by Tom Gaylord
Writing as B.B. Pelletier
This report covers:
- Saw it at my first airgun show
- I had to know!
- Odd loading mechanism
- Instinct shooting
- How rare are they?
- Today’s point
Collectors of anything know there are more things in the world than all the books acknowledge. That’s one of the things that makes collecting so much fun — the joy of discovering something other people knew nothing about.
I don’t consider myself to be a collector. I suppose that’s because I am willing to let go of almost anything. Most collectors have a vault from which nothing escapes while they live. I realized that I could never own all the things I was interested in at the same time, so I buy and sell as my interest changes.
Saw it at my first airgun show
That’s how I came to own today’s collectible BB gun — the Parris Kadet 500 Trainer. In 1994 I was at the very first airgun show I ever attended, which turned out to be the second show ever held in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. That show migrated to Roanoke, Virginia several years later and then it moved on to Salem, Virginia and the Moose Lodge, where it was held for several years before ending. My point is — I have been attending airgun shows almost from the beginning.
Parris BB gun looks like a Daisy until you examine it closely.
I saw many wonderful things at that show, but one of them really stuck in my mind. It was a plain-looking lever action BB gun that had a lever made from stamped metal. Beyond that it resembled most older Daisy BB guns of the Red Ryder style. The ones (yes, there were several at this show) I saw were all in NRA Decrepit condition save one that was all the way up to NRA Lousy. I had certainly never seen this kind of BB gun and it impressed me — apparently a lot!
Fast-forward several years and many airgun shows. Over that time I had learned that this strange BB gun was made by the Parris Manufacturing Company of Savanna, TN — best-known for making toy rifles that resemble bolt action military rifles from WW II and before. I had played with Parris rifles as a child and knew of the company as a toy maker, but not as the maker of BB guns.
I also discovered in the Blue Book of Airguns that Parris made at least 5 different models of BB guns. There may be even more variations out there — I simply do not know. Nor does anyone else, it seems.
I had to know!
Having been teased by this obscure BB gun for so many years, I had to know how well it worked. What was it like to cock one with that thin sheet metal lever? Was it accurate? So I bought one for $60 at an airgun show. That’s what they seemed to fetch — $60. It wasn’t a lot to spend, but when you’re a writer who is interested in everything, you have to have a schedule.
This picture shows not only the sheet metal cocking lever, but also the stamped trigger blade.
I got the gun and immediately started testing it. I discovered that it needed oil, as do all BB guns with the typical BB-gun powerplant. And I discovered it shot BBs at around 300 f.p.s., plus or minus. But the gun was loose as a goose on its inside and buzzed like a bottle of angry hornets when it was fired. Parris was a toymaker who may not have been able to hold manufacturing tolerances as closely as a company like Daisy. At least that was always my speculation about why the gun buzzed so much.
Odd loading mechanism
Another odd thing about this BB gun is the way it loads. The front sight slides back to reveal an opening into which up to 50 BBs are poured. Most BB guns would be loaded at that point, but not the Parris Kadet 500. That just loads BBs into the onboard reservoir.
Push back the front sight blade to reveal the loading port. Up to 50 BBs can be loaded, but they only go into an onboard holding reservoir.
To load the gun for shooting the whole front sight is twisted to one side and a single BB drops down to the breech to be caught and retained by a magnet. Up to 6 Bbs can be loaded successively that way, but to what purpose I’m not sure. The gun is too weak to make any kind of air shotgun. I think this is just a quirk of the design that someone decided had to have a purpose.
I am also interested in the subject of instinct shooting that has a rich history in the BB gun world. Lucky McDaniel was its most well-known proponent and he sometimes used BB guns made by Parris!
It’s true there is a Daisy Lucky McDaniel Instinct Shooting outfit that I wrote about many years ago. But Daisy and Lucky parted ways in the early 1960s and Lucky went to Parris to have his BB gun made.
They shouldn’t have sights, but the 5 I’ve seen had both front and rear sights. I have seen them at airgun shows and they are characterized by a Lucky McDaniel sticker on the butt of the gun. Without that sticker, there is no way of telling who the gun was made for.
This is the label on my Parris Kadet 500 BB gun. A Lucky McDaniel gun would have a Lucky McDaniel sticker here.
How rare are they?
I bet some of you are wondering right now how rare these BB guns are. I wondered that myself after never seeing one for nearly the first half-century of my life. But apparently they are not that rare. I see them at many airgun shows — including one that was at the 2015 Texas Airgun Show held at the end of August. The prices have risen a little, but what hasn’t? I found one selling for $115 online when I researched this report.
The thing is, lot of what has been written about them is stuff I wrote. My name has been stripped off, of course, but the exact terminology I used can be found in a number of places on the internet. That’s discouraging because I know next to nothing about the guns beyond what I’ve told you here.
The point of this report is to demonstrate there are things out there that most people haven’t heard of. There are new toys to be found just over the horizon. And that is part of the thrill of being a collector. You get to learn stuff that few people know and see things most will never see. That keeps the blood flowing, I think.
235 thoughts on “Parris Kadet 500 BB gun”
I think your right about keeping the blood flowing thing.
I haven’t got a hold of much of the old air gun stuff yet. Magic word “yet”. But I have sure had fun trying out alot of the modern stuff. And I don’t plan on stopping that either.
My air gun blood is definitely flowing. 🙂
Maybe I gotta cut some loose to get some coming in because I don’t consider myself a collector so much but more of a shooter.
That don’t mean I won’t have a few to choose from for a loonng time
I just got through talking to Buldawg saying that I’m not in the mood for repairing or modding guns right now working all this overtime. Not much time left to do anything. It’s cutting into my shooting time.
And I like my shooting time. 🙂
So what did it feel like, a toy or a BB gun?
I like the one piece stock!
But not $65 worth.
I got to many projects and not enough time for all of them and have no good method to prioritize them as to which to do first so I just work them in as I get to them and eventually I will get them all done and then will not be able to shoot them all so its a never ending vicious cycle that is the air gunners curse in my opinion.
Always to many guns and never enough time.
One of the best things about going to airgun shows is seeing and learning about an airgun you have never seen or heard of before. I first learned about the BSA Scorpion pistol, the Belgium Hyscore 801, the Air Arms Shamal, the Gamo Survival Rifle, the tiny giss system Diana rifle based on their giss system pistol (forgot the model numbers), and numerous other airguns at the Little Rock/Malvern show. Plus add to that all the airguns I first got to hold and shoot at airgun shows. But, the best part of the shows is all the people I got to meet. No airgun can beat the friends I have made at the shows.
On another note on the never ending quest for the one stroke 12 fpe pneumatic air rifle. How about putting a check valve in a daisy 953? Could two or three pumps then give 12 fpe?
But then it wouldn’t be a single stroke anymore.
But it would be a lot better than 10 pumps 🙂
I considered doing that to my 953 thinking I’d put it’s beefy pump lever to work but the twist rate would be wrong for much higher velocity.
don’t get me started on this single pump again HA. I thought the Webley Alecto was close to the perfect set up. With the 1, 2 and 3 pump with one being low and 3 being high power. With the velocity they got out of it with 3 pumps, I think someone could do the same with a rifle. With the rifle’s pump handle being bigger/longer, it should be easier to pump then the Alecto pistol. Not sure what happened to the Alecto as Webley discontinued it.
You may be interested in some testing I did yesterday on scopes. I know you have one of them on your .25 P-Rod.
I was interested in checking out three scopes I have handy to see how they do in a vice test. It was too windy so no shooting was involved. I was sighting against a field fence at 50 yards with green leaf bush background. Once I got started I found I needed a better background for these tests and set up one of my targets with ¼ inch rings and grids. The Three scopes were a Center Point, a UTG and a Leupold. I wanted to check the scopes without shooting figuring if there were issues with the scopes they would not get better when shooting. I put the scopes/rifles in a large vice with plastic jaws. I have the vise mounted on a heavy wheel from a D5 caterpillar, it is very stable. I know I need to wear my glasses when using a scope to get as close to 20-20 as I can I am near sighted. I have tried to use a scope without my glasses but that set the scopes focal/parallax distances way off. Below are my observations:
CenterPoint Optics 3-9×40 AO scope with mil-dot reticle: Packaged with my Trail NP .22 rifle.
Magnification varies from 3-9 power: Reticle nil movement.
Focus/Parallax adjustment at 3,6 and 9 power: Reticle nil movement.
There was a loss of focus at the set distance of 50 yards between 3 and 9 power with the greatest at about 7.5 power. This showed the parallax was significant when changing power and not resetting the focus for this scope. When I focused at the 9 power setting the parallax was about 1/4 inch and about the same at 3 power, although The scope needed to be set at infinity to minimize parallax at 50yds. At 3 power it was hard to see but seemed about the same as at 9 power. At about the 7.5 power without changing the 50 yard focus used at 9 power the parallax was over an inch each way.
Summary: This scope is not to sensitive to magnification but cheekweld is very critical it has a lot of parallax at 50 yards. I think at 30 yards from what I remember it does pretty well to minimize parallax. Probably not designed for long distance shooting.
UTG 2-16×44 AO Accushot SWAT Rifle Scope, EZ-TAP, Ill. Mil-Dot Reticle, 1/4 MOA, 30mm Tube:
Magnification varies from 2-16 power: Reticle with focus set at 50 yds from 16 power to 10 power the reticle moved about 1/4 inch to the right and was still off 1/8 inch right at 2 power. On the vertical it went to 2 ¼ inch low at 3 power and back up to ½ inch low at 2 power WOW. The vertical change seemed linear from 16 to 3 power.
Focus/Parallax adjustment at 2,6,9,12 and 16 power nil movement.
Summary: This scope better be set at what magnification you want and leave it there. That is not what I expected from this scope. Once set at a specific power the scope seemed to be stable and the parallax could be nearly zeroed out. The distance to the target and the distance shown on side wheel matched up well at all magnifications. I could not believe these results so I went in the house and started typing this response and then went back out to check my measurements. They did not change.
Leupold VX-2 3-9x33mm Ultralight Rifle Scope with extended focal range.
Magnification varies from 3-9 power- Reticle nil movement.
Focus/Parallax adjustment at 3,6 and 9 power nil movement.
Summary: I will not be replacing this scope on my M-Rod anytime soon. Some movement was discernible when changing power settings maybe about 1/16 inch. The parallax adjustment could also always be adjusted out by the focus at all power settings. I did a set of various distance targets a few weeks ago and was able to focus down to 5 yards no problem, I know this scope is not perfect but as far as I could tell for this test it did all I could have hoped for. It did cost a little over $100 more than the 2-16 UTG. From this I would say Made in USA still means something.
Note when I say nil movement I mean not really detectible with the conditions I had. I would guestimate I could see any movement greater than 1/16 inch.
Based on these results I think I will be checking some of my other variable power scopes. I realize that this test did not account for what happens in actual shooting but could save a lot of pellets and head scratching trying to figure out a scope/gun combination. I would think the top of the line scopes go through some kind of test like this before they leave the factory.
That was a thorough test! And look at what you learned. I wonder if Cal will weigh in on this?
The biggest thing you learned from your test I believe is to zero your scope at the magnification you plan to shoot at.
Now that you have that testing done go to the next step. Put you a target out at 10 yard interavals from 10-50 yards. Aim at the bullseye with your cross hair center (+). Don’t use any hold over or under. Try your magnification change on each target and shoot. And see what your pellets do verses where you aim.
If you do that test report uouuou r results. That would show the benefits of both tests. And I bet you will encounter more surprises.
Oh and since you have the scope mounted on your Marauder try the shooting test with it. Oh and for this test keep the same pellet.
Then when you finish that test now try it with different pellet types in your Marauder. That would give very good info to compare with.
All in all it will give a person learning about air guns and scope use what to look for. And how things change from what you see through a scope. And what actually happens when you shoot. And thanks for sharing that part of the test. Now for the rest of the test. 🙂
Yep that is my long term plan. I just received my chrony yesterday and plan on doing some more tuning on my marauder before I do more tests. The Leupold scope has been on it since I got it. It is the only time I have not had to change the windage on a scope. The cap has not been off the windage adjustment screw yet. Probably just luck. I have quite a bit to do before I run the next set of distance vs trajectory against chairgun. I need to run a set of levels out to maybe 50 yards. Right now I can only get to 40 yards. I want to work on my trigger, it is getting more creep with time. Also I want to come up with a more stable table to shoot from. So I will let you know when I get the tests complete.
For most shooting/hunting I don’t change the power of my scope. Deer hunting is one where I do change it from a low power when visibility is limited and to higher power when out in the open and that can occur all in one day.
I don’t think I will try changing the magnification on each target and shoot groups. I will do that though at a select distance maybe at my zero site distance. My best groups right now are about 0.65 – 0.8 at 40 yards. My plan is to get 10 shot groups under 0.5 inches at 40 yards. I think I can achieve that based on where I am now and some more work on the gun.
Yep you mentioned to me that you got the chrony. Did you get to try it out?
And yep your probably right that using the one distance to check what magnification change does when shooting is involved.
But like you said with Chairgun and true shooting results the different distances the targets are then comes into play.
I still believe the more test a person trys the more they know what does or doesn’t affect their shooting. So I’m ready to hear what you find out.
I have a lot to learn on the chrony. I shot four ten shot groups I had some errors on the first three sets. I think my light was bad, my alignment was bad and I was shooting too high fearing to hit the darn thing. Just from what I saw I think my Mrod wants to shoot at a lower fill or crank down the power just a little. I have a lot more shooting to do with the chrony first. I might try one of the new led shop lights. I will be shooting in the shade. Hope to shoot more middle of next week.
The chronys are tricky little devices to get right.
I shot mine once but don’t tell nobody ok. 🙂
And you did say in your statement that you think it likes a lower fill pressure.
First what weight pellets and second why do you think that?
Ahhh, the Chronys. Here’s my take on them. I had lots of errors on at first. I did it indoors, with various light set ups, screens, no screens, diff. distances of muzzle to first eye, diff. shot height over eyes…….
I still do it indoors, muzzle is about 1′ back from first eye, shot is about 2″ over eyes. Indoors allows you to control your enviroment, unlike outdoors in that you have sun, clouds, trees, shadows, etc. that will affect the chrony.
B.B. recommmended shining a 500watt Halogen work light at the ceiling. The ceiling provides an even reflection surface. No screens. (It works.) Also, no flourescents in the room. Turn them off. The lights “pulse”. LED’s supposidly do the same, but they do sell the strips to use with chronys. So??? My 500W was 12$ , it’s the rectangular type with a tube that is about 4″ with a little floor stand built in. Hope it helps. Oh yea, if you go indoors,…a really good back stop/trap. Mine is about 5′ from the muzzle. Chris
(Nice testing) and a lot to think about. Glasses, Mag. levels, parralex, movement,…..
I have a UTG 3-12 side AO, similar to what you have,…and a Hawke 2.5-10 side AO. The parralex adjust dead on the UTG and double on the Hawke. I wear glasses for close up only. Far sight is near 20/20. I look over them to shoot. Any thoughts on the 2X difference?
The one thing I believe you did not mention, was what you used for a scale. A tape measure, yard stick…?
From what I got,…in general,…best to leave the mag. adj. alone? And,…adjust parralex as needed.
Keep us posted on further testing,…Chris
I am no expert on scopes. I set up a target at a measured distance I want to shoot at. Then set the AO at that distance and select the power I want to use. Then I put the gun in a rest and focus the eye piece. On some scopes this does not always work. Then I sacrifice focus for minimal parallax and having the AO show the correct distance. May try it on your Hawke.
For scale I set up one of my bench rest targets I use in the sun at 50 yards. It has six targets with 1/4 inch rings and 1/4 inch grid tics on the border of each bulls eye. This gave a pretty good back ground at all magnifications to guestimate the reticle shifts.
I think if a scope has variable power it should be good to go for adjusting. That said it will vary from scope to scope. Non will be perfect and some will be pretty poor. I have a box of poor scopes out in the shed.
I have never had an extreme high end scope, can’t afford one. I would think for most shooters they would be better than the shooter at all settings.
Thanks for the advice. From a newbie point of view,….I would be inclined to let the A.O. scale be off from actual. As for reticle focus,…my understanding is that you adjust it for your eyesight and leave it alone….at all A.O.’s and all mag. levels. My reticle stays focused at all mag. levels and all A.O. settings….UTG and Hawke.
As for targets, I use quality graph paper with 9/16″ ring binder stickers on it. When the fine blue lines come into focus, I feel pretty confident that my A.O. is set where it needs to be…..even if the A.O. is not reading what the measured distance is. I can not ever see where I would purposely shoot at an un-focused target,..(focus via A.O. and never reticle adj.)
Just my thoughts…..unless I got it “all wrong”,…It would not be the first time! 🙂 Chris
I am sure your way is the normal scope setup. I like to have my objective give me the correct distance that way I can use it as a range finder. As long as what I think the distance is and what the scope says maybe a I feel more confident in my shot. I was not clear on the focus. I tend to sacrifice the reticle focus if it’s not too bad. My priority is to minimize parallax. I always focus on the target as best I can regardless of what numbers on the scope say.
In the past I just kept shooting until I became confident in the setup gun/scope relationship. Sometimes that never happened. I am hoping the scope test information will help me figure out what is going on. I know many people on this blog have been through all this before and can figure out what to do. I can’t tell if it’s me the scope or the gun, just trying to reduce the variables.
The reticle focus has to be adjusted to clear sharp lines with the eye piece. Then it is left alone.
Then you should use the side or front parallax adjustment to get a clear sharp focus on your target.
Is that what you do?
Any idea why the UTG reads dead on and the Hawke will read double the actual? I would suspect the answer will be that all scopes will vary a little on A.O. vs actual.
And, did B.B. not shoot on a really cold Jan. morning one time and the A.O. was WAY down off the actual? All due to temp. And, don’t the pros have muti-temp scales on their side wheels just for that reason? Chris
Took awhile, but I found the answer 1-2-15, LGU 50yd.test. Very cold and AO was set at 15 when BB was shooting at 50. Chris
I usually set a target at the distance I would most likely be shooting and then set the AO at the same distance then I would set the reticle focus and leave it alone. If I could make a small change to have the AO show the correct distance and the reticle still be in good focus I would set the scope that way. On bench target shooting I always set the parallax to get the best focus and minimize parallax and these match up. On my scopes that I have good luck with this has not been an issue. See what I found out below.
I just went out and set up a target at 15 yards to do some more testing in the vise. I used the CenterPoint because it has such a high degree of parallax. I wanted to test my method. When I set the reticle to focus on the target with the scope AO set at the 15 yard target distance the parallax was 3/4 inch with my glasses on.
At 50 yards with this scope I could not go to minimum parallax because I hit infinity on the AO. AT 15 yards I could adjust the AO to both sides of the minimum parallax and focus.
I also tested the scope with and without glasses with the reticle in the best focus. This did require moving the reticle focus from nearly all the way in with glasses to all the way out without glasses. In both cases the AO read 26 yards and the Parallax was down to just over 1/4 inch. So I at least on this scope my test showed to use the best focus on both reticle and AO and use cheat sheet or remark the distances on the AO as you folks have suggested.
I guess I was doing this anyway on the scopes I tested because the Leupold and UTG all matched up as best I could see anyway. The CenterPoint was so far off that I had to give up on the AO distances anyway. I think my process may have been giving me trouble with my 10/22.
In summary you can adjust the AO to have the correct distances by adjusting the reticle focus but don’t do it. It will make the parallax much worse. At least on the one scope I tested.
I am sure someone that designs scopes or at least understands the theory in the design of their optics can answer these issues.
Benji that’s why I try to leave the eye piece alone.
I have much better success by not making adjustments on my scope.
The thing is I shoot at that lower magnification (6 power) so I can get away with leaving my parallax set at 50 yards. Most of my air gun shooting falls in the 15-55 yard range. My targets all are focused pretty well except the 15 yard target does get just slightly blurry. But 15 yards is so close that it’s very easy to put pellet on top of pellet at that distance even if slightly out of focus.
Now if I start shooting out at the longer distances of 70-100 yards with my. 25 Marauder then I will adjust the parallax up to a higher yardage setting.
It’s nice to learn all those different things and at least it does answers some questions to what a person encounters as they shoot.
You must have excellent cheek weld because on my air rifle AO scopes if I adjust to 50 yd focus and shoot at 20 yards I have significant parallax even at 6 power. I have been shooting my .22 Marauder at 9 power for targets and focusing at each distance. So far I have not tried to hit the bull at all distances. I have not progressed that far yet I am still looking at my group size. Once I start shooting to hit the bull I may need to rethink the power and focus issues. So far I feel very confident in the scope on my Marauder and have not found any issues with any of the adjustments affecting my POI. That can easily change down the road. With my UTG scope I would no longer think of changing the power setting once I pick one and sight it in. For squirrel hunting I have always used 6 power on my AO scopes same as you. I arrived at that just based on experience with thousands of shots and many years. It seemed to give me the best feel for hold over and windage on my 10/22. I did not sit down and do any testing or really thinking about it, just lots of shooting.
Same as you. Alot of shooting over the years. And my dad was pretty persistent on me learning to shoot. So started at a very young age.
And I believe the biggest part of shooting good is repeating your hold.
I practice shouldering the gun over and over with both eyes closed then opening my eyes. My main goal is to see the full scope picture without having to move me or the gun around.
I do the same bench resting. I always want to position myself to get the same exact sight picture as possible.
It does make a difference is all I know.
If you want to have your A.O. match your range finder readings,…then I think the way to go is “cheat sheets” of what the A.O. reads and what the actual is. Side wheels are cool for this and can be installed independant of the side A.O. knob. That way you can trust your side wheel and ignor the A.O. turret’s scale. On front A.O.,…I am not sure how you could correct that,…other than a cheat sheet. Chris
You can still put a piece of tape around the Bell of the front focus scope and mark your distances just like they do on the big side wheel scopes.
Thanks, I have a side wheel on the UTG and love it. It makes focusing easy and quick. Mine already reads as good as I expect it to. I did some more tests today and confirmed what you have been saying. See reply above to GF1. My target shooting in general is used to improve on my hunting skills. I generally would not have time for a cheat sheet. My distance estimates by eye are pretty good. My recent air rifle shooting is getting me back to the target shooting I did as a kid where I am shooting targets for fun. Now I want to better understand the physics and theory of it all. I understand ballistics pretty well but not so much the design and theory of the air guns and scopes. I like to push the variables outside the normal range and see if the results still match up with my understanding of what the result is. If not then I need to change my understanding. I did a lot of surveying years ago. Those instruments had stadia hairs that could be used to estimate distance based on the measured distance between the hairs on the survey rod. I think most were 1:100 so one foot between the hairs on the rod was 100 feet on the ground. They had focus but not magnification adjustment. They were accurate not as good as a tape measure but darn good. In the future I may think about getting a single power scope as they may have less issues for the same price especially for target shooting.
My dad did surveying in the army. I would like that job.
And I’m with you on a lower magnification fixed power scope.
There’s also the benefit of having more feild of veiw with the lower magnification scopes. And then like you said. You wouldn’t need to worry about that extra variable in the scope.
And got a question for you. What do you think about the etched glass reticle verses the normal reticles?
The only scope I have that is etched glass is the UTG 2-16. I really like the reticle it is very crisp and clear. I sure don’t like the fact that POA changes 2 1/4 inches from 3 to 16 power at 50 yards. Don’t know what that has to do with the etched glass. Probably just the luck of the draw on the scope. With all else the same I like the etched glass over the wire/spider web (normal) reticle. I haven’t used it hunting or in a lot of different light conditions yet. Will let you know as time goes on.
Yep that 2 1/4″ is crazy.
Now you need to put it on a gun and shoot and compare the results. That will be interesting to see what happens.
We think alot alike. Always playing and pushing the limits and trying to figure out what does what,…and why. I like it. Keep us posted. Me?,…..new to air gunning and guns in general for the most part,…so you are years ahead of me already. I will be checking out the “stadia hairs” thing. Sounds very interesting and first I have heard of that. Chris
There have been many scopes with mil-dots or tick marks set to represent a specific distance versus measurement through the scope. This has to be at a set power. I guess I forgot that when I started some of these recent tests I have been doing. Most are set up for a typical measurement of the intended prey. Say for a deer you have the cross hairs and tic marks set at the locations shown in the scope manual on the deer torso. Then that is 100 yards if they match. If it is half that then 200 yards and so on. Same with the mil-dot reticle the dot at a given power has a given distance versus measured distance through the scope between the dots. The trouble is you don’t have a tape measure to look at while you are hunting and all the prey is not the same size. I guess what I was wondering in my statement earlier was that It should not be that difficult to calibrate the distance on the scope AO to match the focus distance. I think most scope manufactures just don’t take the time to calibrate each scope. I bet the very high end scopes do. But as also stated earlier other things can make a difference. I know in surveying temperature was always critical for high end surveys and corrections had to be made based on the instrument or tape measure and temperature. I remember looking through levels on a patchy cloudy day and watching the reticle move every time the sun or shade crossed the instrument. Made it a real pain to keep adjusting the bubbles each time. Knowing the distance to the target is very critical to knowing where to aim. Although with my 10/22 after shooting thousands of shots at all distances I did not think too much about the distance .I left the scope set the same all the time and got a good feel for where to aim based the view through the scope and the wind on my face and indicators on any vegetation between me and the target. At some point it just started to come natural and I quit thinking about where to aim. That will not happen with my .22 marauder because I will never be able to shoot that many shots. So I am doing a lot of thinking and forgetting things I should know. Then I have to back up and take another path. The good news for me is I am having fun.
The last three sentences sums it up. I would do well to re-read my notes from time to time. Like you said with your 10/22,….it comes natural after awhile. Still, after several thousand shots,…I still find me “messing up” from time to time. I guess,…bottom line to that is,..use it or lose it. Chris
And while I’m here nobody has mentioned the gun in today’s article.
How far open does the cocking arm open? Just wondered if it had a short cocking stroke for fast action shooting.
Kind of a weird collector item gun not a shooting gun. That’s my take on this gun, I’d pass on it even at $20.
Benji started something interesting with his scope test I would be interested in reading how his results translate into shooting. I have one of those same CenterPoint scopes but I’m not impressed. I have an RWS 3-9×44 AO Night Pro mounted on my new 34P I’m thinking the rifle deserves something better. With about 400 rounds through it the gun is breaking in very nicely, revisited the Crosman premiums in the cardboard box and now getting groups around 1/2″ with those pellets also starting to get nice groups with the JSBs.
It’s pretty much what me and Calin discussed awhile back.
But it will be interesting to see what all aspects of the tests bring. Not just the scope side of the test and not just the shooting side of the test.
A open mind on all aspects have to be kept if a person truly will learn from something. Not one side or the other. That’s like getting part of the facts and then being asked to make a truthful decision.
I’m sure B.B. is going someplace with this report, don’t know where yet. Just because I wouldn’t want one of these Parris Kadets doesn’t mean there is nothing of value to learn from this report. B.B. doesn’t waste his time or our time which is why I am a fathful daily reader. I haven’t posted much lately but doesn’t mean I stopped reading the blog.
The comment I made to you about truthful facts of both sides. Is totally and only about the test that Benji is doing.
And what I’m talking about is that all aspects about how the scope is working along with the shooting results.
Was not talking about today’s blog at all with my comment.
I am very interested in what Benji has discovered, I wanted to learn how this non shooting testing applies to shooting. Based on the three scopes he has on hand it seems he has the right one mounted on his M-Rod.
With you there about Benji’s test’s.
I love that kind of stuff.
My take on today’s featured item is that it is a piece of airgun history. Just that. As for buying or collecting,..that is a wide open topic subject to one’s own personal taste.
I think you’re right.
At the next gun show Simone may see a box full o’ these and if the price is right I’d have to say “go for it!”
Pyramyd Air asked me to wriote the history of airguns in the blog. I told them that it is a project I will never finish, and they said they understood.
One part of the history is the history of BB guns. I wrote about the Kadet Trainer because it is an unknown gun that figured in the overall history of BB guns. Later when I write about instinct training and talk about Luck McDaniel, I can refer back to this report for more information on the Parris BB guns.
B.B., maybe for instinct training you can go into more depth on Lucky McDaniel’s technique and other alternatives. I found his method of looking above the target very effective for some of my airgun activities. But the part about looking below low-lying targets makes no intuitive sense to me and doesn’t work at all. I’m also experimenting with the OSS pistol technique which is to swing the gun up until it breaks the line of sight with the target and then convulsively squeeze the trigger along with the whole grip. That works, but I know there are other techniques to, one by an online guru who talks about lining up the pistol with the forehead. I’ll never get into action pistol shooting with firearms because of the expense among other reasons. But for airguns, it opens up a whole new world beyond straight target shooting.
Just got to comment on this.
I was always taught to come down on the target. And soon as you see what you want to hit you shoot.
Maybe I have been doing it bass akwards. But it works for me.
I don’t know about being taught to do it like that but it just seems easier to me,
The Gun is usually pointing up when I get done loading regardless of powerplant so I just let gravity pull it in line with the target nice &slow like.
Is shotgun shooting the same as instinct shooting? Lucky McDaniel demonstrated his method through shotgun style shooting at airborne targets (although he seemed to often use airguns). But I don’t know if the two are synonymous.
There seem to be a lot of deliberate techniques for shotgun shooting. Keeping the gun level with the target, you can lead it. You can track it. Or one other method seems to be to follow it and draw the gun through the target. Maybe that is for those situations when the bird pops up when you are unaware and out of position.
Now it seems like you can come down on it from above, and, presumably, up from below. I wouldn’t have guessed that coming down would work well since the target would be past by the time you realize it. But one the two shots I took at skeet targets with a double-barreled blackpowder shotgun, I missed both times, so I have zero experience about this.
I can’t wait to read about the instinct shooting!
I have a feeling that a lot of it will also be applicable to shotgunning with the lack of sights on most of them.
Yes, instinct shooting and shotgun shooting do have a lot in common. There are things like lead, though, that do differ a bit. So instinct shooting is more of a good place to start shooting shotguns.
I asked if it felt like a toy or BB gun but left out the more.
Sounds like it feels like a toy that shoots.
Well I guess maybe we may find out sooner or later.
As I said I really like the looks of the gun and it appears to shoot BB’s at an acceptable velocity. But for some reason I believe the buzzing may have been left intentionally to keep costs down and transfer the illusion of more power like China seemed to do with their early air rifles.
China’s early air rifles? And maybe some of the modern ones too.
I was referring to the B-2 and B-3’s which have always had a violent and very buzzy firing behavior.
They’re getting better and my Impact is an excellent copy but if it is made in China it’s buyer beware always.
Yep about China.
I have a Ruger Air Hawk very nice copy of the 34 but still a copy. Took two tries to get a good one from Pyramyd. B.B. tested one and never finished cause his rifle didn’t shoot well. I agree buyer beware. Doesn’t mean you can’t get a lemon from Germany though it is far less likely.
I guess the insert with breakbarrel tops on it used to be clamped into the breech collapsing the breech seal but mine was loose in the box it was such a problem that there are tuning kits consisting of shims and a new seal.
The first video review I watch showed a large cousin of smoke escaping from it.
Oh there’s plenty of failures coming outta Germany too for example the Merkur and caterrra.
While the article is good,..I do not believe that it was titled as “Part 1”,…so I would not look a part 2.
As stated above, B.B. featured it as a piece of airgun history, Just that. Nothing more.
As for your next big “find”,…you seem to be doing pretty well at spotting a deal! 😉 Chris
I’m kinda surprised there wasn’t at least one of those in the “Buncha guns I picked up at the Texas show”. But I’m happy to dig through them and discover new things about them as well as do whatever I can to get them shooting without destroying any collector value (if possible) and resurrect as many of these classics as is humanly possible.
Go Reb go!
My trashcan deal was a no-brainer but required dedication to get the most outta it. There will be more and if I have the money I’ll do it again. The discovery of the model B and 958 have me hooked as well as the QB-88 that was a shooterstraifht outta the trunk
So, the attraction to this gun is that it’s cheap and unusual? 🙂
Well, I have my own collecting quirks. I’m as possessive as any collector although my guns are all popular models. Also, with an upcoming acquisition, I just may have reached the point of having all the guns I want. An unusual state to be sure.
Buldawg, if you don’t like a Toyota in NASCAR what did you make of the iconic stock car film Talladega Nights? Remember the odd French driver who says at the end: “Rickeeee Bobeeee, in beeeaating meee, you have set me freeee.” …. I don’t know about classic movie, but it was entertaining in a slapstick way.
In surfing the net, I made my way to the iconic classic American automobile of all time, the 57 Chevy. I had heard of it, but didn’t know it had this kind of status. And while knowing it is a sort of retro hot rod model, I didn’t know that it was an award winning NASCAR design in its time. In fact, it was so successful, they apparently had to make rules to keep it from sweeping the competition. Hard to believe with its appearance. While its tailfins probably looked futuristic at the time, it seems to have bulging proportions, more like a family car. It doesn’t look anything like the stock cars now. Supposedly, you can get brand new ones according to original specs for $180,000, sort of like you can get a brand new Mauser 98 from the original company for $15,000! But I also understand that companies produce the original body inside which you can assemble various parts to approximate the original. Turns out that my grandfather had one with a special powerpack of which he was extremely fond. If only he had hung to it and passed it on. It makes you think that gun collectors may have the right idea after all.
Perhaps you can answer a technical question. Did the 57 Chevy have an automatic transmission or a manual? I think of big American cars like that with automatic transmission, but that doesn’t seem to fit with its hot rod role. I can’t find YouTube videos that show the right view.
Powerglide 2 speed automatic trans also 3 and 4 speed manual trans in the 57 Chevy.
I did not watch the movie Talladega Nights as I don’t think Will Farrell’s humor is funny but rather completely stupid and idiotic so I cannot comment on any scenes from the movie. It to me is no way an iconic stock car movie but more just a poor attempt at a comedy at best.
The 57 Chevy could be had with a two speed cast iron powerglide auto trans or a 3 or 4 speed manual trans and 6 cylinder or V8 power with your grandfathers proud 283 V8 power pack equipped engine which was a slightly detuned corvette engine that put out around 210 horsepower with the 4 barrel carb and power pack heads. There are aftermarket companies like Year One or Classic Industries and so on that make just about every part needed to completely assemble a new 57 Chevy all from individual parts. I am not aware that a new complete cars can be purchased today other than ones that are built by custom shops and sold at auctions. The 57 was and is an iconic piece of automotive history and while in its day did dominate NASCAR it was a big heavy ill handling car in true factory trim and for NASCAR it was stripped of all but the bare necessities required to race so as to shed as much weight as possible to go fast and turn left only which is another of the less desirable aspects of NASCAR to me as cars can turn right and left and speed up and slow down so for me to watch cars go around in a circle repeatedly gets boring very fast. Now back when there were no restrictor plates or limits on engine size or power outputs it was a very exciting form of racing with the 426 Hemi and 429 Fords and 427 Chevy motors churning out 900 plus horsepower and the ability to achieve well over 200 mph with ease but todays racing is as I said before just a glorified demolition derby in my opinion.
Yep and they did the restrictor plates for safety.
They figured slowing the cars down would make them slower. Well it did on some makes of cars but also helped out the other make of cars.
So you had big bunch of cars running together and a couple cars out front out running everybody else. The cars out front were basically on a joy ride. Then the other cars that were back there fighting each other. Well guess what happens next. Crashes.
So all NASCAR did with the restrictor plates is make safty problems. That’s what happens when you get a group of people making decisions that don’t think it all the way through.
Suppose to say yep slowing the cars down would make them safer. Not slower.
Yea I understand that the restrictor plates are meant to slow them down and make for more close packed exciting racing but all it serves to do is cause them to stay all bunched up with not enough power to be able to separate from the pack and hence the glorified demolition derby that happens the entire race and creates wreck after wreck.
if they wopuld slow the car by dirtying up the aero packages instead of limiting horsepower the cars would still have th power to get out of the draft and pull away from the pack and create space between the cars
Yep that’s right. Like I said they sure didn’t think the restrictor plate idea through.
Didn’t they already restrict how much tape they can have on their grilles? The last race I remember watching was the one that cost Dale Earnhardt his life.
That man was a driver!
Dale Earnhardt was my most favorite driver.
But Richard Petty back in the day would pull off some pretty good driving tricks when he had the power available to smoke the tires at a 120 mph.
Richard Petty was racing to survive. Basically to keep the family fed. The competion was feirce back in the early days and the drivers and teams did what they had to do to win.
When you got them kind of things your fighting for you end up with very exciting racing. You never new what the driver was going to do in the next turn or straight. The old racing in the 50’s, 60’s and early 70’s was some exciting stuff to watch.
It was not until the mid to late 80s that NASCAR started placing any restriction on the cars and that was also the last days of the door slammers as they were all going to tube chassis/sheet metal bodied lookalike mattelomattic race cars and that when the tape and restrictor plates came about and was the true end of NASCAR in my book.
But they’re still messing with them. It’s been a long time since I’ve watched one but duct tape was a valuable tool last time I did.
Fast cars win races but crashes raise ratings.
Yes they still race them but they are more of a prototype race car than a stock car and yes crashes raise rating for those who like to sit for 30 minute or an hour to wait for the cars to be cleaned off the track to restart the race but its not my cup of tea.
They used duct tape in the 70s to hold the windshields in place and is how it got the name of 200 mile per hour tape.
I remember back in the 70s when there was no restrictor plates and the King Richard had the 426 hemi under his hood he could pull away from any and all comers at will and specifically in the 71 Firecracker 400 all the cars came in to pit with 15 laps to go and when they went back out the left rear tire on the kings car had the lug nuts left loose so that he had to pit again to replace the tire and lug nuts and when he got back out there was 10 laps left with him being a lap and half down from the leader and he proceeded to run full throttle down the back straight at speeds of 240 plus mph and was power sliding all the way thru the banking on every lap as we were right at the entrance to turn 3 at the end of the back straight. He would back out of the throttle just long enough at the end of the straight to set the car out sideways and put his foot right back in the floorboard and you could see smoke rolling off the rear tires with the car set out sideways thru the banking and he came back and drove right past the leader to win the race so he had been sandbagging the whole race and just playing with the other racers since he obviously had far more power than any other car on the track.
That was the true NASCAR racing of the past and is what earned the sport its true heritage as a premier racing venue.
I just find it so boring to watch a group of cars just race around all bunched up until one makes the slightest mistake and the BIG one occurs. beside they are the farthest thing from a stock car that there ever was so I agree that the NASCAR BIG WIGS have lost sight of the real sport and are only concerned about the money it generates rather than allowing the teams to be able to show who has done their homework and therefore has the ability to pull away from the rest that did not get it right for that day of racing.
I’m 100% with you on the old NASCAR stuff.
That’s when they were trying to make their car the fastest car on the track. Not somebody telling them how fast they could go. And yep that roundy round stuff getts boring fast. You know what I get a kick out of to watch is when they do the road race tracks in the NASCAR series. Them guys are so use to setting their cars up to turn left that they forget how to turn right. You can definitely tell when you got a good driver and a good car setup.
Do you remember the IROC races? (International Race Of Champions.) That was pretty cool when they had the contract with Chevy to use the Camaro’s for the cars. Thus came about the IROC Camaro’s that people could by from the Chevy dealer’s. Well and I think at the end of the last days of the series they were racing Dodges. But that was pretty cool racing because they took drivers from different aspects of racing and put them in so called equally prepared cars and did a bunch of races at different tracks. It was to see if the cars were better or if it was the driver that was better.
That’s like index racing at the dragstrip. They use a throttle stop with a computer to make their car run in that time index class their in. You can hear them cars go full throttle off the starting line. They go about a car legnth then it sounds like they shut the key off for 2 seconds then all of sudden the car comes back on full throttle to finish the run. Basically the driver is just there to keep the car pointed straight down the track. Well that’s not my kind of racing at all.
When it comes to racing I believe it should be all out. A good driver and make the car that I’m driving the fastest on the track no if and or buts about it.
Fast cars rule. 🙂
With you as well since the real racing was just like you said when the racers were trying to go as fast as possible and beat the other guy and had no one telling them how fast they could go or what the car had to look like or be shaped like and it was fight to be on the top of the hill.
I do watch some of the road races but they still are boring since the car are still so much alike they have trouble getting to far apart as well and yes the majority of the driver don’t know how to turn right and then you have the teams that hire a road racer to drive the cars since the dedicated driver stinks at road racing.
I do remember the IROC series and it was at least all driver since the cars were identical as could be possible and it left it all up to the drivers ability.
Never cared for index racing either because of the thing you just said and it could be a monkey behind the wheel in those cars and still get to the other end of the track.
My style of racing is now called the TUDOR Sports Car Challenge series and is the combining of the ROLEX Grand Am and the IMSA Sports car series into one series for 2015 and those are the five different levels of race cars from full on prototype race cars to street stock GT cars that all race on the same tracks at the same time and race in all types of weather as well as race for a minimum of 2 hours 45 minutes to a maximum of 24 hours straight twice a year with once in Daytona, Florida and then again in France at the 24 hours of Lemans as well as the 12 hours of Sebring.
Yep like those 3 series of racing too.
Wasn’t the sports car challenge sponsored by the SCCA racing? (Sports Car Club of America)
I did my share of the SCCA Solo1 and Solo 2 racing. One of the cars was a 90 Camaro 1LE I bought new in 90 and the other car was 72 Olds 442. The olds I raced back in the late 70’s and early 80’s. The Olds was lowered with different springs and shocks. Had heavier front and rear sway bars. Had 50 series dot tires in the front and 40 series dots in the back. The engine was a bored and stroked 455 Olds engine that was 540 cubic inches. The car had 3.73 gears in the rearend and your not going to believe this. A automatic trans with a reverse manual valve body with a shift kit.
Yep that was a muscle car that turned and burned. Oh and in road race trim it ran 11.40’s @ 122 mph in the 1/4 mile. And yes it had big brakes too.
No SCCA was more of a local hometown series of racing for the individual racer like you and me and the original road racing back in the 50s, 60s, 70s and up till the late 80s or so was the IMSA ( International Motor Sports Association ) racing series that started in the USA with the 12 hours of Sebring in 1952 on the old WWII bomber air force base runway in Florida and then the 24 hours of Daytona was started in the early 60s and in the late 80s ROLEX became the sponsor and it became the ROLEX Grand AM series. But IMSA was still around and racing so you had IMSA racing in Sebring and ROLEX racing in Daytona for years up until 2014 when they were combined into the TUDOR Sports Car Challenge series that race now at all the tracks that the two series raced separately.
Down at Little River those races are officially referred to as bracket races but unofficially called slotcar racing.
Bracket racing here is where you give a dial in time and you are staged against a car that may be faster or slower than you are so you may leave first or last and still have to get to the other end first but not break out and run faster than your dial in time and if you do then you lose and put it on the trailer and the winnings all go to the last man standing at the end of the night.
Not a race fan and certanily not a Nascar fan,….the races I like are the track races with all the twist and turns and all the different types of cars. Not sure what that is called, but that is what I would watch and enjoy. Not sure where air guns fit into all that,….. 😉 Chris
Trajectory man don’t you know. It’s about point A and Point B. 😉
It’s not about anything inbetween. All that matters is what happens at point B. 🙂
What you said
See above for the reply to GF1 as far as the road racing you are referring to that has been two series combined into one for 2015 and they race all types of cars in all types of weather and since I have watched the 24 hours of Daytona the race has only been stopped completely twice due to weather. I have watched every race since 1970 so that’s 46 races that have only been stopped twice until the weather passed and was finished.
They make thing called rain tires that very much resemble the tire are cars have on them so that they can maintain traction with the road and NASCAR could put those same tires on and race in the rain but they are sissies as far as I am concerned since even AMA super bike and Moto GP race in the rain.
The Indy cars even use rain tires. Now there’s some brave souls if you ask me.
And you know another kind of racing I like. That’s the rally cars. You see them racing in the mountains off road and on. The Evo’s and the WRX are street cars that can be bought by the general public and taken out and raced. I love those sequential gear box’s in the racing pto versions. Tap the paddle to shift.
Kind of like that go kart video you emailed me with the 1200cc I think it was motorcycle engine. The guys driving it on the street and he passes the cop car.
If you got the link to that video still you should post it. Pretty cool stuff.
That’s what I mean NASCAR is the only series that does not race in the rain and for that they are sissies.
Rally racing is way cool as well as is Pikes Peak racing also since they both race on dirt, asphalt or what ever surface they have under the car and have to contend with cliffs and trees and spectators watching from all over the tracks.
Yea that go kart powered by a Yamaha R1 motor was very cool and I don’t have it saved anymore but just google R1 go kart and it should come up and I like the paddle shifters as well.
The new Ford Escape we just bought has the push button shift 6 speed auto tranny with the buttons on the center console shifter so I can manually shift up or down as I please and the computer will not let it shift until you are at the right speed or power level for what you want it to do.
We just got my wife a Chevy Cruze a little while back. It’s a 6 speed also. And the same. If you pull the sfifter all the way back its like the old slap sticks. You tap it left or right to up shift or down shift. And it also overides the computer. Kind of a fun little car to drive. It sounds like it going like a bat out of _ell to. So it makes you think its exciting any way.
Problem is I keep waiting for it to set me back in the seat but it just never happens. 🙁
Our escape has S below the D for sport that you put the shifter in to use the buttons on the side of the shifter to manually shift it but it will up shift on its own if you try to let it overrev or it will not downshift if you are going to fast for the gear you select until the speed drops low enough to be in that gear so ours the computer still had some control over it.
I guess since its got the eco tech turbo on it they don’t want it to rev past redline on the turbo or it may damage the engine. It also calls for 10,000 mile oil changes but that aint going to happen as it will get them every 3000 mile like clock work as I have always done and yet to have an engine break on me in 45 years of driving.
The shifter on the Cruze is the same.
I will admit that my one viewing of the Indy 500 was not a good time. You couldn’t see anything most of the time since the track was so large. And when they came by, they were gone before you knew it with this unearthly howling that is not the thing for someone who doesn’t like loud noises. Watching it on TV was not much better. But I gained a lot of respect for it from a driver named Rick Mears who won a couple of Indys. He said that going into those turns at speed was like whipping your car into an alley going at 60 mph. Now that is scary stuff with your life on the line. And I have heard that when non-professionals accompany race car drivers on a track, not even at full speed, they are completely freaked out. So, there is a high level of skill involved.
Remember the car that wins on Sunday sells on Monday?
The manufacturers were using NASCAR to ashowcasetheir newest creations.
Yea I remember that slogan all to well and Dodge really cashed in on the phrase with the King winning most every race he entered when he had a hemi in his car as he always had far more power than anyone else on the track and would just play with them by letting them lead for a while so he could just cruise around and then when it came down to business time he just drove right by as if he was out for a Sunday drive.
He would run easily up in the 230 to 240 mph ranges at will with ease in his hemi powered cars and when they came out with the Daytona’s and Superbird’s for the couple years they were allowed before NASCAR banned them they would hit 250 on a regular basis and no other cars could come close to them hence the banning them from racing. Mercury tried to compete with the Talladega edition Cyclone but it just was not near the aero package that the Daytona’s and Superbird’s were so still did not stand a chance.
Will Farrell, if that’s his name, probably wouldn’t disagree that his humor is stupid and idiotic, but he seems to have made a profit on it….
So the factory 57 Chevy was ill-handling?! I’m crushed. Somehow the literature indicates otherwise. But maybe it was only poor handling by race track standards. Incidentally, I have read more of companies including one called something like EMI that makes new production 57 Chevy bodies. And they and others can help assemble an essentially new car. The cost at $70-$120,000 is less than buying a new complete Bel Air for $180,000 but is still considerably more than buying a used one or a new Mustang 2015. The old guys who cut my hair had quite a lot to say on the subject the other day.
Yea he has made a bunch of money from it and Ron Burgundy News Anchor Man and many other comedies so some people must like his work I am just not one of them.
The 57 Chevy was ill handling is that it was a big heavy car with lazy suspension that was more of a family car than hot rod and while it did well on the early NASCAR circuits due to the fact that it was better than the other comparable car of the same years from other manufactures in terms of power and handling.
It is an iconic car in that it was made in such large numbers and made famous in many movies as the American dream car as was the 55 Chevy as well and it is really a toss up as to which model year was more well received as they both are highly sought after in today market by us older farts wanting to regain some of our youth by owning the cars we grew up in and around.
I can see the new reproductions bringing the money you talk about although I would never pay that much for one since I can build it myself for far less and have exactly the car I want since that is what I did for 45 years for a living and have 100,000 dollars in tools to build it with at my disposal in the garage.
Sorry but next time your at car show compare the size of the 57 Chevy to other cars of the day. It really wasn’t a big car. Even compared to some of today’s car’s.
And it has the same suspension design as most of the leaf spring cars of the 60’s and 70’s. It definitely has the same front suspension with the upper and lower A frame design.
Take a look at a 54 Chevy with the king pin front suspension and the one piece enclosed drive shaft. Those cars were dangerous to drive let alone go fast and turn. My brother had one.and we put a 428 Pontiac engine in it. You had to run polyglass tires on the front. If you ran steelbelted radials the design would make each front tire try to grab. It would make the steering wheel pull back and forth from left to right. Not fun stuff when your going fast.
And 55 is when they made the front suspension change to the A frame design and got rid of the enclosed drive shaft.
And you know what the nick name is for the 55 Chevy’s? We called them shoe boxes. And I actually like the 55 Chevy post cars better than a 57 coupe. You know. The ones that had the frames around the front door side windows.
Oh and you was talking about the moonshine cars. One of my most favorite cars was the 57 business man’s coupe that didn’t have a back seat. They use to have hidden compartments under the floorboards that his the moonshine. It also used the 56 Chevy side molding. The single line that curved down at the rear quater pannel. And then back to the 55 it had that straight line side molding which again was my favorite of the 3 years.
But my choice cars of those three years in order would be a 55 Chevy first then a 57 then a 56. I do not like the 56 Chevy grille at all.
But all in all cool cars
By big and heavy I was referring to the fact that in those years they still used real steel and iron to build the car so yes it was really not much bigger than other cars of the day or even todays cars and really no heavier but it was built like a tank as were every other 50s model cars since the had very little plastic or aluminum used in their construction.
If you take a 57 Chevy in a head on collision with a car today which one will suffer the most body damage as the 55 or 57 will have far less bent metal as compared to todays cars.
As far as suspension is concerned yes it shared the same leaf spring rear and control arm/ball joint front suspension as several 60s and 70s cars but GM also had the torsion link rear suspensions on the mid sized car like the A bodies of the Malibu’s, Chevelles and so on so to me the 57s appearance was a much bigger car than the 55 mostly due to the fins which gave it a longer and taller looking stance even though it really wasn’t. I liked the 55s much better than the 57s myself as well and yes the Shoeboxes were my favorite as well.
My choices are the same as yours as the 56 to me is the odd ball design and was like the red headed stepchild.
Agree with you there.
And just loved the black 55 Chevy in American Graffiti. Always wanted one.
Yea the 55 that Harrison Ford drove in American Graffiti really set the shoebox craze on fire and another one that made the 55 famous as well was Two Lane Blacktop with I believe the exact same black 55 that was used in American graffiti.
Yep remember that movie too. Was definitely a different way of life back then.
Yea it was a different way of life and I wish sometimes I had been born 10 years earlier so I would have been old enough to enjoy those days as a teenager.
I had my share of the fun back in the mid 70’s and on buying the muscle cars that some people didn’t want anymore because of the gas prices. Ain’t it crazy to think about they thought $1.00 a gallon was high. But that was double of what it cost before the so called gas shortages of the day. So yep the muscle cars started setting.
I know when I started driving gas was 25 cent a gallon and you could fill your tank for 5 bucks and cruise all night with half a tank left.
Yea the gas crunch of the 70s was a really weird time as I remember having to wait in line just to buy 2 dollar of fuel since they were rationing it at times or you had to buy it on certain days depending on the first letter in your last name.
The gas guzzlers were being sold cheap buy the older folks that could not believe in paying that much for gas just to drive there cars and some good deal could be had for sure.
I remember filling the dirt bikes gas tank up for 40 cents.
Now days everything is triple the cost and you practically have to be a millionaire to survive.
Them were the days.
Wow, that set-up makes any gun hobby look small by comparison.
You have to realize that is 45 years of working and buying the tools to allow me to fix the cars and bikes I worked on as fast and correctly as possible since I worked what is called flat rate where I get paid a certain dollar amount per hour which means if a job pays 2 hours labor I get paid that amount of pay times 2 so if I can fix the car in one hour I still get 2 hours pay but if it takes 3 hours I still get 2 hours pay. So the faster I can get the car fixed and on to another car the more I make and having the right tool for the job can make or break the ability to beat the clock so to speak and do it right the first time as if it comes back with the same problem I don’t get paid the second time to fix it.
I prided myself in having a less than 1% comeback rate in the 45 years of fixing vehicles since I learned early in my career the motto of “if you don’t have the time to fix it right the first time then where will you find the time to fix it right the second time when it is for free”.
The 100,000 dollars in tools were bought over that 45 years time frame with 90 percent of those being bought 25 plus years ago when the price for them was still at least 1/4 of what you will pay for them now. An example would be a 1/2 inch drive socket set that today cost 5 to 600 dollars and I paid 70 to 80 dollars for and the socket set is made no different today than it was 25 plus years ago its just inflation at its best and all the tool have a lifetime warranty so if those sockets break or wear out they are replaced for free regardless of age as I have tools that are 40 years old and have worn out and take it to the tool truck and get it replaced with no questions asked.
My dream car that if I could own any car ever made would be the 1967 Shelby AC cobra 500 that he built and raced with such success and are worth in excess of 5 million dollars today in fair condition.
There were actually 43 of them completely unassembled in crates in a warehoused in California back in 1995 that he never built or sold. he was diagnosed with heart failure in that year and was in the hospital for a new heart and while there to get his heart he saw many less fortunate people that were not so lucky as he was and did not receive the hearts they needed to survive. So when he was better in 1996 he commissioned an company in California to assemble the remaining 43 cobras and sold them for 500,000 dollars each with all the money going to the American Heart Foundation.
If I would have had the money I would have bought one since they are now worth 10 times that much and in 1964 when my dad bought a brand new 64 mustang the dealer in Melbourne, Florida had a 289 AC cobra on a pedestal in their showroom floor with the classic blue and white racing stripe paint scheme for 10,000 dollar brand new and I begged my dad to buy that car because if he had it would be one of those 5 million dollar cars today. in 64 the mustang was a grand total of 2458 dollars with the 289 V8 and C4 auto tranny so 10 grand was a lot of money but it would have been the best investment anyone could ever make if we had only known what history would bring.
See what you got started talking about cars. For about the last 3 or so days you been talking about them and I been trying to stay out of it.
I guess now we need to call BB’s blog the race car air gun forum. 😉
Yea I think we ran away with it today.
Just a little bit.
Yikes, I had no idea since not all of these comments are sent to my email. Well, I will be the first to admit that the blog is incredibly generous with my various excursions into other subjects and I could probably not exist elsewhere. But in my own defense I will say that the weekend is supposed to be a bit more of an open season. Also, Edith, herself, was a confessed gearhead, and I don’t think she would mind. And finally, there is a connection to shooting as there always is:
My M1 Garand was manufactured in 1955.
So, it’s the same era as the iconic Chevys. Half the fun of these old guns is not just the shooting but the history. Putting my hands on the M1 like a psychic, I feel…individual innovation and brilliance, manufacturing expertise of the highest level, big solid muscularity, utter reliability and dependability, world-beating success! It is post-WWII America at its zenith, and resonant with the 57 Chevy. History class was never so much fun.
Your not hurting my feelings. And your right that I do recall Edith talking about cars and her brother messes with cars also.
The way I see it is its history about the things we have here in the USA. I believe what ever the subject is about if its history it needs to be told.
It’s all part of where we live and what we are. And I’m very grateful that I got to live it.
Matter of fact taking a break from shooting and the girls are out racing each other around the yard with the go kart and 4 wheeler right now.
So I know I better go supervise. I know what can happen if they are anything like I was when I was a kid. 😉
And yep with you on the weekend blog. Open season for sure. Time to have fun. 🙂
I can add a thing or two about 1957 Chevys because I used to own one. It was a Model 210 two door sedan.
Available engines were an inline 6 and several 283 cubic inch V8’s. The 265 inch V8 from the previous 2 years may have been offered.
The 283 was offered with high-compression head option and 2 barrel carb, one or two 4 barrel carbs, or mechanical throttle body fuel injection.
1957 had a lot of new technologies in NASCAR. There were not the restrictions enforced today. The 283 engine with Fuel Injection produced 283hp. The same FI setup was sold on Pontiacs. Dodge used a similar FI setup on their Hemi engines. Ford offered a supercharger option. Mercury and most other brands offered multiple carbs.
Chevy also had a new three-speed automatic called Turboglide introduced that year. Versions of it continued for decades, but it wasn’t designed for stock car racing.
In 1959, Detroit decided to put the kibosh on stock car racing. The racing continued, but with intakes limited to a single four barrel carb. Chevy offered a fuel injection option, as did Pontiac, the next year, but it was soon dropped. The Dodge fuel injection option was so troublesome that dealers replaced them with carbs under warranty.
A Ford and Chevy Parts Dept. Manager and Ford stock car owner and driver in a previous life.
Please stop. Your making me want to get a muscle car again. 🙂
My Dad would come home in a “New car” with a locked trunk about once a month.
The best way to get in it to unlock it was to remove the backseat and find someone small enough to worm in there with a wrench or two, in complete darkness.
Kinda scary thinking about what coulda been in there now, and why didn’t I get a flashlight?
Maybe just one classic riceburner.
Rice burner. And what might that be. A Civic or CRX?
The last one I had was the Plymouth “Fire”Arrow, (not to be confused with the.little pickup!).
I was thinking a Corolla hatchback next time. Always wanted one of those to do wheelstands with!
I know exactly what car you mean.
Do you remember the Dodge Omni GLH. Do you know what it stood for.
Go Like H___. One of my buddies bought one new in I believe it was 86. That was the predecessor to the Srt 4’s. You could go through the Mopar motorsports catalog and get the Super 60 turbo upgrade for it. They where already turbo charged but the 60 system where bigger. There where people running those in the high 12’s on street tires.
Imagine what them big block Camaro owners thought when they got their butt spanked by a 4 cylinder.
Sounds like you’ve witnessed a few such run-ins! The insurance companies always want to list it as a truck. This one had a 1.6l that had a huge cast-iron header(with 5″ collector)on one side and a 2-stage 2 bbl Mikuni on the other, it also got a new front end and KYB’s all around.
All I can say is I had one of them Mopar K cars. The 2 door 86 Turbo Lebaron to be exact.
How about 12.90 – 13.20’s on street tires.
I put the different planatary gears in the tranny that the Mopar catalog had in it back then. It made the final drive ratio go from 3.23 to 3.73. Matter of fact I still have the Mopar motorsports catalog from back then on the 80’s. It’s probably is worth some money because it documents what Mooar was selling to the public back then.
Kind of like the ARH air gun catalogs of the day. Particularly the 70’s. I got a 1971 ARH catalog hang’n out somewhere here still.
But that is what’s cool with them old catalogs. It showcased what was the rage back in the day.
Turbos make a big difference!
I tried to find one that sold for in the canister where the catalytic converter belonged on my Arrow. It’s little 1.6l coulda used the help.
Speaking of turbos, there was a Volvo I used to meet up with on the way to work in the El Camino and it was a challenge to stick with him.
Talk about a Sleeper!
Turbos are nice.
That black 05 Srt4 I had was running 11.65’s @ 127 mph and was still getting 30 mpg.
I still want a Subaru Brat.
One of my buddies younger brother had one when we was younger. Cool little cars.
You just reminded me of the song about the little Nash Rambler smokin’ a Caddy. Beep, beep, beep, beep. His horn went beep, beep, beep.
And as the GLH passed the Camaro, the Omni driver shouted out the window, “Buddy, how can I get this car out of second gear!”
Ain’t that the truth. That made me laugh and it sure brings back old memories.
How’s that Sammy Haggar song go. ” I can’t get my car out of second gear… I can’t drive 55″.
Do you remember Megadeth’s 502?
Having a hard time finding it lately and Frehley’s comets had some good ones too.
Maybe if you sing some of the lyrics of the song right now. 😉
A Datsun 240Z! Sweeeet car.
That’s the car that hit my Step dad after sliding 100′ and still going over 70mph.
Hit him so hard it rolled the truck over the car.
In H.S. my English teacher, who had inherited money, had a 240z, an early ’70s (maybe late ’60s) Stingray, and the first BMW I had ever seen, a dark green two-door with that “anatomical” grill badge. He said he thought the 240z was the swiftest of them all, and definitely the most fun of the three to drive.
They are cool cars! I helped one guy get his into the 10’s by installing a 3″ exhaust system after a turbo installation.
He left the shoe white time on the glass for a couple months.
It was always cool back in the day to be proud about what you car ran and show it off.
But back when I was doing the street car muscle car racing for money. The A number one rule was don’t let them display your time at the track and never put your true dail in on the windshield.
Yep I always sand bagged.
Suppose to say never put your true dail in on your windshield. Always put a slower time.
I prefer hawgin’ out aluminum heads anyways
And you know what I liked them aluminum heads for the rear wheel drive cars.
And the front wheel drive cars I wanted the cast iron heads for more weight over the front tires.
Ain’t it funny how one thing is good for something but not for another.
Variety, the spice of life!
I like the corrosion too but I learned they don’t tolerate 383’s well.
All depends on the water pump and cooling system you had and how lean you where running the engine.
I alerted the driver to a big spiderweb throughout the subframe on this one.
Supposed to say fieros
I wish I still had my 64 GTO with the delete everything except the alternator and AM radio that had the 389 tri power, M22 close ratio crash box 4 speed and 12 bolt posi rear end that was the fastest showroom stock car made in 64 and beat the 327 fuelie vette in quarter mile showroom stock racing with a 12.70 off the showroom floor.
That car only weighed 2875 pounds and would run 145 mph and with the bias belted tires of the era could light the rear tires at speeds up to 70 mph at will in second gear with just a stomp of the throttle. It was touted as the start of the muscle car craze and was the creation of Fred Wagners and John Dolorean back when GM was dead set against racing of any kind and it started as an option you ordered at the dealer level on a tempest and was not given its own VIN until 1967 model year.
I miss my Goat.
One of my closest friends in H.S. had a burnt orange Judge with a big black stripe on the top. FAST.
the Judge was a very cool car and do you know if it was a ram air 1 or ram air 2 package as the ram air 2 package was good fro another 50 HP over the 1 package the only thing is by the 69/70 model years those car were up to close to 4000 pounds as compared to my 64s 2875 pounds so even though it had the 455 in it and was a torque monster it was not as fast as the 64 due to its added 1500 plus pounds.
My Goat did not have A/C , power brakes or front disc brakes, no power steering, no sound deadening, no seat belts at all or added weight of any kind and only had an alternator on the motor being driven off the crank and an AM radio with no power windows or door locks or mirrors so it had no comfort items whatsoever and was built for one thing only to go fast as possible.
If I ever knew the specifics, I would have long forgotten them. I do run into his kid brother, also a friend of mine, on occasion. He would maybe remember. If I see him in the near future . . .
No biggie as I was just curious if you knew which option it had as far as the power output of it.
Do you know there was a Ram air lV and V.
They used the big oval port heads like Chevy went to.
I had a 69 LeMans that I painted like the paint scheme on the Ram air V car.
I still got pictures if you want me to text you them.
Yea actually that is what I was meaning and my mind was just not with me at the time as it was the ram air 4 and 5 I was talking about not 1 and 2 so my bad there for being an old fart.
No way, I had no idea. Is it true that stock car racing is one of the few racing events where you make contact? Or was that just hype in the Tom Cruise film, Days of Thunder?
They make contact alright. They ain’t suppose to but you just got to make little nudges or I guess known as love taps.
In other words if your going slow then get the h___ out of the way. Let the rest of the pack race.
And it happens all the time. Also if you got the lead cars running out front you might come over and give a little tap to let them know your there. And it will wake the driver up because it don’t take much to spin somebody out at a 140 plus mph.
Yep just a part of racing.
That must be why it is the stock car drivers who are always getting in fights. It seemed like a strange sport for Danica Patrick to get into since she seems ultra-sensitive about contact. On the other hand, she seems very conflict-oriented, so maybe it is right for her.
On YouTube, I saw one confrontation between her and another female driver who apparently received the black flag. Danica began: “Do you know what you’re doing out there?” It went downhill from there.
From this, I gather that the flag meanings are:
checkered – you win
green – go full speed
yellow – go slow and maintain your position
black – get off the track, you are a hazard
That last one would be embarrassing stuff.
My only experience with go-carts was driving one around a concrete track with various twists and turns. There were plenty of signs posted about not ramming other people. But as I lined up at the finish, sure enough, someone rear-ended me as hard as they could for fun. That was enough for me. No wonder I’ve always favored individual sports over teams.
I do remember when Danica said that. She kind of makes me think she was a Tom boy growing up. I believe she lifts weights too. From what I remember she was kind of pumped up with muscles in a picture I saw of her once.
The last one your talking about. The black flag. That probably makes a driver angry I don’t think it embarrasses them. Probably alot of controversy involved when that happens.
And what sign at the go kart tracks that say no bumping. I just don’t think I ever noticed them when I rode them. 😉
And no I never intentionally ran into somebody but if they repeatedly bumped me it was game over because I was going to get’em back even if I got kicked out. It’s just one of them racing things. Probably respect would be a good word. Your gonna get what you give.
Yes I like racing. 🙂
If someone hit me from behind I’d act like I was letting them around and start squeezing until they were in the tires then go about the rest of my business.
Sounds like something I done to them back end bumpers.
Are you familiar with the Pete Rademacher instinct shooting trainer BB gun and, I believe, accompanying target launcher?
I saw one for sale online once, not long ago. Rademacher designed and endorsed it. His claim to fame was he won the Olympic Heavyweight boxing medal in 1956 in Melbourne. He then became the first boxer to ever challenge for a world championship in his first fight, which was against Floyd Patterson. (Patterson knocked him out, but Rademacher acquitted himself well for a first time pro fighting a world champ.)
I almost forgot. Rademacher also invented a motorized unicycle that had the rider sit INSIDE the one wheel, next to the engine.
I remember that unicycle.
I have researched Rademacher for my articles on instinct shooting. And he was from Akron, where I was born.
The trap he offered was bought by Crosman and became the Trapmaster 1100 trap.
Akron Ohio! The world’s tire capital. Time was, if your car had tires, they were made in Akron. I’ve only been through it once, on the way to Cleveland, but I remember Akron being very pleasant looking.
It is only appropriate that a manufacturing town in a (perhaps THE) manufacturing state be mentioned at least once in this discussion involving . . . manufacturing. The path to a large middle class is an economy centered on making things. If only everybody (anybody?) running for office, Rep. and Dem., conservative and liberal, would really get that. Not just say it at rallies, but really GET IT. Pittsburgh, Youngstown, Akron, Dayton, Detroit, Gary, Milwaukee, Peoria — these towns were the engine under the hood of America.
Yep — Tire-town U.S.A. and home of the All-American Soap Box Derby.
Now what could be better than a kid and dad working on a soapbox derby car and getting to set inside it and finally race it.
I know a dad shooting air guns with his kids. 😉
Finally,…… back to air gunning,….thankfully. 😉 Thought we had run the blog “into the ditch” for a moment there…..(pun intended)…..Chris
Did you know that Floyd Patterson trained with Lucky McDaniel in instinct shooting and was able to hit a thrown bb with another bb? Maybe that made the difference in the fight. It has been said that it was Patterson and not Ali who had the quickest hands of any heavyweight. Ali had the fastest legs and very quick hands but not quite up there with Floyd. On the other hand, Patterson apparently had psychological issues and was nicknamed Freud Patterson for his self-doubt.
Just sent a couple Benji hollowpoints through the QB-88 @ 30yds they dindnt hit the target but stuck into the Pecan round about 1/4″ so it’s got plenty of power but holding it offhand over the extremely hot picnic table while dodging the 4mo old bloodhound was a struggle.
Off hand, extreme heat, dodging “critters”,……man,…you really like to put yourself through the extremes don’t you? You get all that going at once and perfect it,….world air gun domination should be a piece of cake! 😉
Pups are cool,…..till they grow up… 😉 Chris
My legs are raw but Rufus had fun.
Stock car racing tolerates some contact because it is almost unavoidable. Bang too much and you get black-flagged.
I have a Plymouth Neon ACR coupe that weighs 2300lbs. and can go 130mph. On a tight course it outruns 5 liter Mustangs.
Them ACR Neons were cool.
You know the SRT4’s came out with a ACR version.
ACR stands for American Club Racer. The cars were built as spec racers for SCCA competition.
There were ACR Vipers, too.
In the American stock car tradition, the ACR was an option on the base model. In 1996, it was only a $1300 option on the Neon. My insurance company didn’t carry that model on their paperwork. For the first year, I got the base for a base model car. Then they wised up.
There were 822 ACR coupes built that year. ACR 4-doors were rarer, about 120 built. ACR 4-doors used a SOHC engine and ran in a lower class.
ACR package included DOHC engine with non-limited engine controller. Stiffer struts (adjustable Konis on 1997 models). Faster ratio power steering. Close ratio 5 speed. Heaviest anti-roll bars available (bigger than HD suspension option bars). 130-mph rated tires. 4-wheel disc brakes. No antilock brakes (you may need to lock ’em up). Bigger radiator with 2 fans. Front valance with driving light openings but no driving lights (the holes were there to admit air for front brakes. Red line 7,000 rpm. When you get to 8,000, the controller shuts it down. I added a MOPAR competition plug wire set, K&N air filter, Simpson 5-point harness.
I special-ordered my car in December 1995. Dark metallic blue. I added twin white racing stripes when I got it home (they later were a factory option, but I couldn’t wait).
I competed in SCCA West Texas Region Autocross, then did same in Mississippi Region. We had a travelling series in Tennessee, Mississippi, and Arkansas. Took First Place in Street Tire in series in 1999, First Place in D Stock in 2000.
This car was a good match for a 944 Porsche or a Mazda Miata.
I know exactly what ACR stands for.
That’s what was cool about them special option codes that the different car manufactures used. You could buy a a car at your local dealership on Monday and take the car out and race it on the weekend.
Use to get a kick out if how they raised their inside back tire on the corners.
Seen some crazy racing in that series also.
How about them German TDI cars. Normally known as Volkswagen’s. That’s some cool road racing too.
Sorry how all this enthusiasm went crazy about car history.
But you know I bet everybody’s got memories burning deep down inside about all kinds of subjects.
And I know you got it in there about air guns BB.
Let it shine, tell us stories about your personal memories of air guns and war stories. It’s hard to be politically correct about subjects. And people will say what they think should be or shouldn’t be.
But if a story has to be told about a event that teaches people about that subject be it good or bad it needs told.
I said it before. Tell about your war stories and anything else you want. I want to hear it. And don’t worry about what somebody thinks.
If its history its done happened and you can’t change what it is.
How about the Opel GT?
Not a riceburner but a sweet classic.
My buddy that I told you about that his little brother had the Brat. Well my buddy had a Opel GT that was yellow that we put a small block Chevy in. We put a aluminum case powerglide in it that came from a 71 Vega. That paticaler powerglide was the one to get because it had 2 oval shaped cooling holes in the bell housing area on each side that was around 4″long by 3″wide. Then it got a 8 1/2″ 10 bolt rear end in it from a 74 Nova with a 3.42 gear in it.
The engine was from that Nova which was a 350 2 barrel. And we even used the stock exhaust manifold. Had short 27″ tall tires in the back to fit under the fenderwells. The short tires helped keep the engine rpm up with that tall gear. I call it tall gear because we use to run 4.11 or better. Most of the time actually 4.56’s.
But yea even for a stock 74 Nova engine that little Opel GT ran. And by the way that donar Nova was a car I ended up getting acquainted with a telephone pole. It was well done after the telephone pole.
Yeah. I had lots of three wheel corners and a few two wheel ones.
Not really a good idea. You can corner faster with all tires on the ground. I liked how as you approached 1 G in sideforce, anything loose inside the car would float up in the air like in the space shuttle. Better than sex.
It’s one thing going straight at a 100 mph. But throw a few turns in there and it’s another story.
Yep like sex at a 100 mph. Ain’t noth’n like it. 🙂
Once I went into the grass backwards at Memphis Motorsports Park at 110mph. All I could think of was “my wife’s gonna kill me if I hit that wall!”
At least the car was paid for.
Less did the same thing in a 72 copo Camaro that had the ZL1 aluminum 427, 4 spd and 456 gears going over the finnish line at the drag strip.
They talk about drifting now days. We called it power sliding. That Camaro would smoke the tires in all 4 gears no matter how fast you were going. Well maybe exagerating a little. It would do it at 120 mph and under with ease. 🙂
We were taught in the SCCA that each tire can either propel the car, brake it, or steer it. We can ask it to do no more than two of those things at once. The more adhesion you use for any one thing, the less there is for the other.
We use drifting to turn a car, but you don’t want to make it a prolonged thing. Because a car will go a lot faster in a straight line than in a curve, so you want to turn your car early in a curve so you can come off the corner going as straight as possible. This has the effect of making the next straightaway longer. You can pass cars coming off a turn while they are still turning and you are going straight. You will have a higher terminal speed on that straight because you have been going in a straight line farther. There is a challenge with a front wheel drive because the same wheels that have to propel or brake the car also have to steer it. Break your front tires loose and your steering goes away. Rear wheel drive cars will usually go off a course backwards. Front wheel drives usually go off forwards.
Trying here to get a little more on-topic.
Yesterday I tried concealed carry for the first time. I loaded my Makarov and put it in an inside-the-waistband holster and put it in my blue jeans. When I went outside, the first thing that happened was the whole works fell down my pantleg and landed on the sidewalk! Embarrassing! I wish I had bought the model that clips over the belt.
Then I discovered that if I left the butt sticking out (the gun’s butt, not mine) it would stay in place. It was supposed to be made of a “grippy” material, but not enough so. I also bought a shoulder holster to wear under a jacket in cooler weather.
Anyway, I went to the recycling center that was having a “household hazmat day” and gave them a jug of acid my son bought to clean out the drains, but I was afraid to use. Then I went grocery shopping and gassed up the van. It felt a little funny walking around in Safeway with a loaded gun. I’m going to take it with me on frequent forays out of the house until I feel comfortable with it.
I went to Cabela’s in Sidney Friday to buy the holsters. They carried the 9x18mm Makarov ammo for $18/50. I bought 100 rounds (all they had) It looked to be better finished than the Chinese stuff. This stuff was made in Serbia.
I also bought 300 rounds of .22LR. They have this stuff in stock now on a regular basis. The ammo was Federal and only cost $2.95/50!
I had to laugh when I read your comment and thank goodness it wasn’t your butt sticking out.
And yep not a bad price on the .22 long rifle bullets. There’s a gun shop I go to over by the old house we use to live at. He’s always got .22 rimfire stuff in stock and for the most part usually cheaper than Wally world. Matter of fact I just got me some more of those Aguilla 950 fps 60 grain .22 rounds. They are actually pretty accurate. But I paid $45 for a brick of 500. That’s the cheapest I have seen them anywhere. Especially for them being a specialty round.
Have you ever seen or tryed them? They use a short case and the 60 grain bullet is longer than normal. It’s about twice the size. It’s overall legnth with the case and bullet is the same legnth like a long rifle round. And they are way quieter than a regular long rifle round and still make pretty much the same fpe.
Happy Sunday B.B. – and everyone else!
I’ve been following here a little over a year now, and have gained a lot of airgun knowledge during that time. (Thanks B.B., and all you regular posters!) A couple of weeks ago I started reading the blog posts from the beginning — 2005 — and am now up to April, 2006. Wow, what an education!
I have a question related to springers. B.B., you have always said they need to be shot to break them in, and it seems, to maintain them. I read your posts, and the excerpts from your R1 book about spring longevity, the percentage of power lost after being left cocked for a month, etc. Since some springers seem to take 500 shots, or even 1000 or more to break in, what about strategically leaving the gun cocked for brief periods of time? Would you see that as being an effective way to help break them in?
Specifically, I mean something like this: You sight in the weapon, and experiment to find which pellets it likes best. That takes, what, 50 to 100 shots on average? (figuring 20 shots to get sighted in at 10 yds. and 20 yds, then 30 plus shots to test at least 3 pellet types) Then, after that you get used to the rifle by shooting at different distances. During this “second phase”, what if you leave the rifle cocked for extended periods — an hour here and there, maybe even overnight once. Would that work on the spring the same as firing some number of shots — say 500 or so?
This is all hypothetical, but the thought came to me and I’m eager to hear the experts’ opinions on this.
Last thing — B.B., thank you for what you do, answering all these questions, writing about so many different aspects of air gunning, and keeping up such a great resource for us all.
Just remember the spring is only one part of the gun that gets broke in. You have the piston seal and the cylinder that has to I guess I’ll call it seat to each other too. Then maybe even the barrel gets seasoned. And then the trigger.
And you know what I tryed your experment of leaving a gun cocked over night for about 4 days. And I chronyed the gun each day and did not see any type of velocity change.
I also tryed cocking and firing the gun for a extended period of time. I chronyed the gun 3 different times throughout the day. Now that way when the spring kept cycling and the cylinder I’m sure got a little heat in it as well as the barrel. Then my chrony readings did slow up and I did start getting more of a fps spread twords the end of the day.
So I don’t think just cocking the gun and leaving it set is a true representation of the gun actually firing and working all the components of the gun.
I suspected there was probably something I wasn’t thinking about, and as you have pointed out, there was. I did not even consider the other components — the trigger, etc. — that you have mentioned. That all makes sense. I was just thinking about changes in the metal of the spring itself.
And you know that makes me think now about nitro piston guns. That’s one of their selling points is that you can leave them cocked for hours. But what about all the other components. And I never tryed that shooting test of shooting repedativly over the course of a day and chronying the gun the 3 different times.
I don’t have any nitro piston guns anymore. I do wonder if they will slow up and get a wider fps spread as they are fired over and over.
Darn anyway I knew there was something I didn’t test when I had my nitro guns. 🙂
Man, oh, man,…..if that does not sound like an “excuse” to get another airgun,…I don’t know what it would be,…….. 😉 Chris
You know what that’s funny because that exact thought ran through my mind when I was writing it.
🙂 , ha-ha,….your mailbox “might” be “heatin’ up”,….just saying….. 😉 Chris (outa’ here).
Now you can get a 34 and put one of the new adjustable air springs in it! 🙂
Now that’s a thought. I could do a before and after test to see if it makes a difference how that particular gun shoots.
Spring verses new air spring. I like that idea a lot.
I believe it was SL that said that the 34 is the same internals as the 46e I’m getting. Maybe that air spring will fit in it. Then I can have a underlever air spring gun.
I guess I could call it a gas ram can’t I. Air is a gas ain’t it?
I figured the adjustable spring would keep you busy for a while.
That is something that I’m definitely going to keep in mind.
I alwas wanted a underlever gas ram/air ram or nitro piston gun.
So I’m for sure going to do some research. But on the other hand I don’t know if I want to do that to the 46e. I would like to keep it original other than a tune job on it.
Have to see but I like the idea.
Welcome to the blog.
Leaving a spring gun cocked does not help it break in. Breaking in involves the moving parts wearing against each other until they are smooth and well-matched. Stressing the mainspring doesn’t do anything except wear it out prematurely.
No, shooting is the way to break in a spring gun.
Thanks B.B! That all makes sense.
Sooooo,…..are you shooting a springer? If so,….what is it? Yes, there is a lot to learn. Pretty new here myself.
I suppose MY biggest thing is being steady from one session to the next. It may only be an increase in 1/4″-1/2″ in group size,…but it adds complications to you determining where you and your gun are at. Keep notes and data,…however you choose to do that. That will help you “gauge” an (average) and hopefully see a progression in the right direction. Chris
Am I shooting “A” springer? Ha! (GROAN!) I have spent waayy too much money because of reading this blog! Yes, I have acquired a few this past year or so. I have a HW 90 gas piston springer in .22, and a RWS 52 in .177, to start with. My first “adult” airgun was a Umarex Octane .177.
I know what you mean about learning. I’m starting to get better with the artillery hold. I’m doing pretty good off a rest — bench, shooting sticks, etc. — but have a long way to go with offhand, or something you would use while in the field.
How about you? What are you shooting?
I can relate about the “waaaay too much”,…. 😉 …..no regrets though. I have the TX200 and the LGU, both in .22. Played with 2 Vortek tunes in the TX and muzzle weights and a trigger tune in the LGU. Various scope mount set ups, lots of different pellet types….all in less than a year. Just starting to see 1/2″ groups, (10 shot), at 25 and 30 yds.
Catch me in a current blog,…finding you again on a 230+ comment weekender was a bit of a challenge. 🙂 Chris
No, I haven’t heard of the .22 round you mentioned. For the past several years, I’ve seen only LR or CB caps in .22. You used to be able to see .22 regular or shorts, but they disappeared when the .22 supply dried up.
What you do find are .22 regular power or high power rounds, in solid or hollowpoint. The supply here is so spotty I’ve been buying whatever is available, except for the CB caps.
I have one .22 airgun, a Beeman RS2. I shoot Crosman Premiers in that one.
Someday we’ll have to talk about dirt track stockcars in the ’60’s.
What brand CB caps are they? And what velocity and grain is the bullet?
I have been having real good results with the CCI 40 grain 710 fps long rifles.
CCI also makes a 32 grain short that shoots at 710 fps. I have not had good luck with that round as far as accuracy goes. Get to speratic groups or flyers I guess I should say.
And yep love the early dirt track stock car racing. My dad always took me when I was a kid. Tri-city Speedway was one that we went to that was a half mile ovel with 1/4 mile straights. And one of my buddies still is racing. He’s races the super modified class. Yep I know what weight jackers are. Whens the last time you ever heard of somebody running a magneto. And yes love the early midget cars before they put the silly wings on them.
But maybe there’s already been enough car talk. My problem is when somebody brings up car racing I got to many story’s still on fire in the old brain. Just a shame that there ain’t books wrote about that stuff too. That’s stuff that should be taught in schools in history class. It’s part of American history weather a person wants to think that are not.
But yes I would love to hear some of your stock car stories. Maybe you can slip some in on future blogs. But fair warning I’m sure I won’t be able to shut up. 🙂
I got to tell about this.
I have been out shooting. And the sun is in the right position always around this time. I can see the pellet fly if I shoot out over the feild and aim for one of the big trees that’s out about a130 yards.
Here’s the guns I tryed Tx 200 with the JSB 10.34’s and also the FWB 300s with the same pellet as the Tx. Then my .25 Marauder with the 31 grain Barracudas. Andthe last gun was my bolt action Savage with the CCI 40 grain 710 fps long rifles.
Here’s the interesting thing that happened. All 4 guns projectiles flew pretty much the same other than some didn’t go as far and some had more of a arch than the others. But they zig zagged from left to right 2 to 3 times during the projectiles flight.
There is a slight 4 mph wind that comes and goes. I wonder if it’s the wind comming and going as it flys across the feild or if the projectiles trully fly like that.
I can say that the .25 Marauder and the Savage hit the tree every shot. I could hear the thunk and there is no other trees around that one. And I could see the bark fly from the tree through the scope.
I hope it’s the wind that causes that and not that that is part of the pellet or bullets normal flight charectrics. And it didn’t seem like the zig zag started untill the projectiles were out at around 90 yards.
But I never noticed that before. I think it was wind related.
I think it was a combination of both as far as the pellets zig zigging in flight since the last FT match when we all went back and were shooting at the water bottle out at 115 yards I could see my pellets out of the Mrod flying to the bottles and after the 50 to 60 yard point they also appeared to spiral and move back and forth in flight until hitting the bottle or the tree limbs near it if I missed the bottle and we had a slight variable cross wind that day as well and the other shooter were saying the same thing as well so I think the wind does some of the zig zagging of the pellets but I also think its got something to do with the pellets spiraling or twist rates of the barrels and as the pellet slows at distances in it rotations it start to destabilize somewhat and allows for the movement in flight that you were seeing as well as we were that day also.
It all just theory at this point but I found it interesting as I used it to correct my aim to be able to hit the water bottle out at the 115 yards at least 9 or 10 times out of 40 plus shots from the Mrod so I was just pleased to know that the 177 can make it out that far with some semblance of accuracy and repeatability.
Yep I really believe it was the wind. Usually I see a nice smooth arch while the pellets flying. And all 4 guns showed the same type of flight.
I was shooting the .25 Marauder when I noticed it today. It’s usually never affected by wind. Well nothing like that anyway. Then I shot the Tx and the 300. Same exact type of flight path. So I hurried up and shot the rimfire round and it did the same. I really thought it was about the pellets shape that was making the problem. But the bullet did the same.
And I do believe that the projectiles/ pellet and bullets loosing the spin out when they get to a certain distance probably added to me seeing the movement. And I bet they moved a foot off to the left and right. It wasn’t like a couple inches it was a foot.
And what was weird also is its like probably within 30 yards of impact the projectiles stabilized. The more I’m telling what I seen the more I believe it was the wind. And the projectiles just didn’t have enough velocity to cut through the wind.
Man add in scope repeatability with actual shooting results especially what I seen today and its amazing we can hit anything with our guns.
I guess it boils down to use the right equipment for the job at hand again.
I would say it was the wind with us that day but it was variable so there were shots that had no wind that seemed to be there to affect the pellets flight yet they still seemed to wobble and move in flight although not by feet but rather just 6 inches at most and of course at 115 yards there could be wind that was not noticeable from where we were setting that the pellets did fly thru towards the bottle hanging from the tree.
It was very interesting to see the pellets full path and since my gun was having to use a holdover that was below any mil dots in the scope I was guessitmating as to the amount of the thick black bottom line to place over the bottle to hit my mark and being able to see the pellet in flight and how close it came to the bottle made adjustment in aiming much easier to correct to be able just to hit it those 9 or 10 times so all in all I was happy just to be in contention with the far more experienced and better equipped shooters there that day and I think I gained some more respect when they were seeing that I could hit the bottle as well as they were.
Of course then Gabe gets lucky with the benji blue streak and at only two pumps and open sights he hits the bottle with a dull thump as the pellet did not even penetrate the bottle but just thumped it and made it swing very evidently.
And that’s what I’m talking about with Gabe’s shot.
How cool is that to hit the bottle at 2 pumps worth of velocity.
I would of paid money to see that shot. 🙂
You can bet all our jaws hit the ground with that shot when the distinct thump was heard and the bottle went swinging very obviously back amid forth from the impact and if I had not seen it I would have never believed that the 20 cal blue streak would have made enough power to get the pellet out to 115 yards but I did so I know it is capable.
But of course it was a lucky shot since he tried many more times without success to hit it but still even once is amazing at that .
But it is cool when it happens.
Yea it was a cool shot.
Gabe is such a good shot because he does it every day in his job a an exterminator since he uses a break barrel crosman spring gun as his tool for mice and rat infestations so he is shooting off hand all day every day and that 115 yard bottle shot with the blue streak was offhand as well.
He has one of the steadiest holds offhand that I have ever seen as you can see virtually no barrel sway at all when he aims.
He gets to practice everyday then.
That’s why I say the more you practice the hard thing the other things become easier.
Yea he does practice everyday and gets paid for it to boot.
Just got email and our 300 parts have been shipped from Germany so they are on the way and should have a tracking number by tomorrow to know when we will get them.
I am also watching another one for sale that is a junior model at a very nice price but in much more well used condition so we will see if I get lucky again.
Cool. Nothing like having extra parts for just incase down the road.
Yep spare part and possibly a spare gun as well with out the barrel weight and non stippled stock and right now at half the price.
I have actually thought about getting me another 300 also.
Not a parts gun though. I would like another shooter.
The one I am watching is a shooter just not in pristine condition so it would be a beater that would not need to be handled with kid gloves and is lighter with the absence of the barrel weight and smaller diameter barrel and less fancy stock.
So you will let the grandkids shoot that one if you get it. 😉
Yea it will be one for them to shoot since it is not a mint condition one although my oldest has already shot the 300 I have now with close supervision of course.
Its to heavy for the youngest to hold well enough to aim and shoot even when rested as he tried but just did not like it.
I finally found an article on the QB-88 that said it was a copy and guess what of.
I guess that explains why I couldn’t let it get by.
Its a very close copy of the 300 only does not have the sledge system but is capable of being made into a very nice gun as I found this review of it with tons of excellent info and tuning mods for it to make you a fine ten meter target gun and you found you a gem in Hobos clothes with that trash can of guns.
I’m afraid I can’t tell you anything about the CB caps, only that I wasn’t interested in buying them. My only .22 powder burner is a Henry, and it takes .22 LR. I worry about short .22 rounds jamming in the magazine. It holds 15 rounds, but I suppose I could load it up, chamber one round and add another to the mag. I do that sometimes to the Makarov to get 9 rounds in it.
I had a 10 year career in dirt track racing, during which I was a car owner, driver, tech inspector, scoring judge, and track announcer. All kinds of stories there from 1966 to 1976. That is for another day.
That’s really great about the dirt track stuff. I was mostly involved in the drag racing thing from the mid 70’s all the way up to the mid 2000’s. Built and tuned alot of cars. And did like wise as a tech inspector at the local dragstrip. Never did no announcing but did teach some dragracing classes at the track.
And I don’t think I would take no chances on that Henry with a short in it either. Them are nice guns.
Yesterday someone said this comment looked like spam and I followed the link and agreed. So I got rid of it.
It was posted by reader Kevin, who would never post spam on this site.
With apologies, I am re-posting it for him.
Any fans of the Air Arms TX 200 airgun here?
Want a custom stock with spectacular wood? Here’s your chance:
I thought that’s who posted that but I wasn’t for sure. Glad you put the link back up.
Yep, that’s the one I was referring to and stayed up reading it til about 2:00 this morning. It did kinda disappointed me yesterday when it didn’t penetrate the tin can I was hitting at 27 yds. It’s pretty hard to cock for it’s power but that little cocking lever doesn’t offer as much mechanical advantage as a full length underlever.
Buldawg, Thanks for sharing the link! If I didn’t already have it saved to favorites I’d be over there reading it for the rest of the afternoon.