by B.B. Pelletier
Photos and test by Earl “Mac” McDonald
Today, I’ll test the accuracy of the Gamo Whisper CFR. You may remember that the CFR is a more powerful underlever that resembles but is not identical to the BSA Polaris that I tested a few weeks back. I say that because the Polaris was such a wonderful spring rifle and, although I don’t normally make comparisons, in this case I can’t help it. The two rifles look too much alike.
Let’s get right to it
The first pellet Mac tested was the JSB Exact 8.4-grain dome. It produced the second-tightest group of the test, with 10 going into a group measuring 1.23 inches at 30 yards.
Second-best group of the test is this 1.23-inch group of 10 JSB Exact 8.4-grain domes fired at 30 yards.
Okay, I know what you’re thinking. This is an overly powerful air rifle; and maybe if we shot heavier pellets in it, the slower velocity would make them more accurate. The next pellet Mac tried was the 10.5-grain Crosman Premier. Well, it did about the same, only a little more open, at 1.39 inches for 10 shots. It’s very interesting that both groups to this point are very open, with no sub-groups within the main group. So, this is the accuracy and no excuses about it.
Ten 10.5-grain Crosman Premiers went into this 1.39-inch group at 30 yards.
Okay, so Mac decided to try his favorite RWS Superdome. He knew the risks of shooting a thin-skirted pellet in a powerful spring rifle like this, but what the heck?
The CFR blew the skirts out of the RWS Superdome pellets. You can see the smears left by the lead around some of the holes in this 2.1-inch group. Look at the bottom hole.
Superdomes are obviously not the pellet for this rifle. The powerful air blast blew their skirts out!
Next, Mac tried the JSB Exact heavy domed pellet. Knowing that the light pellet did well, it was reasonable to assume this one would, as well. It did better than the Superdome, but was no match for the lighter pellet by the same maker. It grouped 10 in 1.48 inches.
Ten pellets in a group measuring 1.48 inches at 30 yards. Notice that there’s no real tendency to bunch up within this group.
The final thing Mac tried was a second group of JSB Exact lites. Like the first group, this one was the best of the day, at 1.2 inches on the money. So, this pellet is very consistent in the CFR, at least with Mac on the trigger!
Best group of the test was this bunch of 10 that went into 1.2 inches at 30 yards.
The bottom line
The Gamo Whisper CFR is a very powerful underlever that the owner will have to learn to shoot. Start with the JSB Exact lite and search for a pellet that can beat it.
If underlevers are your style, this is one for the hunters.
Morning B.B.,
Blew the thin skirt out?? I need some coffee this morning cause that statement doesn’t make sense to me. My eyes are seeing the lead smear, but my brain is saying how did the skirt get any larger than the bore of the rifle to get itself blown out? I’ve got to get my daughter to school and will get back later in the day.
I am sure that it’s s simple explanation that will have me saying oh ok, why didn’t I see it sooner.
Thanks,
Bruce
Does not look logical to me either.
Should not be much pressure left at the muzzle, since the velocity test did not indicate detonation.
Centrifugal force? At this velocity range seems unlikely. Must be some terribly thin skirts.
Have to wonder how they would manage to not do this in other rifles in the same velocity range.
twotalon
Bruce,
You have misunderstood what that term means. Of course you can’t blow a skirt out larger than bore diameter. What a blown skirt means is the skirt has changed shape from a truncated cone to a cylinder. It no longer looks like a funnel, but a pipe. The pellet loses its flight stability when this happens, because the wasp waist is gone.
B.B.
B.B.
Oh my god… Was that offhand shooting or shot from soft rest? I don’t believe my own eyes, CFX-like powerplant cannot shoot this. I just refuse to believe it.
From previous posts on that rifle I see that there’s big spread.
I think there may be the point.
In my experience big spread on CFX powerplant may mean that there’s trouble with barrel’s breech end – not enough friction. I’d also check barrel tightness, just ramming a pellet through the barrrel. The force after first grooves are cut must be the same all the time, or tightening a little bit towards muzzle.
There’s another possibility (much more likely to happen as spread is irregular, luckily – very curable) – an entire system’s airtightness, specifically – breech’s rear (bigger) ring. Sometimes (rare occasion) it may happen while the breech is installed at the factory, sometimes it’s damaged by diesel effect (more often). Any smoke trom the barrel or harsh bang on first shots?
Maybe Mac should try another CFR to compare?
duskwight
duskwight,
If I didn’t know what a good shooter Mac is I would question those groups, but he has always been able to outshoot me with any rifle. The CFR is probably not a good one, but then that is part of why we test airguns.
B.B.
B.B.
That’s the point – as I always remember Mac making good tight groups.This is just not his kind performance. Maybe changing the test rifle will increase the performance – there may be some sort of trouble.
On second thought – maybe tight Crosman Premier Heavies will give better performance? They like “loose” barrels.
duskwight
Sorry, I missed some words – CP 10,5 _with widened skirts_
I think that your example of the CFR may have an issue. I am definitely more experienced with rimfires and centerfires than with airguns, but at 50 yards I am getting groups as good or better than Mack’s 30 yard groups, and I have only shot about 1000 pellets for break-in. I will say that I did remove my trigger return spring and install a longer pre-travel screw with unbelievable results compared to what I expected. The trigger feels almost as light as my tuned Savage btv that measures at 1 lb. exactly. I also have the inert gas piston installed. I took my CFR out at my gun club’s 50 yard range on a day with very light crosswinds and tested several different pellets. At 25 yards I was seeing 10 shot groups around .5″ with crosman premier hp’s. At 50 yards they were not the best though. Groups were opening up to about 1.75″. Gamo hunter’s weren’t as good at 25 yards as the cp’s, but they were coming in around 1.25″ at 50 yards, making them the best of all the pellets I tested that day. All the wadcutter pellets were printing 2″-3″ at 25 yards, and not one type of pointed pellet would keep all 10 on an 8.5″ x 11″ page with a target on it. I should also note that my groups could have been better, but the rifle did not sit well on my sandbags because they were setup for my savage, and I really should have let some sand out of my rear bag.
Hello Derek,
you have posted to a Blog that was written around 9 months ago. Unfortunately, only a few of us monitor these older blogs. This is unfortunate because what you have to say would be of interest to most of us, and we number in the tens of thousands perhaps. My suggestion is navigate to the current blog (you can get there by the navigation pane on the right at the very top of this blog) and leave your comment there. Off-topic comments are always welcome and this way you get the most exposure possible.
Welcome to the Blog and I hope you become a regular.
Fred PRoNJ
You mention an interesting diagnostic test for your theory about the barrel on the Gamo Whisper CFX possibly being loose. It makes perfect sense to try, but the way the rifle is made I’m not sure how you’d push a pellet through the barrel to check it’s resistance. The weapon doesn’t break in the middle to expose the chamber. In fact, the rotating breach mechanism is curved to form a ramp when the pellet is inserted. I can’t figure out how you’d use anything (presumably a cleaning rod) to get directly inline with the bore and clear to push a pellet through from breach to muzzle. You can insert the rod from the end of the barrel to the breach and then attach a cleaning pad and pull it out, but I don’t know how you could otherwise pull a pellet through. Maybe if you drilled a tiny hole in the nose of the pellet, threaded some fine wire (thought of monofilament first, but the stretch of the line may not allow you to get a good feel for pellet resistance), pull it through and observe the relative tension of the wire as you pass through the bore. What do you think?
… and another comment on the problem possibly being with the breach’s bigger ring – with this weapon, you never see the face of the breach. The way the rotating mechanism works, the face of the breach is hidden when it’s rotated open by the curved feed ramp design. It seems to me that the only way to access this ring is to do a complete tear down. It’s not that I’m averse to trying such a thing, but I’d need good documentation/drawings to attempt it. I’ve ended up doing a lot more gunsmithing on all my weapons than I ever planned, but with greatly satisfying results. Is there anything like a take-down manual for this rifle, something other than an exploded parts diagram? How would I find something like that? I’m also interested in any trigger adjustment procedures or mods to swap it out with whatever (recommendations, anyone?).
As for whoever mentioned the possible flexing of the stock during recoil due to it’s design and imparting vibrations that are affecting the precision, I think that’s possible – but not as likely as some of the other considerations that have been raised here. Note that Gamo did go to some effort to modify and improve the recoil pad, for whatever reason.
Regardless of the relatively skimpy info and scarce user reviews on this new rifle is, I think I’m going to go ahead and try it. I’ve got a great coupon and some points from Cabela’s, and can get this rifle for about $200. I’m pretty convinced that the fixed barrel is a better design more accuracy over time than a break-barrel, and that with some tinkering and lots of experimentation with pellets (figuring that maybe heavier is in fact better) I can get a more precise grouping than what Mac was able to obtain. No offense, Mac!
Note to everyone,
The first group was second-best. The last group was best. It says that in the text, but the captions were confused.
I wrote this blog at a gun show and didn’t have as much time as I normally take to proof it.
B.B.
The caption has now been corrected.
Edith
Re: 10 shot group size
I know that it is intuitively obvious to the casual observer that the 1.23 inch group size of the JSB Exact 8.4-grain domes is smaller than the this 1.39-inch group of the 10.5-grain Crosman Premiers. But statistically is it? In other words is there a statistically significant difference?
Let’s assuming that the group sizes are the exact group sizes for the population of possible measurements, not samples from those groups. For 1.23 inches standard deviation is 1.23/3.813 = 0.323, or the relative standard deviation ( the standard deviation divided by the group size) is 19.54%. [This from table 1 of reference 1 below.]
A 95% confidence interval is typically used to avoid fooling oneself. the 95% confidence interval is the lower 2.5% of the tail and the high 2.5% tail. [From Table 2 of reference 1]
P(10,0.025) = 2.482
P(10,0.975) = 5.409
1.23 * (2.482/3.813) = 0.651
1.23 * (5.409/3.813) = 1.745
So a 95% confidence interval around the 1.23 measurement is from 0.651 inches to 1.745 inches.
– – – – –
So back to the question: Is there a statistically significant difference between a group size of 1.23 inches and 1.39 inches at the 95% confidence level?
ANSWER -> NO
– – – – – — – – –
REFERENCES
– – – – – – – – —
[Reference 1]
APPROXIMATE PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTIONS FOR THE EXTREME SPREAD
Dr. M. S. Taylor, Dr. F. E. Grubbs
Ballistic Research Laboratories
Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland
February 1975
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA006586&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf
[Reference 2]
Group Therapy
© 2007 Denton Bramwell
http://www.snipershide.com/UserFiles/Image/articles/group_size_oct_27.pdf
Reference has a nice histogram of the distribution of measurements that would be expected from a 3 shot group in figure 4 on page 4. Note that the distribution is skewed. You can’t get a group size less than 0, but the group size can be “infinitely” large.
Regards,
Herb
Herb,
You may have noticed that your comment didn’t show up right away. It had enough oddball links and unusual characters that the spam filter stopped it. You’re now whitelisted and this shouldn’t happen again.
Edith
I was confused – as usual 😉
Thanks Edith!
RE: Chance
To beat a dead horse, the point of the post above is that Mac was fortuitous that the two groups of JSB Exact 8.4-grain domes were so close to the same size. If Mac shot a hundred such groups, 95 of the group sizes would be expected to vary between 0.651 inches and
1.745 inches.
Thus the group size of a single group isn’t a very good statistical estimator. The size of the “best” group is also a poor estimator. The average group size would be a much better estimator.
Regards,
Herb
Herb,
To further beat that horse, I don’t think the spread would be quite as large as you say. Ten as a sample size has a pretty calming effect on standard deviations. At a greater range there might be more deviation, but at 30 yards I don’t think there would be.
I realize that I’m arguing intuitive feelings against probability theory, but it just seems like your numbers may be in error.
B.B.
Well, there’s always that 5% chance that the two groups are significantly different. 🙂 Actually 1.23 and 1.39, while the numbers loom large, are not that different, less than .1 inches. So, maybe the statistical analysis tells us something.
Matt61
RE: “I don’t think the spread would be quite as large as you say. ”
I’ll simple point out that this isn’t my “opinion” but rather the data from the research paper by paper Taylor and Grubbs. Please note that my estimated range includes the explicit assumption that 1.23 is the true average of the population, not just a sample of the population’s average. Since this assumption isn’t really true, the “real” 95% confidence interval window is in fact even larger than I proposed!!
The problem that I had was that the paper by Taylor and Grubbs doesn’t provide a good method for handling multiple observations. That is why I assumed that 1.23 was the true average for the population. Something could be somewhat kludged, and it probably would be good enough for most work. Essentially you’d have to collect a lot of data to observe a difference between the kludge and “reality.” Also there probably are better tables in some other paper which I have yet to find.
To restate the point about the 95% confidence interval, it assumes that 1.23 inches is the average for an infinite number of 10 shot groups. Since there were actually only two such groups, this assumption doesn’t really hold. The true average group size for an infinite number of 10 shot groups is unknown and varies around 1.23 inches.
I am guessing that the average reader is shocked that the range is so large and doesn’t believe me either. So be it.
– – – –
RE: Purpose
My purpose with this line of posts is share my knowledge of statistics and demonstrate why using statistics properly is so important. The whole point is to avoid “gut feel” and take a hard look at the data alone. That is why there is so much folk lore in shooting. For example – “I threw salt over my shoulder and my group size went from 1.2 inches to 0.7 inches.” The salt had nothing to do with it of course, it was just plain chance.
Another point – You want a really small 10-shot group size with a RWS-34? Shoot a lot of them. You will eventually, by chance alone, get a 10 shot group size so small that even PCP owners will be envious.
But I have learned a lot from reading this blog, and I’d hope that the readers will allow me to share some of my particular expertise. There is a chance that I am wrong, but I obviously don’t think so. If someone could point out my mistake, I’m more than willing to eat crow. I read this blog to learn something too!
– – – –
RE: Flyers
There is another implicit assumption that there were no flyers in any of the 20 shots in the two 10 shot groups. Properly taking flyers into account adds another layer of complexity on the calculations. Using group size as an estimator is very sensitive to flyers. (To me a flyer is a shot with an unusual POI and does not have a known cause.)
– – – – –
RE: 10 shot group size as the “standard”
I’d agree that more shots has a “calming effect” on the standard deviation. In plain words a shooter is a lot less likely to shoot a “lucky” 10 shot group than a lucky 3 shot group. You can look at the confidence intervals in Table 2 of Reference 1 to confirm this point.
– – – – –
RE: Needed sample size
Believe me after having done statistics for years, you would need about 30 groups of 10 to get a a reasonable average and standard deviation. That is why measuring the actual X-Y deflection of each shot would be so much more sensitive as an estimator. You wouldn’t have to make 300 shots to get reasonable data, but rather about 30. It is absolutely a case of “pick you poison.” Do you want to do more shooting, or are you willing to spend more time analyzing the shots?
– – – – – –
RE: Operating Characteristic curves
In reference 2 there is a histogram for a 3 shot group size. If you use more shots then the tails on either side of the mode (or mean) get smaller. I haven’t yet been able to find a figure which shows curves for say 3 shots, 5 shots, 10 shots and 30 shots. But that would certainly be a nice operating characteristic curve to see.
– – – –
Unless someone asks a particular questions to which they want an answer, I’m going to put away my soapbox for now.
Regards,
Herb
This looks like a good candidate for a treatment with JB bore paste. See if it tightens up then.
Well, guess I’d choose the BSA Polaris over the Gamo CFR shotgun. I was impressed by the Polaris.
kevin
Kevin,
Me too!
I have an editorial coming tomorrow that explains how I write and why I do it that way. In there I explain that this blog is to educate and also to let the readers see things through my eyes. Although I seldom compare one gun to another, this time I felt it was necessary, so I did.
The power-mongers have to understand that spring rifles are the worst powerplants to choose, as far as magnum power is concerned. They throw off so many bad vibes that challenge the shooter that it is almost impossible to do well with them. And this time we were able to see it.
The pellet that hits with 10 foot-pounds is deadlier than the one that misses with 18. 😉
B.B.
B.B.
“The pellet that hits with 10 foot-pounds is deadlier than the one that misses with 18”
I second this too 🙂
Actually one _can_ make a Gamo 1250-type airgun into a precision long-range drill – it all depends on time and effort and sometimes it’s cheaper to move to PCP. But if one is stubborn, resourceful and full of crazy ideas… 😉
8 kg airgun Loctite-glued into 7075 or 2024Т3 alloy stock, with gas spring, heavy barrel shroud, tuned trigger and force barrel lock? A nice piece of rail or ram, sword-bearer included.
duskwight
duskwight,
Oh, I have no doubt that you can turn any rifle with a good barrel into a good shooter. But so many newer shooters think that it should shoot right out of the box. Some do, but many more don’t.
B.B.
B.B.
Yes, you are right. Most forums here have themes like “Preparing [post the model] for the first shot”. It’s mostly removing grease and checking rifle, but that must be done.
BTW, what’s your personal list of “100% right out of the box” shooters among springers?
Mine is: Weihrauch, AirArms and RWS Diana. Mostly expensive brands – but I say one’s got to pay for his troubles treated by others.
duskwight
duskwight,
Of modern guns, Air Arms TX 200 is the best out of the box.
In the past it was Weihrauch for power and Anschutz/Walther for target.
B.B.
B.B.,
As usual, you make several great points about magnum springers….
” They throw off so many bad vibes that challenge the shooter that it is almost impossible to do well with them.”
In this same vein I’ll add and ask…………
As I’ve experienced the heft or weight of the gun can help cancel some of the inevitable violent recoil in powerful springers. This translates into greater accuracy.
For example, using your comparison of the BSA Polaris and Gamo CFR. The BSA Polaris specs are 6.6 lbs. and the Gamo CFR specs are 8 lbs. Based on weight only the nod would go to the Gamo for taming the shot cycle. Unfortunately this appears to not have been a significant factor in the accuracy tests.
Can’t help but believe stock design can also help with managing recoil. Continuing with the comparison of the BSA Polaris and Gamo CFR, I can’t help but notice the wonderful, traditional, wood stock on the BSA Polaris vs. the synthetic, non-traditional design of the stock on the Gamo CFR. Specifically, the very narrow wrist on the Gamo CFR that begins at the rear of the compression tube (directly in line with the guns recoil) and drops dramatically, for what appears a long ways without much support, until it meets the cheek riser on the stock.
I have no experience with a stock like this but I can’t help but think this narrow band at a critical point in the stock flexes/compresses (then lets loose?) during the shot cycle. This “imagined?” flexing would seem to add to harmonics and vibration that make accuracy even more difficult?
kevin
Kevin,
I don’t know, but what you say sounds good to me.
B.B.
kevin,
Yes, you sound right to me. Plastic in this form seems to be not too good for this duty. However I think it plays secondary or tertiary role among other things. I wish I could check this stuff myself – I feel there’s something simpler in its performance.
duskwight
kevin
And I must also add, that angles between stock’s touch surfaces and rifle’s main vector of force do matter. Wrong angles can amplify rifle’s kick and vibe, no matter how heavy its stock is.
duskwight,
Seems to make sense.
kevin
Kevin,
After reading your post, I want back to look at a picture of the CFR so see what you were talking about. I think you’re dead on about the rear drop, material, potential flexing, and added vibration. This is a particular bad combination for a springer. This Gamo rifle would have been better off without an adjustable cheek-piece, and a thumb-hole stock that continued straight back, in line with the barrel. Someone suggested that this stock was gimmicky. I guess they were right.
Victor
B.B.,
“They throw off so many bad vibes that challenge the shooter that it is almost impossible to do well with them.” Wow! Now that is a statement!
Since I started buying springers, I feel like I’ve had to learn to shoot all over again (at statement that I’ve made several times before, by the way). Also, each has taken me months to master (also something that I’ve said before). However, I also believe that it’s worth taking the time to learn to shoot them. They’ve magnified problems that I might have experienced with target rifles (small-bore and precision air-rifles). I think that if I can master springer’s, then I can easily master anything.
Victor
Victor
In my experience springers are THE most difficult rifles to shoot well. If you master springer – you can shoot almost anything that has a barrel and a trigger, as springers train repeatable hold and trigger technique, as well as the art of learning with every shot.
duskwight
Victor,
Gamo even had an ad campaign “Learn to be a better shot” that acknowledged this. You are correct. A spring gun teaches follow-through like nothing else. Even a .22 rimfire is more forgiving than a breakbarrel pellet rifle. If you can shoot a breakbarrel, there is nothing you can’t shoot–except a shotgun.
B.B.
B.B.,
Very interesting! As I’ve been saying recently, my experience with guns is very limited. I don’t have much in the way of practical experience with shotguns to speak. I”ve taken a few shots at a still target with a shotgun, and that’s about it. In any case, I would have thought that Gamo would have applied a little science to the creation of a new product, like the CFR. It does seem that the design of the stock may be introducing vibrations that affect accuracy, especially if the barrel and power-plant are essentially the same as the CFX.
Victor
kevin
I second this.
duskwight
Kevin, have you had much time with your new 9422?
On the quality of recent BSA products , I also would buy the Polaris over this CFR. I am very impressed with my one recent BSA example, bought largely in part from a recommendation from BB about Mac owning a similar one. It’s a BSA Supersport .25 that I bought from Pyramyd in last week. I have never owned a BSA airgun ,but I do own BSA firearms and these newer airguns live up to their heritage. The BSA airgun quality IMO is comparable to the Diana’s, and although I’ve only shot about 2/3’s of a tin of JSB’s through my new supersport, it is very smooth shooting compared to other 12-14 ft/ lb guns I have. It is quite light for a wood and metal air rifle. I don’t get the tactical look/theme of some of these new airguns, but to each his own. That’s why they make different ones I guess. The more folks shooting the better.
Robert from Arcade,
Unfortunately I haven’t had time to get to the range. The 9422 is in the line up of new-to-me rimfires to shoot.
I’ve been out of town more than in town in the past month. I’m back in Colorado for awhile. All my spare time in the past week has been spent getting familiar with some new-to-me airguns. Had 3 guys over yesterday and they helped test some of these new/old airguns. Great fun for us guys that like to shoot.
kevin
BB
Yikes. So this rifle is ugly AND stupid? Not much of a prom date.
Is the BSA Polaris #P1-562919-09 already spoken for? Looks like a can’t lose purchase to me.
Has anyone else seen this website?
http://www.micksguns.com/air%20guns.htm
and the homepage: http://www.micksguns.com/index.htm
Next to BB, this guy is my idol. One super cool dude.
SL,
No, the Polaris isn’t spoken for yet.
B.B.
I’m not usually impressed with the pictures of group sizes. For some reason, to me, these groups look so much larger in the pictures than they really are. After all, only about 3 holes are touching. These group sizes look like 3″ but the captions say ~1″. So I know the problem lies with me and what I think I should be seeing.
I think at 30yds these pictured are good groups but I’m reading an undertone of disagreement from some here. All in all, though, a ~1″ ten shot group at 30yds is adequate for hunting as is the power of this rifle.
-Chuck
Chuck,
Much depends on the resolution of your monitor and how large you indicate your web pages to be in your browser. I can make those targets 7″ wide, making the groups HUGE. That’s why we write the group size underneath the image.
Edith
Edith,
Yeah, a 19″ monitor definitely blows things out of proportion. You’re publishing the proper size in the blog, though. The problem lies with me and my visual perspective. Even BB’s 1/4″ groups appear to be 3″. The only solution I can think of would be to throw a dime or a ruler on every photo like you have on others, but even that might sound silly to have to do all the time. Or, send me the dimes and I’ll throw them on myself.
-Chuck
Hmm…amazing what a misplaced comma can do. …throw them on myself, or throw them on, myself. Biiiig difference!
-Chuck
Is it narcissistic to read your own comment after you’ve published it, then comment on it, too?
Chuck,
No, but it is schizophrenic to comment on your own comment.
B.B.
Yeah, Chuck is kinda like that. I don’t know why I hang around him so much.
-Chuck
Brian in Idaho, I was sorry to see your message about being upset and hope you don’t leave, but it’s up to you. I do very much admire veteran service of the kind you described–both the shooting skills and everything else that goes into it. But I don’t, honestly, think it is fair to criticize Victor. From the outset, he volunteered to take his postings to email, and I and some others asked him not to, so I should be the target of any criticism. And I certainly don’t regret my decision. With the presence of someone who has accomplished so much in shooting, why wouldn’t I want to hear what he has to say in exactly the way he wants to say it? And what could be more relevant to a shooting blog than techniques for shooting better? The same goes for the great shooters who come up in conversation. I’d rather learn from them than persist in what I’m doing.
There’s plenty of stuff on the blog that I don’t understand like the technical discussions on the interior of guns and the ways to fix problems, but that’s fine. If I don’t understand or am short on time, I just skip and go on to something else. Usually something trickles down. I’m actually on the verge of reloading which I never thought I would be! If nothing trickles down, no harm done.
Victor, very amusing with the domain and range. This is usually diagrammed as a trajectory from one area to another, but literally true in the case of shooting as you pointed out. As for the inverse, there may be one after all. I have always liked the notion of looking at a group and being able to tell a shooter’s mistakes from it. I’ve seen some diagrams that purport to diagnose a shooter’s problems based on whether there is a horizontal or vertical spread or some other kind of distribution. Not an exact science I know but intriguing.
While greedily browsing Lee-Enfield No.4 Mk Is online, I wandered to a refurbished Mosin-Nagant 91/30 sniper rifle. It has the hexagonal barrel which is to the round barrel like the metal receivered IZH 61 is to the plastic version. Thanks to our reader who passed like a ship in the night and mentioned the James River Armory which restores old firearms. From here, I began looking at Soviet WWII snipers on YouTube and came across the story of the Russian women snipers. The word is that the Russians favored them because they could handle cold better, they were more psychologically stable, and better shots. AND….. man are they attractive. Russian womanhood triumphant! The bikini clad women shooting firearms on YouTube have nothing on them. Even in their military outfits, the Russian women look like fashion models. And their Mosin-Nagants were certainly capable of dealing out punishment to the target and the shooter with that big cartridge. The women snipers took their licks too with 75% casualties, 1500 out of 2000. The wisdom is that any military formation will fall apart with 50% casualties but not them. All around impressive and that Mosin-Nagant sniper rifle, complete with scope is looking better all the time.
Trivia question. In Josh’s stories of growing up in Russia, there is an incident where someone takes him out as a child to shoot a military rifle that leaves his side black and blue. Which rifle is it? The Mauser 98 or the Mosin-Nagant? I think it was the Mauser but can’t remember for sure.
Matt61
Matt,
I agree with you and your assessment of Victor’s contributions. I also agree with those who see value in Brian’s contributions, too. There are many people who do not like a blog to go off-topic and maybe Brian is in that category. There is little wrong with that position and some benefits to be sure but I think it restricts the overall flow of information and camaraderie, the holistic benefits, if you will. I don’t mind being off-topic and have been guilty of it many times. There have been a few on this blog who have complained and some of those were one-shot comments and they have not actively participated since, as far as I can tell. There may be a few more who have developed a tolerance to us over time. I would like to see us – encourage us – to continue as we have in the past and not put any restrictions on the blog as long as they don’t break Edith’s rules. Edith rules!
-Chuck
Matt,
That was Mauser.
duskwight
Matt 61 : If you want the very best Mosin ,try to find a Finnish mod 39 or 27 . I have had several Mosins,from the very worst Chinese samples ,to American made WW1 Remingtons and Westinghouse’s , to Tula arsenal reworks. The Finnish one I kept has a Sako barrel and they are very good,Robert.
Matt,
And expect to pay several times as much for a Finnish Nagant. The price reflects the higher quality.
B.B.
I wish I had a time machine to go back to aroud 1990-92 when they were selling at under a $100. Better yet were the Swedish 96 Mausers that were only $60 for the full length rifles and the short 38’s were $85. I bought three of them and even gave one away . I sporterized the long ones and wish i hadn’t now,but who knew then?
I don’t know if this violates the rules here ,but Williams Gunsite Corp has a good used gun web site, with decent prices,and interesting guns of military heritage. Some have been sporterized and some not. There are a lot of .303 British and 1917’s that were sporterized for deer hunting up here and they come up used often enough still . Their site is worth visiting regularly. I think they have a Long branch .303 MK 4 on there now,Robert.
You are right, the Finn is most often the best. Matt61, you were probably looking at a Mosin-Nagant 91 Sniper Rifle. The Mosin-Nagant 91/30’s didn’t have the hex receivers. Those rifles were good, even the Germans sometimes used the Mosin-Nagant sniper rifles when they were captured.
I too appreciate Victors contributions.
As a past competitor many years ago in national competition (Canada/rimfire) I find his posts informative and intersting.
Brian…no ones forcing you to read what you don’t find interesting.
CowBoyStar Dad,
Small-bore competition was 90% of my shooting experience, with another 8% in precision air-guns. I don’t hunt, very rarely plink, don’t collect, and I’m a novice, at best, when it comes to expertise about guns. I ONLY shot specific guns for specific types of competition. I only used 3 types of ammo (one for practice, and two for competition), and never deviated. Also, for air-gun shooting, I ONLY used ONE pellet (until this blog, I only knew of H&N). I’d say that 99.99% percent of my shooting experience, and focus, pertained to trying to win matches. A lot was invested in me, so there were very clear expectations. I cared for, and respected those who gave me this opportunity, so it mattered to me, personally. Otherwise, I really don’t have much else to contribute. I bought my first springer AFTER joining this blog, and now I own 5 (plus two pneumatics, and one PCP).
I recognize how blessed I was to have been offered the opportunity to experience shooting the way that I did. It was an experience that I will always treasure. Matt61 clearly was not so lucky, based on what he’s shared with us. I’m the kind of person who loves to share what he knows, or has. I offer it, and if it matters, or helps, someone else, then I’m glad.
But shooting was never my #1 love, even when I competed in shooting. My #1 love was music, but as a collector. I knew lots of collectors, but a lot of them would not share. Many of them felt that everything had to be done for a profit. I frankly don’t understand this mentally, but to each his own. I worked very hard to collect a lot of rare records, and it sometimes took decades to find even a damaged copy of a song. From my perspective, I thought it was a shame that so much great music had fallen through the cracks by the music industry, to be lost forever (even from the history books). There is a reason for this, but I won’t get into it, because it gets a whole discussion about corruption in the industry. In any case, I freely gave away copies of most of my music, and I did it for anyone who asked for it. This was perfectly legal because all of this music was almost impossible to find, and you certainly would NEVER find it in any store. I recognize when, and how, I’m blessed, so my first inclination is to share, or help, in any way that I can. I find that a lot of guys here are the same as me in this respect. This is one of the things that makes this blog so great.
Victor
Matt61,
Mathematically speaking (again :)), because it is possible for a single point in the range (the target) to map to multiple points from the domain (the shooter/gun), this mapping is not 1-to-1. However, all this talk of mapping points from the domain to range is only valid if we consider that the shooter only made ONE mistake, which isn’t always the case. On the other hand, where we come close to creating a one-to-one, and thus possible inverse mapping, is if we include shooters assessment (the “call”). My coaches also talked about mapping shots at the target to mistakes by the shooter, but that talk was specific to the discussion of trigger squeeze.
I once sat in on a seminar put on the the Army Marksmanship Training Unit. This particular seminar was excellent about putting a shooting career in perspective. Among other things, they talked about plateaus, breaking them, and slipping back down. They cited a loss of one, or more, fundamentals as the reason for slipping. Specific fundamentals that we can lose over time, no matter how far up the competitive latter we may go, are thing like; breath control, trigger squeeze, and follow through.
Follow through tells us everything about our execution. It is how we take a mental snapshot of each shot (again, good or bad). We were taught to value the calling, and remembering (EVERYTHING about), a good shot. I would later learn that the best shooters in the world visualize the perfect shot. The best practice for maintaining your fundamentals is dry-firing.
Even today, when I shoot my springers, if I’m not shooting well, I call on follow-through to help me. You know, I wonder how much more beneficial it is to be more conscious of follow-through, over things like cleaning, or lubing pellets? Maybe you want to do all three, but first start with seeing what you can do to improve your shooting without these extra measures.
Victor
Am I the only one who has noticed that Brian’s being upset oddly coincides with the blog’s title,
“How quiet can you be” ??
This all seems to boil down to expectations….like when an airgun show happens,and 98% of those that go report that it was “Amazing”,yet 2% report it was a complete waste of time!Those 2% are usually upset because they had a specific expectation of finding a certain specimen.I think most
of us would feel bad for them,but not responsible.
As a post script,Thank you Brian,for your service to our country!
How did the CP lights do, with the much tighter fps spread from part 2?
I was just looking at the ISSF site to see how the men’s World Cup 10m air pistol event came out. And I was shocked at one thing: of the 72 competitors listed, not one was from the USA. Come *on*! This is just about the only country in the world where you can walk into a store and walk out with a new pistol — most of the time with no waiting and almost all of the time without registering the gun or showing your “fire arms certificate.” And we can’t find three young men interested enough in International style AP shooting to make a run at getting into the 2012 Olympics?
But an American woman did win the 10 meter air rifle gold.
Agreed, the problem is circular. If nobody’s selling competition guns, then nobody’s buying and so nobody’s learning. But there are junior programs — they mostly shoot rifles, but they could shoot pistols. Among other things, pistols are cheaper, and even at the very top end the only equipment you need is a pair of shoes. No need for tripods and leather penguin suits, etc.
.22 is a nice game, but only if you’ve got a safe range to shoot in. Whereas you can shoot scaled-down 10m AP in your living room with just a sheet of 3/4″ drywall as a backstop behind the pellet trap and target holder.
But still, we couldn’t even find three people? It’s a pretty easy way to get to the Olympics compared with, say, diving from the 10m platform.
Maybe we need to propose a combined sport…
Shooting 10m air pistol FROM a 10m platform dive… Of course we’d probably have to restrict the arena to one competitor at a time and surround it with pellet resistant acrylic windows for the protection of the audience and judges.
Would also need a new grade of air pistol… one that works when removed from the pool…
Wulfraed,
Neither the Browning nor the Rugers would be a satisfactory .22 competition gun at national or international levels. You’re comparing apples and oranges when you stack them up against the IZH-46m, which (with a good grip matched to the shooter) actually remains competitive (barely). The price difference between the Izzy and the Browning or Ruger would be made up in a few weeks of shooting pellets instead of cartridges.
No, not at medal match level…
But I’m pretty sure most US would take the .22 first — for light target and plinking use with secondary use as a field sidearm — something to knock out a squirrel or two while hauling the .30-30 through the deer grounds, or taking down the curious pit viper.
It comes down to utility… Dedicated competition gun that needs to be hand fitted [I still have to finish rasping some hard edges off my recent Baikal and THEN actually see where the sights are hitting] vs something that can be carried and ready to fire at the move of a safety, with more range, and able to take game if needed.
Not to mention learning that Michigan requires the same paperwork for that Baikal (or even my CP99) as for the .22 rimfires… (Considering how nasty I thought California was, it is much easier to purchase air guns here… One reason I’m stocking up before retiring and moving back to MI — I won’t need to go through the permit-to-purchase hassle, only the “safety check” [in which they are mostly interested in seeing the serial number]. Police department is going to love me when I come in and announce I need forms for: three [so far] air pistols and five pistols… I think cap&ball is still exempt or two of them would be in the batch… Eight forms, in triplicate, no carbons [so, 24 hand-filled cards, and 24 thumb-prints taken]).
B.B.
Since I have several rifles in this power range, I am going to have to try some super domes to see if any of them blow the pellets out into cylinder shapes. So far I have only seen this with detonations.
I have seen pictures of pellets that were shot with something that only deformed them part way.
There is something to watch out for when looking at this…If the pellet has a very large skirt that has to be squeezed a lot to fit the bore it can take on a similar appearance.
twotalon
Hi every one
I have a few questions,and was wondering if you could help me.
I have a baikal 513m, a few days ago I was showing the rifle to a friend of mine , and as I was doing that I pulled the hammer-like safety back(the gun was not loaded, I didn´t break the barrel), but the trigger performed as if it were cocked and loaded, my question is:
Can i practice dry firing with it ? will this damage the rifle?(without breaking the barrel, so actually I wouldn´t be compressing the spring), the manual doesn´t say anything about this.
Also, the manual says the trigger is not adjustable, but there is a hole in the trigger guard, and I can see a screw, can I reduce the trigger travel with it?
Thanks for your help.
Ivan, it’s not a hammer-like safety. It’s an actual hammer.
When you cock the gun it locks the piston rod back with captive ball bearings held in place with a pin about 6mm diameter (as I recall). When you fire the gun the hammer hits that pin driving it forward, releasing those captive ball bearings and letting the piston slam home.
From what I could tell after examining this mechanism, you should be able to dry-fire it by cocking the hammer (and only the hammer!) without hurting anything. And since the trigger acts only on the hammer anyway, pull weight and release point will feel exactly the same as when you fire the gun for real.
Not sure about the trigger screw.
Thanks a lot for your help.
Best regards.
Looking at page “9” of the PDF manual, you are referring to item #44. This appears to adjust preload on the trigger (return?) spring — hence probably adjusts the pull WEIGHT, but nothing for travel.
And I’ve been beaten to the description of the hammer. The description in the manual does make it sound like a functional hammer in that the trigger releases the hammer, and it is the hammer fall which releases the piston — rather than the trigger itself unlatching from the piston.
Sort of a variant of the T/C Contender — the trigger and internal striker are cocked by pulling back the trigger guard to break open the action; the firing pin hammer had to be cocked separately after closing the loaded action. Pulling the trigger released the internal, lighter-weight striker — and the striker would hit the hammer release sear.
Vince answered my first question, and you got the second one, thanks a lot.
Best regards.
Since I know for sure Mac can shoot very well, my only conclusion is that this particular specimen is at best mediocre in the accuracy department or that he was shooting in extreme conditions that day.
Which brings us to the problem with “accuracy tests”.
What you end up with is only a representation of what that gun and that shooter could do on that day under what ever conditions prevailed. Which by no means tells me much about the gun itself. I would prefer accuracy testing to be done indoors at 25 yards under controlled conditions than outdoors at any range. Even better would be indoors at 35+ yards with controlled conditions.
I would certainly hope that other guns of that model would do better.
pcp4me,
I’m assuming you own one of these and have shot smaller groups at 30yds? If so, can you give us some info: inside/outside, wind no wind, pellet brand, etc.? If not, is there anyone else on this blog who has and will provide the above? I’m asking out of cuiosity.
-Chuck
Edith,
The link for Part 1 of this review takes us to “The great accuracy test: Part 1”.
Victor
Victor,
Thanks for that. I’m sure Edith will correct it.
B.B.
Victor,
Thanks! I fixed it.
Edith
B.B.,
I think it’s important to note the difference in distance tested, when comparing the Polaris with the CFR. The CFR was tested 15 feet further away. Sure, the CFR would likely not have done as well as the Polaris, anyways, but the difference does make an impression.
Victor
Hi Phil,
I enjoyed your comments about the Gammo CFR and they made some sense to me. However, you posted to an older blog and there aren’t many readers who will see your comments.
Off topic here is never a problem with most readers and I’d suggest posting to the current blog, written Mon-Fri by B.B., at /blog// where your comments will be read and seen by hundreds of readers rather than a hand full.
Bruce
Thanks Bruce! It was my first post to this blog, and I thought it was current. If it’s OK, I’ll edit and post these in the current blog as you indicated.
phil,
Welcome to the blog. By all means repost your question and as Bruce said, don’t worry about being off topic. We answer all questions and some that aren’t even about airguns.
-Chuck
Still not exactly sure that this is the right place to post, but I followed a link here from the main blog – seems like I ended up in the same place, just at the bottom with the latest comment.
There was an interesting diagnostic test mentioned for the theory about the barrel on the Gamo Whisper CFX possibly being “loose” (assuming ever-so-slightly oversized bore for most pellets). It makes perfect sense to try, but the way the rifle is made I’m not sure how you’d push a pellet through the barrel to check it’s resistance. The weapon doesn’t break in the middle to expose the chamber. In fact, the rotating breach mechanism is curved to form a ramp when the pellet is inserted. I can’t figure out how you’d use anything (presumably a cleaning rod) to get directly inline with the bore and clear to push a pellet through from breach to muzzle. You can insert the rod from the end of the barrel to the breach and then attach a cleaning pad and pull it out, but I don’t know how you could otherwise pull a pellet through. A coat hanger might work, but the idea of trying to ram that through the breach just doesn’t seem like a good idea. Maybe if you drilled a tiny hole in the nose of the pellet, threaded some fine wire (thought of monofilament first, but the stretch of the line may not allow you to get a good feel for pellet resistance), pull it through and observe the relative tension of the wire as you pass through the bore. What do you think?
As for the problem possibly being with the breach’s bigger ring – with this weapon, you never see the face of the breach. The way the rotating mechanism works, the face of the breach is hidden when it’s rotated open by the curved feed ramp design. It seems to me that the only way to access this ring is to do a complete tear down. It’s not that I’m averse to trying such a thing, but I’d need good documentation/drawings to attempt it. I’ve ended up doing a lot more gunsmithing on all my weapons than I ever planned, but with greatly satisfying results. Is there anything like a take-down manual for this rifle, something other than an exploded parts diagram? Does Gamo or anybody else have something like that? I’m also interested in any trigger adjustment procedures or mods to swap it out with whatever (any recommendations appreciated).
For whoever mentioned the possible flexing of the stock during recoil due to it’s design and imparting vibrations that are affecting the precision, I think that’s possible – but not as likely as some of the other considerations that have been raised here. Note that Gamo did go to some effort to modify and improve the recoil pad, for whatever reason.
The bore-paste idea sounds interesting, but I’ve never used it. How do you apply it, and how often? Is this some sort of viscous goo that’s a little heavier than oil that leaves some sort of coating in the bore?
Regardless of the relatively skimpy info and scarce user reviews on this new rifle, I think I’m going to go ahead and try it. I’ve got a great coupon and some points from Cabela’s, and can get this rifle for about $200. I’m pretty convinced that the fixed barrel is a better design and will be more accurate over time than a break-barrel, and that with some tinkering and lots of experimentation with pellets (figuring that maybe heavier is in fact better) I can get a more precise grouping than what Mac was able to obtain. No offense, Mac!
The best grouping I obtained on a friend’s Gamo Big Cat was actually using some very cheap Copper Head pellets. Both the included Gamo PBA pellets and the fancy ones my buddy had bought on recommendation from the guy at the store couldn’t be patterned for love nor money. I seriously thought that he had a scope or rifle defect, then I remembered these that I’d brought these to just plink around with and decided to try them – and the difference was night and day. I’m talking about a 2-3 inch wild and varied grouping (using sandbags) dropping down to a dime-sized precision cluster at about 20 yards. It made a believer out of me in trying different ammo – I just never thought that the cheapo pellets would have been the hands-down winner.
geekdout,
Here’s how to post on the current day’s blog:
1. Go to the blog’s home page: /blog//
2. Click on the name of that day’s blog. For April 18, that’s “2011 Malvern airgun show.”
3. Scroll down to see the comments for that specific blog. Scroll down even further to see the box to post your own comment.
What you have been doing is scrolling all the way down on the main blog page (which is the link I gave you in step #1). Instead, you should have been stopping about 1/4 of the way down to see a line that says: Posted in Articles, Collecting | Tags: airguns shows, collectible guns, Collecting | 2 comments
The foregoing line appears just before the previous day’s blog, which is dated April 15 and titled “Feinwerkbau 150: Part 1.” Another way to post on the current day’s blog is to click the last part of the line in previous paragraph (2 comments), and it would have taken you to that specific blog and allowed you to post comments. I think the way I showed you in steps 1-3 is the easiest 🙂
You can email me at edith@pyramydair.com if you continue to have problems posting on the current day’s blog. I’ll work with you and even speak with you on the phone if necessary.
Edith
geekdout,
Never use a coathanger in a fine rifled barrel. Use a one-piece cleaning rod:
/product/dewey-26-coated-rod-jag-177-20-caliber?a=1037
You put the JB bore paste on a brass brush and run it through the barrel both ways 20 times, then remove all residue. Yes it works. No it doesn’t harms the barrel and you only do it when accuracy drops off.
B.B.
I’ve read up on cleaning rods a little, and some folks don’t like the coated rods. They say the coating can peel/scrape off, or get particles embedded which makes it worse on your barrel. I found another kit which includes everything, the Kleen-bore Saf-T-Clad SAF303. It may be basically the same thing as the Dewey, but comes with the brush and mop. The Tipton carbon fiber rod looks good, but it doesn’t appear to come with any .177 accessories, which I didn’t see how to buy without purchasing a larger multi-caliber accessory kit. Some folks have mentioned using weed whacker line (which is like my heavy mono-filament idea), but how would you attach anything? There was another cable-looking tool, but a soft coating would have the same probs as the coated rods.
geekdout,
Monofiliment line is used by lapidaries to carve jade. Enough said? You can ruin a muzzle with weedwhacker line.
B.B.
‘Nuff said for monofilament or weed whacker line. What about vinyl coated steel vs. carbon graphite vs. fiberglass?
geekdout,
I know both sides of the argument, but I don’t have an opinion. I do use coated rods.
B.B.
So my Whisper CFR is ready for zeroing. I was at Cabelas and looked at both the Tipton carbon graphite and Dewey coated rods. I ended up with the Dewey anyways (they were out of .177 Tipton rods, which were cheaper) to make sure I could find the right brush. I had it in my hand with an array of brushes in front of me, and there was no uncertainty on thread sizes. I bought the Dewy “No Harm” .17 cal short pistol brush. I wanted a mop, but the .177 one they had wouldn’t fit the Dewey threads. All barrel work on this rifle with a rod will have to be performed from muzzle to breach. Do you still need to use a rod guide with the Dewey? The muzzle brake keeps you from seeing the muzzle crown or getting directly to it for an insert. Is there a .177 only insert you can buy that will attach and work with the muzzle brake, or some other suitable substitute – like a plastic drinking straw or aglet, rivet, etc?
I thought it was kinda neat that the Gamo scope came with the integrated scope stop as part of the ring/mount design.
I’ve got RWS Super-H-Point (6.9 gr), Crosman Hunting pointed (7.4 gr), new Gamo Red Fire pointed HP (8.13gr), and Cabelas’s Outfitter Ultra Magnum (Crosman Premier Ultra Magnum – 10.5 gr) pellets to work with. Hopefully I can get one of those to pattern consistently.
I tried getting a see-through scope mount, but the Luepold one didn’t fit the mount base on the CFR. I don’t know if it’s worth the extra money, having to do something else for a scope stop, and raising the scope off of the barrel that much to still be able to use the iron sights or not.
geekdout,
You will discover that it is EXTREMELY difficult to pull any brush out of your rifle! That’s because the bristles have all been aligned when you pushed it through. I normally never try to clean the barrel on an underlever like yours unless the accuracy is REALLY bad.
And it will be impossible to push the brush out of the breech to realign the bristles like we do on breakbarrels because the rotary breech will be in the way.
I would skip the cleaning with the brush and just use a couple of patches. Why are you cleaning it anyway? Has it lost accuracy, or are you just trying to avoid the break-in period. Because 500 shots through the barrel will do the same thing that cleaning with JB Paste does.
See-through scope mounts are a marketing ploy dreamed up by the marketing department. No one actually uses them. The holes in the scope mounts are put there in the extrusion to save on aluminum in production.
The Dewey rod should do no harm to your barrel, as long as you work carefully and deliberately. Barrel abuse comes from not pushing a steel rod straight into a barrel.
B.B.
geekedout,
The plastic drinking straw idea is the one I read about on this blog. I don’t know the expert answer to your Dewey rod question. I’m hoping it would be enough to prevent damage, else why spend the bucks? But someone else here might have first hand experience.
I don’t think the see-through scope rings were designed to allow iron sights use with a scope mounted. They didn’t work for me and I think BB mentioned the same thing a while back.
-Chuck
My RWS Super-H-Point pellets say they’re 6.9 grains right on the tin in my hand. Check the pic on Pyramyd’s ammo page. I did note somewhere that somebody else thought they weighed 7.4 grains.
Cleaning with patches will be a one time/way trip from muzzle to breach, and then removing the patch from the breach. I haven’t tried to clean it yet and won’t until needed. However, I thought I might want to try the bore paste treatment sooner than later if the barrel’s too loose and I can’t get good precision with any pellets I have. It appears that it takes a brush to apply the paste. I didn’t know that 500 shots would do the same thing. I’m not trying to avoid the break in period, as I didn’t know that was even possible. I’d love to get to the range and shoot for hours if I can ever find the time. It sounds like 500 is the number that corresponds to a typical air rifle break in. I also bought the rod now because I anticipate having the rifle for a long time, and like having all of the maintenance materials I need on-hand for all of my weapons. I can take the brush back if not needed.
As for see-through mounts, I have these on my Ruger 10/22 and they seem to serve a function for sighting targets at near distances. Yep, the iron sights are visible through the mount. My 10/22 scope is zeroed for 75 feet, but the elevation is understandably off for nearer targets. I thought it might be desirable to have a similar setup on the air rifle, but I plan on zeroing the Gamo scope in at about 30 yards – and consider that my closest shot will probably be about 10 yards, with maybe some longer shots nearing 50 yards. I suppose that the trajectory is pretty flat for most of the distance up to almost 50 yards, and that it’s better just to keep the scope low to the barrel. It just seems such a shame to cover up those nice iron sights. I admit though, when I take my progressive (no-line bifocal) glasses off and get that crystal clear site picture and detail from the scope – using the iron sights with my glasses isn’t as appealing anymore.
Thanks for the advice on the Dewey rod, I guess I’ll just try to use it carefully and infrequently without a rod guide. I had also hoped that using it bare would be OK, but the guy at Cabela’s said that he’d recently seen a cleaning video where supposedly Dewey indicated that a bore-guide should still always be used.
geekedout,
Try looking on the Champion’s Choice web sight for bore guides.
-Chuck
AARGH! 75 YARDS, not feet for the 10/22 zero.
Hmmm, most of these appear to be suited for cleaning from the breach end – don’t see how I could attach or use them from the muzzle end of the CFR. I think it’s going to be the drinking straw. I was a little hung up on trying to find the right diameter straw, but it just occurred to me that I can slit one lengthwise, and scroll it a little tighter to get it started in the end of the muzzle. I could probably then turn down a section at the top (like rolling a shirt collar down over a tie) to keep from ramming it into the barrel where I can’t reach it.
Also was thinking about the Dewey “No-Harm” bore brush again and how the bristles get oriented when passing through the bore. This one is shorter in length than normal, says it’s .17 and NOT .177, and is really designed for pistols. I’m only guessing that this means it’s a little smaller in diameter than the typical .177-.20 caliber brushes (it appears so from just looking at it – if an eye can really tell .007 difference), and maybe the bristles therefore won’t get so slanted on brush insertion. They’re also supposed to be some special alloy core bristles that don’t deform as much, either.
I’m getting ready to try the CDT GRT-4G trigger mod, and had to send CDT an email concerning the procedure and his video for the CFX requesting clarification. I’m particularly looking forward to his reply on how to fine tune the trigger, as he tells you to remove the adjustment screw because it’s not needed with the GRT-4G.
CDT trigger’s installed, rifle re-assembled w/loctite where indicated, ready for zeroing. I had to come up with my own idea for a spring compressor used in disassembly, as mashing on the end of the noise suppressor (plastic) probably isn’t a good idea. Furthermore, just built my own 8″x12″ silent indoor pellet trap that will handle the Gamo Whisper CFR’s heat – and I have a 13 yard shooting lane ready in my basement. I should be able to pattern all my ammo tomorrow at that distance.
geekedout,
Sounds like you’ve got a great setup. When are you inviting us to the range-warming party?
-Chuck
Anytime you can bring your chrony! Oh, and when the wife’s not home.
Here’s the story, at 13 yards indoor with sandbags, the Gamo scope and without glasses:
RWS Super-H-Point (6.9 gr) – two different groups, both kinda wild and just under 2″
Crosman Hunting pointed (7.4 gr) – two different groups, first was > 2″, 2nd was unbelievable at 9/16″!
Gamo Red Fire pointed HP (8.13gr) – one (and best first) grouping, at 7/8″
Cabelas’s Outfitter Ultra Magnum (Crosman Premier Ultra Magnum – 10.5 gr) – one grouping at 3/4″, roughly centered about 1″ lower than the Red Fire or Crosman.
I’d take the Red Fire or Cabela’s out hunting any day, and I’m going to pattern the Crosman again. I still can’t believe the second grouping. Sadly, I think I’ll have to set the RWS pellets aside for the Gamo Whisper CFR.
The pellet trap worked great (125A electrical breaker box packed with 9 bars of duct seal putty). CDT’s GRT-4G trigger mod, I’m not so sure. I had it adjusted to move freely before full re-assembly (trigger assembly cover plate screws can’t be too tight), but afterwards it’s a little stiff again. The trigger won’t return fully forward under spring tension alone, and therefore you have to manually move it to home position to be able to set the safety and start a complete 2-stage trigger pull. There’s another adjustment on it that wasn’t in the docs, we’ll see what CDT says. He seemed a little pissed that I criticized the installation video, even though he didn’t make it. I guess I should have known better, but it was the engineering tech writer in me just simply stating some facts.
An interesting note was how extremely close the factory scope settings and my mount were to dead-on zero. Every shot grouping I had at least one in a half-inch bull, and several had two. I didn’t expect that.
A comment on glasses – without them the cross-hair was crisp, remote target a little blurry. With them, the cross-hair was blurry but the target in focus. Sigh. Maybe I can tweek the scope focus with my glasses to get the best of both worlds.
Now I’m going to show my ignorance (even more). What’s dieseling? Yep, I’m getting some smoke when firing, but I’m still in the first 100 rounds through the rifle. How much of my pattern precision (or lack thereof) can be attributed to shooting a rifle that isn’t broken in? And what is the magic number of shots for breaking in a new air rifle?
geekedout,
I’ll reply with my 2c before the real experts do.
Dieseling is normal for some rifles. It’s detonating that is harmful. Dieseling is the smoke that you see and it may go away after awhile. Nothing to worry about. Detonating is the sharp crack you would hear much like a .22 rim-fire. That can damage the seals. If you’re getting detonating then clean the offending oil out of the barrel and/or piston chamber. Use only silicone oil in those areas.
I like your circuit breaker box idea. I’d like to find one that’s been junked sometime otherwise those critters are danged expensive. I use a cardboard box with duct-seal then carpeted 3/4″ plywood behind that. BTW, this does not stop stacked .22 rim-fire. This is the only time poor marksmanship is desired. Hehe!
If your scope has adjustable AO you should be able to adjust the rear of the scope to focus the cross hairs first then use the AO adjustment or the front of the scope to clear up the target. Look at the notched ring that holds in the front lens. Sometimes this can be turned to focus in the target.
-Chuck
I’d like to take credit for the breaker box thing, but I found that on the internet using a Google search. The one I bought was only $15, it was the 9 bars of putty that were expensive. It occurred to me that a 2-gal galvanized steel bucket for about $5 at Ace Hardware would also serve.
The Gamo scope only has one adjustment ring at the rear.
Going to have to disassemble and work on the trigger. I wished I had received ALL of CDT’s instructions before installing the trigger. After telling him about the prob, he sent me another document that explained it exactly – which I had kinda noticed upon re-assembly, but thought it was normal without any info to the contrary at the time. Turns out there was a manufacturing variance in the bear trap lever that hosed my install. I’m going to have to do a little filing to fix it.
I don’t hear any explosions or sharp reports, just some small wisps of white smoke.
The ocular focus made the reticle sharp for my naked eye, but it’s blurry with glasses. There appears to be no front adjustment on the Gamo scope. I’m going to try refocusing the reticle with my glasses on and see what happens.
Got the trigger tweaked (considerably better), only to spawn another problem where a nylon guide between the pump lever and the bottom of the spring housing got mangled and fell out. This caused metal on metal grinding until I came up with a suitable work-around, but it took much experimentation. I ended up with a nylon cinch tie wrap, and had to sand/smooth the gouging and metal roughness that had resulted from just a few pumps.
I also moved the scope back in the rings to provide eye relief that was better to my liking. This totally wrecked the otherwise close to zero setting from the factory, so then I had to do some work to re-zero. Finally, I ended up being able to put the Gamo Red Fire pellets on the bull in a half-inch group at 13 yards. Now I should be ready to hunt.
I believe that you are exactly correct, sir. I zeroed using a particular target I downloaded for free from http://www.airgunsmith.com/target/sq.htm, and that helped considerably as well. It has a 5 box around dot pattern kinda like on a die. They are all exactly 1 inch square boxes containing four 1/2″ bold lined squares, with a 1/4″ orange on black dot in the center. For each type of pellet I’d start in the larger center target to get close, then fine tune and verify using the smaller ones. It was a great help to be able to align the cross-hairs in the center of the 1″ boxes, which were very visible. Any little offset from dead center could then be clearly seen through the scope. When you can be this sure of your alignment and put your shots in the same 1/2″ hole, I’d say you’re done with scope adjustments for that pellet at that distance. At least until something changes, that is.
I can’t believe that the Gamo Red Fire pellet is so precise in my CFR. And it’s a hunting hollow point, too – FANTASTIC! So I went back with my favorite scope zeroing target and worked one more time with the Gamo Whisper CFR and the Cabela’s and Crosman pellets. The Cabebela’s pellet is also patterning (5 shots) in less than 1/2″ at 13 yards, but it’s maybe 1/2″ left and 1/8″ HIGHER than the lighter Gamo. Still not shabby (if you remember to compensate ever so slightly), and bound to be lethal with that heavy 10.5 grains. The Crosman pellets are just strange. You can also get about 1/2″ group, but there’s always 20% that are flyers an inch or so off. So, the Crosman’s are good 80% of the time if you don’t mind the certain oddball. There’s no way I moved that much on just this one pellet, so I can only assume that there’s variances in the weight or some small deformity in the skirt or something.
Now I really hated not being able to use the RWS (too light at 6.9 grains to be precise in the CFR), but then I got out my Crosman 1377 pistol and had some fun. The RWS S-H-P is STILL patterning in less than an inch at 10 yards, with ten pumps using a laser sight. I think I’d read where ten pumps should get you about 650 fps with a light pellet around 7 grains – not sure.
Looking at the duct seal putty, the 1377 shots barely got the end of the pellet skirts past the surface, whereas the CFR shots were typically almost an inch deep into the compound. I discovered that if you really want to know where your shots went, smear the putty surface smooth between target rounds. That way when you think that maybe you put a few in the same hole but can’t tell from the paper target, it’s easy to match up the holes in the putty and be sure.
I know this is getting off-topic for the CFR discussion, but just one more thing that I thought was pretty cool. I’d bought a .177 cheapo red laser boresight for $20, and had mounted and been using just the laser on the end of my Mossy 500 pump shotty”s magazine with a home defense barrel. I now took this little toy and clamped it to the end of the 1377 barrel just behind the front sight using a 1/2″ black steel binder clip. Shot alignment and group precision at 13 yards wasn’t good, but at 10 yards – I was amazed. This was the setup I was using when I got the 1 inch group with the RWS S-H-P’s. Actually, two groups. No windage, no elevation. The clip popped off a couple of times while I was pumping and working to obtain these groups,and I had to re-clamp and try to get it in the same position. Evidently, it was close enough and practically idiot proof. It looked strange, but no sighting required. I set the 1377 on a single sandbag, rested a hand on top to steady it, and just looked at the target to line up the dot. No sighting along the barrel at all. Wild, huh? Maybe I’ll get a green keychain laser…
Which Crosman pellets are you using? Anything but the domed in a box will tend to be flaky.
twotalon
Crosman Hunting pointed (7.4 gr) are the weird ones, and the Cabelas’s Outfitter Ultra Magnum is actually the Crosman Premier Ultra Magnum – 10.5 gr. These Cabela/Crosman heavies are very accurate, with a large dome.
Actually, I used a 1″ binder clip on the 1377. I’m going to try to find a different clip, something that will press and hold a pen/keychain laser into the groove between the barrel and pump cylinder and still keep a low profile. Did a little trigger work and put in some padding to dampen the clacking when pumping. Man, there’s TINY ball bearing on a spring (detent) for the safety that is very easy to lose.
geekedout,
You have just joined a very large and astute group of safety detent-ball launchers. Welcome. Too bad we don’t charge dues. We would be a very wealthy club, indeed.
-Chuck
Yep, I’m a member. Now where do we get replacements from?
Fred PRoNJ
Fred,
Safety-detent ball replacements may be found in the same location as missing ball point pens, lost car keys, dropped contact lenses, and your kids’ right (or left) snow suit glove.
-Chuck
A 3/32″ ball bearing works great.
Hmmm, I think the ball bearings in my Shimano gear shifter may be the right size. I’ll check this evening. Tink, where do you recommend shopping for this small spring? And, does the ball bearing drop in from the top or do you have to slide the safety out and drop it in from the base?
Fred PRoNJ
Fred,
I’m afraid I’ve never had to replace the spring so haven’t looked for an alternate source. Last time I placed an order with Crosman I ordered an extra just in case. As for the ball bearing, I’ve always installed it from the top, its easy that way. I’ve tried installing it without removing the frame from the tube, but never had any success.
AR
Crosman has ALL of the parts and is very hard to beat on price and shipping, especially if you’re getting several items. I just ordered a 24″ barrel (cutting it down to 15″ and re-crown), a barrel band w/screw, stiffer hammer spring, and front sight for $21 total shipped. Mr. Mellon’s FTP piston and valve, along with the longer tip bolt (probably should have tried to mod this myself) and power adjuster are also en-route. Those were $50 total, shipped. I’ve put fiber optics on both front and rear 1377 standard sights, and that makes an incredible difference in sighting precision.
As for inserting the safety ball & spring, evidently if the safety is OFF there’s little pressure on the spring and it should be safer to remove without loss. I suggest disassembling the pistol trigger assemby INSIDE a shoe box. I hadn’t removed the barrel, so when I put the safety back in I carefully positioned the safety and put a piece of masking tape over the end (red band side) to hold it in place against the trigger housing. Otherwise it just falls through. With the pistol laying on it’s side over the box (resting across a corner on the top edges), I took a jeweler’s flat blade screw driver and compressed the safety spring. While holding the spring, I then took a pair of very long mini needle nosed pliers and dropped the ball into place (the groove on the safety) and slowly released the spring. It may be my imagination, but the ball and spring seemed to be slightly magnetized. This is probably more tedious and not preferred over dropping it in from the top while the barrel’s off, but I didn’t know that and had to come up with something.
I found an interesting 2-stage trigger (sear) mod for the 1377 that I’m going to try, seeing as how CDT no longer sells one. There’s a similar sear out there, but it’s kinda pricey and I think I can make the one I saw where you just solder piano wire to the end of the sear and bending it up/over/around the trigger stop to contact the trigger just behind the hinge point.
geekedout,
You may be putting more extra cash into your 1377 that you anticipated but look at the fun you’re having, not to mention the experience gained – priceless – good thinking on the masking-tape-on-the-safety idea. Let us know how that second stage trick works out.
-Chuck
Here’s the link for the sear mod. It’s so beautifully simple, as long as you can find a suitable piece of wire and have a high-temp soldering iron or can do a little brazing. Start with the wire slightly long, do a little bending and then maybe some grinding on the tip to get the length just right, and you’re there. I’d think you don’t have to modify the trigger spring at all, but some polishing on the sear contact points is probably still advised. I’ll find out and let you know.
http://www.network54.com/Forum/275684/thread/1163821545/1377+sear+mod
Here’s the wrap-up for what I can tell you about my Gamo Whisper CFR.
If you like competition shooting and wanted to be very thorough you’d try a range of 8.X grain pellets from Pyramyd (best selection I found), use a rock solid bench (I was on a folding card table) and gun vise, install a better scope that provides magnification and variable good focus on the target, and pattern/zero at 30 yards. Based on the results I got with just a couple of pellets at 13 yards, I think you’d find that with the right ammo it would be accurate enough for just about any purpose. I took all of the data off of Pyramyd’s .177 ammo page, put it in a spreadsheet, sorted it to show just the 8.X grain pellets, left out the wadcutters (I’m interested in hunting, not just targets), and then read the reviews on the rest. I wished that Pyramyd would structure their webpage to allow you to do this. Looking at price, there were a couple of Tech Force and the Beeman Pointed pellets that I might try. Looking at quality, the Mendoza Magnum, JSB Match Diabolo Exact, and the Air Arms Diabolo Field pellets might be good choices for experimentation. H&N also has several options in this range of weights.
I’m not a match shooter. My plans are to go to my buddy’s house and help with a little rodent nut-job problem, using the Gamo Red Fire 8.13 grain pellets. Whenever I get to the range I will check my precision at 30 yards, just to make sure I can still reliably knock ’em out of the trees at longer distances. Based on my setup, I’d have to make some changes as I indicated above to get better precision using a different pellet if the Gamo won’t serve the purpose at 30 yards.
MFG DESC DIA(MM) WT TYPE QTY ITEM# PRICE
Predator * * 8 Pointed
Gamo Red Fire * 8.13 Pointed-HP
Mendoza Magnum * 8.2 Pointed
RWS Superpoint Extra * 8.2 Pointed
RWS Superdome * 8.3 Domed
JSB Match Diabolo Exact * 8.4 Domed
Air Arms Diabolo Field 4.51 8.44 Dome
Air Arms Diabolo Field 4.52 8.44 Domed
H&N Field Target * 8.49 Domed
H&N Neue Spitzkugel * 8.49 Pointed
Beeman Pointed * 8.53 Pointed
Tech Force * * 8.58 Pointed
Beeman Silver Sting * 8.61 Pointed
Beeman Field Target Special * 8.64 Round Nose
H&N Field Target Trophy * 8.64 Domed
H&N Field Target Trophy 4.52 8.64 Round Nose
H&N Spitzkugel * 8.64 Pointed
Beeman Crow Magnum * 8.8 Hollowpoint
Beeman FTS Copper * 8.8 Domed
H&N Crow Magnum * 8.8 Hollowpoint
H&N Field Target Trophy * 8.8 Round Nose
Tech Force * * 8.83 Domed
geekedout,
Dang!!! Just when I though I was done trying new pellets. I think I’ve tried only two of the ones you listed and I’ve tried 15-20 different kinds. Will the madness ever end! 🙂
-Chuck
Another friend of mine just bought a Gamo Whisper CFR… we’re gonna have some fun! Same thing, his factory scope zero was practically dead on. He also bought from Cabela’s, but he had a lot more points to apply than me. He also got the Cabela/Crosman Ultra Magnum pellet, and the Crosman HP in the tin. I’m going to take him 20 of my Gamo Red Fires to play with as he’s tuning his zero, and I gave him 3 of the targets I like. Also, the pest elimination round 1 is on for this Saturday morning!
Had to put hunting off until this Wednesday after work, but have decided to mod my Crosman 1377 in the meantime for any scopeless, close-up mercy shots that may be required. It’s amazing how I can spend $35 on a refurb pistol and then later add another $75 to get it like I REALLY want it (maybe 800 FPS). And I’m being relatively conservative in my expense and efforts, compared to what some folks do with these.
Lastly, turns out another co-worker has a brand new Chrony F1 that I’m going to borrow for a month or so. I plan on getting before and after mod readings on the 1377, and just see what the GAMO Red Fire pellets are doing in my CFR. My buddy with the new CFR says the Red Fire is also the most precise/accurate pellet in his rifle, as he put the first two he fired at 20-25 yards in the same hole. He’s whining a little that at 50 yards they don’t seem to have the smacking power he’d like. So he’s hitting them, but without enough punch to do the job. Imagine that, 50 yards. I told him to try re-zeroing with the Cabelas Ultra Mag 10.5’s and see if that makes him happier.
Gamo Whisper CFR shooting Red Fire pellets is deadly to both squirrels and rabbits at 40 yards. Accurate and hard hitting. I still need to go to the range and really zero the CFR at 35 yards, but that’s maybe next week. Maybe I’m just getting spoiled with the scope and sandbags, but I find myself wanting to use a steady rest when aiming up in the trees from the house’s deck. I’ve got another idea I’m going to work on and will let you know. I’m planning on making a small, contoured wood block to rest the CFR on that will mount to my vidcam tripod. That should give me all the degrees of motion and required angles, and stabilization to make those really accurate tree shots. I may even make block adapters for my Ruger 10/22 and Hi-Point Compact C9 to play with. You’ll still have to grip the weapon and provide support, but this should cut down on the shakes considerably. I’m supposed to get the Chrony today – WOOHOO!
Finished fabricating a CFR rifle mount adapter for my tripod. It supports the rifle from the back of the trigger to the end of the forearm, and is balanced w/rifle mounted and level. With this design, even the shoulder stock movement is minimized. I took a short piece of 2×4 and traced the contour of the bottom of the rifle against it. A jigsaw, dremel, and some sanding later I have a very serviceable lightweight mount. I used that big disassembly hole in the wide, flat trigger guard as a guide for fixing the rear position by attaching a precisely sized nylon spacer to my mount. Instead of using a padded U or V for the forearm, I attached a small narrow block along the top of my mount that fits snuggly inside the underlever slot which provides nice stability. I covered wherever there was contact with some gorilla tape. There’s no wobble or play anywhere in the rifle to mount interface, and the rifle lifts off easily between shots. Making similar mounts for the 10/22 and C9 will require design changes, but shouldn’t be too hard.
Chrony results for my CFR:
I only made 5 shot measurement strings, and tried a heavy, medium, and PBA pellet.
AMMO SUMMARY:
CABELA 10.5 GR :
5 SHOT AVG VEL. 677.34
HIGH VEL 681.3
LOW VEL 674.1
SPREAD 7.2
5 SHOT STD DEV 5.02
5 SHOT ENERGY 10.7
GAMO 8.12 GR :
5 SHOT AVG VEL. 816.74
HIGH VEL 841.7
LOW VEL 797.2
SPREAD 44.5
5 SHOT STD DEV 35.86
5 SHOT ENERGY 12.03
PBA 4.7 GR :
5 SHOT AVG VEL. 1014.4
HIGH VEL 1037
LOW VEL 984
SPREAD 53
5 SHOT STD DEV 52.2
5 SHOT ENERGY 10.74
So the heavy pellet had the least deviation, but it really drops over a shorter distance compared to the medium weight pellet. The GAMO produced the highest energy of the three with respectable velocity. I’d have to look around, but I’m guessing that 12+ ft/lbs of energy is also decent. However, I didn’t get hypersonic results with the PBA pellet. I know that these rifles rarely get what’s advertised, but really – 200 FPS short and no hypersonic firing? Maybe there’s a tune-up, mod, or some possible problem I should check – anybody have any ideas?
Lastly, I built a spreadsheet with calcs for my Chrony data to make it easier/faster to get final results. I’m going to give that and the Chrony to my buddy who also has a CFR and the exact same ammo – and we’ll see what a comparison of the two rifles shows.
While I was at it I also ran my 1377 using RWS S-H-P’s at both 10 and 16 pumps, and I’m right at 600 FPS before mods. That’s almost as fast as the CFR shooting the heavy pellets!
I can’t speak to deviations since my list is all “one shot per pellet” testing, but my ancient Gamo NRA 1000 Special (a scope-only/no iron sights variant of the Shadow 1000, I believe) produced:
RWS Hobby 6.9gr 926.7fps 13.16ft-lb
RWS Super-H-Point 7.4 926.1 14.09
RWS Superdome 7.7 852.2 12.42
RWS Superpoint 7.7 894.2 13.67
RWS Meisterkugeln Rifle 8.3 850.6 13.33
Predator Polytip 9.2 723.4 10.69
Benjamin Discovery 10.5 709.5 11.74
Eun Jin domed 15.6 528.0 9.66
In essence, with the possibility hat all the RWS pellets were at the high end of a bell curve, this old but not yet broken in rifle was spanning 850-925 fps and 12.5-14 ft-lbs (my conclusion is that anything heavier than the 8.3 MK is just too heavy for the spring gun… whereas the Marauder with factory settings hit 19.5ft-lbs with the Eun Jin at a leisurely 743.2fps, while the MK only got up to 16.11 @ 952)
I’m considering actually doing 10 shot strings this weekend — not worrying about accuracy (15ft distance? the scope height alone is going to make impact points low…)
Well I’m not sure how similar our Gamo’s are seeing as how mine isn’t a break barrel (your NRA 1000/Shadow?), but for approximate weights on the 10.5 gr and 8.13 gr pellets it looks like I’m shooting about 1 ft.lb. and 30 fps less than you. And the 8.X grain pellets hit with more force than either the light or heavy pellets in my CFR. I would have though I’d have seen higher force from the PBA’s, similar to how your lighter pellets had more force.
I went back and compared my numbers with Mac’s from the pellets he shot through the CFR (below), and it was similar – except I shot the 10.5 gr pellets about 90 fps and 3 ftlbs less than Mac, the 8.12 gr 50 fps and about 2 ftlbs less, and the PBA’s 100 fps and 1 ftlbs less.
Crosman Premier heavy 10.5-grain
averaged 766 f.p.s
spread from 756 to 777 f.p.s.
spread 21 f.p.s
energy 13.67 foot-pounds
RWS Superdomes. 8.3 grains
averaged 868 f.p.s.
spread from 836 to 891 f.p.s
even larger at 55 f.p.s
energy 13.87 foot-pounds
Gamo PBA Platinum 4.7-grain
averaged 1063 f.p.s
931 to 1119 f.p.s
enormous 178 f.p.s. spread
energy 11.8 foot-pounds
Based on the info so far my CFR just seems a little anemic in comparison. I’m waiting to see what my buddy gets out of his CFR shooting the exact same ammo.
I wouldn’t expect much inherent difference between a break-barrel vs under-lever. Both are still compressing a spring that drives a piston of some size. I suspect most Gamos use the same diameter piston (for parts commonality) so that leaves spring tension and piston stroke as the variables.
There’s a point at which the velocity increase for a light pellet may not be sufficient to make up for the lack of mass, which is why the PBA could be a lower energy. The Whisper system may steal a few fps too, presuming your CFR is in the Whisper line (only version I could find).
Regrettably, I was a slug over the weekend, and didn’t do 10-shot tests to find a true average (nor to fine tune the triggers, now that I know what a two-stage should feel like).
I actually own and shoot one of these CFR’s and here are the facts:
Even if you think the stock is ugly, it is ergonomically similar to the stocks found on many high-end target rifles. I can’t believe that on an airgun forum, people are attacking an adjustable cheek-piece. In fact, I would love adjustments to length of pull, cant, and drop, but this is a low to mid-priced rifle and corners must be cut somewhere. It is definitely more target-oriented than any other Gamo or springer in this price and power range that I am aware of.
The gun tested is clearly experiencing severe accuracy issues. The velocity spread alone is a dead giveaway. With Crosman Premier Hollow Points, I am able to consistently shoot 10-shot groups of around .5″ at 35 meters (the maximum distance of my backyard FT course). At 20 meters, I can almost always get groups of less than .25″. Obviously these groups come from using front and rear bags from a bench. The rifle seems to be almost immune to hold sensitivity, as I can handle it almost like a firearm and see no change in consistency or point of impact. I bought this to help keep my firearms prowess up, and it has not disappointed me. For what it’s worth, I have an inert gas spring in my CFR, which likely helps matters.
in my opinion GAMO CFR have a good specification the light weight underlever AG and price is rigth i vote for gamo cfr.
I could use some advice, or pictures, on how to install my Crosman Nitro Piston in this Whisper CFR. I’m too cheap to have PA do it. Besides, I’m a retired modelmaker, with a hobby machine shop. I like doing the work myself. I don’t want to modify any of the Gamo parts; I understand they can be hard to replace. Help?