by Tom Gaylord, a.k.a. B.B. Pelletier
Today, we’ll look at the performance of the Hatsan AT P1 PCP air pistol for accuracy at 25 yards. It took a long time between this test and the last one because this gun is too loud to discharge inside the house. I had to do it for the velocity test and my ears are still ringing. I waited for a day at the range to test the gun for accuracy.
I mounted a vintage Weaver K-856 scope on the gun for this test. It’s a fixed 8x scope with a 56mm objective lens. I thought it would be clear enough at 25 yards (parallax set for 100 yards), but it turned out to be fuzzy. I will change scopes for the next test.
The vintage Weaver scope was powerful, but it didn’t focus as close as 25 yards. It’ll be changed for the next test.
Before I left the house, I filled the gun to 3,000 psi with the Hill pump. You may remember that this pistol has a proprietary Hatsan fill probe, and I wanted to install it on something I could leave it on for a while. My carbon fiber tank is too busy with other guns, so I dedicated the Hill for this job. Because the AT P1 has such a small reservoir, I felt it would be okay to fill the pistol this way. This is the problem with proprietary fill couplings — they have to be installed on something, making it impossible to use that fill device for your other pneumatic guns that have universal Foster fittings.
After filling the gun, I looked at the Hatsan tank gauge. It read about 50 bar, even though I had just put in 206 bar. I knew it was full, so I left it alone. The next morning, the gauge needle was up to 100 bar, but it never did read correctly. That caused a problem at the range when I shot the gun down too far. It was then that I learned that the gauge needle bears no relation to how much air is in the tank.
I started out shooting a group of 5 Crosman Premiers. The first shot landed a quarter-inch below the next 4. The total group size was 0.678 inches, but 4 of those shots went into 0.322 inches. As it turned out, that was the best group of the day.
This group of 5 Crosman Premiers shows some promise; but for 25 yards, it’s only average. It was the best group of the test!
The trigger-pull was both too long and too heavy for the best in precision. I can normally work around almost anything, but this time the trigger-pull was a real hinderance to good shooting.
I shot the next 5 Premiers at a fresh target after adjusting the scope down. This time, 5 shots went into 0.993 inches, which is considerably larger than the first group. It alerted me to the fact that there may not be 10 good shots on a charge of air.
This group of 5 Crosman Premiers is not so good. It was the second group after the fill. Top hole has 2 pellets.
The pressure gauge on the gun now reads about 180 bar, so I thought there were another 10 good shots in the gun. It wasn’t until later that I discovered the gauge doesn’t read the pressure correctly.
The next 10 shots were JSB Exact 15.9-grain Jumbos. They landed in a group measuring 2.093 inches between centers. That certainly isn’t a good group — especially for just 25 yards. This group has too many shots and was shot with too little air pressure in the tank, but even then the shots are so scattered that I doubt it’s the right pellet for this pistol. But because I don’t know that for sure, I’ll try this pellet again in the next test.
Ten JSB Jumbo 15.9-grain pellets were all over the place at 25 yards. Group measures 2.093 inches.
I filled the tank again and changed to Beeman Kodiaks. This time, 10 pellets went into a group measuring 1.464 inches. The last shot went far to the left of the main group. Because it landed in the white, I was able to see it hit the paper. That was the tip-off that 10 shots were too many — even at only 25 yards.
Ten Beeman Kodiaks was obviously too many shots for a single fill. Group measures 1.464 inches.
I’d wanted to shoot 10-shot groups, but the AT P1 doesn’t seem to have enough air for 10 good shots on a single charge. According to the chronograph testing I did on Part 2, it has air for about 7 shots, so I limited the next groups to that.
Seven Beeman Kodiaks were spread out wide. I was losing my edge on the day! Group measures 0.999 inches between centers.
Seven Premiers did not do well. Group measures 1.675 inches between centers.
The learning curve this day was too steep for me to be satisfied with these results. I’d lost my edge toward the end of the session, and it wasn’t worth pushing on. I’ll return for a second try at 25 yards with different pellets. And I’ll give those JSB Jumbos a second chance. If I can’t do a lot better than this, I won’t bother trying to shoot the pistol at 50 yards.
The trigger-pull on the AT P1 pistol is too long and heavy for the best accuracy. Also, the scope needs to be changed to give the pistol its best chance to do well. Hopefully, I’ll be able to find another good pellet next time and these problems will disappear. As powerful as this air pistol is, it’ll make a good hunting airgun if it can hit what it shoots at.
41 thoughts on “Hatsan AT P1 PCP air pistol: Part 3”
Continue to be impressed with your ability to “press on” with testing of an airgun when all signs point south.
Wish you were closer so we could talk about the 6mm ppc. I’m in a new dimension.
Yesterday was one of the worst days I have had in years. The Hatsan started it with these horrible groups, then an experiment I was doing with swaged bullets went south. I left the range with a storm cloud over my head and it remained for the rest of the day.
I also tested a new handload for my .357 Desert Eagle. The recoil was very light, but the unburned powder hit me in the face, making the experience miserable. To top it off, the accuracy was poor — about 6 inches at 25 yards. I don’t know why I don’t just stick to my 1911s and forget all the rest.
So what you’re saying is that your job is not just about having fun at the range every day? Thought your envious vocation was similar to dancing fairies in a field of buttercups. I’m shattered.
So was I Kevin. Maybe Tom should get a bonus for shooting inaccurate guns?
Sometimes you step on a fairy and it ruins your whole day. Every try to scrape fairy from the soles of your boots? I thought not.
Also, ambrosia is fattening.
Yes, there are moments I can say (even at five yards), “that is the worst group I have ever shot (or several of them)”–an unpleasant feeling to say the least. That’s still some good shooting with a pistol as far as I’m concerned. My home is in a state of rearrangement, so I’m practicing by dry-firing my firearms pistols rested, and this is definitely a different art. The one time I tried shooting rested at the range with my 1911 at 50 yards, I was awful. The shooting was so bad that it disturbed my regular shooting for quite some time.
B.B., so the best do button rifling! How about that. I was under the impression that Savage’s button rifling was one of their economy measures. There are certain conservative voices out there that hold that cut rifling, which I believe is the older method, is intrinsically better. I’ll need to look into the lapping business more. One hears about it on the margins of different accurizing jobs like glass bedding. But David Tubb sells a kit of special ammo that will lap your barrel in the process of shooting, and he swears by them.
dangerdongle, that’s a good one about bolting out the door ahead of your mother-in-law. She sounds like she would compete with Kevin’s mother-in-law who was compared to an alien that points a gun at a human and honks, “I see you are sentient, sickeningly so. If you have the faculty for speech, I suggest that you use to explain why I should not blast you where you stand on your repulsive meaty digits.”
Wulfraed, that’s a fascinating definition of a bolt-action that has the potential to match our blog discussion about the definition of a magazine versus a clip. (I think we agreed that a magazine has some kind of self-loading feature like a spring to advance the rounds.) You remind me of this movie where a highly educated guy takes up work as a car mechanic and starts telling his colleagues about the conversion of chemical to mechanical energy to turn the wheels. The other mechanics stagger out and report about the new guy who knows all this scientific stuff.
Anyway, my first question would be why one would define a bolt-action as something whose handle has a different rate action. It sounds cool, but what’s the reason? I’m supposing it’s because a different rate implies a mechanism that is separate from the bolt itself which would be reasonable. That being the case, does the standard turnbolt really qualify? Once you open the bolt (in a cock on opening action), you’re right that there is only human power at work and no amplification. But why disqualify the turning motion itself? I’ve heard (probably on the blog) that the turning motion generates extremely powerful “camming” forces whatever that is to move the locking lugs into position. So, there’s your amplification.
If I were trying to define a bolt-action, I would try to figure out what is intrinsically “bolt-like” about it. My understanding is that bolt-actions are the simplest and strongest. Why would that be? Surely that has to do with the power with which they locking lugs are held which in turn is based on the leverage forces you can generate with rotation of the bolt handle. So defining the turning motion of the handle out of consideration would eliminate the very essence of the bolt-action. It’s why the straight pull seemed like such a useful test case for me. Here you have something that looks like a bolt-action but there is no rotation that I can see. By the way, I know very little about the detailed workings of either of these mechanisms other than what I’ve said.
On the subject of rotation, that puts the lever action which you mentioned into a new light. The amplification that you mentioned derives from a rotational motion of the handle that drives the linear movement of the bolt. The torque vector of the lever rotation (axis) is at right angles to the bolt movement. Could that be the difference? The classic bolt-action in contrast has an axis of rotation that lines up with the bolt movement. That is visually different, but is it significant? As long as you have some rotational motion linked to the bolt operation, does it matter how it is aligned? Not sure. Anyway, my vote for what defines a bolt-action would be whatever properties make it the simplest, strongest, and most reliable of actions. Maybe that’s not even true. I’ve heard that the falling block action is the simplest and strongest. So we would have a relative definition of strength and simplicity that we associate with turnbolt actions in contrast to other types of actions….
Here’s a simple question. While using a screwdriver the other night, I noticed, as I have before, that the metal screw seems to be magnetically attracted to the screwdriver and clings to it with a surprising amount of force. Where does the magnetic force (or other force of attraction) come from? My guess is that the pressure exerted by the screwdriver on the screw generates heat which allows molecules in the metal to line up as magnetic dipoles to create a small and transient magnetic attraction. I know that you guys have driven enough screws and have enough knowledge to answer this one.
I probably wouldn’t got that far — but I do have to state that the first car I drove with a cruise control was the smoothest cruise control I’ve encountered. Reason: the car had a turbo-charger and the cruise control system worked by controlling the waste-gate of the turbo. The throttle position didn’t vary going over hills, just the boost pressure going from the normal -7 [PSI? or was it inches of mercury] up to +7 when climbing hills and -21 coasting downhill. In contrast my Jeep shows noticeable lag as it has to change the throttle position, producing small lunges when transitioning to climb mode.
I don’t think I did specify a different rate condition. I did mention the initial force amplification (the term “camming” missed my mind at the time). However, for a 60deg rotation of the bolt handle, the rest of the bolt also rotates 60deg (and any camming force can only be provided near the end of the handle rotation as you have to clear the locking lugs — otherwise the lugs would bind).
If you limit to repeaters… a falling-block action (Ruger #1) is probably stronger, but found in single shots only.
Any camming force on closing a bolt action would only apply to seating the cartridge fully — and wouldn’t be wanted at the “end” of the stroke as any surface camming the bolt forward when the handle is turned downwards would respond to recoil by camming the handle upwards. For the most part the closed position, and the first fraction of rotation are not against camming surfaces but instead are flat surfaces.
The early lever actions (Winchester 94 style) locked by having thin metal slide vertically into reliefs cut into the receiver and the bolt. Recoil pushes against the slides which push against the receiver. Some more modern lever actions do have a rotary head on the bolt — though I’m not sure if they are just cammed into place, or if the lever also locks the rotation.
Pump action shotguns (those I’ve examined) have a “shark fin” in the bolt. When the bolt is closed, the action bars press the fin up into a slot in the top of the receiver. Cycling the action involves the action bars moving back about a half inch to an inch, which lets the shark fin drop into the bolt — then the action bars push the bolt to the rear. And semi-auto shotguns use a recoiling mass or gas piston to move the action bars.
The .30 M-1 Carbine has a rotary bolt; the flat surfaces hold against the forces of recoil until gas pressure bleeds into a short stroke piston. That knocks the cocking handle rearward, and a cam slot in the handle then rotates the bolt to unlock, whereupon it can slide to the rear.
The only straight pull bolt action I’m familiar with was a short run .22LR (though it seems to back in production: Browning T-Bolt). And this technically is one of those differential motion designs. Pulling back on the handle results in it pivoting slightly, pulling the locking lug horizontally out of the side of the receiver, which then allows the bolt to slide back.
Kevin, I have been wondering about that 6 mm ppc you mentioned awhile back .
Robert & B.B.,
The sako custom 6mm ppc isn’t mine yet. I’ve shot it twice. Neither trip to the range was perfect but I’m amazed at what this gun can do in wind at 100 yards. It’s been too windy to shoot farther. Up to this point in my experience a custom 22-250 with a canjar trigger shot the best groups in wind for me at 100 yards. The 6mm ppc beat those groups the first time I shot it.
Been shooting the owners handloads with 65 gr vmax. Found some 58 gr vmax this week and I’m taking them up to my cabin and we’re going to load some of those with his H322. I’m planning on getting to the range very early saturday and hope for no wind.
I’ve heard that the 6mm rounds are really the ultimate in flat trajectory and accuracy. And Sako is a very respected name. You sound like you have a winner.
Please tell us about your 6mm PPC. I need to hear about accurate guns.
Howdy Mr. BB & the Gang, long as we’re in the land of fairies & buttercups, heard a great line the other day, ” lookin’ for a unicorn that farts rainbows”.
Thanx ya’ll, shoot/ride safe,
I must agree, Kevin. B.B.’s tenacity with wanting to give this gun so much time and effort is admirable indeed. Maybe it’s because he can see potential, when I see a dog. If I were in the market for something new and different, I would have to give this pistol a pass. This gun looks all wrong to me. At first glance, I thought the handle was either made for a child, or this had to be the biggest air pistol I have laid eyes on. At over four pounds, it would take a big, strong person to shoot it like a pistol. Some folk comment it would be a better shooter with a shoulder stock. However, that would make the Hatsan AT P1 more of a rifle then a pistol. The real deal breaker for me, was learning there is only enough air for 7-8 good shots. With similar pistols, such as the Marauder, getting three times the shot count, 7-8 shots are unacceptable in today’s market. Oh yes, there is the problem of a decibel level exceeding that at a 70’s Pink Floyd concert. And, I don’t think a better scope is going to tighten these groups by much, if at all.
I have always wanted Hatsan to produce a real good gun. I think the potential is there as far as manufacture is concerned. They just need some R+D people who know their way around airguns, and will ask the people in the trenches what they would like to see in a new Hatsan. In todays tight, competitive world, Hatsan had better step up their game, or they will be left behind the many brands producing accurate, affordable guns that folks are proud to own. Of coarse, I might be wrong about everything I say, and find they are producing guns that people are willing to buy. Maybe there are a lot of people willing to settle for less. There is nothing new under the sun.
Hatsan seems to rely on eye candy and marketeering to sell their stuff to the newbies who have not experienced or read reviews about their shortcomings. Gamo and others do the same thing. With the airgun market growing as it is, there are new suckers being born every minute.
Now if I had the money, I would try to pick one of these up at a good used price. I would yank that funky stock off, change and shroud the barrel, maybe do a little something with that tank, fiddle with the trigger and make a bullpup stock for it.
As a pistol it is a disaster. It might be alright for laying in the seat of your pickemup truck and popping things along the roadside, but as you pointed out, who is going to want to carry that honker around?
Here’s what bugs me so much about airgun mfrs: Most use the customer as the test bed. I was never told that, but it’s obvious based on how poorly many of the guns shoot.
Did someone at the factory shoot targets with the prototype, the first version or a random sample that came off the production line? Imagine if car makers never tested their prototypes or the models that came off the production line?
What’s wrong with testing your products before putting them into production or testing the ones that come off the production line? And if they tested them, did they say, “Heck, anybody would be glad to have an expensive PCP that shoots groups you measure with a yardstick!” I’m exaggerating, of course, but it makes my point.
(I edited the above after hitting SUBMIT.)
Cars are regulated by the government and they have a very large large and vocal customer base. Over time the airgin community may grow large enough that more of the manufacturers will will have no choice but to pay attention if they want to survive. It is the ignorance of the masses on which they currently thrive.
All wrong is exactly what I think! The gun is too big, has too few shots and now we see that the accuracy seems poor.
But given the power this pistol offers I want to give it every benefit of the doubt, because even with just 7 shots per fill it would make a wonderful hunting air pistol. There aren’t enough of those that we can afford to overlook one.
You are right about Hatsan having nearly everything it takes to make good airguns. But they obviously have no one in the company with a vision of what is wanted or needed. It’s so sad. It reminds me of Ford making cars nobody wanted and Carroll Shelby taking one (the Mustang) and showing what could be done.
7 good shots per fill is ridiculous. If the .22 is getting 7, the .25 must be getting what 4 or 5? With a 10 shot mag!?!
The ones we’re getting here are shooting under 500fps so we should have a decent number of shots per fill. Would it make it more accurate?
It might. And don’t give up on this one yet. As I said, this session was a steep learning curve for me. I still want to keep an open mind.
Yes, 7 good shots is pretty poor, but when you are dealing at this power level, that’s what a PCP can do. Look at the TalonP. It gets about 10 shots that are good. But we do need good hunting air pistols and this Hatsan has the power for that role. As a hunting gun, 7 shots isn’t such a liability.
7 shots is not enough, especially if you have a 10 shot mag.
They should have done what was needed in order to at least shoot a full mag.
The TalonP doesn’t have a mag so they can make whatever number of shots they want as long as the customer is ready to pay for the product for a compact and powerfull package.
You shouldn’t have to change the air tank on your gun (if you have a second one which should come standard since it’s getting so few shots) before changin the mag.
This thing seems like an after tought… “let’s just chop everything down, people will buy it”.
I’m usually pro Hatsan for their PCP line and I’m still interested in the P2 with the removable shoulder stock BUT in our limited fps version, with more shots per fill and a much more quieter report.
Can the .22 give us an idea of the shot count in .177 and in .25?
I think they really missed on this one
Of course the .22 gives some idea of what the .177 and .22 pistols will deliver. What I find so remarkable is that Hatsan advertises the gun as having 35 max shots per fill, while the number is so easily calculated. It’s like a personality saying, “I am the greatest!” and then failing to deliver. You can get away with it if you’re Mohammed Ali, but not if you’re just a palooka.
Could you have gotten a faulty gun? The pressure indicator is eratic and the shot count is laughable.
People who have their firearm license here bought the sub 500fps version and with a few thousands of an inch taken from the probe inside the valve got close or above 1000fps. There’s really not much difference.
You often say that you test guns as received like you were a regular customer. Well if I had received a gun that doesn’t show the actual fill pressure I would have returned it right away without knowing if it got the advertised 35 shots per fill.
Advertising 35 shots and getting somewhere near 30 would be acceptable but 7, no way.
It’s like a car advertising 35 mpg…”your mileage may vary” but 7 mpg is laughing at us and asking for lawsuits.
Maybe they came up with 35 shots because shot 36 got stuck in the barrel from lack of air pressure…
Looks like too much work for too little return. My sole fill station is a generation 2 Hill pump. If I had to fill a gun after 7 shots, it would not be worth the effort. My HW100 gets about 40 good shots on a fill, but while it’s my favorite gun, it gets very little use because of the shot count.
Too bad, it looks like another Hatson bites the dust!
I don’t yet own a pcp gun yet(!), and what has turned me off is performance like this. That and my reluctance to invest in fill equipment for guns in the common .177, .22, and .25 cal guns that only shoot pellets that are only a little heavier and shoot with only slightly more velocity like the other air guns. I see that there are some guys shooting .25 and ,30 cal cast bullets like the Saeco, RCBS, and Lyman bullets that I’ve shot for decades in my powder burners at very long range, like 500 yards. The ballistics are exactly the same as the firearms I use for fun shooting , foraging and small game hunting ( BTW, without excessive destruction of table game). They are the .25-20, 32-20. 32 mag. I have only shot stuff with those guns at 100-125 yards at most, as I’m in the east where woods ranges are generally short due to cover. I use them because they are effective and more flexible(as to velocity/power) than the ,22 and ,17 RF’s , and cheaper to shoot if you cast the bullets yourself. Why doesn’t Hatsan or the others build guns that use barrels that will shoot the same cast bullets that are commonly available for these firearms? I would put up with only five good shots and then would have the incentive to pony up and buy the compressor to fill it with. I know that there are custom makers who do this , but they can’t make enough. IMO, that is the un -tapped market for pcp’s in this country, considering current lack of availability of firearm handloading componets.
Off-topic, but my latest Pyramyd Air order was delivered yesterday, and I have been playing with my Walther MultiTac. Very cool. Someone mentioned that it is a bit heavy at 12 ounces. True. I purchased this to have in a glove box in my truck, not have on my belt. I LIKE the heft, along with the nubbled/grippy surface and the way it fills my hand.
With other multi-tools, a small complaint I have is how when you grasp it very firmly to apply some force to a fastener, the grips cut into my palm. Not the Walther! It is comfortable no matter what function I have tried.
Oh, and the pictures do not do it justice. The different textures of black give it a cool look. No other multi-tool of mine looks cool!
Just thought I’d share,
Thanks for that feedback! You made me get mine out and look at again. Yes it is heavy, but I like that. It’s too heavy to be just a knife, but as a multi-tool, it’s just right.
Heft is good. I bought a Cold Steel folder that is criticized for its weight. To me, it feels great and has what Goldfinger calls, a “divine heaviness.”
This pistol seems to be headed for obscurity. It’s one for BB’s blooper page. A fine idea gone wrong through inattention by Hatsan. I’ll echo the thoughts of you shouldn’t have to change tanks in the middle of a mag, might get one of its for garage sale prices, and finally I think it’s defective and you should ask for a new one that works….
Man, shooting that Hatsan would definitely have ruined my day. Also, I doubt it, but maybe the noise is bothering you because you don’t expect it from airguns?
This is off topic but I was wondering if you are allowed to discuss products that Pyramyd Air does not carry and sell. I’ve been a bit of a bad boy and looking at some guns made by manufacturers Pyramyd Air does not carry. I am always looking at and watching reviews of airguns. To be clear, everything I own has come from Pyramyd Air and I currently have no plans to buy from anyone else. P.A. is wonderful to deal with. Do they ever do special orders?
I would be surprised if any other gun can out shoot my Air Arms rifles(S500, S400 MPR, TX200) but you never know. Until I know if it is ok I will not even mention the names of what I have been looking at. You and your blog will always remain my primary source of info since I have come to trust all of you implicitly.
I don’t have any plans to buy anything in the near future (except for the Condor SS) because I want to get much better with what I have first. Especially at distances longer than 30 yards. I did order the MTM Gun Rest the other day. Primarily for zeroing in scopes. I still prefer holding PCP’s in both hands when I shoot. I can’t shake the notion that it gives me a better indication of my own skill. Bu that too could change.
G & G
G & G
I can discuss anything that is fit for family conversation., Yes there are some brands that Pyramyd Air does not carry. Some are brands they used to carry and discontinued for various business reasons. Others are brands that have exclusive U.S. distributorship through other companies.
Some of these guns are very good airguns. FX and Daystate both make exceptionally fine airguns. I have reported on a Daystate that I used to own, but I don’t cover the current models because they are in competition with Pyramyd Air. That doesn’t make them bad in any way — just not something you’ll see me write about on this blog.
That’s good to know. It is effective for P.A. because I would not purchase anything without some prior knowledge about it and I don’t trust anyone else enough to drop $1500 to $2500 on an unknown item.
I understand and appreciate your relationship with P.A. because you are very frank about it. Keep up the good work and I will as ever continue to look to you and this blog for my information and education about airguns.
Thanks for your reply and I will talk to you again very soon.
G & G
Maybe there is something wrong with the air valve design. Striker hitting to hard or something. Making it use to much wasted air per shot.
That’s why I asked previously if it had some kind of tuning adjustment.
Or possibly the port that’s transferring the air charge may be to big if they were thinking power when they made the pistol.
The Crosman 1720T comes with 2 different transfer ports. One has a bigger inside diameter than the other. So if you put the smaller one in and it gives less power but more shots per fill. Put the bigger one in and get more power. But you get less shots per fill.
I don’t guess the instruction manual that came with the Hatsan had any additional info about that.
Maybe there is something that can be done to increase the shots per fill but they should of had that worked out better from the factory in my opinion.
Oh forgot also. That would bother me if I had a gage that was working like you said above. I myself would rather not have a gage if it was working like that one.
R.I.P. to Jim Kelly, the African-American star of the Bruce Lee classic Enter the Dragon who passed away recently from cancer at age 67. He certainly had a heck of a build in the movie and on into later life. He also provided entertainment to millions such as with this classic cultural exchange with Mr. Han, the villainous renegade Shaolin monk:
Han: What you value is the competition.
Kelly: The winning.
Han: We all seek to win as we are born to life. It is losing that you must learn to prepare for.
Kelly: Uh-uh. Besides, when it comes, I won’t even notice.
Han: Hm? How so?
Kelly: Cuz I’ll be too busy looking good.
Thanks for yesterday’s blog about “probes” on bolt action air guns. By “probe” I mean what ever part of the bolt pushes the pellet inside the barrel. The topic is even more diverse than I imagined. As always you provided fascinating details.
I don’t really have a clue how you’d measure how well a “probe” fits a pellet, nor how you’d directly measure how well the pellet is centered with the boreline. But since the rifling is engraved on the pellet, I’d suspect that “small” differences in how the pellet is seated are possible. For example the “probe” for a given rifle could seat one pellet +/- 0.5 degrees and another +/- 0.1 degrees. Such a difference in alignment with the boreline would have a noticeable effect on good airguns like the Airforce Condor or the Benjamin Marauder (With a good rifleman too of course!!).
Speaking of parallax, would a scope with 30 yard parallax likely be pretty clear between 10 and 50 yards?
It would be fine at 50 and just a little fuzzy at 10.
This is where one considers putting a universal coupling on the source tank, and creating a set of fill fittings by putting a nipple compatible with the tank coupling on one end, and the fill fitting on the other end.
That’s what I ended up doing when I bought the Marauder — I bought an AirForce compatible nipple, an M-M threaded section, and a Crosman compatible coupler. True that makes for a somewhat long heavy hose end: AirForce coupler, M-M, Crosman coupler… But means one pump can be used for both fittings.
I must agree with edith 100% they should take mabe 1 out of 10 from the production line and shoot it 20 – 30 times to get an idea on how assembly and general quality is running. then pick 1 out of 5 from the group pulled and shoot it real hard. just my humble opinion