con you into doing a 20/222

The 20/222 gives me palpitations. I think its just a brilliant idea. A 'smith up here does his version holding the 204Ruger reamer back to be 222Rem length. Same can be done but at 223Rem length.

Only way I can see myself going 20/222 is if I decide to go a varmint contour and then keep it short at around 20".
Cheers...
Con

[Seddo]

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=22955&hilit=17ppc

Both will do what you want, but why not start an argument!!!

[Branxhunter]

I would go with the 20 cal Con, great for the varmints and can double up as a big game rifle. 32gn Zmax are great, and seeing you have dies for the 204Rug, I won't try and con you into doing a 20/222

The 20/222 gives me palpitations. I think its just a brilliant idea. A 'smith up here does his version holding the 204Ruger reamer back to be 222Rem length. Same can be done but at 223Rem length.

Only way I can see myself going 20/222 is if I decide to go a varmint contour and then keep it short at around 20".
Cheers...
Con

A .20-222 with a 26” tube really sings.....

But given you already have .204 does that seems the sensible way to go. I know you said you have brass, but in the long term .204 brass would be much easier to find compared to the .17Rem.

Marcus

[macca]

Well the 17 rem paid for my first ute and a lot of barrels(rifles and beer ) back when foxes and hares where worth shooting.
I own a 204 and they are alright. But I probably won't put a third barrel on it.
For the use you stated my vote is the 17.
Cheers

[billsshed]

Hi Con,
You know me...17...17...17......
17/222 with a fast twist barrel so you can launch a long ...anything projectile, maybe even one of my 25gn FBSP. THEY ARE GOOD FOR 4300+. Or for more speed a 22gn open tip double annealed jacket..for instant fragmentation.
Unsurpassed hare separator.
Bill

[MISSED]

I would have suggested the 17 mach/Fireball but as you are using the Rem 700 Action I am going to say the good old 17 Rem.

[trevort]

Con my thoughts are what rock have you been hiding under to think a 204 is a new kid on the block


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[trevort]

I would have suggested the 17 mach/Fireball but as you are using the Rem 700 Action I am going to say the good old 17 Rem.

I agree


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Con]

Pulled the old laptop with QL on it for some research. Looked at x3 cartridges... 17Rem, 204Ruger, and just for giggles, the 20 Practical.

Matched all for the 61K psi of the 17Rem (204Ruger is lower by default, Practical even more so)... and in a 24" barrel only the 17Rem could guarantee 4000fps with both 20gr and 25gr. I was surprised to see the 204Ruger come up just short with ADI powders and 34gr pills.

Might give the 17Rem a final barrel scrub, and if it's not up to par, order a fresh stainless 17 barrel...
Cheers...
Con

[Mudgegonga]

I think 20 cals are easier to live with. I wll be interested in your Swan barrel experience. I would go MAB before Swan based on my experience.

[barryb]

I endeavoured to stay out of this voting session cause I will be getting my chance tomorrow morning , but Con I just couldn't help myself. Everything already said is relevant but I would have to stay with the 17teens Con. When your talking speed the 17teens are hard to beat & there's nothing more pumping to see the hair part on a foxes nose at 4000 FPS at 200 yards or so , sight picture still there & you don't need ear plugs. Would you believe when talking about speed I was talking to a fellow the other day who was getting 4000 + fps out of a 17 , my memory not all that flash but I think he had a 17 "Magpie" or something similar , could have been a 17 Garish ?? not sure but he was getting that speed with a 20 grain Nosler shots . He's going to try out some 17 grainers next week so it will be interesting to see how they go. Anyhow that's my 2 bob's worth.
Cheers
Barry