Testing the Gamo Whisper – Part 2

by B.B. Pelletier

Part 1

Well, Joe in Maryland explained that a 50 percent reduction in noise is only 3 decibels, so in that light, I can accept Gamo’s claim of a 52 percent reduction. Sorry, but I was thinking in different quantitative terms (i.e., percentage of loudness).

A well-rounded stock
Let’s continue our look at the features on this Gamo Whisper breakbarrel. First, let’s look at the stock. It’s a black, synthetic stock with a fairly wide forearm and a deep pistol grip. The cocking slot is short because the rifle has an articulated cocking link I’ll talk about in a moment. The Monte Carlo cheekpiece is low, and the cheekpiece is on both sides of the stock. In all ways, this rifle is ambidextrous. The thick, black rubber buttpad is very nicely contoured to the butt and looks terrific. The pull is slightly short at 13-3/4″, so the rifle is well-suited to shooters of smaller stature.

What’s behind the easy cocking?
Archimedes said, “Give me a place to stand and I’ll move the world.” He was referring to the ability of levers to multiply force. That same science works on breakbarrel air rifles. The length of the barrel (the lever) and the location of the fulcrum (the cocking link pivot point) determine how easy or hard a gun cocks to a greater extent than the power of the mainspring. Gamo designed the Whisper right in this respect. On close examination, I see they’ve reduced the baseblock by a huge amount, so they can place the anchor point of the linkage exactly where they want it.


The barrel breaks back an incredible distance. This is relaxed. It comes back another 4-5 inches!

They also employ an articulated 2-piece cocking link that’s longer than a single piece. It allows the barrel to pivot more on the pivot pin, which means they use the cocking force over a longer distance. The net result is a lighter effort.


There’s that small steel barrel I mentioned in the first report. Note the chisel detent. The easy cocking includes breaking the barrel open.

A nice set of fiberoptic open sights
The front is a post and bead that’s hooded for protection. After what happened to the RWS Diana 34 Panther front sight, I’ll accept that fiberoptic sights need protection. The rear sight is fully adjustable and is fiberoptic as well. Both windage and elevation adjust in smooth clicks, and the windage has a reference scale. They are so nice that I thought it would be nice to test them first, before mounting the scope that comes with the rifle.


A red fiberoptic post and bead front sight is protected by a steel globe.


The rear sight is fully adjustable and also fiberoptic.

Nice trigger!
And somebody remarked, “If the trigger becomes nicer with use, what is it nicer than? Itself, before the use?” Obviously the answer to that is yes. And you readers all chimed in and made sure I knew about Charlie Da Tuna’s GRT-III drop-in replacement. I have looked at his website, and I’ll see what I can do about working him into this blog.

A trigger replacement will probably void the Gamo warranty. That wouldn’t bother me if this were my own rifle, but it’s not. Maybe I’ll scare up a cheap, used Gamo at Roanoke.

And I heard the usual anti-plastic remarks made on the first report. What I wonder is how do you wood-and-steel types every buy a modern car? When I have a choice, I’ll pick steel over plastic every time. That’s why I’m a 1911 fancier and don’t care for Glocks. But, I would never make the mistake of thinking that just because an airgun has plastic it won’t work well. I like the synthetic-stocked RWS Diana 34 Panther over the traditional wood-stocked 34, and I’m hoping this Whisper will show me the same great traits.

I may have to postpone the shooting, as I’m leaving for Roanoke in two days and the weather isn’t cooperating. But don’t despair; we’ll get there.

43 thoughts on “Testing the Gamo Whisper – Part 2

  1. Hello Tom, I enjoy your post. A different subject but…Have you done a post on replacing seals in a 1077? The seals on the adaptor and in the rifle are gone. Naturally it was 6 months beyond the 1 year repair policy. Can you help? Thanks and enjoy the show.Mike


  2. I’ve been wanting a Whisper for a while due to its supposed noise suppressing ability, but the more I hear about it the less I like it. Its other features do sound nice and its suppressor does work, but its the spring that makes the most noise, so the suppressor is redundant. I bet if Gamo would put this suppressor on a CO2 or pneumatic rifle they would have a real winner.


  3. hello bb, i’ve been seeing a few mentions of favorable reports on the bam b30-1 rifle. do you have that on your list? hopefully in .22cal.
    thnx


  4. B30, I will take the liberty to answer. I believe bb couldn’t get the rifle from Pyramyd thus the delay. I’ve been waiting for it too… I have one in .22 and I like it a lot. It is heavy and slightly harder to cock than most break barrels, but it packs a good punch and is very accurate if you do your part. Responds VERY well to a good tune.
    Hope this helps.
    Chris


  5. B.B.
    I have a related question about the Crosman 1077. What is the source of its surprising accuracy? I haven’t heard that its barrel is anything special and the revolver trigger is very stiff, but this gun can really shoot!

    Matt



  6. B.B.–Scott298 asking for advice, I cheked with umarex and they said that i can purchace a .22cal barrell for my rws .177 350 mag. Have you ever heard of anyone doing this with this or any type of production rifle . If I were to do this, would i have a true 350 in .22 that had been ordered that way or just a mismosh of parts. Would you do it? Sounds like if it works it would make me feel better buying the air arms tx200mk111 in .177 as I am a little concerned that the tx in .22 would not have enough ftlbs of energy for using as a hunting rifle over 30 yards out—thanks Scott.


  7. Scott, I have had all 3 guns you mention. You can change the barrell on the 350 to .22 no problem as it has the exact same action. I however don’t think the TX200 in 0.22 is weak at beyond 30 yards unless you are shooting coons or chucks in which case you might be better off with a firearm in 0.22 as the 350 is hold sensitive enough for me to be an iffy shot beyond 30 yards. I shoot my 350 .22 wiht a beeman peep. On the other hand 30-50 yards easy to do with the TX on squirrls with 3-9 x 40 leapers.

    KTK




  8. b30, I use RWS Superdomes and JSB Predators, as per velocities, I don’t have a chrony, but it’s more powerful than my CFX in .22

    hope this helps
    Chris


  9. KTX–Scott298–thanks for the input, it’s appreciated. Bought the 350 without any research and since have wanted to get the tx-how do the 350 and tx in .22 compare? B.B.–this doesn’t leave you off the hook-still looking for your response–thanks to everyone out there -Scott298



  10. Scott,
    The Tx is quiet and smooth vs. the harsh snap of the 350. Weight is simmilar as they are both heavy but possibly the 350 is slightly lighter but not by much but the TX is quite a bit shorter. I think the overall quality of the TX is much better. I like the triger on the TX way better than the T05 Diana triger. Scope stop holes and rails on tx supperior to Diana ramp.

    KTK


  11. Scott298, did you check on the price of a 350 barrel? You might be better off buying a 350 .22 and selling yours – you might actually save money and you’d have an intact warranty to boot.


  12. Mike,

    I don’t do seal replacement reports for two reasons. 1. I am not strong in that area, and 2. Too many people get in over their heads and need personal attention that I can’t give. I suggest you send your idea to Airgun Hobby magazine. They like to do articles like that.

    B.B.




  13. sumo,

    Yes, there is one final report on the Mark III.

    Now that my identity is out, I can refer to work I did with Daystate to cover the Mark III for Airgun Illustrated (actually Pete Wadeson did the work, but as the editor, I take all the credit).

    I’m checking one fact that has bothered me about how the solenoid works. I believe it is just a timed pulse, but I want to make certain that it isn’t desmodromic, which would be even more precise, if it is possible.

    B.B.


  14. B.B.–Scott- you still didn’t answer my question–and Vince I did check the price–approx $165. I figure with the 350 in.177 and having the ability to convert it to .22 and also owning the tx in either cal(possible .177) I wpoud then have the best of both worlds.. B.B. you san jump in at any time as I have to leave for the moment-wife is yll at me because the tv is on while I”M doing this


  15. Scott,

    Barrel swapping used to be very common with the Beeman R-series spring rifles. But it is less so with Diana, though I don’t know why it wouldn’t work just as well.

    I would have to take the word of Umarex USA on this. If they say it can be done, I would trust that they know what they are talking about.

    I will tell you this, for reasons of economy, all barrels are made as common as possible in a line of airguns, because they don’t want to have special short parts runs when manufacturing. So a .22 barrel and a .177 barrel are nearly always the same on the outside.

    Sometimes the numbers look different on the other side (i.e., many more sales in .177 in this case)

    B.B.



  16. Scott,

    In the TX 200 vs Diana 350 magnum contest, I have said this so many times I bet YOU could have written what I’m going to say.

    The 350 is more powerful than the TX, but the TX is easier to shoot accurately. It has plenty of power in .22, so make your choice accordingly.

    I liken the TX 200 to an M1 Garand. The darn thing is hyper-accurate and nobody knows quite why. I remember trying to qualify Expert with the M16 after qualifying with the M14 (a modernized Garand) and very nearly failing to do so. The 5.56mm round of 1968 was just not that accurate at long range.

    In WW II the Marine snipers didn’t want to give up their 1903 Springfield rifles until they discovered that a Garand sniper rifle could out-shoot them under most circumstances.

    Just get the TX and then you can help me tell everyone else why they need one, too.

    B.B.



  17. B.B.–I’ll drop the subject from here on in. You know a lot more than I do so the Air Arms rifle I purchase next will be in .22 having the knowledge that my 350 in .177 will reaally be able to throw them out there. Notice I said Air arms, because after your blog on the s410 it will be a tough call between the S410(knowing that it is a pcp) and the tx. So I guess you haven’t heard the last from me–just hope we live long enough to get thru the blogs I’ll be sending in the near future-it’s a game of chess -your move–great chatting with you–Scott298 over and out–ps it would probably a lot easier just to ad opt me-then I can shoot “our” guns DAD!!!!



  18. The trigger design being sold by CharlieDaTuna has a pedigree going back to 2004, when I first introduced true 2-stage modifications for the generic Gamo trigger.

    http://www.network54.com/Forum/79537/thread/1092022279/Tony+I.%2C+thanks+for+the+suggestion+about+a+2-stage+mod+for+the+Gamo-B18-Theoben+trigger%21

    Charlie(Bob Werner)’s current product is actually an unauthorized copy of a subsequent design of mine.

    http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v398/pneuguy/kentrig.jpg

    That, however, is old news.

    Of greater interest is that a much simpler, cheaper, and more cost effective design (1/3rd the price) is currently sold by Skyler McConahy, of Power Stroke Pneumatics.

    http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v398/pneuguy/microGTXratio.jpg

    pspairguns@hotmail.com

    Thought you might like to know.

    Cheers,
    Steve




  19. BB, with regards to Steve’s comment, be aware that there’s two sides to that story. Also, there’s a lot of hard feelings involved here that I’m sure you don’t want to get in the middle of.

    Personally I haven’t had first-hand knowledge of what transpired with the original trigger design and subsequent iterations, so I’m not in a position to say to what extent Steve’s claims are valid. But bear in mind that there’s more involved here than just a dispute over a trigger design.


  20. BB,

    Yeah, what Vince said.
    AFAIK, there is no patent as such, but there is still some lingering fallout from a business relationship gone sour.
    I’ll just say that the current iteration of the GRT-III trigger was made with no outside help, and that it works admirably, even astoundingly.
    The rest is jealousy and money oriented.
    Don’t worry about it, as there is one guy in particular (not on this blog at the moment) who has a bit of a history, and he inhabits a certain well known blog.
    Also, the GRT-III couldn’t be simpler to install, contrary to claims disputing as much.



  21. steve in nc,

    i truely am intrigued…what kind of work went into redesigning a trigger?(there are guns that the grt doesnt fit, and i want to know if i can try to do anything for them, or if theyre hopeless, like the genesis trigger)

    DED(if you would rather email me, my address is davided_1@hotmail.com…anyone that wishes to talk about airguns further with me is free to email me.)


  22. bb,

    if you want to feel for yourself what a grt-III trigger feels like, ill send you my turbo-tuned .22 cfx with the trigger, and let you shoot it a little…maybe youll want to do a review on it…let me know(my email address is in the above comment)

    DED


  23. If I’m not mistaken, the basic geometry of the GRT trigger – or the various inserts that have popped up – isn’t particularly new.

    The existing Gamo trigger has a single contact point that lifts the intermediate lever to release the sear. This trigger adds a second contact point (in front of the first) that partially (and slowly) lifts this lever during the first stage (which previously did nothing), leaving the 2nd stage to “push it over the edge”. The lighter pull comes largely from removing the standard (and virtually pointless) trigger return spring.

    I believe that this is the same basic geometry that had been used in the Benjamin Legacy 1000 and derivatives. Granted, in this application the execution leaves much to be desired, and the trigger doesn’t feel nearly as nice.

    I wonder if this might be why their dispute is not being settled in the courts, since someone else seems to have invented the design?


  24. Yeh! Somehow I knew this ugly conflict would peek it’s ugly head on this blog. BB, you definately don’t want to get in the middle of this!

    Chris


  25. DED,

    Actually, I’ve designed a number of true 2-stage triggers for popular airguns. Besides the Gamo/Quest/Genesis trigger, I’ve done the Benji 392/397, and Crosman 1377/2240/2250.

    All the designs are based on the general principles outlined here.

    http://www.network54.com/Forum/79537/message/1187706969/

    Note that in this particular treatment, it’s the 392 trigger that’s showcased.

    Cheers,
    Steve


  26. I don’t know about the Benjamin, but my second generation Sheridan Blue Streak has an astonishingly good trigger as it is.
    It’s crisp and light, a real surprise, especially coming from an airgun.


  27. Scott,

    I’m not sure what you consider to be “outside help.”

    But if the unauthorized use of detailed, copyrighted, dimensioned drawings counts, then unfortunately you’re been misinformed if you’ve been told that GRT was made without any.

    Because it was.

    Steve


  28. Steve,
    Yep, just as I had feared, here it comes YET again.
    It seems that nowhere is safe from those who want to indulge in this old squabble.
    I’ll leave petty back biting for that “other” forum and those who seem to get a thrill out of that nastiness.
    I refuse to talk about it further.
    I have no dog in this fight.


  29. steve,

    you put the genesis in the same trigger category as the quest, but it doesnt have the same trigger…you have a design for it?

    DED


  30. DED,

    I think you’re right. The Genesis is a synthetic stock sibling of the Legacy, isn’t it?

    In which case it is, as you say, a different trigger and no, I don’t have a design for it. Sorry. My mistake.

    Steve


  31. I haven't shot the Whipser I have than much to make a real call on it but enough to say the trigger does suck. I don't think that it suppresses anything in the way of sound either. I would like to see one of the so called baffle opened so that they may be looked at with total design and fromone model to the next for comparison. of anything different between models. Then truth be known. just sayin'


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


8 + 6 =

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>