In 1969 the world welcomed the Daisy VL.
This report covers:
- The day
- The VL cartridge
- The test
- The result
- Not very accurate
- Not the wind
- Shoot at 50 yards
Today I test the Daisy VL rifle at 50 yards. Stick around, kids. This is going to be fun!
This is the same windy day on which I tested the Benjamin Marauder Semi Automatic rifle — the SAM — that was reported on Wednesday of this week. And by the time I got to this test the wind was picking up. When I tested the Daisy VL the headwind was steady at 10 m.p.h. with occasional gusts to 20 m.p.h.
The VL cartridge
You will remember that the VL cartridge is a caseless cartridge that ignites from the heat of compressed air generated by the spring-piston. In other words, the VL is an underlever spring-piston air rifle.
The VL cartridge has its powder glued to the base of the 29-grain lead bullet.
When we tested these for velocity we discovered that they all fired and the velocity of the 29-grain lead bullet ranged between 1,173 and 1,233 f.p.s. The average was 1,194 f.p.s., which is moving right along for a .22 bullet. So I expected the bullets to “buck” the wind — to be as accurate as possible, despite the wind.
I shot from a sandbag rest at 50 yards. I used the open sights that came on the rifle because it is next to impossible to scope a VL rifle. I shot with the rifle resting directly on the sandbag, as there is no recoil or vibration to speak of.
I shot with the rifle resting directly on the sandbag and yes, those eyeglasses are shatterproof. I put up a sheet of four 10-meter pistol targets, hoping that all the bullets would hit somewhere on the sheet. I had no idea of how accurate these VL rifles are, and I still have not seen another accuracy test with one.
Ten VL bullets went into about 8-1/2-inches at 50 yards. I say about because I measured the “group” with a ruler. You won’t see a dime in the picture because what’s the point? Maybe these ten shots should be called an accumulation or a gathering rather than a group.
At 50 yards, the Daisy VL put ten shots into about 8-1/2-inches. There are 10 holes in this target. The VL bullet at the top of the picture points at a shot that barely clipped the top edge of the paper. I was aiming at the upper right bull.
Not very accurate
This is, hands down, the worst accuracy I have ever seen from a .22 rifle. I have always wondered if this would be the case, but since I’ve never seen a VL tested for accuracy before, I had no idea. That’s why I used a whole sheet with 4 bulls. If I hadn’t, I probably would have missed some of the shots.
Not the wind
In case you are getting ready to lecture me on the wind and what it can do to a bullet, let me tell you that I did one other thing on this day. I needed some fired .22 long rifle cases to continue my series on reloading rimfire cartridges and I decided to make a change in the test rifle. Instead of the old Remington model 33 single shot rifle I have been using, I decided to start using a new Hatsan Escort bolt action repeater that I recently traded for. It’s a 10-shot repeater than can also be loaded singly, which I plan to do.
The Hatsan Escort bolt-action repeater, with my legal silencer attached.
I shot with my Pilot silencer attached. This rifle really hits the primer hard, and that was what I wanted for the reloading rimfire series. I needed to generate about 30 cartridge cases for the next round of tests, so that’s what I shot.
Shoot at 50 yards
I shot at a target someone had left up on the backer board. I aimed at the center of the bull through the 4-power Leupold scope and I just shot and shot. I didn’t even worry about where I aimed. I just needed those empty cases. But I did aim at the center of the bull, more or less.
And then I went downrange and was stunned to see that all 30 shots had gone into 1.713-inches at 50 yards! This was in the wind that was now blowing 15-20 mph, and me not caring if the crosshairs were exactly on target or not.
The Hatsan Escort rifle sent 30 rounds through this 1.713-inch group at 50 yards.
I show that group as proof that that the day wasn’t too windy for an accurate rifle to perform.
Daisy’s VL rifle and caseless cartridges are an interesting diversion from the mainstream of firearms, but in no way do they represent a viable option. That was probably realized at the moment of their introduction. They sold on the basis of the novelty of the concept — not as replacements for .22 cartridges. It’s a curiosity, which is why so many of them are still in like new condition. But not mine!
The rifle was in an open Pelican hard case on the tailgate of my truck when the wind blew it off and the rifle crashed to the ground. Remember that plastic stock? Well, mine now has a dime-sized divot in the left forearm. Live and learn, I guess.
The VL fell off the truck tailgate and hit a rock on the ground below. This is why BB can’t have nice toys.
I hope you have enjoyed this brief look at an oddball .22 firearm from the 1960s. I sure have enjoyed learning about it!
143 thoughts on “Daisy VL rifle: Part 3”
I think this type of rifle is definitely one that will need to put behind glass never to be used again. The accuracy is something else. You can’t even cover it with a dollar bill! You could use a 10 inch pie plate as the largest standard for a rifle target. Thanks for the look into at a rifle and system that was a blip in history.
Well now we know why it never caught on. Sounds like a good thing too…
That’s what I think.
I call the VL group more of a separation than a gathering. 🙂
And bummer the VL slipped off the tail gate. And are you sure the wind really blew it off or was it really just setting a little to close to the edge. 😉
And back to the VL. And just for conversation purposes. I wonder if there could of been something done to make the gun more accurate. You said it was smooth shooting. Do you think the fit of the bullet is not right? Or maybe the barrels just weren’t made good. I guess since its a under lever it might be hard to try a different barrel on it.
Tuning this rifle would be problematic. There was only one source of ammunition that you cannot control nor can you adjust. And that one source only produced one type.
There was a pretty big spread in velocity that BB said in this report.
Probably is the fit and charge causing the accuracy problems by looking at the velocity spread.
Maybe the VL does have a accurate barrel.
Wonder if some .22 bullets could be cast like BB is doing in his .22 rimfire report. Then figure out how to make a more consistent powder load.
The VL just might be accurate. But back when it was made the .22 rimfire guns and ammo was a dime a dozen (slang for you could get .22 rimfire guns and ammo anywhere and cheap back then).
If I had a VL I would have to say I would be experimenting with some different loads to see if it could be made more accurate.
The problem was, there was only one source for ammo and it was horrible. Nobody wanted to go near it. Even if they did, they probably couldn’t.
It was likely the same issue as the Remington 5mm Magnum. When Remington introduced this rifle, it was a cheap looking rimfire rifle, but the accuracy was stunning. It was nothing to hit a groundhog in the head at 100 yards. The power of that small hollow point was incredible. It would literally blow a squirrel’s head off.
The 5mm Magnum had one flaw. Remington had the exclusive patents on the ammunition and never licensed it out. When Remington stopped making the ammo, the rifles faded into the annals of history.
Now that the patent ran out, I think there is a company south of the border that is making the ammunition, but it is not the latest thing to come along so I do not see it making a return.
It is a shame as it was a good step between .22LR and centerfire cartridges. There is the .17 whatchamacallit, but I do not see it really going anywhere either. The truth is, I have never seen one out here in the wild. I think it is mostly one of those city slicker bragabouts. I think the .22LR is going to be around for a long time.
The new .17 rimfire calibers proved to be very popular. Ask any gun dealer. .22 will be around as it is good enough for most purposes, but not because it is a great performer.
I know why the VL didn’t make it.
What I’m getting at is what could be done today to make it accurate. If it could be done fairly easy then maybe someone could get them one of the LNIB VL for a decent price and have them a nice little shooter.
I am finding this out myself at the moment.
I recently inherited my grandfather’s Marlin 27-S pump rifle in .25 rimfire (25stevens) caliber.
The rifle was made until about 1935, and ammo was discontinued in the 50’s I think.
There was a Canadian ammo run made in the 1970’s.
But even now those demand over $2 a shot when you find them.
I grew up shooting this rifle and it’s accurate.
Or was, it’s been a wall hanger since 1983.
I have about 200 rounds of ammo and will shoot a group or two to see if it still is accurate, then try reloading the .25 caliber cases.
RCC BRASS makes .25 caliber rimfire cases that use a .22 blank for ignition, I plan on trying some of those also.
I hope everyone has a great weekend.
You know, a lot of things fail to go as planned at our age. I am constantly dropping things, sometimes repeatedly. Slight mishaps from failing to pay close attention to what I am doing has become part of my life now. Like slamming a car door on your finger. 🙁
Look at it this way, you just made other VL’s more valuable.
You know I like to collect oddball and short lived airguns but I just denied myself the new Flintlock BB Pistol. My obsession is diminishing.
I find that my obsession is also diminishing. Doesn’t mean I don’t like a Supergrade or a Diana 27. Just don’t gotta have all of them. 😉
“They sold on the basis of the novelty of the concept…”
Thank you for the series of reports on this interesting rifle. I like that “novelty of concept” phrase. Yes, and since it was a novelty, and your testing shows its inherent flaws in the way of accuracy, I do not see the production line for this thing being revived…but at least you own a piece of history, =>
Take care & God bless,
…hmm the (lack of) accuracy is about what I expected. The novelty of the VLs back then made them a frequent topic of discussion. The ones I saw and heard about were rated as “OK for plinking tin cans at 20-25 yards” …about half the range we typically plinked at with our iron-sighted .22s.
Given the accuracy of today’s airguns I call anything over 1 inch a “pattern” not a group 🙂
Hank said, “The ones I saw and heard about were rated as “OK for plinking tin cans at 20-25 yards” …about half the range we typically plinked at with our iron-sighted .22s.”
Those tin cans must have been those big commercial ones!
Yeah Shootski, the big commercial ones as well but you had to lay them down and shoot at the bottoms 😉
If you stay away from that “high velocity” stuff, some of those .22s can shoot pretty good. I have shot 1/2″ groups at 50 yards with certain ammo. That HV junk produced 11/2″ groups from the same rifle.
Same here with the .22 rimfires.
I was talking about the VL ammo accuracy can size. BIATHLON shoots into one MRAD Prone and about 2.5 MRAD Standing.
Almost everyone shoots subsonic for modern BIATHLON…if I want to reach out farther I’ll shoot center-fire.
I guess I wouldn’t be doing you any favors to offer you a case of VL
Ammo. It will sit in my closet until I feel like doing some pyrotechnic experiments LOL
Thanks for another great report…… You sure you didn’t throw that rifle?
I wonder if the ammo acts like black powder corrosion. Does the barrel crown look decent?? Sorry I know you’re over it. I just never managed to acquire the rifle only ammo
Thank you and no, I won’t be stocking up on VL ammo. The wind really did blow my hard case off the liner of my tailgate. I will look at the crown closely before packing the rifle away forever.
OK, this is about as off topic as you can get. I have seen reviewers post shot string graphs and talk about muzzle velocity variations; regulated vs unregulated, etc. It seems that 5 or 10 fps is very good.
How about a 2700 lb shell from a 16″ 50 caliber main gun on an Iowa class battleship? This uses 6 110 lb powder bags (SIX HUNDRED AND SIXTY POUNDS!) for each shot. The WWII standard was a variation of plus or minus 5 feet per second!?!
Here’s a video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2oDJDgEGGU
Time index of 4:10 is the mention of MV.
Oh yeah, it’s not really “powder”. The propellant “grains” are one inch diameter cylinders two inches long.
Why do I think those powder cylinders have a hole running through their middles? 🙂
The bags don’t have a burn tunnel.
But they do have a black powder end on every bag to set off the nitrocellulose main charge.
Actually, there are 7 holes, to promote faster, more even burning. They were even oriented pointing in the same direction.
Just for giggles—
2700 lb AP shell X 7000g = 18,900,000 grains @2450 fps.
So, using the PA unit converter—
Muzzle Energy = 251970615.67 foot-pounds.
That should be enough even for the mythical west Texas jackalope.
What he didn’t give was accuracy of one BOA (Bedspread of Arc) at 21 Nautical Miles (23+ Statute Miles) a double bed size at that …no California King needed!
My uncle was a plank holder on the Missouri (gunner;s mate, after turret) and told the story of hitting the lamp on the top of an abandoned lighthouse from 23 miles somewhere in the Caribbean while on their shakedown cruise.
Above I asked if anyone heard from Chris USA. I haven’t seen him post on the blog in a while.
I emailed him today and he said to let everyone know he’s got some health issues that he needs to get taken care of. He said it will be probably a couple months before he comments.
He didn’t say what was wrong but to let everyone know what I just posted.
Thanks for the update on Chris.
Let him know we have him in our thoughts.
I’ll let him know.
Thanks for the update on Chris. I’ll be praying for his health.
I’ll let him know.
Please tell him that he is in my prayers.
I’ll let him know.
Not good news, hope he gets better soon, thoughts and prayers heading his way.
I’ll let him know.
Gunfun1, I am praying for Chris, also; thank you for the update.
Thanks for letting us know about Chris U, Wishing him the best in getting well.
Please let Chris know I’m rooting for him, too.
I emailed him this morning and let him know that everyone is concerned with him and posting on the blog.
He never replied back and I told him in his first response to my 1st email that I wasn’t going to keep bothering him. Told him will be waiting for his reply on the blog.
Hope he’s doing alright.
Thanks, I was late. You’re being considerate, which is important. Chris has been a thoughtful contributor for years. We all wish him well!
Yes. Will be waiting to hear from him here on the blog.
Been away a couple of days. Hoping and praying Chris has a full recovery from whatever health problems he is facing. Chris was one of the first enablers that reached out to me when I first entered the world of airguns. Chris, you, Ridgerunner, Siraniko and a few others have been the core help group for newbies over the last several years.
Thanks for letting us know.
Thank you and yep.
Our health is our most precious possession. I’ll add him to FM’s ever-growing prayer list. For that matter, doesn’t hurt to put all us on it.
Well, phooey! I was expecting better.
I think that I know where I can find one of these, and if I can find some ammunition for it (maybe the same place), see if there is any more accuracy to be found in this platform.
It might just be fun.
If I get things lined up, I will keep you informed.
That’s what I’m talking about.
If you do let us know how it goes.
Are talking about this car?
It’s an .177 air rifle with ~2000fps. Just too much. But I like it.
Nope. The one I’m talking about is all electric and 1500 hp.
I couldn’t find it but sounds like a reasonable commuter. 😉
Here you go. I was wrong about its name.
Check out the 14 photos in the link. The engine bay even looks cool.
Love at first sight!
Real nice, if you do not mind giving China a couple of thousand dollars every few years, plugging it up overnight every few miles to charge it from a coal fired generator.
It’s purdy, but…
Yep I like too.
If you find a good specimen I have enough ammo for all your intended experiments in my closet. I’ll be glad to find a home for it and price it accordingly. Not a commercial just fwiw
It sounds like a fun project. Do remember that once the ammo supply dries up, that is it.
Do remember that if you change out barrels, it will require a .223 caliber as on a .22LR rifle and not an air rifle barrel.
Need to distract you from this deadend!
You may find this .22 bp project interesting.
How about picking up a Hatsan 95 springer and upgrading it. And creating a report on that experience.
Imagine a .177 Hatsan 95 at ~800 fps. Will it become Diana accurate? Will a vortek kit fit in it? How about upgrading with a barrel, which can take a tunnel iron sight on it. Can BB improve the Quattro trigger?
I don’t know… I’m at a loss of words when I see the potential that hasn’t been taken advantage of just to please the trends. I believe plenty of improvements can be done on Hatsan’s springers with only a little R&D.
Better yet, why don’t you do it and make the report. You can even make it into your dream gun that you have been talking about all the time. B.B. has got enough on his plate already.
It is not my dream gun.
This is not about a dream gun anyway; this is about a dream market. Imagine a variety of ~800fps .177 springers at every retailer…
By the way, my dream rifle is a Diana 27. And HW30S is about to replace it.
Really, Siraniko? 😉
To make a successful air rifle as opposed to a gun we want one must either study what the market wants or create the market that the public will want. To create an airgun for experimental purpose “just because” becomes a time wasting experiment unless there is a practical endpoint that is going to be reached. There is no problem with individual scientific curiosity. There is a problem of finding a market to sell a product to.
There should be only one practical endpoint here, and that is accuracy. Maybe manufacturers have to see what could their springers be capable of at reasonable powers.
There are several ways to market. One is called educational marketing. The seller educates the market. Easy to do.
For you, “just because” accuracy could be equal to “time wasting experiment” … For me it’s not.
Siraniko, I’m sorry; I might’ve overreacted a tad bit. It’s just I’m very passionate about the idea. I might be very well wrong…
Interestingly, I had my wife get me an HW30S in .22 caliber as a result of reading about B.B.’s Diana 27 in .22 caliber.
I figured the HW30S would be a modern version of the Diana 27…and in a way, I guess it is.
I used to have a Beeman R7 in .177, and while I liked that gun a lot, I love this new gun even more, =>
Hoping your HW30S is awesome for you,
I haven’t bought a 30S yet. Still, I think it’s the only comparable springer to the 27 today. Thank you for sharing this.
I tried to reply to your latest comment to me, but I didn’t see a “reply” next to it; hence, I’m replying to your previous comment. Anyway, my .22 HW30S is my fave springer of all time (so far). I like it better than my RWS 45, R7, or HW97; it’s just too cool; I enjoyed it with a peep sight, but I had a (recently discontinued) UTG 6X BugBuster scope, and I threw that on there and have never taken it off. The rifle spits out 13.43 grain .22 caliber JSB pellets at 485 fps; at 15 yards, it’s dead on to the crosshairs; at 28 yards, it’s dead on to the first mil dot (below the crosshairs); at 40 yards, it’s dead on to the second mill dot; and at 40 yards, it can plink pecans (in the husk, LOL!). For a plinker, it would be hard to beat. I’ve killed many squirrels with my old .177 R7, and I’m sure this rifle would work even better (within it’s optimum range), but I just love to plink with it; I can cock it with one finger, and the gun is not sensitive to the hold (although I pretty much use the artillery hold anyway). I can shoot it for hours, and have, many times. It’s just a great rifle (I hope this helps with your decision; thank you.
Thank you for sharing this. Yes, this helps a lot.
Your 30S looks awesome, and the scope is an excellent choice. The combination makes so much sense to me.
Yes, 30S, it is.
I want your scope.
You may get your wish in the near future. I while back I purchased a Webley / Hatsan Tomahawk in .22. Because I purchased a Hawke scope in a bundled deal with it, I picked up the Tomahawk for almost nothing. Just so you and everybody knows, if I had purchased this air rifle for the $280 PA was asking when they carried it, I would have sent it back without even shooting it. Though it has a beautiful walnut stock, it is obvious that Hatsan was filling their Webley contract with parts they had rejected for their own air rifles.
The reason I bought it is 1) the price and 2) I wanted something to tinker with. I want to bring the power level down a bit. As is, it is quite a thumper, but it is not great in the accuracy department. I want to take the power down a bit and see if that improves. There are also a couple of other experiments I wish to try on this platform.
Improve the Quattro trigger? It is pretty nice. No, it is not an Air Arms or Rekord, but it is close. Bringing the power down may improve it some.
I need to concentrate on this gal for a bit and see if I can teach her to dance.
You rock, my friend! I cannot wait to hear about your experience. Thank you for sharing this with me.
Unfortunately, Siraniko is pretty much right. Most people who start into airguns, start with an uber sproinger from Wally World that spits out .177 pellets at supersonic speeds. What they do not realize is that thing is going to jump and twist and twang like a banjo player on top of a mule eating briars and they will be lucky to hit the side of a barn while standing inside. Most then toss it in the back of a closet and forget all about it.
A very few will think there must be more to this and these are the ones that start to learn. These are the ones that dig around and find blogs like this. First they will lurk in the shadows and read through old reports and comments. Then they will screw up enough courage to start asking questions here. After a bit they take more educated steps into the world of airguns.
Fish, what I think you are really looking for is a sproinger that shoots as nice as an HW30S, with the power of an HW80 and the price tag of a Wally World Special. You have been hanging around long enough now that you should know that everything has a balance and any true refinements are going to cost.
The market you are looking for already exists. As Sig Sauer learned, it is a tough market to break into. It takes a proven track record before we open the wallet. We may drool a bit and kick the tires, but before we open that wallet we are likely going to think, what am I really getting here?
Yes, there are a few exceptions to the rule here. The rest of us pick their brains to learn of their experience with the new bright and shiny.
Before I totally lose track here, despite the flaws in this Tomahawk, there is still some good quality here and I have enough experience to overcome the shortcomings and believe I can turn this into a decent air rifle. Will it be an Air Arms or an Weihrauch? No. Will I have fun tinkering with it? Yes.
Agreed, but you’ve just stated the obvious. What I’m talking about is changing the trends with educational marketing; not difficult, done many times before. And I’m not in the market for a new springer; my hobby is in hiatus. This is about starting a new trend. All those Hatsan, Gamo, Crosman, and etc… springers could become decent 177s if their power is reduced. Marketing doesn’t have to be about “let’s follow the masses.” It can also be educational. Management is a science, not art. I’m talking about a proven concept. Well, it was just a suggestion. Important for me but not the end of the world. 😉
By the way, there is already a company that does just what you are saying. We have been pointing you at it for some time now. Weihrauch.
I know the .17 is a hot little round, but it is also very expensive. That is one of the things that killed the 5mm Magnum.
Once upon a time Remington made a .17 centerfire. I knew a guy who owned one. He said it would shoot flat out to about 300 yards and then drop like a rock. He also said you had to carry a cleaning rod with you because the small caliber fouled up quickly.
There may be a lot of those .17 rimfires somewhere, but I do not see or hear much about them around here. Recently my Grandson and I went to the range to gather up some 9mm shell casings to make targets of. We did not see any of those .17 rimfire casings anywhere. Did see a bunch of .22LR though.
Is it only me who thinks 1911 is the most beautiful pistol design ever.
I think bottom is a good pellet version of it
Well, while doing a few honey dos today, I took some pieces of scrap lumber and made me a shooting tree.
And as for this bit, “Dave, I want your scope.”
UTG, he is referring to your fixed 6X BugBuster scope.
Those things are awesome!
PLEASE, bring them back!!!
Like the airguns, etc. that slip into the mists of time, I would really like to have a 4X and a 6X BugBuster. Those are made for sproingers. Of course, there is this.
RidgeRunner, that thing is pretty cool; it’s small and light weight, and it is parallax adjustable down to 10 yards…as I said, pretty cool. =>
This is a little closer look at it.
Here it is at 25 yards.
If you look just a little to the right near the bottom spinner, you will see an orange disc. That is 50 yards.
If you look way back there you will see a bundle of yellow surveyor’s tape. That is 100 yards.
There is a 75 yard marker, but you need real good eyesight to see the green post sticking up.
The only one I can’t see is the green 75 yard marker.
Take a picture of the green 75 yard target from the 50 yard target showing the 50 yard target in the picture then we should see it.
Looks like fun shooting.
It is a decent little private range. I could probably stretch it out to 150 yards, but I would have to make some pretty tall target holders.
Looks nice. And all your pictures are turned sideways today for some reason?
All I can see back there is the Big Holler Canyon Beast!
Shhhh! Not so loud! You will have the bigfoot hunters stompin’ around here lookin’ fer it.
Don’t believe that folks really believe in things like fakes like Big Foot, Sasquatch, the Abominable Snowman, or Biden…now how did he get in there?????
But the BHCB is as real as can be!
It has been a bit since I harped about this, so I thought I would do such now.
The 8th Annual North Carolina Airgun Show is scheduled for October 15th and 16th.
I intend to be there. I hope to see some of you there also.
Got something interesting to post about the reloading the salt clips for the Bug A Salt Shred er pistol.
Without going to all the details I have been using water to hold the salt in place in the clip and letting it set overnight to let the water evaporate. Which by the way has been working fine.
So here’s what I tried. I used 70%
isopropyl alcohol instead of water. I let the clip set over night. It worked just like using the water. But now the clip has a chemical smell from the alcohol. The clips I did with water have no smell.
Get what happened when I shot a wasp today. I shot it at about 5 feet. It was crawling then in about 2 seconds it rolled over with legs up. Never had one do that before.
I wonder if the alcohol got activated when the salt hit the wasp.
Same results with a horse fly also.
Is the alcohol doing something?
Instead of Isopropyl, use tequila and some lime juice. It may not kill them, but they will not care when you smash them.
I’m afraid the tequila would be gone before I got to do the experiment. 😉
Had no idea so i looked it up: “Isopropyl alcohol dissolves a wide range of non-polar compounds. It also evaporates quickly, leaves nearly zero oil traces, compared to ethanol, and is relatively non-toxic, compared to alternative solvents.” Maybe it does something to the salt that makes it toxic?
“…relatively non-toxic, compared to alternative solvents…” It is a relative thing. I would not recommend drinking Isopropyl alcohol.
Only Everclear…thank you very much!
See my answer to Gunfun for mixer ideas since drinking it strait can be painful…LOL!
Don’t know but I searched about using alcohol to eliminate wasps after the results I got. And people just spray alcohol on them with the same results. Some use liquid soap mixed with alcohol. Maybe the alcohol is doing something with the salt loads?
Sounds a little like what Everclear mixed 1:1 with Orange Julius does to me!
I suspect what’s happening is the alcohol on the outside of the salt pellet is evaporating rapidly, leaving a solid layer of dried salt around a core of salt that is still wet with isopropyl. Then when you fire the salt pellet, some of the alcohol is getting on the insect, and apparently dissolving the waxy or oily outer coating on their exoskeleton (if the results of my web search were accurate). This should be easy to confirm by using a pen or something to push one of the dried salt pellets out of the clip, then breaking it open to see if it’s still wet inside. You may also want to try letting a reloaded clip dry for a week or two to see if it dries all the way through, and then test it to see if you still get good fragmentation.
I just made a salt clip up with the alcohol. I’ll let it set this week and see how it works.
And I do know this that the salt clips have a strong smell. Made my eyes burn a little. Maybe the salt mixed with the alcohol is doing something too.
Gunfun1, good for you, man!
And by the way, my dubbing wax arrived today, but then we had a massive storm where it rained so hard that you couldn’t see.
Hence, I will test the Crosman 357 (6″ barrel) with salt tomorrow, and post some pics of how it does; thank you.
Take care, wish me luck,
I was wondering if you have messed with it yet. Will be waiting for your results.
As I mentioned in Part 1, I think waterglass (sodium silicate) would be about ideal to seal your salt cylinders.
Maybe so. Another thing I’m going to try is some swimming pool salt. It seems to be a lot finer salt. Almost like a powder. And heck you can get a 40 lb. bag for like $6 right now. That would probably be a life time supply of salt. 🙂
That supply would enable you to design and shoot a Bug-A-Salt-type artillery piece, GF1 – not that FM is trying to give any of you degreed and non-degreed engineers ideas… 😉
Wonder what a potatoe gun converted to shoot salt loads would be like.
Heck I bet that would take out a whole swarm nest and all. 🙂
OK guys, here we go.
Over the years I have acquired “stuff” here at RRHFWA. All kinds of “stuff”, mostly airgun related. Something else that has happened over the years is that there have been a few people who have really helped out RRHFWA, asking nothing in return. By the way, they either read and/or participate in this blog.
As sorta kinda as a tribute to those kind folks, I am going to have a little giveaway. It is nothing much. Some of the “stuff” that has accumulated over the years.
Here are the rules:
There are two boxes, numbered one and two. They are not big boxes, so no you are not going to get a free airgun. You can “bid” on either, but not both. One entry per person. All entries must be made in response to this post as I am a lazy slob and am not going to hunt around for the entries. “Bidding” will end at midnight according to this blog.
Sometime tomorrow I will draw the names of the winners and announce such on this blog, whereupon they can get in touch with me and give me their mailing addresses.
I will pay postage for the “prizes” in the continental USA (lower 48). Sorry Siraniko and DonaldA, I cannot afford to send it there.
Understandable. Even if I won I doubt if I’d receive it due to draconian gun laws around here. I can’t even get just the pistol grip frame of a 1322!
Hi Ridge Runner,
That is a generous offer. As a fellow tinkerer and collector, I can’t resist the allure of a mystery box direct from Ridge Runner’s Home for Wayward Airguns. I hope my meager contributions here have in some small way added to your enjoyment of the blog (as have your comments for me) and I humbly submit my “bid” for box number two.
RidgeRunner, I would like to “bid” on mystery box #1.
(And should I win, I’ll pay you for the postage. =>)
A very generous offer on your part. Since airman and thedave have replied, I will abstain from the bidding. Good luck gentlemen.
“Results of the Pseudo-Bug-Shred-ER”
Wishing a blessed Sunday to all.
Previously, I had told B.B. and Gunfun1 that I would let you all know the results of my testing of my Crosman 357 with 6″ barrel when loaded with salt; all I had to do was to wait for the wax to arrive.
I finally got my dubbing wax, this particular batch know as “Low Tack SWAX” from Loon Outdoors. It is very easy to use; I just spread some on my index finger and wiped it over the back of the Crosman “speed loader clip.” Then I applied the tissue paper I had cut out (yes, I had to use red paper from Christmas, as that was all I had =>), and pressed it in place on the back of the cylinder. Next I loaded up each opening with salt; I used regular Morton brand table salt, as that is all we have on hand (a tribute to my Mom, it’s the only salt she ever bought). I wiped off the excess (and saved it in a plastic bag for next time), and rubbed some dubbing wax on the front of the cylinder, then added on the precut wax paper (which had been cut out to clear the notches to ensure that the cylinder can rotate).
For some odd reason, unlike any other CO2 revolver I’ve ever owned, this one shoots a squib load on the first two shots. Hence, to ensure that I was testing the salt loads with full power, I fired 3 shots with a cylinder of pellets…and the first two fired weakly (even by the sound of them), but the third shot was at full power and punched through both sides of my soda can, so I was ready to test the salt loads
I used tin foil for targets, and I made a 1″ tall numeral on each one (something about the size of a wasp); I numbered them “1” to “5” in order to test the gun from 1 feet to 5 feet. I shot down at the targets that were placed on the grass; I used concrete blocks (since I’m not 8 feet tall) for the 4 and 5 foot targets; I used a tape measure to set the distance of the muzzle from the target. On the first shot, I aimed at the bottom of the “1” (or else there’d not be a “1” left), but on all the other targets, I aimed at the center of the number.
As you can see by the targets, at 1 foot, the salt blew about a 1″ hole through the tin foil (however, it failed to penetrate a Pepsi can at that distance; it did put about a 1/2″ dent in it, but none of the salt penetrated the can). At 2 feet, I got a nice 3″ usable pattern, and all the salt penetrated the foil. At 3 feet, I got a good 5″ pattern, and again, all of the salt penetrated the foil. At 4 feet, I got a 7″ pattern, with about 3/4 of the salt penetrating the foil. At 5 feet, I got a nice 9″ pattern, but only half of the salt penetrated the foil. Hence, I will try to keep my shots to under 5 feet, but I do believe that any insect hit at 5 feet would have its wings obliterated (even if you did need to stomp it).
So, I am going to declare victory on this test…even though the gun has yet to shoot a wasp. Yes, it’s lying out in the car port right now…it’s all loaded up with Hank Specials and is ready-to-go…but with nary a wasp to be seen.
My theory is, the word is out, and the wasps are all like,
“Uh-oh! Ol’ Dave’s got him some kinda wasp blaster! We’d better skeedaddle, afur that boy puts a hurtin’ on us!”
Yep; that must be it. =)~
Blessings and good shooting to all,
And here’s a pic of the making of those salt loads…
Wow! Your gun is getting patterns similar to my SHRED-ER!
Great report . May I add it to Tuesday’s blog?
Certainly, Sir; thank you! =>
I will attach a couple more pics that may be of some use to you; thanks again.
…and here’s the dented can.
After loading my second cylinder, I vaporized one small wasp at 3 feet, and also one fly at the same range. My third shot took down an old (vacant) wasp nest from a foot away. But then I noticed that the back of the cylinder did not look “right.” I fired shot #4 at a leaf on a bush, and saw no shot pattern. Epic failure! I did NOT use enough wax. As you can see in this picture, the front of the cylinder is fine; you can see the outline of all the chambers as darker against the plastic than the lighter shade over the salt. On the back side, the paper is all the same shade, since I did not use enough wax, and the paper lifted up and several chambers of salt leaked out. Lesson learned; use enough wax! =>
Great report on the Crosman 357 6″ shooting Hank Specials!
Nice patterns out to 4′ with the 5″ showing just a few gaps for wasp size targets to Get Lucky!
Never owned the 357 but if it is anything like the other Crosman CO2 piercing systems (22XX style) and works on impacting the Powerlet seal you have a blunt or bent point or a weak spring causing the early Squibs.
“you have a blunt or bent point or a weak spring causing the early Squibs.”
Thanks for that info; I’ll have to get in there with a light and check that out. And yes, 5 feet is very much the outside range; I did vaporize two insects at 3 feet, which seems to be the optimum range for this little gun. =>
Pretty cool results.
What I was wondering is what happens to the wax when you shoot it. Is it guming up in the barrel?
Also 5 minutes to load one clip. It takes me about a minute or so to load a clip. Although I got to wait to let mine dry or a little quicker if I use the heat gun which adds about another minute to it.
What I have been doing is after I use a clip I load it and put it back in the package. I’m not even going to open the other 2 packages of the already loaded clips I have. They will be for back ups if something happens to a clip. Which I doubt will happen.
Anyway cool stuff.
Cutting out the two wax paper pieces, and then cutting out their centers is what takes me so much time.
The wax doesn’t get in the barrel; the barrel stays pretty clean; but the paper on the barrel side starts to bunch up, so after 5 shots, I trim it off.
However, I did have that “epic failure” on my second clip where I used too little wax (rushed the job, not cool) on the paper on the back of the clip; then, after 4 shots, the paper on that side lifted up, and dumped much of that salt…lesson learned! =>
Take care & good shooting to you,
Here is picture of the masking tape on the back of the clip. Then a picture of the salt loaded and dry in the clip. When the salt is dry I take the masking tape off the back then push the black piece in and I’m ready to shoot.
Also here is what I have the alcohol or water in. It’s a old RWS silicone oil bottle I saved. That way I can place the water or alcohol precisely in the holes with the salt in it.
I’ll post the pictures down at the bottom. We will run out of room up here.
B.B. and Readership,
I shared this with Billj to distract him from going for a VL!
At a minimum some very informative pictures on swaged lead #4.
I scanned that article. If Ruger didn’t at least consider offering that as an option to the 10/22 they aren’t thinking. What a great idea.
Your welcome! Seems he did all that some time ago…maybe his work never crossed Ruger’s sightlines!
I know you have interest in BP and Muzzleloader so knew you would be intrigued. When you have a little time you may find the rest of the site of interest too!
He/They must have a bunch of money or some great skills (probably both) and knowledge; nevertheless fun and informative reads.
Shootski, WOW, thanks for the link! That ol’ boy really had his thinking cap on…very cool. =>
What a rabbit hole that article that was. He even made a repeating version using the Girardoni magazine principle!
Unfortunately, I am away from home right now, and do not have access to my email (home) account.
When I do get home, I will do a thoughtful evaluation (at least, as thoughtful as somebody like me can be) and proceed accordingly.
Thanks for your time.
Thanks again, B.B. I added a few more pics and text, related to my vaporization of a couple of insects, and also related to my epic failure from using an insufficient amount of wax…I was in too much of a rush! But, hopefully, my failure will be a lesson for someone else. =>
P.S. In case you need a B.B.-like summary, I guess it could be something to the effect that you can get some decent SHRED-ER-like performance from an old Crosman 357 (probably a current Vigilante, as well), but you will have to do a bit of work; it takes me about 5 minutes to load one cylinder with salt…when using the proper amount of dubbing wax. =>
And the dubbing wax didn’t say how much was in the container, but it’s pretty small; still I think it will be good for thousands of shots, and it was only 9 bucks, delivered, from Amazon. =>
Dave here is the front of the clip with the masking tape.
Here is the back of the clip with salt loaded and alcohol added and now dry. Notice tape is still on.
Here is my water or alcohol dispenser.
Here is the front of the clip after I peel off the masking tape and ready to shoot.
Here is the back of the clip ready to shoot.
I’ll have to try that; but I wonder if it will work OK in my gun, since I don’t have that post to break up the salt? I guess trying it is the only way to know! =>
Thanking you much for the pics and info,
If your salt loads worked out of your gun I don’t see why this wouldn’t work. And I’m sure that post helps break the salt up but the blast of Co2 is probably enough in your gun with out that post being there.
If you try it let me know.