Varmint barrels on a HMR

[john robbo 30]

Following a thread on another site a chap cannot get his varmint HMR to shoot.

I have a HMR an ansultz t/hole sporter, deadly accurate and it never gets enough through the barrel to even warm it up (2-3000 rabbits a year).

Other then someone liking the feel of a heavy profile balance of a rifle why would anyone want to lug the extra weight around??

A .17 hole in a sporter barrel has as much steel around it as a .308 heavy barrel which is alot.

So the question was in the title why and what advantage do you think it gives you, I have seen probably 12-15 sporters from ansultz savage ruger marlin and cz and all have shot well.

Edited July 9, 2010 by john robbo

[blackfox 9]

I had a CZ 16" varmint .17 hmr, to be honest the weight was never a issue, it was very pointable. Excellent for lamping from a vehicle and I also thought it was a attractive looking rifle.

[john robbo 30]

I had a CZ 16" varmint .17 hmr, to be honest the weight was never a issue, it was very pointable. Excellent for lamping from a vehicle and I also thought it was a attractive looking rifle.

A sporter would have been just as pointable so other than looks NO advantage(looks is in the eye of the beholder).

NOT a dig an observation regarding the thread.

[matt_hooks 188]

I agree. The heavy barrel is no good for any kind of walking hunting. If you want to ait in a vehicle that's fine, but a sporter will do that just as well. The heavy barrel also makes standing shots tricky, and I just don't see any benefit to it!

[CharlieT 32]

I agree with you John. I bought a .17 with a sporter barrel when they first came out, heavy barrels were not available then and can honestly say it could not be more accurate.

 

I think the heavy barrel option is offered for sale to meet customer demand from those that like the look of a heavy barrel rather then for any benefit that a heavy barrel could possibly offer.

 

Personally with a rimfire I prefer as light a rifle as possible, makes it much more pointable and easy to carry.

 

charlie

[stubby 175]

from using heavy barrelled guns at work, always found the more heavier had less recoil, and was easier to hold steady, than a lighter rifle would have been

[john robbo 30]

from using heavy barrelled guns at work, always found the more heavier had less recoil, and was easier to hold steady, than a lighter rifle would have been

I can see your point on steadiness but recoil on a HMR???

But if free hand shooting for longer periods heavier means more fatigue and less steadiness.

Edited July 9, 2010 by john robbo

[blackfox 9]

I had a CZ 16" varmint .17 hmr, to be honest the weight was never a issue, it was very pointable. Excellent for lamping from a vehicle and I also thought it was a attractive looking rifle.

A sporter would have been just as pointable so other than looks NO advantage(looks is in the eye of the beholder).

NOT a dig an observation regarding the thread.

 

 

IMO it comes down to "horses for courses" some people will buy the sporter & some the Varmint - wether there is a difference in the capability... i doubt there is any.

[jamie g 17]

see some bigger people dont like light guns in there hands. they perfer something of a bit of weight. i had the annie heavy barrel hmr and imo even with a scope and mod on it. it was as light as can be

[matt_hooks 188]

No matter how big you are, more weight means the muscles have to work harder to keep in up on target. The more tension in the muscles, the more shake there will be. It might FEEL more solid and stable, but in reality it'll be wobbling round like a dick in a wellington!

 

Lighter is pretty much always better!