Umarex Trevox air pistol: Part 2

by Tom Gaylord
Writing as B.B. Pelletier

Part 1

Umarex Trevox air pistol
The Umarex Trevox is a single shot breakbarrel gas spring air pistol.

This report covers:

  • RWS Hobby
  • Discussion
  • JSB Exact Heavy
  • Sig Match Ballistic Alloy
  • Firing behavior
  • Cocking effort
  • Trigger pull
  • Summary

Today we look at the velocity of the new Umarex Trevox air pistol. I said in Part 1 that this is a pistol to watch, so consider today’s report watching!

RWS Hobby

First up will be the RWS Hobby pellet. I’m going to show you more than just the average velocity today, because there is something more to learn from this test. Let’s look at the first 4 shots.

Shot………..Velocity
1……………..708
2……………..665
3……………..656
4……………..617

The Trevox started out dieseling strongly, like so many spring guns do when they are new. Veteran airgunners are used to this, but it may surprise a newcomer to the hobby. Let’s resume this string at shot 5.

Shot………..Velocity
5……………..522
6……………..522
7……………..513
8……………..506
9……………..513
10……………518

If you were to take these first 10 shots and average them, the velocity you’d get would be 574 f.p.s. There’s just one problem with that. This pistol doesn’t shoot that fast. It would be a mistake to take the average of the first 10 shots.

When I saw the huge drop in velocity from 617 f.p.s. to 522 f.p.s. on shot number 5, I felt the pistol had reached its performance range. That is often how it happens (the sudden large velocity drop). If you look at the shots that follow, though, you might think 522 was still above average. It’s certainly on the high side. But let’s continue to shoot and see what happens.

Shot………..Velocity
11……………505
12……………511
13……………512
14……………525

Those last 4 shots tell the story. It turns out that 522 f.p.s. wasn’t too fast, after all. Not if shot number 14, which is the 10th shot since shot number 5, went 525 f.p.s. If we take the velocities of shots 5 through 14 we get an average of 514.7 f.p.s., which I would show as 515 f.p.s. Doesn’t that seem right? At that velocity the Hobby generates 4.12 foot-pounds at the nuzzle.

Discussion

I showed this string for two reasons. The first was to show that new spring guns often do shoot fast until they settle down. Don’t take those early numbers seriously. And next, to show what you can expect as the gun continues to shoot. The Trevox settled down very quickly, which is why it made a good test subject to show in an article.

This phenomenon of settling down is typical but not universal. Some spring guns don’t need any shots to settle in. And others, like the TX200 Mark III, will often shoot slow for the first 500-1,000 shots, but when you come back and chronograph them they will have increased in velocity by a substantial amount. That is why a chronograph is so essential for airgunners.

JSB Exact Heavy

Next I tried some JSB Exact Heavy pellets. These domes are usually quite accurate, and, given the power of the Trevox, I felt they were well-suited. I expected velocities in the low 400s.

The average was 403 f.p.s. The spread ranged from a low of 395 to a high of 415 f.p.s. That’s a difference of 20 f.p.s. across 10 shots. At the average this pellet generated 3.73 foot-pounds at the muzzle.

Sig Match Ballistic Alloy

The last pellet I tested was the Sig Match Ballistic Alloy wadcutter. At just 5.25 grains this pellet should be both the fastest and the most powerful in the Trevox. I expected an average velocity in the mid- to high-600s, but the test average was 609 f.p.s. The spread ranged from 597 to 621 f.p.s., which is a difference of 24 f.p.s. At the average velocity this pellet generated 4.32 foot pounds at the muzzle.

I will note that the velocity of this pellet started climbing as the shots increased, and I almost showed you another extended list of velocities, but after shot 10 I fired one more shot that wasn’t factored into the string and the velocity dropped back to 603 f.p.s. I think this is representative of what the gun is doing at this time.

Firing behavior

I must comment on the firing behavior of the Trevox. It is most civilized. Part of that is the silencing, which really works. I saw that very clearly in this test. The pistol goes off with a dull thump instead of the sharp crack a gas spring usually has. And, there is very little vibration. You feel a thump at the shot and it’s over. The Trevox is very firearm-like in that respect.

Cocking effort

The Trevox cocks with 28 lbs. of effort. And 28 was the highest spike. Throughout most of the stroke it hovered around 25 lbs. I have read some customer comments that say the pistol is suited to kids, but I don’t think it is. This pistol still takes an adult to cock it.

Trigger pull

Stage one of the trigger pull takes 1 lb. 15 oz. Stage two breaks at around 7 lbs. That sounds very heavy, but in reality the pull is smooth and gradual. I don’t think I will have any trouble shooting this pistol for accuracy.

Summary

So far, so good. I am liking the Umarex Trevox a lot. It’s well-behaved, and easy to handle. I just hope the accuracy is there, because this could be a best buy.

51 thoughts on “Umarex Trevox air pistol: Part 2

  1. Didn’t want to make the first post off subject but it’s a pretty good deal. I think anyway. And maybe someone will post right now in front of me before I finnish.

    But Pyramyd Air has the Gauntlet on sale for $239.00 for 3 days. So far they are seeming to be very accurate guns. Might be a chance to get one at a good price before the sale is over.


    • Buying the Gauntlet before BB has finished his review on the Fortitude. There could be buyers remorse coming up, “you’ve gotta ask yourself one question: “Do I feel lucky?” 😉


      • Sean
        What are are you saying. You want to see what the Fortitude does first.

        Heck by them both for the prices they want for then now. 😉

        And so far the Gauntlet is having a pretty good reputation. And the Fortitude is getting mixed reviews.

        But it will be interesting to see what the Fortitude does. But what I seen so far is the Fortitude in .22 caliber is not as accurate as the .177 in some reviews. Kind of sounds like deja vu with the .22 Marauder’s.

        As it goes. Time will tell.


        • GF1
          Buying them both defeats the raison d’etre (There is my bit of posh language for the week 😉 of the pppcp IMHO. The thrifty Scottish quarter of my genes demand the right purchase, and would immediately disown the rest of me if I chose the wrong one before all available information was examined.


          • Sean
            Understand that.

            So get a Gauntlet now and Fortitude after you seen all the reviews you want about the Fortitude. 🙂

            Don’t they say that 2 is better than 1. Or something like that.



    • GF1,

      I was up early to take my brother to the hospital and saw that sale in my email. I didn’t even think about it, but went straight to Pyramyd and ordered one. I personally am glad that they only offered the .177 version. I probably would have bought one of each if they were all that price. I think it is a no-brainer for $240 on regulated PCP that has been as well received as the Gauntlet. Did you feel the need to buy one? I think I remember that you have the .22. Or are you holding out for the .25? 🙂

      Half


      • Halfstep
        My Gauntlet is a .177.

        And I want one of the .25 caliber versions. If it was available today I would for sure have one.

        If it’s accurate like my .177 Gauntlet. I’m afraid the .25 Condor SS will be up for sale.

        Yes I definitely want a .25 caliber Gauntlet.



  2. This is sounding like a good pistol for someone in the market for such. I personally do not like glowy thingy sights, but they can be dealt with. This may shape up into a decent sproinger pistol. Not really many out there right now.


  3. OK, now for a little of my off subject thoughts concerning the Fortitude.

    I have seen and read several of the reviews concerning this air rifle. What many seem to keep forgetting is this is not a Marauder. It is a multi-shot, shrouded barrel, regulated Discovery. Not really anything new here. These modifications have been available for many years now. TCFKAC has finally decided to market them. The price point is what is new. To do these modifications to a Discovery would cost you considerably more than this.

    At this price point someone such as myself can afford to buy one and give it a new sear, a Lothar Walther barrel and an adjustable striker spring. I can play with the transfer port. If the regulator is a slide in type I can use various length sleeves and adjust the volume of the regulated air space. All of this in a nice looking, light, easy to handle package.

    As for the Gauntlet, I am not sure you can do such things with it. I know you can change the bottle to a 22 CI and get a whole bunch more shots. I do not care for the looks of this thing. It also weighs about 3 pounds more. If I am going to lug that much around I will choose a Marauder. Let’s face facts. The performance of the Gauntlet is not anywhere near that of the Marauder. Neither is that of the Fortitude. I am certain that both can be improved.

    I have an air rifle that makes the Marauder look sick. No, that is not fair. The Marauder is just not in this class of air rifle as the Gauntlet and Fortitude are not in the Marauder’s class. The Marauder can be tuned and tweaked on and it will shoot with the best of them.

    It pretty much boils down to what you are looking for. For me, I think the Fortitude has potential to fill a slot I am looking for. I never felt that way about the Gauntlet.

    The following was an expression of the personal opinion of the proprietor of RidgeRunner’s Home For Wayward Airguns and in no way reflects the opinions and/or policies of this station.


    • RR
      I think you better recheck some reviews about the Gauntlet. And bottom line from owning many different caliber Marauder’s. My Gauntlet will run rings around the Marauder’s I have. That is in accuracy and shot count. They are equal in noise. And the trigger on both the Marauder and Gauntlet make for a nice shooting exsperiance. You would have to own each of the guns for a while to know what I’m talking about. And I’ll stress that point. Own at least one of each gun.

      And as far as the Fortitude compared to the Gauntlet. In my books the Gauntlet out ranks the Fortitude. And on that note I have not owned a Fortitude. So I’m just speculating like you did about the Gauntlet and the Marauder.

      And yes don’t think the Fortitude is closer to a Marauder. To me the Fortitude is closer to the Maximus or Discovery with a different breech and shroud thton on with a regulator.

      What I’m saying here is the Marauder, Fortitude, Maximus, Discovery and Gauntlet are all good guns. They all just fall in a bit different category from one to the other.

      What it boils down to for me anyway. Is that I want anyone of them as long as it’s accurate and it stays together. By that I mean doesn’t break after however many shots we think a pcp should stand up to.

      What I say is get one of each then let’s talk about what they are like.


      • GF1,

        I will have to yield to your experience with the Gauntlet versus the Marauder. True, I have not owned either. As for what reviews I have seen, the Marauder seemed to come out ahead. I have shot the Marauder and I am impressed with it. I have not really had a strong desire to own either. Neither suits me. Neither fits the category I wish to fill.

        As for the Fortitude, I see potential. I have seen what can be done with a Discovery. I almost bought a Maximus, but thankfully I could not swing one earlier.


        • RR
          That’s basically what I’m saying.

          So far the Marauder’s are nice rifles as well as the Maximus and Discovery’s. And the Gauntlet is holding it’s own also.

          The Fortitude is what we don’t know much about yet.

          What it’s going to boil down to is what features the guns we are talking about has we choose and how much we want to spend getting them and how much we want to spend upgrading.

          They all can be modded. And they all can be improved that we are talking about. But what is nice now days we have that option of guns that come equipped with features we have dreamed about in th past or took it upon ourselves to mod and make what we want. And they are reasonably priced now.

          So basically it’s what we each wants that determines what will fill the bill. In my opinion everyone of them has been good so far.


    • RR-
      I agree with your thinking about the Fortitude. I bought a .25 Marauder about 1 1/2 yrs. ago and I still love it but after the last year of very challenging physical conditions I have trouble dealing with the weight and bulk of it. I’m just not the hulking young man I used to be! I have a Discovery that I put a lot of miles on and did considerable work on that really fits the type of shooting that I enjoy. Small game hunting and plinking at a maximum of 50-60 yds makes me feel good! The Fortitude offers the multi-shot capability and regulated shot count that I am looking for and yet is in a weight class that would be more manageable for me. I can take the trigger group out of my Disco and drop it in the Fortitude for a decent pull weight and break point. I’m not sure about the free floating hammer setup but it might not be necessary with the regulator in the Fortitude. I would have to sell the Marauder and bubble level scope to be able to buy the Fortitude and a smaller scope but I think I would be a happy camper again!
      Bruce


  4. B.B.,
    This pistol looks pretty good so far.
    The only thing I don’t like about it is the fiber optic front sight.
    I wear contacts, but I still can’t stand fiber optics…on any gun.
    I used to shoot on a pistol team with a Ruger Mark I with a 5-1/2″ bull barrel;
    it had night square sights I used to blacken before a match to ensure they reflected no light at all.
    I hate to sound old, but glowly sights leave me cold, hahaha!
    Hopefully, they will offer different sights for old codgers like me. =>
    Keep up the good work,
    dave




  5. And a word on fiber optic sights.

    I have had them on several guns. And on the ones I have had I haven’t liked them on any of the guns they were on except one. And I didn’t find that out till a little while back.

    That gun being my .22 rimfire Savage 93. I have been shooting it open sight for several, several months now. Don’t know why but they work nice on this gun. And I don’t know if anyone else calls this good. But I can routinely hit a 1-1/4″ spinner at 50 yards with them. And that’s with the 710 fps 40 grain CCI’s and everything in between to the standard velocity long rifles.

    So that makes me think of a question. Is there differences in fiber optic material and placement on the front and rear sight. And I do know this. The fiber optics diameters that you see are very small on my 93. Plus the rear notch fiber optics are placed very close to the opening of the notch. And it’s very easy to place the front post fiber optic right in between the rear notch fiber optics. And the red green is very easy to see and pick up on.

    So maybe there is more to it than throwing fiber optics on a gun and saying it’s good. And you would have to shoot some different guns to see what I mean with fiber optics. Including a 93 to see the difference.

    Figured I would throw that out there for thought.


  6. Thedavemyster,

    Thanks for that group of informative links.

    I knew that many competitors in the various Speed shooting and three gun sports have embraced fiber sights. The ones they use are not anywhere close to the cheap plastic inserts found on many low cost weapons/airguns. The big difference is the good products are made of many drawn glass fibers and the strong housings as one of the links pointed out. I use Tritium tube sights on all my carry and home defense pistols, shotguns and rifles. The advantage of Tritium over fiber optic is that — if you can see your glowing fiber sight the adversary can just as well see you; NOT SO with aTritium sight! Tritium also plays better with various night vision systems; the ultimate low viz solution — to include through mist, smoke, aerosols and fog in some of the newest available systems.

    shootski


    • “if you can see your glowing fiber sight the adversary can just as well see you”

      Shootski, good point man!
      That’s OK on an air pistol like the Trevox, but not-so-OK on a self-defense pistol!


    • Shootski
      Yes about the 3 gun shooting. I like that kind of shooting very much.

      Now the question is who is doing a series of 3 gun shooting with air guns.

      That could be as big of hit as feild target when it evolved with air gunning.

      Let’s see some 3 gun action with air guns. I’m for it.



      • Gunfun1,

        1st: Pneumatic Threegun would be a way to get folks without the big money into the sport for sure!
        It would also help make the sport available in countries that have no PB laws!
        The big weakness I see is the lack of m/any viable pnuematic scatterguns!

        2nd: Opponents sight system possibilities; Starlight scope (amplified existing light), Vortex Spitfire (or other powered/magnified red dot) would make that glow three or more times larger. Matt61 would probably add that soldiers in darkness even in foxholes and trenches were picked off by the glow of their Radium dial wristwatches almost as often as by the red glow of a smoke during WW-II & WW-II.

        shootski


        • Shootski
          I was thinking the Seneca Wing Shot air shotgun could be used for the scatter gun in a 3 gun air gun competition. That gun would be probably the only one that’s available to use. There’s others out there I’m sure. But one thing would happen if the air gun competition caught on. There would probably be more guns made that could be used. Also more that would be made to be more specific for that competition.

          And yes I could see someone looking through a good scope could pick up on a fiber optic sight. What I was thinking was more in close at say 60 yards. And both haveing a open or red dot type sight. Would probably pick up on the person before seeing the fiber optic sight.


    • Shootski,

      Not enough time to shoot and practice and study,…. 🙁 ,….. but I do get the whole NPA thing, but,.. I see limited use (I think). It seems good for bench or prone, sighting and accuracy assessment,…. but for something like off shoulder hunting, kneeling? A sniper? A sniper may have the target moving, so? I do not think that it is (start over time) if the POA moves.

      Is NPA (always) desirable?

      Perhaps reading more shall reveal an answer, but I thought that you might have a quick/general comment on the topic. NPA seems optimal and perfect. Real world shooting can be less than that. Just trying to correlate the two,.. so to speak. Any (quick) thoughts?

      Thanks,…. Chris


      • Chris USA,

        ALWAYS is always answered with No unless it concerns our death or taxation!

        Three Position Olympic shooters (prone, kneeling and standing) all work on NPA a great deal. They learn to build their position(s) with as small of an amount of non bone on bone as possible. Oh and Running Boar in Olympic 10m also use NPA; EVEN though their target is a mover. Biathletes build their standing position as well as prone in the same manner! Good shooters work on NPA as a major building block to better shooting!

        NPA may sometimes be a nonstarter…interestingly you picked snipers! Sniper teams are mostly going to only shoot when they can garantee POA is NOT going to change for at least as long as the shot cycle is in play (ID, Range, Compute, Aim, Shoot, Hit Confirm) bug out to extraction point. They work really hard to get safely to their shooting point, to wait for The Shot and to extract successfully. If a moving Target can’t be avoided then a Prediction is made on the POAs Future movement and the shot cycle steps are precomputed as much as possible, the POA walks, steps, drives, moves into the PPOA. Some varmint hunters practice the same skill set!

        shootski



        • Shootski,

          Thank you. That was very clear. So,… it is not something that can always be done to perfection for every circumstance,….. but,….. it is something that should always be strived for in every circumstance.

          I look forwards to digging deeper and learning more.

          Chris



        • Geo,

          Sorry about that. I did the other day, so I hoped that more would see it. It is not something that most are familiar with,.. as I was not. I will try to more mindful in the future.

          https://www.primalrights.com/library/articles

          This is what I am currently looking at. I am sure there is more like it,… but Shootski linked it and that’s what I started with. Fundamentals are good. Even if you know them, or think you do,… a good reminder/refresher is good now and then. I know (I) need it. I find quite advanced to what we would normally find or hear about or practice.

          If I could shoot more, more would sink in and become habit.

          Chris


  7. I agree that those are a good batch of inks.
    My experience with fiber optics comes from having a Ruger .22 pistol. The all black sights that came on the pistol made it hard to shoot well at the black bulls eye of a silhouette target. When I replaced the front sight with a green fiber optic post my groups on target immediately got tighter. I believe the better shooting comes from a better contrast in the sight picture.
    Gerald



    • Carl,

      Man!,… what a tease you are! 😉 Just had to throw out the “new” word and then drop it huh? 🙂

      That one I made that uses .22 nail gun stick cartridges is impressive.

      Best wishes as always going forwards,….. Chris


Leave a Reply