Crosman’s M1 Carbine BB gun: Part 1

by Tom Gaylord
Writing as B.B. Pelletier

Crosman M1 Carbine
Crosman M1 Carbine BB gun is a classic lookalike airgun.

A history of airguns

This report covers:

  • History
  • Tom the doofus
  • Modern Quackenbush
  • The danger
  • A classic based on an icon!
  • Different valve
  • Repeater
  • Sights
  • More to come

Daisy may have given lookalike airguns the name “Spittin’ Image” but Crosman gave us the most iconic BB gun of all time — the M1 Carbine. Yes, I have written about this gun in the past. Now I’m getting it into the historical archives.

History

The M1 Carbine first came out in 1966. For all of that year and the next it had a genuine wood stock. These early variations are easy to spot because the sides of the stock are flat, since they were basically cut from boards. In 1968 Crosman began producing the gun with a synthetic stock they called Croswood, and production continued until 1976. Let me tell you — except for a plastic-y shine, Croswood is very realistic. In my opinion the Croswood stock makes the more attractive gun, because the stock is rounded and fully shaped.

The Crosman M1 Carbine is based on the Crosman V-350 BB gun. What Crosman did was re-skin the V-350 with Carbine features. The V-350 model name stands for the velocity, which was around 350 f.p.s. The Carbine inherited all of that, so it’s a powerful gun.

Crosman V-350
Crosman’s V-350 is at the heart of their M1 Carbine.

Tom the doofus

Before I became B.B. Pelletier, I was as ignorant of airguns as the next guy. In fact, in the late 1980s, when someone tried to sell me a Crosman M1 Carbine for $15, I said no because I didn’t want any CO2 airguns. As much as I knew about Crosman at that time I thought CO2 gun were all they made. Well, the M1 Carbine is not CO2. It’s a springer!

Modern Quackenbush

In fact, it operates in the same way the vintage Quackenbush spring guns did — by pushing (or pulling) the barrel in until the sear catches the piston. After that, return the barrel and shoot the gun like any other springer.

Two things about the M1 Carbine give away its operation. Unless you are looking at a fully pristine gun, there will be finish wear on the rear of the barrel for several inches. That’s from the barrel sliding in each time the gun is cocked.

Crosman M1 Carbine uncocked
Here the rifle is uncocked, or it has been cocked and the barrel has been returned to the forward position.

Crosman M1 Carbine cocked
Here the barrel has been pulled back and the gun is now cocked. The barrel must be pushed forward again before firing.

Crosman M1 Carbine barrel wear
The finish on the rear of the barrel wears from cocking.

The second giveaway is finish wear at the muzzle. This BB gun is very hard to cock, even for adults. In fact, that’s probably what killed the gun in the end. I’ll get to that in a moment, but most of the guns you’ll see will be worn from handling around the front sight, which is always used as an anchor when cocking.

The danger

Since it is so hard to cock, kids had to resort to extreme and often unsafe measures to get the job done. One was was to push the muzzle against something hard like a tree trunk. Another way, and the most dangerous one was to put the palm of the hand over the muzzle and to push down on the barrel with the butt resting on the ground. A safer way, though still not recommended, was to put the muzzle on the ground on something hard like a book and push down on the butt.

It’s my belief that the difficulty of cocking is what lead to the eventual demise of the gun. Not because on inconvenience, but for safety concerns. I will test the cocking effort in Part 2. Then we will all know.

A classic based on an icon!

The Crosman M1 Carbine BB gun is of course based on the U.S. Army’s M1 Carbine from WW II. That was a rifle that supposedly was to replace the M1911A1 pistol, because the Army felt too may soldiers could not shoot the pistol accurately enough. But, because it was a long gun and also carried the moniker caliber .30 M1 (but it chambered a much smaller cartridge than the Garand), soldiers mentally transferred the status of the M1 Garand to the Carbine and tried to imagine it as a battle rifle. It never lived up to that, and was condemned by many as a failed rifle, when what it really was, was a unique replacement for a sidearm.

At the same time they condemned it, many soldiers also loved it for being lightweight and easy to carry. A love/hate relationship formed. I believe that it is nearly impossible to examine the jewel-like Carbine action and not to fall in love — with the mechanism, if nothing more. That love sets the stage for the Crosman M1 Carbine.

Crosman M1 Carbine and U.S. Carbine
The U.S. .30-caliber M1 Carbine above and the Crosman M1 Carbine below. The firearm is my S’G’ collector’s gun that has a late-issue bayonet lug under the barrel. That was an option any Carbine could have.

Different valve

The Crosman Carbine (as well as the V-350 and V-3500) has a different kind of valve. It is a spring-piston design, but there is more. It’s been years since I was inside one, but as I recall, the valve contains the increasing air pressure until it pops open at the end of the piston’s travel. This “champagne-cork” effect adds something to the velocity, I believe.

Repeater

This is a repeater. The barrel must be cocked for each shot, but the inline BB magazine holds 22 BBs that are gravity-fed at cocking. That’s one reason why putting the muzzle on the ground to cock it not a good idea.

Sights

The rear sight is one of the most exceptional parts of this BB gun! It looks and even operates like the original. The Carbine started out with a flip rear sight that had two heights. But that was replaced by a much nicer rear sight that adjusts in both directions. The Crosman M1 Carbine has this nicer sight and it adjusts the same way.

U.S. Carbine rear sight
The firearm Carbine has a unique rear peep sight.

Crosman Carbine rear sight
The Crosman Carbine rear sight is very similar to the firearm sight.

More to come

There is more to come, as this will be a complete 3-part test. The last report I did was in 2013, and in the 4 years that have passed a lot of exciting new BBs have come to market, so perhaps there will be a surprise in store!

102 thoughts on “Crosman’s M1 Carbine BB gun: Part 1

  1. Thank you for this report! I have the M1 BB gun wood, V-350 BB gun and never heard or seen the V-3500! I also have the real thing in three different calibers! I love them all! I don’t think the U.S.M.C. would agree with the U.S. ARMY on the M1? I carried one for awhile and chose it over an M16! I know the M16 was early model and NOT dependable, when I had the option of the M16 vs M1 Carbine! That is another reason I wanted M1 Carbine so bad! No doubt the V-350 is alot more BB gun! But! You have realistic look feel of the M1 BB gun! By the wayside my V-350 engraved Patent Pending? Semper Fi!


    • J.Lee,

      I can’t recall the M1 Carbine being commercially sold in a caliber other than .30 Carbine. I am aware that there was an article in Gun​s & Ammo in the 60’s if I recall correctly that rechambered it to a wildcat cartridge that boosted the muzzle energy equivalent to that of the. 30-30. They stayed with the .30 caliber but used a bigger cartridge allowing them to load more powder.

      Do you possible mean three variations of the M1 Carbine?

      Siraniko


  2. B.B.,

    Very nice. I would have been around 5 when these things were launched. I love quirky mechanism’s. The cocking method, the air valve and the rear sight all qualify. Being a repeater, I am surprised that the cocking method and a magazine feeding bb’s existed in the same platform. Throw in a kid,.. and it sounds like a recipe for something not so good. Looking forwards to more.

    Chris




        • Chris U
          Playing war and Cowboys and Indians was a big thing when I was a kid. And I do believe you are the same age as me.

          We would go as far as cutting off a branch from a tree and skinning the small twigs and bark off of it. Then bowing it and tying a string on each end. We would even try to get a straight small branch and cut a notch in it for the string and sharpen a point on it with our knifes.

          We wouldn’t shoot at each other as I know some kids would. But we would pretend we where stalking up on somebody for a ambush. Then we would open fire with the bow and arrow or air guns. Depending on what we where that day. Soldiers or Indians or cowboys.

          We did have cap guns when we was younger that looked like revolvers. We would stick the revolver in our pockets like it was our holster. Then act like we was drawing and shooting the pistol. We have oils even practice twirling the gun and such. Or pretend we was racking the hammer getting the bad guys.

          But that’s what we was thinking when we was kids.


          • As a kid, out Scoutmaster taught us how to fashion various weapons. My favorite was a single stick carved like a drumstick w/a piece of surgical tubing pushed over the end and a string tied around it to hold, other end of the tubing held a looped and knotted piece of braided nylon twine also secured w/a string to keep the knotted end inside the tubing. Bolts were made from palmetto fronds, trimmed to make fletching on one end, the other sharpened to a point. Notch the frown a couple inches from the tip for the loop, and voila- a rabbit killer (as if haha)!


            • Cobalt327
              Yep and one of my favorite things we made as a kid was a throwing sling.

              Basically two strings tied to a pouch. One on each side. We would use rocks and such as projectiles. Basically give the string a spin and let go of one end to sling the rock at the target.

              This would of fit right in with BB’s blog the other day of shooting a pistol open sight at long distances. Once you got use to the sling you could hit targets right out in front of you basically like a sling shot. Or let go of it at a higher angle and send it flying out to a target way out in a feild. The rock or whatever was used would have a big arched trajectory.

              If I remember right Matt61 has messed with one also. Pretty fun to do. And real easy to make.


  3. I never owned the BB gun version, but my dad bought a war surplus carbine for cheap in the ’60s. It was made by Remington Rand. I have a photograph of my uncle Andy, my mother’s half-brother, shooting it. Andy was a Marine rifleman in WWII and looks in the photo like her knows what he’s doing!

    B.B., you might want to mention in a subsequent post the movie Carbine Williams. It was a Hollywood version about the man who invented the rifle while he was a prisoner.


    • Joe,

      Actually, David Marshal “Carbine” Williams didn’t invent the Carbine. He invented the short-stroke gas piston that makes it work, but Winchester took his idea (with his help, though Winchester says he gave them a lot of trouble) and invented the Carbine in record time. I have the movie, and although it is a good one, Hollywood played loose with the facts, as they often do. The part about his inventing the piston in prison is true.

      Williams did invent a carbine of his own and submitted it to the Army for consideration, but it was too late. They had already begun development on the Carbine and were not going to stop.

      B.B,


    • Joe,

      I hope you still have the Remington Rand. These are wonderful, fun shooters, and though they were much maligned, they are still good rifles for close work. My dad bought a 1943 Rock-ola in 1965 for $24. He got it for home defense, figuring that we’d have most intruders outgunned, and he trained my brothers and me in it’s use. His job took him away from home a lot, and the M-1 helped his feelings about being gone (mine too). He told us not to hesitate to use it, and ground that into us. When he died there were only two things that we had to work to settle: who got his indestructible cast aluminum BBQ and who got the M-1. There is so much of dad in that gun…
      Thanks to B.B. for this topic!

      Walt




  4. Back in the day, the some on old New York City Police Stake Out Squad favored the M-1 Carbine…..as long as it was loaded with soft point bullets. It stopped the threat fast.

    Mike


    • The proponent of the M1 Carbine for close up work was the late Jim Cirillo, of the NYPD Stakeout Squad. He usually carried a pair of S&W Model 10s ,and a Colt Cobra for backup. With soft point ammo the 30 carbine hits like a rapid fire 357. He preferred the quick handling Carbine to a 12 gauge shotgun





  5. This is a tangential question that is slightly off topic but I am curious as to the historical reason why the military decided to make the M-1 Carbine in .30 caliber to replace the 1911 handgun because “the Army felt that too many soldiers could not shoot the pistol accurately”. The military at the time basically supplied 2 calibers of cartridges for the infantry soldier. The .45 caliber was for the 1911 pistol and the Thompson submachine gun. The 30-06 cartridge was used in the M-1 Garand and the BAR. Now they introduced a third cartridge that had to be manufactured, stored, and transported to the troops on the front lines. It introduces a logistics problem that wasn’t really necessary.

    So my question is this: why not make a carbine to replace the 1911 handgun in .45 caliber? The trooper would have a weapon that would be more accurate than the pistol, but still have the stopping power of the .45 caliber cartridge. Your caliber storage and distribution would be cut by a third. You could even save costs by adapting the magazine from the Thompson submachine gun. If the .45 caliber was adequate for the handgun and submachine gun, then it should have been adequate for the carbine. Fast forward to today, and lots of manufacturers offer carbines in .380, 9mm, .45, and so on. Just wondering.

    Bob



    • Bob, just speculating but I think, from what I’ve read, that the Army was willing to trade the short-range effectiveness of the .45 ACP round for the lightweight, higher capacity, and accuracy of the .30 round. A rifle with 15 rounds of .45 ACP would be fairly heavy, as would be the extra ammo to lug around, plus the heavy, low velocity .45 would drop quite quickly. The basic idea was to give soldier the ability to effectively shoot, say 50-100 yards. The .30 cal round has a muzzle velocity of @ 2000 fps whereas the .45 is under 1000. That’s a huge difference.

      Also, the carbine was not designed for front-line use…it was intended to be used by soldiers who could not easily carry the M1 Garand rifle and ammo, nor did they need the long-range capabilities of the front-line Garand. The carbine was intended as an easy to use weapon for support troops as well as tank crews, artillery units, mortar units, transportation, etc etc. It soon was used by paratroopers too. And in the Pacific theater it did become the weapon of choice for the front-line due to the short barrel and lightweight characteristics of both the rifle and ammo. Easier to use in jungle, etc.

      I was given a WW2 M1 last year–manufactured in late 1942 by Inland, a division of GM. It was in pristine condition and possibly had never been fired. I had an armorer take it apart and clean and oil it and check the springs, etc. At 100 yards, once it’s sighted (and if your eyesight is good), you can punch out 2 inch groups all day. It shoots flat and true with literally no recoil. At 50 yards it’s downright scary. BTW, the .30 cal round at 100 yards hits with the force of 626 lbs-ft of energy. By comparison, a .357 magnum revolver round at 50 yards provides 510 lb-ft.

      Bottom line, at 5.5 lbs loaded the lightweight M1 carbine, loaded with a 15 round mag, is a dandy rifle for personal defense 50 yards and under, although it does have good accuracy out to 100 yards. Of course it can’t compare to the M1 Garand with a muzzle velocity of 3000 fps and range of 1000 or more yards but they were designed for totally different purposes.


      • Thank you for your informative and well researched reply to my question. The .30 caliber M1 carbine is a much maligned weapon but it is a sweet shooter. The M16 in 5.56 is also much maligned but my Remington 700 bolt action in .223 is my “go to” rifle when I want accuracy on the range. Much easier and more comfortable than my other Remington 700 in 30-06.

        Bob


    • .30 M1 vs. .45 ACP.:

      For 100 rounds, the .30 saves about 1.5#s in carry weight. This mostly offsets the extra 2#s of the M1.

      You also eliminate a lot of hold-over – ~850 fps vs ~ 1,400 fps — making the rifle MUCH easier to use at mid-range by the relatively inexperienced troops it was intended for.

      .45ACP as a rifle round is kind of a dog. Witness the near non-existence of rifles chambered for it.

      The US Armed Forces are pretty smart, most days.


      • One of those deals where the concept on paper seems good, but in practice… not so much. Or at least that’s my take on it. For whatever reason, we all know which lasted longer in service between the .45 ACP 1911A1 and the .30 M1 carbine.


  6. I got my Crosman M1 one year ago at the Middletown gun show. It is more accurate ( at 10-15 ft )than I thought it would be. Carbine buffs should read the ( formerly ) secret report—-USE OF INFANTRY WEAPONS AND EQUIPMENT IN KOREA. H. G. Donovan, project Doughboy, May 13, 1952. Korea was a severe testing ground for our weapons and training. In some ways, it was more like WW1. ——-Ed


    • Ed
      My dad was in the Korean war. He was very much into shooting and told me some interesting story’s. His main job was surveying and picture taking. But the other part of the job was shooting his M1 to make sure a area was secure before they started their surveying. They layed out MASH units and such. One thing I remember is he brought back some pieces of shrapnel from planes that got shot down. He had them wrapped up in tissue paper or something and tucked inside a photo album.

      Speaking of MASH units. MASH was probably one of my favorite programs to watch when it was on as a series.


  7. Bob—The short stroke piston system needed non corrosive ammo. It was not easy to clean, under combat conditions. Most ( if not all ) .45 ammo used corrosive primers. Non corrosive .45 ammo could have been loaded for the carbine, but there was so much corrosive .45 ammo in service, that it would have been impossible to prevent its use in the carbines. The 30-06 and . 45 were loaded with corrosive primers, into the early 1950,s. All .30 carbine ammo was loaded with non corrosive primers. I had 4 carbines ( 1964-1990 ). I shot them a lot. I only took the short piston out for cleaning once, in one of my carbines. It required a special wrench and it vise to to take it apart. ——-Ed


    • Ed,

      That’s a very good answer. I do clean the piston of my Carbine about every 500 rounds. It has a lot of carbon, but no corrosion.

      A 1911A1, on the other hand, can have a totally rusted barrel from that ammo!

      B.B.


  8. BB– I forgot to thank you for your report on the Crosman carbine in the archives. If I had not read them , years ago, I would have been ignorant re this carbine. I would have passed it up, last year. I would have thought that it was just a kids toy, Thanks to your report in the archives , I knew that it was a historic , accurate bb gun. When I saw that it still had the magazine, I knew that it had a place in my collection —–Ed. PS– It should have had a CO2 version. I hope that Crosman will make one, using the 10-77 action.


  9. J.Lee,

    I can’t recall the M1 Carbine being commercially sold in a caliber other than .30 Carbine. I am aware that there was an article in Gun​s & Ammo in the 60’s if I recall correctly that rechambered it to a wildcat cartridge that boosted the muzzle energy equivalent to that of the. 30-30. They stayed with the .30 caliber but used a bigger cartridge allowing them to load more powder.

    Do you possible mean three variations of the M1 Carbine?

    Siraniko


    • Siraniko,

      There are several .22 rimfire models, and a 5.7mm Johnson Spitfire (a .22 caliber centerfire round based on the Carbine cartridge case) that is the grandfather/inspiration for the M16. I need to write THAT report! You will enjoy it!

      B.B.


      • BB
        I would be very interested to hear about the .22 rimfire version​.

        And if you may know I would be interested in a .17 hmr model if someone has made one in that caliber also.

        I would buy either and probably both rimfire calibers if I can find them.


        • GF1,

          Got the heat gun from work. Will try the no band tomorrow indoors at 41′ to see how it compares. IF it works, I will drill out the barrel portion and reinstall.

          2 questions,…

          1) Is gluing at that location common?
          2) Per BB’s report, and my measurements, the barrel appears to be 26.25″ long. Is that too long given the diameter of the barrel? What is the “standard” for unsupported limits? I would think that a larger diameter barrel (OD) could withstand being unsupported for a longer distance.

          Just some thoughts prior to “jumping in there”,…. 🙂


          • Chris U
            What is too long of a unsupported barrel length. Hmm good question. What do yo think will happen if it’s to long?

            And gluing common? Don’t know. But I know I have heard of it in the past on the blog. I do believe Twotalon wanted a shroud off a Air Arms pcp. And I think buldawg has had glued on muzzle brakes.

            If buldawg is lurking as he says he does maybe he’ll jump in and give his two cents. And I’m almost willing to bet Twotalon is out there reading too.

            Maybe they can say.

            And I’ll be waiting to hear how it goes tomorrow if you get that end peice off the barrel. Oh and that’s why I didn’t choose the hunter model. I knew at some point in time I would be taking my Maximus apart in one way or another. 🙂



              • Chris U
                Hey, hey now. That was a slick way of getting out of replying​ to my response to you. After all you asked the question about barrel length and being unsupported or free floating as we come to know it by pretty much nowdays. I’m going to think about that one some more. And I want to know your thoughts. 😉


                • GF1,

                  No luck on getting the LDC adapter off despite substantial heat. I did shoot it with the barrel floating in the band. And also shot it with the barrel band set screw back in. Not much difference, but would have to give the lead to the set screw being in.

                  As for your question, if the barrel is too thin, it would have too much “flop” so to speak. When I had the band loose, I did adjust it slightly so that the barrel did “float”. From the set screw marks, it was off a bit. Not much play there, but there is some all the way around.

                  Today is mowing and catching up on some other outdoor stuff. Tomorrow is supposed to be nicer, so I may get out and retry it at 30 and 50, with and without the barrel/barrel band set screw. Plus I need to make some targets and re-top the trusty Guppy.

                  That is all for now/today. Chris


                  • Chris U
                    I don’t think I said anything about the barrel to thin. I thought we was talking about barrels that float and how long is to long. Not to thin.

                    And yes I would say do more testing with the barrel band loose on the barrel. And if you want the barrel band off you can take the breech off and take the set screw loose that holds the barrel in the breech. Then you can slip the barrel band off the back way.

                    Let me know if you take the barrel band off that way and if you get some 30 or 50 yard testing in. I’m working today so might not be able to answer back right away.


                    • GF1,

                      ID, OD, wall thickness,.. stack it up however you want. Barrel stiffness would dictate the length. Fluting of barrels I do believe adds stiffness while at the same time, removing weight. In the case of a firearm, it would add to barrel cooling due to the added surface exposure. Removing material to add stiffness runs counter to common sense, but I do believe that I learned that somewhere. You, being a machinist,.. ought to have some knowledge of that. (?)

                      As for the rear removal of the band,.. I assume that the breech must be opened up? I am thinking of the air transfer tube that intersects with the barrel and would prevent just a straight forward removal of the barrel. Like the M-rod? I did see 1 set screw for the barrel on the scope rail.


                  • Chris U
                    Yep on the transfer port orifice. It does need to come out.

                    And in our case let’s say the barrel outside diameter stays the same. Just a length change.

                    Maybe the extra length on a free floating barrel would help the harmonics for a particular weight and caliber and velocity pellet. In other words find the right length barrel to optimize accuracy if the harmonics do change from that.

                    Maybe that’s another reason Crosman went with a longer barrel on the Maximus besides helping it up velocity from the extra length.


                    • GF1,

                      Thanks. I will keep that in mind. Tomorrow is looking good for some shooting, but winds may be up some. Most times I am good. Sometimes, not so much depending on direction. Either way, much reduced to what is 60′-80′ above. (trees) Will give you an update tomorrow.

                      As for barrels,.. who knows. That is a topic with many variables. That may be the reason we are seeing mini-tanks under the barrels. It shortens the tube/air reservoir and allows more of the barrel to hang out front. Higher air capacity and the option to add sliding barrel weights to find optimal oscillation control.

                      No thoughts on the barrel fluting adding strength? I figured that you would be all over that one. Hit me up at the bottom, if you want to reply.


                  • Chris U
                    I’ll bet barrel fluting makes a difference.

                    Depth of flute and width of flute I’m sure changes the strength of the barrel.

                    And then now we start changing how the pellet engages the rifling.

                    I’m betting that falls into some type of perimeter that would affect accuracy .

                    So he we go again variables. I’m surprised I can hit something at 20 yards let alone a hundred yards. 🙂


            • GF1

              I was dealing with metal . I pulled the top off the S500 to protect the other vital parts and went after the shroud with a propane torch until it cracked loose and unscrewed .
              Have no idea what the stuff was that they put in the threads . Scraped most of it out when I put it back together .
              Whole thing was necessary to get the barrel out .

              tt


              • TT
                Oh yes. Now I remember. And thanks for making me remember.

                And related to what Chris is doing. Do you think that the heat gun can get the glue soft? They do get hot. But not probably as hot as a torch.

                And yes really don’t know if it could be called glue. That’s kind of a generic term. Maybe it’s some type of Loctite or something they use. But I guess that is glue really.


                • GF1

                  I don’t know just what Chris wants to get hot . I was dealing with metal, but was still careful how much heat I was using .
                  Those heat guns can melt plastic and solder . They can also cover more area than you want . Be very careful .

                  tt


                  • TT
                    Chris or buldawg knows that better than me what material that threaded muzzle peice is. They have the Maximus with that peice that’s threaded so things can be screwed on.

                    I’m guessing it’s metal. Then the other question is do they want to reuse the peice they are taking off. If not then maybe it don’t matter so much how it comes off.

                    But on another point I wonder if the high heat can affect the crown or barrel on the muzzle end where that peice is comming off of. Can it distort the barrel?

                    And in reality I wonder if that peice could act against accuracy. That’s another reason why I didn’t want that on my Maximus.

                    On the last note maybe I’m just being parinoid that peice could affect accuracy. The way I see it is why have it there if I’m not going to use it.


                  • Thanks guy’s,

                    I will be careful on what I am doing. As far as “what”,… the LDC adapter on the Maximus Hunter version. That adapter is metal,.. but the cap is plastic. I have played with heat guns before,.. and yes,.. they get very hot. Red Loctite takes heat,.. but once applied,.. it comes off like butter. Prior to heat,.. forget it.

                    Out’a here,… for real this time! 😉




  10. Bob—The reason that I took out the short piston for cleaning was that it was full of lead shavings. I had shot hundreds of cast bullets ( 130 grain) and I was starting to get malfunctions. ——-Ed


  11. B.B.,

    Today’s report and the comments have been informative for me, to be sure.

    I want to thank you for telling me more about “aiming” the mortar rounds.

    One specific thing caught my attention in today’s blog; that is, the rear sight(s). The nicer sight appears t me to use a ramp. While not the exactly the same, I believe this dovetails with what DavidEnoch wrote about lowering the rear sight rather that raising the front sight above the target.

    I am reminded of scene in Lonesome Dove where Gus raises the ladder sight on his Henry to shoot the fellow doing the chicken dance (who, of course, thought Gus couldn’t possibly hit him at that distance). I know Quigley had a flip up rear sight; was it a Creedmore. Lastly, the Colt Buntline revolvers with the rear ladder sight. All effectively lower the rear, changing the angle of the shot.

    If I can find a place where I have the distance and permission, I would like to do some distance shooting (with or without a ladder sight).

    ~ken


  12. Gentlemen;
    As always, someone comes forward with a reasonable answer to my sometimes unreasonable queries and musings. Thank you for the enlightenment. I not only enjoy Tom’s articles and writing style but also the comments of his many readers. Ya’ll enjoy the weekend and the airgun show tomorrow.

    Bob



  13. With the arrival of the Mauser 712, Uzi and now the MP 40, we should be seeing the M2 Carbine, Grease gun , AK 47,SW44 and finally , the king , the Thompson.



  14. You seem to be revisiting my childhood, Tom. My first BB gun was a Daisy Spittin’ Image and my second one was the Crosman M1 carbine. I absolutely adored that M1. It was 1,000 times better than the Daisy 1894 copy. Everyone I knew wanted one and I was the first to get it. It was also the first air gun I had that would embed a BB in a 2
    x4 instead of just bouncing off. I was in heaven. Alas mine was plastic which really made me mad but listening to you talk about how nice the plastic ones were has made me rethink my position.

    It was a beautifully conceived gun but it had its problems. It did not feed reliably. The steel magazine seemed to weigh a ton and if you actually filled it with BB’s it may well have weighed at least that much. If you aimed it down it would let the BB roll out of the barrel sometimes too, but not always. This caused some dangerous situations for small children who thought the gun was empty because it had been pointed down for a long time. I was shot by one and shot someone myself because of this flaw. It was not a big deal. In our neighborhood we regularly had BB gun wars wearing goggles and lots of layers of clothes in the winter. I can tell you it did not hurt as bad as being shot by someone at a paintball tournament.

    I also have a question. I have just ordered a Crosman custom shop 2300KT carbine which is just a 2240 with lots of bells and whistles I guess. I ordered one in .22 with the 10.1″ Crosman barrel as the longer barrels just looked too ungainly. Would it be a waste of money to order a power pack plus which is a kit that contains a stronger hammer spring, a maximum airflow bushing, and a stronger power valve for a CO2 pistol with such a short barrel? I also ordered the long steel breech mainly for strength because of the increased pressure the gun will be subjected too if I do my planned upgrade. I am thinking about getting a brass barrel band and bolt and bolt handle too just for looks. This gun is going to be very pretty, it also will have the Maple handgrips… why not it’s my only birthday present and I have to buy it myself. Are there other parts that I have to have for safety’s sake?

    So I have heard the stock gun with a 10″ barrel gets 500 fps and the 12″ barrel gets 700 fps? Is this true? With that short of a barrel will I notice much of an improvement in velocity with the power pack plus kit? Can anyone tell my what kind of velocity to expect with this pistol in .22 with the 10.1″ barrel and this “power pack” sold by Trainers 4 Me??? https://trainers4me.com/Backyard-Games-Crosman-2240/ They also offer a $99.99 two stage trigger for the 2240… you name it, they sell it.


    • Docteur Ralph
      We that’s one heck of a website. Thanks for posting it.

      I like modding the Crosman guns. Alot of stuff interchanges between them. Plus all the aftermarket stuff that’s available for them.

      So yep that website is right up my alley.
      Thanks again. 🙂


      • GF1,

        On the above conversation on fluted barrels,…

        1) 2 barrels, 1 fluted, 1 not, (same diameter),.. the fluted barrel be weaker, but will dissipate heat better. Not because of increased surface area, but rather that the flute bottoms are closer to the bore and will speed up “conduction”,.. the transfer of heat. The fluted barrel would of course be lighter.

        2) 2 barrels 1 fluted, 1 not, (same weight) (non-fluted has smaller OD than the fluted),.. the fluted barrel will be stiffer, but not because of the fluting,.. but rather the increased diameter.

        What does any of this mean for air guns? Well,.. heat is not a factor. Weight is a factor. However, in order to not lose any rigidity, the fluted barrel would have to have a larger diameter.

        Either way, the fluted barrel looks WAY cooler! 🙂


        • Chris U
          So when you say fluted. Do you mean how deep the rifling is cut into the barrel?

          And I imagine that the width of the land would also change the strength of the barrel to some degree.

          So on your thought. A smooth bore barrel would be stronger than a rifled barrel made from the same material and same outside diameter.

          So now here’s another one. What about a barrel that’s not round on the outside diameter. Like a octagon barrel. Would it be stronger than a round barrel? And again would it be a more accurate barrel because of strength than a round barrel. Or is the round barrel stronger? I would say the barrel with flat sides would be stronger.

          And now back to harmonics and accuracy. Out all the things just mentioned. I wonder what combination of characteristics would make a more accurate barrel. And also if the barrel was free floating with no type of barrel clamp.


          • GF1,

            I am saying nothing of the ID rifling,.. strictly how the exterior is made. I just looked it up on Wikipedia this AM and was just passing along what I had learned since neither of seemed to know for sure. The article I read said that (exterior) fluting, however it is done,.. is a common topic for misconceptions.

            My takeaway was that it is good for weight reduction and some additional cooling. However, there will be a point in which too light and to thin will have negative effects. Your other points are interesting. Perhaps someone else here can weigh in on the topic.

            Heading out now, after making up some targets. Later.



              • GF1,

                Well, a bit windy. 5-10 gust/steady at ground 80% of the time. (.22 Maximus, 30 yds., 15.89’s)

                In short, the barrel band/barrel set screw (in),… won out. It was close. I added up and divided groups to get an average. I also averaged the sub groups which consisted of 3 or 4 shots. 5 shot groups, 4 groups each way. (in, in, out, out, out, out, in, in)

                I tried the .25 M-rod at 70 yards, 33.95’s. 8 @ 47mm., 6 @ 35mm. (and) 8 @ 80 mm., 6 @ 37mm.

                The Maximus trigger is perfect now. Not measured. I think I might still trim the trigger more to make it more blade like. At least on the left side for my left trigger finger. Well worth the time of some simple adjustments. It is a smooth 1# if I had to guess.

                Wind was picking up, so I called it quits for the day. At any rate,… that is the update.


                • Chris U
                  I don’t know if that’s a good test with the set screw backed out on the barrel band. With the band out that close to the muzzle end. Your gun could still be getting barrel rise and contacting the upper part of the band.

                  You need to take a few shots out toward your targets with a pellet loaded. But that hold the gun down on a rest as if you have it in a gun vise. That way the gun is held down solid and any type of barrel movement will be shown. And you almost need someone to pull the trigger while you set a finger from your other hand on the barrel and see if the barrel rises. Ot better yet take a magnetic indicator base and attach it to the air resivoir tube. Then put the indicator needle on top of the barrel diameter. Fire the gun and we if the needle on the he indicator moves. But really the barrel band needs to be out of the equation bc so it no kind of way can be contacted.

                  And why I believe I’m seeing better group results with my barrel band back close to the breech on my gun is because it helps hold the breech more secure. Remember forward of that small flat head screw under the bolt that is helping secure the breech. There is nothing holding the breech down out past the transfer port blast. So two benefits with the barrel band closer back towards the breech. Minimizing breach movement and lift from the air blast. And less transfer port air leakage when the air blast happens from the shot.

                  Oh and it’s nice as can be outside here today temperature wise and sunshine. But rediculous wind. 80° right now but constant 15 mph winds with random gusts to 25 mph reapeatedly. So not really a good shooting day for groups. But fun trying to get the windage holds figured out.

                  Like my old boss use to say when I was getting started running machines in the machine shop biusness back when I was a young’n. One guy I followed on the previous shift was natourious for leaving a machine not as good as could be. I got tired of it and complained to my boss. He goes don’t worry about. Just fix it and make it right. You keep following him and fixing his mess ups. Just think how good your going to be. And he just smiled and walked away.


                  • GF1,

                    I am not going to tear into it. I can move the band fore and aft, no problem. I may try that. It is shooting nice enough now. Hope was to shoot no band, prove ok and then drill out the band on the barrel side. It is free now, very minimal though, but I am sure that it rises when shot. Really though, I think that the barrel is too thin and too long to go unsupported.

                    I got it for a squirrel popper at 30 yards and in. It is fine for that. I think I will get a better scope for it though. Those darn UTG’s got me plain *** spoiled!

                    I keep telling myself,… this in NOT a “project” gun. 😉


                    • Chris U
                      Well if it’s bumping the barrel band. Then I’m betting your gun could be more accurate if the barrel band was out of the equation.

                      And what does it matter if the barrel is long or shorter. The barrel is going to flex a given amount for each paticular length barrel.

                      The gun barrel flexing should happen pretty much the same on each shot naturally. Kind of like a built in artillery hold if you think about it.

                      Holding the barrel rigid might pick up on other things the gun does when firing. Like the bump and vibration caused by the hammer striking the valve stem. The recoil of the gun when the air blast happens. And yes even pcp’s have some sort of shot cycle.

                      And ok maybe your gun is good enough for what you got it for. But remember we was doing the what if. You know what if the barrel flex was contained in a a different spot than the factory location. What if that does change the harmonics in the barrel. What if the gun does get more accurate.

                      So point is that I believe there is more accuracy that can be found if you try more things. In other words why do the test you just did if your not going to go deeper. Obviously you were looking for (what if) the gun got more accurate. 😉



  15. This is great! I bought a V350 two weeks ago. Used the red crossman oil on it. Now it shoot OK. But, bbs Rool out the barrel if it is lowered. I understand there is spring and ball device that should stop this. Either missing or not working. If stuck do you think some penetrating oil might free it up?
    When I turned 16 my Father gave me a M1 carbine and a X-Army Colt 1911. However, I could not have a BB gun. He said they were too dangerous! I think he had a point. I rarely shot them the 45 or M1 as Ammo to expensive. Shot a lot of 22 ammo though. BB we’re even cheaper, so I might have shot at things I shouldn’t.
    Oh, I looked up BB’s articles on the V305 and the M1 carbine before buying my V350. Thanks BB all your great articles.



  16. @Gunfun 1 I wasn’t able to respond in our convo above, there’s no ‘Reply’ button for some reason. I suppose the clay pigeon thrower could be related to the adl adl.


    • Cobalt327
      I noticed that up above to about the reply button.

      And thinking about it. Pretty easy to make something that will aid in throwing a projectile with the force of your arm and hand.

      I have always been amazed by spear and javelin throwing.


  17. GF1, (on the above, and out of room)

    Really? I mean really?,…. You pulled THE “what if” card on me????? You know I cant resist that one!!!! 😉

    Ok,… ok,… I will give the barrel band slide trick a go. I have 5 1/8″ open space to the rear and 2 1/8″ to the front from factory position. 1/2″ movements makes that a 15 movement exercise. 5 shots each = 75 shots. Looks like I have something to try the next time out.

    Darn you anyways!!!!! 😉


    • Chris U
      You don’t have to try it. For discussion purposes do you see what I mean.

      The barrel band closer to the breech helps things better than farther away from the breech.

      Now as the way your thinking. And what I just mentioned. What if you have a barrel band at the breech and then another forward that you could adjust forward or backwards.

      You know Crosman will sell a barrel band by itself. And they are pretty cheap..


      • GF1,

        You know that I will try it. You pulled the “triple dog dare” on me,… I have to try it now. 🙂

        I may throw one in on the next order. Scope, pod, new rings, band,…. heck,.. I am going to have more in add on’s than I have in the gun. It IS worthy. Oh,.. and maybe a sling? I wonder?,… Can I have my paycheck sent directly to P.A.? Maybe they have a payroll deduction program? 😉

        I will give the band slide tip a try first. Then,.. we will go from there.


        • Chris U
          I know what you mean about trying it.

          I was the same when I had my drag cars.

          But at least modding a air gun is a bit cheaper than modding a race car. And a air gun don’t tend to break as much as a race car.

          And as far as pay roll deduction goes. You mean you ain’t got a second job to support your hobby yet. 🙂




  18. My M1 carbine arrived today and I can’t say I’m please with the condition it’s in. First, it shoots with almost no power where it can’t even penetrate a thin card board box at about ten feet. If the box weren’t there, the bb would just drop to the floor.

    Second is a safety issue. After loading a couple of bb’s, I went to cock the gun with the barrel facing up. After I pushed the barrel all the way down and was happy it was fully cocked, I then slid the barrel back up into the firing position. But before the barrel could make it all the way up, the gun discharged a bb which hit my ceiling. It was as though by sliding the barrel into the firing position it somehow activated the trigger or something. Good think I was pointing this rifle upwards when this happened and not at a window or person.

    Can anyone recommend to me someone who restore this rifle so that it fires with the power it should and safely? It would see a shame to let this go being there hard to come by these days. Tom mentioned someone in NY but I can’t find the darn post.

    Thank you


  19. Greetings,

    I tried locating the name but didn’t have any luck. So I searched around a bit to see if there were any spare parts for this to be had for sale. Luckily, I found a functioning barrel assembly for sale which I purchased. The barrel assembly had a cracked off lever slide which had to be removed and swapped out for the one on my old barrel. There is a metal band which is secured with a captive bolt on the bottom which can be loosened by bending up two metal tabs. This was not easy at all. But I managed to get the lever installed, and the barrel swapped out.

    The gun now functions the way it should easily penetrating tin cans and cardboard boxes, which is all I can really ask of this considering it’s age. Hopefully I can locate a spare lever assembly to replace on my old barrel, and located spare parts as well to refurbish it. I’m very curious to see what’s going on inside the barrel and what can be replaced.

    I’m just glad I got this piece working as it should, and it’s is a very cool vintage item it have as well. 🙂


  20. being I had an extra barrel I decided to take it all apart and clean it up and purchase some new seals for it. I did manage to purchase a seal kit and new main spring. But unfortunately the BB retainer ball got away from me and is lost. I still have the little spring which goes into the side hole with the bb retainer ball.

    The thing is, I don’t even know what it looks like as I can’t even find a picture of one. So I wanted to ask here if anyone would know if I can use something else in it’s place which is the same diameter, or maybe a source who would have one for sale. Sad thing, is, I can’t do anything as far refurbishing this barrel until I get that little retainer ball.

    Thanks for any help.

    Steve


  21. OK…I found a parts list and the retainer ball is listed as .140″. Converting this to a fraction we get 9/64, which is a bit smaller than the bb’s I have on hand which measure larger at 11/64.

    So hopefully it’s that simple? Locating a 9/64 steel ball?


    • And just to add to this, I figured out how the BB is retained and prevented from rolling out of the barrel after being cocked. Quite interesting. On the flat of the barrel you’ll see the BB feed hole, and on the side you’ll see a slightly smaller hole. But the side hole is slightly further back from the BB feed hole. So when the BB retainer ball is inserted into this hole, it protrudes slightly into the bore of the barrel, and will not allow a bb to pass.

      That is until the rifle is fired. Then the pop valve the Teflon stem will expel the bb forward and get pushed passed the bb retainer ball which is spring loaded. The spring is held in place by the outer sleeve. This is how I’m thinking it works.

      Guys…I’m probably preaching to the chior here where most of you already know all of this. But I’m just excited that figuring this out as I go.

      And the M1 which I did upgrade and works is a lot of fun to shoot. It’s whisper quite, powerful enough to penetrate tin cans and targets at about 30 feet. But not powerful enough where I will have to worry about one getting away.

      Steve


Leave a Reply