by Tom Gaylord
Writing as B.B. Pelletier
FWB 110 target rifle.
This report covers:
- Sliding compression chamber
- RWS Hobby
- Vogel Match Green
- How good is it?
Today I will finish the report on the FWB 110 target rifle. Some readers thought I was testing the rifle myself. Jerry and Tommy Cupples offered to leave it with me, but given its rarity and value, I declined. I would hate for anything to happen to it in shipping! So, they did the testing for me. Let’s take a look.
Sliding compression chamber
When you pull the sidelever back you also pull the sliding compression chamber back, which in turn moves the piston. The piston compresses the mainspring, and when the sear catches the piston, the rifle is cocked. I showed you the compression chamber open in Part 1, so link back to that (above) if you have forgotten.
Speaking of the sidelever, there has been a lot of discussion about not pulling on the sidelever locking latch while cocking the rifle, for fear of breaking it. The 110 and the 150 that followed had this latch, as well as a few of the early 300s (that’s plural for 300 — NOT the model 300S that came later). Feinwerkbau corrected the problem by changing the locking latch from a separate lever to an integral part of the sidelever. It’s less convenient to operate, but there is nothing to break because you can’t cock it wrong with this one-piece lever.
The 110 sidelever latch pivots on a tiny pin. If you cock the rifle holding this latch, that pin will break.
This top view of the latch open shows the weakness of the latch design. If you continue to pull on the sidelever while holding the latch at this point, you put too much pressure on the small pivot pin.
The new-style FWB 300S sidelever latch does not have a delicate pin to protect. It’s not as easy to operate but there is nothing to break.
Tommy Cupples had Dave Slade rebuild the 110 powerplant. And, now that I have shot the rifle, I can verify that Dave did his usual great job. The rifle now shoots very smoothly. That is due to a combination of a good tune, the Feinwerkbau design and the weight of the rifle.
The first pellet tested was the 7-grain RWS Hobby wadcutter. They are often used to determine maximum velocity. In an FWB 300S with a good fresh tune, this pellet would be expected to average around 640 f.p.s. In the freshly-tuned FWB 110 they average 608 f.p.s. The spread is 49 f.p.s., going from 573 to 622 f.p.s. That seems large, but remember that this is a freshly-tuned spring gun. Tommy Cupples even remarked that it was visibly smoking a little when he shot it. I would expect the velocity spread to diminish to around 20 f.p.s. after several hundred shots have been fired.
Vogel Match Green
The second pellet they tested was the Vogel Match Green, which as far as I can tell is not a lead-free pellet. Green simply refers to the color of the label. These weigh 8.18 grains and average 532 f.p.s. The spread runs from 519 to 540, a spread of 21 f.p.s.
The light smoking that Tommy Cupples mentioned was not present when I shot the rifle at the Texas airgun show. Smoking is common right after a spring gun tune, but once the lubricants settle down it often goes away. Not always, but often. Nothing bad comes from it.
Now, what can she do? Tommy shot five targets with Vogel Green pellets. He mentioned that they were shot from a rest at 10 meters. He took a couple groups to settle down, then shot two good groups.
Mickey Mouse blowing a bubble! The first good 5-shot group is centered on the 10-ring. No measurements were given but from the target I can estimate 0.375 to 0.475-inches between centers.
This last 5-shot group was the best one he shot at 10 meters. He didn’t give a size but I would guesstimate 0.30-0.40 between centers.
How good is it?
This is a slightly different test than I usually do, but you can interpolate these results from the dozens of past tests you have seen me do. I would say this FWB 110 is right there with a Walther LGV Olympia or an HW 55 — two of its closest competitors. Remember, we don’t know if the pellet that was used for the accuracy test is the best one for this particular rifle. I would have tested several different pellets for that. I also would shoot 5-shot groups with a 10 meter rifle, so that part remains the same.
The bottom line in this report goes in two very different directions. On the one hand, you have just witnessed a test of one of the rarest air rifles ever produced. Fewer than 200 of these are thought to have been made and I am sure there are fewer than that remaining. We agreed that the value is whatever two parties can agree upon.
On the other hand, as far as performance goes this 110 is very much in competition with the HW55 series of target rifles and the Walther LGV of the 1960s (not the ones made a few years ago). I feel it holds its own with both of them, in terms of power, accuracy, good trigger and smooth behavior. If it wasn’t such a rare collectible I would want one just for the pleasant way it works. What a strange test —an FWB sidelever target rifle that recoils!
93 thoughts on “FWB 110 target rifle: Part 2”
I imagine the weight of the rifle to be about 10 pounds or less since it doesn’t have the recoilless carriage of the 300S. With a power output of 6fpe I cannot imagine a trained shooter missing his/her target within it’s normal range.
What a lovely air rifle! I suspect that the FWB 110 heavily influenced Diana with the design of their Model 48/52 sidelever.
You have never done an accuracy test of the 48/52 on this blog, as far as I know. Any chance of you doing a complete series on that overlooked classic?
I’m with you. I, too, would like to see a full report on the RWS 48/52. It holds even more interest now that we have seen this gun. How ’bout it BB?
Here is a 4-parter:
And here is the original report:
The first link seems to be to a review of the Pro Guide system.
The second link was the one that I found and it left me wanting. It was from “back in the day” when you apparently didn’t do the systematic 3 and 4 part reports that this blog has matured into. I would like to see a full treatment on the gun, since you refer to it as accurate, but without quantifying that accuracy. I’d also like to know more about the hold sensitivity that you refer to in that little piece. How did you come to that conclusion? How sensitive is it? What ended up being the best hold? If you used a .177 Model 48 as the test bed, perhaps you could try some of the super heavyweight pellets that we can buy now, but weren’t available at that time, to see if they impacted that caliber’s shootability. Maybe some more info on how you would go about lowering their power by 10% as mention near the end of that report. Maybe see how similar the design is to the FWB110. You have, no doubt, shot a number of new guns since then, how does it stack up against them. Is it still a relevant design in this day and age. Who would you recommend it to.
Give us the FULL MONTY!! 🙂 🙂 🙂
If you read all four parts of the first like, I tuned an RWS 48. That’s why I sent you there. The factory velocity and performance is in there.
I did read all 4 parts before I made the above comment and I stand behind my characterization of it being more of a How To and review of the drop in tuning system. All of the questions that I listed in my last comment were left unanswered. If you don’t have the time or interest in reviewing the the gun, I understand, but to say that it has been reviewed in the style and level of thoroughness of your more resent blogs is just not true, in my opinion, respectfully.
I’m not saying that it was a traditional review. But the velocity with the factory spring was given, which is one of the things I thought you were after.
I have owned and reviewed so many 48s and 52s that I guess I have lost interest in them. They are great airguns, don’t get me wrong, but they are nothing new — at least to me.
I guess maybe I better reconsider, if there are others who are interested, as well.
Thank you for reconsidering, and I wouldn’t expect you to do the report if I am the only one that is interested. I think Bob Ryan might be interested , but I’ll let him speak for himself.
If you want a couple of good reviews try Paul Capello airgun reporter episode on the 48. Also Rick Eustler did one also.
Please, please give the 48/52 the full treatment.
Here’s why I think it deserves it: It’s the only spring piston air rifle I know of that beats the Beeman R1 for power, while matching the TX200 for accuracy.
The 48/52 is still a big seller in the US, but in the UK, alas, it has largely disappeared down the memory hole. That is partly due to the rise of PCPs as the instrument of choice for those wishing to go down the FAC route, but largely, in my opinion, due to an import business called SMK which acquired distribution rights to Diana products some years back and jacked up the price of a Diana 52 to a level approaching double that of a HW80, an air rifle which it shared a price bracket with back in the 1980s.
Even though it has been around for over 30 years, the 48/52 is still close to springer perfection, to my mind at least. I just wish Diana would replace the plastic parts (trigger blade, cylinder end cap, safety catch, muzzle break) with the steel parts a fine air rifle like this deserves.
The overly chunky open sights could likewise do with improvement, ideally being replaced with a peep at the end of the receiver and a tunnel with multiple inserts up front. The 48/52 also needs a proper scope mounting system, à la Weihrauch. Oh, and Diana needs to get rid of that blasted barrel droop from all of their air rifles that can go over 7.5 joules – no one, I repeat, no one uses them for 10m competition.
I am sure there are many more out there, BB, besides Halfstep and me who would relish the thought of you treating us to a full series on this classic air rifle, preferably in 52 Superior (walnut stocked) guise, as the furniture on the 48 is a wee bit bland.
Please don’t hold back like that! How will we ever know what you really mean? 😉
Okay, I guess you got me. The 52 is not walnut, but checkered beech is being imported into the US again after a lapse.
Sorry for labouring the point 🙂 The 52 was my very first air rifle though and I still have a soft spot for the old girl!
The standard 52 has a chequered beech stock, yes, but the 52 Superior wears walnut (pic attached). Perhaps that version is not available in the US though.
Oops! Pressed “reply” too soon – here is the picture.
I think I have heard of the walnut stocked 52, though I never saw one. I bet it was imported here at one time. I will just make do the best I can.
I have owned several of these rifles — both 52s and 48s. My favorite is a .22 caliber rifle. Whaddaya think?
OH MY! That is some very beautiful wood! Ahem,… “furniture”,…. my mistake. 😉
Gorgeous wood stock. She’s a real beauty.
Diana 48/52 in .22 cal? Me likey likey! 🙂
.22 is the calibre which maximises the potential of the rifle’s power plant.
The .177 48/52 was popular for field target back in the day though and I bet they were very smooth at sub-12 ft lbs. I tried a friend’s .177 Diana 52 during a visit to Luxembourg once. It had just a sub-7.5 J spring, but was a blast for backyard plinking with open sights.
My own 52 was a 12 ft lb .22. It too was a lovely gun to shoot – smooth as silk, very easy to cock and far more accurate than me. Over 20 years later, I still regret parting ways with it.
That walnut stock is lovely, isn’t it?
I have just checked the latest Diana catalogue though, and to my horror it appears they no longer offer the walnut stocked 52!
Will have to keep an eye out for one on the secondhand market.
Interesting series, but no accuracy test.
I don’t suppose there is much chance of one of these gals showing up at the door of RidgeRunner’s Home For Wayward Airguns looking for a room. It’s just as well as I would have to shoot it and I would be afraid of dinging it.
What a great gun! Nowhere was it stated how much it recoiled.
Hopefully you are done testing cheap PCP’s for awhile.
I thought I mentioned that when I described shooting it at the Texas airgun show. It pulses like a heavy spring gun does. Not much recoil — just a pulse.
In the 3rd picture at the top, the end of the cocking arm appears to be a 2 prong “fork” of sorts and a pin can be seen. Between the fork is another piece of metal with what appears to be a disc like shape at the muzzle end.
Does that move somehow, and does it have some sort of purpose?
Good Day to you and to all,….. Chris
That is the latch mechanism. You push down on the round end and it unlatches the cocking arm. As you hold down the round end, typically with your thumb, you pull out on the arm.
Thank you. Much obliged. Good eye yesterday on the high rear mount shimming by the way. I missed that. I do not know how much it was, but it looked way extreme.
As I have mentioned in the past, I use a cut piece of toothpaste tube in the rear when mounting a conventional sized scope and fixed height mounts. .011″ I believe, without checking.
Regarding the cocking mechanism:
Notice in the earlier photos posted that the underside of the cocking lever, below the latch and latch pin, has machined grooves to improve grip. The mechanism is meant to be unlatched with a light flick of the thumb on the beveled top side of the latch, which lets the cocking lever open enough to slip 2 or three fingers under the cocking lever, and on to the grooved surface. The greater force (torque) intended to cock the spring mechanism can then applied to the solid shaft of the cocking lever, at a right angle to the lever’s grooved surface, not at a more backward angle, against the latch mechanism. With just a bit of practice, this is a very natural and smooth operation — flick open the latch with the thumb, slip fingers under the lever, cock and load, push forward with the heel of the hand against the bulge on the top side of the lever until the latch engages the notched post of the locking mechanism, then gently push the latch lever down to engage the lock.
If, instead, one pulls all the way back on the latch lever, the latch lever cams over an internal spring and comes to a stop against the back of the machined slot where the latch is hinged by the spring pin. If the shooter continues to torque the latch lever backwards with sufficient force, then it can be used to cock the mechanism, but the latch then also levers against the back of the machined slot and applies an equal and opposite force against the spring pin holding the latch in place. No doubt, too many cycles of this unintended force at a right angle to the hinge spring pin will eventually sheer the pin and break the latch.
Here is the latch post and underside of the latch.
/Users/DrCupplesMac/Desktop/Screen Shot 2018-07-13 at 10.07.49 AM.png
Oops, sorry, not facile with graphics posts. Here is the latch post, again, I hope . . . It also looks like the newer latch mechanism forces the shooter to press down on the raised, rounded portion at the lop of the latch pin to open the cocking lever, which means that the cocking force can only be applied to the solid shaft of the cocking lever.
I personally like the latch mechanism, but I can understand why it was changed.
This air rifle is a prime example of why I like these antiques. Most of them are mechanical marvels. They are made mostly of machined steel and quality wood with a fit, function and finish that is rarely matched in today’s air rifles. Many of them would cost thousands to replicate today and it is only with great difficulty that their performance can be surpassed. An FWB 601 is as capable as any modern 10 meter rifle.
This rifle was part of an estate – my brother was asked to give an opinion about it. It still fired but Tommy correctly suspected a broken spring. Tommy also knew it was old and likely valuable. I asked for recommendations of an airgunsmith, and we arranged to have David Slade (Airgunwerks) look at it. He told us he knew the rifle, and that if the trigger was OK, he could repair. He used Feinwerkbau seals, his own European sourced mainspring – everything was lapped and polished and then assembled with proprietary lubricants. Tommy shot it afterwards just about 25 pellets, with better groups each time. The two groups shown measure .0.40 and 0.27 inches. I have little doubt the gun will do better in time. It’s now back with the owner who will likely keep asa memento of a father who wanted his sons to learn how to shoot well. Everyone involved was happy. But I somehow never got to shoot it. 🙁
I shoot my FWB 300S enough to be used to pushing the “cocking lever button” so easy as pie for me. Course I have never shot the earlier type.
Love these oldies.
Here’s the story of this air rifle:
One of my retired business partners, JB, showed up at my office a few months ago with this air rifle in hand. The rifle was purchased new by his father when JB and his 2 brothers were youngsters, for the purpose of teaching them to shoot. Years passed, and JB eventually ended up with the air rifle. Knowing that I was an air gun enthusiast, he brought it to me to see what I knew about the air rifle. The air rifle looked in pretty rough shape. It wasn’t shooting properly, had some areas of rust, and it obviously needed some serious work. I had never heard of or seen an FWB 110, but the air rifle was obviously a vintage 10-meter target rifle and worth trying to restore. I told him I would check in to it and get back to him.
I cleaned it up a bit and used a small wooden dowel to dislodge a half dozen .177 lead BB’s from the barrel. The bore looked fairly clean, but the conical seal at the back of the chamber was brittle and partially cracked. The lever had been cocked when I got the air rifle, so I tried one pellet to see what would happen. The sound the air rifle made was more than a bit disturbing, and the pellet I tried to shoot only made it about a couple of inches down the bore. I again dislodged the pellet with a wooden dowel, and observed that the rear seal had partially disintegrated (sigh). So I gave JB a call and told him that in my estimate, the air rifle would need to be rebuilt and that it would probably require new springs and seals, if parts could be found, and even then, that there could still be damage from scoring of the compression tube or bore, or both. All of this was beyond my ability to fix and I didn’t know for sure if I could find someone to work on this particular gun.
JB indicated that he didn’t want to spend a lot of money getting it repaired, but if I didn’t mind, he’d leave it with me for a couple of months to see what I could find out, since he and his wife were about to leave on an extended vacation. Checked with Pilkington’s (who had resealed my venerable old Walther LGR-U) and they were unsure but willing to take a look. Brother Jerry was about to leave for an airgun match and show in Louisiana. He “offered” (just short of begged) for me to let him take it with him to show around. I believe that’s where Dave Slade saw or heard about the air rifle and told Jerry that he had the replacement parts and could repair and tune the air rifle.
I know Dave Slade by reputation, and he had also done some repair work on my Theoben CroMag .20 cal some years ago. So after giving the OK, Jerry left the FWB 110 with Dave Slade, who then worked his magic. On return to me in South Carolina, fresh from the rebuild and custom tune, I used some Howards “Restore-A-Finish” walnut penetrating finish to touch up the many scratches and dings on the stock and some Ballistol, very light rubbing with 0000-steel wool on some of the residual rust spots, cotton swabs, and an old cotton T-shirt to bring the wood and metal back as best I could to the rifle you see pictured.
The Chrony testing mentioned by Tom Gaylord was done immediately following the tune. I was seated, using a front tripod rest, and shooting at 10 meters at a regulation 10-meter air rifle target (1″ bull), over a Competition Electronics ProChronograph, 10-shot strings. I was adjusting the peep sights as I was shooting and primarily testing velocity following the tune. I shoot for best accuracy on the last couple of targets. I suspect the rifle is still better than my shooting skills, and as pointed out, that the velocities will settle down after initial break-in from the tune eliminates any residual lubricants. The dieseling and light smoke were minimal – certainly nothing at all like a loud crack and big puff of white smoke when a pellet goes supersonic. It was only what I would normally expect following a tune, and probably accounts for some if not most of the velocity variability.
Had I been more devious, I suppose I could have told JB the rifle was probably a lost cause and offered him a couple of hundred bucks for the air rifle “as is” when he brought it to me. But JB is a long-time friend. I have advised him that while he could probably sell the FWB 110 for a good price, he should instead keep it. It was his father’s air rifle. He and his brothers have a family heirloom — but if he should decide to sell it, then to please contact me first!
I was wondering how this gun survived. Reminds me of the muscle car finds us kids ended up with as teenagers in the mid 70’s.
The guns got class is all I can say. I like.
Thank you for that story. Now we all know a lot more about this airgun!
And thank you for letting me be a part of this. I hope it will encourage others to pursue their interest in airgunning.
Thank you for filling in the backstory of this rifle. Half a dozen lead BBs in the barrel? I wonder what Dave Slade found when he took the powerplant apart? Probably some more smashed lead BBs, which would not help with the powerplant’s performance.
I don’t want to start a long sub-thread on the cocking lever latch, but out of habit I slide my cocking hand down a few inches even with the later design on my 300S as the metal thins at the end. It’s probably not necessary, but better safe than sorry. Besides, these beauties take something like 9 pounds of force to cock.
Borrow a great line of Rick Blaine’s, if you cock this air rifle by the latch, “you’ll regret it. Maybe not today; maybe not tomorrow, but soon, and for the rest of your life.”
The 110 is one sweet air rifle. Thanks to Jerry, Tommy, and you for these reports.
On the issue of air regulators,… I am all for them. All up side and no downside.
If there is a downside, it would be that it adds cost across the board and there will always be those that say,… “… just one more thing to break down the road”.
On the Air Force line, it would make sense to offer regulated bottles (or) an add-between reg. for existing guns. I would bet that there is/would be a strong market for that.
At any rate,… my 2 cents on the topic.
Do regulators really have no downside?
I understand that regulators do need servicing, fail at some point and that some designs suffer from something called Regulator Creep. They have springs and pistons along with seats and seals.
Interestingly, in a Big Bore if the regulator doesn’t have enough volume in the expansion chamber they starve the valve and keep the airgun from providing an equivalent full power cycle…hmmm! I suspect a design from the get go might fix the issues I have pointed out (particularly the shot charge accumulator sizing) but that leaves the bottle regulated guns on a path to under performing.
To my way of thinking the regulation of well balanced traditional air metering system, by design, in non Regulator Big Bores like the AirForce Texan and the Denns Quackenbush Big Bores and probably a few other Makers/Brands don’t need and probably would not be capable of delivering the performance they do without jumping to 4,500 PSI fills and other modfications, like the (please understand I am not picking on the Hatsan airgun it is simply representative) Hammer, with an overly long barrel and a very heavy empty/unscoped weight. That 4,500 PSI fill creats some real issues to be overcome; since with a 4,500 PSI CF CYLINDER you will never/seldom have a full fill for your Hammer Big Bore. I realize that compressors are changing to more friendly configurations and are claiming 4,500 PSI fills but are still impracticle for a multi day remote hunt. So I can’t agree that there are NO downsides; at least for me and my DAQs.
Considered rebuttles are welcomed!
I really want to understand this Regulator issue with regard to Big Bore airguns and why it probably would be MARKETABLE? B.B. wants to know too!
Ok. I made no reference to big bores or your DAQ’s. I read your comments, GF1’s comments and Vana2’s comments and thought that you all laid it out very well. We all know that some non-regulated PCP’s get higher shot counts (all other specs being very similar) which only points to the valve design being better or worse. In other words, designed well/better for efficiency.
I would imagine that your DAQ’s are tuned very well for what they are intended for. They fill a 1-2 powerful shot niche with maybe a 3rd weaker follow up if needed at closer range. Because of the massive air dumps, higher fills and larger tanks are impractical. 4500 is just plain ridiculous for a fill since most pumps top out at or near that.
I do think that for .25 cal. and under, even .30 cal., given normal tank/tube size and normal 3000 – 3500 fills,.. regulators will out perform a non regulated. The gun mounted mini tanks have a definite advantage in fill volume over a std. mounted tube which helps both reg. and non reg..
Bottom line, the shot curve (fps range/spread) will be flatter with a regulated gun. Do they have a place in high volume air dump big bores? I do not think so.
So in the end, I think that we are really more on the same page -vs- a different page. 😉
“Considered rebuttals are welcomed”,……. Chris 🙂
I’m looking forward to the advancements that the future may hold for all airguns. I don’t think we have even scratched the surface with the application of materials science and technological enhancements that the future will deliver.
Thank you for your CONSIDERED input to this information gathering effort.
Hopefully some of B.B.’s quieter readers will take this opportunity to post impressions, questions and ideas for further discussions.
Glad you liked it. By the way, the Red Wolf is all set up with all of the many adjustments made. The butt pad ended be adjusted outwards (the opposite as before). It is better. The 8-34×56 FFP Athlon is mounted as well. The Sportsmatch rings put the front bell 1/8″ off the shroud and the magazine clears the turret bottom by 1/8″ as well,… so all of that worked very well.
The MTM rest is working nice too, and while it may not look like the rifle would just there, it does. The deep undercut, or sway in the bottom of the butt/cheek end facilitates the rear rest pad perfectly.
I hope to get out and shoot it and get it sighted in soon. My L. hip has been out since last Sun. and just got it fixed yesterday. Still quite sore, but doing much better than it was. I have grass to push mow and it is hot and humid with heat indexes near 100. We will have to see how it goes. For today, I will just continue to take it easy. All of the set up was done indoors this AM, so sight in is all that is left to do.
Great on the Red Wolf!
As before, wishing you days and days of fun and a great big helping of 10s & Xs with it regularly!
On the left hip…OUCH! May it stay put and not hinder all those 10s & Xs! I finally gave up on using my push reel mower on my front and side Zoizia lawn…I use an electric push mower that I sharpen before every cut; not nearly as good as the reel cut but only a tenth of the effort. Everything else I use a brush mower on…as little as possible. Keeps me and the critters happy.
May dad had Zoizia grass out around the house on the farm.
I remember when I was probably be around 10 years old helping him get plugs from the neighbors farm house. We put them in 5 gallon buckets. Then came to our house and plugged the old grass we had.
We laid the old grass plugs by the holes we made as we put the Zoizia plugs in. Then when we was done we went around and picked u all the old grass plugs.
We then had to go back to the neighbors house and put the plugs back in the holes. Just so it filled the holes back in. Was no worry because the Zoizia grass creeped and took over the weaker grass.
My dad had the farm but also liked growing stuff. He also did landscaping and I helped. And he was a machinist as well like me.
But yep that is some grass that Zoizia.
I think outward is better on the butt pad.
That way it helps support the gun towards your body and cheek weld and so on.
That’s how I have my Condor SS set up too.
It is a 2 way. Up and down of course,.. then the inner plate rotates left or right. There is no cant/tilt adjustment. With the Condor, cant/tilt would be what you have, as you can rotate it on the bottle.
The set up and adjustments went well. It takes time and repetition as you know. The cheek riser is about 3/4″ raised. The front bell is 1/8″ off the shroud and the magazine is 1/8″ under the turret mound,…. so all good there as mentioned to Shootski earlier. Scope is looking good thus far. Looking forwards to using the FFP.
I am taking advantage of my time in the “infirmary”, and getting my usual Sunday chores out of the way today. Hopefully I can get out in the AM and do some sight in. I will push mow dewy grass before mowing in heat. We shall see how it is in the AM. (pause) In fact, I just went down to check the mail and I “think”,… the grass will wait till next weekend.
Priorities,… ya’ know? 😉
I cut grass this morning at 9:00 am. It was 89 degrees already. They said it was suppose to rain tonight or tomorrow morning so had to get it done. Guess what. Was riding the 4 wheelers and low and behold what did we see. Yep the rain started coming. Been a steady moderate down pour for about 20 minutes now. Which is good. It’s been dry.
And glad you got your Daystate setup. Definitely looking forward to how well it shoots. You might make me sell all my guns and get one. 😉
Oh and I’m sure you seen it on your RSS feed. But the AirForce adapter and regulated bottle was a fail. Well sort of. The problem was velocity loss that I just can’t tolerate on the Condor SS. I shoot it long distance. So it needs to work like I want for how I shoot that gun. But I am looking at getting the velocity up. As I say. Time Will Tell.
And will be watching for a report tomorrow on your Daystate.
We shall see how the hip feels in the AM. Did you see the AA S510 top end rifle just went regulated? That fact and the fact that the lever did not flip kept me out of that game. FX Crown the same. Non-flip lever. Both would have worked,… but us lefty shooters have the game stacked against us. 🙁
Yes I did see that. In .25 caliber at that.
And what about the hip. Did you say something and I missed it? And I have been having some medical issues going on. Allergies and dizziness. I have allergies off and on but not the dizziness. It ain’t comfortable is all I can say. It seems to be getting better though.
And yep on the left hand shooting. I’m left handed but definitely right eye dominant. If someone throws me a ball or something I catch right handed. Kind of weird how that works.
And yep on the bolt left hand or right hand. But if you get a stock that is made specific for what handed you are it really makes the shooting exsperiance better. Do you remember when we talked way back when about how the stock of a gun is offset in different ways for the left or right hand shooter. Specifically the left and right hand Tx’s we had. Oh and speaking of that I think you had a unusual Tx concerning the sliding breech and the left hand stock. You should of took pictures of your left hand Tx.
Coduece. You listening. I think you got a unique Tx.
And then that means your left eye dominant is why your shooting left handed?
The hip has been out since last Sun.. Just got it put back in Thurs. and again Fri.. Still very sore but doing 1000% better. We are talking 9/10 and 10/10 on a pain scale and I have a very high pain tolerance. I don’t wish it on anyone.
I think the TX you are thinking about was someone else, I do believe. I think that mine was normal. I think.
On the L/R, I am 100% right handed but have always shot rifle left. I am left eye dominate by the standard finger test. Go figure?
On “medical issues”,.. you said that you are not a fan of Dr.’s,… as I am not.
HOWEVER,… most all insurance offers 1x per year “wellness” check up. FREE.
At least get the blood pressure check, cholesterol checked and diabetes check. A simple blood draw on the last 2. If anything is off, you can take simple one a day medication, at least for the first 2.
Getting blood pressure and cholesterol under control and easy to manage with diet and 1 pill a day.
Like I said, you have said many time your thoughts on Dr.’s,… BUT,… you would be really *(stupid)* to not at least do a wellness check. You ain’t getting no younger after all. The only thing I take is 20mg. Lisinopril for blood pressure. $10 for 90 days at Wally World. That is with no insurance (which I have).
Just lookin’ out for ya’ Bud! 😉
I think I have the standard left hand configuration. But when seated at my shooting bench when I cock the TX the loading port (on the left side) is away from me so I load the pellets by feel with my left hand. I have wondered if in fact having the loading port on the right side might be advantageous? I’m still working on my technique for loading.
I must of missed if you posted about your hip. I do hope you are doing better.
And I could of swore your Tx was a left hand stock with right hand loading of the pellet at the breech.
And I know it makes it harder to find the gun you want being left eye dominant. But as you know that’s what is important. What eye that you shoot with.
On the doctor stuff.
We do have the same deal with my insurance at work. We have to do it in October. And they even give like $65 off the deduction on or paycheck which we get paid every two weeks. So that’s $130 a month I save if I go to the doctor.
So yes I do that. And as you know me. Only reason I go is to get the discount. But also on the plus side my visits all have been good. No issues.
So I think I may have a sinus infection going on and it’s messing with my inner ear. Like I said it seems to be getting better.
And did you get to shoot your Daystate?
I’m with you on the regulators.
Once you own a gun with one it makes it hard to go back to unregulated guns.
I think it boils down to application. For hunting where one needs only 1 maybe 2 shots an unregulated big bore makes sense. For target purposes where the shooter needs to shoot a lot more a regulated big bore to eke out the most number of consistent shots per fill is a better proposition. It also goes down to the manufacturer whether they will devote time and resources to tune a rifle before it goes out the door or it would be better for them to depend on a mass produced item that will (hopefully) have a consistent output.
Just my two centavos. (Which not worth much considering it is only actually worth $0.00037)
I enjoy shooting paper to understand my Big Bore performance, get my dope loged and then get out into the field. Target shooting with the beasts I own can be done; usually with a tether and an external regulator set to fill pressure to keep the air tubes topped up. More of a hassle than I’m Interested in. I guess I’m spoiled by 10M target rifles that get 100s of shots per fill and have air tubes that are simple to swap out.
Maybe if Big Bore target shooting gets a larger following changes will continue to make them more suitable and enjoyable for competition.
See what I mean. You just said it.
Alot of long range big bore shooters tether a big bottle regulated down to the guns working pressure.
Check out the long range air gun Pepsi challenge and you’ll see what I mean.
Just received two additional magazines for my HellBoy M4 Carbine BB rifle and they both shoot well over 100 FPS slower than the one that came with the rifle. 375 down to 250. Same batch of CO2, same pellet. Remember I installed a Remington Air Master 20″ rifled barrel in it that will accept pellets and shoot a 3/4″ group at 10 meters.
P/A just posted two pics of the long version in the customer pics section along with the grenade launcher one I submitted earlier.
Something is very wrong here and hopefully I can discover something. I took one of the new mags apart but did not notice anything wrong but now I think I need to disassemble the good one to compare the two. These mags contain the
So now it looks like I’m turning into a tinkerer but I was just really disappointed in the performance of this fine looking BB replica of an M4.
My DPMS M4 will be here Monday and I’m looking forward to comparing the two.
“These mags contain the” CO2, BBs and the air valve.
I accidently hit the reads aloud option and could not shut it off to finish my above statement.
100 fps is ridiculous. Especially since the gun is lower powered.
But I think the piercing pin might just be the culprit.
Oh and I tryed the AirForce Co2 adapter with a 3000 psi hpa bottle regulated down to 1000 psi on my Condor SS. I lost 150 fps which I can’t tolerate because I shoot at a150 yards plus.
Needless to say that set up came off and the original hi flow bottle went back on. I mean the gun was accurate with the regulated setup. But need to get it to make more velocity.
And interested in knowing what you find out on your Hell Boy.
Gotta remember that regulated bottle was purposely kept low to avoid blowing up guns made for CO2 operation.
But why would you want to replace the HPA bottle on the Condor SS with another one? easier to work with?
Hopefully something in the mag will show up. I can actually hear the higher FPS mag pushing out more CO2 like it was operating the valve slower allowing more CO2 out.
From my understanding, GF1 wanted to regulate the Condor. What is easier than a plug and play? Apparently, not that easy.
While not familiar with your issue, if the valve is contained in the magazine, it sounds as if a spring is either stronger or weaker in the new mags.. Port size change? Cartridge length = pierce difference? Not sure. Just tossing out some ideas. A stronger spring could be clipped. A weaker spring shimmed.
Good luck on getting it figured out.
I wanted to get the Condor SS regulated like Chris said. I want to try to keep the air flow more consistent for each shot.
I get a pretty good shot with the factory unregulated bottle. But I have to fill the gun to a certain psi and watch what psi I shoot down to. I don’t see poi drop off at 50 yards when the bottle starts getting close to the end fill pressure. But I see it earlier if I’m shooting at a 100+ yards.
In other words my ending pressure is let’s say at 1100 psi when I shoot out at 50 yards. But to shoot out at 100 yards I need to stop at around 1300 psi to still maintain poi out at that distance.
So that’s what I want to do is be able to use the full range of fill from 3000 psi down to 1100 psi. I basically just need to get a bigger cubic inch bottle and a higher set regulated pressure of about 1300 psi I’m thinking. Then the AirForce Co2 adapter should work. And that adapter does have the same size valve as my Condor SS. It’s just got one hole that passes air from the bottle to the valve area that is a little on the small side. I just need to mess with it all some more to end up with the right tune.
And it sounds like maybe the spring in your valve may be different. Let us know what you find.
Losing more than 100 FPS is awful! Especially without any indication about the “NEW Improved” substantially slower mags!
Is there something as simple as how the CO2 powerlet is pierced? Say, diameter of pin and the hole it punctures in the powerlet? Or have they changed spring rates in the valve (are the valves disassemblable?) or the feed lips tighter where the pellet/bb get blown into the barrel. With most all the power plant in the mag you have your work cut out for you!
Cool looking rifle! Love the grenade launcher!
Good luck on your efforts to get more performance out of your M4. Interested in how the DPMS M4 will perform too! My first powder burning AR was from DPMS!
Yes I need to check everything against the good mag. It’s a lot more complicated then it looks. Try to send a pic later.
Thanks for the complements on the pics. Hard to believe all three are the same rifle.
My A2 is a beast with the fixed carry handle and a railed scope adapter installed. It has an original black Colt cheek riser with space for the charging handle under it and a full length quad rail installed. One good thing is the additional weight and bulk reduces the felt recoil some.
You ever see this? It’s long. But some great nostalgic racing.
I seen this when i was a kid when it came out around “74”. Pretty well sums it up about me.
It is drawn out at times but definitely teaches about all aspects if you pay attention.
If you done seen it sorry. Oh and don’t fast forward. You might miss something important.
Will watch it later on when things are less hectic .
By the way, we still have Rocky showing up late at night on the suet block .
Your little flying squirrel buddy is still coming around. That’s cool. Them are cool squirrels.
And the video is about when the early flip up body funny cars were running. Lots of burnouts and flames. Only problem is you can’t smell the nitro or the tires burning. 🙂
I would like to get a good pic of Rocky, but not gonna happen on night vision surveillance camera.
You gotta watch those blood pressure pills . I went through 5 different kinds before I found something that worked and had minimal side effects . You still have to learn to live with them, or end up eating the floor .
You posted a video some time back of Rocky I thought.
And Chris mentioned the blood pressure pills. I replied to him I go to the wellness exam every October. So far they say things are good. I think maybe I got a inner ear infection going on with my sinus stuff. This year has been ridiculous for everyone around here. Everyone at work is having some sort of sinus issues too. Probably will end up needing to go to the doctor and get some antibiotics I guess.
Hope you use the RSS feed and see this. There wasn’t no reply button for your comment above.
And about your Tx. You said you load left handed. What side is the release button on so the sliding breech can close?
On the Red Wolf,… well there is nothing not to like, simply put.
I did get to shoot it today. All set up and 4 shots in it started to rain/sprinkle. (drag it all back in) 🙁 I waited 1 hour and went back out and shot for about 3 hours. 60 shots total.
On paper at 25 yards. 25.39
Sight in (zero) at 39 yards, 25.39
Shot groups at 50 yards with 25.39 and 33.95 JSB’s.
The MTM rest is nice. You can raise the gun to POA perfectly.
The scope did well. Shot at 16 mag. At 25 yards, some pellets would stack. Also at 50 (20 mag.). The groups at 50 were just under 1″. Shots were all very steady with the rest, so it must be something in the rest/hold (OR) the barrel just needs broken in. We shall see. All pellets were straight from the tin(s) and a shot tray was used for all shots.
The rest requires about 3″ additional seat height. I may have to re-think a new bench,…or seat,… or both. While solid, mine is a bit crude to most standards. Maybe something like Vana2 has? That would be sweet.
All in all,…. very satisfied. The trigger breaks on a breath, the adjustable comb is super sweet, the side lever works like a breeze, it is very quiet (and that is without the Huggett moderator), the adjustable butt pad fits perfect, etc., etc..
That is about it for now. Chris
Sounds like you have a great set up on your Red Wolf, that should take your mind off your hip a little. Sorry to hear about your hip.
Sounds like your Red Wolf is doing great right out of the box. It will only get better with you getting used to the gun and the gun breaking in.
Yep on the ergonomics. It may have little effect on accuracy, but has a big effect on the plesure in shooting at least for me. The less stress in holding on target the more enjoyment.
When you get a chance post a picture of your setup. I know it is a beauty.
Sounds like good choices all around. And give a little review of your scope down the line.
Thank you. Yes on all you said. Will do on the scope. I have yet to play with holdovers/magnification and FFP relationship. I am still getting my basic holdovers established and confirmed. Honestly, it was a bit like shooting for the first time with all the new gear. Awkwards and fun at the same time. Yes, hopefully more shooting/break in is all that is required. The rest takes the “me” factor out of the equation pretty well. A plus.
Oh,.. the Sportsmatch (fully) adjustable rings work great. No unmounting of anything required. Being fully adjustable, you have to see what they are going to do out of the box. They will not be set perfect. Even so, I was able to correct a steady off right at 25, 39 and 50 yards by adjusting just the mounts. I did not touch the scope at all. Still factory centered on the turrets. I brought the elevation up at 25 and then at 39 too, just with the mounts. I like them and look forwards to fine tuning further.
The hip ain’t back at 100%,.. at all,… but it ain’t as bad as it was at it’s worst either. Hopefully walking at work will help it some more tomorrow. Will keep all posted as I get more familiar with it all.
IM more than a day late with this!
Hopefully you BOXED the target with your FFP scope. On a FFP scope I would recommend doing it twice: Once with just the turrets and a second time not touching the Windage and Elevation turrets but cranking the magnification and using your hold over/off/under to do another BOX the Target. Why? To demonstrate that the reticle really is providing the same Subtensions at different magnifications are spot on! You can use your first BOX to determine your holds. It is highly doubtful that it won’t be spot on but it is something to eliminate before doing a great deal of DOPE work.
Just a thought and certainly not necessary,
Thank you. Notes made and will do. Very good idea. I was going to go with just the hold overs first/mag. chg., but your step takes it to the next level.
What is your method of centering the reticle in the scope, if I’m saying that correctly.
Chris, are you assuming the scope comes out of the box with the reticle centered, or do you verify it in some way?
The manual says that the scope comes centered from the factory. I do assume that means turret travel. Maybe they all do, maybe they all do not. The basic idea,… besides not getting the W or E too loose on spring pressure,… is also distortion from alignment (or lack of) in the lenses. That is the idea behind the Sportsmatch fully adjustable mounts. By doing all of the sight in work, first with the mounts,.. any adjustments with the turrets will be minimized.
That is the best of my understanding thus far. Hopefully that answers your question. Like I said before,.. a lot of this new set up, is new to me too.
The reticle is always centered, in any scope. Reticle focus is the first thing you do on set up by adjusting the ocular lens to (your) eye.
Guess I didn’t word that correctly. I meant optically centering the scope, meaning that the lens are all aligned with each other and the W/E adjustments are at the middle of their travel. My understanding of scope centering is the same as you stated. I have read of different methods of accomplishing the centering. Also, like you said, centering reduces distortion from the lens not being in alignment. Those adjustable mounts seem like the way to go for the best results. All good stuff to know.
I use the mirror method now when I’m home and have the luxury of my workbench! I have a 3/4 inch thick floated glass mirror that I set the objective end of the scope on (I use a testube clamp to hold the scope) while looking through the occular. I then ensure to follow the backlash rules to move windage and elevation turrets until the reflected reticle (iluminated reticles make this way easier if set on a lowest brightness) image is covered by the actual reticle. I do tap the scope turrets just in case to ensure the errector spring(s) isn’t bound. I have used V Blocks in the past as well as counting clicks. The idea of a CENTERED reticle has been debated for some time; my personal opinion is close is good enough and perfectly centered (if it can even be done) is not necessary. The concept is to get maximal adjustability using mostly the centers of the lens system. In the field the only thing I use if I lose track is counting clicks. Adjustable bases and rings are a real plus for extended ranges.
Thank you for sharing your procedure for centering the scope optically. I guess if one does not use adjustable mounts there would be no point in trying to center the scope. My scope is a compact UTG 3-12x44SWAT mounted on my Gamo Urban. I had to purchase BKL offset rings in order to move the scope back far enough to get the needed eye relief. My first shots after mounting the scope indicated the POI at 17 yards was about 2″ to the right and 3″ low. Based on that I don’t think I had to adjust the scope that far from center so hopefully I’m okay.
Thank you. I go to bed early and get up real early on work days so I missed Geo’s reply.
That method would be called the mirror method as I learned a few years ago. B.B. said it was common among pro’s years ago, but now no pro’s do it anymore. I have tried it and it does work, in at least I can see a “ghost” reticle and can align it with the actual one.
It has been awhile since I have studied it, but I did (not) think that it had to do with making full use of adjustment range.
Rather, maximum optical alignment and optical clarity and elimination of glass error.
And yes, once achieved, the adjustable rings help you keep it at or near there when you get on paper for sight in. When I did it, I had to adjust the turrets a fair bit,…. so then I thought,…. “what’s the point?”
Perhaps we can touch again on this over the weekend.
Was a crazy day yesterday. Didn’t even get to look at the blog.
But sounds like everything is working out alright. And yep your bench height makes a difference for your rest set up.
And from what you said to Benji-Don it sounds like the scope rings are nice. And I’m waiting for how your FFP scope works out.
And yep I imagine a break-in is probably needed for the gun.
Hope your hip does better. And let us know if you get anymore shooting time in.
GF1, Chris, Shootski an All Interested
The extra HellBoy M4 BB Magazines
I took one apart to find out why it shot 100 to 150 FPS slower than the one that came with the rifle and also why it shot BBs out two at a time and often let BBs fall out of the barrel.
The only two obvious things I found were the hammer spring only had about 3-1/2 lbs. of force compared to the higher powered one with about 5 lbs. of force.
The other is that the movable cupped piston head type air tube in the stick magazine half had a stronger, longer spring. It ‘may’ have been too strong and failed to allow the tube to slide forward enough to push a BB into the breach area while blocking another BB from popping up to replace it. A possible reason for a double BB shot?
The one that came with the rifles mag is much shorter and weaker. An obvious change as the picture shows.
Other than that I could not find any ‘Obvious’ differences between the weak and strong mags. The air valves seemed to be the same but a little rough at first, not as smooth. However they have a small lock washer between the piercing pin housing and the plunger spring and the only reason it’s there I ‘assume’ is to prevent the hammer from striking the top of the brass valve housing and perhaps to increase spring pressure in the valve?
The piercing pin holes looked the same also.
Now here is the hard thing to figure out. When I put the stronger hammer spring on the extra mag it only increased the FPS by about 20, not a 100 or 150. Perhaps there is something I can’t find ?
I shimmed the weaker spring for now and it almost locks it up before the trigger linkage slips off the bottom and lets it drop on the air valve pin, that close but no big FPS change. There is a big spread between shots and its hard to get a good consistent reading.
HellBoy Mag air tube piston spring difference
Looks like you are on to most of the problem with velocity Delta and the misfeeds!
You might even become a mag tunner! I have a feeling you won’t get rich doing mags, Lol!
On the other hand you will probably wind up with the most accurate HellBoy M4 in the world!
Well, there is differences. At least you are digging into it. My work day evenings are short, so my brain will be of no assistance at all. For now, best wishes. The parts swap with little change is a bit odd. Like you said, something is going on.
I am really surprised to see anything changed! That is odd. You did confirm it 100% though. Hat’s off to you for that.
That 52 stock is gorgeous! It looks edible! 🙂
Yep! It’s right up there with the HW35E in terms of tastiness! 🙂