by Tom Gaylord
Writing as B.B. Pelletier
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7
Beeman P1 air pistol.
This report covers:
- Disassembly
- Cleaning
- Lubrication and assembly
- Velocity — RWS Hobby pellets
- RWS R10 Match Pistol
- Sig Match Ballistic Alloy
- Crosman Premier Light
- Discussion
- What comes next?
Today is a big day. I cleaned the Tune in a Tube (TIAT) grease out of the Beeman P1 we are testing and lubricated it with plain white lithium grease. This will tell us whether TIAT is wrong for an air pistol like the P1 and also whether the pistol I’m testing is still in good shape.
Disassembly
I had the pistol apart and ready to clean in 15 minutes. The directions I gave you in Part 4 work perfectly. I’m not showing any pictures of that today because Part 4 nailed it.
Cleaning
I will say this, TIAT is very sticky stuff! It took longer to clean than I anticipated. Everything had to be wiped dry. That stuff really clings! All I did was wipe it all away with paper towels so the gun was dry and ready for the new grease.
Lubrication and assembly
Cleaning and assembly took 40 minutes, with cleaning and lubrication taking half that time. I used the same hand held trigger clamp that I used the last time, instead of the drill press idea we learned from Gene Salvino. The reason? I didn’t want to take the time to learn a new way. This time I was able to get the mainspring back in the powerplant and secured with the pin in two attempts that took a total of 5-7 minutes.
As the parts went back into the pistol I lubricated them with white lithium grease very sparingly. This grease spreads out very fast and covers everything. I was surprised at how little was needed. I have been using a military grease that was made for for the M1 Garand rifle. It’s lithium-based, but it is a formulation that is thicker than the stuff I used on the P1 today. I will have to get familiar with this grease.
Velocity — RWS Hobby pellets
Okay, the pistol is back together and I will shoot the same pellets as both times before, and in the same order. I will show all three sets of velocities, with today’s tune numbers on the right, under the lithium column. The first pellet tested is the RWS Hobby .
Before………………..After…………Lithium
Hi…..Lo……….…..Hi…..Lo………..Hi…..Lo
541…423…………436…336…….…536…424
As you can see, the P1 is back! I really don’t need to test any further to know that TIAT grease is not necessary for the Beeman P1 pistol. It fixes a problem that doesn’t really exist. But you readers paid for a complete test and that’s what you will get.
The velocity spread on low power was 17 f.p.s. — from 418 to 435 f.p.s. On high it was 15 f.p.s. — from 531 to 546 f.p.s. That’s a tighter spread on both power settings than with TIAT, which were 38 on low and 24 f.p.s. on high.
RWS R10 Match Pistol
Next up was the RWS R10 Match Pistol pellet that was the fastest lead pellet in all the tests. Let’s look at the results.
Before………………..After…………Lithium
Hi…..Lo……….…..Hi…..Lo………..Hi…..Lo
578…457…………474…382…….…574…468
Same as the first time, before the TIAT. Yes the numbers are slightly different, but they always will be. The P1 is right back to where it was.
The velocity spread on low power was 9 f.p.s. (462 to 471 f.p.s.) and on high it was 8 f.p.s, (570 to 578 f.p.s.). With TIAT the spreads were 7 and 14 f.p.s., respectively.
Sig Match Ballistic Alloy
The next pellet to be tested was the Sig Match Ballistic Alloy. These lead-free pellets are lighter and will always be faster than lead.
Before………………..After…………Lithium
Hi…..Lo……….…..Hi…..Lo………..Hi…..Lo
649…478…………469…328…….…612…471
These velocities are slightly slower than the first time but significantly faster than when the gun was lubed with TIAT. The spread on low was 10 f.p.s. (466-476 f.p.s.) and on high it was 20 f.p.s.(602-622 f.p.s.). With TIAT the low spread was 86 f.p.s. and the high was 25 f.p.s. The P1 is slightly slower than on the first test but a good deal more stable than it was with TIAT.
Crosman Premier Light
The last pellet I tested is one I didn’t try before lubing with TIAT — the Crosman Premier 7.9-grain pellet. I don’t have the numbers from the dry pistol. However, given the results of the other three pellets I think those numbers in a dry gun would be pretty close to what I got in this test.
Before………………..After…………Lithium
Hi…..Lo……….…..Hi…..Lo………..Hi…..Lo
NA…NA…….……393…291…….…478…364
Although there are no velocity figures from the dry gun to compare to, we can look at the spreads since switching from TIAT. This time the low spread was 15 f.p.s. (357 to 372 f.p.s.) and the high was 21 f.p.s. (464 to 485 f.p.s.). With TIAT the low spread was 23 f.p.s. and on high it was 16 f.p.s.
Discussion
I will summarize the entire test by saying it was right to just remove the TIAT and lubricate with lithium. Getting any deeper into all the numbers doesn’t help very much when all we have are these few data. I think everyone will agree the P1 is back to normal.
TIAT grease is miraculous in many ways, but when a spring gun like the P1 is already running at its ragged edge for performance, it’s not the way to go. As I said, it solved a problem that didn’t actually exist.
So, how does the pistol now shoot? Well it’s a bit harsher when it fires, but that’s understandable. It does not buzz, and we now can rest assured that the piston seal and breech seal are doing their jobs. It’s just quicker when it fires now than it was when lubed with TIAT — especially on high power! Cocking seems a bit harder than before, but it’s not that different than my other P1. This one always was just a bit harder to cock.
Next
Now I can test those things you readers asked for — accuracy with sorted pellets and others. There is more in store for our P1. Stay tuned!
BB
Sounds like good news. And I was going to ask how the shot cycle was. Sounds like it still is not bad.
Now I’m waiting for group shooting time.
B.B.,
With the tight fitting airguns I now understand why former reader Dom kept protesting with the use of greases to minimize vibrations. Seems like the tighter the tolerances you have the less lubrication is needed. Fitment is more critical in these low powered airguns to produce power. So any excess lubrication to dampen vibration affects them a lot.
Would moly paste been a viable alternative to white Lithium grease in this case?
Having taken out the Piston and relubing with white Lithium do you need to reseat the Piston seal by dry firing it again?
Siraniko
Siraniko,
I think the results with moly would depend on the grease vehicle the moly is in. Some are viscous and others are less so.
I looked at the piston seal and pronounced it good to go. It reshapes itself in use, too, so I think it will be fine.
B.B.
BB,
Quite a dramatic change in velocities. I will most definitely have to keep this in mind when I replace the piston seal on the Webley.
By the way, under the “Velocity – RWS Hobby Pellets” you stated the lithium results were on the left. I think you meant right. In the next paragraph down “I really don’t need to test ‘amny’ further…”
RR,
Got them. Thanks,
B.B.
BB,
Very nice. Looking forwards to the next phase of testing. The topic of sorting (works?/does not work?/ don’t know) is always a good one.
After a good bout of weighing and head sorting myself, I have pretty much come to the conclusion that I cannot shoot well enough to tell the differences. I do believe that anything to eliminate variables is good and ideally should be done, especially if one can perceive positive benefits.
Chris
Off today’s topic, more related to the PCP regulators/power adjusters and valve tunes really,… but the Pumpkin’ Chuckin’ (massive) air cannons are a real hoot to watch. Now that! is the ultimate in air gunning! Launching pumpkins hundreds of yards through the air. “Bill,… I think that you should use a 75 foot hold over on that 1,200 yard shot,.. just sayin’,.. if it was me”. 😉
Someone mentioned air cannons very recently, I think?, but I failed to find the post in a quick search, so I thought that I would toss it out there again.
Chris, I went to do a search on what you talked about here, but I was typing too fast, and wrote ‘chunkin’ instead of ‘chuckin,’ but my google search on ‘youtube pumpkin chunkin’ turned up this great video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmSyrGsqmg8
Air cannons…they’re airguns; they fit in with this blog…they’re also way cool!
Thanks for bringing this subject up! =D
Oh wait, I forgot to include a pic with the specs; airgunners love specs; here is the air cannon known as the Second Amendment. =)
Dave,
🙂 I said that they were a tad bid on the “BIG” side. It has been awhile since I have seen the show. With online, I suppose that missing something does not matter as much as it used to.
Oh,.. and I meant to finish the next sentence when Bill responds:
“Now Frank,… we just went over this. There is 9 feet added to the barrel,.. we added that 3 foot extension of slow spiral corrugated culvert to the end, which ought to act like a smooth twist,… we upped the tank another 2,000 psi and I adjusted the valve dwell another 2 seconds!”. “60 feet hold over should be just fine as we now have a flatter trajectory”. 😉
Very cool stuff!
Yes! Way cool, for sure!
Chris,
I think that was me that mentioned the air cannon physics.
Try this search “physics of a pneumatic airgun”
It may depend on what search engine you are using they do affect what you find.
I usually just look at the graphs and pictures, high math always gives me a headache.
Don
Don,
I must admit that I get in over my head pretty quickly on high math. Not that I do not like it, I do. I like math in general, but just never learned the mid/top end stuff.
Picked up the .22 2240 at Wally world today. It got there in 24 hrs. as opposed to the advertised 48. I am happy. I like pick up options, especially if it’s a work week. It is a brass bolt and black trigger version. With a $50 gift card, I added $14.04, so that is what it cost total.
I loaded a Co2 and fired 4 shots. (Wally’s Crosman Hollow Points in 14.3 grain) The sights are absolutely worthless to me. I like it and it fits my big hand well. Near perfect in fact. Feel’s nice. Trigger seems ok too. Looking forwards to getting started on a build. No rush though as I want to take my time and explore options. That can take a bit, but I do have some stuff saved to look over. No lack of “stuff” for them. 😉
B.B.,
Using white lithium grease on a dry spring in a powerful air gun seems like a 180 degree shift in approach from using tar. That was also true with your artillery hold, so perhaps this could be a revelation, too.
A couple questions:
Is white lithium grease dieseling and detonation prone?
In an airgun with a dry mainspring that is twangy and buzzy, would white lithium grease be an option, or would a tar-like grease such as TIAT still be the go-to treatment? (I’m thinking specifically of my twangy/buzzy Walther LGV, which probably has a dry powerplant but tight tolerances.)
Michael
Michael,
So far the lithium hasn’t detonated.
In a buzzy airgun TIAT is the way to go. Tight guns and buzzy are almost mutually exclusive, so buzzy guns still get TIAT. Yes for your LGV. If it buzzes, it isn’t tight.
B.B.
BB
Maybe still yet on a tight gun a light coating of tune in a tube would work and not slow the gun down.
And on another thought. Maybe a bit heavier of a coating of the white lithium grease would work on a buzzy gun.
I myself have had good luck with white lithium grease on either type of guns mentioned.
B.B.,
I believe YOU, but the braintrust at Umarex USA disagrees with you. Back on 10/3 my “mysterious” LGV was discussed in the comments section.
On 11/2 I reported back: “I sent my like-new Walther LGV to Umarex USA last week to have it looked at under the warrantee against defects, and they called an hour or so ago to tell me the air rifle has their clean bill of health. They did not say whether or not they opened it up, just that it was ‘performing normally,’ and ‘vibration and buzzing like that is normal for an air rifle shooting around nineteen joules. If you wish to quiet it down, you could have us lower the power to about sixteen. Then it would be smoother. At that power, though, that twang is normal.'”
I thanked them and declined, preferring to just have them ship it back to me as it has been.”
Now I am on vacation, and during the next week or so I will open up an air rifle for the first time and discover (I hope) why my (essentially new) Walther LGV is the twangiest air gun I’ve ever shot. It makes my Compasseco-era Industry air rifle seem like my TX200 by comparison.
If I do find a defect, it will not be covered by Umarex’ warrantee because I will have opened up the rifle, but what choice do I have?
Michael
Tom ,
Glad You used TIAT on the pistol . Yes the P1 is too tight of a piston to bore fit for it. White Lithium used to be my go to until We discovered the TIAT . Another way to do a P1 is too use Synthetic gear oil on the piston and grease on the spring guide. This is the best of both worlds , You get piston velocity and the grease dampens the vibrations. Lithium grease is not prone to detonation , gear oil is ! It must be used only as a film , not too wet. Michael , tight guns are less buzzy due to less oscillation on the guide , loose guns buzz more ! Loose guns get way more out of TIAT than a tighter gun. My 2 cents for today .
Gene,
I have a Walther LGV that must oscillate more than my Fluke PM3382! ;^)
Michael
Gene,
Thanks for that!
B.B.
BB,
Off topic.
Thanks everyone for the reactions and the video referrals. I am late in reading them as I had no time yesterday anymore.
The regulator in the video looks more like something which delivers fixed portions of low pressure air downstream and has thus two functions. Is that intentional?
Regards,
August
B.B.,
I never would have guessed the P1 would merit 8+ blog entries; just goes to show.
I had an opportunity to shoot at 50 yards without leaving home. I just had to look at things differently. At any rate I set out to see what I could do with my Crosman NP .177 break barrel rifle. All shots done with Crosman Premier Copper Magnum 10.5 gr. domed pellets. It was a about 60% with no wind. Drizzle was the precipitation for the day.
I had shot a 3 short group inside a nickel at a measured 20 yards. I was happy with that because I felt that everything had come together for that, I had shot the best I could for each of those three shots.
Today, I set out to see what the rifle and I could do at 50 yards. I believe it was actually somewhere between 48 and 50 yards. A laser range finder is now on my wish list.
I shot for the black center of an orange, 3 inch, Birchwood Casey Target Spot. I shot several shots. I was surprised at the results. Aiming for the center I placed 5 pellets in the bottom left quadrant of the circle. Hitting the orange circle at all was the first surprise.
Five more shots hit on the cusp of the bottom left quadrant and 5 more hit just off the cuff of the bottom left quadrant. All of the shots in or just off the bottom left quadrant fit inside a 2.25 inch circle.
The were 7 more shots within the lines that denote the bottom left quadrant. The spread goes to 4 inches when they are counted.
There was 1 shot in the orange of the bottom right quadrant and 2 more outside in the bottom right quadrant.
A couple more that make the spread become astronomical and that’s it.
Considering I am sighted for 20 yards and shooting at about 2.5 times that distance, I am surprised. Regardless of the spread, I anticipated all shots to hit lower than they did. One other surprise is that all pellets shot through both walls of the corrugated cardboard box which is about 1 foot deep. I found no evidence of hits on the brick wall and I found no pellets, but that could be because the box sat atop rocks.
This definitely gives me something think about.
BTW, some time ago I mentioned my consideration of parallax correction and magnification. What I learned from a careful consideration is that for an x magnification value, once the focus was set using the parallax adjustment things remained stable, or very nearly so, for various magnification adjustments. But what I learned lately about the varying mildot values for different magnification values offers more grist for the mill.
Thank you for all you have done for the air gun sport, B.B.; you are not the only one but you are a very significant one.
~ken
Ken,
I think that you may already know this,.. but you will hit the bull at 2 points in the trajectory. The near zero and the far zero. For some of my guns, that can be 10 yards (near) to around 38 yards (far),… ish. So, the fact that you hit close may not be such of a surprise.
Chris,
You are correct, of course, about the two zeros. My surprise is that the 10.5 grain pellets hit as high as they did. After I posted I remembered that our British friends are shooting sub 12fpe rifles. I don’t know how much lower my pellets would have hit at 60 meters. All things considered, my biggest surprise was the number of pellets I put inside a 2.25 inch circle. Makes me think I am improving my performance. Whether I can find pellets that favor this rifle, I don’t know, nor do I know whether the rifle will favor any particular pellet. Many folks here and that I know in person have many tins and boxes of pellets. That will take me a while.
Thanks, for writing.
~ken
Ken,
Improvement is good. Good to see you posting more,… at least I think anyways. I always look forward to reading your post. They have always seemed,… uh,… very thoughtful,… which I admire. 🙂
Ken
When you shoot 3 shots only at 20 yards and get a good group, you are setting yourself up for a big disappointment at 50 yards .
I picked up a tin of those copper coated pellets and found them to be seriously egg shaped . Nowhere near round.
tt
TT
Trick question here. Did you use the pellet gauge to find out if they were egg shaped?
GF
Trick answer..
Calipers with roll, lift, roll, lift method.
tt
TT
Yep same here. Exactly how I check too.
Twotalon,
I was surprised my hits were as good as they were. I have had little chance to shoot past 30 yards. Perhaps there is another pellet this rifle will favor. I will see about at least getting some tins of pellets that are in B.B.’s top 5, or your top five. Unless I hit the lottery big time, my acquiring of various pellet types will be slow. However, it seems I am improving my part so I may do well to at least try more pellets.
Thank you, Art
~ken
Ken
I usually end up with JSB or H&N . Sometimes Crosman .
Some rifles have a very limited selection they like, while others digest several kinds well .
Usually, NO gimmick pellets or wadcutters . Round nose only . And lead only .
The distance you shoot at could give best results with one pellet, while a change in distance could favor a different one.
Wind gets into the mix too . Best pellet in the wind is not always best in calm air . There are tradeoffs to be considered .
Some times, you find a pellet that should be wrong for your rifle, but does the best . You never know.
A lot of times, polishing the bore with JB Bore Brite will improve the accuracy quite a bit . You need to work from the breech end, or risk messing up the muzzle . The kind of rifle you have will dictate if this can be effectively be done.
tt
B.B.,
On a 2240, or similar pistol, I see that there is extended bolts offered. From what I can gather, these would only seat the pellet deeper in the breech. Is that the purpose, or am I missing something else altogether?
Chris
Chris,
I think they mean extended bolt handle. The probe has to stay the same to be able to load the gun.
B.B.
B.B.,
Thank you. With all due respect, the “nose” of the bolt that contacts the pellet is longer. Just now, I was looking more and it did state that it does seat the pellet deeper. It supposedly seats the pellet past the port and gives more consistent shots. ? When it comes to modding a 13XX or 22XX, the options are mind numbing. So I am just at the cusp of my learning.
Looking forwards to Hiveseeker’s blog where he will touch on modifications,… over and above what he has already done.
Thanks again, Chris
Chris
Have you found any barrels for sale that are shorter than the Discovery or Maximus barrel that will fit the 2240 or 1322/77’s?
You know you can’t buy custom shop barrels unless you get a custom shop gun.
And also just a note. You know they use different bolt probes for a .22 steel breech verses a .177 bolt probe steel breech.
GF1,
The site I sent you has about everything. Since we are talking a Maximus barrel, Crosman or another site looks like it. I would have to check again, but I think that they will take any stock barrel and cut it to a custom length. Yes, I am aware of the bolt,.. .22 vs .177. I need to call Crosman and also look at PA as to what cost what. The site I sent offers Crosman parts and also takes them and modifies them further. Plus, custom stuff.
What DID you get me into???? 😉
The breech, barrel and stock I have pretty well decided on. I have listed other items which I am still researching. (valves, ports, etc., etc.)
Chris
Yep I see now I must of missed it. Saw about 5 or so barrel lengths.
Didn’t catch anything on custom made lengths though.
It looks they are just buying barrels from Crosman guns parts diagrams. Basically they did the homework already for the part numbers and make them available.
And u didn’t see no 18″ barrels offered which I think is what everyone raves about.
GF1,
18″? Maybe. I thought that we had determined that the longer the better.
Like I said, still much to research. Maximus barrel is the plan now.
By the way, the 2240 has a screw right behind the breech, at the bottom of the loading port. I thought that was a disco feature. I do not see one on the Maximus. Maybe I have it backwards?
Chris
I don’t remember we determined that. I remember you asking about the longer barrels.
And that’s the screw location thing I’m talking about that is different in the Maximus, Discovery steel breech verses the Crosman steel breech PA sells that is a direct replacement for the 2240 and 1322/77’s.
The Maximus, Discovery breech is back so it don’t interfere with pellet loading. That’s the one I like and that’s the one I rely on the barrel band clamp to secure the front of the breech. But also the transfer port does help lock the barrel and breech together. The band clamp just holds it down for added assurance.
You know what’s funny. Is I talk about this stuff over and over and I think your getting it and find you really haven’t been???
Chris
Do this.
Get your Maximus and cock the bolt like your going to load a pellet.
Now take your 2240 and cock the bolt like your going to load the pellet.
See the screw in the 2240 where you are going to load the pellet. That’s the screw location I’m talking about.
GF1,
Maximus = no screw,… 2240 = screw. Got it. Verified it. I do not see the difference in loading. I do see the difference in transfer port clamping pressure.
If you say the Max./Disco breech works and you like it best, then I will lean that way.
What are saying???,… I am a little “thick” at times? Maybe. For now I am going to go with a bit overwhelmed. Out’a here.
Chris
The 2240 will tilt the pellet when the probe pushes it with the forward screw location. Makes it tricky to not nick up the pellet when loading.
The Maximus and Discovery breech has the screw. But it’s back under the bolt. So the pellet loading area is smooth all the way to the barrel. No hole for the pellet to fall in from that hole for the front screw like the 2240 has.
And yes u like the Discovery and Maximus breech.
And no not thick. It’s like you let it blow by you when you talk about something. Then all of a sudden when your into researching something you start asking about and into answers about we just discussed like the other day.
So yep some repeating going on here.
GF1,
This may sound stupid,.. but is there a mod. that will take a foster at the Co2 cap and basically just replace a Co2 cartridge with a HPA charge? Would it get the same shots as the Co2 cartridge?
Chris
I was waiting for that.
First would not be a big enough volume of air in a 12 gram cartridge to get more than probably 3 shots. Remember you would only be able to fill to the most around 1500 psi. And that would probably cause valve lock. So more like 1200 psi. Remember the factory 2240 is tuned for Co2 operating pressures. Around 1100 psi down to 700 psi roughly.
Here we go with our pcp tuning blog again. 😉
But do you remember me and Buldawg got some old 88 gram Co2 cartridge adapters for 1077’s that Crosman use to sale. We drilled and tapped the bottom of the cartridge for threads and put a foster male fitting in it with a one way check valve.
But still could only fill to about 1200 psi. Got something like 20 shots or so per fill to 1200 psi cause of the bigger volume cartridge. But still not a very efficient idea. Shot velocity dropped rapidly.
Remember how at first when I got my Maximus. I tethered the regulated 1200 psi bottle 3000 psi hpa Air Venturi bottle to it. That worked out pretty good. Matter of fact that was a big indicator to me that the Huma regulator we put in our Maximus would work.
So as it goes. You need volume for shot count and you need to feed the gun with air pressure that it’s tuned for.
So I guess the answer is yes it can be done. But the question is will it be efficient.
And you know I can go on and on about this subject. 😉
GF1,
Not looking to go on and on,…. but to me,… a Co2 cartridge is good for so much. An HPA charge is good for so much. Operating pressure,.. ok,.. just fill to 1200. To me, air is air. The volume of the tube, with the cartridge in is far less. Only the Co2 is in play. HPA uses the entire tube.
Unless,… unless,… Co2 has a RE-equalizing effect each time some is used? Due to the gas expansion.
Chris
What are you trying to say?
The short simple version this time.
GF1,
No,.. well yes,.. 😉 ,… but is that why such a small volume of Co2 works and a tube full of HPA will not?
Chris
Yes on the Co2.
So what do you need to get a stable consistent shot count on hpa in a gun that is tuned for Co2?
GF1,
Ok. That will work for now. I do not have any desire to do a HPA conversion. This will stay Co2. I had to ask though. If it could work, there would not be extended tube HPA conversion kits out there.
I guess that we have one positive thing for Co2.
Out’a here for now,… (in a good way). Up early to do the weekly Mom and Dad visit and do whatever they need done thing in the AM.
Back in the early AM and PM. Go “on and on” till your hearts content. 😉
Like I said,… I will take all of the info. I can get at the moment. It will be interesting to see what Hiveseeker puts together on modding.
Chris
I shot 2240’s Co2 for a long time before trying the conversion.
They are good shooting guns. But you have to watch the shot curve too.
Some Co2 guns will start falling off on poi and when you get to low on pii. That cartridge will still have more air pressure left.
Then there are Co2 guns that seem to use every bit of Co2 before the poi drops off. In there words hardly any air left when you release the cartridge.
Do you have a idea why that is?
Hi Chris,
Is it possible that the “re-equalizing effect” you mention is because the CO2 is stored in the cartridge as a liquid? That is, most of the CO2 in the cartridge at the beginning is liguid, and just a little converts to gas with each shot. The liquid stores more energy than the gas, so you get more shots from CO2 than from air. If the containers are the same size. Not sure if I’m making it clear here.
Flintrocker,
Yes, it is perfectly clear. I guess that I have never seen Co2 and HPA compared that way before or the question that I asked,.. asked. One renews itself to a point (Co2),.. the other just depletes (HPA).
Chris,
Exactly, it is intended to push the pellet fully past the transfer port, if the skirt was to be right at the transfer port the co2 blast might deform the skirt. Also it puts the pellet more into the rifling.
I have also seen where a hollow probe is machined with a hole in the side to match the transfer port when locked which would seem to put a more consistent flow of co2 directly behind the pellet.
http://www.network54.com/Forum/275684/thread/1166402061
Mike
Mike,
Thank you. At this point I will take all of the info. I can. In fact,… I JUST saw the hollow bolt. It makes sense. If the post “took”, I just posted a pic to B.B.. I have not checked it yet.
Thank you for the assistance,… Chris
B.B.,
As an example:
http://www.crosman-air-pistol-owners-forum.com/gmac-extended-hollow-probe.jpg
Hope that works. There is “hollow ones too. Who knew? 😉
Chris
You are on it, just posted the direct flow above. same time
Chris,
There are so many mods that can be done on these pistols and many of them can be obtained directly from Crosman so it takes some research. There are also many mod parts that are high quality and an improvement over the stock Crosman parts so you need to do your research. As you always do. It takes a while to go through all the information out there.
Just saying take a breath.
Don
Don,
Good advice. I do try to heed that. Like anything new, it is very exciting and I want to find out and know all that there is,…. now. 😉 I am really not in any kind of rush, so I should not rush myself. At least I have started instead of just talking about it.
B.B. and all,
All of these blogs on the early Crosman pumpers finally pushed me over the edge, I picked up a Crosman 101 today at my local pellet gun shop. It was supposed to have been gone through a few months ago before it was put on the shelf. I tried to pump it and it and the pump did not hold compression. That was ok for me because I could offer a lower price for it. We did try some oil and the pump still did not work. It has a bronze barrel and pump tube. Guess they could also be brass will check that out.
I brought it home and worked on the pump and pump tube doing some polishing and giving the leather a little more compression and it began pumping pretty good. I also adjusted the linkage to eliminate as much dead space as I could. Something seems a little strange because it does not need to be cocked to pump it up. Eventually I will get into the valve and see what is going on.
So far not too bad it is getting about 590 fps with Falcon pellets on 10 pumps. Eventually I plan on putting a Maximus barrel on it either a .22 or .177 maybe try both.
Don
Benji-Don
Nice. And adjusting the dead spot is definitely a good thing.
I think my old, old rifled barreled wood stock and pump arm 760 has a adjustable piston position.
Curious with out being nosey. How much did you give for it. Not that I know what a good price is.
GF1,
I usually buy high and sell low. I gave $200 for the gun. I probably could have found one at show for less the blue book shows them going for around $100 for one in 60-80% mine is maybe around 60% the surface is a little rough but it does not show much wear. So I spent a little more than it maybe worth. I think I will get my monies worth by the time I get finished making mods and testing. I don’t plan on any mods that cannot be put back to stock.
Don
Benji-Don
Kind of the way it goes for me too.
Interested in how it does for ya.
I keep wanting to get a 392 again after all this pump gun stuff here lately. Thought it was the best air gun ever when I was a kid.
GF1,
I still have a soft spot for the ol tootsie roll pump handles though. I have a Benjamin 312 that was 95% when I got it for $20 at a show as a parts gun. Everything was like new when I got it. The only problem is the barrel was installed with a bend to the right on the last inch at the muzzle. I straightened it as best I dared but I had to make an offset rear sight to sight to get on target. Its still a good looker though.
Don
Benji-Don
Yes on the tootsie roll pumpers.
And here I go again.
As advanced as Crosman was back in the early days. It just gets me why they didn’t go farther on evolving the pump guns into something like the Marauder.
I guess just me. But still would like a .25 caliber pumper with a big volume tube and pump stroke and a shroud. Maybe one day I’ll see one before I go to the happy hunting grounds in the sky.
Don,
If it pumps without being cocked, that valve has been fussed with. There might be a lot more under the hood!
Good on ya! 😉
B.B.
B.B.,
That has been in the back of my mind. Hopefully if its been fussed with it is a good fussing and will be better than stock. So far the valve seems to be working good.
Don