Crosman 2100B multi-pump air rifle: Part 3

by B.B. Pelletier

Part 1
Part 2


Crosman’s 2100B is a full-sized multi-pump that hopefully delivers power and accuracy with a few economic concessions.

Blog reader J was alert and noticed that I had not yet done the accuracy test of the Crosman 2100B multi-pump. I was astonished to find that he was right, so today we’re going to look at it. But before we do, I want to show you something I did at the range last week. Some of you who have been reading for a long time will remember that over a year ago I was suffering from eye problems. It turns out that my diabetes had dehydrated me so much that my eyesight was affected. And it took a long time for the situation to correct itself. I wondered if I would ever be able to shoot with open sights again.

This past Thursday, I was out at the range testing several firearms and airguns and a friend of mine happened to bring his Remington RangeMaster model 37 .22 rimfire target rifle for me to try. The model 37 was Remington’s equivalent to Winchester’s model 52 target rifle until the model 40X was created, and it (the model 37) has the reputation of being incredibly accurate. My friend can no longer use open sights and is scoping all the rifles he intends to keep. But this one is a rifle he has owned for decades but never shot. It still has the factory non-optical target sights.

The Lyman 17A front globe has a post-and-bead like target shooters used back in the 1930s and earlier. You put the post at the 6 o’clock spot on the bull. With good eyes, this kind of sight is considered second only to a properly sized aperture front sight out to 200 yards, and world records have been set with it. But notice I said, “With good eyes.”

I shot it at 50 yards with Winchester Super-X high-speed ammo, which is hardly target ammo! When I saw the group made with five shots I was ecstatic, because it proves that I can still see good enough to use open sights. I stopped at only five shots because who wants to ruin a group like that? However, after an involved trade with my friend, I ensured many more years of shooting this 37, and eventually I will shoot 10-shot groups.  That’s important for today’s report, because the Crosman 2100B has a square post-and-notch sight, and the front has a bright green fiberoptic bead.


Five shots in 0.30 inches at 50 yards with open sights! The old man can still see! Sorry about the over-exposure.

Next, I tried my custom .17 HM2 that this same friend made for me on a Mossberg 44 US action. This rifle has a Leapers scope, so there’s an even better chance of hitting the target. This time, five shots went into 0.266 inches at the same 50 yards. I was on fire! Unfortunately, I haven’t yet mounted the scope on the FWB 300S, so I didn’t have that to test, but everything I shot that day went where I wanted. Since I couldn’t see the group through my scope, I knew it was a small one. And, once again, I chickened out after 5 shots. If I were reporting on the guns and shooting for the record, I would have shot 10 shots with each gun.


Five shots in 0.266 inches at 50 yards with a scope. Not that much better than open sights. It looks better because the .17-caliber bullet is smaller, but the actual size of the group isn’t that much less than the first group.

On to today’s test
I decided to begin shooting pellets with the 2100 at 10 meters. That way, if the rifle proved somewhat inaccurate, I could still keep them inside the trap. The 2100 has a .177 rifled barrel, so pellets should be more accurate than the steel BBs it also shoots. Since this is a Crosman rifle, what better to begin than with 7.9-grain Crosman Premier 7.9-grain domes?

The first thing I did was oil the pump head with several drops of Crosman Pellgunoil. I did that for the velocity test, as well; but since it’s impossible to overdo this step and it does ensure the best compression, I did it again.

I decided on 5 pumps for this test because the velocity test showed that was enough to get all pellets into the 500 f.p.s. range. At 10 meters, that’s all you need for good results. So, this test was very easy on me.

A new way of loading
Many owners may already have discovered what I am about to share; but while I was shooting the Premiers, I discovered a foolproof way of loading them. The loading port on the side of the rifle is too small for most adult fingers, and until now I’ve found it difficult to load the pellet so the head points forward. But during this test, I accidentally discovered that I could drop in a pellet in any attitude and simply elevate the muzzle of the rifle with the receiver rotated to the left so the loading port is angled up. The pellet would then try to right itself at the bottom of the loading channel; and, if it wasn’t aligned, all I had to do was push it forward slightly with the cocking handle and then pull the handle back and the pellet would align itself every time. I tried this with the JSB Exact RS pellets, as well, but they got stuck and didn’t align as easily as the Premier lites. I can’t wait to try this method on my old Crosman 2200.

Sights are okay, but not great
I found the sights easy to acquire and very sharp and crisp, but the method of adjustment leaves a lot to chance. I never did get the group shooting where I wanted it. Also, though I elevated the rear sight nearly all the way, it was still just hitting at the point of aim at 10 meters. Forget about shooting longer distances unless you learn how to hold the front post above the top of the rear notch. But the sights are not important, because this will not be the last test of this rifle. Just like the M4-177 rifle I tested last year, I found the 2100B was far more accurate than the price indicated! In a word, it was phenomenal — which is why I told you about the state of my eyes in the beginning of the report.


Ten Crosman Premier lites went into this 10-meter group that measures 0.539 inches. This is fantastic accuracy for an inexpensive multi-pump with fiberoptic sights.

Next, I tried the JSB Exact RS pellet. I was expecting to see a similar group, which is why what I got surprised me so much.


Ten JSB Exact RS pellets made this huge 10-meter group that measures 1.05 inches. This is obviously not the pellet for this 2100!

What a difference! Crosman could use this as an ad testimonial for Premiers, if they wanted. We all know that the JSB Exact RS is a premium pellet; but in this rifle, the Premier lite is the clear and obvious choice. I already demonstrated that my eyes are up to the task, so there’s nothing to blame in this case but the pellet.

BBs next
After testing two pellet brands, I switched to Crosman Copperhead BBs and fired 10 from a standing supported position at 22 feet. If the group was small, I would then try other brands of BBs, but as you will see that wasn’t necessary.


Ten Crosman Copperhead BBs went into this 2.219-inch group at 22 feet. This demonstrated that it wasn’t worth pursuing BBs any further. My photo inadvertently cropped off a BB hole on the right of the group. It’s on the 5-ring, as it ends on the right margin.

The results
This rifle is deadly accurate with Crosman Premiers and not very good with BBs. I wouldn’t even bother with BBs in the 2100 anymore because I have a host of BB pistols that will out-shoot it. But with Premier lives, it’s a different story.

The 2100B has earned the right to a special 25-yard test with a scope sight. That will come in Part 4, and I charge blog reader J with making sure I don’t forget to do it!

68 Responses to “Crosman 2100B multi-pump air rifle: Part 3”

  • Victor Says:

    B.B.,

    I’m not at all surprised by the accuracy that you got from the 2100b. This kind of accuracy is what I got from my father-in-laws new 2100b that I got him for Christmas. This is a VERY accurate rifle!

    Also, I didn’t use Crosman Premiers. I used one of the Crosman hunting pellets. The trigger requires a bit of work, so you have to be patient, but because there’s virtually no recoil, you can easily follow-through, seeing how well your execution is throughout the shot.

    He’s a large man, so the 2100b made sense, since it’s a full-size rifle. It’s a bit on the light side, but is full-size none the less. For the money, and the fact that he’s not particularly picky, this rifle has proved to provide real bang-for-your-buck because the accuracy is there.

    His only application is to clear pigeons from his back and side yard. I demonstrated that it had enough power to penetrate a fairly thick tin can, putting a good dent on the opposite end. Therefore, in my opinion, it was more than adequate for pigeons, even with fewer than the maximum number of pumps. I also added a good CenterPoint 4x scope, making it even easier to extract accuracy from this rifle.

    Victor

  • /Dave Says:

    Nice groups, BB! I’ve always had a soft spot for Crosman’s guns, but never owned a 2100. Now I see what I’ve missed…..

    Thanks for this report from me, too!
    /Dave

  • twotalon Says:

    B.B.

    You sure had a good day. I could use some days like that myself. Might get to find out how good some of my rifles really can do without being handicapped by me.

    twotalon

  • derrick Says:

    Wow! That’s impressive, but for a $60 rifle, that’s remarkable.

  • B.B. Pelletier Says:

    Kevin,

    Take note of the second group.

    B.B.

    • kevin Says:

      B.B.,

      Your pictures of your groups shot with the model 37 and your custom .17 HM2 floored me.

      Having a tough time formulating words. That .17 HM2 just seems to shoot better and better. That group you shot with the model 37 with open sights at 50 yards with winchester super-x has me shaking my head. I’m stunned and humbled.

      Maybe I need to see an eye doctor or just sell my guns and take up knitting.

      kevin

      • B.B. Pelletier Says:

        Kevin,

        I thought you would like that .17 HM2 group. Otho has now completed eight rifles and is working on the next two. They are all tack-drivers, but mine seems especially good.

        The ones built on the Mossberg actions seem to have the best triggers, while the Remingtons are strong, but have poorer triggers. He is about to get a Remington 37 action (not mine!) to see how that works.

        He has also built at least one Savage rifle, but I don;t think he wants to do any more of them.

        B.B.

        • kevin Says:

          B.B.,

          His latest builds are with different barrels than yours if I am remembering correctly?

          kevin

          • B.B. Pelletier Says:

            Kevin,

            We know that his current builds are with Green River barrels. And he has shot groups as small as this with them. My barrel is of unknown pedigree.

            B.B.

      • Hank Mcrae Says:

        Kevin,
        It’s funny you threatened to take up knitting. I said the exact thing last weekend during a ft match. I was shooting as poorly as I ever had been. I then got up from the lane and proclaimed that if I did take up knitting, I would probably just poke myself. Some smart-alleck then said “You’re poking yourself right now!” How right he was. Sigh.
        -hm

  • Al Says:

    I’ve also gotten excellent accuracy from my 2100 using crosman pointed pellets. For the longest time, I just used the small scope that came included in the box.

    • B.B. Pelletier Says:

      Al,

      I have just the rifle, so I’ll have to scope it with what I have on hand. It should be at least as good as what Crosman packs with the rifle.

      B.B.

    • Victor Says:

      Al,
      I think it was the pointed pellets that I test with as well. They gave me a nice small one hole group at around 18 feet. I was amazed that I had to look for where the pellets were going. They were going into the same hole! Sure, it was a ragged hole, but that’s about it.
      Victor

  • Robert from Arcade Says:

    My 2100 does the best with the old Beeman Ramjet pellets, I hoarded a bunch of them from PA before they disappeared. I’ve never shot BBs in mine. I also have had very little luck with the JSB pellets in mine. You have to watch out for the forward receiver screw on the 2100 if you scope it. If it gets loose the barrel and whole front of the gun wobbles which plays hell with accuracy with the scope being mounted on the receiver. Lock tite that one.

  • Al Says:

    I’m sure whatever you have on hand will be better than the scope that came in the box:-) If I recall right, it was a very small scope, very dim and fuzzy. Somehow it worked fine for me though.

    Were those groups you posted with the open sights? Nice! I had to use a file and open up the rear blade on mine a bit since the front post completely filled the rear notch.

    I’ll also have to try your loading technique. I wish that Crosman would bring back the loading gate of their old Backpacker model. All you had to do was roll it out to the side, easily slide a pellet into the hole and then roll it back in.

    Al

    • B.B. Pelletier Says:

      Al,

      Yes, that good group is ten shots at 10 meters with the open sights. The rear notch on my gun is large enough to show daylight on both sides of the front post, and the sight picture is sharp.

      The loading technique is really great with Premiers. I don’t know how it will do with other pellets.

      B.B.

      • flobert Says:

        B.B. – an old shooting trick is to mount a peep aperture *on your glasses* or otherwise in front of your face, I believe a company called Merit has made them for years but you can improvise one. I used one improvised from a piece of plastic for a while. It will sharpen that sight picture right up.

        Archers have peep sights that are actually woven into their bowstrings, they’re forbidden in Olympic competition but allowed in other types of competition.

        • B.B. Pelletier Says:

          flobert,

          I have an old Merit peep from before 1950, but I don’t use it. Never got used to it, I guess.

          B.B.

          • pete zimmerman Says:

            Gehmann makes a very nice adjustable aperture that clips onto standard glasses. It can be used to give you increased depth of field and apparent sharpness when the opening is small or to adjust the amount of light reaching your eye at the other end of the size scale. Not cheap; competition legal.

  • J Says:

    Well… Your accuracy test definitely tells me something about my Crosman 2100. I’ve tried a couple different pellets (Crosman hollow-points, Crosman pointed pellets, Daisy wadcutters, and Crosman wadcutters) at between 25 and 50 feet (with both a scope and the iron sights) and have yet to see anything as good as what you got with Crosman Premier Lights. In fact I don’t think I’ve seen anything as good as what you got with JSB Exact RS pellets from my gun BB. Maybe I’ll have to try it again next time I go shooting. Regardless I appreciate you doing the accuracy report BB.

    I’ll keep an eye out for the scoped accuracy report.

    • B.B. Pelletier Says:

      J,

      Like I said, the results surprised me, too. If I hadn’t had such good luck with the M4-177 I think I would have been even more surprised.

      B.B.

  • Fred DPRoNJ Says:

    BB,

    if you get tired of that Remington Rangemaster and want to trade or sell, keep me in mind. Roanoke is just around the corner!

    Fred DPRoNJ

  • duskwight Says:

    B.B.

    The old man has eyes and skills and a perfect trigger-finger! That’s _amazing_! Something Shakespearean – like “Grey makes the green blush red”.

    duskwight

    • Matt61 Says:

      I wonder if this is the line from MacBeth where he talks about his hand covered with blood from his assassination of the previous king and says basically that there is so much blood that it would “Turn the multitudinous seas incarnadine/Making the green one red.”

      Matt

  • Chuck Says:

    BB,
    Wow! That’s some mighty fine shooting – from both rifles. I am so glad to see your results for the 2100. Such accuracy from such an inexpensive rifle. A rifle anybody can afford.
    -Chuck

  • flobert Says:

    Interesting. About 2X the cost of my daisy 880, which as I’m always saying, I’m very happy with, but it may be half again a better rifle.

    The “fuzzy, dim” scope that comes with this is probably the Crosman Targetfinder Superscope (no kidding!) and is just a bit better than the really lousy scope that came with my daisy, and until I find a nice old metal-tube, classic .22 scope, will have to do. And do it does, well enough.

  • flobert Says:

    OK I have to post a correction. I guess my Daisy 880 cost about the same as this Crosman. The scope that came with *it* is dog-chew-toy grade, and I spent an additional $6 or so on the Crosman “Targetfinder Superscope” which is no Leupold but is a measure better, and I’m getting excellent accuracy.

    The $6 Crosman scope is a “quantum leap” better compared to the stock sights, or even a decent target peep and globe setup. I believe scopes for hunting/pesting only became popular after WWII when the economy allowed widespread sale of them and GI’s returning home had had exposure to really nice military equipment that used optics wherever advantageous. Even a skinny little sub-one-inch diameter tube “rimfire” scope is a joy and this is why I want to find a few of those old metal-tube ones at gun shows. I don’t want a modern type scope which is fatter and higher off the gun then I prefer.

    Some time when I have the odd $50 to throw around, I think I’ll get one of these Crosmans just to be able to compare. I think this gun is a bit more powerful, 700-odd fps vs. 600-odd.

    • Desertdweller Says:

      I think the Crosman 2100 is intended to compete with the Daisy 880.

      You might want to try Tasco scopes. They make some in the $30-$40 range that work well on springers that have shaken their original scopes to death. You will need to get rings for them, as they are not included.

      You can use medium height rings for the 40mm objective scopes, but you will need high-mount rings for the ones with 50mm objective lenses.

      I wish Daisy still made the Model 856. While lower-priced and plainer than the 880, I think it was an improvement on the design. The later ones only shot pellets, so there was no bb port for a pellet to get caught in. Also, the use of the forearm as a pump lever is a lot easier on the hands than the lever on a 880.

      Les

      • flobert Says:

        The 880 lever isn’t hard on adult hands though, I guess if I were a kid I’d do my famous string-winding thing on it, I was all into macrame and nautical-type ropework and I’d have put a winding on there that would have made all the other kids jealous.

        I like those skinny old .22 scopes. Once upon a time they were well made. I remember a cool old mount that was made of spring steel, that was sort of both rings in one piece. The only way I can think of to get one or a few of ‘em is to get to a local gun show and get there early. Which is in my plans.

  • Desertdweller Says:

    BB,

    Nice shooting with that 2100. I had thought that gun would more-or-less be a 760 built on a bigger frame. It looks like it must have a rifled barrel.

    I checked out the grandkids’ 760′s this weekend, and found the barrels were grooved all right, but the grooves ran parallel to each other (no twist). Must be on account of the way they were manufactured.
    I think that still makes them smoothbores.

    We had the big tournament shoot here yesterday. It was the kids’ first tournament, shooting against other teams from the Panhandle. Nicky shot a 261 and Melanie shot a 188 (out of a possible 400). Both scored a number of 10′s on each position (4 positions).

    I think it was a great experience for them. We will work on their shooting until next shooting season.
    There is a learning curve to this. They were shooting against kid’s who follow the tournament circuit every week.

    Today we have high winds forecast for this afternoon, so I took them to the gun range this morning. I had the scopes sighted in on Shoot-N-C targets and ping-pong balls. They shot their scoped 760′s and I shot my XT.

    Tonight the 4H Club winds up its shooting program for the season. We will shoot with them again next year. Melanie will have to decide if she will stay with bb-gun or go into the air rifle program.
    The adults get to shoot tonight, so I am bringing my Crosman XT.

    The guns the kids shoot at the 4H all use diopter sights. All my guns either use open sights or are scoped. They need to shoot with the same sort of sights they use in competition.

    I think I took care of that problem today. I ordered from Pyramyd Air a Bronco Target Model. These haven’t arrived yet, but are expected in the first week of April.

    I also looked in my current “American Rifleman” magazine and found the Mossberg 464 SPX. It’s real.
    I don’t know who would design something like that, but it does look like it would work.

    Les

    • B.B. Pelletier Says:

      Les,

      Good for the girls to have their first match. I bet some day you’ll listen to them howl for dropping three points in the standing position.

      I am going to test the Bronco with peep sights, soon, too.

      B.B.

    • cavaman Says:

      Les,
      In for a penny in for a pound! That is great the girls are having fun with the sport and enjoying competition. I’m a 4-H shooting sports leader and pend 15 to 20 hours a week at the range this time of the year. My daughter started at age 8 and now is 15 shooting on a very good junior team. I see a Crosman Challenger in your future.

  • Matt61 Says:

    All around fine shooting. B.B., maybe you can weigh in on the ballistics of the .17 HMR. CowBoyStar Dad mentioned that that this caliber could be accurate out to 150 yards while the .22WMR tailed off at around 100 yards. How can this be? I thought that heavier bullets stabilized flight and were accurate to a longer range.

    DaveUK, your grandfather was a combat vet from WWII? No doubt he used the Lee-Enfield. Would have loved to hear some stories from him.

    Duskwight, your knowledge of movies is truly astounding and surpassed only by…my ability to pull out another movie example. :-) ‘Fraid I can’t even tell you the name of this one. :-) It is part of a series where an Asian-American martial artist goes around fighting evildoers. At one point, he blunders across a white supremacist group. The leader executes people of color with a baseball bat, and then for the hero, he graduates to a…minigun! This one, I admit was much smaller than the one used by Arnold, more like a submachine gun. It was fed by a long belt, but it ultimately ran out of ammo too. But not before the shooter had pretty much demolished a house with it while shouting, “Can’t we all just get along?!” He had a certain amount of style in his crummy way. Anyway, I’m persuaded that the time of the hand-held minigun has not yet arrived.

    Edith, you’re right that there is plenty wrong with the world today. Hardly a day goes by without headlines that make the world look like a circus. But do you really think things are worse now than they have been before? We don’t have the Holocaust, slavery, the Black Death and other diseases, mass starvation, public executions with people being broken on the wheel, burned alive and disemboweled all in front of cheering crowds, the mass exterminations practiced by the Mongols, gladiatorial games, roads lined with crucified people, the routine sacking of cities and mass rape. As a fictional gladiator says who was frozen and brought back to life in modern times: “You have already told me that this society has no crucifixion and no slavery, so what is there to worry about?”

    Matt61

    • duskwight Says:

      Matt,

      In fact Black Death is not dead. It’s just lurking somewhere, under control – for now. Yersinia pestis is a very patient being it can live in populations of rodents for centuries, just waiting. Let the outbreak start in densely populated areas – and voila, it’ll be faster and “better” than in Middle Ages.
      I’ve studied cased of “spanish flu” of 1918 for my book. The Great War killed 10 million people in 4 years. “Spanish flu” killed at least 70 in less than a year, only in “civilized” world, where medical statitics were available.
      Public executions? Well, take China for example.
      Holocaust? Pol Pot operated not too far from our times, and the numbers of victims of tribal wars in Africa are quite on par with mass extermination of Jews, Gipsies and Slavic people.
      World just had a little more gloss, but it still is a very unpleasant place to live ;)

      duskwight

    • Edith Gaylord Says:

      Matt61,

      My brain works in pictures. Can you hear me screaming as I read your comment?

      There are entire nations held hostage and literally being starved to death. That’s the new slavery. It’s not the Holocaust, but it’ll have the same effect.

      Also, there are a lot more people on the planet, which means much larger populations are affected by the evil that lurks in every corner. Plus, we’re not punishing evil the way they used to. Now, we give evil the benefit of the doubt instead of the electric chair.

      I believe it’s a pretty sucky state of affairs. The toilet bowl is full. I’m glad God has a plan, as I cannot imagine living in today’s world thinking that there’s no Master plan :-)

      Edith

      • Victor Says:

        Edith,

        I believe that just as there are evil people, there are good people, and it is the good that are holding this world together. But as it has been said, the presence of evil is just the absence of love. We have to spread the love, and not give into the hatred, otherwise things get even more twisted and hard to comprehend.

        Politics, like the legal system, is entirely of this Earth. The evil that live within this world know how to manipulate it, so as we solve one problem, loopholes allow those with bad intentions to express their goals in some other way. It’s a constant battle. Where politics comes in is that it demands things like loyalty and “patriotism”, often asking that we choose party over God Himself. As with cults, there’s always a mixture of truth and falsehood.

        That’s why we often see the good intent of something (policy, program, government, etc.) being tarnished by it actual execution, or implementation. Just enough of the good spirit remains to make us want to fight for it, even when we know that it’s appearing to fail. We are hopeful, but often disappointed, making it hard to trust in our hopes, and not our fears. BUT, all is lost when we’ve lost all hope, so we can’t give into our fears.

        Bottom line, as individuals, we have to be as good as is humanly possible, knowing that we do have influence over those around us. It’s the little things that matter, including each and every one of us. Even the strongest current, or title-wave, is comprised of tiny individual drops. We just don’t see our effect on the universe around us. Everyone has love within them. Some may never see it, or express it, but many can be changed. Some simply need to be overpowered for the overall good of humanity. But ultimately, it is love that initiates movement in the right direction. We are the movers (billions of us), and yet we all share a single first mover. I like the saying, “The source of all creation is love.”. I think that’s what we all have in common with the First Mover.

        Victor

      • Slinging Lead Says:

        Edith

        I hate to sound like a broken record, but I agree with you completely. I too understand things in pictures. In my line of work I often draw things out, so that I can understand them. When it comes to driving directions vs. a map, I will take a map every time.

        I also agree that barbarism, which I usually refer to as savagery, is rampant in our ridiculous PC infected world which is filled with fake outrage. When given the choice, our leaders will always choose the route of pretending to do something to help, rather than making a tougher choice that actually helps the situation but might upset a vocal few. Take the housing crisis for example. If our fearless leaders had used the TARP funds, and perhaps the half a Billion dollars spent on Solyndra, (which would have gone bankrupt no matter what), how many lower to middle class mortgages could have been paid off, free and clear? Think that might have stimulated the economy?
        Naw, lets give it to the banks. They created the crisis, so they know how to fix it right?

        Thank you for the toilet analogy. I think the poop is hitting the floor right about now.

    • B.B. Pelletier Says:

      Matt,

      I can’t argue the ballistics of the .17 HM2, except to show the targets. My friend killed a bobcat at 100 yards with a single shot with his. You mentioned the .17 HMR. That is an entirely different round that’s based on the .22 Mag, and to date I haven’t seen a good one.

      I always heard the .22 Mag was good out to 150 yards.

      B.B.

      • Victor Says:

        B.B.,

        I’m very interested in this conversation. I’d like to know what is the best, cheapest, round for shooting out to 200 yards (maybe 150 yards), that is relatively cheap. More specifically, what is the best rim-fire round? Based on what you’ve written, it’s sounding like the .17HM2. I want something with more range than a .22 long, but at least as much accuracy over a longer distance (up to twice). Anything in mind?

        Victor

        • B.B. Pelletier Says:

          Victor,

          The rifle I’m shooting isn’t a commercial one. It is a custom job made by a friend of mine. So he controls the barrel he selects, how it fits to the receiver, the chambering, the receiver rigidity and the stock profile.

          I have never shot anything but his rifles (I’ve now shot three or four of them) and they all perform on par with this. But whether a commercially-made rifle in the same caliber could do as well, I don’t know.

          At $6 a box of 50, this is definitely the gun and cartridge to have in rimfire!

          B.B.

      • cowboystar dad Says:

        Matt and b.b., I got my info from a the rimfire section of the forum at SnipersHide…a powderburner blog I like because is has a flavor much like this one…ignorant people soon get the idea that they’re not welcomed.
        Anyhoo…they’ve had a lot of discussion on the most accurate rimfire found and what they seemed to feel, across the board was that the .17HM2 was by far the king…with the caveat of a windless day. A bit depressing, but they seemed to agree that at 100yds a good barrel/cartridge combo in .22LR will outshoot a .22WMR, primarily because there are so many good .22LR cartridges out there compared to the magnum that it is just much more likely that you will be able to find a cartridge that really ‘sings’ in your barrel.
        Of course the .22WMR is packing a much bigger wallop than either the .17 or the LR, and is much better at putting down larger prey…but it is not a competition cartridge.
        Here is a link (hope that’s okay Edith) to their 300yd rimfire competitions http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2940654

    • Wulfraed Says:

      All around fine shooting. B.B., maybe you can weigh in on the ballistics of the .17 HMR. CowBoyStar Dad mentioned that that this caliber could be accurate out to 150 yards while the .22WMR tailed off at around 100 yards. How can this be? I thought that heavier bullets stabilized flight and were accurate to a longer range.

      Not so much accuracy, as usable sight zeroes. (or, if you will “point blank range” — that range in which the diversion from the sight line is +/- some defined value).

      Without actual values, the .22WMR with first zero at 75 yards may put the second zero around 110 yards with the portion between no more than, say, 1″ above line of sight. The 1″ below points may be 65 and 120 yards, for a total of 55 yards “PBR”.

      The .17HMR, with a first zero at 90 yards, is fast/flat enough for the second zero to be around 145 yards, same +1″, with the -1″ points being maybe 75 and 160 yards — total PBR range is 85 yards.

      Accuracy is another matter… I’ve only put one box through my Ruger 77/17 and finally managed to find a target at 50 yards… My .308Win A-Bolt II was actually more accurate at 50 yards (evening wind was building up, and I /was/ hurrying some to get all on paper before the range closed for the day).

      • Wulfraed Says:

        Perverting ChairGun Pro… Adding the weight/BC of the .17HMR and using it with my former .177 Marauder setup (scope height).

        .17HMR with second zero at 155 yards, a 2″ kill zone (+/- 1″), the “PBR” is 24.6 to 177.5 yards. With a 1″ kill zone (+/- half an inch), the second zero is 135 yards, and the PBR is 40 to 151 yards.

        .22WMR, second zero at 125 yards, 2″ kill zone, PBR is 19 to 144 yards. With the 1″ kill zone, the second zero is at 105 yards, and PBR is 33 to 119 yards.

  • cowboystar dad Says:

    Wow…you had me scared there for a moment.
    As I usually do, I scanned the photos before reading the article.
    My first thought was…’if he’s getting those groups at 50 yds with that Crosman, I’m hanging up my guns’ ;-)
    But you’re sure giving me something to aim for with the new Savage.

  • JohnG10 Says:

    Off topic questions:

    The wrist on the Bronco stock looks like it is more horizontal than other stocks. Is there any advantage to this ?

    Is the Mendoza peep sight on the Bronco target version work any worse than the Williams peep site? (ie: more backlash, less smooth, mushier clicks, etc) ?

    Unrelated Question:
    Which airgun replicates the fit/feel of Savage Mark II rimfire most closely ? The RWS Panther ?

    Thanks.

    • john Says:

      I think a horizontal wrist makes your trigger finger have to reach further for the trigger blade…not a good thing if you like your trigger finger pad to pull straight back, a practice which I believe was touted recently on this blog as being a plus…i’ve been trying it since i read about it and it has helped but has also made me wish for more swept trigger blades.

    • B.B. Pelletier Says:

      JohnG,

      The horizontal, or less-dropped attitude of the Bronco’s stock is intentional. It raises the line of sight to the eye, eliminating the need for a Monte Carlo stock.

      The Mendoza peep sight I will start testing next week.

      B.B.

  • Victor Says:

    B.B.,
    I just want to say that you’ve provided a commendable service by giving a “lowly” rifle the like the Crosman 2100B as much care and attention as you have in this report. It’s important that potential buyers know that they can get such a good product in this price range. Being a multi-pump makes it flexible. Being a pneumatic makes it easy to shoot. Being accurate, makes it worth every penny.

    A rifle doesn’t have to be cost hundreds of dollars to be an excellent buy. Th 2100B is just one example this. I’ll bet that lots of people who buy magnum springers, really would have done better for themselves by buying a rifle like this.
    Victor

  • Slinging Lead Says:

    I have always wanted one of these, but have been too busy buying rifles I can’t afford. Either I am financially irresponsible, or BB is a bad influence on my buying behavior.

    As much as I hate to navigate the fine clientele of this blog elsewhere for more information, Ted from Madison has done a fine set of videos on this very rifle, even though he usually test rifles that cost several hundred, or several thousand dollars. He seems to like it quite a bit, despite his champagne tastes. Ted is a very likable guy, and shoots a fine video. Be sure to check out all 3 installments. Then come back to PA to buy the darned thing!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3qHC7bzi-w&feature=relmfu

  • Douglas Says:

    I don’t remember exactly when I bought my 2100 but it is well over 20 years old and still shoots as well now as it did then. Never even bothered to oil it. At the time I was not interested in hand-loading each round and so have shot bb’s exclusively, although with much better results than BB achieved. Guess I should give a pellet a try and see if things improve. : ) Anyway I wanted to comment about cocking force-I realize it’s entirely subjective but I find it hard to believe anyone could find this gun ‘difficult’ to pump….20 years ago I’d routinely pump up to 20-25 times in a misguided effort to get more power and never found it difficult at all. Perhaps an explanation as to how you’ve defined ‘difficult’ would prove handy to those considering purchasing this gun?

    • Chuck Says:

      Douglas,
      I can’t find where anyone said the 2100 was difficult to pump. Was it in this post somewhere?
      -Chuck

      • Douglas Says:

        My apologies Chuck, I should have copied the comment from part 1 but I was being distracted by a very demanding 3 yr old at the time. From page one under ‘cocking’….”The effort needed to cock this gun is considerable, and buyers should know that before they buy. This isn’t the gun to pick to train your 10-year-old. Think of it as more of an adult pneumatic. I compared it to my vintage 2200, which is much easier to cock, so there’s a possibility that this will wear in with time and use.”

        I suppose ‘considerable effort’ isn’t exactly the same as ‘difficult’ and I do realize something like that is hard to quantify other than by direct comparison…so it may be an impossible question to answer.

        But I’d sure hate to see someone new to airgunning pass on one of the best bargains in the sport!

  • chuck Says:

    Douglas,
    I can understand those 3yr old issues. Point well taken on the 2100 cocking effort. Someday we should quantify what the average 10 yr old can cock. My skinny 12 yr old grand children even had a difficult time cocking the 18 lb Bronco until they learned what leverage was.
    -Chuck

    • Wulfraed Says:

      Heh… I was in the 6th grade before getting a BB gun… And that was only after my father took me into the laundry room to show me a secret… That being the BB gun my younger brother was getting for Christmas — a Daisy “spittin’ image” of, I believe, a Remington .22 slide action. I’m the “wimp” so my father hadn’t even thought I’d be able to cock one.

      I cocked it… so my father than spent the next week or two looking for a store that still had something in stock — which turned out to be a Daisy mod 25 (a better gun even if uglier to look at).

  • Max FPS Says:

    I have this gun that I purchased in July 2012. I have modified it to shoot RWS 8.3 grain domes at over 800 FPS with 10 pumps. It’s now my 40 yard squirrel sniper.

    Max FPS

  • jon Says:

    That’s a great shooting 2100, and a fine shooter B.B.!! I don’t have a 2100. I went for the Remington Airmaster77. I have been happy with the accuracy of that gun. I did put a decent scope on it and threw the very poor scope it came with. These seem to be among the last multi-pumpers that actually are made with a metal receiver.
    I also have a Crosman 1077 CO2 rifle (with a terrible trigger) that has it moments of very good accuracy. But it looks like my best shooting air rifle may be my Crosman Custom Shop 2400 carbine with the metal receiver and (as I recall) a 15″ barrel. I am still trying this air gun out. Last time I shot from a (pretty shabby) bench at 10 yards scoped. When I got to trying some Crosman Premier HP I Shot a 3 shot group that literally measured “0″. The hole was the size of one pellet. I knew it was going to be a good day as the scope sight in shots were amazingly tight as I adjusted the scope. I know I’m cheating here, but I couldn’t bring myself to risk ruining that group by shooting more shots into it. Just like in one IHMSA match years ago I had a perfect score of 39 going into the last shot at the 200 meter ram, and got so excited I missed the target entirley.
    Your 2100 is a definite keeper. I can’t seem to get the hang of spring piston shooting. I am considering buying a new Crosman M4-177 after reading reviews like yours and others.

    Jon

  • jon Says:

    Oh, and I should mention that, in the air gun forums I check out, if anyone asks about the 2100 and how accurate they are, I send them to this page where Tom did his accuracy tests on his. I figure that shouls settle the issue. Seems like a few air gun shooters kind of look down on multi-pumpers. I do not. My Remington Airmaster 77, and Crosman 1377 keep me convinced every time I shoot them.

  • Santiago Linares Says:

    A DECIR VERDA , PARA MI ES UNA DE LAS POCAS ARMAS DE BOMBAMULTIPLE QUE TIENE TANTA PRECISION. YO TIRE A MAS DE 40 PIES O PARA DECIR MEJOR 50 (15 METROS ) Y DE 10 DISPAROS HECHOS A UNA LADA DE SODA SOLO FALLE EN DOS. YO LA RECOMIENDO. ESTAMOS HABLANDO DE LA CROSMAN 2100. NO ?

    • B.B. Pelletier Says:

      Santiago,

      En Ingles, por favor.

      Yes, with good pellets the 2100B is an accurate arm. And yes, that is the gun we are speaking about.

      Welcome to the blog.

      B.B.

  • jon Says:

    Maybe I should mention that my Remington Airmaster 77 (made by Crosman and based on the 2100B0 likes RWS Hobbys, and does well with Crosman Premier hollow points and wadcutters.

    Also, I see Webley has a brand new multi-pump air rifle out. Might be a good gun for a test review?

    • B.B. Pelletier Says:

      Jon.

      Yes, it appears that Webley has revived the Sharp Innova, though probably they sourced it from Indonesia rather than Japan. It will be interesting to test.

      B.B.

Leave a Reply


1 + = 8

NEW: Dan Wesson pellet revolvers!
Dan Wesson pellet revolvers

You wanted Dan Wesson revolvers that could shoot pellets, so we ordered them. Six-shot pellet shooters that so closely copy the firearm, you'll be stunned by the realism. An excellent way to hone trigger control and maintain accuracy with your firearm -- without range fees, expensive ammo or leaving your house. Pre-order yours now. Get it. Shoot it. Love it!

Ka-BOOM!
Airburst MegaBoom reactive targets

Airburst MegaBoom bases transform ordinary plastic soda & water bottles into booming targets that deliver up to 150 decibels when punctured. Get the base and charge your own plastic bottles or get the MegaBoom bottles filled with BoomDust that mists like smoke when the bottle is punctured. Low-pressure air pump and blast guard accessories also available. A real blast!

Archives