How to make a spring-piston air rifle shoot smooth: Part 2

by Tom Gaylord
Writing as B.B. Pelletier

Benjamin Legacy SE
The Benjamin Legacy SE.

Part 1

This report covers:

  • The rifle
  • Important point!
  • The chase
  • Cocking effort
  • Trigger
  • Accuracy
  • Summary

Today’s report should make an interesting contrast to the work I have been doing on Geo791’s Diana RWS 34P. By the end of this report I think you will see that American airgun manufacturers have the ability to make world-class spring guns. Let’s get right to it.

The rifle

Now I’ll tell you a little about the gun we have been looking at. The Legacy SE looks a lot like Benjamin Trail rifles. There’s no Weaver scope base because the Legacy SE was made years before Crosman began putting Weaver bases on their Trail rifles. What it does have is a set of conventional 11mm dovetail grooves with a single hole at the back for a vertical scope stop pin. Given the extreme smoothness and lack of recoil, that was good enough. There are no open sights.

The trigger appears to be the same one that’s found in today’s Trail guns; and since it isn’t holding back as much force, it breaks very crisply in stage 2. The safety is manual, so the shooter is in control, which is how I like it.

The cocking effort is exactly 16 lbs. I know because I’ve measured it for this report.

The rifle is normal-sized, at 44 inches overall. What looks like the barrel is just under 20 inches long, but the actual barrel is hidden deep inside a shroud. The actual barrel is about 1-1/2 inches shorter, and there are no baffles in front of it. The muzzle brake is just a nice solid cap that completes the look of the rifle.The pull is 14 inches.

The stock is synthetic with a dipped woodlands camo pattern in deep woods green and gray. There’s a stylized thumbhole, and the stock makes the rifle completely ambidextrous. A dark rubber cheekpiece is pinned to the top of the straight comb. The buttpad is a ventilated black rubber pad that prevents the rifle from slipping when stood in the corner. The forearm is thin in cross section and flat on the bottom for a good hand rest.

The metal parts are not polished and present a matte surface for the black oxide. The metal barrel jacket is even duller than the spring tube. There are a few plastic parts on the gun, like the triggerguard and end cap, but the trigger blade is metal.

Important point!

The barrel pivot is a screw that can be tightened. That means the rifle can be very accurate because any sideplay can be removed. However in testing mine wasn’t that accurate. I discovered that the end cap on the muzzle brake was probably touching the pellets as they exited the muzzle, tipping them sideways. The 25-yard groups were all over one inch.

Crosman Premier holes
The pellets were flying sideways, causing an open group.

The chase

As I told you in Part 1, the Benjamin Legacy SE did not last long. Rather than go on about what didn’t happen, let’s look at what did. Ed Schultz used what was learned from the Legacy SE as a starting point to develop the Crosman NPSS (Nitro Piston Short Stroke) — the rifle that got everything right! Same idea — easy cocking and smooth shooting, but with more power. How much more? Let’s look.

Crosman Premiers — 712 f.p.s. with a spread from 695 to 727.
RWS Superdomes — 694 f.p.s. with a spread from 680 to 709.
RWS Hobbys — 771 f.p.s, with a spread from 761 to 781.
Air Arms domes — 673 f.p.s with a spread from 664 to 679.

 

NPSS

Crosman’s NPSS is no longer made, but was a landmark rifle in its day.

Cocking effort

The cocking effort was no longer 16 lbs. like the Legacy SE. It had increased to 24 lbs., but was still lighter than any other gas spring air rifle at the time. Now we had good power and easy cocking — a world-beater combination!

Trigger

The trigger on the NPSS rifle breaks at 3 lbs. 12 oz. and is so crisp that I guessed the weight was a pound less. The length of the stage one pull is adjustable, but the letoff weight doesn’t seem to change with adjustment.

Accuracy

This is where the rubber meets the road. Because, if the rifle isn’t accurate, nothing else matters very much. This NPSS is quite accurate.

JSB Exact RS group 3
Five JSB Exact RS pellets went into this 0.302-inch group at 25 yards!

The accuracy may have a lot to do with the NPSS having a pivot bolt instead of a pin. The breech can be tightened to eliminate sideplay. But pivot bolts aren’t common on such airguns. Plain pins are far more common, to keep the manufacturing costs down.

I can just imagine the corporate meeting in which this design feature was discussed. The money guy asked, “How much does a bolt really help the accuracy? A bolt, plus the subsequent additional machining (threading the receiver fork) and additional assembly time costs the factory 31 cents more than a plain pin that can be pressed in. By the time that cost flows through our marketing model it adds $1.29 to the retail price of the gun. Is this pivot bolt really necessary?”

If there is an Ed Schultz sitting at the table (as there was for the NPSS), he can explain how the bolt helps the rifle maintain superior accuracy by allowing the barrel pivot tension to be adjusted. He knows this, not because he is an engineer, but because he is also an experienced airgunner.

If the engineer at the table doesn’t know the answer, the bolt goes away and the pin is substituted. Don’t blame the money guy — he’s just doing his job. The question he asked was reasonable. The problem was the engineer at the table didn’t know the answer and could not defend the more expensive bolt.

So, the rifle that gets the plain pin sells 11,000 pieces over the next 10 years, where the same rifle, if it had a pivot bolt, might have sold 50,000 pieces. But that is a subtlety that few people understand.

The NPSS went on to become the Nitro Piston 2 (NP2). That’s a gas spring rifle with even more power and additional technology (a buttoned piston) to reduce vibration.

Summary

I wrote this 2-part report because of the test I did on the Umarex Throttle. That rifle contains a device called Stop Shox to calm the firing cycle while still producing excellent power. In this 2-part report I have shown you the evolution of a gas spring rifle that needs no technology to produce the same result — with incredible accuracy!

If a manufacturer were to provide a gas spring rifle that the user could fill, then what you see here might be possible again. Let’s hope such a thing is being designed.

100 thoughts on “How to make a spring-piston air rifle shoot smooth: Part 2

  1. Ok, B.B.,
    I give up! I have been following your reports on a number of mid-range break barrel rifles for the last year or so and I am just plain confused ! Barrel droop, broken springs, recoil to break your cheekbone, won’t group well past 20 yds, and so on! What is a shooter to do?! Terrus?
    Well, I just ordered my next gun and it is..–! Marauder .25 and it should be here next Tuesday.
    Bruce


    • Yes it has been a rash of springer articles.
      I think Tom has a huge soft spot for them.

      I admit to being a self confessed addict of anything with a trigger.

      While I can shoot a springer, I Admit they are my least favorite airgun power plant.

      You will love the Marauder!


      • I would really like to have a good “grab n go” springer for 25- 30 yd stuff but I don’t have $350+ to spend on something for that use. $250? Maybe so. For now, the Marauder should keep me busy, and I am really looking forward to the challenge of the new platform.
        Bruce


        • BBB,

          Congratulations on your new toy. I have one and GF1 just sold his, but he knows a bunch about them. My .25 M-rod and the .22 Maximus are my two go-to air rifles.

          Please be sure to keep us posted.


      • 45Bravo,

        No, I don’t have a soft spot for springers. I have a soft spot for airguns that perform the way they should — they way they are advertised to perform. That’s what excites me.

        I write more about springers because there are many more of them sold and most shooters have them. Look at Geo791. He bought a Diana 34P that I had been saying was the best buy in that price range, but then he couldn’t get it to shoot. I tried to coach him through my writing, but it didn’t work. So I asked to test his rifle, because sometimes things really don’t work as they should.

        Well, we now know what’s what with his rifle and he can go back to trying to learn to shoot it. No more wasting time, wondering if it is him or the gun.

        Truth be told, there are far fewer problems with PCPs. They are easier to shoot accurately and they perform as they should more often. Still, you only see me touting a very few types. That’s because I know they work in all ways.

        I worry about that guy who can only afford to buy one airgun this year and wants to buy the best. If he reads my tests and buys based on my results, I want him to be happy. But if he goes off half-cocked and buys something based on its appearance or advertised velocity/accuracy, then he’s on his own. He is a test pilot. And I hope he knows how to fly!

        B.B.


        • Well I do like the spring guns, gas or metal springs. Lots of fun getting each one to shoot accurately. I spend more time with the hard to shoot guns than I do with my fabulous HW30s.

          Question I have for you is the NP2 likely to be more accurate with the Stop Shox or not?

          I enjoy reading your reports whether or not I’m likely to buy what you are writing about.

          Decksniper


        • BB.
          Greetings from Colombia. I must agree with you BB, PCP’s will have less troubles and will be less difficult to shoot accurately, but the springers and gas piston airguns for some of us have a special enchantment. Exempli gratia, my hatsan 95, which was my first, and only one (for now) airgun, is very difficult to shoot accurately, but, to be honest, I feel very proud when finally learned how to shoot it! For me that was a very satisfactory feeling, and makes me happy! I hope can buy a PCP this year (my Christmas auto-gift), and my beloved hatsan 95 will stay with me until I can give him to my little son!!


    • Bruce,

      PA does not sell them for this price, but another well known air rifle retailer located in the SW USA has some real nice deals on Weihrauch air rifles.


    • Bruce,

      Confused? Why?

      You’re confused because there are so many problems with products that you think ought to work as they should — as they are advertised to work. But often they don’t. That is what this blog is all about and it’s why I test airguns the way I do.

      I read other “reports” on airguns and they read like the writer was being paid by the marketing department to write ad copy. I try not to do that. I try to tell you exactly what happens when I test.

      That’s why, when I find an airgun that performs as it is supposed to, I get ecstatic. You bought a Marauder. That’s one I am ecstatic about.

      B.B.


      • That’s what I want-“it works like it is supposed to”! I went around with a couple Gamo rifles and it was a great learning experience, but went with a Discovery for the accuracy thing! Now, a step up to the Marauder will be great but I still will look for the “magic” break barrel.
        Bruce



          • GF 1, the problem with the HW 30 is it is only in .177. As a hunter, I prefer .22. I know a kazillion people hunt with .177 but I was a powder-burner until a couple years ago! I know, “accuracy over energy!” but I still would choose .22 every time!
            Bruce


            • Bruce
              The HW30s are available in .22 caliber. Its just that Pyramyd Air doesn’t sell them. And to add I don’t think they would behave as well as a .177 version.

              And the only thing I can say is your missing out if you don’t try out .177 caliber air guns.

              Have you?




                • Yup that is me…

                  As BB said, they are so accurate and easy to shoot that they are boring…..boring….boring
                  Unless you are shooting them at 100 yards in gale force winds, now that might be interesting. Shooting a PCP is like watching Shaq practice his dunks.
                  I still do not understand why they do not become totally modular. Sort of like how AR’s have become. Get a barrel, get an air tube, get a valve with regulator, get a receiver, heck some of them don’t even have a real stock, and you are done….

                  -Y


                  • Yogi,

                    Point taken!!! 🙂 Thank you. Your comment (does) have a (lot) of merit!

                    For me,… I like easy. Even “easy” has plenty of challenge’s though. I do suppose however,.. that it just makes the challenge’s “easier”. Did I mention that I like “easy”? 😉

                    Have a good one, thanks for the reply,… out’a here.

                    -C


                  • Greetings from Colombia. I must agree with you, PCP’s will have less troubles and will be less difficult to shoot accurately, but the springers and gas piston airguns for some of us have a special enchantment. Exempli gratia, my hatsan 95, which was my first, and only one (for now) airgun, is very difficult to shoot accurately, but, to be honest, I feel very proud when finally learned how to shoot it! For me that was a very satisfactory feeling, and makes me happy! I hope can buy a PCP this year (my Christmas auto-gift), and my beloved hatsan 95 will stay with me until I can give him to my little son!!


            • Bruce,

              Try the HW50. I got one in .22, and I love it. I have never even put a scope on it, as I enjoy shooting it so much with open sights. I did take the action out of the stock and apply a little Tune-in-a-Tube, but it was really a good shooting rifle even before that. I don’t have a HW30 to compare to, but the 50 is great.

              Jim M.


              • Jim M
                I had a HW50s and it was a nice gun. It was a .177 though.

                Compared to the HW30s I have now which is .177 I have to say I like the HW30s the best of the two.

                But on the other hand if someone wanted to give me a HW50s. I wouldn’t deny it.
                🙂


    • Springers are not so bad. I have two, the IZH 61 and the B30. They are at the extreme ends of power, high and low, and both very cheap, and they have given me little or no problem. Even my fantasy gun, the HW30S is way cheaper than most pcps. And none of these guns have the hassle of maintaining and operating pcps.

      Matt61


    • You will love the Marauder, especially if your other guns have been springers. Very easy to shoot, quiet, and no recoil. When I first got mine, my wife didn’t like it: “It doesn’t feel like I’m shooting anything!” Nice and quiet!


  2. I researched (the best I knew how) and bought the Remington NPSS in .177. The 10.5gr CP is a tack driver.
    Lazered at 74 yards, Ground Squirrels bit the dust!
    Normal groups of 1/2 inch at 34 yards (my zero for this piece) is common.
    Thanks for the flashback (a couple of years), my PCP’s have my undivided attention these days for the control of Critters for farmer friends.
    Lord Bless You B.B.
    Shawn


    • Shawn,

      That is some fine shooting, especially for a .177.

      On the user name,… I went to a youth Christian summer camp as a kid (many) years ago. It was called Camp Maranatha and was around the Mt. Vernon, Ohio area if I remember correctly. Just wondering if there might be any outside chance of any relationship?

      Chris


      • No, don’t think so. I’ve been shootin air guns for about 20 yrs or so. Most recently my PCP’s have taken over. I started getting serious with my Blue Streak .20 that was my dad’s, then i moved up to a Hw77 in .20.
        The handle MV Maranatha was what I named the boat God gave as a Baptist Missionary to the Natives in SE Alasta. Maranatha is found one time in the Bible and means “The Lord Comes Quickly”.
        Relationship? very possible. If your are a Believer in Christ then we are “Blood Brothers”.
        Lord Bless You Chris


      • You’re right that if a manufacturer wants to compensate for the lower power of airguns compared to airguns that they should drill the barrel to shoot high rather than low. That would be the intuitive move. But after some thought, it seems to me that maybe there is a method in the drooping of the Diana guns. If the desire was to compensate for power alone, drilling high would make sense. But what if they were trying to compensate for the relationship between scope and rifle? At short distances characteristic of airguns, you need to really crank the scope elevation to get zeroed. At my preferred distance of 5 yards, many scopes will not even adjust adequately. The way I think about it is that for extreme short distances (high elevation) the axis of the scope and the line of the bore make for a relatively large angle of intersection compared to the angle at longer distances. By drooping the barrel, this angle becomes smaller and easier for the scope to adjust. So while there is criticism of Diana’s drooping policy, could it be that these are isolated instances and that the drooping procedure eliminates many more scope problems that you would get otherwise? If so, then this would be another case of the line from Young Frankenstein: “If you change the pluses to minuses and the minuses to pluses…Grandfather, you’ve done it!”

        Matt61



        • Matt61
          LarryMo had a explanation why the early Diana’s had barrel droop on yesterday’s blog.

          He said that in the early Air Rifle Headquarters catalog that Dr. Beeman said it was to help sight alignment with the open sights how they were mounted on the gun.



        • Matt61,

          From Larry Mo’s comment, I think that scoping was not the thrust of the comment. Rather it was better for off hand shooting and natural eye alignment to the barrel mounted rear sight, with the front sight.

          My understanding is the droop only makes any scoping more difficult. I can see no benefit.

          As for “drilling high”, it is not a solid set up. To me, the issue seems to be letting the barrel lock up into a higher position to aid better in scoped applications. It seems to me that different machining at where the action and the barrel breech meets would be the solution.

          As I have said before, if anyone has other thoughts,… feel free to jump in. The water is fine! 😉

          Chris


          • Chris U
            With you on the machining of the breech block angle so the barrel raises when closed. On break barrel guns of course. A little different machining would be needed for a fixed barrel gun.

            That would be the smartest way to do a break barrel to me though.


            • GF1,

              I am at a bit of a disadvantage on knowledge of Diana’s, but the under levers and side levers have droop too???

              I do remember that B.B. said that (any) break barrel (can) have droop, maybe he said (any) airgun, but Diana’s seem to be the “poster child”.



                • GF1,

                  I thought that Larry Mo’s comment made the (most) sense (of any) that I (ever) heard on the topic of Diana barrel droop. His comment played heavily into open sights and off hand. To me, that makes sense. Your thought’s on the matter/his comment?


                  • Chris U
                    I have to agree about how it would help sighting with open sights.

                    I do have one of my old early 70’s Air Research Headquarters catalogs. There was alot of useful information in those catalogs. And once LarryMo mentioned that. It makes me remember hearing something like that. And I do believe it was in that catalog.

                    I will have to get it out and read it over again. I got it sitting right on top of my gun safe now too so I don’t misplace it like I did on a previous move when packing.


        • Matt61,

          You can justify anything if you try hard enough…

          Hey you could mount the scope on the barrel, right where the rear site sits. Then you need a looonnng eye relief scope and you are all set. Problem solved!

          Or just use the open sites. Barrel droop becomes irrelevant.

          Where can you get a scope that focuses down to 5 yards? 7 is the closest I have ever seen advertised, and I hear on many of them this may be an empty boast.

          God bless,

          Yogi


  3. BB,

    You never did come back to the Benjamin Trail NP2 after Part 6. You seemed to be trying real hard to make it into a world class sproinger. I really like some of the technology in it. If they would figure out how to improve the trigger and if the pivot is a bolt, I could see one of the newer ones like the Mayhem.

    /s/m/Benjamin_Mayhem_SBD_Nitro_Piston_NP2_Air_Rifle/4319/8340



    • Yogi and Gunfun1 –
      Please allow me to throw in another 2 cents here: First I want to agree with Yogi about PCPs – boring! I’m even more extreme, in that I gave all my CO2 pistols to my brother.
      Here’s what I’ve found out about a small selection of scopes. I don’t have the best arrangement for shooting. I basically have no where to shoot unless I pack everything and go over to my brother’s place. My first set-up was across my living room at 3 yards. I started using store bought reinforcements as targets and then figured out if I was using a scope at that distance, I could aim at dots the size of a period. I kept the reinforcements for pistol shooting and shot at dots with my rifles. Believe me, it’s challenging enough since I also don’t have a steady rest. I sit on the couch against the wall, cross my left leg over my right and brace my left elbow against my left knee in a sort of modified field sitting position. Doing this, I was able to determine the best pellet (in my possession) for each of my rifles. After reading some of the groups entries about shooting at targets down the hall, I was encouraged to set up my target from my living room to my bedroom. I managed to eke out a range of 48′ 6″ or, 16.2 yds.
      However, back to the scopes. On my Beeman RS2 Gas Ram dual caliber I have mounted a Hammers 3-9×40 AO. On the Gamo Bone Collector 1300 fps .177 cal., I have a Hammers SA3-9×32 AO. On the Browing Leverage .22 I have a Browning 3-9×40 AO. On the Hatsan 95 .22 Vortex I mounted a Bushnell 4-12×40 AO, and on the Umarex Octane .177 I have a Umarex 3-9×40 AO. For a little while I mounted a UTG 3-9×32 AO Mil-dot Bug Buster on my B3-2 .22cal. I found I really like the lightness and feel of it and also my Walther Terrus .22 cal without scopes and just use the iron sights. At least, so far.
      All of these rifle/scope combos were set up originally for that 9 ft range and I managed to get good sight pictures by fiddling with the Ocular lens adjustment. Some more than others.
      Notice I don’t mess with anything without an Adjustable Objective and in all cases kept the power setting between 4 and 6.
      Larry in Algona


  4. BB
    I always enjoy your blog even when I don’t care for the gun you are testing.

    Many of us have already pre-ordered the Umarex Gauntlet. We have seen the few videos and the just out Americanairgunner feature on the Gauntlet. How about you getting started on testing on the blog so that when we start getting shipments, we will be up on everything you are able to get out of the new PCP?


  5. Magnumitis is the reason the NPSS NO longer exists. Speaking of which, in no wind conditions, I put 6 shots into an inch, 6 into 1 /8, and 2 fliers? that opened the group up to 2 5/8 at 100 yards off of a bipod with my R1. 6×24 Leapers scope set at 12x with 8.64 Stoeger pellets in a no wind situation. Springers can still shoot!


    • Brent,

      That is pretty amazing. That is about what I average with the .25 M-rod,.. on a consistent basis,… at 100,… which is making like a bazillion times more power. 🙂 Nice!


  6. Great report as always, B.B. Thanks!

    A random question for anyone who may be able to help: Is anyone familiar with a Japanese air rifle manufacturer that marked their rifles “T.S.A.”? I have now come across one such air rifle for sale, but there seems to be virtually no information available in the Blue Book of Airguns or online. All that I know is that the rifle in question is a small break barrel manufactured in the 1960s, and that is bears some resemblance to older Slavia air rifles (like the 618). I am led to believe that Japanese-made air rifles are comparatively scarce because of the restrictions in Japan on gun ownership. Any more information I can get would be greatly appreciated!



    • BB
      Really what’s the big deal about the gun having droop anyway. Bet most people would never know it if they shoot under 40 yards with a scope unless you have a weak shooting gun and using a heavy pellet.




        • GF1,

          Yes,… as “usual”,.. there is more than meets the eye. I agree with both comments. Drooper proned guns seem to be better left to open sights and closer rages and off hand,.. IMO.

          And I will say that Larry Mo’s comment seemed to refer to a simpler time and quality optics’ were not as common. In a time frame context,.. that makes sense. I however am not so sure that it fits so well in the current/today’s time context where quality and affordable optics are more common.


          • Chris U
            Ok glad you mentioned that because I was about Larry’s comment and open sights.

            Now let’s relate that to the scope with high scope rings I just mentioned. Didn’t you need higher rings on the LGU than what I had on it when you got the gun from me?

            Wasn’t that about fitting the gun to your hold while looking through the scope sight. Same thing ain’t it when you think about it.

            And you probably didn’t even need the drooper mount you put on it. All you probably needed was higher scope rings and you would of accomplished the same you did by adding the drooper mount with the same rings. The only thing the droop mount did was give you a place to position the rings differently to get your reticle centered more.

            You very well could of just put high rings with no drooper mount and would of been in the center of elevation adjustment. Or close to it. And the scope would of fit your hold better for cheek weld to line of sight. Right? You sure would have to put more down clicks in the scope with higher rings than you had without the drooper mount and lower rings.

            But got to go. Got t go in early tomorrow at work. I’ll read your reply tomorrow.


            • GF1,

              I am going to have to think on that high ring bit. It does not make any sense, but for now I will say OK.

              Just learning to shoot again for the first time, in a long time, yes, I did some playing around with height. In the end, both scopes ended up real close to barrel, so height was never the issue.

              As for the drooper mounts, I did not care the 11mm mount and (preferred) the Weaver/Picty. style mounts. They are both springers, so I figured I would get the adapter which gave me the mounts I wanted,.. and at the same time gave me some elevation “insurance”.

              Regardless of how the story started, that is how it ended.


              • Chris U
                Check out what long range shooters do that only shoot out at longer distances. They usually use higher scope rings so they don’t have to dail in alot of up adjustment.

                Back to the drooper mount. It’s simple. What does the reticle do with a drooper mount or a high scope ring. It raises the back of the scope higher away from the barrel. What happens when you put shims under your scope on the rear ring.

                Making more sense now?


                • GF1,

                  You are mixing (drooper mounts), (high rings) and (front) and (rear sights) all in the (same) explanation?

                  We were talking droop and then you went to high rings. Droop is droop,… you are going to need some rear high/front lower scope set up to get past that. And yes, the M-rod and Maximus are both shimmed at the rear for (no other reason) than some elevation “insurance”. Nothing else. Both are straight rings and no adapter mount, droop compensated or not.

                  For me,.. I am not going to give it much more thought. I have no plans on buying anything drooper “prone” in the near future. That is just “me”.


                  • Chris U
                    Ok then explain to me why you used a drooper mount on a LGU that doesn’t have known droop.

                    I remember why. I think we had a conversation about why you chose a drooper mount on it.

                    Do you have any notes on that. I’m betting it will come back to you if you do.

                    Just a little reminder. Staying in the center of the objective lens to the ocular lens. And why we wanted to keep them in line with the line of sight.

                    You remembering now?


                    • GF1,

                      To be honest, long 30 hr. week and a bit tired. I am drawing a blank.

                      Early on, I realized that shimming the rear, or a drooper mount, will insure that the scope does not get adjusted too high. That point,.. and the fact that I wanted Weaver/Pic. style mounts is the (only) reason that I went to that set up on the TX and LGU. I am not sure what you remember.


                  • Chris U
                    Remember wanting to keep your sight picture true to center also so when you held over or under so you didn’t get that faded not sharp focus with the scope.

                    Look at the reticle out towards your out diameter of the ocular lens. Do you have a sharp picture or is shadowed or look like a glare.

                    Well that very well can be from not having a drooper mount.

                    And yes it does sound like been kind of tired lately. Seems like you don’t have the same old same old in your comments any more.

                    Or maybe it’s just me. Getting to much rest. 😉


                    • GF1,

                      I am fine,… I just do not have as many questions as in the past. I am an “early to bed and early to rise” type. Hit me up at 4AM!!!!!,… and (at least) one cup of coffee,… and the “fight” is on!,.. in (full) force! 😉

                      Hey,… you DID get me exploring that whole “O-ring thing” on the ocular lens “thing”. I am not holding my breath,… but more than a few of your “wonky” ideas have worked out in the past. 🙂

                      Out’a here,…. Chris


                  • Chris U
                    I get up every working morning at 3:45 am.

                    I don’t read the blog when I get up. I do read it when I get to work and we’re all sitting around to stalking before our shift starts. So when I post I’m done at work.

                    All that doesn’t matter anyway.

                    And hey you ain’t working tomorrow are ya. Going to sleep early. So you getting up early tomorrow. I am. Now time to work around the house.

                    It just never ends till it finally ends I guess. But darn anyway. You know I’ll be shooting tomorrow when I’m done with the other stuff.


              • Chris U
                Also to add to the conversation.

                What happens when you click up adjustment in the rear sight on open sight guns. It moves farther away from the barrel.

                And back to scopes. Remember I just mentioned the other day about the rear ocular lens on a scope moving around when you grab it and move it side to side or up and down. Same thing if the reticle is changing location at the rear of the scope it could change your impact point.

                And back to BB. I understand the point he’s trying to make about scope reticle float if adjusted to high. But what I’m saying on what I was trying to explain to you. Raising the scope or raising the rear of the scope will make you aim higher. Remember those adjustable scope rings RidgeRunner has been talking about.


          • Chris USA
            After inferring from Robert Law’s (not Beeman’s) reference to barrel droop and BB’s history with Diana rifles, (how many years ago was it BB went head to head with Diana Rep’s about their barrel droop?) that air rifles are more commonly shot with open sights and that scopes on air rifles are mostly a ‘Murican thang’, Diana has found their winning formula and the Yankees can stuff it. (Would any of our European friends please jump in here and set me straight if I’m wrong!)
            Also, I don’t know about simpler times, I’ve been simple all of my life ;-). Also, while there may not have been as many options for scopes, there were some really excellent optics available – a big problem being that scope manufactures were just coming around to realizing Americans were putting scopes on air rifles and their scopes were being destroyed. Tasco was a big leader on catching on – I had a great Tasco set up on my custom FWB 124 by ARH.
            Larry in Algona


            • Larry
              I did say Dr. Beeman didn’t I.

              But yep if I reference my ARH catalog. You didn’t see much at all about scopes for air guns.

              I know back in the late 60’s and early 70’s I never thought about scopes. Not even on my old Winchester 190 I got for Christmas when I was 10 years old in 71.

              How about the accuracy tunes they offered for the guns they were selling. Each gun had at least a 1-1/2 to 2 page discription about the gun being sold.

              Plus some nice black and white pictures and articles of plinking at home with air guns. Plus one picture from another article in the same catalog shows them plinking down a hill with a Dodge Daytona in the back ground.

              Never even would imagine how much nostalgia is in those catalogs until I went looking for my catalog I misplaced in a move about 11 years ago. When I found it I was so happy.


              • Gunfun1 – ah, nostalgia! You brought up even more. I used to have a Dodge Daytona. The catalogs I’m yearning for are the old Herter’s – old George was a hoot but he sold me on his Improved Bowie knife and other equipment. I still have a copy of The Professional Guides Manual. (I’ll have to review the “Sioux Indian Method for skinning rabbits and squirrel, and making pond scum soup.)
                Back on the scope thing, I really do wish some of our European readers would give us some insight on how popular scoped springers are compared to here in the US. Your air and gas bloated rifles would be a different story, of course.
                Larry in Algona



                  • Larry
                    What was your handle when you started reading the blog if I can ask?

                    Seems like you use to comment possibly under a different handle. Or maybe I’m just being crazy.


                    • Gunfun1
                      I’m pretty sure I didn’t make any comments before what you’ve seen fairly recently. Also, at the time B.B. welcomed me to the blog and he seems to be excellent at keeping tabs on contributors to the blog, as far as if it’s their first entry or not.
                      I have been reading the blog for nigh on a year and a half – being determined to catch up to the most current blog before making a contribution.
                      But then, I could be crazy, too. I know I have a propensity for doing things and forgetting that I done them – I refer to these as my “senor moments”.
                      Larry in Algona


                  • Larry
                    Well it seems you remember things from the last year and a half pretty well then. 🙂

                    And remember 55 is considered a senior at places. Just say’n. 😉


                • Larry
                  Ain’t going to get into muscle cars again. Talked about them here on the blog more than everybody likes to hear. I’m sure.

                  And you know the reason why scopes weren’t as demanding in them days.

                  Maybe something like the general public just didn’t have extra left over spending money. Plus the scopes of the day didn’t have the optics available we have today.

                  And most people learned open sights back then because it was just what was. Pretty much like people think scopes now days. Once you get accustomed to something the comfortable thing happens.

                  Then it’s hard to change because you know how you can do with what you have.


            • Larry,

              I have been pretty simple all my life too. In fact, the simpler, the better. I (might?) have over reacted on your comment,.. but when I read it,.. it was like a “light” went off. I have heard the topic discussed many times and your comment was the only one that ever made any sense.

              Ok. If Diana wants to say “stuff it”,… then fine. They do not seem to be hurting on the sales end of things if I had to guess. And, there is always “drooper” mounts for scope-ish inclined. Why change?

              Still, (thank you) for your comment. I like to know the “why’s and how’s” of things. Your comment just hit a solid note with me.

              Chris

              Chris




                • GF1,

                  You? Muscle cars? Yea,… too much! Too much,.. only because I am jealous! 🙂

                  Your comment makes sense and is also what I eluded to my comment to Larry.

                  I am not so sure that that sticking with “old school” thought is the best going forward. The future, or (present), has a way of catching up and squishing you like an undesirable insect if you know what I mean. Just saying,… if I were Diana,.. I would be thinking of some re-tooling,… more than a few years ago.


                  • Chris U
                    But think of it in their point of view.

                    Probably scopes ain’t been that popular over there like it has been here. Just saying. Don’t know for sure.

                    But if their guns work fine with open sights why would they want to spend extra money on engineering costs and tooling and setup and machines and tooling and such if it works fine like it has for years.

                    Diana does make fine air guns. Pretty quality minded if I say so myself from the guns I had made by them.

                    And really like BB said his gun that he had was a extreme case of drooping. Others he seen wasn’t that bad. And he mentioned also all Diana’s don’t have droop.

                    The thing is you got into shooting with scopes. And from what it sounds like you have no intention of exploring open sights.

                    All I want to know is why you don’t learn them. Maybe it would help with your thought on barrel droop and how that type of sighting really can be used at multiple kinds of distances from long range to in close. But of course then maybe a study of European air gun culture is in store.

                    Once you start researching it you will find that they are very serious air gun shooters. For one they have to be. Some of the places don’t allow Firearms. They can only shoot air guns. So right there that tells me that they need to know what their doing with that air gun in their hand.

                    Open up is all I can say.


                    • GF1,

                      I have nothing against open sights. Nothing I have has them except the 75th Red Ryder and that is just a wee-tad small for me. The Maximus would have been a fun one to play with on open sights, but I did not get that model.

                      I am not going to go out and buy something new just to try open sights. I do love the peepers on the 499 though. I am surprised that since you have “powered down” a bit, that you have not picked one up yet. Toss in a Red Ryder spring and it just might become your new favorite plinker.



  7. B.B.,

    If a low-pressure gas piston air rifle is remarkably smooth shooting and easy cocking but no one makes them, are there air rifles with gas pistons that are adjustable for pressure? One could just let a little gas out, like some folks do with their tires before driving to work the first snowy morning of the season.

    If not, are there lower-pressure pistons available that can be put into rifles to make them smoother?

    If not, is there a way to shorten the stroke of an existing gas piston powerplant?

    Michael

    Michael


Leave a Reply