by Tom Gaylord, a.k.a. B.B. Pelletier
Walther’s LGV Challenger is an exciting new sporting breakbarrel springer.
Wow! That’s my assessment from today’s test. Please read the explanation of how I arrived at that result.
Today, I shot the .22-caliber Walther LGV Challenger air rifle at 25 yards with open sights. You’ll remember that it has fiberoptics front and rear, but they can be defeated by lighting the target brightly and sitting in a dark place to shoot. Fiberoptics are not good sights for precision shooting, but they’re good for a fast snap shot when hunting. These can be used both ways, so they’re wonderful.
I always become concerned when I shoot indoors at 25 yards — especially when using open sights. I have only a few inches of clearance through the garage door; and if a pellet goes astray, it could plow into the woodwork around the door. I needn’t have worries with the LGV, however, because the only place those pellets went was to the target.
JSB Exact Jumbo Heavies
Reader Kevin asked me to try the rifle with 18.1-grain JSB Exact Jumbo Heavy pellets, so I did. I was concerned that a 12 foot-pound rifle wouldn’t be able to handle a pellet so heavy, but that wasn’t a problem. In fact, this pellet gave me the best 10-shot group of the test, measuring 0.78 inches between centers. That’s just a hair over 3/4 of an inch!
Ten JSB Exact 18.1-grain heavies made the best group at 25 yards. It measures 0.78 inches between centers. This is great for 10 shots at 25 yards with open sights.
Crosman Premiers
The first group was low on the target, so the rear sight was adjusted up for the next pellet, which was the 14.3-grain Crosman Premier. As you can see, I lucked into the perfect sight adjustment for this pellet and tore out the center of the bullseye. I realize this makes a lot of people feel better about the group, but I hope you readers realize that it’s simply a matter of sight adjustment that determines where the pellets land. If the gun will shoot a tight group, then you can move that group anywhere you want. This one certainly does shoot very tight.
Ten Premiers landed in a group that measures 1.147 inches between centers. It’s not as tight as the previous group, but we expect that to happen with different pellets. The irony is that because this group is centered on the bull, it’ll look better to those who think the object is to the strike the center of the target regardless of anything else.
Ten Crosman Premiers made a 1.147-inch group. It happens to be centered on the bull but isn’t as tight as the previous pellet.
Predator Big Boy
I did try a group of 10 Predator Big Boy pellets in the LGV; but at 26.2 grains they’re clearly too heavy for this powerplant. They opened to 1.657 inches at 25 yards, which told me this isn’t the right pellet for this rifle. I could also hear a very long lag between firing and the pellet hitting the trap, so the velocity must be in the high 300s or low 400s.
Ten Predator Big Boys made an open 1.657-inch group. This is obviously not the pellet for the LGV.
JSB Exact Jumbo Express
I finished the test with 10 JSB Exact Jumbo Express pellets that weigh 14.3 grains. I tried it because, in the 10-meter test, 13.4-grain JSB Exact RS domes didn’t do as well as the others. But at 25 yards, this pellet certainly did very well. Ten pellets grouped in 0.786 inches, just a whisker larger than the group of 18.1-grain heavies…and really too close to call.
Ten JSB Exact Jumbo Express pellets made3 a 0.786-inch group at 25 yards. This is too close to the group made by the Jumbo heavies to call the difference.
The bottom line
So far, the LGV is living up to its name and even going beyond. I say beyond because this new LGV delivers 12 foot-pounds, where the target rifle by the same name was less than half that powerful.
This rifle is smooth, it holds well, the weight is distributed very well and the trigger is light enough for good work. When you cock the rifle, it’s smoother than any breakbarrel I’ve ever tested…other than a few that were tuned to perfection. I had the chance to shoot another LGV while I was at Umarex last week, and it felt identical to the rifle I’m testing. Rick Eutsler, who usually tests airguns costing $200 and under, fired the rifle before he was ready on the first shot. He, too, was blown away by the feel of the gun.
I know these rifles are going to cost a lot, and I know that not everyone will be able to purchase one, but that doesn’t detract from the fact that this is the best new breakbarrel to come along in the past half-century. I may not live in a mansion, but that doesn’t prevent me from appreciating one when I see it.
Impressive especially with fiber optic open sights.
I’m buying one since for my use the lack of over penetration and accuracy with 18.1gr jsb’s is perfect.
Thanks Tom.
kevin
Kevin,
Remember that the sights didn’t appear as fiberoptics to me because of how I lit the target. When lit that way, they look like the finest solid open sights.
B.B.
Kevin,
Congratulations, another fine rifle to add to your collection. Sounds like it will be a working gun, so more the better. Please give us your valued opinion and or impressions after you’ve had a chance to play with it. Do you plan on using the Pos-Align/Timberline combo? Thanks.
-h
hankmcrae,
I’m hoping that the fiber optic sights will be enough. Since this gun will be used for tree rats in light and dark situations I’ll have to get the gun and see how well the open sights work. If I need a scope I’d put on a fixed lower powered scope rather than a burris timberline since my shots are usually at 25 yards or less.
kevin
This Walther LGV, has turned out to be everything you would expect from a quality German break barrel airgun, and more. The technology used to dampen vibration, and decrease the effort needed to cock the barrel, is what makes this gun so desirable to me. I am not acquainted with it’s target namesake, but I have read it was the last spring gun of it’s kind to be competitive in international tournaments. If I am still around in 30 years, I can tell my great grandchildren of the time the Walther LGV took the airgun world by storm for the second time. I hope to have an example to show. I can’t help but wonder what Diana and Weihrauch are coming out with to answer Walther’s challenge. If it is as good as you claim, B.B., then for them to ignore this technology, would be foolhardy indeed. Charles Dickens begins A Tale of Two Cities with the famous line. “It was the best of times”. “It was the worst of times”. As airgunners, we are surely living in the best of times.
Caio Titus
If Walther can get the LGV price down to compete with Diana and Weihrauch, then and ONLY then Daina and Weihrauch will raise to the challenge.
Not bad for a sproinger. When you do Part 5, I would not be surprised if the groups dropped to .6″ or better. I can well imagine the German version is a real tack driver. Since they are not allowed to have much power, they have always seemed to focus on producing supreme accuracy. After all, what good is 500+ FPE if you cannot hit what you are shooting at.
RR,
I agree, the scoped groups should be 75 percent of the open sight groups. I’m counting on that happening.
B.B.
Nice rifle! Things are looking up for buying one of these, even though I already have a .22 breakbarrel… Dang it, BB, you’re messing up the pellet gun acquisition order that I had planned so carefully!
/Dave
/Dave,
I own an R1 — the one I used to write the book. I have it tuned very smooth and adjusted just the way I want. And yet this LGV has captured my attention. What’s that tell you?
B.B.
Tom,that tells me that you need to sell me the R1,,,,,and use the money to buy the LGV,and the change for an RC & a moonpie!
Conundrums, conundrums. Do I buy a TX200 Air Arms as my next rifle or this Walther? On the one side, i don’t own any English rifles. On the other side, I don’t own a Walther. Hmmmmmm.
Had a funny thing happen the other night while shooting. I was using my RWS 52 with a leapers scope. My first 8 pellets were right on target. The next 4 moved to the left. I readjusted the scope and the next 4 were again on target. The next 4 moved to the right forcing me to readjust the scope again back to it’s original position where the pellets were on target again. Now we’re only talking less than 1/2 inch of movement from side to side. So is it the pellet, the scope or the shooter? I have to try a different pellet to see if the same thing happens.
Fred DPRoNJ
Fred……
Can be the scope or shooter either one. The scope could also be slipping. That’s 3 possible causes.
twotalon
Buy the TX200 for sure. As to the windage issue, check the stock/action screws. They could be getting loose. Next, check the scope mounting screws. If you are not keeping your eye centered in the scope, parallax may be the problem.
Mike
Mike,
thanks for the suggestions but that was the first thing(s) I did – stock screws and scope mounting screws. As for parallax, the Leapers has an adjustable objective so I thought parallax was not the problem as the picture was nice and sharp. I’ll recheck if the image can move on the reticle when I move my head side to side or up and down slightly – but this will be interesting to see if I can solve this problem and what the problem turned out to be. I sure hope it’s not my scope. For those who are interested, I was shooting Falcons – .177.
Fred DPRoNJ
Fred…
How do you get away with shooting Falcons in that beast ? My 48 absolutely hates them (and exact rs) in .22. All of my mid powered .177 rifles hate them too. They drive the power plants nuts.
Your scope…you said Leapers. Shooting in the cold, my Centerpoints got sticky. They would not hold zero or adjust right. This is on PCP rifles. If it gets down into the 50s, they cause trouble. 70 or better, and they are stable and adjust right. I won’t even think about using them on a springer. I am going to replace them one of these days.
Also, you can adjust the AO on just about ANY scope for a clean looking focus, but there will still be parallax if you get your eye too far off center. Check it from a rest without touching the rifle.
I use a gun vise at 5yd intervals and re-index the AO.
twotalon
Fred,
That sounds like a parallax problem — not a scope problem. Check your hold before adjusting your scope.
The groups moved right because you adjusted the scope in that direction. I think your head was in a different place for those shots, or your off hand was in a different place.
B.B.
BB,
I typically will rest the forearm of the rifle on the top of my fist (left hand) but – now I’m wondering if I rested the rifle in exactly the same spot or did I move it on my hand? OK – that’s two things to check out now. Thanks for pointing me in what is probably the right direction, BB, Mike and TT.
Fred DPRoNJ
I had the exact same thing happen to me with my CFX. I finally figured out that the slightest difference in pressure with the thumb of my right hand (trigger hand) would change my POI. I no longer own the CFX.
Over $500 and looks like every other gun on the market. I’d call shot placement with it about average for an air rifle. I’d actually save my money and wait for some of the less expensive but no less accurate guns to begin rolling into the stores. I hear Crosman’s MSR77NP should have as good of accuracy as this gun, give us that assault rifle styling that’s so popular, and will be $150-$200. Possibly due in April some time if rumor control is reliable. To be fair though, I figure this gun will appeal to some people with lots of money sitting around needing spending.
John,
You can believe these results or you can wait for the rumors to unfold. There are always more rumors.
This rifle is the best breakbarrel I have ever tested — short of a finely tuned one. I have done my best to report what I’m seeing.
The one thing I won’t do is condemn other guns to make this one look better. It stands on its merits, alone.
The TX200 is still the finest spring gun on the market, but for the breakbarrels, the new LGV is king of the hill.
B.B.
Don’t worry. I believe you. Just not a gun I think I’d save up for. I’m looking for guns that stand out in design and performance for the price they are. I’m just not convinced this one is worth the hefty price when I have other guns in my collection that give me the same results on a target this one gave you that didn’t cost what for me is two months or more saving up my gun buying budget to justify the expense. So I’m simply going to wait and save my money, buy something that when it comes time to sell it I’m not going to be taking quite the huge loss I think I’ll take on this gun. I’m currently trying to sell off some of my aging but lightly used guns and finding guns of this design are selling for sizable losses if i want them sold. I just don’t see this as something that I’ll be all that excited about. For example I sold my Discovery for $250 but paid $259 for it then did several modifications and repairs to it. My Ruger airhawk I had to practically give away. Same thing with my Big Cat, Shaddow express, Couldn’t give away mt TF99 premier or Savage arms Enforcer, TF66 or TF67. But I’ve had people beg me to sell them my Condor. So I learned to buy guns that don’t look like cookie cutter guns.
So you had a Ruger airhawk , Gamo Big Cat and a Shadow express, plus a cupboard full of Tech Force airguns. Which means you spent a lot of money (more than a Walther LGV costs) on budget airguns that pretty much fall into the same category.
You can do that, but I prefer to have one really good airgun instead of five mediocre ones.
And you’re not alone.
Cheap can be fun but working with high quality certainly also has it’s advantages.
You can buy a Mustang and upgrade it to exotic car level or you can go straight to the exotic and enjoy it that way. There’s room for both.
J-F
I didn’t buy them all at once. I got them one at a time over the years. My ruger air hawk was one I bought after my divorce since my ex took everything. I needed it to deal with a muskrat. It did the job. From threr i pucked up a whisper since it was innovative for it’s time, followed by the viper express since it was the first air shotgun I ever saw… the list goes on until we get to the Tf66. It was a unique takedown tactical bullpup. Of course then I got the 67 to have the set…..I have too many now so i’m trying to cull the herd a bit since they all are just collecting dust. About 90% of my shooting is done now with my condor with my springers and pumpers simply sitting in a rack. The other 10% is poweder burner work since that’s mostly deer and other large game. My sights are set on the new condor ss and other unique guns like that now.
ahhh, what makes the world go round.
We don’t all have to like the same things, nor justify them.
I to would rather have one or two really nice guns that I can pass down, rather than a closet full of mediocre guns that I’ll sell off when the mood hits me.
Makes sense. I prefer to collect guns I see as unique or I buy them to serve a specific purpose. If that purpose evaporates or the gun is replaced by a newer better gun for that purpose, the old gun collects dust. So I’m always looking for a better gun for my purposes. Who knows, maybe my condor will be replaced someday by something better, but for now it remains one of my stable champions joined by my Mossberg 100ATR which will be unseated by my AK47 this year. Who knows if an AR15 might in the future unseat the AK47, but I wouldn’t count on it.
PA doesn’t sell it right now, but you can get one with a pretty nice wood stock for not much more if you just had to have a break barrel. Of course that TX200 with a walnut stock is SWEET!
Nice, but another gun I just can’t do for the price. Most of my stable that gets used has hunting power. Those older guns without hunting power with the exception of a few old sentimental favorites are heading for the used gun sale boards, so I just can’t justify $600-$700 for a springer I might rarely use no matter how nice it is. I have my eye on a few guns not out yet that I plan on being very excited about, Unfortunately the TX200 isn’t going to be one of them at this time. I have to set some limits on what I put into guns right now. Part of my restraint comes because I’m buying all new tooling to go in new gun building directions. So unless a gun has exceptional styling or something I just can’t live without, I gotta pass on it.
Some of us would be interested in how this gun performs in field target conditions. Can you please mount a scope and try something between 25 and 55 yards? Thanks.
Dave,
As I said in an earlier part of the report, that is what I’m doing next. First shooting the scoped rifle at 25 yards and then shooting it at 50 yards.
B.B.
That report should be a good one, all the UK tests and reviews i have come across speak highly of its performance out to 40/50 yards.
Wing Commander, Sir Nigel Tetlington-Smythe O.B.E
I’ll try to be patient. Sorry.
Just received another order from Pyramyd AIR. Their packing is first rate as usual. Really like the catalogues. Full color and chocked full of great articles.
Wish at the end of these multiple articles a few sentences would be added along the lines of…….”Want to know more about airguns or have a question about airguns? We have a blog where new airgun articles are published daily, Monday-Friday, and airgunners from around the world share their experiences everyday. Join us at /blog// .”
kevin
Kevin,
I write the copy for the catalogs & will remember to add something about the blog at the end of Tom’s articles. We have fillers in the catalog that send people to the blog, but putting it at the end of each article is a good suggestion.
Thanks,
Edith
Edith,
Remind him to add something at the end of his articles about the blog. You already have enough to do. All he does is go to the gun range and play. 😉
kevin
B.B.,
When you shot springer FT, did you have a back-up rig? Do you think a second gun should be the same rifle/scope combo as your main?
Thanks,
-h
hank,
I didn’t have a backup rig, because I didn’t have the money to put one together. And since I was shooting a springer, the only thing that could go wrong was the scope. I did have extras of those, but not installed on guns.
B.B.
BB, I also have an airgun or two with fiber optic sites and I too am one that wish they were just solid. Has anyone ever thought of painting the light tubes black? Just something I’ve been considering doing to mine. Maybe someone else has tried it?
Bradly,
That’s a good idea. I bet it will work.
B.B.
Wow, that is good shooting. I wish I can do that with open sights.
Nice shooting, B.B. Looks like we have a winner here. The claim about the best breakbarrel in the last half century has got me thinking. I guess the Beeman R series is from before that period. What about the Bronco? Is it that it lacks the power of this gun?
Well, I wouldn’t have known that mystery airgun at all and agree with Rossi’s view of the case. I expect that you’ll be having fun like this for a long time to come. Speaking of silencers what exactly is the status of “suppressors”? I hear about them all the time as a feature of guns. Isn’t that the same thing as silencers and aren’t they mostly illegal?
Michael, surely you’ve seen the swimming cat video.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/27/cat-swimming-video_n_2775280.html
Those eyes are so expressive. That’s a great idea to saw off elephant tusks that I’ve heard of before. It sounds brutal, but it apparently doesn’t effect the elephants. You see them walking around with broken tusks all the time.
In the course of watching my WWII videos on YouTube, I’ve come up with an obvious but baffling question. What was the purpose of those German motorcycles with the sidecars that you see everywhere? My first thought was that they were for officers but sometimes you see whole lines of them. Otherwise, I thought they might be for messengers. But why have two people to be killed instead of one? The sidecars remain a mystery.
And while watching what must be something like the 500th video on the Battle of Stalingrad, I received one of the surprises of my life. One of the commentators on this video who is a fixture of many other military videos is a fellow named Dr. Aryeh Nusbacher, senior lecturer at the British military Academy at Sandhurst. He’s quite an engaging and forceful speaker who obviously knows a lot. I decided to look him up and learned that sometime around 2007, he had himself turned into a woman. After one vacation, the recruits returned to class to find that he was now Dr. Lynette. How about that. I guess the British, in spite of their older military tradition, are more progressive than we are. Recruits were told that any snide remarks or show of disrespect would be cause for severe disciplinary action. Imagine if the West Point cadets returned to school to find the Commandant had turned into a woman. Well, Nusbacher must have had tenure.
Speaking of Russia, I have America’s answer to those wild Russian drivers on the dashcam.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/snow-plow-driver-covers-cars-driveways-purpose-171946901.html
Well, the snow won’t last much longer, so he’ll be bottled up for another year.
Matt61
Matt,
This is the best breakbarrel — hands down. The Bronco is one of those “for the money” things. Also very good, but not in the same class as the LGV.
B.B.
The guy in the sidecar must pretty useful at shooting back at the enemy. Shooting anything while driving a motorcycle must be quite a challenge. You must have seen some of these sidecars outfitted with a large machine gun.
My guess is motorcycle could pass where larger vehicules just couldn’t therefore getting anywhere faster.
Speaking of motorcycle with a sidecar have you seen the Russian Ural motorcycles? They’re available with a sidecar and 2wd! Could be used in the winter here. Edith, could Tom get a motorcycle with a sidecat errr sidecar?
J-F
J-F,
You know the rules: Tom can have airguns, firearms, metal detectors, and many more wonderful and delightful things. He may not own or ride on a motorcycle. Don’t feel sorry for him. Life is pretty darned good…and he knows it 🙂
Edith
Yes, pudding cup!
B.B.
You guys are hilarious.
J-F
Speaking of metal detectors and treasure………did you hear the latest clue last friday from forrest fenn?
Hey Matt …
Re: The sidecars …
The sidecars played a very important role in the German Army Africa Campaign. First of all, the one’s you refer to had a driven sidecar wheel. There was actually a driveshaft that went from the ring and pinion on the motorcycle over to the sidecar wheel. The motorcycle was shaft driven to the rear wheel. It had a dual range, seven speed transmission plus reverse giving it 14 forward speeds and 2 in reverse. It’s not your average motorcycle with a sidecar.
Next, a machine gun was mounted in the sidecar. I have been told it was a 50 caliber but I do not know that for sure. The amo boxes were on the motorcycle where saddle bags are now. The whole rig was lighter than other vehicles and with two driven wheels and only one wheel steering, it tended to stay on the surface of the sand and not sink into it so much. Out on the African desert, it was awesome. Consequently, it was a fantastic “hit and run” device. It is said that the motorcycle/sidecar/machine gun was the reason that Rommel got into trouble by advancing so fast he outran his supplies, especially gasoline. Oh yes, gasoline … the motorcycle got much better MPG than a tank.
The sidecar motorcycles were made by two motorcycle companies but the only one I can remember today is BMW. The second one might have been EMW. That same rig was made for civilian use after the war. The Russians copied it and produced two models, one called Dnieper and the other called Ural. The Russian copies were not the same quality as the German made rigs. In about 1980, a couple British guys tried selling Ural Driven Wheel Rigs in the US and Great Britain under the name Neval. They were the same rig with some western updates for carbs, points. tires, etc.
I was a dealer for the Neval motorcycles. They were sold complete with the sidecar installed but minus the machine gun. One model had a driven sidecar wheel and the other one didn’t. You could get any color you wanted as long as you wanted red or black. The owner’s manual for the driven wheel model suggested that, in order to aid the wearing in of the pistons in the cylinders, drivers should not exceed speeds of 45mph for the first 1000 miles. Really. After that, run it wide open and, downhill and with the wind, it might reach 50mph. Speed was not an objective. Russian farmers found it was better suited for pulling stumps and plowing fields than heading for babuszka’s house for dinner.
(Sigh.) Those were the days …
Ah I knew I wasn’t far off. I also heard of .50 caliber but wasn’t sure.
The Ural motorcycle are still imported here. A bunch of colors are available for it OD, red, black and different colors of camo.
http://www.uralcanada.com
I’d get one if I had the money, I think the kids would love to be dropped at school in one.
J-F
<gasp>
H. Ford is spinning in his grave at that flexibility…
I think the second brand you are trying to recall is Zundapp. I know two people who had the Urals (or Urinals as we politely call them). They were neat machines but more curiosities than serious machines around here. My one buddy picked his up brand new and in the dealer’s lot, had a valve drop on him. They swapped the head with one on the showroom floor right then and there.
The Ural is a great machine for those who like to tinker and fuss as we did back in the 60’s and early 70’s before the Japanese got so good that you would do nothing more than change oil and change tires.
Fred DPRoNJ
I don’t feel sorry for him at all but I saw a grey area that might have been exploitable.
A 3 wheel, 2wd sidecar ain’t really a motorcycle… how about those BRP spyders? They’re made here so we see a bunch of them here. They look like fun.
In our house it’ s the opposite, my wife would love it if we got a motorcycle but I don’t want one or I’m pretty confident I’d end up dead (or worst paralysed).
I know how fun they are for someone who’s able to control himself.
J-F
Ooops that was supposed to go undeneat Edith reply.
J-F
B.B.,
In Part 1 you wrote the LGV’s firing cycle at the time had “a tiny shudder of vibration”. Has this changed since you have put more lead through it?
Also, if I remember reading the comments correctly from an earlier part, you thought that the LGV did not have a Lothar Walther barrel??? If that is true I really don’t get it.
David H
David,
No, the gun still shudders. Also the one we shot at Umarex felt exactly the same.
I doubt the LGV has a Lothar Walther barrel. Lothar Walther is a separate company from Walther and if they paid for such a barrel it would be on all their literature.
B.B.
B.B.,
O.K., I was not aware they were two separate companies. Makes somewhat more sense now.
David H
B.B.,
Since I’ve been reading your blog, you’ve shown us a few surprises in terms of pellets that seemed to perform well with certain guns (for whatever reason), and of course, pellets that didn’t work so well with certain guns (even when the particular pellet was usually a “go-to pellet).
While I’m sure that an enormous variety of designs have been attempted, I’m also sure that we’re far from having exhausted all good ideas for pellet design.
What are your thoughts on regarding things you’d like to see that haven’t been done, or haven’t been done right? Do you have any ideas pertaining to pellet design that you’d be at least curious to see? Maybe something that is more aerodynamically stable, or possibly a hybrid pellet constructed of a mixture of materials (forget about cost)? Anything?
What got me wondering about this is a recent comment from you about how golf balls benefit from having dimples. Such a design detail wouldn’t be obvious to me, or probably most people, but I’m sure that there is physics to support it. I long time ago I openly wondered about a pellet design that had grooves that weren’t parallel with the pellet (as some pellets have), but rather slightly diagonal, to possibly add, or support spin. I have no idea if such a thing could work, but you do see this with nerf-footballs. Again, just thinking out loud.
Victor
Victor,
Can’t add anything to your interesting suggestions about potential additions to pellet designs. I think I remember B.B. mentioning a good idea about a pellet design that was stolen from him. Like to hear the rest of that story.
Your comment about dimples on a pellet, like a golf ball, might work. Dimples on a bb make a lot of sense. Dimple patterns on golf balls have come a long ways since featheries were used.
kevin
Kevin,
I understand Herb’s point (below) about limited resources made available for pellet design, but there are many different designs nonetheless. However, many creative and ingenious thinkers have borrowed breakthrough ideas from other problem domains when when looking for solutions.
What I’m also throwing out is the notion of what one might do if given complete freedom to design something, ignoring things like cost, or materials. For instance, could a better pellet be designed if some of it were lead, and some of it were some other material (e.g., plastic, steal, some alloy)?
Of course, I didn’t define what “better” means. We already know that precision class 10-meter air-guns are almost perfect for their intended use, so that wasn’t what I was thinking about. I was wondering what could be done for extending the accuracy of more powerful airguns out to 50, or maybe even 100 yards. Of course, 25 yards accuracy improvement would be nice too.
One thing that I’ve found, and so has B.B. (he mentioned once that I know of), is that wind-doping with a pellet rifle is not easy to do (seemingly impossible for me, at least).
I wouldn’t care if a pellet had to be made extra heavy in order to achiever better performance from a magnum springer. I guess one area that I’m thinking about, more than anything, is shooting longer distance with better stability and trajectory characteristics. But that doesn’t mean that I’m trying to limit B.B.’s, or anyone else’s imagination. Again, I’m just thinking out loud.
In any case, I just can’t help but thinking that there’s a whole lot more that can still be done.
Victor
Victor and Kevin,
Okay, you just defined Friday’s blog for me. I needed a topic, since I’m having some technical problems with another test that was scheduled.
On Friday I will tell you about the pellet design Ideas I have had.
B.B.
B.B.,
Sounds good! After all, pellets are a big part of the equation. If manufacturer’s are reading this blog, maybe something good will come out of this.
Again, keep an open mind, and allow yourself to consider your wildest ideas, if necessary.
Thanks,
Victor
Speaking of pellets, is there a good resource (online or in print) on pellet design? I have a few mundane questions that would surely bore everyone here, and the forums I’ve searched just don’t have the answers I’m looking for.
DanderDongle,
I say just throw your questions out. There are some pretty knowledgeable people here. I certainly have very limited experience with pellets, as I’ve not experimented with too many different ones. Also, I think that a lot of us learn from some of these off-tangent discussions.
Victor
There are only general agreements about design. There isn’t the experimental numerical data available on pellets to make any real design assessments. Numerical analysis with computer programs should be possible, but it would be more expensive than any pellet maker is willing to pay.
Victor is right. A lot of nice people here. Try to ask some specific questions and maybe someone can help.
Herb
I wrote explicitly that numerical analysis had not been done by any manufacturers. I of course don’t know that for a fact. If they had done such an analysis it would a trade secret and they wouldn’t be sharing. Some patents on pellet design, but I’d guess that designs mostly tweak previous designs. This will change in the future as computer design and numerical analysis gets cheaper.
I don’t know if one of the ballistic modeling companies could be enticed, but this would surely make a interesting topic for the American Airgunner show. Hint hint… 🙂
Herb
Herb,
Sophisticated mathematical modeling of pellets is more accessible now than at any time before. I remember way back around 1985, when I was working with TRW’s Space & Technology Group, there was a guy doing research on fluid modeling using finite element analysis. At that time, the Floating Point Systems computers that we had in our computer lab were among the most powerful available, short of having a Cray computer. A modern desktop computer is now orders of magnitude more powerful than those FPS’s. Of course, the real issue is one of human resources, i.e., hiring the physicist, mathematician, or Fluid Mechanics person to implement the proper models. That would be very interesting, I think.
Victor
something tells me b.b. is gonna be the owner of this fine gun and he might tune it to his likeings. edith get some cash out haha . great review tom . now im gonna have to get my wife in a happy mood so i can get 1 when its available here. did they say its available with wood furnature also tom?
robert w,
Yes, I have a wood gun on its way for testing.
B.B.