by B.B. Pelletier
Today’s blog comes from an article I originally wrote for Airgun Revue #4.
Today’s airguns are so refined that they make the models I grew up with look ancient by comparison. When I was a boy in the 1950s, airguns were either BB guns or pneumatic pellet guns–there were no others to choose from. Although Crosman bulk-fill guns had been around for awhile, they weren’t well known in my neck of the woods. If they had been, this story might be very different. I grew up with Benjamins in rural Ohio. Both rifles and pistols were around, but my father only had a pistol, so that became my first exposure to airgunning.
His was one of the first–a front-pump pistol. It isn’t the first airgun to have a pump mechanism built into the front; that credit probably goes to Giffard, or to someone else from Europe in the last century. But Benjamin gets the recognition of having built more of them than anyone else, so if you think about them today, they’re the ones who come to mind.
Let’s set the record straight–it’s a Benjamin, not a Benjamin Franklin. When I was a boy, everyone seemed to know that; but over the years, a completely new crop of collectors and dealers has sprung up. They insist on using both names because they happen to appear on the side of the guns. Maybe, back when the guns all came in boxes and the pellets were still sold under that name, it was easier to remember. Just Benjamin.
I had my father’s Benjamin 107 pistol. Although I now know it to be a fine air pistol, at the time I didn’t even consider it to be real. It was just too hard for a little boy to operate. Even today, the front pump mechanism can be a chore for an adult. It has the least mechanical advantage of any pneumatic airgun, which you may safely read as “none.”
The pistol is a metal and wood airgun with a substantial but compact heft–not unlike a Colt Woodsman of the same era. It was contemporary with the last of the Quackenbush long guns and has that same look of substance and quality. Although we’re living in a golden age of airgun development right now, the Benjamin and other guns like it made the earlier decades of this century a very fine time to be alive, too.
According to the chronology given to us by collector Fred Liady, the pistol models 100 (.177, smoothbore), 102 (.22, rifled) and 107 (.177, rifled) were all introduced in 1935. These were Benjamin’s first air pistols. I remember my father’s pistol came in a green cardboard box that was colored the same as the pellet tins, but advanced collectors tell me that the plain brown box was the earliest. You’ll still find many of them in their boxes because even the box looks retro enough for people to recognize it as quality.
The rifles predated the pistols by several decades, with the first–designated on Fred’s list as the Benjamin model A–being made around 1898. Actually, that first one was the St. Louis Air Rifle. The date on the left side of the stock reads “Pat. June 20 1899,” so the 1898 date may be taken with a grain of salt.
The B model, supposedly first made in 1900, was actually the second version of the St. Louis Air Rifle, and I’m sorry to say I have only seen one picture of this gun–in Smith’s Gas, Air and Spring Guns of the World. The model D, first produced in 1910, is the earliest Benjamin rifle (using the Benjamin name) that is seen in any great quantity. That rifle came 25 years before the first pistol–a remarkable stretch of time, when you think about it.
Benjamin rifles and pistols of the vintage of our subject gun came with two finishes on top of solid brass. The top finish was a fragile layer of black nickel on top of a much tougher coat of silver nickel. The black usually wears off pretty quick, although there are guns with lots of it still clinging. There may have been small lot-to-lot differences in the application of the finish, or it just might be due to how much the individual guns have been handled over time. As incredible as it sounds, the example shown above was acquired in 1997 and has much more original black finish than my father’s almost-identical gun had in 1955!
The silver finish is much more permanent, to the point that many believe it to be the only original finish on the gun. Often, when I see an older Benjamin advertised with 60 percent of its finish, I ask the seller whether all the silver is still there. They often refer to just the silver nickel because they believe it to be the top finish of the gun; so it pays to ask. Many people are not aware that the black finish was ever present. Obviously, 60 percent silver nickel with no black showing equals 30 percent of the whole original finish. It makes an interesting bargaining position, if you want to get a price adjustment.
Don’t be surprised to see some of the base metal peeking through on an otherwise good-looking gun. It’s not at all strange to see brass showing on the sharp edges, silver on most of the smooth surfaces and some black in the corners and under the barrel, where it has been protected. Our subject pistol, a model 100 smoothbore, is showing a little brass on the edges of the end cap, a condition that tells me the owner(s) were pumping it correctly. Unlike fine cameras, a little brassing isn’t such a fatal flaw on a Benjamin pistol or rifle, although there are plenty of guns showing none at all.
62 thoughts on “The Benjamin front-pump pistol – Part 1”
I'd like more articles like this. Thanks.
B.B. your airgun collection must compare to Jay Leno's car collection. I'm jealous.
I do have quite a few airguns, but it probably looks like more because of how I present them. I no longer own this pistol that I documented about 10-12 years ago. I buy and sell so I can own as many different types as possible, so my collection looks better through the long lens of time.
I'm still green with envy. Have you ever shot the Beeman HW70A air pistol? I am thinking of getting a break barrel pistol. I just don't know which one. Any suggestions?
Good morning B.B.,
I'm wondering about tne accuracy between the Model 100 and 107. What is the difference, if any, in the accuracy between the smooth and rifled bores? Thank you!
My dad had an air pistol back in the early 1950's. I think it is still locked up in a filing cabinet in my basement. I had forgotten all about it. I think it is a Daisy 1911 style shape but I don't remember how it was cocked. I was so young back then I never got to see it much. When he died I locked a bunch of stuff in the cabinet while cleaning things out and then misplaced the key. Things were somewhat chaotic then. Now that you have me thinking about it I'll have to find a way in there.
I've put about 100 rounds through my Marauder now. Oh what a sweet gun. I can't believe the order of magnitude difference in power between my .177 Talon and the .22 Marauder. Ms. M is so powerful. So far I have shot only one hole groups, some as large as 1/2". My high fps has been 918 on a 2500psi fill.
It is so easy filling from a scuba tank. Takes about 10 seconds and I have to fill very slowly to keep from over filling. I have noticed that the gauge needle on the gun will reach 2500psi the when I shut off the tank valve it will drop back a couple marks and I'll have to turn it back on again until it holds there. I am assuming this is normal. Once it's where I want it it stays there, so it's not leaking. Must be temp induced or something.
For hoots I did the B.B.P. pen test. I keep a pen on my shooting table to log info on the chrony tapes before I save them and just for kicks I shot Ms. M and then tossed the pen off the end of the table onto the Berber carpet. The pen actually made a louder noise. From behind the gun, the only noise I hear is an interesting little boing (must be the hammer spring?) and the pellet hitting the target. I don't hear any muzzle noise at all from back there. Some day I'll let someone else shoot it so I can listen at the muzzle.
If the "boing" bothers you there are folks making an aftermarket de-pinger for the maurader. Takes about 5 minutes to install and has detailed instructions online.
Try shooting out in the open…like a bare field with no obstacles to reflect the noise. Even a Talondor gets quiet under those conditions.
A tidbit for you…….
I put a custom hammer in my Talondor because I wanted a one piece hammer….
Custom 96 gm hammer is too heavy for .22 18" with Kodiaks.
Peeled off the extra weight on the lathe to match weight with the Talon hammer/Condor weight setup.
What a change……
Talon hammer/Condor weight setup ran about max at PW6 with 180 bar (965 fps). Good curve with PW 5.8. 35 fps spread on curve.
New one piece brass hammer of same weight after "lathe liposuction"….
Same fill and pellet…
PW 4 is about max at 987-988 fps. PW 1.16 drops the mv by about 30 fps for an initial mv of about 957 fps.
Have to get outside to shoot a whole string soon to see what the curve will look like and make some small adjustments.
I'm glad to be living in the golden age of airguns, and there still seem to be plenty of models with good wood and metal.
Chuck, yes it would make sense for ROTC to shoot airguns instead of smallbore. Our smallbore range was 50 feet which seems inadequate for a precision firearm.
That's quite the mouth-watering description of the Marauder. I guess with air compressor and scuba tank one would be self-sufficient–a huge investment but perhaps worth it for someone who doesn't have a dive shop nearby. Taking the apparatus to a public range would be another story.
Anyway, the description reminds me of my new favorite long-range precision rifle; I'm such a fickle fellow. It's the TUBB Spec-Tac-Lr, basically Tubb's personal design dressed up on sniper mode and chambered for .338 Lapua Magnum. It's half minute at 1000 yards, fully adjustable, and doesn't weigh a ton like some of the other models. Its bolt requires only 5 pounds of pressure and can be operated by a finger–perhaps the Marauder can as well. So I would say that the airgun equivalent to the Tubb tactical rifle is the Marauder and at almost exactly 10% of the price.
At what point does a 14.3gr cm dome become loud in a Discovery (no moderator and unshrouded)?
I wanted to find a point where I could set the ajustable hammer spring on the Discovery so it will be quiet, but at the threshold of becoming loud for maximum stealth power, but not full power so you can get a few more shots out.
Running about approx. 640 fps 13 ftlbs and is very quiet. I suppose my Daisyy 22SG runs about 12 ftlbs max, and that 13ftlbs would do the trick on rabbits and squirrels etc….
I have to say the Discovery shoots really nice and smooth. I don't why I never had pcp before, but wow, what a difference. As far as hand pumping to 1800-2000psi, not a problem.
755 at 18 ftlbs cm 14.4 dome isn't bad. For hunting good. The groups were about the best at 13 ftlbs 640 fps.
For my adjuster, that mean hunting will probably remain where it's at 18 ftlsb and turn adjustment 180 degrees counterclockwise for indoor precision. Now to find the best pellet and the best fill/grouping/shot count range.
Right now the boing does not bother me. But I will do a google on Marauder de-pinger to see what is being offered.
I watched BB shoot a Marauder on the Sportsman Channel American Airgunner and his boing sounded way louder than mine, unless the gaffer put the mike right up to the gun when he shot. Someone might be able to sell BB a de-pinger:)
I've never taken any of my airguns outdoors. They are house kitties right now. This year I haven't been home long enough to do anything except replace some moldy stuff in the frige. But taking them to the range is on my list. Sept is pretty much booked with another one week fishing trip and a two week trip back to Phoenix.
I don't think I could operate the Marauder bolt with one finger. Maybe I could but it's not something I'd want to do on a regular basis. I don't see any benefit doing that either. The reach to the bolt seems too far from the trigger to me to make one finger cocking useful. Although it is not hard to cock it is too hard for what you are describing. Maybe I'd need to see what you're doing before passing too much judgment on it. The bolt has to advance the magazine and cock the hammer. Unless it loosens up after 500 shots which seems unlikely at this point.
Well, I never did a comparison test like that (100 vs 107) so I can't say.
What you are REALLY asking is how accurate can an unrifled pellet gun be? Because we all know how accurate rifled pellets guns can be.
So, everyone, what's the best way to find this out?
seems like 1800 psi is the place to start 18ftlbs 40-50 shots and 13 ftlbs 50-60 shots.
Wierd thing happened, I pumped to 2000 psi, the valve is stiffer (probalby close to locking up) and autmatically gives you 20 to 25 13ftlbs shots then around 1800fps it loosens up to 40 to 50 shots at 18ftlbs. So no adjusment needed, just pump to the psi that gives you the results needed.
Does anyone own the Beeman HW70A? Please comment if you do. Pro's/con's.
Thanks for the tidbit. However, I think the whole meal is in order. My memory says you're shoot a Talkon w/ a .22 caliber 18" barrel, a stock talon valve and a one piece brass hammer whose weight I don't know. Do the Talon and Talon SS share the same hammer and spring?
Sounds to me that I need a different hammer in my SS when I'm using it's .22 caliber 24" barrel. What would you recommend to shoot Kodiaks at 950 fps and would I be able to also get about the same velocity using Eungins or would they require a heavier hammer? Thanks for your reply.
I have a new condor tank on the Talon.
Tried the 24" with stock Talon parts and could not get much over 960 fps with 16 gr Exacts. The standard parts make the valve dwell time too fast to get much gain out of the 24" over the standard 18". A heavier hammer to increase dwell still may not be enough to get the velocity you want with Kodiaks or EJ's with a standard tank.
SS and Talon have all the same parts (in theory) when stock.
Stock hammer 48.3 gm
Condor weight 18.9 gm
Total for Condor configuration 67.2 gm
New "modified" hammer 67.2 gm
RE: How accurate can an unrifled pellet gun be?
The only real way to find out of course is to shoot'em. There is a small problem however. All the unrifled barrels I have seen are for combination BB-pellet rifles (which are overall cheap guns). Since a BB is a hair larger that a pellet, pellets won't really fit the bore properly. As I've speculated before, I'd also expect that a choked barrel would work a bit better too.
I can't imagine though that anyone is going to spend the $$'s to really investigate this. Using a really cheap gun like the Crosman 760 could give an upper bound on what a "good" smoothbore should be able to do.
But the cheap guns don't have much power. Maybe 600fps (?) for a reasonable 0.177 pellet. The extra 300 fps to 900fps would no doubt help if shooting more than 10 meters.
I don't have the numbers at my fingertips, but a pellet in a 760 is much better that a ball from my experience at 10 meters.
I also realized that cheap guns come with cheap scopes. A really good scope would probably improve shooting significantly. Kind of weird to have a $100+ scope on a $50 gun.
Maybe the way would be to have some oversize 0.177 pellets made.
BB, with regards to smoothbore vs. rifled, seems to me the only way is to compare groups from one of each barrel type THAT ARE OF SIMILAR QUALITY. And something fairly new, so that we're not dealing with barrel bores that are degraded from wear or other issues.
The only possibility that comes to mind is the .22 smoothbore Gamo Express (Viper or Shadow) vs. either a Whisper in the same caliber or a somewhat older model Gamo, which were more available in the larger caliber. Gamo might not make the best barrels in the world, but they are decent enough… and I think that Gamo quality is consistent enough to mitigate any 'luck of the draw' issues that might make one barrel shoot better than another.
I've got a .22 cal Gamo 440, but no Viper or Shadow Express, otherwise I'd take a crack at it fer ya!
A .177 pellet is larger than a BB. A BB is .172 to .173 inches in diameter.
Lots of older Germany air guns are smooth bores. I had a Diana 25 smooth bore that I tested with diablo pellets and perfect rounds. The results at ten meters with pellets were it could hold its own with a rifled R-7. So a smooth bore can be just as accurate.
However with round balls that was not the case, they were at least half as accurate. This may have been an over exaggeration however, as I was able to try about a dozen pellets to get the best group, and I had but one brand of .177 rounds.
Lastly, I did not test at longer distance, were I know the R-7 does very also.
I guess I wasn't seriously suggesting the Marauder could be cocked with one finger. The Tubb rifle has modifications to the bolt to make this possible. But it's nice to know that the weight required to operate the bolt is the same in both rifles.
B.B., regarding the accuracy of unrifled pellet guns, I bet that you could get a good approximation from blackpowder. The big stud at the workshop told me that smoothbores can be amazingly accurate. Given that normal pellet guns rely less on rifling than blackpowder rifles, the difference in accuracy between the rifled and unrifled pellet guns should be even less than between smoothbores and rifled muzzleloaders which is to say very good.
A smoothbore muzzle loader can be more accurate than expected if a patched ball is used compared to the Revelutionary War muskets that shot undesize unpatched balls.
However, a rifled barrel will shoot better than either, because a round ball is never perfectly round and will plane off …something that rifling compensates for.
I can't see any way that testing a smoothbore against a rifled gun could give a conclusive answer.
Two different guns, two different barrels.
Which one has the better barrel? You could end up with any kind of results possible just by luck of the draw.
This would be like testing one model of gun against another to determine which is more accurate. One single gun tested against one single other gun. Much the same as testing to see which is more accurate…a .22 or .177. Again, one individual gun against another. And again which has the better barrel, and is shooting the best working pellet for it's own barrel.
Then we get into pellet shape and velocity….
will this also play a role no matter which gun is used?
Twotalon, if one one can't reliably discern an improvement in accuracy with a rifled barrel… well, that only means that there really IS no significance difference between them. And all the manufacturers rifling barrels are just making their guns more expensive than necessary.
I strongly suspect that a back-to-back test will show beyond a shadow of a doubt that rifling really helps. I can't imagine a smoothbore keeping a 2" or better group at 60 yards…
If the question is simply “are smooth bores accurate”, then testing a similar air rifle vs. air gun does supply a general answer.
Using a rifle like my R-7 that was at 575 fps with a 7.9 gr pellet as the standard, it was as similar to the Diana 25 that was shooting the same pellet in the 560’s as I had. Putting it up against an HW97K would have been another story.
My best group with the R-7 was not noticeable better than that of the Diana 25 from 1933. So if the R-7 is accurate and the 25 matches it, then smooth bores must be accurate, no?
Don’t forget, BB is just giving us something to keep us occupied. He is well aware of the accuracy of a smooth bore.
I think the value of the rifling comes into play at greater speeds with bullet shapes. I agree a smoothbore 22-250 would be of little use.
What I was pointing out was the pitfalls involved if you test only one rifle against another then using the results to generalize all rifles..
I have seen some really wasted barrels that may have shot better if they had been smooth bored.
That's why the guns need to be in known good condition, preferably new-ish, from the same factory, and from one with decent QC.
Good condition and QC….let's see now…. might be a tall order with some manufacturers. Then there are some that slip through.
Still would put more faith in a test if a dozen of one kind were compared to a dozen of the other.
RE: 0.177 pellet vs BB
Edith – Thanks for keeping me honest! I did indeed have it backwards. The BB is undersized, not the pellet.
So maybe comparing something like Crosman 760 (smooth-bore) to 760XLS(rifled) would at least yield a somewhat reasonable ratio which would be a stake in the ground. I would expect a rifled barrel to be a bit better. But as was pointed out – you're really comparing apples and oranges. No-one is going to spend millions trying to create the best smooth-bore barrel possible. There are enough rifled barrels that we could choose the "best" as our "gold standard" for rifled barrels.
For both the 760 and 760XLS though I'd be concerned about variations between guns of the same model. I don't think QC on cheap guns is great. Thus you might need to test 10 guns of a given model to experimentally find the "best" one of that model to be the gold standard.
I'm a firm believer that spinning the pellet over comes variations in the pellets themselves.
All in all though, remember the Daisy Avanti Champion 499. It shoots BBs very, very well at 5 meters. I assume that the general consensus is that a diabolo pellet should do even better, and that a diabolo pellet in a rifled barrel should do even better. (The good feature of BBs is that they are cheaper of course than pellets.)
The power is limited, so the Avanti won't do well much beyond 5 meters. I also doubt that the strict geometric notion of the "cone of fire" and ballistic path is really absolutely true. Spin, deliberate or induced by propulsion of the projectile, coupled with air friction has got to throw a monkey wrench into that notion. Of course by "sighting in" a rifle you are empirically correcting for the thus "hidden" inconsistencies.
There is still the factor of the distance between where the skirt of the pellet and the head of the pellet contact the barrel. There has to be some magic combination of velocity, pellet length, twist rate, pellet weight, and barrel diameter. I doubt if this has been optimized to maximum. The interaction of the factors probably has a lot to do with why there is such a variation between different types of pellets for the same gun. You end up testing different pellets to experimentally find the "best" pellet out of those available for a given barrel. As we all know, it does make a considerable difference.
I had bought a 760 to test, against a 760XLS, then decided that I was comparing apples and oranges. I also realized that I wasn't going to by ten 760s and ten 760 XLSs to find the "gold standard" for each. Before even trying one pair of guns, I decided that my experimental approach with just two guns was flawed and gave up. Typical Herb – to much thinking and not enough action 😉 !!
So all in all, you still end up with shooting real guns and comparing. You then compare the best smoothbore to the best rifled barrel and stick a stake in the ground. Someone makes a better smoothbore or a better rifled barrel and the stake moves.
So pick a distance, and a reasonable group size (10 shots?) and have a contest to see who can do the best with BBs and pellets using a smooth-bore. You'd have to have a big group size so that some lucky stiff wouldn't shoot one hole groups. Then perhaps average the "best" 20 groups of 10 to get some statistical notion of how good a smooth-bore could be. (Same guy with same gun doing twenty groups of 10 would be OK if he was best. You don't want just one "lucky" ten shot group for the gold standard.)
There has to be enough tournament data say for 10 meter rifled barrels so that already existing data could be used to represent rifled barrels.
RE: Ball vs diabolo pellet
Chairgun 2 lists some pellets that have better ballistic coefficients than a ball. Anyone know what happens at supersonic speeds?
I wonder if a "screen" ball (ie with a dimpled surface like golf ball) would maintain supersonic speed better than a diabolo pellet. I'm not sure that BCs above speed of sound correlate well with BCs below the speed of sound.
I assumed that B.B. was talking about shooting pellets from smooth and rifled bores. Not pellets from one, and balls or bb's from the other.
A good fitting round nosed pellet should give a perfect barrel of either kind it's best accuracy (in theory). Under those conditions, the rifled barrel should win due to slight flaws in the pellets.
Once again, the big stud is right. There was a group of shooters in Ohio in the 1850s (before the Civil War) that shot smoothbores at 50 and 100 yards for that express purpose. I don't have much on them or how well they did, but small groups at 100 yards were apparently their goal.
Indeed I was talking about pellets in both types of guns–rifled and smoothbore. The theory is the diabolo shape adds a lot to stabilization, so at short range, smoothbore shouldn't be a handicap.
Good post, ie, your R-7 and your Diana 25. No notable difference in group size probably says it all, but you know how we are.
Do you remember the distance you were shooting at?
BB, Volvo – the Diana 25 was smoothbore??? The Winchester 425 I've got here sure is rifled…
Yes, the Diana 25 was available as a smoothbore until 1986, according to the Blue Book. It probably isn't common, because when a gun gets that large most shooters are looking to shoot to longer ranges.
Mr. B and Vince,
I was shooting at just over 10 meters. The reason I did not try a greater distance was the Diana’s sight handicap. The R-7 wore a Beeman peep, but the 25 had only iron sights. No provisions for mounting any other sights were available. Initially, I had hoped I would finally have a gun that liked the round balls being a smoothbore, but that was not the case.
I then proceed with all sorts of silly testing, including the R-7 challenge. (Also tried to make a mini shotgun out of the Diana, to no avail.)
I believe after the War, you will find a good deal of smoothbore German arms, as restrictions were placed on rifled barrels. Lastly, the old girl proved you will never shoot out a steel barrel with lead pellets at 550 fps.
Forgot, my Diana 25 from November 1934 would bear no resemblance to your Winchester 425. Over the years Diana reused model numbers even if the rifle was completely different. Think about a 1967 Chevy Impala and a 2007 Impala. Same name, but that is it. To make matters more confusing there would be a good chance your Winchester was made by Milbro.
Don't want to hijack the thread comments, and you may have covered this elsewhere.
Is there a source for the composite stocks for the diana 34, and if so would one fir a 2004 34?
Ol' Timer ,
Try Pyramyd Air. They have more RWS Diana parts than anyone, including stocks.
Ol' Timer, the Panther stock should fit a T05 34. I believe that they all have been T05's since about 2000 or 2001.
Thanks about the information about the older German smooth-bores.
When I was thinking about trying to compare rifled vs. smooth-bore I really thought that cheap smooth bores just just wouldn't yield a reasonable comparison to a better made rifled gun.
Price range certainly is a strong factor on the overall quality of the typical gun. Quite interesting to tests some good Dianas with a smooth bore.
This gun is very strong and always be a mainstay pigeon hunters in tropical forests Timor island. a very good gun and has an endurance extraordinary. not damaged even when used to shoot up to hundreds of times in one day
I have an identical gun but with,"177", instead of 100 or 107. What is it? I also have the cleaning rod and a partal box. e-mail me if you're interested, firstname.lastname@example.org, thanks, BB
Your model 177 is a later version of the model 100. It is rifled for the .177 pellet. Made 1938-1941.
You might sell it quicker on the classified ads here:
i have a front pump just like the photo ho much is it worth
If it has all the black finish like the one shown here and if it works, it's worth $125-150. If it shows silver or brass, it's worth $75-100.
I thought I posted, but somehow didn't go through I guess.
I recently came into possession of my Dad's Benjamin Model 122 air pellet pistol that I last remember seeing back in the early 50s when we lived in St Louis. The gun has been in my Dad's unheated garage for years, and shows the wear. It looks like corrosion around the grips, and wear on the barrel.
My question: where can I get this gun restored? The air chamber leaks also.
I want to keep for sentimental reasons, but don't want it to go to rust.
No one in the St Augustine FL area seems to know who can work on it.
They all shrug shoulders and say who knows.
Any help appreciated:
I reposted your comment on the current day's blog article.
go here to always get the current one:
Here is the best place to repair your 122:
There is very little that will rust on your gun. The mechanism is made of solid brass and the grip frame is aluminum, I think.
Can I get parts and a diagram for a model 100 I would like top restore?
Welcome to the blog.
This man has the parts, if anyone does.
Can I get parts and a diagram for a model 100 I would like to restore?
Hey BB…I’ve been getting pretty lucky lately and have acquired a couple more air guns…I got a Daisy Power line 856 and a 1978 Crosman 760 Power master (all metal and wood) from a co worker for free and they just needed to be cleaned andbserviced, they are in great condition! From another co worker I purchased a Benjamin model 177 front pump air pistol for $50 bucks! I had to make a new leather seal for it but other than that it works great! I read it was supposedly built somewhere around the late 30’s to early 40’s….some of the original black coating is still present on it but shows its been used…neat piece and pretty accurate too…it has a rifled barrel so I’m shooting pellets only so I don’t ruin it…collecting air guns is very addictive!!!
Yes, you have been lucky. Be sure to not miss today’s blog:
HI i just found in our family home a 122, but its very inconsistent at holding pressure, is there some sort of maintenance i can do on the pump? i cant figure out how to get in there
Welcome to the blog.
Your 122 has leather seals and one part that’s made of soft lead. I wouldn’t try to fix it myself.
This man can fix it for you plus he manufactures the parts to fix all the old Benjamins around the world.
thanks BB P. 🙂
his website is changing but what would i do in Peru for example the new home of the 122, is there a manual that shows how to get the pump apart?, do you know if i need to take the sight off? looks like it might be
the way to the leather piece, the lead piece sounds a bit more involved but i can get it machined
Get on the Benjamin forum and ask them. Someone there will be able to guide you.