Tuesday, May 27, 2008

Diana 35 - Always the contender

by B.B. Pelletier


Diana's model 35 was one of the most powerful spring guns in the 1950s. It was made until 1987.


Manish from Mumbai, India, requested this report, but Graham also wonders about his Winchester 435, which is another variation of the classic Diana 35. I did the first post on the Diana 35 back on December 8, 2005. In that post, I showed you the inside of the pre-unitized Diana trigger group with the ball-bearing sear, and I cautioned you not to take one of these rifles apart unless you're sure you can get it back together again.


Lots of parts for a simple job. Diana's ball bearing trigger was a real sales point when the gun was new. It releases about the same as a standard lever-type trigger.


Since that post, I've done more research on the Diana 35, along with four other powerful spring guns of the time, and I've discovered an interesting bit of information. The other four are the HW 35, Diana 45, BSF 55 and the FWB 124. I wrote a large article about them titled The Four Horsemen for the September 20 Shotgun News. The Diana 35 figured in the research because it was positioned against them as a powerful air rifle of the Diana line, but somehow it never quite measured up.

Back in the 1970s, velocity ruled the day. That's no surprise, is it? The magic number was 800 f.p.s., and for a while, only the FWB 124 was capable of shooting that fast, in .177 caliber of course. The other powerful rifles all reported velocities in the 700 f.p.s. range, with as little as 10 f.p.s. making a huge difference in sales. If left to their own devices, the manufacturers would have soon blasted past 800, but they were held in check, first by Air Rifle Headquarters and then by Beeman Precision Airguns. Both dealers did their own testing and reported the true numbers, regardless of the outcome.

The outcome was a disaster for Diana. The 35, which was their magnum hope, was rated at 725 f.p.s. in .177 with light pellets. ARH testing revealed only 685 f.p.s. The cheaper, lighter Diana model 27 shot 650 f.p.s., so sales of the Diana 35 languished because it wasn't that much faster.

Enter The Airgun Revue
Like many airgunners who had lived through the 1970s, I knew what the hot guns had been and had already owned many of them. For some reason, the Diana 35 had eluded me. Then at a Roanoke airgun show in the late 1990s I happened to score a 35 for myself, and resolved to set the record straight in the fifth edition of Airgun Revue. After all, I was tuning spring guns for a living (through my newsletter, that is). Certainly, I could employ "space-age" lubricants (to use Robert Law's term) to improve on what had been possible 20 years earlier. My .22-caliber rifle was made in November 1977 and was marked as a Hy Score model 809, one of many names by which the Diana 35 went.

The tune
To see how far I could take a 35 I tested mine as it was, which was factory-original. Then, I stripped the action and cleaned it. The inside of the gun was dry and caked with hard lubricant, plus the piston was somewhat rusty. Never a good thing. The cocking effort had been 24 lbs. before the tune. By cleaning and lubricating all the moving parts, that dropped down to 19 lbs. afterward. The gun also buzzed pretty bad before the tune. I used a thin coating of black tar on the mainspring, and I burnished moly grease into the compression chamber and the leather piston seal.

High hopes - dashed
After the tune, my rifle had almost exactly the same power as before (a couple f.p.s. less, to be honest). The cocking effort had dropped and the spring twang was reduced, but the power remained around 11 foot-pounds with RWS Meisterkugeln pellets. In .22 caliber, that works out to about 590 f.p.s. With Crosman Premiers, the gun averaged 542 f.p.s., which produces only 9.33 foot-pounds. At the time, I remember being disappointed that no more power had been found, but my recent research reveals why.

Hamstrung from the start
The Diana 35 had a short-stroke piston that limited the available power. When the design was new in 1953, the 11 foot-pounds it generated in .22 caliber was considered stupendous, but by 1977 it had become mediocre. Rifles like the BSF 55 and the Diana 45 had longer-stroke pistons that were capable of much higher velocities, and the long-stroke FWB 124 that started it all, of course, was one of the most potentially powerful spring guns of the era. Unfortunately for Diana, nothing could be done to remedy the situation, so in the late 1980s, it faded away - replaced by the models 34, 36 and 38 that came out in 1984. These long-stroke spring guns represented modern technology at its best, taking velocity in .177 caliber up to 1,000 f.p.s., where guns like the 35 could no longer compete.

Twenty years have passed since the Diana 35 left the world stage, and the airgun world is now in a renaissance period. Lower-powered spring guns are once again embraced. The Diana 35 is a larger, more adult version of the extremely popular Diana model 27, and many now find it to be an appealing spring rifle to add to their collections. If the spring twang is eliminated and the trigger is tuned to break crisply, the 35 becomes a classic airgun - the kind everyone wishes they still made. If you can ignore the chronograph, the Diana 35 can be a wonderful companion. Viewed that way, instead of as the powerful spring gun it tried to be, you can be very content with this fine old classic.

27 Comments:

At May 27, 2008 6:23 AM, Anonymous Bruce said...

Morning B.B. I've been shooting and enjoying my Made in West Germany Diania 35, since I bought it new maybe 3 decades ago. A perfect back yard shooter.

 
At May 27, 2008 6:35 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

B.B.

I have a new leapers 8-32x56 scope. What magnification are the mil-dots set up to be accurate at? Is it the full 32x?

 
At May 27, 2008 7:22 AM, Blogger B.B. Pelletier said...

Bruce,

Good for you.

B.B.

 
At May 27, 2008 7:28 AM, Blogger B.B. Pelletier said...

Mil dot,

Usually the full magnification is the one selected for ranging. I will ask Leapers.

Do you use the WORM formula, or do you pick a standard and size it for ranging?

B.B.

 
At May 27, 2008 10:36 AM, Anonymous Andrew said...

Thanks again for an interesting review.
I have been looking for a while for reviews of the Walther Lever action (or other Levers), perhaps you could look into that in the future?

 
At May 27, 2008 11:04 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What exactly is the worm formula? I'm thinking I use that one, I've just never heard it called that before. Is that the size of the target in yards times 1000 devided by the size in mils? That's the one I use. (actually, I use a varient where the top part is size in inches times 27.778)

Speaking of leapers scopes. People say they are cheap. There was a 50 cal at a local store that had won some competition. It had a leapers scope on it. I thought that was interesting. That obviously proves just because they are cheaper doesn't mean they are bad.

 
At May 27, 2008 11:21 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Do you know if the plastic bushing around the threaded part of the cocking knob is split or removed on an Airforce rifle will affect or decrease accuracy?

 
At May 27, 2008 11:25 AM, Anonymous Mike Tipton said...

Hi BB,

At the airgun show in Little Rock you stated that you thought that JSB Exacts were the best pellet for a .22 TSS. When I look for JSB exacts I find several flavors. But from an early blog you seem to be pointing at the 15.8 grain JSB Diabolo Exact Jumbo. Is this correct? Thanks,

Mike T.

 
At May 27, 2008 11:27 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

B.B.

So was the big secret to breaking 1000 fps just a longer piston? That seems obvious, but maybe only in retrospect.

anonymous, that's very encouraging to hear about the Leaper's scope on the 50 cal. You have to assume that is for long-range shooting. I continue to be mystified at the fantastic prices for centerfire rifle scopes. My $100 Leapers scope produces images as clear as I can see. After putting the crosshairs on this image, I don't know what else a scope can do. I suppose the brightness can always be improved, but it seems like a case of diminishing returns. I guess the only way I can compare for sure is to pay for a $500 scope which I am not willing to do.

Matt61

 
At May 27, 2008 11:35 AM, Anonymous Vince said...

Andrew (looking for Walther lever-action reviews) - did you see this?

http://www.reviewcentre.com/reviews4019.html

 
At May 27, 2008 11:50 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

matt61,

It was cool to see that gun with the same scope on it I use. I actually had to get the guy behind the counter to make sure I wasn't seeing things.

I use a leapers 8-32 on my condor and on my remington xr-100 in .223. I can shoot .2" groups all day at 100 yards with my .223 (with the right bullet of course, and off a bench) I don't know how much it could improve if I had a 2000 dollar scope on it. The condor is the same, it hits what I point at. I guess light can be better, expecially at low light conditions. But I just don't know if the extra light is worth thousands of dollars.

 
At May 27, 2008 12:40 PM, Blogger B.B. Pelletier said...

Mil dot,

Leapers says that on all their scopes that adjust greater than 10X, they have standardized the mil dot measurement to 10X, following the military's lead.

Of course the other magnifications can be used, but a conversion formula must be applied to get the power to 10X.

B.B.

 
At May 27, 2008 12:43 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hi BB,

What is a cantilevered hold?.
You've said you do not shoot pistols/handguns two handed and that includes the 1911 .45 ACP am I right from what I've heard?.

Hank

 
At May 27, 2008 12:44 PM, Blogger B.B. Pelletier said...

Mil dot,

Here is an explanation of the WORM formula:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/23-11/Ch5.htm

B.B.

 
At May 27, 2008 12:49 PM, Blogger B.B. Pelletier said...

Andrew,

Lever action airguns:

http://www.pyramydair.com/blog/2008/02/erma-elg-10-spring-rifle.html

To my utter disbelief I have never reported on the Walther Lever Action rifle.

Next week.

B.B.

 
At May 27, 2008 12:51 PM, Blogger B.B. Pelletier said...

AirForce plastic bushing,

That bushing should have nothing to do with accuracy.

B.B.

 
At May 27, 2008 12:54 PM, Blogger B.B. Pelletier said...

Mike,

I'm not sure what a .22 TSS is, but when I recommended JBSs I invariably mean the 15.8-grain Exact domed pellets. If I mean otherwise, I will be explicit.

B.B.

 
At May 27, 2008 1:16 PM, Anonymous Mike Tipton said...

Hi BB,

TSS = Talon SS. I thought that was a common abreviation.

Mike T

 
At May 27, 2008 1:19 PM, Blogger B.B. Pelletier said...

Hank,

A cantilevered hold is when your skeleton assists you in holding a handgun at arm's length. To read about how to do it, read all parts of this report:

http://www.pyramydair.com/blog/2008/05/10-meter-pistol-shooting-part-3.html

B.B.

 
At May 27, 2008 2:00 PM, Blogger manish_r_karnik said...

Thanks a ton for the review B.B.
Where can I find the serial number for the gun on the cylinder and barrel ? If indeed there is one.

Which Leapers Scope rail would you suggest for the 35 ?

Manish

 
At May 27, 2008 2:45 PM, Blogger B.B. Pelletier said...

Manish,

The serial number can be on the underside of the barrel, or on the right or left side of the base block that the barrel is pushed into. It can also be on the spring tube but under the stock.

I'm not sure all Dianas had serial numbers.

A scope mount is a real problem, because the scope base on these rifles is extremely narrow. A 3/8" mount may fit, but I have no way of checking.

B.B.

 
At May 27, 2008 2:45 PM, Blogger B.B. Pelletier said...

Manish,

The serial number can be on the underside of the barrel, or on the right or left side of the base block that the barrel is pushed into. It can also be on the spring tube but under the stock.

I'm not sure all Dianas had serial numbers.

A scope mount is a real problem, because the scope base on these rifles is extremely narrow. A 3/8" mount may fit, but I have no way of checking.

B.B.

 
At May 27, 2008 9:23 PM, Anonymous BG_Farmer said...

BB,

I'm guessing the 35 bore was roughly 1" and the stroke was well short of 3". Is that close? It reminds me of my forum research leading up to the QB36-2: many references to the QB36/-1, which was touted at 900fps but fell well short of that in reality. It seems they basically doubled the stroke (to 4") to actually get to 900fps on the -2. Seems like the mistake is fairly common: people want to increase the power of their gun and shove a "bigger" spring in it, only to find out that it does little if anything.

 
At May 28, 2008 12:30 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

anonymous,

Thanks for the extra details about the Leapers scope--more grist for the mill. What you are doing with the Remington xr-100 is closer to what I hope to achieve with my Savage police rifle. I've heard about this Remington rifle of yours. Most people talk about the M700 but this one has turned in some amazing performances.

Matt61

 
At May 28, 2008 8:05 AM, Blogger B.B. Pelletier said...

BG_Farmer,

Yes, the bore was large and the stroke was short. Well under three inches, I'd guess.

B.B.

 
At August 11, 2008 8:10 AM, Anonymous drop out said...

hi! i've got a diana 35 at my house
but yesterday i wasnt at home and my brother and his friend took it
they forgot about the gun, went inside and it was in the rain for almost an hour
and now it wont shoot anymore
can someone help me out? what should i do best?

 
At August 11, 2008 9:21 AM, Blogger B.B. Pelletier said...

The rain won't hurt a spring gun, unless you don't dry it.

What is wrong. What you you mean, then gun won't shoot. Are you able to cock it and the trigger won't release the sear?

What exactly is wrong?

B/.B.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home