Precision Rimfire Platforms

[HKShooter65]

Update from post #77 above:

Bought the Ruger 17HMR American target rifle.
Just mounted a huge-overkill 5.5-22x50 Nightforce NXS on it.

ya...I know...
A $2,000 scope with massive Badger rings on a $360 rifle is not my long term plan but it should be good to test the first-impression accuracy.

Spending as much on the optic as on the rifle makes some sense.
Spending 6x may make less than total sense.
Nightforce came off a .338L I sold to a buddy and needs a temporary home.

Will update later.

 

[HKShooter65]

First outing today.

Ruger American Target .17HMR highly recommended.

Took several optics. Settled on a Trijicon 2.5-10 Accupoint as the Nightforce was silly overkill.
Shot 3 suppressors on it. The sonic cracks of the .17HMR are loud and shrill and dominate the muzzle report for all three. Negligible difference. The little Gemtech GM-22 is lightest and looks sleek and elegant I suppose.

 

[HKShooter65]

 

[HKShooter65]

I shot about 15 4-5 round groups with boring consistency. All at 100 meters, not yards. Don't ask why. To honor Jimmy Carter and to be different on my range.

It was very windy but the lack of horizontal spread attests to the .17s ability to ignore the wind.

With monotonous regularity my groups were typically 0.75 wide and 1" to 1.25 vertically.

This little Ruger is a great buy, as I paid all of $360 for it.
Clearly capable of one MOA accuracy in still weather, a better rest and hands that weren't freaking numb and shaking and hurried in the 37 degree 5pm night!

 

[toddnjoyce]

As posted in the new gun thread.

 

[HKShooter65]

Very nice.

Shot it yet?

How do they create those printed test targets?
A factory machine rest I'm guessing.

Fantastic accuracy potential.
Had to Google it but a dime is 0.705 inches. Save that in our brains to impress someone?

 

[toddnjoyce]

Very nice.

Shot it yet?

How do they create those printed test targets?
A factory machine rest I'm guessing.

Nope. Tuesday night at the earliest.

The barrels are test fired at the factory in a machine bench gun. Here’s an example of how AMU does it.

 

[EZ-E]

Congrats on the new CZ.

 

[AustinN4]

You guys are giving me the bug for a precision small bore. I usually just try for minute of coke can accuracy. I am very interested to see how that CZ 22/17 combo pans out for you.

 

[HKShooter65]

Have you picked an optic for the .22/.17 yet?

Therein is a unique challenge due to the vastly different trajectories.

The setup I shot for the first time yesterday, the .17 with the Trijicon has a line of sight almost 2.4 inches above the bore.
It was 1/2" low at 50 when dead on al 100 with the bullet still rising to intersect the line of sight. At about 450 feet I was only 2" low.

You will love the laser-like .17.

Quite a contrast is the .22 LR 1070 FPS subsonic I almost exclusively shoot.
When zeroed at 50yards or meters it is about 8 and 12 inches low out at 100 yards/meters.
It's 3.5 to 4 feet low at my max bench range of 450 feet.

https://www.mcarbo.com/store/pg/59-Trajectory-Chart-for-17-HMR-17-HM2-22-LR-22-WMR.aspx

Your interchangeable barrel setup will likely need a scope with an external tactical turret and you'll get to know that a 150 yard shot needs 130 clicks for the .22, or whatever works. The .17 will need all of 8 turret clicks at the same distance.

I have a set of 7 (2"-14") gradually increasing-size AR500 steel disks out at about 400 feet that are huge fun to plink at with my .22lr especially with iron sights and good old fashioned instinctive elevation.
Hitting the smallest of them with the .17 is boringly easy which is a joy.

Enjoy!

 

[easy rider]

Have you picked an optic for the .22/.17 yet?

Therein is a unique challenge due to the vastly different trajectories.

The setup I shot for the first time yesterday, the .17 with the Trijicon has a line of sight almost 2.4 inches above the bore.
It was 1/2" low at 50 when dead on al 100 with the bullet still rising to intersect the line of sight. At about 450 feet I was only 2" low.

You will love the laser-like .17.

Quite a contrast is the .22 LR 1070 FPS subsonic I almost exclusively shoot.
When zeroed at 50yards or meters it is about 8 and 12 inches low out at 100 yards/meters.
It's 3.5 to 4 feet low at my max bench range of 450 feet.

https://www.mcarbo.com/store/pg/59-Trajectory-Chart-for-17-HMR-17-HM2-22-LR-22-WMR.aspx

Your interchangeable barrel setup will likely need a scope with an external tactical turret and you'll get to know that a 150 yard shot needs 130 clicks for the .22, or whatever works. The .17 will need all of 8 turret clicks at the same distance.

I have a set of 7 (2"-14") gradually increasing-size AR500 steel disks out at about 400 feet that are huge fun to plink at with my .22lr especially with iron sights and good old fashioned instinctive elevation.
Hitting the smallest of them with the .17 is boringly easy which is a joy.

Enjoy!

Doesn't list the .17WSM, what a shame.

 

[toddnjoyce]

Have you picked an optic for the .22/.17 yet?

Therein is a unique challenge due to the vastly different trajectories.

Enjoy!

http://www.vortexoptics.com/product...P-riflescope_with_ebr-2c_mrad-reticle/reticle

There’s enough elevation to cover trajectories in most use cases.

Realistically, I’ll probably end up with a 70ish yard zero using 22LR and dial down for 50. I’ll have to keep separate dope for 17HMR zero and use that to establish the new zero and calculate from there.

 

[toddnjoyce]

Doesn't list the .17WSM, what a shame.

I believe they corrected that with the CZ457 series, but not certain.

The Sako Quad does have all four ‘major’ Rimfire caliber options, for sure. But it’s a $1500 base gun.

 

[easy rider]

As far as rimfire's go, this is something that got my attention and led to buying a .17WSM rifle:

 

[Big Green]

As far as rimfire's go, this is something that got my attention and led to buying a .17WSM rifle:
View attachment 162484

Less than a 5” drop at 200yds?

 

[easy rider]

Less than a 5” drop at 200yds?

That's about right.

 

[HKShooter65]

Well dang, you guys are making me want a 17WSM

Here's the telling chart.

All projectiles are subject to the same force of gravity uninfluenced by varying horizontal velocity.
This occasionally is the subject of some debate.

The WSM gets farther faster due to higher velocity and (sometimes) better ballistic coefficient.

Darn attractive round, indeed.

 

[easy rider]

View attachment 162501


Well dang, you guys are making me want a 17WSM

Here's the telling chart.

All projectiles are subject to the same force of gravity uninfluenced by varying horizontal velocity.
This occasionally is the subject of some debate.

The WSM gets farther faster due to higher velocity and (sometimes) better ballistic coefficient.

Darn attractive round, indeed.

Accuracy was an issue to begin with. The thinner barrels often used with rimfires would heat up quickly, so many manufacturers switched to a heavier, free floated barrels.

Although I researched .17WSM quite a bit, I was actually quite surprised how good the results were.

 

[toddnjoyce]

Start:

Finish

Interim optic until Vortex fills my backorder.

Harris BRDM bipod

Hope to zero Tuesday night

 

[ZX9RCAM]

Is that in your garage?