Spring gun performance as caliber changes

by B.B. Pelletier

The wind has slowed, but there was some local thundering today. I decided to do an indoor test I’ve wanted to perform for more than 10 years. Because I own a Whiscombe JW75 with all four smallbore barrels, I can test how each caliber performs with the rifle set at one specific power level so I can control as many variables as possible.


My JW75 has barrels in all 4 calibers – .177, .20, .22 and .25.

Theory says there should be a power increase as the caliber increases. Velocity is unimportant, as we’re looking at power, only. However, velocity is one component of power, so it is considered.

I also learned last year that .20 caliber is less efficient that .22 caliber when pellets of the same weight are used. I have a supply of 14.3-grain Crosman Premiers in .20 caliber, so when I tested the first .20-caliber Condor I was surprised to see that it shot slower than the .22 with the same pellet. I don’t think it’s friction with the bore, but rather the .20 caliber pellet has a smaller surface area against which the compressed air can push. This test with the Whiscombe should be interesting from that aspect, too. Let’s begin!

I removed the transfer port limiter so the gun would run on full power in all calibers. The temperature was 70 degrees F and the humidity was 55 percent.


That hole in the receiver with the Allen wrench sticking in it is the transfer port. That’s where the limiters go. The large flat lever at the bottom opens the barrel for loading.


These Allen screws are the transfer port limiters. The one with the tiny hole at the bottom is the 12 foot-pound limiter that was in the gun when I got it. By removing all limiters and leaving the transfer port wide open, you get the maximum power the rifle can deliver.

.177 caliber
RWS Hobbys (7.0 grains) averaged 1221 f.p.s. They ranged from 1191 to 1238. The average energy was 23.18 foot-pounds

Crosman Premier (7.9 grains) averaged 1139 f.p.s. The range was 1136 to 1142. The average energy was 22.76 foot-pounds

Beeman Kodiaks (10.6 grains) averaged 959 f.p.s. The range was 948 to 971. The average energy was 21.65 foot-pounds.

Eun Jins (16.1 grains) averaged 719 f.p.s. The range was 709 to 727. The average energy was 18.49 foot-pounds.

.20 caliber
Crosman Premiers (14.3 grains) averaged 847 f.p.s. The range was 839 to 860. The average energy was 22.79 foot-pounds. In .20 caliber the Crosman Premier weighs 14.3 grains, the same as in .22 caliber.

Beeman Kodiaks (13.32 grains) averaged 858 f.p.s. The range was 851 to 863. The average energy was 21.75 foot-pounds. In .20 caliber, the Premier is a light to medium-weight pellet.

Eun Jins (23.7 grains) averaged 539 f.p.s. They ranged from 518 to 554. The average energy was 15.29 foot-pounds. They were very tight in the breech and hard to load.

.22 caliber
Crosman Premiers (14.3 grains) averaged 906 f.p.s. The range went from 904 to 908. The average energy was 26.07 foot-pounds.

RWS Hobbys (11.9 grains) averaged 983 f.p.s. The range was from 975 to 990. The average energy was 25.54 foot-pounds.

Eun Jins (28.4 grains) averaged 580 f.p.s. They ranged from 571 to 590. The average energy was 21.22 foot-pounds.

.25 caliber
Diana Magnums (20 grains) averaged 813 f.p.s. They ranges from a low of 807 to a high of 819. They produced an average energy of 29.36 foot-pounds. They were tight in the breech and loaded hard.

Beeman Ram Jets (24.18 grains) averaged 725 f.p.s. The range was 719 to 728. The average energy was 28.25 foot-pounds.

Beeman Kodiaks (30.70 grains) averaged 571 f.p.s. The range was 549 to 592. The average energy was 22.45 foot-pounds. They were an extremely tight fit in the breech and had to be hammered in with a rubber hammer. I would not have used them, had I not been doing this test.

Here are the top energies for the four calibers in this rifle.

.177 – 23.18 foot-pounds
.20 – 22.79 foot-pounds
.22 – 26.70 foot-pounds
.25 – 29.36 foot-pounds

So, except for the .20 caliber barrel, there is a linear power increase as the caliber increases. I have no way of knowing if I’ve hit on the most powerful pellet in each caliber – in fact, the odds are probably against it, except perhaps in .177. And, there might be a much better .20 caliber pellet that would vault the .20 above .177, where we all think it belongs. The relationship between the calibers, however, will probably remain in this order when the best pellet for power is determined.

The .20 caliber barrel for this rifle seems to be on the small side, as two of the three pellets were snug. Only the Kodiaks fit well. The .25-caliber barrel was also snug. Of all four barrels, the .22 seems to fit the most pellets.

I was surprised that .20 caliber was less efficient than .177, but that’s just in this particular rifle. However, .20 caliber is also behind .22, where I expected it to be. In the late 1990s, the British airgun magazines had an ad campaign that touted the .20 caliber Crosman Premier as more effective over longer range than the .22. I think my experience with both the Condor and now the Whiscombe disproves that, or at least makes it suspect. In the same powerplant, I have twice seen .20 caliber Crosman Premiers go slower than the .22-caliber Crosman Premiers of the same weight.

Now, if this same test were run on the AirForce Condor, I would expect the relationships to remain as they are, with the exception of the .20 caliber that I think would surge ahead of .177. However, the heavier pellets would produce more energy than the light pellets, in all likelihood.

71 thoughts on “Spring gun performance as caliber changes

  1. bb
    hi. i have been firing airguns for years and recently got in to firearms also. when shooting cartridges such as the .243win and larger, the recoil does through the rifle back a few inches. This doesnt hurt of course (not with these fairly small calibres anyway) but once i just tickeld the hair on my eyebrow with the scope, and ever since then i have been a little nervous and flinchy when firing them. My question is, should i tense my upper body (shoulder) and stiffen my posture to absorb the recoil so that the scope cant hit me, or am i supposed to relax like i do with airguns? If its the 2nd option, how to i ensure i dont end up with a shooters black eye and stitches lol

    Paul


  2. B.B., I bought my son a Daisy MOd.25 Pump gun many years ago. It no longer holds air.How do I rejuvenate the seals.Thanks.


  3. B.B.,
    What is your bench rest accuracy with 5-shot groups with this air rifle at 25-30 yards with the different .25 pellets on a calm day? How does this rifle compare in loudness to a Model 54?Thank you. – Dr. G.


  4. Paul,
    I started with firearms and recently moved into airguns. I’m still trying to figure out a proper artillery hold for my springer but I have firearms down pat. With firearms you need a firm hold, and try to rock at the waist when using rifles with heavy recoil. By holding the rifle tight against your shoulder, you will lessen bruising and the the chances of the scope hitting your eye. If you lean forward and allow your torso to rock back at your waist when firing, that will also help absorb recoil. There are also a great deal more scopes to choose from with firearms. If you are really concerned about getting hit in the eye, you can switch to a magnum scope. A magnum scope has about an inch more eye relief but are usually more expensive. Shotgun scopes are cheaper and have long eye relief but a much closer parallax setting, about 50 yards as opposed to 100. Most magnum scopes have an adjustable parallax setting, so they are good at any range.


  5. Paulk,

    Proper eye relief is what you want. Your eye shoyuld be positioned 2-3/4″ to 3″ back from the scope’s eyepiece. I think you must be closer. I shoot a .30-06 that kicks pretty hard, but with the proper eye relief there’s no problem.

    B.B.



  6. Daisy 25,

    The pump gun is a spring-piston gun. It doesn’t hold air.

    This is a very difficult design of BB gun to work on. Even I hate to tear into them. I recommend you send the gun to this guy for repairs:

    Jim Coplen, PO Box 7297, Rochester, MN. 55903 (507)281-2314.

    If you can’t contact him, try this guy:

    Jim Dry Claremore, Oklahoma (918)341-9104

    B.B.


  7. BB, wouldn’t a .20 penetrate further than a .22, if both were of same design and equal weight? I always was under the impression that the .20 was supposed to be the best of both the .177 and .22.

    Al in CT


  8. Morning B.B. Alpha Chrony came yesterday afternoon. Will get started later today. PA included a flyer that had an add for an AirForce CO2 adapter and part of installing it included putting 3 drops of Pellgunoil inside the adapter,”so it will get blown into the valve when the gas starts flowing”. Wouldn’t that then put the oil throught the gun resulting in a possible detonation it you run the gun on air?


  9. Al in CT,

    The myth of the .20 being the best of both the .177 and the .22 was started by Robert Beeman, who didn’t care for .22 caliber. If the .20 were able to be driven as fast as a .22, then yes, it might penetrate deeper. But in the two guns in which I was able to test both calibers, the .22 was faster, and therefore more efficient.

    Perhaps out at 75-100 yards the performance of the two might cross, but not close to the muzzle, which is what the British ad campaign promised.

    B.B.



  10. B.B. This adapter is used on the rifles and the article goes on and gives number of shots expected on CO2 and velocity on high and low power. Forgot to mention how interesting your your blog and pictures are today. Thanks, what a neat looking rifle both visually and technically.


  11. B.B.

    It seems like the fatter .22 or .25 cal. would make a larger hole and more impact,and so penetration is not as important in hunting, but your test results are saying that you would get the same penetration and a big hole with the .22 cal., aren’t they?

    Wayne in Ashland




  12. Morning B.B.

    When you are talking about pellet fit how tight should the pellet be? In my TalonSS jsb’s seem tight I have to push them in, in my ben. 392 a benjamin pellet just slides in real easy. How can I know to tight or to loose?

    Also that JW is one fine looking rifle Ide love to get one it is already personalized for me. When ever you get tired of yours or run out of room I will gladly keep it for you:)

    JW


  13. BB,

    After I get A digital camera, I will do A more in depth report on the Remington Genesis.

    For now, I have A couple of questions for you.

    Would it be A good idea to use the new Leapers RWS mount on most other air rifles, even if there is not much barrel droop?

    I will be getting A Benji Super Streak or the RWS 34 Panther (.22 Cal.) in the next few weeks.

    What weaver rings should I be using to go along with the new rifle, new leapers mount and new leapers 3-12×44 mini swat scope?

    The scope I had been using was the RWS 3-7×33 model 400. When I tried to loosen the screw to set the zero ring the elevation settings would move every time I moved the screw. The marked ring that is used for scope setting is free wheeling. Any suggestion on how fix this problem?

    One final question BB. What mount and rings did you have on the Genesis you tested?

    I love the Genesis, just need something A little more powerful for these large north east Ground Hogs. Trying to decide between the RWS 34 Panther, the Benji Super Streak, the Walther Falcon Hunter or the CFX.

    Thanks for the time BB,

    BobC NJ


  14. BobC in NJ

    I have been testing for the future rifle range…I am not at all impressed with the rws34. I have not been able to try it with a scope..because every adjustable mount I have tried so far has failed to stay put, or broke. I have ordered the new leapers base as recommended by B.B., but it won’t be available for a while. So I have only tested the rws 34 with the open sites and on the crony. It has really crappy sights, is very hard to cock, compared to the cfx’s, and it only shoots 11.9 hobbys .22 cal at 660 instead of the 800 claimed and high 500s with 14.3 pellets..I may have a dud,(that is why I like to buy two of every rifle I test, I didn’t with this one), so I don’t know.

    I would wait and see how the test comes out on the falcon hunter..I ordered one myself in .22 just to see how it compares, should have it this week.

    I like the cfxs in .177 but they are not even close to there advertised fps either, but a very smooth rifle, especially in the gas spring version, which also has a little more fps and I have found contrary to what some have, that my 3 gas cfxs are all 30% easier to cock than the steel spring..I hate the forever creeping trigger though.

    The super streak is way to heavy for my taste.

    Your discovery will do a better job on the bigger critters than the rws34

    If you can find one..I am really looking myself for more of them..try a rws 94 made in spain.. the most powerful, smoothest, best trigger, easy to cock and best of all no barrel droop.. at under $200 I can’t see how to beat it…it is the best so far for the money, in my humble opinion.

    Wayne,
    Ashland Air Rifle Range


  15. Can someone provide general info on the Ruger Air Hawk? So far, what’s I’ve found is it’s a Chinese “semi-clone” of the Diana 34.

    How close is it to the Diana 34, do they use the same piston seals, piston, and spring?

    Is it a copy of a specific brand name gun?

    Any info is appreciated.

    Thanks.
    JustAPlinker


  16. B.B.

    Very interesting and meticulous data. If I’m understanding this correctly, it would seem that the results seem to violate the common perception that speed is more of a contributing factor than mass in the development of energy based on the formula Energy =1/2mv^2 (in International Standard Units ISU of kgm/s^2; the physics is the same is foot-pounds units). The smaller calibers go faster but have less energy than the larger calibers. My only explanation for this is that the velocities are low enough where the squared value v^2 does not really kick in.

    That’s a great-looking rifle. I didn’t realize that Whiscombes came as PCPs too.

    Thanks too for your comments about Ballistol yesterday. This is really the miracle substance that works on organic things as well as all parts of a gun. Reason enough to persevere through that terrible smell.

    Matt61


  17. B.B.

    This subject brings up a puzzle for me…I really get air rifles for low power and noise situations…but when someone wants to hunt or just shoot high power air rifles..I don’t get why they consider spending 3 to 6 times more than a .22 cartridge rifle like a marlin semi-auto for $150. Why are high power air rifles like the condor better than a .22 semi-auto rim fire? Especially when most are single shot.


  18. Hello all, thank you for your thoughts and kind attention to my predicament yesterday. B.B., yes the pendulum has swung as you predicted and not just with the wonderful and amazing Ballistol. Derrick, expediency is my goal, but the problem is that I had already paid $700 for the transaction and I wasn’t about to throw more money at the guy.

    That was interesting about the implications of different business sizes. Not having any experience in business myself, I wouldn’t know except that I suspect that the individual entity is probably more important than the category. I am led to wonder how to classify PA with its great service. It seems to have a national if not international reach but it has the personal touch of the small business with the blog being only the foremost example. Maybe the combination of the large and the small is the ideal.

    As it turned out, scale was the deciding factor in my case. I first went to the local civil court as advised by the police, and the experience was terrible. Between hostility, ignorance, and a public attorney who never answered the phone, I would have thought I was dealing with the Dukes of Hazzard county. My horror mounted as I read online the procedures for small claims which include a mountain of arcane paperwork and endless delays.

    If the issue was only the dollar value, I probably would have written it off, but I thought that someone must take an interest in the large stockpile of guns and ammo at this place and the bizarre behavior of the owner. The local police did not seem to particularly, but there was someone who did. The heroes of the day turn out to be the friendly, courteous and matronly (!?) agents of the ATF. It turns out that they are not a regulatory agency but a law enforcement agency as well. Clicking around online, I found that there are huge felony penalties attached to any irregularities with gun dealing. I reported the case to the local office, and they told me that they would make phone calls. Within an hour or so, the dealer called sounding very cooperative, and I have a date and time to pick up the firearm. So how about that. I guess the feds win this one, and I will commend you to your friendly ATF office….

    As if that wasn’t enough, I came home yesterday to find my ceiling light fixed by the management so perfectly that you would never have known there was a problem. So, I ended the day shooting under my 100W bulbs and giving everything a coat of Ballistol.

    Matt61


  19. wayne, I’ve wondered the same thing myself about high-powered airguns. My guess would be the appeal is partly the Mount Everest one of doing it because you can. More practically, the high-powered airguns can give power approaching a rimfire without the same range and penetration problems.

    Matt61





  20. Matt61,

    Energy increases with the square of the velocity, and it works very well for Roy Weatherby. But with slow pellet-gun velocities, the differences are like mouse-turds. They aren’t as significant.

    The pellet gun world is one of mass over velocity. That’s why black powder is such a good analogy and why I study it rather than smokeless powder.

    B.,B.



  21. B.B.
    Great data. I am thoughtfully pondering it but am missing a couple of pieces of the puzzle. What is the barrel length, and do you know the bore and stroke? It has the opposed double pistons, doesn’t it?

    Also, on that beautiful gun, it looks like the cheek piece is very high. Does that make it easier to find the “cheek weld” each time?

    Thanks very much,
    Pestbgone


  22. B.B.

    Thanks B.B. but I am still confused. Velocity is speed right? So would not speed have a lot to do with penetration?
    And if a .22 cal- 14.3 gr. pellet can go faster (906 compared to 847 in 14.3-.20cal) because of more surface area to push against by the air chamber, why wouldn’t you get more penetration too?

    Wayne,


  23. B.B.,
    I just noticed in your answer to Bob C that you are going to show us the new base for Diana’s. Very soon, I hope!!
    Thanks,
    Lloyd aka Pestbgone


  24. Concerning the Daisy, try a few drops of oil with the barrel removed. Cock and fire several times. Works for me after years of storage.



  25. Wayne,

    Like I said, I didn’t test for penetration, so I am not saying anything about it.

    Don’t make the mistake of taking one data point and trying to extrapolate every answer from it.

    A .45 ACP travels about 830 f.p.s. and a .17 HMR goes about 2,300 f.p.s., but the .45 will out-penetrate the .17 in ballistic gelatin. Penetration is caused bay many separate factors, of which velocity is just one. And penetration changes at the same velocity with different bullet designs.

    B.B.


  26. B.B.

    Wow this is deep stuff…so much to learn and your such a great teacher..look forward to a blog on the subject

    learning in Ashland,
    Wayne



  27. BB, I hope you don’t mind me disagreeing with you. The “best caliber” varies with the power source. Spring guns are best suited for .177cal. Co2 guns’ velocity has a much smaller velocity decrease than a springer, making it best for the .22cal. PCP guns like almost everything from 50 to .177. Is your wiscombie a springer or a pcp. I couldn’t help noticing the amazing power.



  28. Wayne,

    Viva la difference :-) If not, we’d all be stuck with savage 110′s, remington 870’2 and ruger 1022′s. Three well known, rugged, reliable and economical guns that would be all anyone ever needed. If we had that, there would be no Dakota’s, no Weatherby’s, and no Kimbers.

    Al in CT


  29. B.B.,
    Please re-read my question (2nd question today, above) and answer regarding .25 CALIBER, rather than .177 and .22. Thank you for your time. – Dr. G.


  30. Dr. G.,

    I have no accuracy data for the rifle in .25 caliber, because I don’t shoot that caliber for accuracy.

    John Whiscombe stopped making .25 caliber barrels several years ago when he discovered they weren’t as accurate as .22s.

    Now there may be a solution to the .25 caliber barrel crisis. Van Jacobi offers a ,25-caliber custom Lilja barrel for the AirForce Condor. It is probably quite accurate. Especially for an airgun.

    B.B.


  31. Matt61

    Sorry, I didn’t realize you hadn’t ordered directly from the local gun shop. I went back and looked at old posts to figure it out. Sounds like good news from the ATF, I’ll cross my fingers that you get the rifle soon. Let us know. We’re all pulling for you.

    Derrick


  32. Al in CT

    Sorry, I don’t get your drift, very clearly.. could you be more clear..I am hearing there is a difference between a good .22 rim fire rifle and a condor or the likes…but if your hunting why would you pay more for a condor?

    learning in Ashland,

    Wayne,
    Ashland Air Rifle Range & Rentals


  33. Thanks for the encouragement, Derrick. That is a good reminder that the gun is not in hand yet, and I won’t relax until it is. The anticipation of waiting for a new gun is bad enough without all of this layered on top. I don’t think I can take much more of this.

    B.B. I had thought Whiscombes were springers but the thing under the barrel that is sticking out of the fore-end of the stock looked awfully like an air tank for a PCP.

    Wayne, you’re not the only one wanting an answer to your question. I saw a YouTube video of a guy shooting his Air Force Talon, and one of the comments went something like: Haw, haw, why should I pay $700 for that gun when I can get an excellent .22LR for a third of the cost?

    Matt61


  34. Wayne,
    If I may jump in here and make a couple of comments, although I certainly have a lot less experience than a lot of the folks who post here. I’ll list a few reasons why someone would hunt with a Condor or other air rifle instead of a 22 rimfire:
    1. The air rifle is quieter.
    2. The rimfire is dangerous for a much longer distance.
    3. An air rifle is simply not a “firearm.”
    4. At shorter hunting ranges, a good air rifle is more accurate than many 22 rimfires.
    5. Pellets are a lot cheaper than 22 rimfire ammo.
    6. You can practice with your air rifle in your basement.
    7. Personally, I think a single shot air rifle can make for more conscientious hunting than a semi-auto might.
    Just a few thoughts,
    Lloyd


  35. Wayne,

    Thanks for your input, I appreciate it very much.

    I’ve decided that if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. So, I’ll get A new scope for my Genesis and get back in A good shooting grove. I’ll wait for the final on the Falcon Hunter in .22 before my next air gun buy. But, I do see the TX200 in my future.

    BobC NJ


  36. Lloyd

    Thank you so much…those are interesting points…I will give you that an air rifle may be quieter, less dangerous at a long distance, maybe,
    practicing in the basement for sure,…
    but I have not found any of the 20 odd air rifles I have recently tested, more accurate than my $150 marlin LR semi-auto at even 25 yards, let alone 50 yards. And if I want to kill a critter, I like to have a few more shots on the ready.

    Most pellets are not cheaper than a box of 500 long rifle hollow point for $10 at walmart..
    But at least I get most of your points, thank you.

    BobC NJ,

    Your welcome, yeah, wait for the falcon report, (maybe I should have also, but I am very impulsive for rifles about 7 lbs or less, under $300 with good scopes, anyway mine is on the way)…
    the TX200, from what B.B. says, is probably the difference I am curious about, being a whole lot better than a .22LR cartridge rifle, especially at field targets, but at about 9.5 lbs..a little too much for me, my marlin is about 5lbs..that is why I have not gone for it yet, but maybe I might look at that price range for the rifle range someday…It could be that nothing in the $400 and less group will hold up for club or rentals…

    keep up the input please….

    learning in Ashland;

    Wayne



  37. To be fair, the uk mags were comparing downrange efficiency of the crosman .20 vs .22 with the same ME. They never claimed .20 was more efficient in the barrel.


  38. Wayne,

    Sorry if I wasn’t clear, I suffer from off-track-itis at times :-)
    I hope I’ll be able to do a better job. Personally, with my lack of money, I wouldn’t buy a Condor for hunting, I’d just use my Sheridan for that. But if I could afford a higher end air gun for hunting, I would get one in a heart beat. I can’t say I fully understand the reason why either :-)
    As for using an air rifle over a .22, for me it’s just a safety issue. There aren’t too many places in CT that you can go and not worry about the bullet traveling far. I guess I feel safer with an air rifle.

    Al in CT


  39. Downrange,

    I know they were comparing them at some distance from the muzzle, but given the huge difference in performance I got with the Whiscombe, and also with the Condor (about 100 f.p.s. less) I doubt there’s a useful range at which that happens.

    B.B.


  40. It’s the JW75 again. I want to claw my eyes out. Just seeing it makes me wish I’d have bought one before Whiscombe quit making them.


  41. Wayne, I had a .22 Panther 34 that shot about 600fps with 14.3gr Crosman pellets. I eventually discovered that the breach seal wasn’t protruding enough and therefore not sealing. When I shimmed it out the velocity went up to well over 700fps. BTW – I agree wholeheartedly about the ’94. I have NO idea why that gun isn’t supremely popular.

    JustAPlinker – the AirHawk is an inexact copy of the ’34. It has a shorter stroke (5mm), same bore and uses the same piston and breech seal. It even copies the T05 trigger reasonably well. It uses an articulated cocking link similar to that on the M350.

    Overall, though, the production quality on the one I had was pretty poor – rough stampings, sharp edges, and so on. If you care to read it, I recorded my impressions of the rifle here…

    http://www.gatewaytoairguns.com/airguns/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=7498&mid=53874#M53874


  42. anonymous about the hw30,

    Yes indeed, love it, bought 6 already, (I heard from another dealer that Beeman was raising prices, so I bought all that pyramyd had, sorry to those who are waiting now, but it looks like pyramyd is not going to raise there price)

    I think it is the best rifle I have tested yet, super accurate and with such a light kick, it does not throw you off your scoped target, light and small, but still shoots 7.0 hobbys’ in the upper 600s and 6.5 beeman lasers at almost 700 average. (they only claim 675fps so they are one of the few that actually shoot what they advertise) Keep in mind that I live at 2,800′ elevation and that is suppose to effect spring guns.
    I really like the trigger on the hw30, very crisp and about 2.5lbs I think. It is so smooth and easy to cock. The firing is a nice thunk instead of twang like so many others.

    And BB says they are good for a million shots…who could ask for more at that fps? Especially when a lot of 8 lb rifles that claim to shoot 1,000fps end up shooting 700 to 800 with the same pellets as the hw30 shoots at 650.

    learned my lesson on the hw30, but keep teaching me please.

    Wayne
    Ashland Air Rifle Range & Rentals


  43. Vince:

    Wow, thanks, that might be an easy fix, I remember a blog on shimming seals, I will try to find it. Although, I don’t feel I should have to do that to a new rifle. I agree with you that the 34 is not up to rws standards. They cut to many corners trying to have a low price point…better leave that to other countries like china or spain…

    Speaking of spain..

    Thanks B.B.
    for the Umarex USA lead for the hws94, at first they said they did not have any, I asked again if they could special order them, and they wrote back & said they have 25 they have taken back that need to go thru the tech department. So I may have some after all…anyone want to go in on an order with me? I asked them “what price for all 25″

    They also offered me a rws92 youth rifle at 700fps and rws93 at 900fps. Any one know anything about these two? He is sending me specs. because they don’t have it on there website any more.

    It looks like I could resell the 94 at $170, the 93 at $150 and the 92 at $130…any one want to pool an order?

    Wayne,
    Ashland Air Rifle Range & Rentals


  44. Hi Wayne,

    Here are a few more advantages of airguns over firearms.

    1) What Lloyd said.
    2) Wife tolerates airguns, but not firearms.
    3) There is more cleanup with firearms (picking up the brass – what a pain!, cleaning the barrel).
    4) You have to store explosive material (the ammo) for firearms.
    5) Airguns can be silenced with a shroud where in some states you can’t even get a legal silencer for firearms.
    6) Generally there are more legal hassles associated with buying firearms (maybe not in all locations).
    7) Different tastes – some like airguns and some like firearms.

    I happen to like airguns more than firearms. I have also asked myself, “Why?”. Part of it is just personal taste, but part of it has to do with what I perceive as the advantages of airguns over firearms. Of course there ARE limitations to airguns. For example, I haven’t yet seen an airgun I would want to use for protection against cougar, bear (or humans – although a paintball gun with pepperballs might work).

    .22 multi-shot


  45. Wow, no post for today? I’m shocked. I hope all is well.

    So now we come to the issue of most interest to me in the comparison of airguns and firearms–accuracy. What exactly lies behind the claim that airguns can be or are more accurate at shorter range than firearms? I’m guessing that if this is true the deciding factor is that airguns (excluding springers) have less recoil, making them easier to shoot. I’m guessing that barrel making technology for both is identical so given a lighter-recoiling weapon you are bound to do better.

    This is also my understanding of why the AR-15 has pushed both the M1A and the M1 Garand off the line at service rifle competitions. Perhaps the ergonomics of the AR-15 offer something new, but given a lighter caliber it will just be easier to shoot. That was one rationale for introducing the calibre for combat soldiers and I suppose it also applies for elite marksmen.

    Matt61


  46. .22 multi-shot

    Now those are good reasons…especially the purchase hoops to jump thru, and the clean-up..I forgot that is the main reason I don’t shoot my marlin that much, it is so messy to clean it.

    But then again, we are talking hunting, when hunting how many shots do we take? It is field target shooting that gets the marlin dirty most…so there I give you the air rifles if you can afford them.

    still learning in Ashland,
    Wayne


  47. Matt61,

    Google, who owns Blogger, was screwed up this morning. Today’s post is up.

    Who told you the AR-15 is favored at military matches? At short ranges (to 300 yards) it may be, but at longer distances, the .30 caliber still reign.

    Just as the U.S, Army is considering bringing back the 7.62 x 52 mm cartridge to replace the 5.56 because of poor performance against personnel. It was the same in Vietnam, which is why the Marines never fully bought into the M16..

    B.B.



  48. B.B.

    Yes, fill me in on the truth about service rifles. I was sort of hoping the Garand and M1A would continue to hold their own in match competition. The narrative I heard comes from various sources and go like this. Supposedly, the U.S. Army competition team was the first of the service teams to switch from the M1A to the M-16 some time ago, perhaps in the 80s and 90s. Then, they began beating the U.S. Marines! The Marines held out for awhile tweaking their M1As. But then there was some competition with a sudden-death type shoot off between an Army shooter with an M-16 and a Marine with an M1A. Both shot incredibly well but the Army shooter nosed ahead to win. With that the Marines capitulated and have adopted the M-16. It should be easily verifiable which rifle the service teams shoot which should tell us something.

    All I know about the distances for service rifle competition is that they go up to 600 yards or possibly 1000. From what I’ve read, the M-16 is standard out to 600 yards. I would think that the .223 bullet couldn’t possibly keep up with the 7.62 any further and certainly not at 1000 yards, but I haven’t heard that the M-16 is substituted for something else at longer distances. So what is the truth here? Is this all wrong?

    On a related note, I was asking my man Clint Fowler about the relative accuracy of the M1A and M1 Garand. The internet consensus seems to be that the M1A is more accurate. Clint tells me that this perception results from people who do not know how to accurize the M1 Garand. With his method which includes adjusting the gas plug, putting in a guide for the op rod and adding extra locking lugs to the action, he tells me that the Garand can be made equally accurate to the M1A and that if he had it to do over again he would have done his shooting career with a Garand. How wonderful if a bit of modification can extract even more accuracy out of the Garand.

    I don’t expect that there is any controversy about the greater combat effectiveness of the .30 caliber round. As far as accuracy, I would like to think that the Garand is keeping up, but that’s all I know.

    Matt61


  49. Matt61,

    When I was in basic training in 1968, I qualified Expert with the M14 (the military M1A). The M16 was also being issued, so I was asked if I would like to qualify with that, as well. I said yes, and then the range sergeant told me the M16 wasn’t accurate at 300 yards, where the farthest pop-up targets were, so I would have to hit the dirt about 10 feet in front of the target to shower it with stones to knock it down. I shot expert that way, but gained a lifelong distrust of what is essentially a varmint cartridge and unsuited to military combat.

    Please don’t get me started on the design weaknesses of the rifle!

    That was the rifle we sent to Vietnam.

    Since then, the Army has taken the time to do better. The twist rate has gone from 1-12″ to 1-8″ and the bullet has gone from 55 grains (M193) to 62 grains (SS 109).

    That change got them out to 600 yards, but that’s about it.

    B.B.


  50. B.B.

    Thanks, how interesting. There’s no question from all I’ve seen that the 7.62 round is more effective in combat and the Garand/M1A action is more reliable which, for me, is of prime importance for a combat rifle. It does seem that with much fiddling and with the aid of the 6.5 Grendel cartridge that the M-16 has found some kind of niche in target shooting although I don’t know enough about the format to say more.

    Actually, I would be interested in hearing your thoughts on the design features of the M-16. On the negative side, I understand that something about the gas system makes the rifle prone to fouling; the sights are high up off the barrel making for less accuracy; and the structure is overall fragile. On the plus side, the way the butt lines up with the barrel is supposed to promote accuracy and the pistol grip enables more control. What else is in play here?

    Matt61



  51. Wayne,

    Wayne,

    PA does not carry the HW30S I was referring to. The added ā€œSā€ just like with the HW50S, includes the Rekord trigger. Huge difference. This elevates the gun to a Beeman R-7 equivalent. (except the stock and extra stamping on the receiver, which I prefer to pass on since Beeman now includes budget arms). While mine visit Mr. Watts so he can work his magic, this would not be needed in your case. The HW30S would be outstanding for your needs, the HW50S while my favorite, would probably give you more power than desired.


  52. anonymous,

    OH, OK…if PA does not carry them..maybe Umarex USA..I am talking with them about the “closed out” rws94, rws93 and rws92, made in Spain..I have a 94 and really like it so far..only 1,000 or so shots, so still testing..

    Anybody got input on these models?

    still learning in Ashland,
    Wayne


  53. Believe the results of your comparison of spring gun calibers are skewed in regard to the .20 caliber by your use of only the very heaviest pellets. Would be interested to see results using the same pellet in all four calibers – e.g. Beeman FTS (8.60, 11.18, 14.68, 19.20), Beeman Silver Ace (8.12, 11.44, 15,74, 21.68), or Beeman Crow Magnum (8.80, 12.80, 18.20, 26.20) (Weights as shown in charts on the “Straight Shooters” site and are for .177, .20, .22, .25.) Or any other pellet available in the same design in all four calibers.


  54. Another great blog BB!
    How about extending it a little to give us an idea of the trajectories of each caliber and a comparison together with the expected energy retention? I am looking forward!
    Yorgos


  55. Larry,

    And if I do this test, what will I have proved/demonstrated? I don’t mind testing something when there is a principle at stake, but this sounds like a redo to justify the .20 caliber. Isn’t it enough that I admitted I may not have used the absolute best pellets in each caliber?

    Shooting the same pellet in every caliber is not helpful because they AREN’T the same at all! Their different weights make them different. In .20, the Kodiak is medium-weight (not the very heaviest for that caliber).

    Are you wanting to see the .20 caliber develop more power than the .177? I admit that there’s probably a pellet that will make it do so. Is that good enough, or is there something else that I’m not picking up on?

    This isn’t a criticism, but this test takes HOURS of time, and the results will look a lot like, well, this test.

    B.B.


  56. Yorgos,

    To give an idea of the extended trajectory and energy retention would take weeks of time. Even pellet manufacturers don’t supply that kind of info.

    The tables from FSI are the best way to generalize this kind of data, but to actually develop it, you need to spend the time with ONE gun in ONE caliber and ONE pellet. That might only take a long day.

    B.B.


  57. Thank you for the quick reply. I know it is very difficut to provide the data, but you have always provided with great work! Thank you anyway.
    Yorgos


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


+ 1 = 3

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>