by Tom Gaylord
Writing as B.B. Pelletier
Mauser 300SL. There are three finger scallops along the cocking lever.
Part 1
Part 2
A history of airguns
This report covers:
- The test
- The trigger
- Firing cycle
- Qiang Yuan Training pellets
- Sig Sauer Match Ballistic Alloy pellets
- H&N Finale Match Heavy pellets
- Last pellet was a dome
- JSB Exact RS
- Evaluation
We start looking at the accuracy of the Mauser 300SL target rifle today. This may be the first time this air rifle has been tested this thoroughly and also documented, so I want to cover as many of the bases as I can.
The test
I shot the rifle off a bag rest at 10 meters. I rested the rifle directly on the bag because of its gentle shot cycle. I used the sporting open sights the rifle came with. They are easy to see when the target is lit by a 500-watt photography light. I do think I would like to test this rifle with a rear target peep sight and, because the front sight accepts inserts, I would like to try installing an aperture insert in it. I think the accuracy might improve with these things, and we will have today’s results to compare to.
The trigger
I have not yet adjusted the trigger on this rifle. Right now I can’t tell if it is single-stage or two-stage, but it feels like it’s been adjusted to single-stage. I can’t be sure because some of the excessive travel might really be stage one. It’s incorrect for a 10-meter target rifle trigger to have just one stage and I will try to adjust it in the future. The pull is long, heavy and creepy. I mentioned in Part 2 that I would like to lubricate this trigger when I adjust it, so perhaps that will be my next task.
Firing cycle
Tune in a Tube grease has made this rifle dead calm. It never recoiled much before the tune, so now it’s the next best thing to a recoilless target rifle. Okay, let’s get on with the test.
Qiang Yuan Training pellets
The first target was shot with Qiang Yuan Training pellets. You might think I should have used one of the other two more premium pellets made by this company, but this particular pellet has actually proven to be quite good on its own. I selected it because of the low original price point of the Mauser 300SL. I couldn’t envision anyone shooting world-class pellets in a rifle this inexpensive. That doesn’t mean I won’t try them, since I now own the rifle. I just didn’t want to overlook this training pellet, even though it would be considered a budget pellet.
Ten training pellets made a group that measures 0.658-inches between centers at 10 meters. There was one stray shot and the other nine landed in the same group that measures 0.459 inches between centers. This is what makes me wonder whether better sights might improve the accuracy.
Ten Qiang Yuan Training pellets went into 0.658-inches at 10 meters. Nine went into 0.459-inches.
Sig Sauer Match Ballistic Alloy pellets
Next I tried 10 Sig Sauer Match Ballistic Alloy pellets. We have seen stunning results from this pellet in other vintage 10-meter rifles, so it had to be included in this test. Ten pellets went into 0.756-inches at 10 meters, with 9 going into 0.544-inches. The group is a little horizontal, so again I thought what those better target sights might do.
Ten Sig Match Ballistic Alloy pellets went into 0.756-inches at 10 meters. Nine went into 0.544-inches.
H&N Finale Match Heavy pellets
Next I tried some H&N Finale Match Heavy pellets. The ones I shot had 4.50mm heads, and no, I didn’t sort them with a Pelletgage. I shot them straight from the tin. Ten went into a nice group that measured 0.693-inches between centers and there were no fliers.
1
Last pellet was a dome
One of our readers speculated that wadcutter pellets might not like jumping from a loading tap into the breech of a barrel when the gun fires. They thought a nice domed pellet might do even better. So I resolved to try a dome. Now, testing with one pellet does not make a complete test, so no conclusions will be made from the next results.
JSB Exact RS
I selected a JSB Exact RS dome for this test. No reason, other than they are often quite accurate, and they are among the lightest domes JSB offers in .177 caliber. Ten of them went into a scattered group that measures 1.026-inches between centers. It was the largest group of the test.
Like I said before, one pellet doesn’t make a test, so hold your judgements until I can do a little more testing. But also know that domed pellets are not automatically more accurate than wadcutters in a taploading rifle.
Ten JSB Exact RS pellets went into an open group measuring 1.026-inches between centers.
Evaluation
The Maser 300SL target rifle has a lot going for it. We didn’t see the level of accuracy in this test that I had hoped for, but we’re not done yet. There are other sights to try and other pellets, as well. And I am hoping I can adjust that trigger to be crisper and more precise. So, sit back and enjoy the ride!
BB
Since you want to retest this rifle with aperture sights, and you are in the business of testing things, can you slap the Air Venturi rear sight on it?
/product/air-venturi-rear-sight-micrometer-adjustable?a=3191
Killing two birds with one stone and whatnot.
SL,
That is a very inexpensive sight. I wonder if it was made by the same bunch that made the 888 stock?
RR
As BB related, it seems to be a spitting image copy of the higher-end Daisy aperture.
But because it is done up in a tasteful basic black instead of a gaudy mixture of red blue and yellow, I don’t think the peyote infused creators of the 888 stock have anything to do with it.
If this sight stands up to BB’s rigorous testing regimen it would seem to be just the ticket for those who want a precision peep sight at a lower budget.
SL,
I do not know what you intend to mount it on, but I would be more inclined to buy the AirForce sight myself.
/product/airforce-adaptive-rear-target-sight-fits-most-10-meter-3-position?a=2237
I have an Edge and have owned a FWB 601 in the past. The AirForce sights are every bit as good as those produced by Feinwerkbau and such and are a whole lot cheaper. Now if you are thinking of mounting this sight on a Daisy Red Ryder, well then maybe the AirForce sight might be a little over the top.
RidgeRunner
Nope, my Red Ryder already has a sight mounted on it.
/product/hawke-sport-optics-10-50×60-ed-sidewinder-rifle-scope-illuminated?a=7428
🙂 Arrrgh!, Arrrgh!, Arrrgh!,……. Yea!!!!,….. More power!…………. 😉
SL,
That’s the old Daisy rear aperture! That’s a good idea!
B.B.
Would the sight picture of that rear aperture be useable for general purpose or really only for target shooting.
Belgrath04,
A rear aperture sight would slow down the acquisition of the target. But it’s much more appropriate for what the 300SL is trying to be.
B.B.
I think that if Weihrauch had made an HW-30S variant with a match style stock like this I may never have started on the road to ruin- I mean the road to a small collection of airguns. I was quite happy with the way the 30S shot but I just find the 10M match style stock so comfortable to hold that eventually I had to get a 10M rifle. I still can’t shoot anywhere near good enough to exploit all the performance the 602 has but it certainly is a joy to hold.
This test has got to be one of the very, very few I’ve seen where someone else has the same experience with JSB pellets that I usually do. For some reason no gun I own seems to like them at all. Puzzling – a friend of mine with the same make and model (even same year of production) of gun gets great results with JSB’s and when I shoot his rifle so do I. Put the same JSB’s into mine though and the groups open out compared to what I get with H&N’s!
Nowhere,
I used to own a 601. Every once in a while I miss that jewel. It shot better than I ever hoped to also.
I have had pretty much the same experience with JSBs with some of my air rifles, most especially the RS. I usually have pretty good results with the JSB Exact, but not necessarily the best results for that particular air rifle. More often than not, I end up with an H&N. Right now I am breaking in a Webley/Hatsan Tomahawk and it seems to like the H&N Field Target.
I am having great results with the JSBs in my .357 caliber RAW HM1000X though. Part of that is this air rifle has been tuned at the factory for this particular pellet. I think that may be the secret of it. Different air rifles are “tuned” slightly differently and we need to find what works best with each, most especially with sproingers because it is very difficult to tune these to a particular pellet.
Many PCPs, most especially the newer ones can more easily be tuned for different power levels and projectiles and that is where the secret is. Just like a powder burner, you need to find which projectile with the correct load produces the best results.
BB,
You most definitely need to try that with a rear peep and aperture insert. If you are in need of a decent peep, let me know and I will let you borrow mine from my Edge.
I also do hope that the trigger can be adjusted to something a bit more usable.
No, this thing will probably never be as good as a FWB 300, but I do expect it will still be an interesting air rifle when all is said and done.
RR,
I live about 5 miles from the AirForce plant. I can borrow an Edge target rear sight from them very easily.
Thanks for the offer, though.
B.B.
BB, why do you shoot from a rested position even at 10 m? Shooting from a rested position , I find myself doing nothing but pulling the trigger. Where is the fun in that?
Riki,
I’m not shooting the gun for fun. I’m testing it. I do my tests in a standard way, so one done today is the same as one done 10 years ago. Readers can see how a particular gun holds up against all others.
B.B.
BB, my apologies. You wrote a blog sometime ago about what kind of air gunner are people, and know I see you test guns like Dr.F.W.Mann. I am more of the shooter/hunter type.
Just one more question for today, using a stronger and longer mainspring doesn’t increase the power of a springer, rather sometimes decreases it. I did the experiment myself before believing you. Why is that so?
Riki,
I think if the powerplant is too short the spring though stronger and longer is not able to push enough air to produce power. By cutting down the preload the spring gains enough room to expand compressing more air and producing more power.
Siraniko
Riki,
If there is no more air in the compression chamber, it doesn’t matter how fast the piston compresses it.
Turning the ignition key on your car harder doesn’t make the engine more powerful.
B.,B.
Riki,
A reader, Gunfun1,…. actually kept cutting a spring until a drop in fps was noted. I forget the amount,… but it was inches removed. In fact, he ended up with free play. In other words,…. the first movement of the cocking lever (TX200) was doing nothing. The same could be applied to a spring powered break barrel. It is one trick to smooth out a rough shooter. Dremel tool with a cut off wheel,…. slow and easy,…. keeping the cut squared to the spring.
There is also something called “swept volume”. It has been awhile since I studied that,…. but I believe that it has to do with the total volume available in the compression chamber. I believe B.B. was eluding to that in his reply to you.
Have fun, good luck,…. and welcome. Chris
Chris U
I did do something like that didn’t I.
I kept cutting the spring watching for velocity drop. I actually got to the point you mentioned of free play in the spring instead of preload and my Tx still shot the same velocity.
So all that extra spring preload was a useless waste. It made the guns shot cycle harsher and stressed the guns components more.
So what I found is too much spring preload does nothing. It’s waisted energy.
Gunfun1,
Hey, long time,.. no see. Thanks for confirming that. I thought it fit in quite well for Riki after trying stronger and longer springs. That was surely some of the most extensive testing on the topic that I had ever heard of.
The real question is why do they put in more spring then needed,…. if they could get by with less and end up with a much smoother shot cycle?
Chris,
I had a long blurb to your question, but lost it. Basically it boils down to cost. The size they use is readily available en masse. Also the engineering time to determine the exact spring size to produce the optimum performance adds to the cost.
When I start in on my Tomahawk, I will be giving these guys a call.
http://vortekproducts.com/ourstore/airgun%20Springs
RR,
I have their HO kit in my .22 TX200. It was a bigger spring but the power only went up a little. The main thing is that it made it even smoother with no power loss. I think the stronger spring is needed to overcome the inner and outer plastic spring guides. At any rate,…. I am happy with it.
Chris,
I had heard good things about their products and when I found out they make custom springs… My 1906 BSA could use a new spring also.
RR,
I do not remember the specifics now,….. but I did call them about making a spring. They said they were 2 months out on open machine time (I believe),… but yes,… they could do it.
Springs are interesting. On struts (for cars) the wire is often tapered. The coil count per inch can vary over the length of the spring. The coil OD also can vary over the length of the spring (taper wind). Spring rate is interesting too.
It would be interesting to hear you describe the design parameters that you decide on and how that you arrived at that choice,…. sometime in the future.
Chris,
When I have the opportunity to do such, I most certainly will. First things first though. I need to get a chrony before I start experimenting with the springs so I have more than one piece of data to work with (accuracy).
Chris U
Been kind of crazy on the home front. Seems like no time to get everything accomplished.
But yep tryed the spring shortening on a few different springers and pretty much same results. Matter of fact had a couple FWB 300’s and had good luck with them. One of them had a Maccari I believe it was single spring instead of the two factory counter wound springs. Once I cut the spring to the point of almost free play the velocity stayed the same. Then I replaced the factory cast iron ring with a black o-ring. Once I found the right o-ring to cylinder wall fit the guns velocity actually increased. But one benefit from doing that was a easier to cock gun also. It went from useing my hand to grip the cocking arm to only needing two fingers to cock the gun.
So yes I myself believe to much spring preload is a waste.
GF1,
This is exactly what I intend to do with my Tomahawk. I am planning on cutting the spring to where it has just enough loading to keep it from rattling around when it is not cocked and see if it will calm it down some. If it does, it will be an awesome air rifle, even if it loses some of it’s uber magnumness.
I am also going to investigate whether I can install a gas spring in it. If so and I can get my hands on one of the adjustable ones that will fit, I will be in high cotton.
I think it was Dom who told me that he had one he had tried various springs in and said that one of the issues it had was the transfer port. I may also look into doing a little drilling and tapping to make replaceable ports like on the Whiscombe.
I bought this air rifle to see just what I could do with it. When I bought it, it was a package deal with one of these scopes.
/product/hawke-sport-optics-hd-ir-series-2-7×32-ao-rifle-scope-illuminated-mil?a=3864
The scope by the way is superb and gets the coveted RRR rating.
With the package deal, the Tomahawk was almost free. I can afford to invest some in it.
RR
Nice little Hawke scope. I would like it if I had it.
And I had a few of the Hatsan under levers. They definitely benefited from less preload. One was a .177 caliber and it didn’t really loose any velocity and was much nicer to shoot and more accurate. The other one was a .25 caliber and it was a magnum beast. Very unenjoyable to shoot and not very accurate. I shortened the spring on it. But it dropped in velocity right off the bat. So that gun needed all the spring it had to shoot at the velocity it was shooting at. Which wasn’t very high for it being a magnum gun. Something like 500 fps. When I finally got that gun to smooth out and easier to cock it was only shooting at around 375 fps. It did get more accurate to shoot though. It was like lobbing a soft ball to home base with a underhand pitch.
So all in all there’s a balance that needs to be met for what you want out of a gun. But that’s the way it goes with most things anyway.
GF1,
This one is an uber magnum sproinger in .22. I do not know what it is doing, but even if it slows down a bit that will be just fine as long as it becomes more accurate and gentler to shoot. It does not need a lot of power as long as I can hit what I am shooting at. The Brits do just fine with under 12 FPE.
And besides, if I need power I can pull out the HM100X. 😉
RR
With you on that with reducing power on the magnum springers to improve accuracy from a better shot cycle.
And some guns like the pellet shot at a lower velocity. But back to that .25 Hatsan springer at 375 fps. That was just to slow for that big pellet. It really didn’t have enough for anything other than plinking. I bet the pellet would of bounced off a sqerrial at 50 yards with it.
As it goes. Adequate power is what’s needed for the task at hand.
GF1,
We will just have to see what happens. I am hoping to keep it in the 12-14 FPE range with 1/2″ groups at 25 yards. What I probably will start off with is as you did and slowly chop chunks off and see what happens. Then once I find the sweet spot, I will contact these guys and get a kit made to suit.
http://vortekproducts.com/ourstore/
Like I said, I would like to get it down to where there is almost no spring load at rest, yet have maximum accuracy and sufficient power.
By the way, since I used Tune-In-A-Tube on that Diana 46E it smoothed right out and quieted down and turned into a right nice shooter. Now I cannot decide whether to sell it or keep it.
Do you still have the 300s?
RR
I tryed the Vortek kit in my Tx and have to say I like the stock components and my added tuning goodies better than the Vortek kit.
And I read a little while back that you did the tune in a tube to the 46e. Glad it smoothed it out. But I have to say that my Tx is quiet and smooth with just a light film of white lithium grease on the spring and top hat and factory steel sleeve. I like the idea of less is more when it comes to grease also. I think with the proper fit of the components that the extra lube is not needed. Just say’n from what I exsperianced.
And no I don’t have the 300’s anymore. They went to Buldawg. I don’t know if he still has them. I’ll have to ask. I still talk to him all the time. He’s at a field target match at his local shooting range today. I’m suppose to talk to him later to see how he did. He’s got a Walther LGV that he’s been using. He loves it. I know that LGU that I had was a nice from the factory tuned gun. So if it’s like the LGU I see why he likes it so much.
But back to shoot’n. Today and tomorrow is suppose to be 1-2 mph winds so taking advantage of it today and tomorrow. I have very few days out where I live now with low wind conditions. So going through all my guns and making sure they are still shooting on the money.
GF1,
I did not put much in the Diana. It surprised me how well it worked with it.
Today may be a shooting day for me also. It is supposed to be calm and clear, although maybe a bit on the cool side. Also, to get the scope I desired on the RAW I had to play musical chairs with scopes, rings and adapters on it, the Edge, the Diana and the Tomahawk. It was incredible. Now I have four air rifles I have to rezero. It’s a rough job, but somebody has to do it. 😉
RR
That make me think of this with the tune in a tube. Like you just said that you didn’t put much in. I could see someone keep adding more and more to try to get the gun to smooth out more since it’s so easy to apply. I think that would be a mistake. But I guess that could be experimented with easy enough with some chrony work.
And yep I just played musical barrels yesterday on a 1377 I have with a 1399 stock on it. So I took the scope off and on with each barrel I tryed. I got like 5 different length barrels that are .177 and .22 caliber. And by the way the longest barrel I had was from a 2250 in .22 caliber. It gave the best performance over the shorter barrels in both calibers. One of the .177 barrels is even a Lothar Walther barrel.
But I do still have that other 1377 that I put the .177 Discovery stuff on it. Including the wood stock. That gun is just almost as good as my Tx acurracy wise. By the way which has a 1/2 mildot reticle Hawke scope back on it. The Tx that is well and the 1377/Discovery conversion pumper.
So yep know what you mean about musical scopes. Well and barrels too. And I’m getting ready to go out shooting here in just a few. Let me know if you get your guns sighted back in. Especially interested in the RAW.
GF1,
Unfortunately, the Hawke scope does not have the 1/2 Mil reticle, but 1 Mil dot. It at the moment is sitting on top of the Diana 46E.
Hopefully I will have some trigger time today and of course I will start with the RAW. I mounted my new Leapers 4-14×44 SWAT Accushot on it. Eventually it will be traded out for a Hawke Sidewinder, but I am going to have to give the wallet a break for a while.
RR
You know how I like my 1/2 mildot Hawke sidewinder scopes. But I have found some use for a couple old fixed parallax 3×9 power Winchester air gun scopes I had laying around. They are just a regular reticle with no dots or dash’s.
I just now took the Hawke sidewinder scope off the 1377/Discovery pumper and put the Winchester scope on it and sighted it. And just to mention the Hawke came off to be used on a pcp gun I will have on the way soon. And not say’n what it is till I get it. 🙂
But back to the pumper and Winchester scope. I have it sighted at 35 yards at zero on the reticle and using 8 pumps with JSB 10.34’s. At 50 yards it needs 10 pumps for reticle zero. And 5 pumps is good for 15 yards out to around 30 yards with reticle zero. So all I do is put the reticle on target and pump the correct amount of pumps and not have to worry about mildot hold overs or unders. I can stay within about a 1-1/2 kill zone on the different distances. Definitely can be used for a bird pest gun.
See them cheap scopes can be used for something. But it helps to have a accurate gun too. 😉
GF1,
New PCP coming huh?
I did not get any shooting in today. My wife and I went for a walk today and on the way back came across an injured deer. I called the sheriff’s department and a deputy came by and put it down.
My son-in-law came over and he and I spent the afternoon skinning and dressing out the deer. It looks like I will have tenderloin biscuits for breakfast Christmas morning. 🙂
RR
Nothing like some good deer meat.
And yep new pcp. Nope not a big bore. But could be converted to one I’m betting if I can find the right kit. Pretty sure it’s out there.
I’ll email you a picture after I get it.
GF1,
Looking forward to it.
When I went to the show, this is not the air rifle I had in mind on buying. I wanted an FX Impact in .30. I did not see any Impacts, but when I saw this rifle and the price he was asking, I could not lay it back down.
RR
I know what you mean about jumping on a deal.
The pcp I’m getting will be a step back in time for me so to speak. It’s going to get done up like I had one of my first pcp guns I got. It’s sort of a fall back on the way I did a couple pcp’s in the beginning but with a few added kicks that I found to work in my recent pcp’s. I think it should turn out to be a nice all around gun.
It will be soon. But want to get it done up and some shoot’n results before I say what’s what.
Off subject, but HAM tested what looks like a winner. Hoping this one “pans out” (hint hint BB, maybe you’ll find time to test it in the future).
Doc
https://hardairmagazine.com/reviews/sig-sauer-1911-max-michel-bb-pistol-test-review/
Doic,
Scheduled for next week.
B.B.
B.B., SWEET! I’m so hoping it works out. Looks like a great trainer, plinker and dare say I a bb target shooter? Well maybe, we’ll see.
Doc.
Doc
That’s a good looking pistol.
I would say that this rifle deserves at least an aperture sight. 6MOA is not that great. I would expect better of the Mauser name although I am a little mystified at their pricing and quality. I understand that they have begun reproducing 98 Mauser sporting rifles from the original blueprints and charging $10,000 for them! That is way more than a surplus rifle. Today’s post is also coincidental. Last night I received the PA catalog, and I see that someone has produced a bb gun reproduction of the K98. Did I miss a test on that?
One major question I had about the PA catalog is the the smiling Tom Gaylord face is no longer next to the TX200. Can this be right? Has the ultimate springer fallen from grace? Otherwise, the catalog made me feel old as some attractive brands from the past, especially IZH, are a distant memory. On the other hand, the march forward continues with some delectable choices. The Air Arms S400 is especially attractive to me as a repeater. And I see that someone has finally taken my advice and created detachable air reservoirs for pcps! Formerly, I believe that only Air Force did this, but their buttstock bottles are bulky. Air Airms has produced a slim vesion identical to the fixed reservoirs on most pcps. It’s easy to imagine carrying around a small bundle of them, and leaving the fill tank at home. Too bad the replaceable reservoir only fits the S200, the single-shot version, instead of the S400. If you had both a repeating action and a detachable reservoir you would really be in business. It looks like PA does not carry the nifty kit that allows you to convert the S200 to a repeater.
But the great ones remain which would be the Benjamin Marauder, the Crosman Challenger, the Benjamin 397/392, and the HW30S. What a shame that I have more guns than I know what to do with. But there is a physical limit. Unless I want to sell guns, which I don’t plan on from my meticulously built collection, the only other option is to let them sit unused which I don’t plan to do either. But one can still dream. It looks like there are more high-end target rifles than before. That includes super-expensive biathlon rifles that I can’t figure out. Rimfire shooting with biathlon rifles is a specialized already. Who puts out big money for airguns in a biathlon?
Matt61
Matt,
That’s just an omission. I still love the TX200.
As for Mauser, what makes you think this air rifle is theirs, other than the name? It was made by somebody else and they slapped their name on it.
Mauser sporters in excellent condition do approach $5,000 these days. For twice that they had better offer the value, and I don’t know where they plan to get it.
B.B.
Slinging Lead’s response shows that I am naive in interpreting brand names. Still, you would think that if a name doesn’t mean original manufacture, it should represent some kind of quality control.
As for the new M98 Mauser sporters, I was wrong. They are going for $12,000 and up! Maybe it makes a difference that these are magnum safari rifles with a wealthier clientele. But I expect that the Mauser company expects the extra value to come from their name and the original blueprints behind their new guns. I wonder if European gun laws play a role. If guns are restricted, their gun industry may not be aiming at the general public but for either the very wealthy or motivated.
Matt61
Matt61
First off, I would like to offer my warmest and most sincere greetings to you.
Secondly the most recent PA catalogue has a full page ad for a K98 look-alike PELLET GUN, and made by Diana, no less. I am thinking of installing a Murphy bed in order to make room for that one. Actually when I first saw this rifle one of my initial thoughts on it was “Matt61 is going to love this one!”
I already pestered BB about it, and he plans to test it. Unfortunately Diana has pushed back the delivery date a couple of times. :^(
Thirdly Air Arms does not make the S200. It is manufactured for them by CZ. CZ brands it a 200S under their own name.
Fourthly Pyramyd AIR still offers the S200/200S conversion kit to make it into a repeater (though out of stock as of this writing) It can be found here:
/product/air-arms-s200-t200-10-shot-air-rifle-conversion-kit-177-or-22-cal?a=2622
I have the repeater kit installed on my personal CZ 200S and while it is expensive, I highly recommend it.
Happy shooting,
Lead
SL
How was it to install?
GF1
So easy, even I could do it!
SL
I guess I could manage to install one.
Maybe.
😉
GF1
YOU could figure out how to install one on a sling shot.
SL
Haha. Well let me tell you about when I…..
Oh never mind. I’ll just sit back and listen. It’s amazing what a person can learn now days if find the right place.
🙂
Good to hear from you, Slinging Lead, one of the funniest people on the internet. That is saying something. In this season of vigorous discourse, there are some real twisted geniuses out there, but you stand alone. Incidentally, didn’t you once advise me to run for Congress? I don’t believe I will but thanks for the vote of confidence. 🙂 Incidentally, have you seen the new Magnificent Seven film? I thought it was pretty good, especially as a remake. I was reviewing the original for background, and I came across Steve McQueen’s famous line: “We deal in lead, friend.” That is almost poetry.
Thanks for getting me caught up with the PA products. If the Mauser 98 is a pellet gun, I’ll be looking for accuracy. All the same, I probably won’t pick one up since I have the WWII firearm which is a joy even to hold. I never would have guessed that the S200 is made by CZ. That is kind of strange that one major manufacturer will allow their guns to be branded by another major manufacturer. Maybe it is because Air Arms has a better distribution network for airguns.
With this kit, I believe you may have laid out a pathway to a pcp. One could get an S200 with the repeater kit and five spare reservoirs. Then, in a single vigorous workout, you could fill all the reservoirs with a hand pump, saving the price and hassle of a compressed air tank and getting good exercise in the process. The five reservoirs can be carried easily enough in one of those survivalist canisters and would make for a fair imitation of a LAW rocket which covers the looks. I’m glad to hear that the repeater kit works for you although I am naturally cautious. I believe there was something called a Pedersen Device which was supposed to convert the 1903 Springfield to a semiauto, but I don’t think it was too successful. Okay Benjamin, this is your last chance. If you hurry and make a detachable reservoir for the Marauder, you can still be my number one pcp.
Slinging Lead, how interesting that you should appear the day after another big range day for me. This time I didn’t screw up at all, so I am learning slowly. It was one of my most comprehensive days that included everything from tomahawk and knife-throwing to archery to rifle and pistol shooting. All of human martial history was condensed into a day. Probably the most fun was the tomahawk and knife-throwing. I believe that one of the main features of modern Close Quarters Battle is transitioning from an assault rifle to a pistol. I could sort of do the equivalent by throwing my tomahawk and then charging forward and throwing the knife on the run. I actually got the tomahawk to stick convincingly for the first time even though I knocked the head loose. It was an all-around good time which tends to support Matt61’s Inverse Law of Primitive Enjoyment.
On the pistol range, I had a strange experience with steel-cased Tula ammo in .357 magnum. It shot extremely well, but I could only single load the rounds. The cases stuck in the gun, and I couldn’t eject more than one at a time. Too bad. On the subject of military rifles, I took out my Lee-Enfield No. 4 Mark I* again and shot a two inch five round group at 100 yards. I think that is about the best you can expect without a scope, at least with my vision. But the real star of the guns was my Anschutz with a scope at 100 yards rested.
This has everything to do with airguns. It’s a way of seeing if all my indoor labors at my 5 yard range can transfer to firearms. It’s also not unlike Conan the Barbarian turning the Wheel of Pain (a large grindstone) for 20 years before exploding on the world. (Although I’ve had only fun shooting.) The Anschutz did great. At first, I thought I had shot a .25 inch group, but closer examination showed that I had thrown one wide to open it to a half inch. I’ll still take it. That would be .05 inches at 10 yards which is even better than the Feinwerkbau target rifles. I must say, everyone should own a really elite gun. I wasn’t crazy about spending $3,000 for mine, but it was worth it.
Perhaps the most fun, though, was shooting dirt clods on the berm so that I could get some reactive targets. With that gun, I was able to tag just about anything I could see on the berm which gave me an almost god-like feeling of control. I also noticed a perceptible delay in the bullet strike, and this got me wondering more urgently about equivalent distances between calibers. My problem is that the furthest distance I have is 100 yards. Paradoxically, the only way to go out further is to get a smaller gun for the distance, but how can one find the equivalence? Since my starting observation is the time delay, I could compare based on time. If a 30-06 bullet travels roughly three times as fast as a .22 LR, could I say that 100 yards with a rimfire is like 300 yards with a 30-06? But it’s not just a question of speed. How does the different bullet weight change things? I’m guessing that a smaller bullet weight means less energy which means less of an ability to fight the wind. That will loop the trajectory even more, so maybe I can push my equivalent 30-06 distance out to 500 yards! The next step would be to use airguns at 100 yards. The blog once speculated that 100 yards with an airgun (non-big bore) was like shooting 1000 yards with a firearm. That would be interesting to test.
Matt61
Matt61,
Considering the time of flight a .22 fired out of a PCP at 850 fps MV hitting a target 28 mm wide 100 meters away would be roughly be the equivalent of firing at a man size target at 3000 meters. Some friends of mine had been speculating on accurate long range shooting at 100 meters and that is so far our computation. We did base this though on the initial figures given by Peter Hathaway Capstick’s article on mini-sniping which stipulated that using a 10 meter rifle on a 9mm casing at 32 meters is equivalent to hitting a man size target at 1000 meters.
Siraniko
Matt61—Lead—-I was one of the first 10 PA customers to order the Diana 98K pellet rifle. I will report on it when it arrives. It is featured on a few you tube posts. The rear sight was adjusted all the way over , on one video from the UK. This would be a problem for me. I like my iron sights zeroed close to the center of the scale. I like to have lots of windage, right and left. Pa told me that most of the orders ( 40-50@) are for the .22 version, as is mine. BB,s report on the Diana 460 convinced me that the .22 caliber is the best choice, at least for me. ——-Ed
Z-Ed,
I was just looking at the Mauser on the PA site. I happened to see this gem of a response in the questions:
John from USA asked:
REALLY need a faux bolt handle, (non-functional, fixed would be fine, and easy to do!) to top off the impression!
zimbabweed from USA:
why stop there? Add a faux bayonet, grenade launcher, rifle grenade, German helmet, iron cross, autographed copy of Mein Kampf, etc.. Bugs Bunny would say ” ridiculous, isnt it?”
Hilarious! Made my morning.
Jim M.
Ed
I will be looking forward to reading about your thoughts on this rifle.
In order to show some semblance of self-control, I am making myself wait until BB reviews the gun. Then I’m gonna buy it!
I too will order the .22 version. For a gun in this power class, it seems the best way to go.
Hope yours is a winner.
Slinging Lead,
The way I see it you ought to at least put your name on the list. It is easier to cancel an order than to order an item that is out of stock.
Siraniko
Siraniko
Aah…. yet another airgun enabler!
Shame on you sir! ;^)
Slinging Lead,
After reading the blog and comments from the beginning for the past two years (up to September 2015 now) I hear the distant echoes of the lamentations of those who rued that they did not buy something when they had the chance. Since I can’t buy it I might as well help those who can. 😎
Siraniko
SL,
Nothing like a little pressure to make my day! 😉
B.B.
BB
No pressure. But it better be good.
BB,Siraniko, Chris & Gunfun1, thanks for clearing it. But that leads me to another question, I have another gun which is the Indian copy of theoben evolution. The gun which I used for a test bed has more swept volume, not only is longer but also wider. It is harder to cock, but it produces only 9 fpe compared to the 11-12 fpe of the other rifle. I thought it was only dependent on swept volume?
Riki,
I do not pretend to know much about swept volume or springs and fps. I just brought up that experiment that Gunfun1 did so that you would be aware of what his results were. You can see from his comment that one rifle had no fps drop noted with spring cutting,.. and the other rifle dropped immediately when the spring was cut.
I think that power is dependent on many things,…. not just swept volume. Maybe one of our resident experts could shed some more light on the subject for you. It sounds as if you have a chronograph,… so that is good.
Riki
Is that gun your talking about a gas spring or a steel coil spring?
Riki,
I am most curious as to how exactly you determined the swept volume of your 2 rifles. For one,… you would have to know the piston bore diameter. That could come from specs. or actual measurement. The second would be to know the exact stroke or,… piston movement. On something like a fixed barrel (under lever/side lever),… that could be done with a small, long rod and measure cocked and un-cocked. I suppose the same could be done with a break barrel. However,…. you would (not) want to dry fire either. Both would require re-cocking/re-breaking and loading a pellet. No dry fire on a springer.
At any rate,…. I was just curious.
Riki,
Piston weight plus the size and shape of the transfer port also factor into the power equation.
B.B.
And pellet weight and fit to the barrel and many other things.
Jim M—I am glad that I made your morning. I wish that I could do it every day. Some people have the knack to add useless, un- necessary gadgets and widjets to anything that they can get their hands on. It was Phil Sharpe, or Crosman who quoted a French Officer ( in a WW1 machine gun school)—” We zimplify ze Browning machine gun by ze mere addition of a few additional parts”. ——Ed
Hard to argue with the French reputation for effective machine guns, eh? 😉
-Jan
Chris,The evolution copy is gas ram. The rifle used to test did not lose much power before 7 coils of spring were cut. The cocking effort decreased, but muzzle energy remained more or less intact. The evolution copy is a far better manufactured gun than the other one. I borrow the chronograph from a friendly gun shop whenever I can, other times use chronoconnect mobile lite.
Riki,
You have been quite busy. There is much to learn. I do believe that you first mentioned that you have been reading the blog for a couple of years already. Between the articles and comments since 2005, there is lot here.
There is a (real good) site that has some (real nice) “animations” of air gun related subjects. I do not know how to post a link so I will try this,…. 3w, dot, arld, dot, com, /.Give it a try and check it out. Let me know if it works for you. It really should be a “must read” for anyone starting in air guns,…. or scopes…. or shooting period.
Riki,
Hope this works,…….
http://www.arld1.com/
Riki,
There should be a 1 after the d in arld.
Thanks, BB and Gunfun1. The transfer port is oblique and off center in one, while offcenter and straight in the evolution copy. BB , I know you are very busy, but can you please do a blog on elementary air rifle physics when you have the time? It will be of great help.
Riki,
Actually, I have done such reports already.
Here is one:
/blog/2010/02/changeable-air-transfer-ports/
And here are three more:
/blog/2008/11/the-air-transfer-port-part-3/
B.B.
Riki
All good. And you just mentioned above to Chris that the gun is a gas ram.
I had a Hatsan that was a gas ram and a few nitro piston guns. From shooting them and different springers I lean more towards the spring guns. To me they can be tuned for shot cycle and velocity. Not much can be done with gas rams. Well on the other hand some gas rams do have a plug so air can be let out or added. But from what I understand they have a very small working area in relation to the pressure in the ram. Basically hard to hit the right pressure level and get a good shot cycle, velocity and cocking pressure. Me I’ll stick with spring guns over gas rams or nitro piston guns.
B.B.,
I am not sure that you can do it,….. but the link that I provided to Riki (just above) would be HUGE asset to have linked (here) on your blog. You, I and 10 other people could try to describe something to a new comer and we still would not come close to what that site offers in clarity, illustration and (inter-activity). Pyramid Air is featured on the site as link,… but also too is some others that are P.A. competitors. Heck, it is even a good site for very experienced shooters.
If a new shooter was to ask a question,…. you could point them to the site,…. and come back if they have any further questions. Saves you time. New shooter gets ultra clarity,.. immediately. Win, win.
Just an idea,…. Chris
Chris U
I tryed punching in that web address you gave and it comes up some different training classes.
Are you sure you gave the right letters above.
And all you need to do is type in the right address in your reply and it will automatically highlight blue as a link. Or you can go to that website and right click on the address bar at the top of your computer screen. Then click on copy. Then come back to the blog and say what you want about the link. Then go down a line under and right click and hit paste. The link should show up highlighted blue.
If you give the correct website address here I can post it.
GF1,
You are correct,…. or should I say that I was not. There should a 1 after the d. I will note your method though and try it sometime in the future. Thanks.
GF1,
I did it,…. but ended replying to myself. At least I did it and it is up by the original comment.
Thanks again,….. Chris
Chris U
All good.
And I just checked it out. Very good site. Someone has posted this in the past.
I bookmarked it to my favorites on my phone this time so I have it hand if I want to check it out if needed.
GF1,
Yup,.. excellent site. Really good for all things scope related,…. at least on how to use them correctly. That can be one of the hardest things to try and explain to someone and have them get what you are trying to say. Plus, it covers all the basics of how springers and PCP’s and multi-pumps works and shows the insides and the entire shot cycle. The fact that you can interact and actually move and adjust things,…. (and see the effects) in real time is absolutely an invaluable learning aid. Triggers too. Lots of things. A person could get real smart, real quick, spending a few days on that site and going through all of the exercises.
I just look at it as another tool in the tool box. Of course, nothing can replace what B.B. does here. That will never change. 🙂
Chris U
Yep. 🙂
Spring strength and piston speed was more vital to power production back in the day of leather seals
The spring guns of those days relied on a controlled dieselling to produce much of their power (see Gerald Cardews book of the era) and the leather seals were somewhat “lossy” in a way modern parachute seals just aren’t, expanding to the compression tube as they do.
A moist, greasy leather seal, a high impact fast spring cycle and a slightly larger TP was the way to increase power (as well as the obvious swept volume)
When manufacturers started to embrace the parachute seals a lot of them changed nothing else, particularly the British and, especially, German quality marques…
In modern design, the power comes almost entirely from the swept volume, with the rest of the refinement coming in the shape of barrel length, pellet weight and TP size…..which, incidentally, in physics terms ought to be different sizes for different calibres and volumes…but never is
Dom,
This is a very insightful comment. Let’s get specific. Weihrauch, for one, changed from leather seals to synthetic parachutes in their guns. The HW55 is one example. I found the synthetic-sealed 55 slightly harsher than the leather seal, for the reasons you mention.
But with the HW80, which was designed as the Beeman R1 originally, all the design was supposedly from a clean sheet of paper. I have spoken to the engineer who designed that powerplant for Dr. Beeman. It was done on the CAD system, though I doubt he had access to performance data, because this was thew first time it had even been done. So this was more of a “Will this work?” exercise than a “How well will it work?” exercise.
I have done some testing that shows the size of the transfer port makes little difference between caliber., As long as it works for one of them it will work for all. But m testing was too coarse to reveal subtle differences, so I think you are probably correct in what you say. I jusyt think the advantage may not be big enough to matter.
B.B.
Weihrauch dropped the size of their transfer ports across the board….I think from 3 to 2.7mm sometime in the mid to late eighties because they were aware things were harsher with the synthetic seal.
The HW80 remained at 3mm and, in fact some tuners took them out to 3.2mm as its not so much the size of the port as the ratio of swept volume TO port and the HW80 had so much of that.
As for the neccesity of CAD drawings, I’ve always smelt a big fat marketing rat over the whole story
Remember that EVERY single part of an HW80 apart from THREE already existed, namely the stock cocking rod and compression tube, both of the latter being extended HW35 items, I’ve always been a touch dubious of the, rather breathtakingly arrogant claim that it was designed by Beeman and suspect some marketing cook up betwixt Robert and Herman to attempt to make an American connection to assist home sales.
I mean, think about it logically, firstly, would CAD drawings be required just to extend an HW35 tube 25mm, and certainly, would poor old Weihrauch need them for this leap of engineering magic?, given their lack of experience in this field!….doesn’t really stack up at all does it?.
I think CAD drawings were made, but I think as an incidental aside rather than a pivotal event…you can say “make me an HW35 with an inch longer compression tube and put your non locking barrel on it” over the phone to one of the best airgun engineering companies in the world and I suspect they might get it right.
Weihrauch and Beeman weren’t shy of waffle, the nonsense about the HW85 being a BSF design, when not ONE single part is interchangeable or even a similar dimension! is a pervasive and oft repeated one that is physically totally unevidenced.
I mean, with the whole lot sat in the parts bins (some of which had been there for 20 years)….what bit was CAD designed?, not the trigger, nor the piston, nor the barrel, not the guide, none of the stock screws, or barrel bolts, not the sights…none of the seals.
Beeman, much as US adult airgunning owes him a debt was (mainly if not entirely) a very fine salesman, and, I suspect for the same reason he rebranded Weihrauch and H&N to make it “Buy American ” palatable…with Weihrauch blessing, possibly encouragement…. they concocted, what is, at best a story with no logical necessity (once you look at it empirically) and at worst a load of cock and bull with some unnecessary CAD thrown in as the smoke for the mirror.
Dom,
After the fact you can have that conversation. Before the fact, who knows? I do know that Weihrauch on their own tried to get the R1’s power from the HW 77 and ended up with a rifle that weighed almost 11 pounds. That certainly wasn’t the way to go! Yes Diana exceded the R1/HW 80 power with a sidelever that has the sane sliding compression chamber as the HW 77, yet weighs under 9 pounds. So it is possible, but not always guaranteed.
B.B.
My HW77 is a heavy old beast, I wouldn’t fancy it enlarging, the more time goes on the more remarkable the Diana 52 becomes as a design, its no lightweight and fell out of the ugly tree hitting every branch, but an honest 21fpe, sometimes more, at close to 14fpe AA TX200 accuracy levels with a cocking effort 50% lighter!….as each company tries and fails spectacularly to achieve those compromises it becomes a more and more remarkable design.
The Diana 52 preceded the HW77 too (just) and can rightfully claim the sliding compression tube design.