Thread: .17 WSM

I have done a fair bit of research into this calibre in the past and was very excited when it came out and really wanted one as I am a massive fan of rimfires but...there are a few problems with it unfortunately.

1. Because the first rifles released in 17wsm were mainly shit and it got a bad rep resulting in there being almost no factory rifle manufacturers in this calibre and not many sales to keep factory ammo sales up resulting in what will probably be a slow and painful death for the calibre.
2. Most of the ammo is getting up towards or if not $1 a round - You can get decent factory 223 ammo for this price and it will out shoot it by faaaaar. You can get 204 ammo for $1.25 ish and you can point and shoot out to 200m....
3. Even if you can get the nicer 17wsm rifles to shoot well, they will never match the accuracy of the hmr. I'm yet to meet one that doesn't shoot ridiculously well out of the box and we all know accuracy in any platform is far more important than a few extra fps. Especially if you can get a rifle out of the box to shoot well - not everyone wants or has the time to bed rimfires...

If they had released the 17wsm and it shot as well as the hmr and ammo was around the same price I have little doubt it kill the hmr like the hmr killed the mach2 but they fkd it up so unfortunately this wont happen
@small_caliber I think the reason Maca said the hmr and 204 is you can get factory ammo both, it doesn't cost too much and they will out shoot/be on par with most of the calibres listed bar maybe the 22-250ai in a fast twist(custom barrel) and 6mm which burn waaaaay more powder, have far more recoil (for watching impacts through the scope) and are create much more noise.

If it were me I'd get a hmr if you want a rimfire or 223 if you want a cheap centrefire or a 204 if you want the velocity/red mist and don't mind paying a little extra for ammo.

Just my 2c