Firstly nice clear tests. Well done! If we ignore gas induced recoil then, bullet weight X bullet energy = rifle weight X rifle recoil energy. Note a bigger or more massive bullet can have less energy than a lighter but faster and more energetic bullet and still produce more "Bullet Effect" at the target. Lighter bullets will always look more impressive because they stop quickly in water, dump energy and explode the target impressively. However the 45 grain .22" bullet has more "bullet effect" than the .17 Hornet up to 200 yards, which is a reasonable distance to shoot a fox. The "recoil" on the rifle is higher with heavier bullets generally in any given calibre of rifle. That "recoil" effect is carried to the target by a bullet and can be higher with a heavier but less energetic bullet every time. You can multiply bullet weight by its impact energy and you will get figures like this for the two calibres. 100 yards the bullet effect for 17H is 67% of the 22H, At 200 the 17H is 87% of the 22H and finally the 17H catches up with the 22H and actually exceeds it by 16 %. However I would prefer weight to energy to secure penetration if shooting a fox. The 17H is probably better for non edible small pests due to its flatter trajectory and better energy dump when penetration is not really required. Nice presentation.
Thank you Mr Mack for taking the time to provide us with some well thought out commentary. Much appreciated. Working on a vid right now that demonstrates your thoughts...
@@outdooradventures1696 Thanks for your reply. You should actually use "mass" instead of weight but as both examples are also multiplied by the "g" constant it does not really matter. Most folks understand weight better than mass anyway. You can also "square" the momentum and divide by two and get the same ratios and results. Once more all the awkward constants disappear. I got an article published on this "bullet effect" phenomenon in an English magazine. They have never published the other two yet but they say it will happen. There is a kind of "pressure inversion" after a bullet expands, where it goes from very initial high pressure to very low pressure. Basically from a very high penetration capability with a low wound volume , to a lower pressure but much higher volume that blasts a great shallow wound. The impact force is ,of course, much higher. That is why water jug tests always favour fragmenting bullets. I look forward to seeing your new video. Cheers!
You are comparing apples to watermelons . 17 hornet is shooting a ballistic tip & hornet is a soft point . Y not try the 35 gr v max for the hornet ... Or hand load a 40 gr Nosler Ballistic Tip to around 2900 fps then compare the results. I have a 22k hornet that is shooting 40 gr NBT at around 3300 fps bet that will make the little 17 look bad at all the ranges you just shot
Wimpy Hornet loads shown. I reload both a K Hornet and a Standard one as well. Both will throw a 40gr at 3,000 fps, the K version at 3,150 fps. As for killing power, the Hornet wins hands down. Shooting a coyote beyond 100 with the .17 is animal abuse.
the 22 hornet has same verlocity (and thuss power) at 100 yards that the 22 WMR has at barrel. Quite alot of power difference. I shoot 40 grain sierra varminter @ 2800 FPS in my hornet, holds 0.8-1" at 100 yards. The real issue is wind.
The problem with this test was that the .22 hit on the (low) left side of the plastic container whereas the .17 hit more centrally so the results are skewed (in my opinion) because the plastic is firmer at the sides .
Thank you Mr Hazelton for your kind words. Much appreciated. The improvement in bc that the 40 grain V-Max offers seems to be a real game changer. If ammo companies would start to load that 40 gr bullet, many people would have their eyes opened and you would have a lot of company with your views...
@@outdooradventures1696 biggest issue with hornet and the 40 vmax is magazine lenght restriction. If i load it to max COAL the 40 max sits to deep in the cartridge. Optimaly it will alwasy be 0,08" (2 mm) longer, forcing me to single feed them in my anschutz. The COAL for 22H is around 43.5-43.7 mm, and the vmax is 45.5 mm. Only bullet i have found that is relatively "modern" is the sierra 40 varminter #1385 wich fits nicely in the magazine and has accuracy but lacks the BC of the vmax. But if you single feed them, vmax 40 and 40 blitzking both work great.
I think your .22 hornet math is a bit off. Maybe, maybe not not. Ive shot full sized whitetailed deer out to 200 yards with my .22 hornet. Penetrates to the oposite side skin
Thank you Mr Colston for not only taking the time to watch the video, but to also be so observant as to spot details like what you have mentioned. Other than time travel, I am sure there is a logical explanation…
There seems to be a fad of advertising kinetic energy - dependent on the square of the velocity times the mass of the bullet - and ignoring the quality of momentum - the mass of the bullet times the velocity. The 100 yard test shows the heavier bullet as having a greater impact and effect than the lighter bullet. Also, a greater penetration. 200 yards and 300 yards show the heavier bullet as having a lesser effect, but complete penetration. Presumably the lighter bullet also has complete penetration. However, I'm not convinced this mimics actual results in game. I would prefer a comparison using something more on the order of body muscle penetration. Perhaps even wet newsprint.
I shoot a 22 hornet all the time, killed many deer with neck and ear shots, in my opinion, the 17 h would be lacking in penetration especially in medium distance neck shots.
The BC is what people need to see. We know mass is always going to produce better terminal damage at lower velocity. It is all about personal preference. And it is why magnum loads were produced for most every caliber. Distance performance. The type of bullet needs consideration as well. Do your research people.
That 17 is quite surprising! Time to bring in a "ringer", lol. How about sneaking in a 223 using the same 45gn projectiles for a comparison..... Cheers mate.
@@outdooradventures1696 Hell's bells!! The 250 would be a bit unfair, 🤣! Last time I used 45gn projectiles (home loads) in my 250 it was putting them down range at about 4400fps (MV), 😂. I was thinking of a calibre closer to the hornet and what would be the replacement for the old Hornet. 300yds is my limit for vermin removal (using 55gn projectiles) as it is a guaranteed kill - 100 - 300 = -2MoA @ 100, +2MoA @ 300, all on scope hold under or over, ranged using scope. Goats are great targets, lol.
A great comparison with the same principals for each calibre, well done!
Firstly nice clear tests. Well done! If we ignore gas induced recoil then, bullet weight X bullet energy = rifle weight X rifle recoil energy. Note a bigger or more massive bullet can have less energy than a lighter but faster and more energetic bullet and still produce more "Bullet Effect" at the target. Lighter bullets will always look more impressive because they stop quickly in water, dump energy and explode the target impressively. However the 45 grain .22" bullet has more "bullet effect" than the .17 Hornet up to 200 yards, which is a reasonable distance to shoot a fox. The "recoil" on the rifle is higher with heavier bullets generally in any given calibre of rifle. That "recoil" effect is carried to the target by a bullet and can be higher with a heavier but less energetic bullet every time. You can multiply bullet weight by its impact energy and you will get figures like this for the two calibres. 100 yards the bullet effect for 17H is 67% of the 22H, At 200 the 17H is 87% of the 22H and finally the 17H catches up with the 22H and actually exceeds it by 16 %. However I would prefer weight to energy to secure penetration if shooting a fox. The 17H is probably better for non edible small pests due to its flatter trajectory and better energy dump when penetration is not really required. Nice presentation.
Thank you Mr Mack for taking the time to provide us with some well thought out commentary. Much appreciated. Working on a vid right now that demonstrates your thoughts...
@@outdooradventures1696 Thanks for your reply. You should actually use "mass" instead of weight but as both examples are also multiplied by the "g" constant it does not really matter. Most folks understand weight better than mass anyway. You can also "square" the momentum and divide by two and get the same ratios and results. Once more all the awkward constants disappear. I got an article published on this "bullet effect" phenomenon in an English magazine. They have never published the other two yet but they say it will happen. There is a kind of "pressure inversion" after a bullet expands, where it goes from very initial high pressure to very low pressure. Basically from a very high penetration capability with a low wound volume , to a lower pressure but much higher volume that blasts a great shallow wound. The impact force is ,of course, much higher. That is why water jug tests always favour fragmenting bullets. I look forward to seeing your new video. Cheers!
You are comparing apples to watermelons . 17 hornet is shooting a ballistic tip & hornet is a soft point . Y not try the 35 gr v max for the hornet ... Or hand load a 40 gr Nosler Ballistic Tip to around 2900 fps then compare the results. I have a 22k hornet that is shooting 40 gr NBT at around 3300 fps bet that will make the little 17 look bad at all the ranges you just shot
Wimpy Hornet loads shown. I reload both a K Hornet and a Standard one as well. Both will throw a 40gr at 3,000 fps, the K version at 3,150 fps.
As for killing power, the Hornet wins hands down. Shooting a coyote beyond 100 with the .17 is animal abuse.
Not sold on the 17
Would love to see .17WSM , .17 Fireball, .22 Magnum, and .20 Practical added to these charts.
the 22 hornet has same verlocity (and thuss power) at 100 yards that the 22 WMR has at barrel.
Quite alot of power difference.
I shoot 40 grain sierra varminter @ 2800 FPS in my hornet, holds 0.8-1" at 100 yards. The real issue is wind.
Where did you find 17cal 25gr hp heard that Hornaday discontin them I have 17 rem that doesn't like the lighter ones
Is my hearing bad or were you comparing hollow points in .17 to soft points in .22?
If you wanted to get more speed go with lighter grain on the 22 Hornet. 31 and compare.
The problem with this test was that the .22 hit on the (low) left side of the plastic container whereas the .17 hit more centrally so the results are skewed (in my opinion) because the plastic is firmer at the sides .
Good video. Thanks, I’ll stick with my 40gr V-Max and my 22 Hornet. 😄
Thank you Mr Hazelton for your kind words. Much appreciated. The improvement in bc that the 40 grain V-Max offers seems to be a real game changer. If ammo companies would start to load that 40 gr bullet, many people would have their eyes opened and you would have a lot of company with your views...
@@outdooradventures1696 biggest issue with hornet and the 40 vmax is magazine lenght restriction. If i load it to max COAL the 40 max sits to deep in the cartridge. Optimaly it will alwasy be 0,08" (2 mm) longer, forcing me to single feed them in my anschutz. The COAL for 22H is around 43.5-43.7 mm, and the vmax is 45.5 mm.
Only bullet i have found that is relatively "modern" is the sierra 40 varminter #1385 wich fits nicely in the magazine and has accuracy but lacks the BC of the vmax.
But if you single feed them, vmax 40 and 40 blitzking both work great.
Wow at 200 yards there is no denying what is more effective! 17 hornet blows 22 hornet out of the water…22 hornet fans will not like this video 😢😂
I think your .22 hornet math is a bit off.
Maybe, maybe not not. Ive shot full sized whitetailed deer out to 200 yards with my .22 hornet. Penetrates to the oposite side skin
Wow
Same here
Should use a 30-35gn for the 22 and see the result .
Love love love muh 17 hornet!!! Its the most fun with gophers and praire dogs. Even with my hmr the coyotes don't go more than a few feet
2:52 Amazing, a 25gr projectile with the energy *at 100yards* of a 230gr .45 pistol round *_at the muzzle!_* - That's the magic of velocity.
yeah, double the velocity quadruple the energy.
This is why I switched to 17HMR from 22lr it is just devastating on game.
I would like to see you use the same weights and see the differences.
This video has a date of 9/16/20 but one of the empty milk jugs has a use by date of 2/9/21.
Thank you Mr Colston for not only taking the time to watch the video, but to also be so observant as to spot details like what you have mentioned. Other than time travel, I am sure there is a logical explanation…
Mandela effect
I saw a may 3rd 2021
Hey,how about k-horent vs 17 hmr
There seems to be a fad of advertising kinetic energy - dependent on the square of the velocity times the mass of the bullet - and ignoring the quality of momentum - the mass of the bullet times the velocity. The 100 yard test shows the heavier bullet as having a greater impact and effect than the lighter bullet. Also, a greater penetration.
200 yards and 300 yards show the heavier bullet as having a lesser effect, but complete penetration. Presumably the lighter bullet also has complete penetration.
However, I'm not convinced this mimics actual results in game. I would prefer a comparison using something more on the order of body muscle penetration. Perhaps even wet newsprint.
AWSOME job!
Thank you BJ Coveney for your encouraging words. much appreciated. 👍
I shoot a 22 hornet all the time, killed many deer with neck and ear shots, in my opinion, the 17 h would be lacking in penetration especially in medium distance neck shots.
Maybe not in Texas using a 17 hornet for deer ?
The BC is what people need to see. We know mass is always going to produce better terminal damage at lower velocity. It is all about personal preference. And it is why magnum loads were produced for most every caliber. Distance performance. The type of bullet needs consideration as well. Do your research people.
I use the 40 gr Nosler Ballistic Tip spritzer over 12.7 GR of Lil Gun in my K Hornet . It has a solid copper base & does it's job quit well
Just not a fan of .17 caliber.
i reload my 22 Hornet with 40gr sierra or 40gr VMax loaded with LilGun powder and i get 3220fps at the muzzle ! wicked round...
That 17 is quite surprising!
Time to bring in a "ringer", lol. How about sneaking in a 223 using the same 45gn projectiles for a comparison.....
Cheers mate.
Pilot McBride. Thanks for the great idea. it is difficult to find any 45 grn hp 223 but I can probably use a 45 grn hp 22-250 if that will work. 🤔👍
@@outdooradventures1696 Hell's bells!! The 250 would be a bit unfair, 🤣! Last time I used 45gn projectiles (home loads) in my 250 it was putting them down range at about 4400fps (MV), 😂.
I was thinking of a calibre closer to the hornet and what would be the replacement for the old Hornet.
300yds is my limit for vermin removal (using 55gn projectiles) as it is a guaranteed kill - 100 - 300 = -2MoA @ 100, +2MoA @ 300, all on scope hold under or over, ranged using scope. Goats are great targets, lol.
@@PilotMcbride Everyone forgott about the 222? :)
What about 17 hornet vs 22khornet
So 17 hornet it is
why not compare it with the 22Khornet
At 400 yrds.
How about trying a .222 rem
22 cal fanboys are upset!! 22 cal going extinct (besides 223 ) 😂🤣🤣 YALL ARE MAD
Me bad 17 hornet vs a k 22 hornet
Should have used hornady .22 hornet ammo with the 35 gr V-max at 3100 fps
100 yards----2271 - 401
200 yards----1590 -197
300 yards---- 1196- 99