I handled one of the Heritage Arms .17's at my local gun shop a few months ago. I don't doubt that it will go bang, but the cylinder fit and play was quite pronounced. I don't think this cartridge will flop, but I don't know how well it's going to work in revolvers. If you look at the Taurus website, they have a 17HMR and .218Bee in 12" revolvers, stainless of course. I think they where the silhouette models. I'd take the S&W first, but sometimes they are too expensive just to try something you might not really want. I have a .17 HMR in a Savage rifle that is quite effective on prairie dogs and other vermin. The trigger is a drawback in the Savage, but moa accuracy out of an inexpensive rimfire makes up for it.
Posts by kciH
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
DOK,
I've got a Scheels about 45 minute from me, but I've never bought a firearm from them. I was turned off to them by other business practices in dealings I had when the store was being built. That said, they are by far the best sporting goods store short of going to Cabela's. The .17HMR ammo goes for $7-10/box of 50 depending on where you buy it. I know this is not the cheapest thing around, but lots of people don't handload, so it can be a bargain of sorts.
I know that Taurus produces a fine product for the money. Everyone on this forum loves Rugers and seems to scorn the Taurus. With the money and/or time I've had to put into my Rugers to make them into decent/excellent shooters, I'd think there could be some huge bias here. I'll grant you the Brazillian product doesn't shoot like an S&W, but Taurus is meeting the customer demand at a reasonable price(Much like Ruger). I'm happy to have both companies products at my disposal one way or the other. Taurus is producing handguns of at least the quality that S&W was in it's heyday, with more calibers, for a price most folks can afford. I love my Smith's, but this can definitley not be said for them any longer. My Taurus 85 stainless .38 that I carry daily will outshoot any other snub I've ever handled, at any price.
As for the .17: If you shoot dog's or other smaller vermin at ranges under 200yds, you're missing the boat if you don't try one. I don't mean you have to pay $5-600 for a Ruger 77/17 like they where trying to rape us for locally. Try a Marlin, try a Savage (rifle or pistol), try any one you like, especially a Contender/Carbine barrel. This is a cartridge worth a try in my estimation. As the firearms become available, try one, it's alot of fun. I usually shun anything I can't handload, but this is the exception. Bullberry.com makes some excellent barrels that will blow you mind accuracy-wise for little more than the cost of a factory Contender/Carbine barrel.
Dont' forget to add the cost of a good .17 caliber cleaning rod and some brushes and a jag. Folks may tell you the .17's have fouling problems, but in my experience (.17 HMR and .17 MachIV in rifle length barrels) this is innacurate in modern times. If you don't try to shoot at velocities under 4000fps, the .17's are good as gold and the bullets are becoming more and more common and economical. Try to shoot something with your 22-250 and watch it vaporize through the scope without a muzzle brake, you'll understand the rising popularity of the .17's. I'm not trying to beat up the .22's, God knows, I've got a few.
I've got a Scheels about 45 minute from me, but I've never bought a firearm from them. I was turned off to them by other business practices in dealings I had when the store was being built. That said, they are by far the best sporting goods store short of going to Cabela's. The .17HMR ammo goes for $7-10/box of 50 depending on where you buy it. I know this is not the cheapest thing around, but lots of people don't handload, so it can be a bargain of sorts.
I know that Taurus produces a fine product for the money. Everyone on this forum loves Rugers and seems to scorn the Taurus. With the money and/or time I've had to put into my Rugers to make them into decent/excellent shooters, I'd think there could be some huge bias here. I'll grant you the Brazillian product doesn't shoot like an S&W, but Taurus is meeting the customer demand at a reasonable price(Much like Ruger). I'm happy to have both companies products at my disposal one way or the other. Taurus is producing handguns of at least the quality that S&W was in it's heyday, with more calibers, for a price most folks can afford. I love my Smith's, but this can definitley not be said for them any longer. My Taurus 85 stainless .38 that I carry daily will outshoot any other snub I've ever handled, at any price.
As for the .17: If you shoot dog's or other smaller vermin at ranges under 200yds, you're missing the boat if you don't try one. I don't mean you have to pay $5-600 for a Ruger 77/17 like they where trying to rape us for locally. Try a Marlin, try a Savage (rifle or pistol), try any one you like, especially a Contender/Carbine barrel. This is a cartridge worth a try in my estimation. As the firearms become available, try one, it's alot of fun. I usually shun anything I can't handload, but this is the exception. Bullberry.com makes some excellent barrels that will blow you mind accuracy-wise for little more than the cost of a factory Contender/Carbine barrel.
Dont' forget to add the cost of a good .17 caliber cleaning rod and some brushes and a jag. Folks may tell you the .17's have fouling problems, but in my experience (.17 HMR and .17 MachIV in rifle length barrels) this is innacurate in modern times. If you don't try to shoot at velocities under 4000fps, the .17's are good as gold and the bullets are becoming more and more common and economical. Try to shoot something with your 22-250 and watch it vaporize through the scope without a muzzle brake, you'll understand the rising popularity of the .17's. I'm not trying to beat up the .22's, God knows, I've got a few.
I'm with you on the 45LC Bisley, and there's also the .41 Bisley. Those are two of my favorite revolvers. I love the Smith's though. I probably own 3 Rugers for every S&W. I recently purchased a lightly used 617 (6 shot), but it did need a trigger job to match the rest of them. A new 50 cal would be interesting, I just hope they get it right for the sake of durability and don't create a boat anchor (SupRedhawk). I know there are many people on here who love the Super Redhawk and I'm not trying to disparage it in any way, I just don't like to wear suspenders to keep my pants up when I have a revolver on my hip. I wore out a couple of 29's slammin steel about 10 years ago, hence my concern for durability. The 44 Classic Hunter I have still was one of the first years that where supposed to be more durable, but I still don't hammer on it like I do my Rugers.
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Shooters Forum
A forum community dedicated to Sport shooters, owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, hand casting bullets, hunting, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Top Contributors this Month
View All
AllOutdoor.com
217 Replies
JBelk
162 Replies
recoil junky
75 Replies
Recommended Communities
Join now to ask and comment!
