by Tom Gaylord, a.k.a. B.B. Pelletier
The LGV Master Ultra with a wood stock is what readers have been asking to see. Today, we see how it shoots!
Now that we know how powerful the new .177-caliber Walther LGV Master Ultra is, people are lining up to see it shoot. We get to that today. I’ll start at 10 meters because I’m using the good open sights that come on the rifle; but as I mentioned in the last report, there will be other accuracy tests yet to come. While I’m not keeping this rifle like I did the .22, I don’t mind having it around awhile. Also, I’m writing a feature article about these new rifles for Shotgun News, so I have to do the testing anyway. I love my job!
For today’s report, I shot the rifle rested at 10 meters. Although that is an easy test for what we assume will be an accurate rifle, it is sensible because the open sights are being used. If the rifle really is accurate, I may also shoot the rifle with open sights at 25 yards because I’ll have confidence that it can do it. I haven’t mentioned this yet, but I shot the other couch in our living room about a month ago (I shot the first couch a few years ago), and we have since bought two new couches that I’m absolutely not allowed to shoot. So, any rifle I test has to be accurate…guaranteed.
I’m going to write a report this week for Jim H. on how to pick a good pellet, but let’s get that started today with how I selected the pellets for this rifle. I picked three for this rifle based on the power I thought it might have, which the velocity testing had demonstrated varied widely from 13 to 16.25 foot-pounds. I chose the JSB Exact RS dome because it’s been a wonderful pellet in lower-powered airguns, though in this one it’s up pretty high. I chose the H&N Baracuda Match because it often proved accurate in .177 rifles of wide-ranging power. Some say this spring rifle is too underpowered for a pellet this heavy and that the mainspring will suffer from shooting it, but I strongly disagree. I’ve used them in many rifles of this same power, and they usually worked well. The last pellet I tried is the 7.9-grain Crosman Premier lite, which has always been an accurate pellet. Sometimes, it’s even the absolute best in rifles of this power.
That was my pellet selection criteria for this rifle. It’s not scientific — it’s based on experience and some other factors I’ll talk about. I could just as easily have chosen 3 or 4 other good pellets for this test, but that would have been about all for this rifle, in my experience. Be sure to read that pellet-selection report later this week.
The rifle was shot off a rest at 10 meters. The rest was a sandbag on which I rested my off hand, then I rested the rifle on the flat of my palm, with the heel of my hand touching the triggerguard.
H&N Baracuda Match
The first pellet up was the heavy H&N Baracuda Match. The first shot was made without adjusting the sights. The pellets landed low but centered, so I dialed the rear sight up about 5 clicks. The next shot landed in the black, so I settled in and fired 9 more pellets without looking through the spotting scope. After the 10 shots, I knew we had another winner and how this report was going to end. This rifle is great, just like the .22, only more powerful.
No more mystery! This LGV is accurate. 10 shots with open sights at 10 meters in 0.422 inches.
Now, we’re on a roll. I expected great things from it, and the Premiers were up next.
After making certain that the first pellet was on target, I shot the other 9 without looking. When I went down to change the target I came upon a near-screamer of a 10-shot group. Ten Premier lites went into 0.325 inches. Yes, I’ve shot smaller groups at 10 meters, but maybe not with open sporting sights — I don’t really remember. This is justification for including this pellet in the test.
Now, THAT’S a group — to paraphrase Crocodile Dundee. Ten Premier lites in 0.325 inches at 10 meters.
JSB Exact RS
The last pellet I tested was the light JSB RS dome. Again, the first pellet landed in the bull, so I stopped checking. Nine more went downrange, then I walked down to pull the target. This time the group wasn’t very good, which was something of a surprise. The group measures 0.666 inches between centers. I’ll shoot this pellet again at 25 yards, but I’ll be careful when I do.
JSB Exact RS pellets didn’t do as well as I’d hoped. This group is twice the size of the Premier group; and because this is 10 shots and not 5, it’s not just an estimate of accuracy: It’s the final word.
The trigger on this rifle continues to excel. And the sights are exceptional. The firing cycle is smooth and relatively free of buzz. But I imagine that will vary, rifle by rifle. And as it breaks in, I think it’ll become increasingly smoother.
I like the shape of the stock. I said that about the synthetic-stocked Walther LGV Challenger in .22 caliber I tested before, but this stock has a more conventional shape. The balance is slightly muzzle-heavy, which I find ideal.
Next, I’ll back up to 25 yards and test it there with open sights. But you already know how this is going to turn out. The new Walther LGV family of sporting spring rifles is a very refreshing change to the usually similar new airgun models.
110 thoughts on “Walther’s new LGV Master Ultra .177 air rifle: Part 3”
Not allowed to shoot the new couches eh? Good thing that rule wasn’t passed when you bought the last ones. A shrewd person would buy couches with a pattern that includes lots of pellet-sized dots.
Nice shooting BB. If I didn’t own too many airguns already, I would pick up one of these LGVs. Did you use the Eyepal during this test?
Yes, I did.
So, just how will you ensure that you absolutely will not shoot the new couches? 🙂
Obviously you have never met Edith? 😀
So, you’ve learned your lesson.
Now, what can we do to stop you from shooting up the rack in the garage that holds your trap? It has more holes than a window screen!
Shhhh! That’s for a future blog! 😉
So B.B. shoots up a lot more things than he has admitted to ? I suspected as much !
The rack in the garage?? Check for termites. It can’t be Tom- we all know he is an expert marksman.
Pete in the Caribbean,
Yeah…those would be the termites that eat holes in plastic racks and only near the trap…and the holes are .177- and .22-caliber sized.
Those must be highly specialized, highly evolved termites 🙂
Maybe plastic eating carpenter bees ?? Yeah. That sounds good.
I suspect if he does shoot one, he’ll be sleeping on it for a loooooooooooonnnnnnnnngggg time…
Keep them in storage. 🙂
I hope none of this blog’s readers and their friends were hurt in Boston. If not – I wish them quick and complete recovery.
Thanks! I’ve hurt that Boston is the city of rude, obnoxious people, but they seem to be helping each other out in the tragedy.
B.B. you say you love your job.I’m not surprised, i would love your job. If i ever get a new springer again i would without doubt have to now get an LGV, but for now I’m utterly delighted with the results I’m getting from the Sharp Innova i have just repaired. I know it’s not a springer but I’m getting that buzzing warm glow in my chest every time i get that ragged one hole group on the target every time i let off 10 shots.
There are some people here in the UK that are converting Diana’s and Weihrauch’s to use the new piston in the LGV, check out a blog called AirGunTech by a bloke called Tony and you would be amazed by his idea’s and work. Walther have certainly given air rifles their next evolutionary step with this one i think, every day i go to read this blog recently i have been hoping it would be another LGV installment and today was no disappointment for sure.
Best Wishes, Wing Commander Sir Nigel Tetlington-Smythe
P.S. As duskwight has bought up the subject, i would like to send from all in the UK our sympathy to all those affected by this disgusting act of cowardice in Boston.
I will shoot this again at 25 yards with open sights next week, so hold your breath until then. I also cannot wait to get behind this gun again.
Oh splendid my good man, i wait with baited breath.
Sir Nigel Telington-Smythe
After my own recent pellet tests, I thought good I am now getting to grips with this pellet thing…
Then this article got me thinking some more, and that I am not so sure about pellets anymore
My test taught me one thing though, anecdotal is called anecdotal for a reason, and it only gives you a hunch to test, not a result. To get a legitimate result, for even one airrifle takes a bit of work… Thank you for your efforts putting in this work for all of us…
How to select pellets would be a really nice post…
Not as simple as the “standard answers” or the “everybody knows” answers that you often read on many forums, is it ????
On the link:
I read until I got to “Rotating our pellets, through the use of rifled barrels, helps give them stability; so, they do not flip end over end.”
Seriously ?!? Since the guy doesn’t understand that diabolo pellets are drag stabilized and won’t ever flip end over end, I cannot accept him as a ballistician.
In his last paragraph he states that the tail of the pellet must be flexible enough to give a good seal but without deforming. Yet when I shoot the most accurate (JSB Exact RS) pellet through my TF 87 (magnum Springer ) it exits the barrel as a cylinder and not as a diabolo pellet. In this case I think it is the velosity and twist rate which makes it accurate .This coincides with what he was saying at the beginning of the article when he was doing the math to explain how fast a rifle bullet spins.
Good point. A magnum springer will blow the skirt out so that it is more of a cylinder rather than a cone tail. In that case then spin stabilization is gets more important.
I’m sure if one loaded the pellet tail-first it would flip somewhere in the first 10 meters…
I used to load crosman ashcans backward in my 1400 once in a while. Quite brutal on vermin. Accuracy fell off with distance pretty quickly, as if accuracy applies very much to ashcans in the first place.
You’re right. The hollow tail in the rear is the stable configuration.
What I was trying to point out is that diabolo pellets won’t tumble, even if the pellets are not spun.
Thanks for pointing out another facet of this.
Thanks for the links. Interesting.
I believe that since Jim Baumann published that article in 2000 he would change a thing or two. I agree with 95% of what he said though. Especially this:
“When pellets don’t fit the barrel; as they should, stability and accuracy suffer. At this point I would like to point out that what we pay for pellets; is nothing near what high powered rifle bullets go for. That in itself tells us that what we shoot is darn cheap. While there is a lot more material involved in making these bullets; it is not really where the cost is, and if we were all willing to pay 7 or 8 dollars for a hundred pellets; I am sure that we could get much better quality. So, before you start to blame someone, like the pellet makers, or the barrel makers, place the blame where it belongs. Gun and pellet makers sell only what we buy; so, if there is any blame here; we are the ones it belongs too!”
IMHO, as airgunners we are a cheap bunch.
Haha thanks for the comments and info, wasn’t complaining, much 😉 the rather disconcerting thing of the test I did was, I actually now have more questions than answers… one answer was found: In my 97, pellets that tend to fall to the same place as in THAT pen, comes out at a closer muzzle velocity than those that don’t… Nothing else…
All the flak I get for putting a few dents in the wall.. and he shoots the couch, twice! Makes me feel a bit less guilty here.
Oh, we have a few holes in the walls and ceilings, too! 😉
B.B., wouldn’t a larger pellet trap be more cost effective?
I suppose this fits the old “Two Types” rule, i.e., There are two types of air-gunners; those who have put a pellet through the couch and those that are going to put a pellet through the couch.
Why not use a tire plug ? More cost effective than buying a new couch.
Besides, the tire plug will provide a new aiming point.
You must admit though, that a pellet hole in the couch would be a great conversation starter!
It could have a very functional purpose….
” You can see that this hole has much larger intrance and exit wounds than the hole made by this here other pellet. And look at how much more stuffing that this here pellet pulled out the back side !!!! ”
Ha, ha. You’re a funny man. 🙂
I could have gone more redneck than that….
How about Duct tape ?
to that I would like to add I shot my son’s kitchen chair in the leg recently.
Time to get creative… Borrow from Sherlock Holmes… As recorded by Dr. Watson in The Musgrave Ritual:
I’ve shot one pellet through a wall in my office when I was playing with a trigger weight adjustment screw. I set it so light that it went off when I cocked it.
I had a BSF S55 do the same thing. Had to adjust the trigger much heavier to be safe.
I shot the string on the swing ball at the bottom of the garden just to see if i could, i did and now the wifey is furious and i have to buy a new one next time i sell a rifle.
I’m about 2 mouse clicks away from pre-ordering this rifle! From the looks of it and the testing it should make a wonderful companion to my R9 and TX200. I’m a sucker for an accurate airgun.
The next test will be open sights at 25 yards. I think I’m going to call this rifle the TX 200 of breakbarrels.
You might want to check out the competition version of this rifle. I believe they are the same except for the stock, and maybe the sleeve.
Victor, that rifle is also on my watch list. I’m going to guess it has the same accuracy as the rifle that B.B. is reviewing here. Thanks for the links, I’ll check it out.
I watched a bunch of videos on this rifle and have decided to add it to my own short list. There’s really little or nothing about it that is a turnoff for me, including the price. However, I still have a lot of rifles that I haven’t shot as much as I should, so it won’t be right away. The TX-200 was at the top of my list, and I still haven’t bought one, and I’ve bought several air-rifles in the same price range, and even much higher. So it’s not a question of IF I am going to buy one of these, but when.
If you’ve read some of my posts over the past year, you’ll know that the biggest issue that’s slowed me down are health issues. I went from shooting every day to shooting about once every 6 months for over a year and a half.
Victor, I will own one of the new walthers shortly after Pyramyd gets them in. The question is which one. I’m a sucker for an accurate rifle. Part of my collection includes the R9, TX200, HW100 and my prized FWB 700 Alu. I’m not hesitant about buying high end airguns.
Do a google search for “Walther LGV Competition Ultra”, and you’ll find several reviews. For starters, you might want to check out the following.
It looks like a very high quality rifle, and is comparable with the best spring-piston rifles, including under-levers. However, break-barrels are easier to load.
Since this one turns on with heavier pellets, you might try CPH and Exact heavies when you stretch the range out. I would not like to make a habit of CPH because of leading though.
This rifle seems like it might do best in .20 cal. . The power plant seems to be running off the opposite ends of the curve with .177 and .22.
Did it still run smooth with the RS ? My R9 acts like it is going to blow up with RS and Falcons.
That’s a good idea. I don’t think the RS pellets need to be tried any more. Yes, it did still run smooth with them, but they did fit looser.
Another sip of coffee later…
If you shoot the CPH, you might watch out for one other thing besides leading…
When I was doing deformation tests, I tried a CPHP thay loaded VERY tight in my R9. It showed a great deal more skirt deformation than anything else did. You could run into problems with very tight fitting hard pellets. So watch out for the fit on CP.
I’ll watch it, but the Premier lites fit the breech well.
Tom, Tom, Tom,
“… open sights next week, so hold your breath until then.”
O, Lawd. Really? At that rate, we’ll see 50 yd/scoped sometime in 2014.
All the interposing distances with opens will only tell us how hard it is to use open sights with older eyes. I Know you need Something to Write about, but honestly, you’re milking this one out quite unreasonably. I wouldn’t mind, if it weren’t so transparent and therefore annoying. Obfuscate; move things along –pick one.
A solution: THROW A SCOPE ON IT AND GO TO FIFTY.
Based on where you’re at, I’m hereby on record that this version will produce field run groups of about 1.5″ with best pellet. Which is ok, but not great, for a top-end springer. Zee gauntlet, she eez down! Decaf for you.
I bet you’re the kind of little boy who found all his Christmas presents before they were under the tree and unwrapped them.
I will get to 50 yards with a scope before next year, I promise.
Heh… There were times when I’d take the packages, measure the size of the box, and weigh it… Then compare back to the highlighted items in the old Sears Christmas Wishbook.
I was disappointed in these groups. But to be fair, I don’t use open sights on a springer, and look forward to your scoped groupings. At least we now have a baseline that should only improve. For the cost of the LGV it has to provide superior results. With the situation with your friend, I was surprised you even had a chance to provide a LGV Part 3 update.
As powerful as the .177 version is, I wonder if the .22 you had was shooting slower than what the average will be for most production .22’s.
I sincerely doubt it, but it will be interesting to watch.
The power plant may not be suited well to .22 . This one may have a relatively sharp peak in efficiency compared to other kinds of rifles. (in relation to caliber)
As B.B. said, we will see in time.
Indeed. I understand that the FWB 124 power plant was like that in the FWB 22 version.
That’s why I was thinking that this family of rifles (there’s a competition version) might be best suited for field target. It was not designed for magnum power by design, I think. I expect the accuracy to be there when B.B. goes out to further distances.
We will see what B.B. chooses for his shooting at distance. A few other pellets to try are in order, even though the CPL are doing well up close.
I doubt that he has cleaned and polished the bore, or conditioned the bore to each pellet before “scoring ” a group. Just running straight from the box.
I can only think of one job better than yours b.b.
About 20 years ago I read a road test in Road & Track.
Four drivers and two photographers and four high performance sports sedans (BMW and Audi are the two I remember).
A one week road test in the highlands of Scotland…touring scotch distilleries.
And they paid these guys 😉
$700 for a LGV, no thanks. Looking at the LGV shot groups, I know the TX200 shoot much tighter groups, and cost less ($600).
What…Joe complaining about the Walther…say it ain’t so!!
And right on schedule too !
I’ve come to the conclusion that Joe works for a competing rifle manufacturer…only reason to come up with so many lame complaints about what has turned out to be an excellent gun.
Or a FWB appetite and a RR wallet.
All you guys that said I am complaining, when are YOU going to purchased this air rifle?
Talk is cheap, money is not. Show me the proof that you purchased this LGV rifle, if you do.
Opinions are cheap, and when seemingly all comments from someone are negative and childish, they say more about that person than anything else. Do you REALLY expect ANYONE, let alone everyone, to buy EVERY gun being reviewed because it appears to be a winner? Most enthusiast create a short list of guns under consideration, and it’s not always because of money. Please try to apply a little common sense, or maybe even just modicum of depth to your reasoning, so that you too might some day have something to offer. Thanks!
From reading your opinion, Walther and the rest of the airguns manufacturers will know soon enough, if being innovative with new airguns will be profitable. Yes, it is all about the money. If you guys are any indication, the answer will be…NON-PROFITABLE. Back to the ideal air rifles that B.B. has been talking about that are priced like the cheap Chinese airguns and perform like the FWB P700. If you guys want to see more innovative ariguns like this LGV, better support Walther by dishing out that $700.
I certainly can’t argue with such a narrow, one-dimensional, view of things. I can barely comprehend as an abstraction living in flatland.
Please Joe (or b.b.) point me to which of these chinese guns shoot like an FWB700…I gotta get me one of those.
Maybe a $20 B3 (or whatever it is) like I got off the Cummins truck.
I feel the same way, but I’m glad you said it first…..lol!!!! We’ll have to see some tight groups.
Took you a little longer than usual today to harp about the new LGV costing too much. Sleep in?
What’s up with the comparison of a break barrel like the new LGV to an underlever like the TX200?
I just bought an apple that’s better than your orange. Haven’t tasted the apple yet and haven’t tasted your orange but because my apple was cheaper I can be confident of what I speak because of what I’ve heard.
Get a new script.
Like I said, you guy better shell out that $700 to support Walther else, you won’t see much innovation in Airgun technology. Nobody will be producing an airgun like the LGV, JUST TO HAVE YOU GUY LOOKING AND DROOLING OVER IT, AND NOT BUYING IT. Stop flapping your gums, and dig deep into your bank account.
Your comments are historical (hysterical?) since you can go back in time and view the same naysayers belittling the diana 65/66 series and the fwb 300 when they were introduced. “Too expensive, too heavy. too highly touted by beeman (in the case of the fwb 300)”, etc. etc. They have withstood the test of time since many owners have paid more money to have them rebuilt than they originally cost and many still sing their praises.
What are the current production model airguns that you own that you feel will withstand a 40 year critique like these models?
In your experienced opinion, is there a reason that the new LGV won’t withstand this test of time like the old LGV has?
Joe’s opinion may be unpopular but he is certainly entitled to it. One of the things I like about this blog is the tone set by it’s creators. Vigorous debate is welcomed, but picking someone apart is beneath us. Joe could be a ‘web troll’ who posts on blogs just to upset people and inspire tirades. I don’t think this is the case, but if you really want to shut someone down, ignore them completely. Nonetheless I am not the blog police so I digress…
Joe does have a very valid point. For this model to survive it will take more than good reviews and enthusiastic admirers. It will take sales, period. This is the cold reality in the business world. At the price point of these LGVs, they have some VERY stiff competition. When you price yourself at the very top of the category, accuracy is expected. After that, legacy comes down to the fit and finish. If Walther can compete with or best the likes of Weihrauch and Air Arms where it comes to that, they will have a winner. If not, they will become a collector’s item because of the short production run.
Slinging…I completely agree everyone has a right to their opinion.
I think the reason people have been posting as they have is that the person in question has never added anything of substance to any discussion on this blog that I can recall.
The only time he has posted (unless he uses more than one moniker) is to bash the Walther.
Something’s just not right.
And I still want that $75 ChiCom gun that shoots with an FWB 😉
So do the Chinese!
Thank you for your very open minded thoughts and comment.
Airguns companies exist to make money. I wonder where this LGV fits in…in Field Target, Silhouette, plinking, dust collecting, or what?
As always, time will tell about this gun. Sometimes a gun’s only purpose is to be enjoyable and put a smile on the owners face. I bought a very expensive (to me) TX200 and do not shoot field target. But I have used it for pest control and I enjoy target shooting, plinking, and frankly just looking at how beautiful it is. Perhaps people will feel the same about this gun, it just has stiff competition. You are right to bring up this point.
Feel free to comment on airguns you have and enjoy. Or guns you’ve shot and don’t enjoy. Off topic comments are welcomed here. It’s the best airgun place on the net.
I respect peoples opinions about guns if they’ve shot them. If they want to criticize price even though they haven’t shot the gun then I can live with that too. Once or twice.
Joe got under my skin since everytime there’s a post on the new LGV he says the same thing, “even though I haven’t shot the gun it’s too expensive.” 4 or 5 times of this is too much.
Not a bad place to start. I sat around .500 to 1 with open sights with a stock Quest 800. With some lubing, polishing, scoping etc. I can get around .236 with JSB Exact Jumbo Express 5.51 14.3gr pellets. My first real bunny bustin’ AR.
Looks good. Did someone say that the Crosman Premiers were going downhill? They used to shoot fine, but I believe that my new box is the cause of my IZH 61 shooting all over the place. The gun shoots well with the usual RWS Hobbys. Upon inspection, I see that the Crosmans have very narrow skirts. Could it be that every so often, these don’t fully expand? Then they might behave similar to bbs and go bouncing down the barrel to exit at some angle.
If I had shot any furniture by mistake at my five yard range, something would really be wrong. As a matter of fact, I had a very good session last night relearning my fundamentals. It is so strange how you get the urge to snipe no matter that you know not to do that. It’s like the Adam Within or Fallen Man, the way the impulse creeps up on you. My trigger finger was grinding to a stop as I tried to anticipate the exact right moment to release the shot. But by forcing it forward, everything fell into place. I feel like I just passed a martial arts test.
ajvenom, whoa, that’s quite a mule story. I like the details and the mules, but I don’t get the last part. A guy auctions off a dead mule under bogus conditions, then refunds the money to the winner and somehow earns a new Ford tractor out of the transaction in the middle of the Depression? If the storyteller makes his living from things like this, that’s as amazing as anything else. So sad about the various abuses that mules have been subject too. You can only imagine what happened when horses and mules were used for transport. I’ve read something about this in military campaigns and it is frightful.
BG_Farmer, you’re right. Horses have been praised for their courage, strength and loyalty, but I cannot recall them for intelligence. There is just one counterexample. When I was lecturing in military history at the University of Minnesota, I used to ask my students which was the most powerful weapon of the pre-gunpowder battlefield. It boiled down to the mounted knight versus the heavy infantry. Contrary to most expectations, the winner is the heavy infantry (provided they are well-trained enough to stand up to a charge). The reason is that you can train people to suicidal bravery, but you cannot make a horse run onto a line of spears. Sooner or later, the horse will start looking out for number one. But what this says about the relative intelligence of the two is open to interpretation as I used to conclude. He he he.
Yes, I understand that the reputed stubbornness and bad temper of mules is actually a sign of their intelligence and they respond well to good treatment. I’ve also heard that they can hold a grudge–again a sign of planning and abstraction. I was ruined for horses on my first lesson when our group was listening to instruction and then for no reason at all a horse behind us, cut loose and fired both legs against the stable door that a disabled girl was resting against on the opposite side. Anybody would have been killed from the force of that blow and the silent surprise was chilling. I can only imagine what a mule would be capable of.
Slinging Lead and FredDPRofNJ, yeah, that was embarrassing to get conned like that, but I couldn’t help but appreciate the criminal skill. About that time, I had been practicing Jack Dempsey’s falling step technique with the straight punch. It is a now forgotten art in boxing for putting all of your body weight into a punch with explosive effect. There are versions of this in other styles, but I can’t say that I’ve seen anything quite like it either. It crossed my mind to haul off and hit the second distractor, but thank goodness I didn’t. It is a fundamental rule, as I learned later, that you do not get into fights in a foreign country because you will always lose. And besides, these guys were so sophisticated that I would never have known what hit me. Well, I was lucky enough to survive that and live on to an older age.
In view of the attack in Boston, I’m starting to wonder if guns may not even be the crucial element in self-defense. Maybe the smart money is on buying a full suit of bullet-proof gear with leggings and everything. Whenever I see a casualty list, I subconsciously assume that wounded means “will recover” but that is not the case here. It sounds like there were plenty of amputations. So curious to find out who was behind this. It’s got to be either foreign or domestic terrorism, and I haven’t heard of anyone claiming credit for this which you would expect of foreign terrorists.
I am more of a of Paul Harvey, “the rest of the Story”, fan which had more truth to it. Neely starts off good but then tends to spin a good story like Garrison Kiellor. Although, “there’s good news tonight”, Garbriel Heatter, is probably more influential for news, especially during his more famous broadcasts “We the People” during WWII.
A full bullet resistant suit won’t work alone. There is no perfect defense. You have to have a offensive capability too.
Sniping becomes a strong urge when you’re focusing on the wrong thing, like trying to shoot bulls-eyes, trying to shoot high scores, trying too hard not to blow it, or even because you simply become impatient. Giving in to the temptation to snipe is a sign that you’ve given up on focusing on what really matters.
Relax, and allow yourself to make mistakes. But also make it a goal to learn from each shot by following through. Just the act of being able to call your shots is an accomplishment, just as being able to cause the gun to go off without disturbing your sight alignment is. So there are lots of things that can be “a positive”, even if a shot doesn’t go as well as you might have liked.
Relax, think positive and happy thoughts (or maybe a favorite feel good song), and be as intelligent as possible about what you are doing. Bulls-eye shooting really is an intellectual endeavor.
I learned a long time ago that negative (or stressful) thoughts WILL cause you to lose focus for a fraction of a second, which is more than enough time to blow a shot. Accept bad shots, so long as you are able to achieve the full shot cycles worth of fundamental goals. You can learn from bad shots, and especially if they are consistent. If you snipe, then you’ve added a sort of random component to the equation that you won’t learn from.
So just as I said awhile back, your wobble area is your friend, so are your mistakes. If you focus on all of the fundamental goals and observe shot execution till the end of follow-through, you will be able to master a higher percentage of your shots. Again, fixing problems outside of the fundamentals is an entirely different phase of shooting development. First try to find exclusive satisfaction in achieving the fundamental goals, no matter what mistakes you’ve made. In other words, forget about things like scores, or group size. Those are directly a function of how well you master the fundamentals. If you make something likes scores your priority (or goal), then you’ve absolutely created a plateau that will be nearly impossible to break. There’s little in the way of intelligence in making “scores” a goal. That’s a classic case of putting the cart before the horse.
Keep it positive. This also means knowing when to walk away for awhile.
In my opinion – a VERY wise/mature perspective!
Considering my own ‘mental experience’, it was possible to understand what you are talking about – only after a very long way of practicing..
It is not something you ‘read and learn’.
In my case, the objective limitations of my airgun’s “equipment” (the ‘rifle’/break barrel/spring/lock system? the rear sight? the pellet? the scope? ..) did create a tricky field to deviate my attention and my “gross errors’ diagnostics” from – “..what really matters”.
Keep up this kind of lucidness is my challenge, thank you for reinforcing it.
We must institute a registry of Pressure Cookers, and a 5-day wait on the purchase of them.
Okay — that’s hyperbole, but compare it to the normal response to any use of a firearm…
at least no one got hurt and your loss was really minimal, all things considered. I can tell you from experience it’s a royal pain when your wife’s / daughter’s credit card numbers get copied on a Euorpean vacation and used quickly and frequently in a very short period of time.
As for shooting my son’s kitchen chair leg, he’s moved back home. The chair and other furniture is in our basement and that was the first shot I took with that Leapers scope that shot 2 feet low at 28 feet. It wasn’t my fault! Also, no one else knows but everyone on the blog here 🙂
Sounds like this AR has it all. Will be interesting to how it does with a scope and perhaps “a little mellowing out.” The price is a little scary, but if it performs well, it should be worth it.
Nice to see the .177 sample is accurate as was the .22. I may well have to buy one of these sometime.
As far as the price goes, yes it is not cheap, but it looks like you are getting a well-built, accurate airgun. It is a piece that should easily last 50+ years. In that light, it is not so expensive.
My Beeman R1 is now 30 years old. All it has needed over the years is a breech seal and a mainspring. Other than a couple of stock dings (my fault) it looks almost new. My hunch is the LGV will exhibit similar longevity.
Paul in Liberty County
That’s my take, as well.
I noticed for every 1 new air rifle there seems to be 10 new plastic airsoft guns. I am starting to wonder if they have finally found the ultimate edge of where airguns can possibly go as far as design and performance. It seems that every gun that comes to the market is practically identical to every other gun. I see very few guns that stand out as something new and unique.
Victor & twotalon,
I had to remove your two most recent remarks. Kids will read this and get some bad ideas.
Good thinking. Unfortunately the internet is full of bad ideas, like the example I gave. It’s amazing how different one thinks about guns when they’ve actually completed a good Hunter-Safety course, which was a mandatory first step in becoming a member of our Junior Marksmanship program. In organized shooting, safety really is the number one priority. I knew ranges that would bar you for life if you committed even seemingly small infractions, like leaving your bolt closed while shooters were out changing targets. Didn’t matter if the gun was loaded or not, the fact of the matter is that no one could know whether it was or not.
I’ll never forget the “Primitive Pete” character from the NRA videos. Maybe those videos should be put on utube.
I know where to draw the line now (except for ragging on B.B.).
Prayers for the people in Boston who innocently became part of a national tragedy.
Prayers for Mac, may he overcome his illness.
Prayers for everyone who appreciates life and spending time together.
Could someone please shed some insight as to what the Walther Marketing department is thinking when they produce this LGV air rifle. Is it to be the best spring gun for Field Target? Best spring gun for Silhouette? Best spring gun for plinking? or Best spring gun for people to drool over and talking about? or what?
Could you shed some light on why you’re so negative and vocal about an airgun that you’ve never shot?
Have you ever shot any of the new Walther LGV models?
I’ve never shot one either. I’m on the fence about this new introduction. “TUNED OUT OF THE BOX WITH NEW PISTON TECHNOLOGY” is intriguing. Reviewers from the UK, OZ, USA (multiple including B.B.) confirm this marketing hype.
A tuned gun (my definition is tight fitting parts, i.e., tight manufacturing specifications, correct lubes in the right places in the right amounts) out of the box translates into a premium price paid for an airgun. Just like “accurizing” or customizing comes with a price premium for a firearm.
Buying even a “high end” springer with low tolerances that requires a tune to address starts with shipping cost both ways. In the CONUS this is an average of $75.00 when you include packaging, insurance and shipping cost (no time or cost to package, label or deliver to the shipper is included in the cost). Then you have to add in the cost to pay a tuner to create a gun that is smooth like the LGV has been reported to be “out of the box”. Think hard about the price/value of a properly tuned (tight fitting parts, sized seals, proper lubes, advanced piston designs, etc.) breakbarrel when you allege the new LGV is $100 too high.
You mentioned earlier that the $100 price difference between a LGV and a TX200 outraged you since the TX had legendary accuracy that was probably equal to the LGV. Many airgunners are put off by an underlever or sidelever so this comparison is not comparable.
Let’s talk breakbarrels. What breakbarrel “out of the box”, with similar power, feels tuned like the new LGV as reported in many venues?
In other words, this is not about the new LGV being the best breakbarrel for field target or silhouette it’s about offering an option for airgunners and potential airgunners to buy a sedate springer with power that doesn’t require as much technique to shoot accurately as most and potentially grows this hobby because of these attributes.
How is this a bad thing that warrants complaints?
Thanks, your answered my question which is…this airgun offers an “option for airgunners and potential airgunners to buy a sedate springer with power that doesn’t require as much technique to shoot accurately as most and potentially grows this hobby because of these attributes.”
The problem with me is that I purchased an airgun with a purpose in mind, such as “this air rifle will be for Silhouette…etc.”. I just don’t see how this air rifle fits into any of my shooting, such as FT, Silhouette, and 10-meters.
Also, from looking at B.B. accuracy report of this LGV, it is not that accurate for the money that Walther wants, so I am not going to buy it even for plinking. Also I not much of a dust collector.
‘Accuracy’ – new reader on the blog.
Congratulations for your work (nice work and highly professionally handled)!
After decades.., since June/11 I’ve restarted airgun shooting with a Gamo Whisper X 5.5 mm (“W1”) and a Gamo scope 3-9x 40 (one piece mount with stop pin); in Oct/12, I’ve bought a second Whisper .. (“W2”).
Professionally retired in 2011, I shoot a LOT!
In March/12, after the third W1’s mainspring has broken, I’ve changed it to a GAS RAM spring (“45 kg”). With this kind of review.., I’ve asked the brand new W2 already comes with a GAS RAM spring (“50 kg”).
Trying a brand new Nikko Stirling Mount Master 4 x 32 AO (one piece mount + stop pin) for W1 (mostly) and W2: – after a month (few hundreds of shots), the first scope has broken the windage adjustment; the second brand new scope has broken the mil dot reticle, also after a month .. I’m waiting the availability in stock to substitute by a Nikko Stirling Airking Gold Crown 4 x 32 AO.
Recently, I’ve bought a RWS 350 P Magnum 5.5 mm (Pyramid Air); in a couple of weeks I’ll get a Diana scope 3-9x 40 AO (+ Diana one piece mount with stop pin).
I’m only using the HN Field Target Trophy (14.66 gr) for the 3 rifles, mostly to the 25 m shooting, once in a while to the 50 m shooting. When the Diana scope arrives, I’m thinking to use the HN Barracuda Match (21.14 gr), only to the 350 Magnum and 50 m shooting.
Chronograph (old/trustable?) at approximately “3” m from the muzzle:
W1 = media 621 fps; “17/18” joules (“estimated” muzzle energy);
W2 = .. 668 fps; “20/21” joules ..;
350 M = .. 782 fps; “27/28” joules ..
Well, with this ‘profile’, I would like to know for each equipment, if you please:
1) What distance do you recommend to ‘zero’ each scope (Gamo and Nikko only for W1 and W2); Diana scope only to the 350;
2) What 10 shots ‘groups’ (inches) do you think it would be possible;
2a. Open sights / 25 m / 50 m;
2b. Scope / 25 m / 50 m.
And I’ll do my best efforts (‘artillery hold’ included) to get close to them, considering you as my benchmark challenge.
Thank you very much for your time and attention.
Marcos (São Paulo/Brazil)
I zero the scopes for all air rifle at 20 yards. The pellet will rise after that and settle back down at between 28 and 35 yards, depending on its velocity.
I zero open sights about the same, unless I want to shoot closer. Then I zero for the range that I want to shoot.
Thank you for your answer.
Indeed, 20 >> 28/35 yards seems to be an ‘interesting’ band to field use.
I’ve found a software – “Hawke BRC2” – that you can customize for your own parameters, and it gives some graphics in order to estimate our pellet trajectories.
I’ve not looked at what BRC2 is supplying yet, but you might be interested in:
… since it was optimized for pellet guns (Hmmm, time to upgrade — I’m still on v3).
BRC2 was just my first step in that field..
Thank you! Straight to what I was looking for!
I may by “late to the show,” but the 177 vs 22 power level has got to be explained as two different power levels as per the Walther “variants” on their website. One is 23J (the 177 one being tested here) and the other the 16J version (the one tested in 22).
I’ve hounded P.A.’s customer service to ask which power level’s they’ll be stocking and have yet to receive an answer. It shouldn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out they need to offer them ALL!!!!
BB- tell me, how’s your opinion of the shot cycle comparing the two? I think it’d be much better to compare each caliber in the same power plant (as some say a 22 generally feels softer than a 177 in the same model gun). From what I’ve read the lower version is mighty smooth. So it’d be particularly interesting to see if the higher one is as well?
I believe I said this in the report. The shot cycles are identical.