The Diana 27: Part 3

by Tom Gaylord
Writing as B.B. Pelletier

Diana 27
My .22 caliber Diana 27 is actually a Hy Score 807.

Part 1
Part 2

A history of airguns

This report covers:

  • The test
  • Eye report
  • RWS Superdomes
  • Some questions arise
  • RWS Superpoints
  • The artillery hold
  • Summary
  • MP40
  • Second time was the trick

Before I begin, someone asked about Rich Shar. He’s the guy who smoothes the biggest spring guns like the big Gamos and Hatsans. Rich tells me he has not been working on guns for awhile, but he does have a project in the works. He promises to tell me more about it. Now, on to today’s report.

I have decided to take my Diana 27 apart and clean out the old grease, then relubricate it with Almagard 3752 grease, to see what difference it might make. But not today. Today will be a traditional Part 3 accuracy test.

The disassembly and relubrication will probably take me two reports, just to get the kind of detail I’m looking for. And the accuracy shouldn’t change. Accuracy lives in the barrel. As long as the trigger isn’t too bad, the barrel is clean and all the screws are tight, the gun should be accurate no matter how it feels when fired.

The test

I shot the rifle rested directly on a sandbag at 10 meters. These were 10-shot groups, because the Diana 27 is a close range airgun. I normally shoot it at 25 to 50 feet. Anything longer is a real stretch, given the lower velocity.

It took 4 shots to sight in. I was surprised that the rifle was hitting high and to the left when I began. But when the elevation was lowered by 8 clicks the rounds also went to the right enough that I saw no need to adjust the windage.

Eye report

I had difficulty seeing the sights for last Friday’s test of the HW 85. Several readers gave me tips on what to do. Some of you newer readers will not remember that back in 2010 I was very ill with pancreatitis. I was hospitalized for 3-1/2 months. A drain was put into a pseudocyst on my pancreas at the first hospital, and it was in me for 7 months. To remove it, my spleen and a third of my pancreas were removed. That gave me type one diabetes, which started my eye problems. For 6 months I had to wear reading glasses to see the sights. Reader Halfstep suggested I do that again.

Reader Michael wondered whether I might have “dry eye,” where not enough lubrication gets secreted onto the eyeballs. I do have it, and thanks to my eye doctor I use eye drops 4 times a day. But maybe I should put some in just before this test.

I did both things and am happy to report they worked. There will be no excuses for this day’s shooting!

RWS Superdomes

The first pellets I tested were RWS Superdomes. Ten of them went into 0.757-inches at 10 meters. The group is a little horizontal, but since I don’t have much experience with this pellet in this rifle I don’t know what to say about it.

Diana 27 Superdome group
The Diana 27 put 10 RWS Superdomes into 0.757-inches at 10 meters.

Some questions arise

You might wonder a couple things at this point. Last Friday I made a big deal of only checking the HW85 at 10 meters, but getting serious at 25 yards. Today I’m accepting 10 meters as the accuracy test. That is because the HW85 is capable of shooting at longer distances. The 27 is a close-in air rifle.

I’m also accepting a 0.757-inch group without a lot of fuss, when for the 85 I pitched a fit with groups half that large. That’s because I expected a lot more from the 85. This 27 is my plinking buddy and the expectations are more relaxed. Also, these are 10-shot groups and the others were only half that. That said, I thought the rifle should do a little better than three-quarters of an inch!

RWS Superpoints

RWS Superpoints are my go-to pellets for this rifle. I like them for their thin skirts that seem to fit the bore very well. This time 10 of them went into 0.699-inches at 10 meters. The group looks a lot smaller than the first one. That’s because Superpoints tear the target paper and their holes aren’t as clean.

Diana 27 Superpoint group
Ten RWS Superpoints made this 0.699-inch group at 10 meters.

At this point I would normally load a different pellet and shoot a third group, but I’m going to do something different today. I have been resting the rifle directly on the sandbag for these first two groups. Some of you may wonder how it would do with the artillery hold. I did, too, so I tried that next, by resting the forearm on my off hand, out by the start of the cocking slot.

The artillery hold

Ten rounds of RWS Superpoints fired using the artillery hold went into 0.911-inches at 10 meters. That’s pretty convincing evidence that the 27 does best when rested directly on a sandbag.

Diana 27 Superpoint group 2
When I used an artillery hold 10 RWS Superpoints made a 0.911-inch group at 10 meters.

Summary

That was a quickie test of the Diana 27. Next time I will take it apart so we can look inside. However today’s report isn’t finished.

MP40

Reader Halfstep asked me to try the Umarex MP40 on full auto with Hornady Black Diamond BBs again and try to hold it steady this time. Last time I said it got away from me in full auto. He is interested in it and wants to know if it’s really that accurate.

I set up the range and shot two 10-shot groups of Black Diamonds on full auto. This was at 5 meters, like before. I used the UTG Monopod and held the gun tightly. My eyes were also clear for this test.

Second time was the trick

The first group is 8 shots in a 0.62-inch group, with two more that opened it to 2.708-inches. The tight main group told me this BB wants to shoot in full auto, so I shot a second group of 10. All 10 of those were in 1.183-inches, which is the best you are going to get from me today.

Umarex MP40 group 1
Eight of the 10 BBs went into 0.62-inches at 5 meters. The other 2 opened it to 2.708-inches. This shows promise!

Umarex MP40 group 2
This time all 10 stayed together in a 1.183-inch group.

I hope this shows you what you wanted to see.

30 thoughts on “The Diana 27: Part 3

  1. B.B.,

    Nice report. I like that phrase that the accuracy lives in the barrel. I do admit curiosity regarding the state of the previous lubrication done so many years ago and what possible improvement could be seen after replacing the old lubricant with a modern grease.

    Minor editing at the Eye report section. 2nd sentence: Several readers gace (gave) and third sentence: Some of you newer readers will not remember that back in 2010 I was very ill with pancreatitus (pancreatitis).

    Siraniko


  2. Yup the barrel.
    I am still amazed at how fast the pellet spins on its axis….

    -Y

    Maybe instead of FPS velocities should also have NRS, Number of Revolutions per Second?


  3. BB,

    Thanks for the retest with Black Diamonds. It tells me what I need to know about the MP40, that being that it belongs at the top of my Xmas list !! Now if I can just stay off the “Naughty” list ’til then…..

    Glad the eyeglass suggestion helped.



  4. B.B.,

    Thanks for both for reporting back on Mr. Shar for doing a double report today by testing the Black Diamonds again.

    Those who’ve shot the Walther LGV, I have a small favor to ask. A few weeks ago many here offered me advice on my barely-fired Walther LGV that came new to me 3-4 years ago with a loud buzz (actually a BINNGZZ).

    This fellow’s Walther LGV makes the SAME EXACT SOUND in his online video. Turn the volume way up, and listen carefully from 8:43 to 9:52. (Obnoxious music warning: do NOT listen to the earlier part of the video at loud volume.)

    Does your LGV sound like THIS? (again, 8:43 – 9:52)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JPqfvHBEQc

    Michael


  5. B.B., Gunfun1, Decksniper and Chris USA,

    I must confess yesterday I discovered a probable error in testing my Gamo Recon G2 Whisper recently. Two weekends ago I shot it at 15 yards. Last weekend I shot it at 22 yards. Or so I might have, but I now have serious doubts about that.

    From my regular bench rest shooting position on my patio I face a berm at the edge of our property. I have orange tent stakes driven flush into the ground at 5, 10, 15, and 20 yards. To get 25 yards I must position my bench at the corner of the house and make myself visible from the street. So instead I settle for 22 yards from the farthest position that still affords privacy.

    Yesterday I think I discovered, well I’m about 90 percent decided, that I shot with the targets at the wrong tent stake. I believe I shot at roughly 17 yards, not 22 as I thought. :^( VERY depressing, and emabarrassing to admit, but there it is.

    Therefore, I need to try again and make certain it is at 22 yards, but it will have to wait until next weekend.

    Michael



      • B.B.,

        Thanks so very much for your encouragement. It means a lot, especially coming from you.

        Some days you’re the pellet; some days you’re the spinner! ;^)

        Michael



    • Michael,

      No problem. I am quick to admit mistakes when I make them. I have right here on more than one occasion. That is one thing about the blog,.. I think we all trust each other’s comments. Plus, we can all discuss things and still have different opinions without anyone getting defensive or offensive.

      Shoot whatever is easiest for you. 5 yards will not make that much of a difference.


      • Shooting at 20 yards is easy for me to set up, just shoot from my patio table/shooting bench to a target I set out where I have a tent stake flush with the ground at 20 yards. I also have one at 15 yards, 10 yards and five yards. I mistook the 15 yard one for 15 yards. (They’re all orange plastic.)

        To make it 22 yards, I have to move my patio table/shooting bench. So I moved my bench for the extra two yards, but I put my target at the 15 yard mark, not the 20 yard mark. So I shot at about 17 yards while I thought I was shooting at 22 yards.

        From now on I’ll shoot 10 meters indoors and 15 and 20 yards outdoors. Keep it simple.

        Michael


        • Uh, correction. I mistook the 15 yard marker for the 20 yard marker. Bottom line is I thought I was shooting from five yards farther than I was, which is depressing.

          You know how you feel when you find money in your pocket you forgot was there? This was like reaching for money you though was in your pocket but then remembered you spent. :^(

          Michael


  6. Hello B.B.,
    You specifically mentioned a clean barrel yet you rarely talk about cleaning barrels anymore as you did in older reports. Especially after retuning a gun, I think it is important to clean out any gunk and excess lube that has been blown into the rifling grooves over years of previous service. And what about cleaning the barrels of new guns? What happened to that practice of brushing with good ol’ JB bore paste?


  7. I think that pinpoint accuracy of full-auto is not that important and even antithetical to an extent. When you cut loose, you don’t want to see a single hole. You want coverage. Maybe I’m thinking of a scene from the Sam Peckinpah film Iron Cross where a German unit is under attack on the Eastern Front. Finally some men get to an MG42 machine gun that had been disabled, resume firing and fill a whole field with the puffs of bullet strikes, ending the attack. When I had my full-auto M4 airsoft rifle, I liked to make some bushes thrash under the impact, until I realized how much money I was spending.

    Gunfun1, I don’t know that snipers try to walk their bullets onto a target. Concealment is a big part of sniping and once you start shooting your cover is blown, or at least the target knows to take cover making things more difficult. The Bill Dixon Indians were an exception. I thought the cold-bore first shot was the ideal. I was actually reading a memoir of a Navy SEAL whose unit was tasked with a surprise night-time training mission to discover the maximum distance where they would be guaranteed to make a first shot hit. The answer turned out to disappointing (to them). It was about 500 yards in those conditions.

    Matt61


    • Matt61
      I think it would be more like the sniper would check his dope charts or notes from previous similar shots. Then make the shot. If the shot does not make that one shot one kill then he knows where the shot fell and correct.

      Most of the time a sniper can’t be seen. That’s also part of their knowledge as being a sniper. So as far as giving away position. More than likely even if they make that one first shot with their firearm they won’t be seen exactly as to where they are. They can probably make a follow up shot quicker than what the other person can find their location.

      That can go all kinds of ways. But for the most part they go by what has happened on previous missions and apply to the situation they are in. If it doesn’t make the hit. Then they adjust. That’s just what happens in war. Definitely nothing simple. I don’t think anyway.


    • Matt61
      Oh and the previous conversation the other day was about trying to adjust for wind holds.

      So in regard to that I brought up the point that it would take one shot to see where it actually fell verses trying to guess a windage hold by how wind blows.


  8. Matt61,

    I thought the same. Doing a “test” shot would give away your position,… or at the very least send your desired target(s) scrambling for cover. Dense cover or buildings, densely and variedly positioned would be a benefit and cast doubt to the enemy. Well hidden, Gunfun’s comment makes sense, but I would sure want to make sure that I was. Quick/ready follow ups would be beneficial as well, I would think.

    That would really be something to do 1 test shot and then be dead on every shot after that,.. especially when talking hundreds of yards.

    Chris


Leave a Reply