Loving the .17 WSM

Rimfire bolt action rifles, lever action, pump action and self loading rifles. Air rifles.

Re: Loving the .17 WSM

Post by Lazarus » 03 Nov 2022, 6:56 pm

bigpete wrote:
Lazarus wrote:
bigpete wrote:I'd definitely have one over my 17hmr if Cz had made their 452 chambered for it. I don't see the point in buying a rimfire that weighs as much as a centrefire,and I don't like the savage,the only one I've seen that I liked is the winchester 1895


G'day bigpete,
Not being picky, just asking as one who owned a Savage in 17WSM and regrets parting with it, what's not to like?


They're ugly and I don't like them? Do I need much more reason?


Nope.
I don't like Harley glides for the same reason
Courage is knowing it might
hurt, and doing it anyway.
Stupidity is the same
.
And that's why life is hard
User avatar
Lazarus
Officer Cadet
Officer Cadet
 
Posts: 1917
New South Wales

Re: Loving the .17 WSM

Post by in2anity » 04 Nov 2022, 1:29 pm

bigpete wrote:I'm not sure what your argument is ?

Oh, well you said:
I don't see the point in buying a rimfire that weighs as much as a centrefire.
My argument is "because it's cheaper and more convenient to run a rimfire offering comparable performance" That's all. Not having a go bp.
At what point does lack of maintenance become patina?
User avatar
in2anity
Lieutenant Colonel
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Posts: 3048
New South Wales

Re: Loving the .17 WSM

Post by bigpete » 04 Nov 2022, 5:39 pm

in2anity wrote:
bigpete wrote:I'm not sure what your argument is ?

Oh, well you said:
I don't see the point in buying a rimfire that weighs as much as a centrefire.
My argument is "because it's cheaper and more convenient to run a rimfire offering comparable performance" That's all. Not having a go bp.


Ruger apparently specifically made their 17wsm the same weight as their centrefire rifles....which is not necessary at all in my mind. My comment wasn't about the why of getting a 17wsm,more as to why have a rimfire built to centrefire weights,its pointless
bigpete
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3577
South Australia

Re: Loving the .17 WSM

Post by Die Judicii » 05 Nov 2022, 5:13 pm

bigpete wrote:
in2anity wrote:
bigpete wrote:I'm not sure what your argument is ?

Oh, well you said:
I don't see the point in buying a rimfire that weighs as much as a centrefire.
My argument is "because it's cheaper and more convenient to run a rimfire offering comparable performance" That's all. Not having a go bp.


Ruger apparently specifically made their 17wsm the same weight as their centrefire rifles....which is not necessary at all in my mind. My comment wasn't about the why of getting a 17wsm,more as to why have a rimfire built to centrefire weights,its pointless


Well that all depends on,,,,,,,, the end users likes, and specific needs, and then looks,,, and cost should be the last considered factor so long as it ticks all of the first boxes.
For me personally I both like and need varmint style rifles, which inherently are heavy and therefore suit the way I shoot.

In my case the Ruger 77 .17 WSM ticks ALL the boxes for me.
And, a big part I believe, why my rifle gives me zero perceptible recoil is tied up to the "center fire weight" that you mention.
Sure,,,,,, you may not like it,, but I'm just glad that Ruger put that option on the table as are probably a lot of other shooters.
:thumbsup: :drinks:
I do not fear death itself... Only its inopportune timing!
I've come to realize that,,,,, the two most loving, loyal, and trustworthy females in my entire life were both canines.
User avatar
Die Judicii
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3706
Queensland

Re: Loving the .17 WSM

Post by Lazarus » 05 Nov 2022, 5:45 pm

Die Judicii wrote:
bigpete wrote:
in2anity wrote:
bigpete wrote:I'm not sure what your argument is ?

Oh, well you said:
I don't see the point in buying a rimfire that weighs as much as a centrefire.
My argument is "because it's cheaper and more convenient to run a rimfire offering comparable performance" That's all. Not having a go bp.


Ruger apparently specifically made their 17wsm the same weight as their centrefire rifles....which is not necessary at all in my mind. My comment wasn't about the why of getting a 17wsm,more as to why have a rimfire built to centrefire weights,its pointless


Well that all depends on,,,,,,,, the end users likes, and specific needs, and then looks,,, and cost should be the last considered factor so long as it ticks all of the first boxes.
For me personally I both like and need varmint style rifles, which inherently are heavy and therefore suit the way I shoot.

In my case the Ruger 77 .17 WSM ticks ALL the boxes for me.
And, a big part I believe, why my rifle gives me zero perceptible recoil is tied up to the "center fire weight" that you mention.
Sure,,,,,, you may not like it,, but I'm just glad that Ruger put that option on the table as are probably a lot of other shooters.
:thumbsup: :drinks:


That's what drew me to the Bmag, heavy barrel and thumbhole stock.
All this talk of WSMs getting me wanting another, good onya
Courage is knowing it might
hurt, and doing it anyway.
Stupidity is the same
.
And that's why life is hard
User avatar
Lazarus
Officer Cadet
Officer Cadet
 
Posts: 1917
New South Wales

Re: Loving the .17 WSM

Post by bigpete » 06 Nov 2022, 6:38 pm

The problem is there's no other decent options....
bigpete
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3577
South Australia

Re: Loving the .17 WSM

Post by Die Judicii » 06 Nov 2022, 9:39 pm

bigpete wrote:The problem is there's no other decent options....


Are you saying you don't like any of what's available ?

Have you looked at the Volquartsens ?
I do not fear death itself... Only its inopportune timing!
I've come to realize that,,,,, the two most loving, loyal, and trustworthy females in my entire life were both canines.
User avatar
Die Judicii
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3706
Queensland

Re: Loving the .17 WSM

Post by bigpete » 07 Nov 2022, 6:12 am

Die Judicii wrote:
bigpete wrote:The problem is there's no other decent options....


Are you saying you don't like any of what's available ?

Have you looked at the Volquartsens ?


God they're even worse !
Only one I've seen i remotely like is the winchester low wall and thats 2k and still way heavier than any rimfire needs to be
bigpete
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3577
South Australia

Re: Loving the .17 WSM

Post by Die Judicii » 07 Nov 2022, 12:32 pm

bigpete wrote:
Have you looked at the Volquartsens ?


God they're even worse !
Only one I've seen i remotely like is the winchester low wall and thats 2k and still way heavier than any rimfire needs to be[/quote]

Your a hard man to please it would seem.
These days any rifle worth it's salt would be hovering around the $2,000 mark.
And from first hand experience I've found that an awful lot of em have some degree of "finish" issues.

One very beautiful rifle I have is a Sako Grizzly 30-06 in walnut.
If your blindfolded you get the feel of quality the moment your hands wrap around it.
And I find the Ruger 77 .17 Stainless WSM also in walnut (although lower grade than older timbers) to have the same feel of quality about it.

I'm very quick to say "that's ugly" when I look at some various rifles,,,,, but I think this Ruger is very well finished, and pleasing to the eye as well.
In fact,,,,,,, I just took it out to have another close look trying to find something that could be classed as ugly,,,, but Nahh

The way that you write about rimfires (that shouldn't be a bit hefty) only makes me think more so, that a reasonable amount of weight in a quality rifle only imparts more of a quality feeling/impression.
I would not think along these same lines if a rifle was being bought for the likes of hill/mountain type terrain,,,, but you haven't put forward any such reasoning for your dislike of a bit of weight in a rimfire.

Again, as I've indicated previously, what suits one person doesn't suit the next of course.
If you don't like the weight or the looks of a particular rifle,,,,,,,, that's fine.
I'm just very curios as to your reasonings behind your views because it seems you've indicated that you don't like XXXX and that XXXX is ugly,,,,,,,,,
But you've not given any particular reason/s as to why.

I've done a little research on the one that you say you like over and above all else in this field,,, and can only surmise that due to your apparent penchant for shotties,,,,,, these rifles have some similarities to a single barrel hammer gun which I could see would help in your likes.
Coupled with the distinct "Western" appearance that would I'm guessing also go hand in hand with your choices.

The fact that what I could see in them only being a single shot wouldn't appeal to me personally but may well be right up your alley.

My real like for the one I looked at was that "gimmicky" variable direction ejected shell lever.
Gimmicky,,,,,,,,,,,,, but very useful I believe.
So it would seem the only real choice you have is to save up and get a Browning/Winchester (Brinchester ?) Low Wall rifle for your self.

:thumbsup: :drinks:
I do not fear death itself... Only its inopportune timing!
I've come to realize that,,,,, the two most loving, loyal, and trustworthy females in my entire life were both canines.
User avatar
Die Judicii
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3706
Queensland

Re: Loving the .17 WSM

Post by bigpete » 07 Nov 2022, 2:39 pm

I've pretty much told you why I don't like them....
Ruger is too heavy,but if they made a lighter version around 5lb I'd be on board.
Don't like the savage and volquartsen because they're goddamn ugly
Kinda like the classic lines of the winchester but again its too heavy and too expensive for a single shot rimfire.
If Cz had of brought out one based on the 452 action I'd be in. But they didn't.
As for having to spend 2k to get a decent rifle.....a fool and his money are easily partied the daying goes.
I have a safe FULL of fine firearms not a single one has cost me over 1k including scopes.
I've shot a lot of stuff with them.
Hell,the best 22 I have cost me $115 dollars, and that was just to replace the magazine. I believe the make starts with A and ends with Z.....
Rimfires have o appreciable recoil so why carry around something heavier than it needs ? Even spotlighting out of a car you often have to support the weight one handed ( found that put recently trying to get onto a fox that just wouldn't sit still ).
I mean if all you do is sit in one spot,then go ahead,get a heavy gun. Hell, add lead weights to it.
But if you're carrying that gun around,every bit of weight counts against you. Which is why I don't like any of the offerings. They're either plasticky or too heavy.
Like I say though,the ruger would be great.....2.5lb lighter....
bigpete
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3577
South Australia

Re: Loving the .17 WSM

Post by Elmer » 07 Nov 2022, 5:41 pm

Looks like your on a winner mate, I was wondering how that 17 was going.
I've sent you s mail.
Elmer
Sergeant
Sergeant
 
Posts: 724
South Australia

Re: Loving the .17 WSM

Post by Elmer » 07 Nov 2022, 8:54 pm

Die Judicii wrote:
bigpete wrote:
in2anity wrote:
bigpete wrote:I'm not sure what your argument is ?

Oh, well you said:
I don't see the point in buying a rimfire that weighs as much as a centrefire.
My argument is "because it's cheaper and more convenient to run a rimfire offering comparable performance" That's all. Not having a go bp.


Ruger apparently specifically made their 17wsm the same weight as their centrefire rifles....which is not necessary at all in my mind. My comment wasn't about the why of getting a 17wsm,more as to why have a rimfire built to centrefire weights,its pointless


Well that all depends on,,,,,,,, the end users likes, and specific needs, and then looks,,, and cost should be the last considered factor so long as it ticks all of the first boxes.
For me personally I both like and need varmint style rifles, which inherently are heavy and therefore suit the way I shoot.

In my case the Ruger 77 .17 WSM ticks ALL the boxes for me.
And, a big part I believe, why my rifle gives me zero perceptible recoil is tied up to the "center fire weight" that you mention.
Sure,,,,,, you may not like it,, but I'm just glad that Ruger put that option on the table as are probably a lot of other shooters.
:thumbsup: :drinks:

Yeah, I like heavy rifles too....My sako synthetic quad in .22WMR was too light for my taste
So, I filled up the forearm channel with about 1kg of no 8 lead shot locked in with fibreglass resin, it now weighs almost as much as my 85VLS 223 which feels perfect for sitting and offhand shots.
Elmer
Sergeant
Sergeant
 
Posts: 724
South Australia

Previous

Back to top
 
Return to Rimfire rifles, and air rifles