Ruger Air Magnum Combo – Part 1

by B.B. Pelletier

Test and photos by Earl “Mac” McDonald


Ruger’s Air Magnum Combo is a big, new, powerful breakbarrel.

Today, we’ll begin a look at a brand-new ΓΌbermagnum from Ruger, the Ruger Air Magnum Combo. This is another spring-piston breakbarrel with smashing power, and I can tell you where that power comes from — in a moment.

Mac described the rifle as a Diana RWS 34P on steroids. And, then it hit him. Maybe, it’s really more of a Diana RWS 350P Magnum. Regardless of what it reminds him of, the report will focus on this new rifle, only.

Now, being both a breakbarrel and powerful is going to mean one thing for sure. This rifle will take some technique to shoot well. You’ll have to apply the artillery hold and find and use the one best pellet no matter how many tins of lead sinker larvae you can find on sale at Wal-Mart. You know, praying doesn’t make bad ammo good, and no amount of savings will ever be enough to compensate for the miss you know started out as a good shot.

The rifle comes with open sights. In this case, they’re fiberoptic, front and rear, which is probably the right choice for a hunting gun. And, the rear sight is fully adjustable.

A scoped combo
Being a combo, though, the rifle also comes with a scope. In this case, it’s a 4×32 that I’m sure you’ll want to upgrade at some time, though Mac tells me the one on his test gun is pretty darned clear. It doesn’t have parallax adjustment at this price level, but Mac will share how to adjust the parallax on this scope in part three of this report. You can set it to 25 yards, if you like, and you’ll be averaged for hunting. Or, if you just want to shoot it at 10 meters (even though this is not an indoor plinker by any means), it should be possible to set it for that range.

And, some very good news. The rifle has a Weaver base permanently attached to the spring tube. So, buy Weaver rings and forget all scope mount movement problems. Of course, if you get the combo you also get a scope mount set, so there’s nothing more to buy.

Big gun!
The rifle is very large, Mac says, though at 8 lbs. it isn’t a heavyweight. It’s 48.5 inches long, which makes it much longer than the average breakbarrel. The length of pull is a good 14.25 inches, which most adults will find in the right range. The barrel measures 19.5 inches, which you’re going to want for some cocking leverage.

Where the power comes from
The cocking effort on Mac’s test rifle measures 58 lbs.! Yes, I said 58 lbs. If you want to know how that would be measured, look at this video. Please, think that through before you order one, because at that level of effort you’re not going to use one of these rifles for plinking. Even bodybuilder Lou Ferrigno would soon tire of that much effort. But, hunters shouldn’t care one way or the other, because they don’t have to cock their rifles that often. Umarex, which imports the gun, lists the cocking effort at 42 lbs. Even that’s substantial.

However, it isn’t just the powerful mainspring that creates the extra power of this rifle. Mac reports that the barrel also comes back about 120 degrees from closed before the rifle is cocked. That extra stroke of the piston is where the real secret of power lies. We know today that swept volume in springers is the real secret of their power, which begs the question of why the rifle has to cock at 58 lbs. Maybe it was a poor mainspring choice and maybe an aftermarket tuner can chop out 20 lbs. of effort without losing much power, but that’s not a question we’ll address in this report.

The one note Mac added about cocking is that he cannot feel the sear set when the rifle is cocked. The safety comes on automatically, but you really have to give the barrel a hard last yank to ensure the rifle is cocked. Maybe that’ll change with break-in, like the older Gamo triggers and BSF triggers used to, but we shall see.

Mac measured the two-stage trigger at 53 oz. He says stage two is a bit vague, but you can feel it. The trigger is also adjustable, but only for the length of first-stage travel.

You can see that the butt is synthetic, and Mac noted the thick, smooth buttpad. The stock design is conventional Monte Carlo style, but without a raised cheekpiece. Note the complete ambidextrous design because of where the automatic safety is placed, at the rear of the spring tube. The metal is nicely finished medium satin and sets off the dark stock perfectly.

More toys, boys!

91 thoughts on “Ruger Air Magnum Combo – Part 1

  1. 58 lbs of cocking effort and a 53 oz trigger with specs of 1,400 fps. This should be called the T-Rex.

    After this 3 part series I think Mac deserves a very nice Christmas present.

    kevin


    • great review i was going to get a gamo rocket dx witch is 1250 fps but this gun is 1400 fps i like more speed so i changed my mind it seems like a very decent gun but the original price $299.99 lol i hope my parents get it on sale for $170 something dollars cant wait till christmas + great review bye oh and i love 9/11


      • Aside from your strange comment about ” I love 9/11″, you do realize that accuracy with rifles exceeding 1,000 fps is very poor. Put in perspective, unless you are aiming at the side of a barn, whatever you aim at from any type of distance – 10 to 15 yards and up, you’ll probably miss. So do you want to be able to brag that you’ve got the biggest, fastest rifle on the block but can’t hit the side of a barn unless you’re shooting inside it or do you want to be able to show a target that you’ve put 10 pellets into that can be covered with a quarter from 30 yards away?

        Fred PRoNJ



  2. I am suspicious about this rifle accuracy- 1400 fps in 17 cal ,this is 426,72 m/s this rifle WILL break sound barrier(342,2m/s speed of the sound ) with pellets too light to withstand that turbulence ,not to mention 58 lbs cocking effort-actually this gun would be nice in 22 (at least) or 25 cal for a hunting gun.It is cool to own rifle that can make a hole in 10 cm thick wood at 20 meters but all this power goes for nothing if you can’t hit that wood at 10 meters ,so can’t wait accuracy tests but still my opinion is that this is a wrong caliber for this rifle!


    • Milan

      “A weak hit is better than a strong miss” – that’s the saying we’ve got here among ourselves, airgunners.
      I agree that .177 is a bit too light for such powerhouse, but I think we must excuse Ruger marketologists. I wonder how 1400 fps speed was achieved – some makers do a cheap trick, using less that half-gram, e.g. 0.45 g or 0.51 gram pellets. Although it’s not as light as Russian “cups” that weigh 0.28, it can still produce a very loud and well-selling number like 1250 or even 1400 fps. I am quite sure that real tests by Mac will show us a bit more humble results.
      And considering pellets for this “doomsday springer” – if the task is to keep it subsonic in .177 – so one must use something like Eun Jin 1.04 gram monsters.
      As for rifle’s accuracy – I think its power and 53 oz on the trigger says it all. This rifle requires much skill and expertise to shoot precisely, just as Mac mentioned, and, if it was my rifle, some work to do.
      Without it it’s a typical “vedroboy” for a fps-crazy people.

      duskwight


    • Milan,

      I agree with you, that .177 caliber is too small for all this power. However, that’s the first caliber they have brought out. In selling to American buyers, velocity still impresses a lot. Most of these potential buyers will have never attempted to cock a 58-pound spring, nor do they know how much skill it takes to shoot a magnum springer like this.

      I also agree with Duskwight about the heavy trigger. But let’s wait and see what this baby can do in all departments.

      B.B.

      B.B.



      • B.B.

        Yes, real tests sometimes beat all the speculations.
        I wonder if Mac tested it with Eun Jin 16-grain “mauls”, IMO the only suitable pellets for this kind of power. 58 lbs – whew!

        BTW, congratulate me – I finished blueprints for cocking system and finished testing my trigger unit. Well, for now it was just a 1:1 mockup, made of acrylic glass (thank God for providing me with friends working on industrial laser plotters πŸ˜‰ all you need is just a CorelDraw file ) with weak springs, but it worked fine and predictable. Next will be made made raw steel, just to “kill” it while testing – maximum loads, breaking points, wear etc. If it’ll “die” valiantly – then I’ll make it from Cr-V alloys and high-durability steel and put into my new rifle.

        duskwight


        • duskwight,

          You remind me of Bert Munro, the New Zealand motorcyclist who set the word record for motorcycles under 45 cubic inches on a 1920 Indian! He made everything, too.

          My friend, you make us all proud. Never let that mockup trigger be destroyed!

          B.B.



            • Aw, I pressed the wrong button, sorry.

              I guess I’m not after Burt Monro, I don’t have lathe or milling machine or welding equipment and I don’t have skills enough to work with it, but my strength is in men I know.
              I rather feel myself more like Howard Hughes – I’ve got an idea and its overall shape, and I organize other people who posess tools and skill to turn this idea into reality. Well, I’m not a billionaire in any mean but I try to compensate it with stubborness and learning πŸ™‚

              duskwight



                • B.B.

                  Hm…
                  *checking empty pockets for cash*
                  *touching face for any kind of moustache*
                  *trying to remember the last time I married some movie star*
                  (sigh)
                  Well, I’m afraid I am not HH at all.

                  However I love aviation, I think Ava Gardner was and is one of the most beautiful women on earth and I think DW sounds and spells not an inch less proud than HH πŸ˜‰

                  duskwight


      • BB, I think this rifle is merely a rehash of the Xisico B-28, which has been out in .22 for quite some time. In fact, I believe it is now available in .25

        Pseudo-clone of the Diana 350, either way…


  3. With an airgun this fast I’d be looking at the heavier pellets before expecting accuracy.
    And with a cocking effort of 58 pounds I’d probably look for a cocking aid, maybe something like a Browning 500 but a bit longer?

    Question to all: would a minie ball design work in (powerful) airguns?
    B.B. It’s great to hear you’re doing OK and getting better, I hope you’ll be with us for years to come.

    Best regards,

    Wildey


  4. Morning B.B.,

    Hmm, at 58 pounds of cocking force, I wonder which shooter expends more energy per shot a .22 caliber Condor shooter with a hand pump shooting at max fps for 40 shots or a Ruger Air Magnum shooter for the same number of shots? Just a thought.

    By the way I sure like ” tins of lead sinker larvae” as a Tom ism phrase.
    Bruce


    • Mr. B.,

      That “Tom-ism” is the first time I actually thought about it. It stems from my frustration with newer airgunners who do not yet understand the importance of good ammo to accuracy. I get these lectures about what a wonderful savings some of these inexpensive/junk pellets are and why don’t I use them more often.

      B.B.


      • I’m with you on that one Tom. I’m always amazed at the people (and no…they’re not on this blog) who on the one hand complain that their brand new rifle must be faulty because it’s only grouping 3 inches at 10 yds…then a couple of days later are putting out the grand announcement that WallyMart has some off brand pellet on sale for the great price of $2.00 for the 1500 box.
        And they don’t get the corellation.


        • Sometimes I don’t know whether the price of the ammo makes a difference. I’m new to the airgun world (only bought 2 in the last 6 months) and my main gun is a RWS 34P. That gun loves Crosman Destroyers which work out to $8/500. They shoot better than anything else including RWS Superdomes ($9.25/500), RWS Super-H ($9.15/500), and Crosman Premiers ($8.35/500). The only pellet it likes a little better are the H&N Crow Magnums ($11/500) and I’m not sure it’s worth it.

          With both the Destroyers and the Crow Magnums I can siamese 4 shots in a 5 shot group at 10 yards as long as I do my part. Maybe the Crow Magnums are a little more accurate at about 30 yards, but I don’t have as much time as I would like to keep changing ammo and checking groupings. πŸ™‚


          • JeffT,

            It’s hard to determine accuracy to 10 meters. Thirty yards is very good, though.

            Have you tried Crosman Premiers in that 34P? I mean only those packed in the cardboard box. They always work well for me in a Diana rifle.

            B.B.


        • i have a ruger air magnum i got last year and i can not get the thing to group for the life of me. Well no what i should say is that i cannot find and air rifle scope that will hold up to the recoil this thing puts off. But it groups fine with the original fiber optic sights but at 20 yards u cant see a silver dollar size bullseye with the dang thing. Does anybody have any scope recomendations?


          • Brett,

            You will have to be more specific. Why can’t you keep a scope on your rifle?

            1. Is the scope moving in the rings?

            2. Are the rings moving on the rifle?

            3. Are the scopes breaking?

            4. Is the aim point of your scope shifting from shooting session to shooting session, or is it impossible to group well with a scope?

            You tell me what the problem is and I will try my best to help you.

            If I am able to help you, will you be willing to tell me what I need to know so I can document this in a blog?

            B.BV.


  5. B.B.

    How could you ever break in a gun that has a front suspension coil spring from an old Buick? I can’t see how anybody would ever be able to shoot it enough to break it in.

    Sounds like a real scope buster.

    Time to oil up some Raptors and see if it can go faster than a .17/.223 Remington.

    OUCH!!!!!

    twotalon


  6. I don’t think most adults will really find 14.25 inches LOP in the right range, but most airgunners probably will. Little wonder people say they can’t shoot offhand — their rifle is probably not helping the situation.



      • I think 13.5 or 13.75 for c/f rifles and a lot of rimfires last time I checked. Every time I try one that fits me well and measure it (or check the specs. if available), it comes out to that range, though I can always be wrong:). I know it has increased over the years as people were getting taller, but not that much, I think, especially considering how much easier it is to adapt to a stock that is “too short” than one that is too long, not to mention allowing for clothes in colder weather.

        I know my 870 has a 14.25 LOP, and it is too long, but that’s a utility piece and a shotgun, so I’ve lived with it for years, but if it was a rifle I’d sell it or saw it off.


        • BG_Farmer,

          Well, I will look into it, but most modern sporters seem to be greater than 14 inches, or I’m not paying attention. I always thought 14.5″ was the average.

          B.B.


          • After my reply, I searched on it a bit (so at least I would know if I was full of …–it πŸ™‚ ). Actually, my range seems to be viable, but I didn’t find anything truly authoritative, and finding spec.’s from makers is hit or miss. I would really be interested to see what you can find out, as always.


          • Remington has all their pulls, but they make it hard to paste a link to spec’s. as far as I could tell. Remington 700 BDL (in .30-06, of course) lists pull as 13 3/8″, with 700 CDL SF in 7mm-08 at 13 1/2. I think my Savage 111 is 13.5″, but can’t find any actual spec’s. from the factory. 13.5 also seems to be what most of the aftermarket stocks default to, as well.



            • BG_Farmer,

              I surrender! Apparently the ergonomics of rifles has been growing smaller in my dotage. I think it may be that I’m more used to vintage American military rifles.

              But I submit. I have learned a valuable lesson. Thank you.

              B.B.


              • BB,
                Seriously, I don’t care about win or lose, but I’m happy to have you back in fighting form. In the case of this rifle, I really like the look of the stock (I’ve been won over by plastic), but I can’t do anything within reason (and that does not always limit me) to shorten the LOP of a synthetic stock. Please keep this in mind next time you talk to airgun manufacturers — no reason an air rifle stock should be longer than good number of c/f’s. I suppose they are responding to demand, though, and give the people what they ask for.


                • BG_Farmer,

                  Oh, I WILL keep it in mind! I developed the Bronco thinking that a 12.5-inch pull was really short for an adult. Maybe I’m not the average shooter.

                  B.B.


                  • B.B. I am 5′ 9″ and I find the Bronco extremely comfortable to shoulder. It is very easy for me to control, unlike some of my other rifles with a longer LOP. I guess I am just an old kid.


                    • Toby,

                      And I am only 5’10’ and need another 2 inches of pull to be comfortable. Different frames, I guess.

                      B.B.


  7. Hope you are keeping well BB.
    It is great reading about and seeing Magnum Springers.”Don’t see many round these parts”.
    I gather there are a lot of up’s and down’s where they are concerned but to counter Duskwights very wise words,we have a saying,
    “don’t worry about the quality,feel the width” πŸ™‚
    Dave(The power hungry loon)UK



  8. B.B.

    I’m so glad your back in the saddle!

    This is my kind of springer! I can hardly wait to buy two.. one for each hand.

    Those who know me… know I’m joking.. just like this rifle is a joke. What a great way to waste money.. or turn someone off to the great sport of air gunning. IMHO:-)

    But the reality is, they will probably sell a bunch of them.. Americans are so easy to dupe… and buy on impulse… I know.. I’m one:-) … and I do..

    Wacky Wayne,
    Match Director,
    Ashland Air Rifle Range


  9. Ok, I went to PA site and looked up this gun. Not as powerful as you all seem to think! Site says “1400 fps with light weight high velocity pellets and 1200 fps with lead pellets.” And I am sure the 1200 fps is with the very lightest lead pellets. So using something like the 10.5 grain brown boxed CP’s would likely get you below the sound barrier and using the 16.1 gr Eun Jin would get you below 1000 fps.

    Still great power as my Sumatra 2500 carbine in .177 hardly does more. With the lightest lead pellets it breaks 1200 fps but not by much. With 10.5 gr brown boxed 10.5 gr CP’s it barely does 1100 fps. And with the 16.1 gr Eun Jin it gets about 975 fps average.

    So that is real good power from a springer but at a cost as shooting it accurately will be a bear, while shooting the Sumatra carbine accurately is a piece of cake!!

    To me there is just not much to recommend about a spring gun. I will take the pcp every time hence my blog nick name!



    • Springers seem better suited to disciplined shooters (i.e., those who enjoy a challenge), though today’s feature might frustrate even the best — we’ll see if Mac and BB can tame it.


      • BG_Farmer,

        Agreed. Sure is satisfying to discover all the secrets to shooting your springer well. They’re such quirky individuals but fun to get to know. Reminds me of a few of my friends that aren’t guns LOL!

        kevin


      • I think you’ve nailed it BG. I like my springers because I’m forced to be careful and precise when I shoot.
        Even my gentle Slavia…I’ve wasted many shots because it is so forgiving for a springer that I’ll just start shooting willy-nilly…and the pellets land all over the place. Then I slow down, breath and hold properly and all of a sudden it’s back to 30m 1″ groups.
        I just don’t see the fun of picking up a gun and having the pellets land exactly where you want them every time πŸ˜‰
        Same with archery (which I’ve taken up with my son this past year). It just seems so easy to shoot the compound bows…ya really gotta do your homework to be accurate with a recurve.
        The force has to be with you!


        • CowBoyStar Dad,

          What ever happened to the old adage that “the only interesting gun is an accurate gun”? Course that doesn’t apply here as that gun is advertised to go 15 gazillion fps! And at 15 gazillion fps ANY gun is interesting!

          Of course we all know that the right “artillery hold” will turn this into the most accurate of behemoths! Wow! Isn’t knowledge exhilarating?


  10. BB Regarding swept volume, is there an optimal ratio of cylinder internal diameter x length for springers as defined by the caliber or other determination? Also, what is the largest diameter and/ or swept volume in a springer that we know of? You got me thinking about the NASCAR rules for V-8 cylinders!

    I realize that the air transfer port and other more detailed features play in to the total picture, but wondering about swept volume, etc.





        • Same here, I read a little bit about Dr. Beeman’s discoveries way back when, but as BB noted it’s particular to an entire list of materials and parts and other esoteric stuff inside the R-1. I can feature such a list for experimentation. Tube material type, ID & OD of tube, spring type-wire size, coil count, wire shape, etc etc, then on to the piston metal and size, shape and then on to……..

          Couple that with the vibration and harmonics and reed-frequency analysis and my head is already hurting!

          As said before here on similar topics, all of this work and endeavor requires a LARGE payback or market potential. Therefor the reason we have custom tuners and parts for mediocre or less than perfect guns?



      • Thanks BB, interesting reading. Like so many mechanical devices, there is balance (or should be) between weight, energy input , frequency or vibration, work done, etc etc. Finding that balance is the magic of the designers and tuners out there, as in your comment about Jim’s TX200 plastic piston; hi-speed but with all the vibration that comes with it and the lack of dampening of heavier metal parts!



    • A.R. Tinkerer,

      That is my hope, as well. My nurse told me they had gotten as many of my organs as they should for free. From now on I should charge.

      But as an organ donor I’m rapidly becoming worthless. πŸ˜‰

      B.B.


  11. Your favorite scope?

    Tell me your favorite scope(s) that fits the following criteria:

    1-Must be rated for a springer
    2-Must be lightweight. Approximately 16 ounces or less.
    3-Must be under 14″ in length
    4-Must have a reticle that helps with holdover and windage. Mil dots, map 6 reticle, ballistic plex reticle, etc. Duplex reticle doesn’t count but can be honorably mentioned. Thin reticle and small mil dots/hash marks get extra points.
    5-Must have at least 9X and more magnification gets high marks. Variable magnification is fine.
    6-Must have AO
    7-Good warranty is a plus
    8-Most important. Good glass, i.e., good light gathering, no flaring on the edges, etc.

    Here’s my list:

    1-Burris Timberline 4.5-14X with AO and ballistic plex reticle
    2-Leupold vari-x 3-9×33 EFR (AO) with mil dots
    3-Sightron II 4-16×42 AO with mil dots
    4-Clearidge ultra RM 3-9×32 AO with mil dots

    Would appreciate knowing your favorite(s).

    kevin


    • I overlooked one of my favorite scopes that fits this criteria. It’s often overlooked by many:

      5-Bushnell 3200 7-21X40 AO with mil dots. Weighs 15 ounces and is 14″ long. 21X !!

      kevin


      • Kevin,
        21X out of a 40mm objective sounds pretty dark – and with less than a 2mm exit pupil. How does the image look, and how easy is to hold at max zoom? What is the highest power you find usable on the scope if not the max power?

        Just checking as it sounds interesting if you rate it so highly – just on those specs I would probably dismess it (21X out of a 40mm objective).

        Alan in MI


        • Alan in MI,

          The bushnell 3200 7-21X40 is very bright. I just went outside and it’s dusk (Colorado) and on 21X it focused clearly enough on a leaf AT 10 YARDS that I could see the veins of the leaf. The light gathering capability of this scope made the leaf look like someone had a weak flashlight on it. Much brighter than my naked eye.

          The size of the objective does help with light gathering but the quality of glass and coatings are more important. The bushnell 3200 is a low-mid price scope with above average glass. If you want to have some fun go into a good sporting goods store and grab a leupold competition series scope (all these have a 45mm objective) with 40X or even 45X magnification. Point it at a dark corner of the store. You’ll be amazed. That’s mid-high range glass price wise and you’ll see what the extra money is spent for.

          I’m not very steady offhand anymore so when I’m shooting with a scope with high magnification I shoot from the bench. When long distance shooting with the bushnell 3200 7-21X I have it set on 21X and don’t get any dimming or fuzziness at the edges. I paid for the magnification I’m going to use it. It’s a good scope for the money especially if you find one used. They don’t come up for sale used very often though. I bought both of mine used.

          kevin



      • Frank B,

        Well….it’s been almost 8 hours and I must assume that you have at least one of each of the scopes on my “meets the criteria” list. Tell us your thoughts.

        kevin



  12. B.B., what a beast! I would love to tackle that cocking effort. Just imagine if this spring has a buzz to it; you would be vibrating for some time. I didn’t follow this statement: “Mac reports that the barrel also comes back about 120 degrees from closed before the rifle is cocked.” Is this angle measure the distance that the barrel rotates through the cocking stroke? Is this different from normal? Never had a breakbarrel. I’m a great fan of the RWS 350, and if this is a lower-priced version with equivalent performance that would really be something. I believe that low-priced quality and reliability is a Ruger specialty with their firearms.

    Matt61


  13. Yes, Ruger FIREARMS, made in the US. This is, as mentioned above, German designed, Chinese made, American named.

    chinese airguns == chinese firearms in my opinion. Not necessarily bad, just lower on the price ANd quality curves.



  14. With all of the silly, gimmicky, exercise products out there, this rifle could be sold for it’s “workout” value.

    “Lose weight, get stronger, and feel younger in just 40 shots a day!”

    “ACT NOW!!! Supplies limited!”

    Victor


  15. Kevin,
    I agree with you on the Burris timberline 4.5-14 timberline. I have one on my A/A TX 200 very nice clear image and seems to be holding up to the recoil just fine. I just got a Hawke airmax which is rated for all spring guns in fact I do believe all thier scopes are spring rated. Looks real nice, think I’ll try it on my rws 54.
    Another realy nice cheap scope that I have is a Simons side focus 6-21×44 44 mag the yardage marks are right on, its the 44 mag model. I have it on my Benjamin Marauder so I don’t know if it’s spring rated. Anyway I’m glad Pyramyd now stocks the Hawke scopes since I do believe I need a couple more of those.


    • Loren,

      We’re preaching to each other. We know about the burris timberline secret LOL! When you consider weight, length, the very usuable ballistic plex reticle, quality of glass, 14X MAGNIFICATION and price, in my opinion I don’t think you can beat the burris timberline. I don’t like the overly long eye relief for some guns and I don’t like the offset turrets since it requires offset mounts on some guns. I’d also like the windage and elevation adjustments to be finger adjustable rather than a coin but these things don’t stop me from buying burris timberline scopes.

      I’ve never had the simmons 44 mag scope you refer to but the 20 ounce weight on the spec sheet puts me off a little.

      Thanks for chiming in. I’m hoping to be introduced to some new to me scope models!

      kevin


  16. Kevin,
    Check out the Hawke 30mm sidewinders, they are a little more spendy but look at all the features. Might be a bargain.I have heard they are real popular in England.
    Yes that Bushnel 3200 7X21 is a real beauty thats what I wanted on my TX but decided to go cheap.
    Loren,


    • Loren,

      Good call. The Hawke series, especially sidewinders, get good press. I like sidefocus AO but the “price” you pay seems to be weight. Even the entry level 3-12X sidewinder weighs in at 23.4 ounces which is almost twice the weight of the average scope on my list. Since I’m not into FT and like to hunt/pest and occasionally would like the option to shoot offhand weight is a big consideration for this old guy. Really appreciate your input. Wish more folks would share their scope secrets.

      kevin


  17. Thanks for the reply.I looked at my statement today and got pounded by the currency exchange ordering the mount, but that’s life when you play with big boy toys.The list of scopes was interesting.How do the RWS scopes stack up?Does any one have any thoughts on the Remington nitro piston.


    • John Ridley,

      There’s always a market for those cross bar type mounts. The FWB’s are only one of the guns that require them. Those mounts will always be valuable.

      Which RWS scopes are you referring to? I had an old RWS 4X that was made in japan, weighed around 6 ounces and wish I never sold it. Got a good price but have never seen another one.

      Regarding the Remington Nitro Piston (NPSS-Nitro Piston Short Stroke) B.B. did a 3 part series when they first came out. The article is titled, “Crosman Nitro Piston” but it’s the same gun. Here’s a link to part 3, just scroll down below the picture and you can click on part 1, then part 2, etc. to read them in order:

      http://www.pyramydair.com/blog/2009/07/crosmans-new-nitro-piston-short-stroke.html

      kevin


  18. BB,
    Has Mac figured out yet that you’re dumping all the heavy, hard cockers on him to test while you’re waiting to test the light ones after you get stronger? πŸ™‚
    -Chuck


  19. I would normally choose .22 for hunting, but pushing those 10+ grain .177’s at 970 fps and 21 fpe sounds perfect for any birds, squirrels, rabbits etc at extended ranges. BB…at what range would the energy of this pellet fall to around the 5 fpe level needed to take smaller game? I understand the ballistic coefficient of different pellets comes into play but I’m just looking for an approximate answer. Seems ideal to be shooting at just under sonic level, and the potential for a nice flat trajectory is very appealing. There seems to be a lot of general advisory against magnums in .177 and while I understand going supersonic is not good, it’s also easy enough to simply select the heavier pellets when ordering!

    BTW, I did the JB Bore Paste “new gun” procedure on my RWS 350 Pro Compact .22 and the groups are very, very good…thanks BB!


    • Ken,

      I’m guessing the pellet will still be above 5 foot-pounds out at 80 yards. And, isn’t it amazing how the JB treatment will change an airgun’s accuracy?

      B.B.




  20. I have one of these rifles in .22 it’s a decent gun, I guess. Initially had to remove the stock and tighten all of the screws then I had some accuracy. Don’t go for the light pellets folks, speed isnt everything. If you shoot light and they go supersonic you loose all chance of accuracy because the pellet will tumble. The heavier the better in this gun is where I got some accuracy even out to 50 yards, you can hit at 100 but if you are trying to use this one for hunting stay closer unless you are hunting barn doors or something.


Leave a Reply