17 rem or the 219 Donaldson Wasp
MJPaluda2
I am getting a new barrel for my T/C contender carbine and want to hear
from someone who has had a gun in either caliber and others opinions on
these. Thanks in advance
Mike
Byron D. Krohn
I have the 21" .17 Rem. barrel, and I love it. The Contender system may
be the most accurate .17 around at a reasonable price. A re-worked Sako
may beat it but not by much.
The major problem is the relitave scaricty of bullets. Only 25 Gr. HP
are commonally available. Custom makers exist however. I would like to
try 30-35 Gr. SOFT- points for Texas white-tails, (Jackalopes??).
Don't know anything about the .219, .223 w/ 1:12 twist is an "iffy"
thing. .22 Hornet is a winner. 7mm .30 Waters is my all-time favorite.
Good shooting,
Byron, in Austin, TX
Tim Calvin
MJPaluda2 <mjpa...@aol.com> wrote:
>I am getting a new barrel for my T/C contender carbine and want to hear
>from someone who has had a gun in either caliber and others opinions on
>these. Thanks in advance
>
>Mike
The 17 Rem is difficult to handload, barrels must be cleaned frequently
(every 20 rounds?), and you'll need a new, smaller ramrod. If you can put
up with the inconvienence, they're a lot of fun. The 22 has to be more
practical, except that case forming can be a chore depending on which case
you start with. Ackley likes the Donaldson Wasp as an ideal benchrest 22
(course that means all the fiddling with the brass for absolute uniformity,
like neck reaming). Several production 22 cartridges will perform
similarly, and would be easier to load. The Donaldson Wasp is faster than
the 222 Rem and slower than the 22-250 and 220 Swift. Ackley's version, the
.22/30-30 Improved Ackley, is the full length 30-30 case blown out and
necked to 22, and matches the Swift.
Tim Calvin <timh...@quiknet.com>
author of CD-ROM "Tim Calvin's Hunting the West"
eli...@vt.edu
>I have the 21" .17 Rem. barrel, and I love it.
>The major problem is the relitave scaricty of bullets. Only 25 Gr. HP
>are commonally available. Custom makers exist however. I would like to
>try 30-35 Gr. SOFT- points for Texas white-tails, (Jackalopes??).
A .17-caliber gun, any .17 caliber gun, is too small for whitetails, period.
Jackalopes, maybe...but even those scrawny little schnauzer-size deer they
have around College Station deserve better than to be shot with a .17-caliber
weapon. Even if it is legal.
The Elitist
David Thedens
MJPaluda2 wrote:
>
> I am getting a new barrel for my T/C contender carbine and want to hear
> from someone who has had a gun in either caliber and others opinions on
> these. Thanks in advance
>
> Mike
Since I have both a 17 Rem and a 219 DW I feel qualified to respond.
The .17 rem is a bit overbore (case capacity vs bore dia.) and you will use
a little more powder to get it to perform in a 14 or 16 inch barrel. I have
a 14" SSK barrel and a 18 inch Bullberry barrel. The extra 4 inches is
about 200 fps but I cannot get much over 3500fps without huge pressure
signs, whereas the REM 700 24" barrel runs at the rated 4000fps.
(chronographed, ofcourse). Factory brass is available but expensive, and
since it is just a bit longer than a .223 you should probably buy the real
thing. (although I have use necked down .223 for grins :) )
The 219 DW is a nice cartridge but it is a pain to case form. If you want to
do better than a .223 then this is a good choice. I have the Hornady
Projector 5 station progresive and put a 30-30 case in one side and an
untrimed 219 DW comes out the other after 5 operations. Case forming dies
are expensive and there are two versions of the 219 DW one is shorter than
the other. I opted for the shorter. Then I have a drill attached to a
Foster case trimer that does a rough trim. Another Foster case trimer neck
reams and case trims to the final length. If I could find some 30-30 brass
with a small primer pocket I would be in heaven. :)
I have a very hot .223 load pushing a 45g bullet at 3000 fps out of a 17
inch barrel. I do not have final loads for the 219 DW yet but they far
exceed the .223.
I think the best .17 in a Contender are the .17/222 (very easy to form) or
the .17 Javalena (a tad bit shorter improved .17/222). The 17 Ackley Bee
is also good, but you must fire form it. Bullberry made allmost all of my
.17 barrels.
dave
--
Get it right you're a star
Get it half right you're a gas giant
Byron D. Krohn
Dear Sir:
I respectfully suggest that you read P.O.Ackley, "Handbook for Shooter's &
Reloaders", Vol. II pp 83-82.
Of course P.O. could be all wet.
Byron
Jerry Houston
eli...@vt.edu wrote:
> [snip]
> >try 30-35 Gr. SOFT- points for Texas white-tails, (Jackalopes??).
>
> A .17-caliber gun, any .17 caliber gun, is too small for whitetails, period.
> Jackalopes, maybe...but even those scrawny little schnauzer-size deer they
> have around College Station deserve better than to be shot with a .17-caliber
> weapon. Even if it is legal.
I figured all along that by "Texas white-tails" he was referring to
white-tail jackrabbits. (As opposed to black-tail jackrabbits, both
species of which we have in Washington state.) ESPECIALLY after he
added the part about "Jacalopes."
Byron D. Krohn
What did I do to rate refereences in the third person?
Byron
eli...@vt.edu
>eli...@vt.edu wrote:
>>
>> In article <318E5D...@ccsi.com> "Byron D. Krohn" <bdk...@ccsi.com>
> writes:
>> A .17-caliber gun, any .17 caliber gun, is too small for whitetails, period.
>Dear Sir:
>I respectfully suggest that you read P.O.Ackley, "Handbook for Shooter's &
> Reloaders", Vol. II pp 83-82.
>Of course P.O. could be all wet.
If he's advocating the use of any .17-caliber rifle on deer, he is all wet.
Sopping, in fact.
The Elitist
>Byron
Dwayne Potter
>eli...@vt.edu wrote:
.>A .17-caliber gun, any .17 caliber gun, is too small for whitetails, period.
.>Jackalopes, maybe...but even those scrawny little schnauzer-size deer they
.> have around College Station deserve better than to be shot with a
.17-caliber
> weapon. Even if it is legal.
If you think that's bad.....
Read in the Austin Daily Mistakesman (05/05/96) that TPWD Commission is
to vote this week on allowing .22 *rimfire* for whitetail, claiming it would
make
the sport "more accessible." I very nearly went apoplectic.
Apparently the commision is the only group in favor of the proposal. Public
hearings input from around the state seemed to be unanimously in opposition.
I fired off a letter and made a couple 'phone calls to register my personal
disapproval.
Ted Culin
Dwayne Potter <dpo...@discon.tdh.state.tx.us> wrote:
>>eli...@vt.edu wrote:
Rimfire is a little small, but so are these deer. Were talking a
trophy with 4 inch horns weighing 35 soaking wet, I don't think there
would be much left from a blast from a 30-06.
Chris Fulton
In article <4mteq3$8...@nadine.teleport.com>,
Are the deer in Texas really this small? A typical whitetail buck
weighs 35 pounds? Surely they are bigger than that...?
Chris Fulton
John S. Strahl
Before you comment about a person who has proven himself to be a genius
on a subject, you should read his books! Don't comment if you don't know
WHAT HE ADVOCATES. He isn't suggesting the 17 on deer. READ THE REFERENCE
John Strahl
Dwayne Potter
In article <4mul9k$c8g...@cv.hp.com>,
CHRIS_...@Non-HP-McMinnville-om3.om.hp.com says...
No. *Average* 2.5 yo buck probably closer to 125 lbs.
Many diverse ecological regions in the state produce wildly varying sizes.
Pineywoods average more like 140 lbs.. Hill Country - guesstimate - 110 lbs.
"Muy Grande" South Texas Plains - who knows - 185 lbs.
MJPaluda2
I started this to get an idea on cartridge chambering for my rifle and
this really got off on a tangent. The original post was to see the
experience of different people had with these two chamberings. Thanks
Mike
Jerry Houston
Dwayne Potter wrote:
> Ñsnip®
> >
> >Are the deer in Texas really this small? A typical whitetail buck
> >weighs 35 pounds? Surely they are bigger than that...?
>
> No. *Average* 2.5 yo buck probably closer to 125 lbs.
>
> Many diverse ecological regions in the state produce wildly varying sizes.
> Pineywoods average more like 140 lbs.. Hill Country - guesstimate - 110 lbs.
> "Muy Grande" South Texas Plains - who knows - 185 lbs.
My best guess is that the original poster misfired on his "1", and that
"35 pounds" was really supposed to be "135 pounds." Of all the possible
scenarios that I can think of, that seems most probable to me.
Ster600
In article <318FDE...@ccsi.com>, "Byron D. Krohn" <bdk...@ccsi.com>
writes:
>Subject: Re: 17 rem or the 219 Donaldson Wasp
>From: "Byron D. Krohn" <bdk...@ccsi.com>
>Date: Tue, 7 May 1996 18:36:45 -0500
>
>eli...@vt.edu wrote:
>>
>> In article <318E5D...@ccsi.com> "Byron D. Krohn" <bdk...@ccsi.com>
> writes:
>>
>> >I have the 21" .17 Rem. barrel, and I love it.
>>
>> >The major problem is the relitave scaricty of bullets. Only 25 Gr. HP
>> >are commonally available. Custom makers exist however.
Get the Varmint Hunter magazine and you'll see quite a few makers of .17
bullets in weights from 15 grains up to 30. It is an excellent cartridge
for the fur hunter - mostly one little hole in and now hole out.
Effective on coyote out to two hundreds yards and more.
Byron D. Krohn
Thanks for the response. I have still not found any .172" dia Soft-Poimt
bullets. I'll take a look at VH, but I'll bet all of the bullets are
HPs.
Byron
MJPaluda2
Bullberry markets a solid for the fur hunter.
Mike
Ted Culin
Chris Fulton <CHRIS_...@Non-HP-McMinnville-om3.om.hp.com> wrote:
>In article <4mteq3$8...@nadine.teleport.com>,
> Ted Culin <tcu...@teleport.com> wrote:
>>Dwayne Potter <dpo...@discon.tdh.state.tx.us> wrote:
>>
>>>>eli...@vt.edu wrote:
>>
>>>.>A .17-caliber gun, any .17 caliber gun, is too small for whitetails,
period.
>>>.>Jackalopes, maybe...but even those scrawny little schnauzer-size deer they
>>>.> have around College Station deserve better than to be shot with a
>>> .17-caliber
>>>> weapon. Even if it is legal.
>>
>>>If you think that's bad.....
>>
>>>Read in the Austin Daily Mistakesman (05/05/96) that TPWD Commission is
>>>to vote this week on allowing .22 *rimfire* for whitetail, claiming it would
>>> make
>>>the sport "more accessible." I very nearly went apoplectic.
>>
>>>Apparently the commision is the only group in favor of the proposal. Public
>>>hearings input from around the state seemed to be unanimously in opposition.
>>
>>>I fired off a letter and made a couple 'phone calls to register my personal
>>>disapproval.
>>
>>Rimfire is a little small, but so are these deer. Were talking a
>>trophy with 4 inch horns weighing 35 soaking wet, I don't think there
>>would be much left from a blast from a 30-06.
>Are the deer in Texas really this small? A typical whitetail buck
>weighs 35 pounds? Surely they are bigger than that...?
>Chris Fulton
They are that small. A huntin partner of mine just moved to Oregon
from Texas. He has this 4 point rack (actually a fork n' horn and the
thing is only 4 inches tall. I've seen spikes blacktail deer with
bigger horns. I was at a resturant in Dallas and they had some horns
mounted and I mean I wouldn't have placed them in public view.
Now parts of Texas do have large deer, but these little whitetails are
really small. They don't call them puppy deer for nothing.
This buddy of mine thought he was in heaven when he got his doe this
year. It was the largest animal he had harvested in his hunting
carrer. This animal was a yearling blacktail doe around 100lbs
(counting awfull). You should have seen his eyes when we got a seven
point (Thats seven on one side, six on the other) later in the season.