Industry Brand B-7

by B.B. Pelletier

Our favorite guest blogger, Vince, is at it again. Today, he shares his experience of testing a Chinese airgun.

If you’d like to write a guest post for this blog, please email us.

Now, take it away, Vince!

Ahhh… the way we were! The way some of us were, anyway. By “us,” I’m referring to those of us who first got into airguns (or came back to airguns) after being seduced by those irrascible Chinese. I’m going back about, oh, 10 years or so ago, when, waltzing through the internet, we would find all sorts of places selling “The Chinese Can Opener” or the “High-Power Military Training Air Rifle.” What a deal they were — my goodness, why on earth would ANYONE spend $100 or more on one of those high-falutin’ overpriced airguns when these $25 Chinese models were obviously just as good? And we knew they were just as good because that number said so!

You know, that number. The velocity number. Because that was the only thing that mattered! That one number told us the whole story!

Sooner or later, we discovered the inevitable — although for some (like, uh, me), it was certainly later than sooner. Eventually, the B3, B4-2 and Fast Deer airguns went by the wayside to be replaced by Gamos, RWSs, Cometas, Noricas, and then Spanish and German Beemans. Around this time, the Chinese started cranking up the quality, though, so their better products didn’t entirely leave our field of view. But the old carved-out-of-a-2×4-and-lubed-with-pig-fat models — along with all their broken seals, mainsprings and promises — were pretty much forgotten.

But man is a funny animal, and a collector (even a half-baked collector) often sees value in diversity as well as quality. And just as a man who collects Mustangs sort of really needs a 1974 Mustang II 4 cylinder automatic (as horrid a car as it was) in his collection, I began pining for some of those old, crude guns just because they were there.

So it was that I found myself fishing around for some of those old bottom-feeders…those poorly made, all wood-steel-and-leather guns that smelled like bacon grease when fired. Those guns that, frankly, I had virtually no interest in shooting, except to appreciate the better guns that came later. The subject of this report, the Industry Brand QB-51, is one of those fossils I dug up.


Industry Brand B-7 spring-piston rifle.

This .177-caliber breakbarrel air rifle was also called the Industry Brand B-7 and shouldn’t be confused with the BAM B-7. That gun was the old sporter-style sidelever that actually had a reputation for being sort of decent. No, the Industry Brand B-7 was one of those smoke-and-soot, machined with a dull file and worn-out drill bits and carved-with-a-hatchet examples of communism at its most typical. If you were lucky, it worked out of the box. If not, well, it simply didn’t. But luck shines upon me, and this one actually did.

The QB-51 was one of those novelty guns they used to put together by combining a low-buck action with some possibly less-than-useless useless bells and whistles. This one was apparently playing paratrooper with a folding wire stock, a total weight of under 6 lbs. and an overall length of only 35 inches. But it’s not a kid’s gun by any stretch — the pull length of 14 inches and a 28-lb. cocking force certainly attest to that.

Since the folding stock is obviously the most interesting aspect of this gun, let’s take a look at that first. It actually has two interesting features, the less obvious being an adjustable buttpad.


Buttpad is centered.


Buttpad adjusted down.

Is an adjustable buttpad on this cheap gun completely pointless? Actually it isn’t. It can be used to dial up a more comfortable shooting position. The gun does look awkward as all get out if the pad is moved too far off the normal position; but let’s face it, this pup isn’t winning any beauty contests if the judges are permitted to keep their eyes open.

The folding stock is perhaps less useful.


Folding stock extended.


The stock is folded flat against the side of the gun.


This is what it looks like from the side.

Some rifles with a folding stock can be handled as a pistol (sort of); that’s not really going to happen with this gun. All it does is make the rifle a bit shorter and easier to pack up for transport — if you could think of any reason you’d want to. But at least the rough cast folding/locking mechanism is stout enough.


The hinge is stout and tight!

Moving past that, we come to the pistol grip — and another gadget! The grip is hollow and has a sliding door at the bottom.


The grip has a secret compartment!

Presumably, you can put pellets in there. It would hold several hundred, even if getting them out one at a time might be a bit tricky. Again, we have an oddball feature that still isn’t quite useless.

On top of the gun, we can see the simple rear sight. If you were into mid-grade airguns 10-15 years ago, you might recognize it. This is pretty much a knock-off of the old Gamo sight that used to come on a variety of their breakbarrels. Frankly, they did well to copy it. It’s simple, largely devoid of free-play and pretty darned rugged.


The rear sight was kind of nice!

Finding it on this rifle was a pleasant surprise, and I was hoping to find a similar surprise as I moved rearward toward the trigger. I already knew that Industry Brand used a knock-off of the Gamo trigger in their QB-57, QB-88 and QB-25 models. When I saw that telltale safety tang in the triggerguard area, I got my hopes up. It says something about bottom-feeder Industry Brand triggers when you’re seriously looking forward to a Gamo trigger. But even those modest hopes were quickly dashed. This gun has a simple direct-sear and a crude sliding safety, both of which makes a 2004 Gamo Shadow feel like a Swiss watch.

As I move around the gun, it’s becoming obvious that this thing is based on the old Industry Brand 61 and 62 model actions, later known as the B-1 and B-2, respectively. I’ve had those. My B-1 had a horribly inaccurate barrel and probably a 12-lb. trigger. One B-2 had a soft trigger that quickly wore and went into the auto-fire mode, and the other B-2 bent its rear retaining pin because it couldn’t handle the spring pressure. As one might guess, I don’t get all excited by B-1/B-2 variants.

One giveaway is the breech pivot bolt.


The pivot bolt has only four places for the locking screw to engage. That often makes it difficult to adjust properly, for many times you want to stop somewhere in-between.

And the other is the smashed-leather breech seal.


The leather breech seal is as flat as a pancake.

Both are hallmarks of Industry Brand inferiority, and that breech bolt (with its four positive locking stops) frequently makes it impossible to properly tighten up the sideplay without making custom washers to go under the bolt head.

Oh well…let’s keep going. The front sight is basic enough.


Front sight is what you would expect.

Although I won’t be using it. I’ve learned from recent testing that I just can’t be consistent with open sights anymore — so I pretty much have to go to a scope. The problem is that the grooves milled into the receiver are ridiculously short. In trying to mount a scope, look at what I had to resort to.


The Daisy variable scope was cheap enough and worked well. Notice how close the rings have to be to fit the short dovetails!

The skinny scope mounts I used — moved as close together as possible — barely fit. The scope, by the way, is a cheap Daisy Powerline 3-9×32 (no AO), in which I had fudged the objective lens to eliminate parallax at 10 yards. Set up this way, the $35 scope works like a champ — and seems way too good for a rifle like this.

I do have some concerns about running a scope on this gun, however — Diana’s aren’t the only breakbarrels to have droop, and this one seemed to have joined that party. But there’s only one way to find out, so I’m off to test it. And, yes, this time I checked the stock screws first.

I’m shooting the gun with the same series of pellets I used last time — although, frankly, putting Crosman Premiers through this rifle seems rather silly.


I tried all these pellets in this gun.

No matter, same drill — 5 shots to get the barrel used to a pellet, then 5 on each through two separate bulls.

Much to my surprise, dialing in the Daisy scope wasn’t such a big deal, and soon I was landing pellets close enough for government work. Though the Daisy scope worked well enough, the Daisy Precision Max wadcutter pellets didn’t.


Daisy Precision Max wadcutters: These shots are hard to see, but the group sizes are listed next to them.

These groups came in at 0.66 inches and 0.82 inches; but come to think of it, maybe I’m being too hard on these pellets. Maybe this really is the best this gun can do!

Crosman Competition wadcutters do nothing to dispel that notion. At 0.78 inches and 1.40 inches, they’re making the Daisys look good.


Crosman Competition wadcutters.

At 1.28 inches and 1.52 inches, Crosman Hunting pellets (pointed) do even worse.


Crosman Hunting pellets.

Even my cherished Crosman Premier hollowpoints are sucking canal water at 1.12 inches and 0.9 inches.


Crosman Premier hollowpoints.

Of all the Crosman pellets, only the Premier Lites seems to consistently do under an inch — although 0.82 inches and 0.9 inches is nothing to squawk about.


Crosman Premier Lites did better, but still not great.

Oddly enough, those new Gamo Match pellets I don’t like so much just about equalled the Crosman Premier Lites in this gun.


Gamo Match pellets were a pleasant surprise. But it still isn’t good enough.

But at 0.95 inches and 0.88 inches, they still couldn’t match the Daisys. I had high hopes for the RWS Diabolo Basic pellets that seem to shoot so well in many low-power guns. I finally started to see some improvement.


RWS Diabolog Basic pellets are an inexpensive wadcutter. They look good here.

At 0.57 inches for both groups, they were quite consistent; and now we’re starting to get into the range of acceptable performance for a cheap rifle.

But then we have the Beemans. Not the German Beemans from H&N. I’m referring to those imposter, Chinese-made Beeman wadcutter coated pellets. My very first group with them was typical for this rifle.


These groups are difficult to see, but Beeman coated wadcutters, which are made in China, did remarkably well.

As you can see, the second group was a shocker. We went from 0.78 inches to 0.37 inches in one set. Something’s up. Let’s try this one more time.


Incredible! Almost a quarter-inch group of Beeman coated wadcutters. I circled the group for you.

My goodness! Stick a feather on my rump and call me a turkey — but this Chinese junk just put 5 pellets into virtually a 1/4-inch group.

Now, before anyone starts complaining — “That’s not fair! No other pellet got a third chance!” — let me explain something. The Beemans were absolutely the first pellets I shot, and during that time I was trying to come to grips with that yucky trigger. That’s why I think the first group was poor. Since the second group did so well, I shot the third group last after I had completed all other testing. So I think this third test was fair and that it really means something.

[Editor's note. This happens sometimes, and it's a reminder of the hold sensitivity issue and why things have to be done just right to see good results. I've seen what Vince is talking about. With some experience under your belt, you'll know when something deserves a second chance like this.]

But before we get too excited, let’s do a velocity check. Since the Chinese Beeman pellets were far and away the best, those were the only ones I tested. 10 shots came out like so: 396, 397, 388, 390, 380, 381, 381, 379, 381, 377.

We immediately notice three things: (1) The velocity stinks, especially for a gun with an almost 30-lb. cocking force. (2) The velocity seems to be on a downward trend. (3) The spread of 19 f.p.s. is significant, considering the fact that this thing is outgunned by a P17 pistol.

Where does that leave us?

Well, to begin with, this gun obviously has a decent barrel. Not sure how that happened, but happen it did. And if the barrel is good, the gun is good, right? Couple that with the fact that, against all odds, this example also seems to have a consistent lockup — and we seem to have a perfect diamond in the rough.

Yes – very rough. I could probably go through this gun and get the velocity up to 500-600 f.p.s. range, and some trigger smoothing and lubing would probably help as well. Even at that — will I ever want to shoot this thing just for fun? Really?

If I’m honest — not really. In fact, I have absolutely no reason IN THE WORLD to go through the trouble of tearing this thing apart and making it right.

Nope. No reason at all.

I’ll let y’all know how it turns out.

[Editor's note. Maybe I should have made this a Part 1. We'll see what Vince does. I don't want him to feel pressured.]

62 thoughts on “Industry Brand B-7

  1. Vince you are incredible, if someone would have told me I wouldn’t have believed him but I actually, kinda want one of those piece of crap now… shame on you. IF I buy one and I lose a finger I’m blaming it on YOU ;)
    Why is it that some of us are captivated with things like that? I don’t seem to be able to resist cheap airguns and I, like you, know better and should stay away from these digit choping rifles but I can’t.
    Why/how can they make a folding stock pivot look so crude yet produce a barrel able to achieve .25 inch groups? And WHY do I now want one of these… I’m puzzled.
    You’re bad influence on me Vince, I think you’re worst than Tom and to top it all off you make all those repairs and make some of them seem so easy I’m tempted to try them on.

    Well it’s almost 1am so off to bed I go.

    J-F




  2. Vinve, thanks a lot for this entertaining post!

    One reason why these old chinese junkers are so suprisingly accurate is their low-powered mainspring that results in a much more forgiving system.


  3. Vince…

    Why did you have to do that? I got one of my eyes fixed just two days ago.
    Maybe the damage will not be as severe if I spend all morning fondling my HWs.

    twotalon


  4. Looking forward to a Gamo trigger? That’s sad. I was just starting to delve into the world of air guns ten to fifteen years ago, but I think my firearm experience warned me away from the Asian imports of the time. I still am not that impressed with what I see, even if it does say Crosman or Benjamin or ….

    I do have to admit that some of the higher end Asian imports are worth owning, but only because of quality control of the import company. I can see Marauders and such taking a downhill slide when the marketeers decide a larger profit margin is needed. Didn’t the Marauders originally have walnut stocks?

    I guess if I get into rebuilding air guns in the future, I could see me buying some of these things to see if I can “fix” them.


    • RidgeRunner,

      The Marauder never had a walnut stock. That was the Discovery. The first 4,500 of them were walnut, as the factory had that many blanks laying around from an old 2260 project.

      B.B.


  5. Vince

    A great story and quite an impressive rifle, despite it’s ugly as a crocodile. I doubt if it’s possible to make it look better anyway. Nevertheless it has definite flaw in its design – they thought they could sort out everything with a spring, but they forgot (or never knew) that motto “spring moves, but volume rules”. Too short and very ineffective swept volume. It may happen that _weaker_ spring and channel restrictor will make it shoot faster and flatter.
    Some technical solutions make me think that going back down its line of ancestors it looks like a strange crossbreed between early series Izh-38 (barrell lock, bolts and sealing system) and Gamo-clone trigger.

    duskwight


  6. Vince,

    Horrible gun, great article, and ah yes, Fords loaded Pinto… the non production period of the Mustang.
    Back to the gun, I wonder if every one produced made it to distribution or do you suppose there was a “quality control” department? If you do tear open this gun and tweak on it, I would love to read about the results! Thanks for today’s post.

    ka


  7. Vince,

    You know, something about your article reminded me of something I had a while ago and I couldn’t think of what it was until now. It was an old Ruger Mini 14 with the factory collapsable stock. Your picture of the hinge on the rifle reminded me, because the Ruger had the same thing. The Ruger was just about as accurate and well-made as your gun, too!

    Bet I start an argument with that! ;)

    B.B.


    • No argument here! We had Mini-14′s issued at work. Ruger’s standard for accuracy was at least a five inch group at 100 yds. If they were worse than that they would repair or replace them. Some were.
      But, we had one that would shoot about 1 1/2 inches off of sand bags. That one was set aside for when we needed one that would shoot. That said, the new ones are much better. Most shooting around 2 to 2 1/2 inches. One of the changes was to slow down the cycle rate. I much prefer the AR’s.

      Mike



        • I was the training director for two prisons. I was also the master firearms instructor. That means that I trained the other area firearms instructors. We had Mini-14′s mainly because they cost less than AR-15 type rifles. When we went to semi-autos, my recommendation was AR’s but I might as well have been talking to the wall. The IO AKs look good but US law enforcement doesn’t use AK’s for the most part. I’m retired from the prisons now :) But, I still work part time for the Sheriff’s Department.

          Mike


  8. Vince: I know why you mess with these because I’m a hopeless addict also. It’s no different than remodeling old miltary relics into sporters. You still have a relic in a nice wrapper when your done, and you really didn’t save any money either. I have way better airguns as well ,and no need to make one of these burred up pieces of scrap metal shoot , but despite that, I have just fiished tuning up a TS-45 in .177, and have now moved on to a QB-6 in .22. I even put a Williams reciever sight on the QB-6 that costs 1 1/2 times what the gun did new (can’t see as well anymore either). The QB-6 has the open sight that is right on the very back of the receiver and wouldn’t adjust low enough. The TS-45 I paid less than $10 bucks shipped for it. After I repaired it, (it wouldn’t cock or fire) it is doing as well as your gun is using the RWS Miesterkulgens at 10 meters with open sights. There are no scope rails on the TS-45, so open sights are all you got. My crony string with the miesters showed a velocity of 612.6 fps low to 617.5 fps high for ten shots . I think that getting a result with one of these like that is what the fun is all about. It’s like hunting, it’s all about the chase, and if it doesn’t work out , go chase something else. Beats sitting on your butt watching reality TV too.


  9. Yeah, the mini 14 seems to fill the whole spectrum between accurate and inaccurate, mostly inaccurate, but I have shot ONE mini 14 ( a friend’s ) that was fairly accurate. All from the same company that makes otherwise good stuff. Go figure.

    ka

    Please complete the CAPTCHA. (aaarrrggg!!)


  10. BB

    No chance Vince doesn’t use his valuable time and tear down this unvaluable gun. My guess is that he secretly wants to take apart one of every airgun on earth, and make it better. I purchased a very good Tech Force rifle from him, a good deal cheaper than new. I secretly wanted to smell cooking bacon when I shot it. No dice, he went through it, and replaced the animal fat with moly apparently.

    Vince

    “..sucking canal water…”? I must start jotting these things down. A creatively phrased description beats a profanity any day. Thanks for another great blog. I must confess that you are not my favorite guest blogger. But you are in a dead heat for 1st with Edith. I always look forward to reading what you write.


  11. Much of the appeal for these guns lies in the potential improvement factor. There’s no question that your Anschutz will shoot well–it’s simply a given. The satisfaction to inveterate tinkerers lies in the possibilities and the satisfaction obtained when it works far better than expected. It’s also a boon that the guns are so inexpensive, we can consider them cheap shop entertainment.


  12. Yes, yes. Chinese air rifles. The thing they are best at is making money when you sell them. As to watching your finger……..do it. I still have mine. Don’t ask me how I know.

    Mike


  13. Great job, Vince. Today is my last full day in Barcelona and I decided to try to someone that sells Gamos. No luck. Probably just as well

    Fred DPRoNJ.


  14. Vince, you’re reviews are always entertaining and informative.
    I gotta admit, I have a couple or three very nice air-rifles…but I shoot my B3 (the AK lookalike) just as much as the others.
    I don’t know, something about the fit and finish just reminds me how good we have it…because this gun doesn’t have that (fit and finish). But just like it’s real world chi-com weapon it remarkably gets the job done.
    Mine shoots right around 500fps and at 30m offhand easily keeps 10 shots in a 2″ circle…which amazes me considering it’s looks.

    On another note, directed towards ‘new to it’ from yesterday.
    My shooting buddy came over yesterday with his Umarex 1911A1. He competes in IPSC competitions and uses his pellet pistol to practice quick draw, sight aquisition, trigger squeeze…pretty much everything except recoil recovery.
    He figures in 5 years he’s put just over 40000 pellets through it. FORTY THOUSAND!!!
    The finish is worn to bare metal on the front of the grip, the rear grip safety, and where he pulls the slide to insert the clips.
    The diamond finish on the rubber grips in place is nearly worn away.
    Yet it shoots exactly the same as mine, which is 2 years old and has seen 1/5 the use.
    I think if you can get that S&W sorted out with Umarex you’ll be one happy camper.



    • The targets seem to be so close, it seems to be more about reloading you mag and running thru the course than precision, they sometimes seem inches from the target which seems almost as big as a stop sign…
      I found this firearm version:
      http://youtu.be/SORxmwmrcUI
      I’m pretty sure she looks better than your friend ;) and the sound track is really along my tastes.
      The POV shots are really interesting!

      J-F



      • Victor…primarily the Umarex pistols, Colts, Walthers, that sort of thing.
        There is a local informal group here that does it…like my friend mostly IPSC shooter who do this as practice.
        They outfit the guns with dot sights, and all the bells and whistles. Most have actual IPSC style holsters and rigs…my friend uses something called a Race Master Holster that was more money than his Umarex 1911…something like $250.
        I’ve been to a couple of their events…it’s great fun.


        • Yeah, I’d imagine that a pretty penny can go into a sport of this kind. Most shooting sports can get expensive, if you really choose to do it that way.


      • I believe they’re using customized airsoft, at least in the vid posted by cbsd. You can see the blowback.

        J-F

        Ps stupid capchat


        • I wasn’t sure what kind of gun they were using because I could see the pistol ejection process (not sure that would be called), but didn’t see a shell fly out, as would with my Ruger Mk II. However, also didn’t see any of the shots hit the target. They probably showed some hits, but I didn’t see any.


          • They call it blowback pistol. That’s usually what they use because of the smooth and fast single action trigger, they’re like the Tanfoglio Witness 1911 BB gun and use a lot of the same parts as the firearm so they can modded with parts made for the firearm and have the trigger, spring and grips they prefer.
            They probably cost an arm and a leg for the top competitors. I was looking at some of the pistols used and saw one for 1000$. Just google IPSC airsoft, I can’t put the pistols here as they are sold by other stores.

            J-F


  15. Another great blog, Vince! And yes, picking up a cheap gun and NOT trying to make it better would be the equivalent of not taking a double dog dare ya! :-)

    /Dave


  16. Vince,I never run short of admiration for your work,nor enthusiasm for your writing style.Good luck working with this one…..at least you have a barrel to start with! My own notion of an airgun BARGAIN
    is a Marksman 70.They are truly worth double the average market price.The same goes for the 60-61
    side levers.You are really putting from the rough to take this one on…….but I have NO doubt you can
    do something close to a miracle with it!


  17. Vince,
    Thanks for the fun and interesting report! Man! You sure must be a curious one!
    Incidentally, I too have gotten good results from the Beeman coated wadcutter’s.
    I happened to get about 5 FREE tins from K-Mart, so I’ve been able to see that they can perform surprisingly well on some guns. The good news is that they are relatively cheap, so they are excellent as plinking ammo.
    Victor


  18. B.B. and Vince,
    When you guys describe Chinese airguns it just kills me. How do you come up with this stuff? It’s so funny I have to cover my tears. My wife thinks I’m crazy. She is rarely incorrect.
    B.B. – What ever happened to the LW barreled TS-45? With you, Ray and Dennis working on it, it’s a piece of American airgun history.
    -hm


    • Hank,

      I don’t remember where the rifle went. But if it’s like a lot of others I have sold or traded, one day it will pop up at an airgun show again.

      B.B.


  19. Another great article, Vince!

    I think Mel has it nailed as to the reason for it’s accuracy. It develops so little power it doesn’t jump around much when it is fired. It makes my Daisy 880′s seem like magnums.

    The lack of finishing on this gun is pretty shocking, especially the rough-casting of the stock hinge. I thought perhaps the folding stock would allow it to be shot as a pistol, but, no.

    I’m glad to see how the products of the Chinese airgun industry have improved over this thing.

    Les


  20. Well, that hinge on the rifle looks like it was made by Neanderthal Man. The point about the stock adjustment was an interesting one. David Tubb claims that the rifle/shooter interface, which means mostly ergonomics, is the key to higher accuracy. But I have to admit, I have used relatively little of the adjustment on my Anschutz rifle. Maybe that other stuff only comes into play at a high level.

    FrankB., glad you’re back. Don’t forget to send along the potato recipe. I’ve been experimenting.

    BG_Farmer, yes a chainsaw can be a fearsome weapon. I saw a YouTube video about horrible neighbors where one large woman was leaning over a guy’s fence, mutilating his flower bushes with a chain saw and saying into the camera, “Come here, you little twerp.” I’m afraid I’ll need a translation of the Latin. There may have been a time when I could have made sense of that with the aid of a dictionary, but that time is long gone. And I can’t even guess what it says.

    Victor, it’s time to resurrect the domain and range! If anyone is offended by this, please move on as you would from a messy traffic accident; there’s nothing to see. Or better yet, provide some other explanation. :-) On the subject of the action of the spring-piston and the small amount of perceived backwards recoil, it is intuitive that the backwards recoil (caused by the forward release of the spring) will be registered at its full energy in the shooter’s shoulder. One explanation for the surprisingly small impulse that is felt maybe is that it happens so fast that you don’t notice. But another explanation would be that the felt recoil is not just a matter of perception but actually corresponds to much less than the actual energy released by the forward movement of the spring. The reason for the reduction is the propagation of the momentum through the stock and into the shoulder as follows. The counteracting slam of the piston into the breech provides a canceling forwards movement of the gun that is set in motion down the stock a very small amount of time after the spring releases. My Conjecture is that the shooter only sees the difference between the two which is the element of backwards recoil before the canceling forwards movement catches up. So, would this mechanism serve as the basis for a NON one-to-one function (which spreads out the original backwards recoil along the stock and subtracts the forwards slamming effect) so that the original value of the backwards recoil is diminished to something much smaller when it reaches the shooter? Of course some big assumptions to this model are that the travel time of recoil down the stock into the shoulder is at least comparable to the time it takes a piston to cycle. The fact that the stock is rigid makes you wonder if there is so much of a delay. On the other hand, wood is not as stiff as metal, and a shoulder certainly is not. So as shooter, engineer, and mathematician, any opinions about this? And yes, I knew this has very little practical consequence and is mostly mad science for its own sake.

    Matt61


    • Matt,
      Sorry about the Latin, I thought you would know it. Basically it says that a good person has no need of weapons. The start is very formal, perhaps even ritualistic, language, but it turns silly pretty quickly. I should have put in the middle section (he sees a huge wolf) because it is what made me think of it relating to your post. I found this (with fairly adequate translation below) for you — not exactly what I would do with it, but it gives the idea, and I’m getting old and lazy:
      http://www.rhapsodes.fll.vt.edu/horace_ode_1.htm


  21. Another great blog, Vince, and mighty fine shooting.
    Just goes to show that Chinese airguns can be great value for money if you are prepared to do some tweaking.
    Always enjoy your blogs. Looking forward to the take down.

    Pete


  22. Way to go, Vince! .37, .26? Hasn’t it been said you can’t make a silk purse out of sow’s ear? I think you just proved that wrong cuz they don’t get much sowier than that critter. Although, it does remind me of a WW II paratrooper rifle, which I do like the looks of.
    -Chuck


  23. Thanks for reminding me of my first air rifle. It makes me appreciate what I have now even more! It was in a “bucket-o-airguns” by the counter in a gun store, only $49.99 each and “carved-out-of-a-2×4-and-lubed-with-pig-fat” describes it perfectly. Mine never shot groups as good as yours though. Of course I’m also pretty sure that it had been cocked and then fired to snap the barrel up when it was in the store judging by how crooked it shot. At ten meters the best I could get out of it was about a 70% chance of hitting a pop can (holding the sights about a half can-height down and a can-height to the left!). At the time I thought I was just a terrible shot. Now that I have a couple of good air rifles I’ve proved to myself that I’m just mediocre!


  24. Regarding sizing by diameter, would you assume truly round pellets and measure once OR measure, rotate 90º, and measure again? Just checking how laborious this is going to be. ;)


    • You will drive yourself nuts trying to size them. They are not round. Every time you measure, you will get a different answer.
      Then when you try to load them, they will not all fit the same way. The widest part may land on top of a rifling land or in a groove.

      If you shoot good pellets that are fairly consistent in size in the first place, you won’t have to worry about it. If you are trying to sort pellets that are very inconsistent then you are wasting time and money. These are the pellets that are like this….some of them just fall in or even fall through the bore, or have to be chambered with a great deal of force, and between the largest and smallest in the tin you will wonder if they were intended to be the same caliber in the first place.

      twotalon


    • Calvin,

      But why are you sizing pellets? The barrel does a fine job of uniforming all of them when they pass through.

      Years ago there were pellet sizers on the market. They lasted to the point that everyone who was curious had tried one and found that they don’t work. The gun’s barrel is the sizer. And a choked barrel is the most perfect sizer, because it gets even those that are slightly undersized.

      Don’t confuse pellet sizing with the discussion of different head sizes. All they do is determine how much of the rifling gets engraved on the head.

      B.B.


      • Well, as I reread this blog, I can’t find what triggered my question; I’m losing it. :) I totally agree and ignore pellet head diameter. But I’ve read others buying certain brands by the head size although I’ve never seen any brands advertised by head size; just wonder how nitpicky such people are being. Personally I’ve been able to stabilize fps by spreading skirts of soft poor quality pellets (e.g. JSB Jumbo Express .22) with my arbor press but that hasn’t affected accuracy. Of course, fps went up.

        calvin


        • Calvin,

          I thought the discussion about head sizes might have triggered your comment.

          Head sizes are important, but not on pellets that you are spreading the skirts on. Head sizes relates to target pellets and I guess it’s a topic that’s worthy of its own blog.

          Thank you for suggesting one of next week’s blog topics! I’m going to have some real fun with this one, because I’m going to work in black powder target rifles, as well.

          Thank you!

          B.B.


  25. I have a chinese rifle that I can only identify because the sight adjustment wheels are stamped in chinese which naturally I do not understand. These are the only markings other than the usual safety and other markings required by various countries. There is no brand or model number anywhere on the gun. It’s an underlever and fairly accurate. It’s relatively light, rather uncomplicated and I was told it is a chinese military training rifle. I think I paid around $50.00 for it at a “junk store”, one of those shops selling a variety of cheap chinese tools, and other stuff. It’s long out of business now. In fact this rifle is one of my favorite cheap chinese guns because it is relatively accurate, easy to operate guns. I think it was made in 2005 since I bought it not long after I moved into my apartment. If anyone thinks they can identify it, let me know and I’ll get you a picture of the thing.

    One other unusual thing is it must be unusual since it was stolen around 4 years ago and the cops were able to locate it and return it to me along with 4 others, one was a tech force model 67 I think it is.


    • Sounds like an Industry B3 or a BAM B4-2. Does it have rails for mounting a scope? If it does, are they cut into the tube or is it a separate piece that mounts on top of the tube and is bolted to the rear sight?


  26. ROFLMAO,

    A Chinese? airgun? Makes about as much sense to me as buying a Chinese knock off of a Smith and Wesson Model 41.

    Oh, wait? Seems some where I heard of a Chinese made SS2? Supposed to be a “fine” example of a FWB 65 at a “bargain” price. Dumb me always wanted an SS2. Fortunately you can now buy used FWB 65′s at fairly reasonable prices.

    Even though this seems to be a mild mannered hunk-o-junk, are you sure it won’t blow up on you and take out an eyeball?

    When I was a kid and had maybe $.26 to my name I might o bought one for $.10 of my bankroll.

    Glad I’m not a kid any more.

    Btw…some poor soul actually gave me some Chinese under lever gun that they didn’t want. Dunno why they didn’t want it? It cocked. It shot. Accuracy was REALLY great. Some where like minute of soda pop can at about 5 – 10 feet. And wonder of wonders in the modern day world it was actually honest to goodness wood and metal. Now why in heck would any one want to give away such a beauty? :-)


    • Newtothis, no, this gun is not going to blow up. I’ve worked on quite a few airguns, and am familiar with the pressures and stresses these guns have to contain. My eyes are not at risk.

      The gun is crude, no doubt. But if you read the report you’ll note that 10m accuracy is actually quite passable for a low-end gun. I’ve shot American-made guns (the Crosman 795 comes to mind) that couldn’t hold a candle to this thing in accuracy or in the strength of its construction. The low power this example is exhibiting is not helping accuracy at all. Since the spring is in good shape it still has a full load of piston recoil and induced harmonics, even though it just isn’t building up the pressure it should.

      The low-end Chinese guns were always hit-or-miss, sometimes luck of the draw, sometimes dependent on which factory churned them out. Some time ago I’d done a comparison of two TS45′s… if you look up that report you’ll see what I mean. (http://airgun-academy.pyramydair.com/blog/2011/03/a-tale-of-two-ts45-rifles/#comments)

      Yes, the Chinese have knocked off a lot of guns. Sometimes they are copies such as the BAM B18/B19, B21, or B20/26. Other times they are almost outright clones as with the Industry AR1000/Norica Marvic. Speaking of those, I do have a Beeman GS1000 that is someday going head-to-head with its Walther Force 1000 Chinese clone. Preliminary testing, however, indicates that the Spanish original doesn’t really shoot any better.

      Dismissing the Chinese airguns out of hand, making broad assumptions about their relative quality is a mistake. They do have their faults, but the Chinese have long demonstrated their ability to surprise the more complacent industrial societies.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


8 + = 15

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