Who has a 17/222???

[RePete]

I have a L461 in 222 that is going to be transformed into some form of 17cal.
I'm not sure how hard the brass is to resize. I hear "it's a piece of cake just run 222 brass in the seater die then FL" from one person and then the next guy tells me I'll need several expencive dies to get the job done. Since I've never really owned a wildcat, I'm not sure what to believe.
I have a 17Rem and a 17FB so I thought this would fill some sort of imaginary gap in my arsenel. :(
All my rifles are hunting rigs, and with my skills I'll never win any BR titles. I just want a pleasant shooting, walking rifle that isn't to much trouble to reload or make brass for.
I'd appreciate any pro's or con's from those of you that have or had this caliber.
Thanks Alot
Repete

[Jim in Idaho]

I thinbk you'd be MUCH better off going to a .17MachIV. You won't get any more from the .17/222 than from the MachIV, and the M4 is a proven great round. I was looking at the .17/222 in my Quickload program a couple of years ago, and one of the things I noticed was that the accuracy nodes don't fall at the max velocities. Maybe that's why you don't see any of them around. You'd think it would be a great fit, but for some reason there aren't very many. But, in the case of the MachIV, the accuracy nodes are exactly on the max velocities, and with more than one bullet weight. The field experience of the owners proves it out, too.

[T.Zimm]

Pete; I sent you a pm..... Jim I might have to respectfully disagree with you. I think it does have a useful purpose. While the Mach IV/Fireball is a spectacular round the Duece does have it's uses. But if you are looking for max velocity I would go with the .17 Predator. My friend has a .17 Duece and is very happy with it. I do not claim to know the particulars of the loads or speeds though. Here is one thing though; Feeding a Duece is FAR easier than trying to feed a Mach IV, wouldnt you agree?? At least out of a 700 action. I wish I had one of all of them!!:D Tyler in N. Idaho

[Catfish]

I am a wildcat fan and have 6 of them here now, but I think you`re waisting your time if your trying to fill a gap. If your wanting a .17 cal. wildcat I would recommand the .17 AH. I have one of those and I push a 19 gn. Calhoon bullet at 3,600 fps. with 10.4 gn. of powder. You would be better server to build a custom gun with a tight necked chamber in eather .17 Rem. or .17 Fire Ball than building it in .17-222, unless you are just wanting something different.

[Jim in Idaho]

I won't say it's a bad round. Nor will I say it won't shoot OK. I will say, considering it's easier to make cases for, so why isn't it more popular? The reason is that it doesn't do anything that the MachIV won't do, and the MachIV does it on less powder. It probably does feed better, but most people with the MachIV do get it feeding eventually. And what I said about using Quickload to compare cartridges perfectly illustrates why the .17 deuce isn't more popular. Personally I don't have a dog in this fight....I just answered the question with the info I have. I also know that Kevin Guilette has a .17/222 that he really likes. What makes the MachIV so desirable is it's extreme flexibility in loading, much like the .222 itself. When you look at it in Quickload, you see that many different powders give very good performance, and the accuracy nodes with most of them are very close to max velocity....that's my kind of cartridge, regardless of caliber....LOL

[RePete]

Couple of things.
I talked to DAA a little and he pointed out that the L461 chambered in 222 may be to short in the mag well to feed the 17Pred. That was one of my firsy choices but I think he may be right. I can get the 17Rem to feed ok in the Sako but from what I see,,, the capacity is maxed out and I know the 17Pred. is longer than 17Rem. I use my rifles for hunting and a feeding problem isn't something I care to deal with.
Jim in Id,,,,,,,,,,You are right about this action being a natural for a 17FB/MK4.
Like I said "I already have a 17FB (which is by far my favorite caliber) that shoots lights out, so that probably wouldn't be the best Idea. That's why I have created the imaginary gap for it to fill. Building another 17FB or another 17Rem wouldn't make much sence.
Although the 17AH is on my to-do list, I'd never use this action for one, even if it would work with the Hornet cases.
Keep em coming guys, and thanks again.
RePete

[Jim in Idaho]

What's weird about the .17/222 is that it looks like, judging by case capacity, that it would fit nicely between the .17 Rem., and the MachIV. In reality, it doesn't. I've looked at it several times, and I can't figure out why it doesn't, but you just don't get any better velocities than you do with the MachIV. That MachIV case shape just seems to really work with the .17 bore size, for some reason. If you step up to the .204 in the .222case, (20 Vartarg Turbo), you can push 36 grain bullets to almost 4,000 fps on about 25 grains of powder...that .222 case works great in the .20's.

[RePete]

What's weird about the .17/222 is that it looks like, judging by case capacity, that it would fit nicely between the .17 Rem., and the MachIV. In reality, it doesn't. I've looked at it several times, and I can't figure out why it doesn't, but you just don't get any better velocities than you do with the MachIV. That MachIV case shape just seems to really work with the .17 bore size, for some reason. If you step up to the .204 in the .222case, (20 Vartarg Turbo), you can push 36 grain bullets to almost 4,000 fps on about 25 grains of powder...that .222 case works great in the .20's.

Jim,,,,,,,,Thanks for the input. What you are saying makes perfect sense.
I thought about the 20cals too (Tac 20 in particular) but I really love my 17's and think I'll be happier with that cal.

My original idea (and probably the best) was to have the Sako chambered in 17Rem and then eventually have my LVSF 17Rem. rebarreled in 17Predator. The 700 action seems like a natural for the predator, but like I said earlier "I fear the Vixon may be to short in the mag well for the Pred. to feed well, or at all".

I know a good Bullet Smith that is fond of the 17/222 but I haven't picked his brain yet. I'll see if he can talk me into it.
Truth is, I really do have the 17cal's covered pretty well for hunting, but I just hate letting this sweet little action set idle. It almost seems criminal!!:(

[Jim in Idaho]

I know what you mean...I've got an L461 in .222mag. I also have a nearly new .222 barrel for it, and keep thinking about changing barrels, or doing something else with it, but can't make up my mind. I'm not a big fan of the
20's, especially for hunting the bigger predators, mainly because of lack of bullet selection, but I've always thought, looking at the Vartarg Turbo in Quickload, that it would be a fine cartridge. Good luck with your decision.

[T.Zimm]

You have really got me thinkin now.... Tight neck .17 Remmy and then turn the LVSF into something else like you mentioned. I still think that .17 Duece would be fun to play with. The Javelina is another; but it requires a little work making brass. You have a good brass choice with the duece. You can get Lapua and Federal etc... What about a .17/223?? I think we need a North Idaho Small Caliber club. :D

[Buster]

My vote, FWIW, would be TAC .20. I have a .17 MachIV and a .17 Remington, and they've stayed in the safe since I received my TAC .20. Just something about it that's almost magical.

[Bigrock]

Well here is my 2 cents worth. Leave it in 222. its one of the best thats ever been put out. I have a Mohawk that I use as a walking rifle. And there a dream to reload for. :D

[Jim in Idaho]

Yup, Bigrock....that .222 is one hell of a cartridge. I'm seriuosly considering changing my Sako in 222mag to a straight .222.

[RePete]

We could even let people in from as far South as Riggins.
Naturally Bob would be the exception. He's smart, and we could use some smart folks.
Bigrock,,,,,,,,That's a no brainer and I've given it alot of thought. May very well end up going that way. If i do I would want a tight neck. What do you (or anybody for that matter) suggest for a neck diameter????????????
Thanks Again

[Jim in Idaho]

Well, I guess that leaves me out....LOL, I'm south of Riggins, and on top of that, I'm not smart!

[RePete]

Well, I guess that leaves me out....LOL, I'm south of Riggins, and on top of that, I'm not smart!

Opps,,,,,I ment to say Jim. Don't know where "Bob" came from?:o

I was trying to make a joke, and it turns out the jokes on me.

See what I mean? We deffinatly need some smart guys from down south.

Back to the original topic, the more I think about it the better leaving it in a tight necked 222 sounds.
All I would need to get would be a Redding bushing die and a neck turning tool. I have lots of 222 brass. Hmmm
I love my 17's, but I really do have them covered.

[Jim in Idaho]

No biggy Pete....LOL. I haven't checked a loaded round, but on my .223AI Ackman suggested a .250" neck when I built it, and that seems to work very well. It doesn't require turning, but it's tight enough you can clean the necks up a bit without making a sloppy fit. That's for .223 brass, and I don't know how the .222 brass compares...should be close.
Bob......ha ha

[Charlie g]

This is the one I dont have went to a 17-223 instead but if it is a walking gun love my 17AH or my 17AB both on BSA no 12 and no 6 actions

[Darrel in Minn]

Jim, I as well like both calibers, but I would leave it as .222 Mag. Just something different with a little more horsepower. I have a Mag and really like it. I am using Herters brass and it works well. I just have a soft spot for the Mag. Do you have load data for a .17 Predator? Darrel

[Jim in Idaho]

I like the deuce mag fine, but have a .223AI which is a little better, and I really miss having a .222. I shot a lot of coyotes back in the high-priced fur days with the .222, and have always had a soft spot for that cartridge. It might be the best calling cartridge, for backpack hunting, I've ever used.
I don't have the .17 Predator in Quickload, but if I had a reamer print, and some time, I could draw it up in Quickdesign, and then transfer the data into Quickload, and we'd be "off to the races" with data.
Jim
(edit)...now that I think about it, I may have a reamer print on the predator in one of my old Small Caliber News issues...I'll take a look and see what I can come up with.

[Jim in Idaho]

Darrel, what bullet are you shooting in your Predator? What's the barrel length? I do have that cartridge in Quickload in the other computer.....apparently I drew it up for someone else awhile back. I checked, but don't have any loads worked up on file, but can run some new data.

[RePete]

Do you have load data for a .17 Predator? Darrel

Darrel,,,,,,,,,,,Take a look at DAA's Varmint Safarri web site. Click the "Article" By Dan reguarding the 17Pred. build. He's posted load data, as well as lots of information on the Cartrige.
I wish my Sako had a little bigger Mag Well. I'd build the 17Pred in a heartbeat. But like I stated earlier,"I can't tolerate any feeding issues in a hunting rig", plus the fact that this action is too nice to take a chance on.


Later

[Catfish]

My personal felling is that the .17-223 is not worthy of being considered if you are building a rifle. I have both a .17-223 and a .17 Rem. They are so close that untill you get used to looking at them they are hard to tell appart. Velosity is so close that that there is no way you`ll be able to tell them appart in the field. New dies for the .17-223 are around $ 100. For the .17 Rem. abt $ 35 for the same quality. The .17 Rem. will be far easier to sell. I bought my .17-223 barrel and dies for less than I could have bought a .17 Rem barrel alone. If you can find a deal like that go for it, but don`t build one and take the big loss yourself.

[John in CA.]

We could even let people in from as far South as Riggins.
Naturally Bob would be the exception. He's smart, and we could use some smart folks.
Bigrock,,,,,,,,That's a no brainer and I've given it alot of thought. May very well end up going that way. If i do I would want a tight neck. What do you (or anybody for that matter) suggest for a neck diameter????????????
Thanks Again

Mine is cut at .252" and it needs to be kept very clean to function well. No neck turning reqd., I noticed an increase of 230 fps vs. the factory neck dia. using my 36 gr. bullets, and had to reduce the load a notch.

Mine is a L-46 / Lilja

[RePete]

Mine is cut at .252" and it needs to be kept very clean to function well. No neck turning reqd., I noticed an increase of 230 fps vs. the factory neck dia. using my 36 gr. bullets, and had to reduce the load a notch.

Mine is a L-46 / Lilja

Jon,,,,,,,,,,,Thanks for the input. The more I think about, the more I think rebarreling in 222 is the best way to go.
Yea,,,,,I am aware of your L-46. I have lusted for it several times. It seems to be well thought out, and built with the best components available.
Very nice indeed.

Is the 36gr bullet you are using home grown. or manufactuerd.
Thanks again.

[John in CA.]

Pete, I am sorry to be so late in replying to your question. I should check the board more often! :)

Bullets are Starke RPVB's (red prairie varmit bullet). A thin-jacketed, flat base hollow point that holds up to speed well, and stays inside coyotes. Occasionally one will pop on the hair, if he is too close, and or you hit the shoulder bone, but about 95% good results. I honestly dont think the bullet was designed for large varmints, but it works. They were made in 40 gr. weight, and those work well too. Also, they were by far the most accurate in that gun.

Too bad Clint Starke quit making them, but you occasionally see some for sale, and he is around, guys here know him and I think you could locate some, with a little effort.

Take care

[Darrel in Minn]

Jim, I don't have a 17 Predator, yet. Seriously thinking about one though. That or a 19-223 Calhoon, or Tac 20, or a 20 Practical. Won't use any balistic tip bullets for fur again in a 20 caliber. What are your thoughts on these four calibers for a coyote calling gun? I really don't need one of these as I use my .220 Swift, 22/250, 222 Magnum, and 17 Remington, but it is something different. I will use hollowpoints and want to save the fur. I have checked out the Varmint Safari site on the Predator. Darrel

[Jim in Idaho]

I like the 20's Ok, but I'm a bit concerned about the lack of bullet selection. With your coyote-calling experience, you are as aware as anybody just how important the bullet is in cartridge selection. We have proven coyote bullets in .17, and in .22, and on up, but not much experience documented yet with the 20's, and what is documented is mostly bad news...LOL. If I were building a new .17 today, I'd build a Predator, probably, or more likely a Tactical .17....they're pretty similar. I'd build it with an 8 or 8 1/2 twist, too. There are several people on the board, and I'm one of them, that have bad luck with the 30 Gold bullet's stability unless driven to really high speeds. Other than that, it's a great bullet for coyotes. I like the .17's for coyote-calling, mainly because of their low muzzle report. The muzzle report from that tiny bore just doesn't carry very far, so the nearby coyotes aren't alerted as much as with larger calibers. When I shot that coyote with John in CA a few years ago, he was videotaping the shot from the other side of the coyote. The shot was no louder on the video than the sonic crack of the bullet...just sort of a "tick" sound.....that was 1/2 mile from, and almost facing, the muzzle. .17 Rem. shooting the 30 Gold @ 3880. On the .19... I'd be afraid it is going to become extinct with the introduction of the .20's. As far as I know Jim Calhoun is the only one making bullets for it? Other that, I guess any round built on the .223 case would be fine with me.....17 or .20. Boy we sure have a lot of choices anymore don't we......way more than when I started coyote calling.

[sscoyote]

1 of the guys over at longrangehunting.com was shooting the 17 Ackley Magnum Improved (i think that was what it was)--222 MAG necked down, and blown out. He claimed over 4000 with the 30's. If i were gonna build another 17 fur rifle it'd be the 17-204 Ruger to drive the 30's as fast as possible. I can't imagine a much easier 17 wildcat to form really.

[Ackman]

I wouldn't bother. To begin with, there's not that much gap between the 17MachIV/FB and a 17Rem. The gap can be small or nonexistant depending on the accuracy load for your particular. Many times I've used a MIV and .223 side-by-side on prairie dogs and out to about 250 the results were about indistinguishable. A 17-222 would be good in the 461 action, but so is a MIV/FB. I have 2-MachIV's and 2-221FB's on small Sakos and they all feed like the action was designed for that cartridge.

Awhile back I was looking at the Predator for a Sako action and it looked like there was enough room in the magazine. That'll be my choice for the next one.