Airguns as military trainers

by Tom Gaylord
Writing as B.B. Pelletier

The history of airguns

This report covers:

  • Two different directions
  • Trainers first
  • The private trainers
  • Airguns? Not yet
  • U.S. Army marksmanship training
  • Air Force
  • Started in England
  • WW II
  • Stasi trainers
  • The austere ’70s

We last looked at a military airgun on Monday, when the U.S.S. Vesuvius dynamite cruiser was examined. Today I will get more personal and look at some of the trainers the military has employed to train new recruits. This subject is huge, and will become its own special section of the airgun history project.

Two different directions

When we speak of military trainers there are two very distinct paths. One leads to the training devices used by the military to train their personnel. The other path is a private one, though no less real and important. Those are the trainers that were built to order, one at a time.

Trainers first

First we have the trainers that were built specifically for the purpose of training. They all conform to specifications that somebody believed were right for the job they were tasked to do. Most of this series will be based on these trainers.

The private trainers

The second path is the private one, where officers would buy specially constructed firearms for their sons to learn both marksmanship and military drill. In the days when this was done — mostly the 18th and 19th centuries — a military career was considered very honorable and something to both covet and pursue.

The guns made for this kind of training were often made by the finest makers and were fully equivalent to the full-sized firearms of the day. They ranged from half-sized to three-quarter sized and mimicked the firearms they copied in every important way. All of them were fully functional because they were not considered toys, but rather appropriate training weapons for special youth. These guns often command prices today many times higher than the equivalent full-sized weapons they copy.

Airguns? Not yet

I would like to tell you about the youth-sized airguns that were used as trainers during this time, but I have never run across any. There must have been a few, but remember that airguns were such oddities themselves at this time, that finding one made for a youth would be astounding. So we will look at the first path, which are the airguns created for military training.

U.S. Army marksmanship training

When I entered the Army I thought it was going to be all guns and explosives. I was shocked to find the majority of what we did was done either without weapons or more often with unloaded weapons. The military wasn’t about to put loaded guns in the hand of kids until they had to!

I remember being trained in rifle marksmanship with .22 rimfire single shot rifles. This was before I entered the Army, but it was done with Army rifles and ammunition — all the lowly .22 long rifle shell. For some odd reason the Army seemed to want me to know how to shoot accurately before I started spraying machinegun bullets all around! Go figure.

The training I received was being given in the Army to all who entered just a decade before I joined up. I could still find the targets and even the rifles and ammunition in odd places, but there was no formal marksmanship program when I was in. I was there during Viet Nam and the focus was in putting guns in our hands and getting us out to the field as fast as possible.

Air Force

While the Army I served in had no airguns, the Air Force had them! They had purpose-built Crosman 160 target rifles that performed the same task that the Winchester model 52 target rifles did for the Army. They did it at 25 feet rather than 50 , but the pace was the same — one shot at a time.

Crosman 160
Crosman made several hundred special model 160 target rifles for the U.S. Air Force.

Started in England

Unbeknownst to me this pattern had been established a half-century earlier in Merry Olde England, where British cadets learned to shoot with purpose-built BSA underlever air rifles. King George was so enamored with the accuracy of the new BSA air rifle that he pushed for a conversion to its use, abandoning or at least cutting back on the Army’s use of — wait for it — the single shot .22 rimfire target rifle. That was way back before World War I, so this sort of individual training has been going on for a loooong time!

WW II

Adolph Hitler had to rearm his military under the scrutiny of several nations who watched to see that the conditions of the WW I surrender were not violated. He created flying clubs for young people (mostly men, of course) and rifle marksmanship training for his Hitler Youth, which he said was the German equivalent of the Boy Scouts. Call it what you want, tens of thousands of young men learned to fly and to shoot, which came in surprisingly handy in a few short years.

The Germans used the Schmeisser pattern bolt action repeating airguns. These were Schmeisser 33s, and Mars 110s and 115s. After the war they morphed into the Haenel model 310 and the AnschΓΌtz model 275 bolt action rifles. They shot 4.4mm lead balls through rifled barrels and were surprisingly accurate at short range.

Haenel 310
This Haenel 310 trainer was liberated from East German Stasi headquarters during the reunification of Germany.

Stasi trainers

The U.S. was flooded by thousands of Haenel target rifles in the 1990s. Ironically they all came after the fall of the Berlin Wall, when the former Stasi (secret police) headquarters were being cleared by the German government. Guess what those rifles had been used for? That’s correct, youth marksmanship programs.

What all the military organizations knew was that trigger time was important, no matter what the trigger was attached to. If the ammunition was inexpensive enough, the shooters could shoot a lot more than they could when shooting full-charge military ammunition. After good airguns came along in 1905, even the cost of the .22 rimfire cartridge was considered high, by comparison.

The austere ’70s

I remember that in the 1970s my combat support company budget for ammunition was barely enough for each man to shoot a qualification course once per year. Viet Nam had drained both the defense budget as well as the national reserve of the population, and nobody cared that our soldiers were not training with their weapons. I would have welcomed a pellet rifle that could have been used to train my troops.

We trained with low-cost simulations because live fire was reserved for one time each year. I have seen exactly one M72 Light Antitank Weapon (LAW — a portable recoilless rocket launcher) fired, but I have personally shot a dozen 35mm subcaliber training rockets.

I’m going to stop here because this is a large subject and there is so much more to talk about. Things like the Czech VZ35 trainer that accepted a real bayonet and the Daisy model 40 BB gun that looked surprisingly like a military rifle. We will get to all of that and much more in this series, so stay tuned.

226 thoughts on “Airguns as military trainers

  1. These guns are interesting to me. Especially the air gun versions. Plus I like the youth air guns and .22 rim fire youth guns.

    BB you have wrote about these military training guns in the past. I remember a Egyptian one you did some time back. I can’t remember the name of it for the life of me.

    I hope in this new history section that you are doing that you can write about some of these guns and how they functioned. Like how they loaded and what means of power that they used. Like springs or Co2 or even pneumatic.

    Heck while I’m at it was there ever any steam guns or canons? Don’t they use the steam catapults to launch the fighter jets on aircraft carriers?

    Anyway I can see where this history section could be a real big thing. I like it.


    • GF1,

      They do use steam catapults on aircraft carriers. There have been experiments with using steam cannons and such, but like the dynamite guns they came to no fruition. Modern propellants and explosives became more reliable and safer to handle. Also, a pneumatic or steam system is very bulky with high maintenance requirements. Just look at your Marauder and what it takes to make it operate versus a .22LR rifle.


      • RR
        I bet a steam canon could end up being pretty big. Probably maybe something that could be on a battle ship or a aircraft carrier. Heck the aircraft carrier already has steam. Maybe it could of shot something like that dumbell shaped round. Or even some giant steel darts.

        I’m just thinking out loud. But it would be interesting to know about the steam canons also.



      • SL
        Thanks. That is it. Cool gun.

        If I ever win the lottery or start getting ahead on the money game I would love to start collecting some of these type of military training guns.



      • BB
        Thanks. And that should be a nice report. I would love to see how they compare and their differences at that.

        Are there any other military airgun trainers that we could see you reporting on later on down the road?



      • Fred
        Pretty cool stuff. Just watched the video.

        You notice there are no metal objects any where around the launch area.

        I wonder if you have to remove watches and wedding rings before you get anywhere near it. Or you have to park your car within a certain distance away from the launch area. I wonder what procedures would be needed out on the aircraft carrier when loading the weapons on the jet fighters.

        I bet things could go wrong quick if a procedure wasn’t followed.


        • GF1,

          When flight ops are about to begin, the flight deck crew will line up across the flight deck and slowly walk from stern to bow looking for any and all foreign objects on the flight deck. The exhaust from a jet engine or the downwash from a helicopter can cause a bolt, a nut, etc. to go sailing through the air with enough force to cause serious damage/injury. More than one careless man has been blown off of a flight deck during flight ops. That is one of the main purposes of that netting around the edge of a flight deck.


          • RR
            Yep I knew they did that. I have flown the bigger nitro powered RC helecopters.

            The same applies for them. If you was to take off or land with gravel close by it would be like bb’s ricocheting off everything.

            But maybe the opposite happens with that magnet lauanch system. Maybe everything flys to it.

            Wow maybe that could be a silent weapon. Drop nails behind the troops your fighting then turn the magnets on in front of them.

            That would be a very hard system to detect. Fly in drop, then magnet on.


            • Sort of like a Gauss gun, but a giant-sized field version of a Gauss Shotgun…BIG surprise, if it’d work, lol.
              Ok physics-guys…here’s your chance for fame. πŸ˜‰ Make Gf1’s idea work. πŸ™‚

              Denny.


              • Denny
                Sad to say but the machine shop that I work at since back in the early 80’s was a government shop.

                Sad because we made projectiles. But the way it was thought about back then it was a very respectful job. We was making things that was protecting the US.

                But on the subject of flying projectiles we made the grenades that exploded in cluster bombs.

                They were supposedly 20′ long tubes that had the 3 different grenades we made in the tube. They would drop them from the sky. Supposedly one tube would cover a football feild area. One grenade would blow up above the ground, one at the ground and one would blow holes in the ground. The word from the bad guys was that they nicknamed it the metal rain.

                Don’t know if I should be happy or sad that I was involved in making specific devices to kill.

                We don’t make any of that stuff anymore. All automotive now. Now our work is all about trying to make people safe in cars. Go figure.


                • Gf1,

                  I completely understand you mixed feelings about that part of your job in the past at the machine shop. It was a part of your job, nothing more, nothing less. It was what you DID, not who you were (or are now). And as you said, there was a positive side to it as well. Trust me when i say that you do not want to know (nor do I want to tell) some of the things that were “part of my job” when I was in the service, but that’s exactly what it was…part of mt job, not who I was. I also had some positive parts of the job as well, so I know the mixed feelings all-too-well.
                  Am I proud to have served in the capacity that I did? Yes. Do I fondly remember the good parts? Yes. Do I wish that I didn’t remember the not-so-good parts? Yes. Would I go back in time to change any of what I did, if I could? H*** NO. There were reasons for all that I did (both the good and the bad). Both the good memories, and the physical and emotional scars are mine..I “EARNED ’em”, and they helped mould me into who I am today.
                  Point is, don’t sweat the past, much less work done in the past. Don’t forget it, just don’t regret it.
                  And for what it’s worth you seem to have turned out to be pretty ‘strak’ (knowledgable, ok decent kind if person) so I wouldn’t worry about it. πŸ˜‰

                  Denny.


                  • Denny
                    Thanks. And yep guess there’s a reason for everything that happens as they say.

                    All I know is just trying to survive and make good memories now.

                    And air guns are pretty fun. πŸ™‚


                • Sounds like the MOAB which we were told stood for Mother of All Bombs.
                  When I looked it up just now it said it’s Massive Ordinance Air Blast. Rumor was a 50′ crater. It must’ve been just about to come online right as I was being discharged because it was being discussed all over campus.



  2. The historical mindset of some facets of the US military is tough to wrap my head around.

    Your mention of the “austere 70s” is revolting and reminds me of how many times the US military built up sniper training, only to scuttle the program after the current hostilities had ended.

    Imagine how many Carlos Hathcocks we might have had if the military and congress had not been so myopic.


    • SL,

      I don’t talk about it much, but my memories of the military are entirely different from what we see today. People used to spit on us if we wore our uniforms in airports. They called us “baby killers.” The thanks I see being given today is so much better than the way it was 40 years ago.

      And the austerity was rampant! I remember coming into my squadron one Saturday and packing one-fourth of our tactical equipment other than weapons. It was sent to Viet Nam, because the locals needed it (we were told). What nobody thought of was the fact that the Saigon harbor could only unload a few boats at a time and there was no warehouse, so this stuff sat in cardboard boxes on the beach and rotted in the rain and sun. It was never used.

      But at least we did something! πŸ˜‰

      B.B.


      • BB

        You are torturing me here.

        The notion of US forces being “baby killers” is so absurd, it makes me sick. The notion that John Kerry is secretary of state is equally nauseating.

        The lack of gratitude for service members such as yourself at the time is a disgrace that I can barely stomach.

        I thank you for your service, despite the fact that you snore so loud that you drove your troops to sleep outside in the snow.


        • SL
          I can remember the story’s my dad told me about the Korean war.

          War whatever way you have to look at it is usually going to end in a angry or unhappy thought. And also a happy thought when the people serving get to come home.

          I never served but I can just imagine the frustration of being there to do a job and also the thought of its nonsense. And then knowing what your doing there then can’t wait to get back to your normal life back home.

          And then get wounded and waiting and wondering how or what’s going to happen next. And the family back home and all the other things that could run through your mind.

          I probably shouldn’t even be commenting on this because I was just a kid at the time. But I know as a kid and growing up that the Vietnam war brought alot of controversy with the people of the US back then.

          If the people serve in the forces and they are doing their jobs for our freedom. Then a person is home in the US in the comfort of their home and griping about the war. Well there is something wrong with that picture.

          It’s not somewhere I would of wanted to be. And I sure would of had a problem with the situation if I came back to the US and people were putting down the people that served. Crazy is all I can say.

          And if somebody has something to argue about with my thoughts I just don’t feel like hearing it. Sorry.

          Ok now I got to start thinking about air guns again so I can have a happy Friday. The weekends comming is all I can say. πŸ™‚


          • Gf1,

            You’ll get no arguements from me, only a sincere “Thank you” for obviously understanding what many non-veterans were unable ( or unwilling) understand at that time. So Thank You, and I sincerely mean that.

            Denny.


            • Denny
              I appreciate the thank you.

              And it’s just hard for me to comprehend how people don’t appreciate what a veteran goes through.

              One of the old timers had a automobile body shop down the road from my mom and dad’s house when I was kid growing up. Of course I was all into muscle cars so I found myself hanging out there quite a bit helping out but really just to be able to hang out there.

              He would tell car stories and gun stories and sometimes war stories. He talked about visiting the wall with the soldiers names.

              He was always a happy smiling and joking guy. It was weird to see him cry when he talked about the Soldeirs memorial wall. And he couldn’t talk no more. He would stop and go sit down and be dead quiet.

              Yep people don’t think or know what its like to be in a war environment. My dad said it was like living hell at times. I don’t even want to imagine.


        • Slinginglead,

          Please don’t bring politics into this forum. Its readers are, I suspect, of all political colours.

          As you are offended by the lack of support for troops, I am equally offended at your ironic denigration of John Kerry.

          (Pasted from Wikipedia) Kerry served as a Lieutenant in the United States Navy during the period from 1966 to 1970. His last tour in Vietnam was four months as officer in charge of a Swift boat in 1969. Kerry received several combat medals during this tour, including the Silver Star, Bronze Star, and three Purple Hearts.

          Please read the entire article, and recall that Kerrys service distinction was only called into question as he ran for president against George Bush–a candidate with a less decorated military background.


          • I must commend your restraint in not delving into politics.

            For some supplemental information on the topic of John Kerry read “Unfit for Command” by John E. O’Neill.

            YouTube also has some documentation of his postwar activities where he told congress that our military forces were raping pillaging baby killers.


            • Okay everybody.,

              I don’t have Edith to watch this blog, so I’m asking you to end the political discussions now. I’m sorry I started the whole thing with my comment.

              If this continues, I’ll have to shut down the blog. Let’s not go there.

              B.B.


      • BB
        That’s a shame that you don’t talk about it.

        Sometimes the truth ain’t a fun thing. But its what it is.

        I wish you could tell your stories here. I’m telling you I would enjoy listening.


  3. Another great read, including the recent U.S.S. Vesuvius write-up. An article on modern military rifle airgun replicas would be interesting, though I included a brief summary at the end of the Winchester MP4 blog. There are dozens of pistol replicas, too, many of which B.B. has already covered in detail.


    • HiveSeeker

      Also what I would be interested in. But I’m betting is top secret stuff.

      Air guns that are being used in the military today. Not for training but for weapons. And probably stealthy weapons at that.


  4. My own training experience was in 1960. I was in ROTC as a freshman at our small community college. Everyone got a worn out M1 for drill and because I was on the “rifle team” competing in 3 position small bore, I was also issued a beautiful Winchester model 52 target rifle. I had owned a Winchester model 75 target rifle for several years and the model 52 was a big step up from it.

    We were encouraged to shoot as much as we could. At practice, we would be handed a brick of 500 standard velocity .22 rounds and were expected to shoot as much of it as we could. This training for sure made a better marksman out of me as I went on to take 4 first places that year.

    The key here is that I just “shot” my Winchester 75, however I was “trained” to shoot with the model 52. Big difference.


  5. B.B.,

    I have a Hakim and a civilian market Haenel 310, and they are as fun to look at and hold as they are to shoot.

    It seems to me that now that airguns with blowback are the state of the art in the airsoft world, why various militaries wouldn’t experiment with a special order of green gas or CO2 (or PCP!) powered blowback replicas of current military rifles. They could control the quality of materials and build and see if over a few years if it would be effective as a trainer and cost-effective. Ultra cheap 6mm plastic “BBs” won’t injure anyone, and high quality airsoft rifles are accurate even at pretty serious distances.

    Michael


  6. I have really been enjoying this series about airgun history! Each one has been a good read. Nowadays, airguns are still great trainers, with .22LR being hard to find. Blowback pistols in particular, since their operation is similar to a powder burning handgun.


  7. B.B.,

    One of my roommates in college was a senior whose father was an Army Ranger Major, or perhaps even Col. My roommate Dave had already had gone through both Basic Training and OSC, although he had not yet been to Ranger School, of course. But as an active duty future Ranger, he was an ROTC assistant instructor at the university.

    He told me about the M-16 (or whatever was used in the early 1980s) “Rubber Ducky” trainers they used in ROTC. They were solid, hard, heavy rubber and were in the exact shape and weight of the real deal. They even attached real bayonets to them and had bayonet training.

    Using non-firing replicas seems smart to me if the kids using them are college freshmen taking ROTC just to fulfill their P.E. requirement, and P.E. 115 Weight Training had already filled by the time they registered.

    Michael


  8. BB
    Here’s a gun that you wrote about that makes me think of a military air gun trainer. Maybe if it had a different stock on it. I’m probably thinking out of the box but with the flip up breech and all it seems it could resemble a firearm out there somewhere.

    It’s a underlever and the breech is something I like also. I can get one for a couple hundred dollars right now. It’s suppose to be clean and in good working condition and .22 caliber if I remember right.

    But do they have a pretty calm shot cycle? I would like to know because I’m seriously thinking about getting it.

    https://www.pyramydair.com/blog/2005/10/diana-rws-46-a-german-underlever/


    • Gunfun,

      I can’t comment on the firing cycle of the 46, but that breech is easy to load, I’ve been told, if you have slender fingers. But if your fingers are like my tree stump fingers, loading is a bit tricky, as that space is pretty tight.

      Michael



      • Michael,

        The Diana 46 is very easy to load. The long transfer port flips up giving you better access than most breakbarrel rifles. Look at the second picture down in the linked article.; You load the pellet into the thing that is flipped up — bot into the back of the barrel.

        B.B.


        • B.B.,

          Ah! I stand corrected. That makes me wonder what air rifle I was remembering (or mis-remembering) hearing or reading about. That’s one difference between remembering something you read or heard, and remembering something you’ve DONE.

          Man, I’m getting old.

          Michael




        • GF1 , I have a Diana 46E,, in .22 cal.that i bought new years ago. It is my most accurate .22 springer and makes about the same power as my Benji 392 msp. The seals on the the flip up breech block and the long trasferport rob some power ,but it is a very safe gun to use compared to some other under levers and side cockers, especially the chicom versions.


          • Robert
            Thanks a bunch for that info.

            The gun I’m trying to get is still available. And I do have a little extra money saved up but I been trying to hang on to it.

            But the info people are giving today seems to me like they are pretty good guns.

            I think I better bite the bullet so to speak and get the 46 while the chance is available.

            Thanks again.


  9. I collect (and shoot) military trainer rifles. I have 9 .22 trainers- 4 German ( including the rare Paatz), 3 Chinese copies, 1 Lee-Enfield, 1 M2 springfield. I enjoy shooting them and researching their history. My Paatz has a SA stamp on the stock, and I would welcome any info that readers of this blog might have. This rifle is an early Paatz. The Paatz “factory” was a house near Munich, where Adolf got his start, and where the SA was first formed. I think that the first rifles made for training the SA were made by Paatz, . This is just a theory, I need more information to confirm it. There is a blog devoted to military trainers, but I have found very little info re this rifle. I took it to the West Point museum, but the curator knew very little re trainers. He did not know that they had one (a KKW) in their collection, until I contacted him. Ed


    • Zimbabweed,

      Try in Google : British Military arms forum. That site is really nice to read if you are into military arms. They concentrate on the 19the century, but as all enthusiast will welcome a discussion about other historical arms.

      Regards,

      August


  10. Buldawg

    That link I just posted look at the last comment made on that blog. There maybe a answer there to our question about same gun same pellet but chronyed at a different areas.

    I just glanced at it. So I need to read that comment over again to see if its some kind of answer we are looking for.


    • GF1
      Are you talking about the link to the Diana 46 that was compared to the TX 200 as I did not see any info in it other than the difference in cocking effort as to why we get different chrony readings on our air gun versus the 22 quiets we both tested.

      BD



        • GF1
          It does show the differences especially with temperature change more so than altitude but still the difference from 70 degrees to 90 degrees is only less than 100 fps and we got over 200 or close to that so it does explain some of the variations for sure.

          I can only believe that there is still some error in the chronys themselves as for 100 bucks or a little more the accuracy could be off by 100 fps or so per individual chrony as again it is just a tool and you get what you pay for so while it is useful in comparing guns on the same chrony it is likely not that accurate for comparing them with different chronys.

          If the chronys cost 1000 bucks I would be more likely to believe the true reading we get between our two chronys but at 100 bucks or so they can only be so accurate.

          It does shed some light on the difference that the air density plays in the reading we get on our chronys.

          BD


          • Buldawg
            Ok glad you found it and read it.

            What was funny about it. I was searching information about the 46 and I wanted to read the comments to see what the readers had to say. Then I came across that at the very bottom.

            So kind of a coincidence that it was some info we was looking far.


            • GF1
              Yea I saved it to my favorites so I could reference it as needed and it does give us more info to explain some of the difference in our readings but I still believe some of the difference is with the accuracy of our chronys themselves. We will know for sure when the wife’s knee gets fixed so that we can travel and we get your way so we can shoot some of our guns on both chronys and compare the results first hand side by side and that will tell the whole story.

              I do know when at Harley our individual torque wrenches and any other tool that was used to measure anything at all was sent to Milwaukee once per year to be calibrated so we could be in compliance with ISO 9001 standards in the testing we performed. Since our chronys have not been calibrated against a high dollar piece of calibration equipment to insure they are within acceptable tolerances we can only assume that they are reading accurately and within acceptable range of operation.

              BD


              • Buldawg
                The thickness of the air is what I had in my mind since we have been talking about this. I just didn’t know how to say it.

                The same thing happened at the dragstrip. When it was comfortable outside and I could walk the staging lanes and the pits and not fill like I was out of breath.

                Well then I knew the car was going to breath easier and run better.

                There was some nights out there and it felt like you couldn’t breath or move. It just felt like the air wrapped around you. The cars felt like somebody put a ton of bricks in the trunk.

                Well I think that is what is happening with our pellets. I think the air where you live could be thicker than where I live.

                Then if you bring up the fact about the .22 rim fire bullet that shot pretty close in velocity from your gun and my gun. What I think there is something that Reb brought up. It makes its own pressure if you will from the gun powder. Where as a airguns air that powers the gun is affected also. And maybe the shape of the bullet is more efficient in flight than the shape of a pellet.

                The air guns are probably more affected by atmospheric pressure and humidity and temperature than a firearm that uses powder.

                And also the point you bring up is involved I’m sure also. How closely will a hundred dollar chrony be to the next one comming of the production line.


                • GF1
                  That would be air density as a measure of the thickness of the air relative to temp and humidity and is very much the likely explanation as to why we get such differences with air guns versus the powder burners since as you say the powder burners only rely on the oxygen to complete the combustion and propel the bullet and the air density is not near as big a factor for the powder versus an air gun that has to compress the air to propel the pellet.

                  The thicker the air the harder it will be to compress and therefore develop less energy behind the pellet so while we have compared air temp and humidity we have ignored density in our locations when comparing the data.

                  We would both need one of those three gauge barometer wall mounted setups that sailing vessels use very extensively as they to use air density to gain the most energy from the wind only it is reversed for them as the thicker the air the more energy can be extracted from it.

                  So I think we have found the most important part of the puzzle we have been trying to answer and likely is the cause for our difference in readings. We will know for sure when we can shoot our guns over both chronys and see the results first hand.

                  BD


                  • Buldawg
                    My dad was big into watching the weather.

                    He would write down the information on one of those big 2′ tall by 3′ wide planner calenders. He had years of them hanging around the walls on the garage in order by year.

                    He had one of those gauges hanging on the wall also. He would watch all the high and low fronts coming across the country and be able to tell the weather that was comming easily 3 days in advance. That was all part of timing for the farming he was doing.

                    But yea I kept relating the air quality I guess you could say with the sea level we was at. The density is what we were missing.

                    And yep the only way we will really know is the results if we shoot together in the same location and have your chrony and my chrony available. Then that will for sure narrow it down to variation in the chrony.


                    • GF1
                      Yep I believe you are correct in we are comparing what we thought were the relative factors in the different numbers we were getting but did forget that air has substance to it even though it is not visible to the naked eye.

                      My dad had one of those barometer gauges on the wall as well only he used it to predict if he was going to be able to get a complete game of golf in or not as he did not like to be on the golf course in a thunderstorm since back then it was thought that golf clubs were attractants for lighting when raising them to swing at the ball LOL.

                      Yea the day will come when we will be shooting side by side with guns and chronys and will have our question answered once and for all as it will be the chrony as the only variable to deal with.

                      I was shooting my 300s today some and had noticed it Wednesday at the end of my shooting session but it got dark before I could be sure. But today it seems that my POI as compared to my POA from Wednesday has raised by a half mil dot at the 22.5 yards I was shooting it at and had it sighted in at so I have not chronyed it again but it leads me to believe that the velocity has increased slightly to raise the POI versus the POA. I wonder if the gun had set for awhile so that the chamber had developed some light rust or buildup that was not allowing the ring to fully seat and by me putting the ATF in it before going to the CMP range on Tuesday and then installing the scope on Wednesday and sighting it in and shooting probably 100 plus pellets thru it the ring seated completely at the end of my session which caused it to seal better and increase the velocity. Just the readings I got when first shooting before adding the ATF versus just after it being put in increased the velocity 20 to 25 fps so I am hoping when I chrony it tomorrow it will be up close to 600 fps and possibly even slightly over that so will see tomorrow.

                      BD


                  • Buldawg
                    I’m betting the ring is seating even more.

                    There ain’t to many things that make the POI rise. Most of the time POI will go lower. Well depending on the type of power plant the gun has.

                    But yea that first day when you told me that the gun increased 25 or so fps after you put the tranny fluid in it I knew that was a good sign.

                    And the way you were texting me about how the gun was performing I knew you were liking your new 300.

                    I told you that you would like it even though it’s a lowered power springer. I know you always like the guns that are on the more powerful side. But when that gun is dropping one on top of the other time after time it kind of makes a person wake up and smell the coffee if you know what I mean.

                    Just way nice guns is all I can say. I know I like my 300.


                    • GF1
                      OH yes I most definitely like the 300 thats a fact and it is just so sweet to cock and shoot even if it is not a high power gun as sometimes precision does make all out performance seem not so important.

                      It is actually a perfect powered gun for my backyard range since I only have a maximum range of 35 yards and it will put pellet on top of pellet at those ranges with ease and does not wear me out or make my arms sore cocking it and shooting with the recoil beat my shoulder up all day so it and the 124 have become my favorite backyard gun with the 300 at the top of the list. I am going to shoot it at the next FT match in October and call Gabe to bring his so we can have our own 300 Ft competition within the match itself so that should be interesting since he has already shot his at one match and scored a 19 out of 44 and even hit the 50 yard crow target that is 30 feet up in a tree limb so I know it can do it you just have to aim it like a mortar with a five mil dot hold over at that range. LOL.

                      I will let you know tomorrow how much it has increased in velocity tomorrow as I believe it will just get better the more it is shot.

                      BD


                  • Buldawg
                    Wow just thought of something.

                    If the air is thicker where you live then that’s probably why you need more holdover than I use.

                    Ma be even more piece’s to the puzzle.


                    • GF1
                      Those are all good points and are things to consider but if we get so deep into trying to figure it all out we will lose the fun of just shooting and enjoying the guns we have so it all matters but only to the point that it improves my accuracy.

                      Right now I am my biggest obstacle in the equation in accuracy so that is what I am working on the most and the rest will be what it will be with the best tweaks and tunes I can provide on the guns.

                      it would be nice if we could shoot in a vacuum so we could remove air from the equation all together but then our guns my not even shoot or if they did the pellet would never fall or slow down. Now wouldn’t that be cool.

                      BD


                  • Buldawg
                    Yea but then if we shot and in a vacum we would probably have to wear one of those funny space suits.

                    That wouldn’t be no fun. πŸ™‚

                    And yep sometimes over thinking is worse than just going out and trying.

                    As I say you never know till you try.


                    • GF1
                      We would have to be tethered to the ground along with our gun also so yea it would be way to uncomfortable to be able to enjoy shooting and I don’t think we could get close enough o the scope to see thru it either with the big bubble face mask those suits have. LOL

                      Yep trials and errors are how we improve and learn from our mistakes so if we don’t “do” we never learn.

                      BD


                    • GF1,

                      I would bet that it would bust the 1300fps. all to heck and back. Then again,…on a springer,…(what) would you be compressing when you pulled the trigger? Chris




  11. My opinion of the Vietnam “war” is this and I believe why there was so much controversy here at home over it as it was never actually declared a “war” by our President or Congress so it was just a political exercise in control over the North Vietnamese.

    I myself was appalled at the treatment of the returning soldiers at the time by our civilians as my father was in the Air Force in WW11 and the Korean war and I never served but any man that is wiling to pay the ultimate price for his country get my highest praise and respect as if we did not have these dedicated men and women we would not be the free country we still barely are clinging to be.

    I will not single out any one individual in our govt now other than our Idiot in chief as being incompetent or truly out to destroy this great country but I will say we have far to many spineless self serving could care less what the people want or say Senators and House of Representatives members, not to mention the completely corrupt Obummer cabinet that think they can make rules and laws that only serve to support the criminals and oppress the innocent.

    It is a sad day when the criminal has more right than the victims do and myself truly believe that if the victim survives the act of the criminal it should be the victim that decides the sentence given the criminal when they are convicted by our judicial system and not the judge or jury. I believe in an eye for an eye and if you take a life in premeditation then you give up all rights to your life.

    BD


  12. BB
    Very interesting report on the old trainers that the military used for training the troops or at least attempting to train them as from what you described at least in the Vietnam era there was no time for proper training as we need boots on the ground so to s[peak regardless of how well trained or properly equipped they were for the task at hand.

    I was just a few years to young to have been able to serve as by the time I turned 18 the “war” was over and while I did go take my Asvab test and had thoughts of enlisting I found work as a mechanic and that sealed my carrer for life.

    But to all that served in any capacity in any war I will say Thank You for your service and loyalty to this the greatest country in the world.

    BD


  13. Very interesting. My abiding question on this subject is when exactly does the U.S. army use .22 rimfire trainers? My Dad was in the army for 6 months as a volunteer in 1960. He was about the most unlikely recruit, almost like Gomer Pyle and received an amount of punishment details on KP that were probably illegal since he missed the training on grenades and machine guns. Maybe that was no accident as he unthinkingly turned and pointed a loaded rifle at the range officer when he turned to speak to him. If anyone should have been assigned .22 rimfire trainers it should have been him. But he said that most of basic training was marching to the rifle range and shooting off thousands of rounds with the M1.

    On the subject of military rifles, here is something you really will not believe which is the latest in the saga of my malfunctioning M1 rifle. I finally listened to experienced blog voices like Kevin, Mike and some others telling me that something was mechanically wrong with it. The last session was a little frightening with the rifle giving a weird popping noise like something was going to break. I went with a highly recommended M1 gunsmith on the Civilian Marksmanship Program (CMP) forums. He turned around the gun amazingly fast, so that I just received it yesterday, and he said that the problem was the op rod spring. He claimed that it has been installed backwards and had deformed which affected the operation of the follower and the timing of the gun. But far from solving the mystery, this has created more controversy. Orienting the op rod spring correctly, he claims, is basic gunsmithing, so this implies that Clint, the master gunsmith who rebuilt the rifle, made a bonehead mistake. The new gunsmith also said that the adjustable gas system which I thought was the culprit was not the problem. In fact, he says that this gas system, which was the core of the rebuild and which Clint was particularly proud of, doesn’t seem to work at all! Another gunsmith weighed in to say that the op rod spring has no orientation and that the powder that Clint recommended for the gun actually won’t allow it to cycle. So we’ve got three people with good references claiming that the other two are basically incompetent. This is too rich and worth the price of admission all by itself. This is how professors talk about each other.

    The only thing to do is to take out the gun to the range tomorrow and see. I’m cautiously optimistic. But my records show that in the 1000 rounds I’ve fired with this rifle, not one of the 20 odd outings has been jam free, so I won’t rest easy until that happens. If this sorry tale finally comes to an end, I will hardly believe it.

    This will also be an opportunity to test out the Saiga accuracy and our discussion about scope height over bore. I checked, and it appears that the height for the Saiga is actually close to 3 inches which is more than I thought. My utterly reliable scientific resource claims that this configuration, zeroed at 25 yards, should hit 9 inches high at 100 yards which would explain what happened to me. I’m going to zero an inch low at 25 yards in any case, but I will check the other scenario as well. It is ironic that all the advances in optics come at the price of high mounts that create sighting problems that were not there before.

    Now for something truly off-topic addressed to people with automotive expertise. My interest in American muscle cars was deflated when I found that these kinds of cars do not have the engineering of true sports car that allows them to turn at high speed. Instead, the muscle cars are kind of low budget drag racers designed to go straight. This is dramatized in the movie Drift King where Vin Diesel shows up at the end to challenge the newly crowned American Drift King in Tokyo with what looks like a big retro American car. The two competitors have a short dialogue.

    DK: I didn’t know Han was into American muscle.

    VD: He was when he was rolling with me.

    DK: You know this ain’t no 10 second race.

    VD: I got nothing but time.

    An online commenter claimed that even Vin Diesel would not win a race through a parking structure in his car. The most recent Fast and Furious shows the two drivers talking after the race. So, who wins? The invincible Vin Diesel with the unwinnable car? I guess we’ll never know. Anyway, I read that the most recent Ford Mustang actually has track capabilities that rival those of established sports cars like Porsche at prices still in the muscle car range. That would be a paradigm shift. Can it be true?

    Matt61


    • The muscle car thing can be a tough thing to do right.
      Get one that already has discovered brakes and that’ll put you ahead in the “turn And burn” crowd, I also chose to replace all bushings with polyurethane and raised the spring rate on the front of my ’76SS el Camino and was still working on installing bolstered bucket seats when the city of Austin sucked it up for no registration.


    • Matt61
      You got my attention on everything you just wrote about.

      First I can’t wait to here how it goes at the range with your M1. On all accounts. It sounds to me your on the right track with load and gas recirculating system. And darn them springs anyway. They just don’t never seem to go in the right way. I’m joking a little about the spring. But darn them springs.

      And I’m kind of running out of time replying. But got to say that all muscle cars didn’t only go straight fast. Some turned and burned too.

      Search up 1969 or 1970 SCCA road racing or if that don’t get you what you want. Search what kind of cars did they race in the 1969 and 1970 Trans-Am series.

      Hopefully you will find something there about muscle cars that turn and burn.


      • Darn the springs is right. I remember B.B.’s post about not remembering how the springs work in the trigger of the Air Force rifles. I was congratulating myself on not having to worry about this kind of problem, and now I find myself stuck in the same situation.

        One reason I never thought that the M1 op rod spring could be the problem is that I cannot visualize how it works. I can easily see a spring that resists the motion of the op rod as it moves back and forth along the barrel axis. Nothing could be simpler and that works just like the recoil spring on the 1911. But somehow this same spring is also responsible for working the follower which moves at right angles to the axis as it pushes the round up in the magazine well. I looked at pictures of the op rod spring, and it is straight just like the 1911 spring which completes the mystery. I am jiggered at how this spring can work at right angles to itself. Anyway, I love science which will allow me to put things to the test tomorrow.

        Matt61


        • Matt61
          there were many muscle cars that turned as well as they went straight and GF1 sent you in the right direction in the Trans Am SCCA racing of the late 60s and 70s with Mustangs, Camaros, Firebirds, Dodge challengers , barracudas and AMC AMX/Javelins.

          All these above cars were street legal cars modified by race teams to strict standards that limited the suspension and chassis changes as well as engine modification that could be done to them so as to remain very close to a showroom stock car and they did in fact turn and burn with the best of the European and Italian sports cars of the time and in fact out did them in lots of races.

          There was a Polish Immigrant by the name of Max Buchowski that had never even graduated high school when he arrived here in the USA with his parents. He found a sweetheart whose father owned a garage and found work there and eventually married the owners daughter and after her father retired he took over the business and was very interested in the Formula road racing going on in southern California in the late fifties and early sixties. It was mostly dominated by the Italian and European high end sports cars but he could not afford any such cars so he decided to build his own race car. He started by drawing out lines on the garage floor in chalk for the frame he intended to build the car from and proceeded to build the frame and then went to junkyards for the engine ( Buicks 231 CI all aluminum V8) and a corvette four speed tranny, Ford 9 inch rear end with Lincoln continental oversized drum brakes at all four corners and a hand fabricated sheet aluminum body that was painted a mustard color yellow and was not anything close to the refined sports cars that were racing at the time and he installed heavy duty truck tires on the car since they were cheap and readily available. It was later called by two names and he actually made two cars thru the years but if you have ever heard the terms “Junkyard Dog” or ” Old Yeller” when being associated with early racing that was the car he built that in his first race against the European and Italian cars which he fought with the sanctioning body just to be able to race it as they laughed him practically of the track but he was determined to race and prove that you did not need the high end cars to do so successfully. In his first race he finished in the top five and after the next several races was able to tune the car so that he beat them at their own game and won most every race he entered. the Buick V8 he used was lighter than the engines they had and made far more horsepower so he would pull away from them down the straights and by using truck tires he could run the entire race without changing tires so he was only in the pits to refuel and therefore would be laps ahead at the end of the races. There is a book that has been written about his life and his racing career and is a good read and is called ” Old Yeller” ( not the dog book ) so while I may have some of the facts mixed up or out of place he beat the stuck up sports car crowd at their own game and never apologized for his success.

          Also growing up one of my best friends talked his mom into buying a 71 dodge challenger 340 four barrel slap stick auto and we had a river road in Merritt Island, Florida that we would race down very late at night when there was little to no traffic and it was an 18 mile length of twisting road that followed the river bank and we would time ourselves from one end to the other to see how fast we could make it the 18 mile stretch. He would have that car in 4 wheel drifts at 120 mph in second gear with the pedal on the floorboard and the rear tire smoking while hung out in the power slide.
          Our best time worked out to an average of 96 mph for the 18 miles of river road so I know first hand that American iron can and did turn and burn with the best of the best from Europe and Italy.

          BD


    • Matt,

      The M1 is a magical contraption. If you haven’t seen them already, you MUST check out the various old Army M1 training films on youtube. This one includes animations of the internal workings that really do help explain how things work: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-KVu_jko3s

      I’m no M1 expert, so big grain of salt on anything I say about U.S. Rifle, Caliber .30. What I do know is how tough it can be to maintain your scientific method when you’re lost at sea, at the range with an uncooperative rifle. In the name of testing only one variable at a time, I might suggest springing for factory ammo for your initial outings with the rebuilt M1 – factory ammo that’s specifically meant for the M1. Unless of course that fancy gas system is specifically built for something else.

      I’ve had real good results, accuracy wise, with the Hornady 150gr SPRG #8109, and with the Federal M1 Garand specific 150gr. I can’t say much about the reliability, since like others, you apparently can’t pay my M1 to malfunction, despite any incompetence I manage to throw at it. I remember just one stoppage, but that was clearly down to a round that was forward of the groove in the clip: no jam, just totally failed to strip that round from the clip, and cycled onto an empty chamber.

      One more thing: last I read, you had politely ignored advice from our blog readers to try ballistic software like Chairgun. Rethink that. Really. Do it. Grab Chairgun, and immediately use it to visualize why your close-range zero should not be expected to be particularly close at longer ranges. This is not a new phenomenon, nor is it even specific to optics. It’s just a bit more pronounced with a high-mounted scope. Even the ~1″ high peeps on your Garand would require some clicks at 100 or 200 if you zeroed them at 25, right? Get Chairgun now. Ignore wisdom from this blog at your own peril.

      Man, I need to bring my M1 to the range ASAP. Had to cancel today’s DIFTA match due to rain and lightning, and now have a VERY itchy trigger finger!

      -Jan




          • Jan

            My father told me how they did it in training….
            They tied a cord to the bolt handle , and the second guy yanked the cord to cycle the action for dry firing . My father told me that somehow the cord kept getting under the shooters ear .

            twotalon


            • I think we’ve stumbled on a litmus test for a true shooting buddy. Are you willing to be the bolt-slapping/cord-yanking patsy while I dry fire my Garand?

              I knew about the Garand Thumb, but now I have to worry about Garand Ear!

              -Jan


              • Jan

                My father told me that those guys would mess with each other for something to do . I guess when you are going off to some place bad, you need to keep yourself a bit distracted from the reality of the situation .

                twotalon


      • Jan
        I’m late to the conversation.

        But the video was way cool.

        Did anybody notice when they showed the gun cycling by hand that they had a hoke drilled in the case and they had it positioned so to could distinctly see it in the video.

        How’s that for dry firing. Back when I started at my job we made military projectiles. We made practice rounds all the way up to explosive rounds and armor piercing rounds. From what I remember the practise and dummy rounds were probably the most important thing we made. Maybe more important than the live round.

        That way the soldiers could practice loading the guns among other things. But probably a different ball game than the Garrand. We was doing the 20, 25, 30 and 40 mm projectiles.

        But yes cool video.


    • For sure, some of the muscle cars are straight line dragsters. However, my son’s 2003 Mustang Cobra (Engine Modded) is both a rocket and handles really well. BTW, while my M-1 is mostly issue (Except a Match Trigger Group) it has never jammed. It just runs and runs. Good luck with yours.

      Mike


  14. B.B., this proves to be a subject easy to get lost in. I do believe you wrote something that supports one of my childhood memories. I am sure I never shot on of the MacGlashan military training machine guns, but I swear I remember shooting something similar at carnivals.

    Here, http://www.thegodfatherofairguns.com/air-machine-guns.html you wrote that MacGlashan “was already making something similar for shooting galleries”. My memory dates to the late ’50s or early ’60s. I also tried to shot the star out with a Feldman, but did not succeed.

    I also saw a LAW fired once, then they had each of us fire one training rocket before moving to the next demonstration. I did fire a well armed grenade from an M79; I wanted one of those for myself. Of course, I would have shot my eye out.

    ~ken


    • Ken
      I wanted to reply earlier but the was at work and trying to get out of there.

      Thanks for the link. I absalutly loved trying to shoot the red star out.

      You wouldn’t believe all the ways I tryed. Following the outline of the star. Swiping the gun from side to side while shooting top to bottom. I knew I never would get it shot out. But boy oh boy was it fun trying.

      I remember one time I had my girlfriend with me (now my wife). And I was trying to win her a big ole teddy bear that was dressed up like a farmer with blue jean cover all’s on and a straw hat.

      I tryed a don’t know how many times to get it. But I guess I can say now because it had to be over 35 years ago. But I slipped the guy a ten and told him put it with the money I already spent and let me win the teddy bear the next time atound. Well of course he did and my wife to this day still thinks I finaly shot that red star out.

      Man those where the days. πŸ™‚


      • GF1
        You have said your daughters read the blog before so you just gave your secret away about that teddy bear as your wife is going to know the truth now so you just let the bear out the bag. LOL

        I liked those red star as well and like you tried all types of methods to shoot it out but BBs just don’t lend themselves to cutting paper very well and I know now that they had it tested that the 100 BBs the guns held were statistically almost impossible to be enough to completely shoot the star out so it was just pure luck that you had success in doing so with 100 BBs.

        BD



      • I didn’t stand a chance wit #2 shot, #1 was worth trying and when we ran steel it was in the bag.
        I keep trying to read the caliber off the tag in my mind, it Threw me they weren’t .177 when I first noticed but they were either .173 or .175 but when that steel started flying it was time to make haste at finding a safe place. I usually stood behind the shooter if I only had one ready to pop the hose chuck if it got nuts.


        • Reb you know what. They must of had good back stops when I shot them because I don’t remember ricorches.

          But yea could you imagine a bee landing on somebody and frwak out while the trigger is pulled

          That could turn into a disaster real quick.



          • That’s why you’re not supposed to use steel but it can be hard to get and nothing stops the show until it’s over. Our backstops were bulging by the end of that spot due to the ammo actually fitting the bore and raised velocity as well as spinning on impact and 0 distortion to the projectiles.



          • One July day we were playing in Des Moines while a dirt track race started up, the night before was humid until the bottom finally fell out.
            Some of thaw chunks of mud that hit my trailer mustard weighed 5 pounds.
            I watched Steppenwolf for lunch later that day.
            Good times! I always had at least $500 in my pocket


            • Reb
              Hey w much better could it get than that.

              Dirt track, Steppenwolf and 500 bucks.

              Man life was so much easier back then. And I was going to say more fun. But I can say that I still try to make good times happen.

              Matter of fact getting a bon fire started here in a few minutes. The boss already told me to have it going by time they get back from the picnic.

              Can’t disappoint the boss you know. πŸ™‚


  15. BB
    My dad talked about a military air gun he and his brothers had before he left home in 1922. Not sure what it looked like, but he said it was pretty powerful. They put allot of meat on the table with it. They could not always afford ammunition for their firearms. Wish I could remember more about what he said but it was a very valuable hunting gun for the family.


    • Benji
      So it had to be the year you said or older.

      Maybe it was a early pcp if it was powerful enough to take game.

      Well you said put food on the table. So that’s kind of open as to what kind of food so maybe it was even a springer.

      Bet it would be a interesting gun to have now days.


      • CD1

        My dad grew up on the bank of the Mississippi in southern Illinois. He said all the deer and turkeys had been killed out of the area. So they only had small game. I know they ate quail, ducks, lots of squirrels and some opossum. I think the largest game they had were raccoons. My guess would have been ducks and squirrels with the gun. I don’t even remember if it was a rifle, I think so. Wish my memory was better. He told me how they loaded it and I think it shot round balls but I can’t remember. I think he said they pumped it, I had a 312 benjamin when I was little so that was my reference. He did say it was bigger than the 312 but most air rifles are. I have often wondered about that gun. Now there is no one left to ask.




          • Reb
            The gun was made before 1922. I also had a 3100 when I was a kid It was a bb smooth bore and had poor accuracy. My 312 was a tack driver I made a scope mount for it. I am sure that the gun My dad talked about did not look like a Benjamin pump. I know Dad said it was military and I think he said it was used as a trainer. I would give a lot for the gun today but it has been lost to time.



        • Benji
          All that you described it very well could be a pump air gun.

          I’m not that up on the history aspect of air guns so I really don’t know. But it had to have some power to make the kills your talking about.

          Or your dad and grandpa still used stalking techniques with the air gun.

          That is one of my most enjoyable memories from my childhood was sneaking up on the animal and then making the kill. Wow that don’t sound right does it. Well don’t know what to say. That’s the way it was.

          I just told Buldawg that I remembered how I got the starlings out in the fields when the corn was up when I was a kid. I would shoot out in the middle of the feild with my air gun from the left of the feild and work my way to the right. The starlings would fly up and circle and land right on top of the corn stalks in the same location they where at. They would look back and forth at each other before one would finally leap and land down on the ground. Well guess what. It was game on at that point. Shoot one before they did the leap. I just refound that technique this week.

          Makes me wonder what else I have forgot throughout time.


          • GF1

            If I had a good memory I would be dangerous. O well. Yep dad was a good shot with rifle or shotgun and a good hunter, he always went for meat not so much sport. I don’t know about Grandpa all dad said about his shooting was that he always said to aim at their feet maybe a ricochet would get um. I don’t think he was a good shot but he died before I was born. Very long between generations in my family. Dad may have said they pumped the gun by shoving a plunger against a tree. I don’t know where that memory comes from.


            • Benji
              I’m willing to bet your and my dad and grandpa was very good at what they hunted. They had to be cause they relied on it.

              They had to shoot to help the family survive. We shoot. Well I should rephrase that. I shoot because I want to try to be better. My family doesn’t reliy on if I shoot something and bring it home for supper tonight.

              I use to hunt but I don’t have to anymore. I do very occasionally hunt though and I should mention Bluegill and Crapy fish. I just love the taste of that food.

              But yea it would be interesting to know about the gun your dad and grandpa used.


              • GF1
                Dad did not believe in target shooting, site the gun in and that was it. If it seemed to be off he would check it again. I would get in trouble all the time for wasting shotgun shells. I am a little below average with a shotgun. I didn’t waste much rifle ammunition though. Dad expected something to eat from every shot. I guess the reason I had so much fun with my old pellet gun was that Dad never complained when I ordered 5 lbs of pellets from Herters. I shot it most every day from about 8 to 15 years old. I had to lean it against a tree when I first got it for Christmas to pump it up. I am still the same way in fishing I eat what I catch and only catch what I can eat. Just never seen the fun in catch and release. Bluegill are one of my favorite fish to eat, same with Crapy.


                • Benji
                  We did a little bit of everything when I was a kid. It was like one of my dad’s major goals was for me to be able to shoot.

                  I never got to know my grandpa’s on either side of the family. But from what I was told by my dad was that they could shoot. My dad told me before he died that he hoped I would teach my two daughters to shoot and make sure they new about the country life. And I know I been doing that the best I can.

                  And yep always had enough ammo for the air guns when I was a kid.

                  And yep the catch and release is a different type of fishing. We always caught what was enough and same when hunting. Shoot what you eat.

                  But also always dad had a big garden on the farm. And the rule was always keep what we needed and give where it was needed. Garden, fishing or hunting wise. The neighbor farmers were the same. You gave what was needed if somebody needed it. Everybody survived and helped.



  16. Air Strippers/Muzzle Weights/Noise Reducers,

    Hey,…all you “Theorist” and “wanna’ be designers”,..I would appreciate some input on the above. Why you ask?

    I have a Walther LGU that has the stock air stripper. Remove the cocking lever ball detent pc. and the end cap comes right out,..a nice hefty little steel pc. about 9/16″ long. The inside, about 3.77″ deep and around 3/4″ I.D. is completely empty/hollow,..no baffles.

    I will be adding weights inside to better stabilize muzzle jump/rise. No problem and easily done. The thoughts that come to mind,….

    1) If a smaller weight, say 1″ was used,…and moved fore or aft,..would it control barrel “whip”?
    2) By filling the tube with weights,..thus reducing the expansion chamber,…would the blast of air now have a different effect on the pellet?
    3) Does a stripper/noise reducer have (any) affect on the pellet and accuracy?
    4) Despite many different designs,…is one design better than another? Why? (“cool-ness” factor aside)
    5) I am thinking about a cap that would allow an “extension” of some type to be installed, that would allow weight shift (externally). Thoughts on design?

    Unlike a barrel that is fully shrouded, this is a solid barrel and the expansion chamber attached to that. So,..it should be possible to influence barrel whip/oscillations with weights. Since the LGU lends itself to playing with this aspect of tuning, why not?

    Any thoughts, ideas, theories, experience, etc. appreciated,…….Thanks, Chris


    • In addition,…

      I just did a search (here) and read several articles that dealt with legality, noise, design, etc. Some info. was noted on muzzle blast and it’s affect on the pellet, but not much. No articles on muzzle weights and barrel oscillations that I could find.

      To be clear, I am interested in reducing/controlling muzzle jump and, any ideas on adjustable weights/barrel whip….all with the end goal being,…improved accuracy.



      • Twotalon,

        Ahhh yes, the “wobble”. If your looking for data, I can hold the crosshairs (within) a 9/16″ dot at 30yds. on 7 mag. Group avg. 3/4-1″. Somedays better. For me it’s about the breathing, relaxing, heartrate and what happens at, during and after the shot. All things I am working on.

        The weight only should help. As for adjustable weights, I am not sure I am a good enough shot to tell the difference.

        Sorry to go, but got some running to do and will check back around noon-ish. Chris


        • Chris

          That is a heavy rifle . I could take a lot of weight to have a significant effect of wobble .

          I think you said that you were trying to time your shots to your wobble . You need to be very careful that you do not start trying to throw your gun at the aimpoint while yanking the trigger . Sometimes called “target panic ” . A hard habit to break .
          Probably best to just let it wobble while you squeeze off the shot . Try to see if you hit where you were aimed as the shot went off.

          I don’t know what size aimpoints you are shooting at . Something that the crosshairs almost cover may help you concentrate on a very distinct spot . Something so small that you can consider this as one shot groups ….. it’s either hit or a miss . I like to do this with plinking . Small twigs, weed stems, or a hanging piece of cord . Pick a distance at which it can work .

          There are also things about your shooting setup that can make things easier and cut your wobble . Can get into that later if you want .

          twotalon


          • Twotalon,

            Good advice. As far as “timing my shot to the wobble”,…..hey,…you stealing my lingo? πŸ˜‰ I am aware of the pull you speak of. I would say that I have that under pretty good control as I will not take the shot if I feel/see that happening.

            As for aim points, they are neon colored ring binder re-inforcement stickers. 9/16″ with a 1/4″ hole in center. As for the 3/4-1″ avg. ….that includes the “flyers”,…unless really bad. Most groups at 30 have a 1/2″ cluster/hole with about 2-4 outliers…(10 shot).

            Wobble advice?,…I am open to any and all suggestions. Thanks, Chris


            • Chris

              If you are shooting from a bench for your practice/testing, your setup gets important .
              You need to sit at the bench in as nearly vertical and natural position as possible . You must avoid strained positions .
              How high the bench is, and how high the rifle sits above the bench are important . You should be able to snuggle up to your rifle and be very easily on target without a bunch of twisting around or anything else.

              The way I like to bench shoot, I set up as comfortable as possible . My rest is in the right place so that with my hand on it, I can drop my left elbow down to rest nearly under the rifle and my elbow resting on thee bench . My right elbow is out to the side, but still resting on the bench . This amounts to a bit of a distorted tripod configuration supporting the rifle .
              I also like to have a piece of rubber shelf matting on the bench so that my elbows will not tend to slip . Nothing worse than getting dead on target and having your shooting hand elbow slip out to the side as the trigger breaks .

              twotalon


              • Twotalon,

                I am paying alot more attention to strain of (any) kind. My set up in and out is sawhorses both set at the same height with a top/table. The same rest is used in and out. With all the pictures B.B. has posted, I would say that my set-up/lean in/”snuggle” is very much the same.

                One thing I have noticed is that if I lay the rifle down and aim,…..if I have to move or twist the rifle in any way,…I will reposition. I try to keep that as natural as possible.

                What else ya’ got? πŸ˜‰ Any thought’s on weights or air stripper design? Ever tried it?

                Chris


                • Chris

                  I have not tried anything on a springer . Any of that stuff could hurt, help, or do nothing .

                  Too bad there is not an easy way to polish the bore on a fixed barrel gun . It usually helps a barrel .

                  twotalon


                  • Twotalon,

                    Thanks for all your input. Polishing?,….still looking for an effective way to clean one, let alone polish it! Still need to do B.B.’s trick of holding a light at an angle instead of going/looking straight through. It may not even need cleaned.

                    As for me and accuracy,….I may find out that I am relegated to the “tin can army”,….but “daw’ gone it”,…that ain’t gonna stop me for trying for the “sniper” army.

                    πŸ˜‰ ,…..Chris


                    • I looked for contact information in the packaging I got withmy pullthrough, it’s a quality product.it’s the best way to clean a fixed barrel gun I’ve come up with unless you just wanna strip it down and have at it with a cleaning rod.



                • Chris USA
                  I think I remember somebody saying to keep your back as straight as possible.

                  And I rember somebody saying that means they would have to change their set up.

                  Yep change the setup.


                  • GF1,

                    “Somebody”,… huh? πŸ˜‰ On that point, since you are so insistant,…bench shooters seem to do the set up I do. Personal quirks aside,.. the end goal would be to hit a target at various positions. That is, after all,…what Field Target is about,..is it not?

                    The way I see it,…I should be able to do a std. bench rest. As I said before,..I see a difference in postion when moving from the top dots to the bottom dots on a std. sheet of paper.

                    I am not saying that your set up would not benifit me better. What I am saying is that a person should be able to get good results at a position that is close/same to std. bench rest set-ups.

                    Unless, I am missing what std. bench set ups are?,…….What is the std. height of a bench anyways, or is there one? Personal rest height aside.

                    Chris


                    • Chris USA
                      I’m following up on the point Twotalon made which is what I have been telling you.

                      Read his comment again. Your setting position makes a difference.

                      And yes a good shooter can shoot no matter what position he is in.

                      Try some different types of positions and you will see what I mean. If you keep only concentrating on bench rest you will always be a lazy shooter.

                      See what happens when you stand or kneel or even sit cross leged on the ground and then use your arms and body to support your gun.

                      When you start doing that you will see what you learn can be applied to bench resting.

                      If you get proficient at the other type of shooting. Bench rest will be a piece of cake.


                    • Gunfun1,

                      I did re-read and it did say “as upright as possible”. I will have to give it some more serious thought. As for other positions, sitting crossed legged would be out. I could do it but I would look like a moose on roller skates trying to get back up. Kneeling would be a bit tuff as the knees are not the best anymore. I will try to add some positons as best I can.

                      I would think that bench shooting would be first and then other positions would follow. You said the reverse. All good food for thought. Chris


                    • Chris
                      Just try standing and shooting by just holding it. Not supporting the gun with anything. That will let you get the back muscles and the other muscles trained if I’m useing the right word.

                      It will help make you a more steady shooter. And remember me saying throw the hard things into the mix. Then when you do the easier stuff it will be a piece of cake.



    • Chris, there was a time I took the muzzle weight off my 953 and tried to wrong some semblance of accuracy outta my 760, I started with it at the muzzle and moved it back1/2″ at a time but the results were inconclusive(later I discovered the rifling I could see didn’t have enough depth to influence the pellets) on the subject of noise damping: if it lessens the report it’s supposed to be nonremovable. That’s why I’m concerned about messing with the Impact, I’d really like to have a different front sight but I’d lose my “legal” silencer and it’s already pretty loud for shooting in this apartment


      • Reb,

        If it get’s louder, that is no problem,..inside or outside. To make it more stable and inprove accurracy is the only goal to the test. Most noise reduction systems do not tend to lend themselves to modification. The LGU just happens to.

        And,..in a most serious statement,…while noise reduction does open the market to more urban airgun shooter’s,…at what cost of loss of (performance),..if any,…comes with it?

        If you look at the high end air rifles,..think Steyr and Daystate,…the air stripper has a (inner) tube that is adjustable fore and aft, and tapers very gradually towards the entry point. The outer part has long, open ports that allow the air to blow by as the pellet enters the inner tube. As for a design feature on high enders’,…it would seem that this is a desirable thing to do. Hence the question of design and any effect.
        I would think however, that there would be little to no noise reduction to this design of air stripper.

        Thanks,…Chris


        • Correction,

          Rowan Engineering is where I saw that style of air stripper. One fit the Steyr. A bit mixed on my facts. Not sure if this style is on production models of any brand. Nice design though. Chris




  17. Gunfun1,

    Shot the weights and the other idea. The weights won hands down.7-8 pellets in one larger hole. 3 1/8oz. total.

    As for back position, it is (and) stays straight up. Slight shoulder and head lean in when coming down on the rifle.

    Your tip of “thumb pressing down behind the safety” seemed to help and I will stay with it.

    I have a steel weight that is about half the size and more weight than the silicone bronze ones I used. I could double the weight at least. The report was a little louder but not much. The shot cycle was better as well and the muzzle did stay in place better too. Chris



      • GF1,

        30 yds. 14mm. “1 hole” groups of 7-8 pellets. Nice and round. 30yds. on the LGU as that what all the past data is,..and 25yds. for the TX for the same reason. While I would have to check, that might be the most pellets in the tightest group for the LGU. Steady was way better than normal for some reason. The thumb behind the safety/on stock, may have been the difference. Chris


        • Chris USA
          Good deal. And yep resting the thumb of the trigger hand on the stock by the end of the action seems to steady a rifle nice. You can apply different pressures for different guns.

          Just got done with my yard work so about ready to do some shooting. Very nice out today again. Zero wind, blue sky’s, low humidity and 65 degrees.

          Here I go. πŸ™‚


  18. I don’t see a use for an aistripper on many springers, now big bores like the Texan and boutique guns pushing a lotta air could take advantage of the adjustments you mentioned and may be a valuable resource.


    • Reb,

      My guess would be that an air stripper would be good when applied directly to a barrel, (non-shrouded).

      Baffle systems would be good for noise reduction. But even though the air blast is now expanded and contained for a brief moment, the pellet must still pass through that eviroment. That’s were the Rowan style would seem to stand out. Chris


      • Chris USA
        No where to reply above about the vacum.

        I bet it would still compress air. Once you load the pellet in the barrel and close the breech you will have a enclosed chamber.

        After the pellet leaves the barrel, well that’s another story.


  19. Just looked a little harder at this Daisy I was calling a 99 and found it to be a 958 so the front sight is supposed to be missing as well as the rear! I’ve been wanting a 99 or one of it’s close relatives since I started saving for my first BB gun back in’75 but it would kill any value to put sights on it. Anybody wanna trade?



  20. B.B.,

    Just a thought,….but maybe an article on baffled guns/air strippers(non shrouded barrels)/weights/(effect on accuracy.)

    With higher and higher fps,…the move towards “silencing” would seem to be the trend. Plus, as I said earlier,…it also helps the noise situation with the urban backyard shooter. But,..at what?,..if any?,…cost.

    Weights and other muzzle mods. would seem to be a mute point as most air rifles do not lend themselves to such things. I can tell you that with the the LGU and added weights, my grouping was cut in near half. ‘Course,…I had those 2-3 shots of me “mucking it up”. 10’s ;(

    Just an idea,….”quieter” air guns do seem to be the trend. Chris


    • Chris USA
      Bet I know the answer to this question but I’ll wait to see what BB says.

      Oh and while I’m at it. Did you try the thumb positioned like we been talking about without your sliding weights in the muzzle?


      • I’ll bet you’re right about B.B. not wanting to delve into SILENCERS but many newer models incorporate some type of noise damping system and it may be about time to revisit the subject.


      • GF1,

        You are probably right. I realized also that my statement of “once expansion occurs, the pellet must still pass through this enviroment”,….would be off a bit. The main air blast is behind the pellet, so the pellet is ahead of any turbulance. If the expansion chamber would be really long, then the 2 might have overlapping effects.

        As for the weights, the “sliding” system would be the spring/weight/spring set up. The first set up was weights only and filled the chamber fully and does not move at all. I may revisit the slider idea with a much longer weight with shorter springs on each end. The one I tried was a 21gram weight.

        As for trying the thumb bit first,…no. I tried it on the TX though. Felt a lot different. That was later in the day and my steady was not as good as the am/LGU testing. I did get a 12mm. 10 shot group. That may be the TX best/most pellets record as well at 25yds.

        And, while I got ya here, more tips such as the thumb trick would be welcomed. That was simple, easy to understand and apply,….and it worked. Let me know down the road. Chris


        • Chris USA
          You should take the weights out of the muzzle on the LGU to know for sure what helped. The weights or the thumb trick. And it does sound like it helped the Tx.

          Maybe more shooting time needs to be done to verify on both guns. Heck try it on your guns that you shoot with on your inside shooting range you have.

          Let me know if you try.


          • GF1,

            The LGU and TX (ARE) what I shoot indoors with. The 499 and Red Ryder don’t count,…though that 499 is sweet and will blow out the sticker if I do my part. I want SMALLER front inserts. May have to adapt one with a small washer or something.

            The LGU difference was too dramatic to go back. IF,…I get some shorter springs and get back in there,…I will try stock, with thumb. Chris


    • Chris,

      I may write an article about muzzle brakes (what you call an air-stripper) but testing with and without baffles requires a control. I have shown how baffles sometimes get in the way of pellet leaving the bore, but that’s not what you are asking. You want to know if the baffles disturb the flight of the pellet when they aren’t touched. I’m not really sure how to run a test like that and what would serve as the control.

      B.B.



  21. Double score! The Plymouth Daisy i picked up says 1000 shot , still has the trigger and lever and the wood’s not bad for a 100 year old BB gun.
    I sure am glad I rescued them guns! :-). Wish Edith coulda been there to join in the fun.


  22. I just put a blue book 11the edition in my cart and I’ll be getting some pellets picked out for an order. I’ve decided to hold off on the m8 and 2240 until I get something of these other projects done… I wonder how much it would cost to get this model B shooting again without ruining its value? It sure feels like it would make a good shooter!


  23. Two Talon.
    Our experiences were probably complete opposites my phone corrected Pffft and a little puf of smoke. But it’s only a 8 front gun already and the pellets almost perfectly sealed it off so I didn’t get the bone jarring loud whack you did outta that 48.


  24. Buldawg,
    I steer as clear of dryfires with all my springers but have been caught slippin’ on both my magnums and also found out the QB-88 had been cocked for who knows? In the parking lot right in front of the office!
    At least I found out it worked!


  25. G’day BB
    I started rifle shooting at high school. In the school yard’s range we shot SMLE .22 during the week and 303 at the range on weekends. It was a winter sport.
    Cheers Bob


  26. Gunfun1, I wouldn’t wanna make a haul like that on a plane or a minivan for that matter but there’s stuff everybody would be interested in and if we go out to the range we might be able to hear each other.



  27. The “Quick Kill” trainers? According to Cass Hough’s “It’s A Daisy” book. October 30 1967——-“Daisy developed training aids,including a modified Model 99 B-B rifle,will be used in the military’s Quick Kill program at all of the nations basic Army training centers beginning in December”. The Quick Kill course was included in the June-August 1967 Fort Benning basic training class. Daisy B-B rifles were used and I’m almost certain it wasn’t Model 99’s.My recollection is of a plastic stocked, gravity fed,lever action lacking a fore end.Perhaps a Model 102? Does anyone know what preceded the Model 99 in this program? Thank You


    • I have a 958 trainer that looks a lot like a 99; only no sights and the cocking lever is locked.
      Not much use to a shooter so it’s probably gonna wind up with a collector or someone that trained in the program or wants to.
      I’m outta town right now but I will have a bluebook on order as soon as I get back tomorrow.


    • Boley,

      The Quick Kill trainers were derivations of what became the 99. The designation was 2299. See page 294 of the Blue Book of Airguns 11th edition. The had no sights, but they did has wood forearms. They come up for sale from time to time on Gun Broker

      B.B.


  28. Thanks Fellows for the replies so far.The Daisy I used in the 01Jun67 to 04Aug67 Fort Benning Basic Training Quick Kill course was not a Model 99 or a modified Model 99.It was some other Model Daisy. I would have noted and remembered handling a wood stocked Daisy.The Daisy’s of my youth were all plastic stocked ones,starting with a 1953 Red Ryder Model 111-40.Hopefully someone with a better memory than mine that participated in the Quick Kill Training prior to the end of 1967 will see this and clear it all up.I’m not sure we used a Model 102,but it might have been.Whatever it was was a gravity feed because we used the “nothing came out” alibi for misses.I just don’t remember about the sights,they could have been removed or taped over,or we could have been instructed to ignore them.I think it was the latter.


Leave a Reply