0

People are listening

pump-assist 392
That’s not the Dragonfly Mark 2, folks. It’s the Dragonfly’s inspiration — the Benjamin Pump-Assist 392.

This report covers:

  • Dragonfly Mark 2
  • Meopta MeoSport RD
  • The Diana Oktoberfest
  • The Air Venturi Avenger
  • Others
  • Summary

While searching for a great weekend report I went back to the first post I ever made. This blog started on March 2 of 2005, and next Thursday it will be 18 years old! In a few more years it will be old enough to vote, except in Chicago, where the slogan is vote early and vote often!

Dragonfly Mark 2

As I read the comments to that post I discovered something. It seems that people read the blog and they listen. In the comments I directed a reader to a 5-part series that was made in 2008 and titled, The Pump-Assist Benjamin 392. That was written back in 2008 and I revisited the rifle in December of 2016. And I thought that would be the end of it. But in 2022 I started testing the .22-caliber Dragonfly Mark 2. As you all know so well, I think that air rifle is one of the best I have ever seen, and it came about partly because of this blog!

pump-assist 392
The Benjamin pump-assist 392 is the father of the Seneca Dragonfly Mark 2.

The pump-assist Benjamin cost about $100 more than the basic rifle, so people stayed away from it in droves. Only a few were made and each one was hand built. Then its inventor, Robert Moss, faded into obscurity (though I’m sure he didn’t think so!) until Val Gamerman sought him out to recreate the idea. It took four years to bring it to market, but the Dragonfly was made from the ground up — not by modifying an existing design. As a result, the Dragonfly Mark 2 is $20 less expensive than the Benjamin Variable Pump (the rifle the 392 evolved into). 

That’s what happens when people listen.

Meopta MeoSport RD

I have reported on several Meopta scopes in the past, but the MeoSport R 3-15X50 was special. Where most Meopta scopes are priced in the lower end of the premium scope category, this one came out in 2022 at a retail price of $450. Finally airgunners could afford a premium scope that sold at a price under the premium level. I tested it for you in 2022 in a two-part report and I still use it on various tests of accurate airguns.

Meopta MeoSport 3-15
The MeoSport 3-15X50 brought premium scopes down to affordable levels.

But that’s not all. Meopta realized that airguns are a market sector they need to cultivate, and there is now an even less expensive Optika5 3-15X44 second focal plane scope. It retails for $400! That is listening, folks!

The Diana Oktoberfest

I have talked about The Diana model 30 for years. But several years ago a marketing manager from Diana told me there would soon be an affordable bolt action ball shooter for the rest of us. And the Oktoberfest is it! Diana listened, they soldiered on and created the Oktoberfest rifle for airgunners who care about accuracy.

Oktoberfest
Diana Oktoberfest.

I’m not done testing that air rifle. I just wish I could find a source for some actual 4.4 mm lead balls — not those labeled 4.4 mm but those that actually measure 4.4 mm. HEY — is anybody listening?

The Air Venturi Avenger

Sometimes it’s the manufacturers that listen. And sometimes they have people working for them who actually know what is needed. Tyler Patner is such a person. When Air Venturi asked me in 2020 to test a new precharged pneumatic (PCP) they were offering I said sure. It was made in China, so I wondered how good it could be.

Well, three years later I’ll tell you how good it is — stupendous. In fact, my personal Air Venturi Avenger, called BB’s Goldie, is so accurate that it challenges my Air Arms S510XS! That’s a $350 David (base rifle price) taking on an $1,800 Goliath!

BBs Goldie
BB’s Goldie.

Build a Custom Airgun

Others

Sure there have been others. When Daystate and FX told the world that accurate repeating PCPs with great triggers had to cost thousands, Crosman gave us the Benjamin Marauder. It’s a model that people still refer to, as in — just as good as a Marauder.

Marauder
Benjamin Marauder is a timeless classic.

Bug Buster

Even before this blog began people were listening. In 1998 (?) Leapers founder David Ding listened to me at the SHOT Show and a year later the Bug Buster scope line was born! It’s two decades later and still no other scope in the world focuses as close as 3 yards. There will even be a premium Integrix Bug Buster that will cost about half what the other Integrix scopes cost — as a gift to faithful airgunners for their support of UTG over the years.

Bug Buster
There it is, boys — the Integrix Bug Buster with an etched glass reticle!

Summary

Well, listeners — I have left the field wide open for you to talk all weekend. Go to it!

174 thoughts on “People are listening”

  1. Yeah, B.B., we’re listening.
    You got me to buy a P17, an HW30S, two BugBuster scopes, a Crosman 362, a Dragonfly Mark2…
    …I’m not complaining, just noting, and in each case you were right; the hardware’s all good.
    And I’m sure you’ll enable me to buy other stuff in the future; I’m cool with that.
    But I’m really happy when not just your readers, but manufacturers listen to you.
    That’s good for them, good for the industry, and, ultimately, good for us. 🙂
    Blessings to you,
    dave

    • Blessings indeed! Let The Great Enablement continue, ‘cuz FM ain’t done being enabled yet. Lotta catching up to do.

      The Benjamin 392 assist is a good-looker; obviously it was a little ahead of its time and potential customers’ wallets when it made its debut.

    • Dave,

      I looked recently at the wholesaler’s website, the one where I bought my s400. I looked to see if they had them back, but they don’t even carry air guns at all now. :^( The business is called Rex Distributor.

      Michael

  2. Tom,

    That’s rather curious that Diana would market the Oktoberfest without a matching ammunition in the market. Are they hearing without listening? To the sound of silence.

    Siraniko

    PS: Section The Air Venturi Avenger 1st paragraph 2nd sentence: “And sometimes they have people worling (working) for them who actually know what is needed.

  3. BB,

    I have enjoyed this blog of yours for many years. Fortunately for us in the airgun world, some of the manufacturers read and listen to what you have to say also. My first airgun scope was/is an UTG (I still have it). I am so sorry I do not have the 4X and 6X Bug Buster. I do have a 3-9 and a 3-12.

    I have still resisted getting a Chinese airgun, but they are making it most difficult to not do such. They are making some pretty nice and most affordable ones these days, some of which you have influenced. Fortunately for me, there are a whole bunch of old gals out here that are looking for a place to retire to. An old feller was talking to me this past week about an old Diana that is looking for a home.

    Oops. In a few more years it will be old enough to vote, excerpt (except) in Chicago, where the slogan is vote early and vote often!

    They also vote after they are dead.

  4. Hello All,

    Here is my promised lengthy comment in response to the many responses (Whew!) to my post of 2/22/2022, which I prepared late yesterday. I rely heavily on the words of others because they are better written, more informed, and my right eye was throbbing terribly from my monthly ophthalmic treatment, which is for one of many medical issues, Macular Edema, I have in my eyes.

    My prickly mood as I wrote on the 22nd was colored by what I was going to experience shortly after. I will spare you the literally gruesome, knee-weakening details, except to say once a month for the past two years my ophthalmologist fits the same exact device used to keep Alex’s eyes open in that infamous scene in “A Clockwork Orange.” Yep, it’s a real thing, and he inserts it under my upper and lower eyelids to prevent my eye from involuntarily closing from the truly excruciating pain that follows. A hypodermic needle is pushed into my eyeball which he uses to inject medicine into the center of my eye. It is more painful than any other medical procedure I have experienced in a life full of painful medical procedures. (A personal comment regarding the kind words of concern many of you offered me is forthcoming.)

    OK, as promised, and I apologize for its length:

    On the 22nd, FM wrote: “There were very warm epochs in Earth’s climate history.”

    I found a webpage by earthday.org (I know, Earth Day is a little corny) that responds to this observation well:

    “The Earth has been through a lot in the last 4.5 billion years. And yes, high levels of carbon dioxide have been released naturally in the Earth’s history. Scientists have attributed mass extinctions to atmospheric carbon dioxide from 580 million years ago, long before humans were around to burn ridiculous amounts of fossil fuels.

    “What we’re experiencing with climate change today, however, is far different than any warming or cooling humanity has seen — in rate and in scale. Our present climate change is occurring 20 to 50 times faster than the most rapid climate change events in Earth’s history.

    “That some of the world’s mass extinctions have been tied to CO2 shouldn’t be a relief, though; it should be a wakeup call.” (earthday.org)

    The same source provides the following responses to some of the most often made arguments against climate change, three of which were made by some of you yesterday (all is quoted):

    ARGUMENT: “Scientists can’t even agree that climate change is happening.”

    Well, actually… 99 percent of scientists agree that climate change is happening and that humans are the primary cause.

    To put this into perspective, we are more sure that humans are causing climate change than we are that smoking causes cancer.

    Perhaps you’re thinking of indecisive politicians, many of whom are backed by the fossil fuel industry. Maybe that’s why leaders are still dragging their feet when it comes to climate action — or worse, vocally denying its existence in the face of rigorous scientific report, after report, after report.

    The truth is politicians have known about climate change since (at least) the 1980s and fossil fuel companies have known about it since the 1960s. But leaders in the highest-emitting countries are doing next to nothing to slow climate change, let alone stop it.

    ARGUMENT: “It’s so cold outside. Sure could use some of that global warming.”

    Weather and climate are two different things. Weather fluctuates from day to day, while climate is defined by long-term trends and weather averages.

    So, just because it’s cold right now doesn’t mean global warming isn’t happening. The last seven years have been the hottest seven years on record, and that’s counting the bitter polar vortexes that have driven Arctic air down across North America during that period.

    The Earth is on track to warm up to two degrees Celsius this century, but winter’s not going to disappear altogether in many parts of the world. Record low temperatures will just become rarer.

    The U.S. saw nearly as many record highs as record lows in the 1950s. By 2000, the number of record highs was double the record lows. And, as the cold becomes rarer, it will feel more intense and hit unexpecting places.

    And while you might not lose your winter altogether, unchecked climate change will bring other major weather shifts, in the form of extreme weather events like drought, wildfire, and hurricanes that will become more frequent and more intense in our warming world.

    So, bundle up and brace yourself for the extreme weather climate change brings — including the intense cold.

    ARGUMENT: “Plants and animals will adapt to the changes.”

    Climate change is occurring too rapidly to allow for species to adapt. And this is about more than the pictures of starving polar bears you see on Facebook.

    Climate change threatens over 40 percent of amphibians, nearly 33 percent of corals, and more than a third of marine mammals. At this point, with climate change not even at its fullest force, more than one million species are at risk of extinction. Estimates show that dozens of species go extinct every day.

    This is because climate change is compounding the effects of other already-existing detrimental human activities like overfishing and deforestation.

    A U.N. report published in 2019 ranked the top five direct drivers of the disappearance of species. Climate change was third, behind changes in land and sea use and overexploitation of organisms (all human-caused).

    Currently, species are going extinct at 1,000 times the natural rate of extinction. That means we could lose 30 to 50 percent of the total species found on Earth by mid-century. Can you pass the cranberry sauce?

    ARGUMENT: “Climate change is a good thing.”

    For many reasons — economic, environmental, physiological — climate change will have a net negative impact on the world. Research even shows we’ve significantly underestimated the financial risks of climate change around the world.

    The United States stands to lose billions of dollars, second only to India in terms of the negative economic impact. In our warming world, U.S. estimates currently sit at a loss of one to four percent of its GDP each year by 2100.

    But enough with the economic hypotheticals. We’re already seeing how dangerous climate change is to plants and animals as well as humans.

    Higher temperatures have increased heat-related deaths. Higher temperatures also worsen air quality, which scientists have connected to everything from more violent crimes to more cancers.

    But what’s just as scary are the statistics on natural disasters: Hurricanes are reaching new extremes — with the number of categories 4 and 5 increasing over the last 30 years. Wildfires, too, are claiming larger burn areas and increasing in intensity.

    ARGUMENT: “It won’t affect me or anyone I know.”

    Climate impacts are already here and now, and they will only get worse if we continue to do nothing. Climate change affects individuals disproportionately, hurting the poorest and most vulnerable communities worse than others, so you may just be feeling a buffer from your comparative privilege.

    Climate justice recognizes that climate change isn’t just a physical problem — it’s an ethical one, too. The individuals and communities who will be most affected by climate change are the ones contributing the least to it.

    But this is also a generational issue — you may not have to bear the brunt of our collective inaction on climate change, but let’s try to have some empathy for future generations (even if you don’t understand TikTok or selfies).

    Your great grandchildren — who are currently on track to inherit a world four degrees warmer than yours and feel its effects at every stage of their life — will have to clean up the mess your generation made in their fight for survival.

    They’ll grow up in a world with more air pollution, more vector-borne diseases, and more extreme weather events to deal with.

    (originally published on November 25, 2019 and updated on December 20, 2021.)

    The following is from a different webpage (https://www.edf.org/climate/how-climate-change-plunders-planet/climate-change-facts):

    ARGUMENT: “Climate change stuff is just propaganda by the mainstream media!”

    1. Climate change is real and human-made, and there is overwhelming scientific consensus that this is true.

    Human-produced pollution is the main cause of climate change and this will become much more dangerous in the future if we do not act.

    NASA, the National Academy of Sciences and every major scientific organization recognizes this. Indeed, 97 percent of climate scientists worldwide agree that climate change is real and driven by human activity. In the scientific world, that is consensus.

    2. All major climate change reports are thoroughly researched and based on the most accurate, up-to-date science.

    For example, the National Climate Assessment (NCA) report was developed and written by NOAA, NASA, the Department of Defense and experts at 10 other agencies. It was based on the most up-to-date scientific literature and matches the conclusions of thousands of other scientists around the world.

    The report includes the latest attribution studies for Hurricane Harvey, which made landfall and devastated parts of the U.S. in 2017. Studies cited in the report show how human action made the storm about three times more likely to happen and increased Harvey’s rainfall by at least 15 percent, with a best estimate of 38 percent, based on data culled since 2016.

    3. Climate change studies are transparent.

    Climate change reports from major climate science institutions around the world are entirely based on thoroughly peer-reviewed scientific research, are further reviewed by external experts at various stages of development and are often even publicly available in draft form and open to review by the general public.

    For example, the NCA report’s development was open for review at every step. The rough draft was open for public comment and the authors were even required to respond to every public comment. The report was also reviewed and endorsed by major scientific institutions. Every statement in the report is meticulously documented with sources and citations.

    4. Addressing climate change will strengthen the economy.

    Working to stop climate change can drive economic growth, while unchecked climate change is expected to have dire economic consequences. For example, Citibank estimates the costs of unchecked climate change at more than $40 trillion by 2060.

    Meanwhile, more than 4 million Americans now work in wind, solar, energy efficiency and other clean energy jobs — far more than the 160,000 who work in the coal industry — and experts estimate that investing in revitalizing water infrastructure in the U.S. could generate 1.3 million more jobs.

    5. Climate scientists are underpaid — or not paid at all — for their work.

    Scientists often volunteer their time to write climate change reports. For example, the authors of the NCA report did not receive compensation for writing the report.

    6. Federal climate change reports are credible because they are written by scientists, not politicians.

    The NCA authors, for example, are not political appointees, but impartial, independent civil servant scientists whose work is not directed by the politicians but by the facts.

    It’s worth noting that fossil fuel companies fund climate studies too. In peer-reviewed climate studies by Exxon Mobil from 1977 to 2014, 83 percent acknowledged the reality of climate change, and that it is caused by humans.

    7. Climate change reports consider a wide range of possible future scenarios.

    Major climate change assessments from reputable scientific institutions — such as the U.S. government’s National Climate Assessment and the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s special report on different levels of warming — consider a wide range of future conditions, from the use of advanced technologies that remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, to escalating emissions from the absence of climate action.

    Here’s one from me:

    ARGUMENT: “The Bible says . . .”

    God gave dominion over the Earth and the responsibility to Mankind to be good stewards. “God will provide; God will see the world through it.” No, He won’t. Just because God has the power to provide and save the Earth does not mean he will. This responsibility is a test. One doesn’t take the exam back to the teacher and say, “You are the expert, you take the exam.” To do so is to fail God’s test.

    The Bible says many things, and some of them appear to conflict with each other. But in the Old Testament the tenet that the Earth, like so many things, is a gift from God is consistent, as is the tenet that God intends for us to tend to it with care. In the New Testament Jesus repeats this again and again.

    Additionally, God cautions us against ignorance, especially willful ignorance, as an excuse against sin.

    Peace,

    Michael

    • Michael,

      I believe the Bible to be God’s word. You are correct to point out that not only did God expect us to be “good stewards” of this Earth, we have done a lousy job of it.

      I do have issue with the “Earth Day” and other “scientists” timeline, most especially when they ignore evidence that contradicts their “Theory” of Evolution. Their own “Laws” of science contradict their “Theory”. I guess it is true that if you repeat a lie enough times, someone will start believing it.

      Having said all of this, do you not think that this subject matter is beyond the purpose of this blog? I do understand that there are not many places where you can freely express your inner feelings and thoughts, but should we not limit ourselves here to the general subject matter for which it was intended? You really do not want to read what is going on inside my head. It scares even me sometimes.

      Besides, it is waaay too early in the morning for all of this.

      • RidgeRunner,

        Actually, it was your comment (along with Bob M’s) on the 22nd that prompted me to do all of this: “With a winter like this, I could almost be convinced that “global warming” is real.”

        But I want to thank you. :^D I had no idea so many readers of this blog are among the tiny minority of climate change non-believers in the world. Down from 1/3 of the country, only 28% of Americans believe Climate Change is not real (https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/visualizations-data/ycom-us/). And only two countries, Saudi Arabia and Indonesia have more climate change deniers than the United States (theguardian.com).

        If I am not part of a solution, then I am part of the problem. :^)

        Michael

        • Michael

          Thank you for a nice read on the current thoughts about climate change. It was a pretty long one for this forum,,, that didn’t involve airguns, that is.

          I totally accept and believe that climate change IS happening AND that humans have caused a great deal of it. I believe in the “scientific method” , tho.
          By that I mean the idea that the things we learn should not be disregarded because they do not agree with our hypothesis. That is where I and many others have issues with most “published” articles( not research papers) .

          Any scientist who ignored contradictory evidence in a research study would soon find himself ostracized. Not so for a journalist who is expected to just that.

          So,, do I believe in human enabled climate change is real and happening? Yes, quite firmly. Do I believe that the sensationalized stories of our impending doom are accurate? Weeeelllllll,,, I believe that the possibilities are there,,, but I also believe that they are extremely remote.

          We have done a great deal in this country to help alleviate our part in forcing climate change,, and we are doing more every day. It is good that we are making this effort, but we must be careful to do so in a thoughtful manner. “Exhorting the mob” is never a good long term plan.

          Sorry RR,, It’s later now and I couldn’t help myself.

          • “By that I mean the idea that the things we learn should not be disregarded because they do not agree with our hypothesis. That is where I and many others have issues with most “published” articles( not research papers) .”

            See my inclusion of counters to this. Contrary data are not ignored by credible climate scientists

      • RidgeRunner,

        I will do my level best to honor your appropriate request. Just realize I have seen most of the World first hand and done so much to learn how it really works to stay alive for another day. When confronted with drivel I have a hard time holding my tongue. I guess I’m lucky i never misused the authority granted by the Personnel Reliability Program I spent decades under.

        shootski

            • shootski,

              When I wrote, “Just because we disagree does not mean we must be disagreeable,” I meant it sincerely.

              “I was responding to RidgeRunner.” In an open forum. Are you saying you thought I would not read that comment? Are you saying you did not intend for me to read that comment? Are you saying by “When confronted with drivel . . .” you did not mean my comments?

              Exodus 20:16
              Matthew 15:18
              James 3:14
              John 8:43-47
              James 1:26
              Matthew 5:11

              Overkill? Yes, that is one of my innumerable flaws, as this page demonstrates. :^(

              Michael

      • “Having said all of this, do you not think that this subject matter is beyond the purpose of this blog?”

        You brought it up. Were your comment and Bob M’s comment about climate change beyond the purpose of this blog?

        • Michael,

          Hmm. You very likely are correct in that I have commented on this subject. Your chastisement is received and accepted in I hope the proper spirit. I must learn to keep my socio-political views to myself. I do humbly apologize.

          • RR,

            I apologize if I offended you personally. I never meant that. Above I wrote to shootski, who seems upset, “Just because we disagree does not mean we must be disagreeable,” I meant it sincerely., and I offer it to you, as well.

            Michael

            • Michael,

              You did not offend me in the least. Do not sweat it dude. I have very thick skin and I do realize that I see things differently than others. Variety is the spice of life. We’re good.

      • The Genesis Account when recounting the instruction to Adam, a.ka. “Red Clay,” instructs him to “radah,” and, “Qavash.” Those are to subdue and dominate. Those two verbs are the same when used to describe a rape of a woman! Here, however, it meant to have the power to affect the creation that IS NOT THEIRS but is under the sovereignty of YHWH. Adam’s role is that of the steward or care taker of the creation; having the real power to manipulate the Creation for good or ill. Obviously, the charge is to be a GOOD steward not an evil one.

        Genesis’ first chapters are a revolution in philosophy and theology. They posit an INANIMATE creation, contrary to the mythology of Mesopotamia, meaning that the creation is just STUFF – what we call time, space and matter. That STUFF is to be used by Adam as a creature made of STUFF who is to manipulate it by means of experimentation and experience NOT prayers and incantations! Gensis is, in the long history of Western thought, the beginning of a materialistic and ultimately scientific approach to the creation.

        If one knows this, and the place of Gensis as a revolution against Mesopotamian and other mythic forms of thought, then one is precluded from the Seven Day Creation nonsense of too many so-called “Christian” groups. What Genesis is saying is that YHWH is the creator of a good creation and we, as incarnate (or fleshly beings made of STUFF) are to work within in it by the various frameworks of the physical world. Astrophysics is NOT precluded by Genesis, but its fullest accounting as its understanding of cosmology, physics and science in general grows richer and fuller.

        This also makes us RESPONSIBLE FOR the effects of our use of the creation (the STUFF). Here, in Ohio, in East Palestine, we have an example of the effects of railroad deregulation, aging infrastructure, and just plain accidents. When we ignore the reasons for things like regulations, we end up with potential disasters and WE are responsible for those things as the appointed stewards of creation – from a Biblical/Theological perspective.

        Big questions need to be addressed to the managers of the railroad in this circumstance. Big questions need to be addressed to the Congress and prior administration that allowed a softening of safety regulations. No doubt, the decision makers would that we should look at the tracks and bearings of the train at East Palestine, but who makes the decisions? Locally, a train engineer, but systemically the bosses and regulators who ignore reality foolishly or greed or gain. The power to “radah,” and “Qavash,” is not without its consequences – the people of EP are paying the price for other folk’s stupidity and wanton disregard.

        • LFranke,

          I admire your knowledge and understanding of the scripture. I wish I knew as much as you.

          I also agree completely with your thoughts regarding East Palestine and how the residents have been harmed by negligence. My heart broke when a homeowner asked about his property values. And what of the farmers all around that town? I did not hear a word about soil being tested, presently or in the future. Imagine a farmer whose family has over five or six generations of his family investing in the land. Perhaps before the crash the acreage was worth $3M. But now? What if it can no longer be farmed or even sold for development?

          Thanks for your expertise.

          Michael

          • My late parents lived in Calcutta, not far from East Palestine, in an area of NE Ohio that has its share of despoilation of the environment by almost three centuries of human endeavor. All the forests are secondary growth as the primeval ones were burned for fuel. East Liverpool has periodic problems with sinks and collapses due to old clay mines (for the pottery industry that once thrived there) and the now diminished steel industry used to fog the entire Ohio Valley with sulphureous near whiteouts. It is probably among the oldest and most worn parts of our Buckeye State dating back to the times of Washington as a surveyor and minor military officer (and beyond to earlier times).

            The people of EP will be paying for the irresponsibility of the railroad and those who seek to deregulate commerce and industry. The right wing in today’s political milieu seems given to presenting a view that regulation is a threat to manufacture, commerce and industry and should be eliminated in the name of “freedom.” We see how “freely dumb” that is.

            Regulations DO NOT ARISE out of whims of civil servants. Indeed, every rule and reg causes a burden to a civil servant or group of them to enforce; as a past civil servant, the goal would be to minimize them and their workload. HOWEVER, regulations and rules do arise because someone is acting badly either intentionally or by ignorance. They arise to protect the public from intentional or unwitting harm. They are a force for good, in the main, and complained about by those who would do harm – also in the main, for the sake of their convenience or enrichment.

            To the anti-regulation zealots, I simply remind them that the opposite of regulation is not “freedom,” but being “freely dumb!” I.e., it is irresponsibility. Regs have to be periodically reviewed and judged for effectiveness, reality and relevance; we need very few regulations on livery stables now days, for example. As East Palestine shows us, the removal of regulation and its compliance and enforcement isn’t “freedom” it is too often harm from being “freely dumb.” Accidents do and will continue to happen but that does not mean that we should abandon measures to minimize harm to our citizens, society and environment.

            • I will say that I broadly agree with you on this – regulations and laws are needed to make sure that all entities behave in a way that does not infringe on the rights of others, including managing “the tragedy of the commons.”

              But what drives me nuts is watching people have a kneejerk reaction of adding more regulations or laws on top of ones that already exist. So often we have tragedies that are caused by somebody breaking a law or regulation, and the general reaction is to “make it more illegal” than it already was . . . .

              While it is still early in the East Palestine review, I don’t doubt that the findings will show that somebody did something that was already against the rules – and of course people will want to follow the same sorry script.

              BTW, I’ll go on record as one that understands and therefore accepts the science of “climate change,” or more accurately, manmade alteration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and the consequences thereof. The good news is that, as the source of the problem, we actually can solve it internationally – just as we did with the much bigger problem of CFCs and ozone depletion through the Montreal Protocol. All it takes is will, and eventually we will find enough . . .

              Peace to all.

    • Michael,

      I’m so sorry to hear of your monthly eye procedure! What can I say? I would say you are brave, but what choice do you have?

      I put you on my healing prayer list yesterday and I will say that the Lord does listen to my requests. I will ask Him for a miracle for you. Matt 7:7-8.

      BB

      • Tom,

        Thank you so very much.

        You said it quite well, what choice do I have? I am by no means brave, but necessity is the mother of courage, I guess.

        Both my eyes have serious issues (cataracts, macular degeneration, macular edema), but my right eye, the one treated on the 22nd, provides me with no usable sight. At this stage the treatment is to preserve the organ.

        Michael

        • I can’t feel your pain but feel a lot of empathy and sympathy because my dad suffered from the same condition the last few years of his life. He was offered the option of injections to delay the inevitable darkness coming but at that point he was close to his century mark and he never had been very pain-tolerant, so he declined. At least he could still see well enough to enjoy “Wheel of Fortune” on TV up to the day he died. Have my own share of eye problems, starting with myopia diagnosed at age 10, so that keeps one keenly aware – and terrified – about problems with what is, to me, the most important of our five senses.

          So, you are in my prayers and may God grant you at least some improvement and hopefully relief as well. Also pray humanity comes to its senses in the many areas where we are failing miserably.

        • Michael,
          I put you on my prayer list for your eye issues.
          Personally, I can’t stand it if a grain of sand gets under my contact lens (like when I’m out riding my motorcycle). So I can barely imagine what you are going through!
          Praying for you,
          dave

        • Michael,

          I hope the process you are enduring saves the eye structure and nerves long enough for you to be assisted by the regenerative breakthroughs coming from the work at Harvard Medical!

          I will avoid a return broadside salvo to honor and uphold RidgeRunner’s request.

          shootski

      • Motorman,

        PragerU admits on its own web sight that “Prager University is not an accredited academic institution and does not offer certifications or diplomas. . . . [It] is an American advocacy group that creates videos promoting a conservative viewpoint on various political, economic, and sociological topics.” In other words, it is a right-wing propaganda producer and disseminator. They employ a total of 97 people.

        Alex Epstein is neither climate scientist nor meteorologist. He is a promoter of the coal and oil industries whose Bachelor of Arts is in Philosophy and Computer Science.

        Therefore, I will not watch that video, and I am sorry if I have offended you, that is not my inent. My inent is to promote the truth and facts about the most important problem facing humanity, climate change, and I will continue to do so without apology.

        Michael

        • Michael:

          Whether Prager U is an accredited university is not the point. The real point is, is the information presented accurate? Yes, you can demean the source of the information by using the words “propaganda producer”, but that’s just political word play, not logic and reason.

          You accept the words of newscasters every night on CNN, MSNBC or whatever and you don’t question THEIR credentials (are they legitimate climate “scientists” or meteorologists?). So, why would you not watch the video to assess the chance that there is some real-world accurate data being offered? Please excuse the observation that it appears you don’t want to entertain any information that may contradict your pre-conceived notions of fact.

          The truth about climate change is difficult to determine, but it is not difficult to determine that any scientist or educator that dares to defy the conventional wisdom is quickly cancelled, demonetized, and generally excoriated. Suppressing First Amendment rights doesn’t make a particular perspective right, it just makes it the only available perspective.

          You are not necessarily promoting truth and facts. You are promoting your opinion. The fact is that the climate on this marble has NEVER been stable. The Earth warmed significantly between 950 to 1250, then went thru several periods of extreme cold in the following centuries. Why? Several causes have been proposed: cyclical lows in solar radiation, heightened volcanic activity, changes in the ocean circulation, variations in Earth’s orbit and axial tilt (orbital forcing), and inherent variability in global climate. This much is certain. Since the world population during this time is estimated to be around 350 to 500 million it was far too low to have had an impact on climate.

          That you are willing to take up a cause and promote it within reasonable limits is admirable. But, always be willing and able to accept new information that may contradict your established perspectives.

          Motorman

  5. The following is mostly for shootski, who argued the other day that he listens to meteorologists more than “climate scientists.” Shootski, as we all know, loves statistics and figures, so I chose something with a lot of them. LOL:

    Shootski: The following study (https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/bams/95/7/bams-d-13-00091.1.xml), published in a scholarly, peer-reviewed journal by the American Meteorological Society, addressed your concerns. Here is the abstract:

    “Meteorologists’ Views About Global Warming: A Survey of American Meteorological Society Professional Members.” Neil Stenhouse, Edward Maibach, Sara Cobb et al. Print Publication: 01 Jul 2014 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00091.1 Page(s): 1029–1040
    “Meteorologists and other atmospheric science experts are playing important roles in helping society respond to climate change. However, members of this professional community are not unanimous in their views of climate change, and there has been tension among members of the American Meteorological Society (AMS) who hold different views on the topic. In response, AMS created the Committee to Improve Climate Change Communication to explore and, to the extent possible, resolve these tensions. To support this committee, in January 2012 we surveyed all AMS members with known e-mail addresses, achieving a 26.3% response rate (n = 1,854). In this paper we tested four hypotheses—1) perceived conflict about global warming will be negatively associated, and 2) climate expertise, 3) liberal political ideology, and 4) perceived scientific consensus will be positively associated—with 1) higher personal certainty that global warming is happening, 2) viewing the global warming observed over the past 150 years as mostly human caused, and 3) perception of global warming as harmful. All four hypotheses were confirmed. Expertise, ideology, perceived consensus, and perceived conflict were all independently related to respondents’ views on climate, with perceived consensus and political ideology being most strongly related. We suggest that AMS should attempt to convey the widespread scientific agreement about climate change; acknowledge and explore the uncomfortable fact that political ideology influences the climate change views of meteorology professionals; refute the idea that those who do hold nonmajority views just need to be ‘educated’ about climate change; and continue to deal with the conflict among members of the meteorology community.”

    CORRESPONDING AUTHOR: Neil Stenhouse, George Mason University, 4400 University Drive MSN 6A8, Fairfax, VA 22030, E-mail: nstenhou@gmu.edu A supplement to this article is available online (10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00091.2)

    Michael

  6. B.B.

    As the “godfather of airguns” you have a great platform. If they do not listen to your pearls of wisdom, you can make them sleep with the fishes.
    Unfortunately, we do not have that power.

    May the Force be with you!

    -Y

  7. Weihrauch won’t produce a multipump airgun (or it would exist already) but imagine a quality one were available to all of us european airgunners? 🙂

    How about this: Imagine an airgun like the Weihrauch HW90 – that is powered by an adjustable pressure air ram – to include an onboard easy-pumping mechanism (like that of the Dragonfly) for that air ram, then you would have a kinda multipump breakbarrel air rifle! How light could one manufacture such and how cool would it be…? ! 🙂
    ——————–
    I would like to buy quality fun targets just as much (!) as I already have bought quality airguns.
    Maybe it is because so many owners of airguns like to kill animals and I’m in the plinking minority, but I see less effort in target- than in airgun manufacturing. 🙁
    ——————–
    I second the call for ammunition that is consistently of one exact calibre, eg 4.4 mm lead round balls. 🙂

    • Theoben did that, although the pumping procedure sounded fiddly to me, to use a British term for a British (I think) air gun. It did not seem to be intended for on-the-fly power settings.

      • Michael, I’m still researching – currently reading some interesting stuff by a guy who calls himself Tom Gaylord (B.B. Pelletier), who has quite a bit of experience on various Theobens – and so I may yet find my answer, but, I wonder whether you meant that there was a Theoben with an onboard, albeit fiddly, gas ram pump?

        Oops, I have just read/ learnt the correct term: erm, it’s not a ‘gas ram’ but a gas spring!

        I am learning things about the mechanism of my very similar HW90, which is invaluable, thanks Tom Gaylord (B.B. Pelletier)! 🙂

      • Hello Fish, I remembered that this Weihrauch had a ‘funny’ trigger, and so I have just come back inside from having refreshed/ re-familiarised myself with mine.

        In answer to your question, my opinion on my HW90’s trigger is, it is different but perfectly fine, in a RidgeRunner kinda way, who likes one stage triggers. 🙂

        Normally, I prefer some trigger movement before feeling a little resistance that then snaps away for a shot, ie a light 2-stage trigger.

        Well, I failed to adjust my HW90 that way.
        Instead I managed to adjust the trigger to a light one-stage. It’s heavier than a hair trigger, but not by much and once I feel the trigger blade, any further pressure lets it go! 🙂

        As it is my only airgun like it, I take 2 to 3 shots to remind myself of the feeling, and then I’m comfortable. 🙂

        ——————–
        Because it’s part of the trigger guard:
        The safety for the HW90 is easily resettable, as it’s a simple pull on the ‘trigger’ in front of the actual trigger guard (black serrated sticky-out wedge/ pointy thing below and left part of the pictured trigger guard).

        Apparently that was designed to complement the airgun’s capacity for being able to be kept in a cocked condition for a prolonged time, ie if the shooter changes her/ his mind and decides not (!) to take a shot, she/ he can very easily reset the safety without any harm to the now cocked gun. 🙂

        A neat feature for (hunters or any other) unexpected interruptions to shooting. 🙂

        It is also quite easy to de-cock the airgun: break barrel of cocked rifle and while holding barrel firmly (!) at the muzzle in the fully broken open position, pull trigger (with safety off, of course), then slowly return barrel. 🙂

        ———————-
        pictured is the trigger on my Weihrauch HW90, which shows the little red safety indicator in the proud/ cocked/ not safe !/ ready to fire position (on safe, it’s not proud but flush with the surrounding surface)

        • Hi3
          Since I promised to update my HW 90 experience here it is; I took it with me at our country house where I can set my target at 25 yards (23m). The H&N slugs still perform quite well as do the redesigned 25gr JSBs. But my accuracy is not that good at this distance. It’s maybe me being off shaped but I think it’s also quite hold sensitive.
          Two more things; trigger as set by the previous owner is a very clear two stage. A short first stage and a crisp, light second stage. I am not going to try to change it. Second thing is that I use it without a silencer since it’s not that loud at the open.
          I will keep you informed about any progress since I plan to try 18gr JSBs in 5.53.

          • Thanks Bill, for the update. Looking forward to more. 🙂

            Like you, I am happy with my trigger settings. But I wonder for how long, now that I know a light second stage trigger can be achieved… 🙂

            Are you going to experiment with different air spring pressures as well?

  8. Hello All,

    I would like to thank you for the kind words of sympathy and encouragement for me regarding my eyes. I assure you I am immensely grateful for it. Except for my friends here, I have not disclosed my vision problems with others besides my family.

    I know that someday, perhaps soon, I will be forced to give up airgunning. That will be emotionally devastating for me, along with other things I have long enjoyed such as driving, reading (learning Braille at my age? Maybe.), watching movies. It is something that millions of other human beings, including my late mother, have endured.

    The support of folks like you helps so much, and again, thank you.

    Hey, do any of you know if there is such a thing as blind airgunning? ;^)

    Michael

    • Hehe Michael, are you talking about the way I shoot? Ok, fair enough! 🙂

      ——————–
      Seriously: yes (!) as long as you have hearing.

      I said, YOU NEED TO BE ABLE TO HEAR ! 🙂

    • Michael, my visually-impaired or “legally blind” friend uses laser sights, in addition to hi-power scopes to shoot his firearms; maybe the lasers would help? I’m trying to get him interested in airguns but he seems to enjoy the sounds and smell of gunpowder more. That’s my fault; your airgun friend here is the one who got him into shooting firearms. That and Ruger’s 10/22 carbine.

    • Michael
      Remember there is now a Read aloud option on computers. If you can get there.
      Don’t they give you some Anesthetics?

      I’m afraid to most boomers you sound like chicken little. It won’t be our problem to solve and unfortunately, I believe it will have to get much worse before any serious action is taken. We can’t even fix our Social Security Pension problem. Politicians will avoid any uncomfortable actions to solve anything so the problem will have to be more uncomfortable than the solution.
      When the need for more chemical contrails eventually blocks out the sunshine people may begin to get worried. It will have to hurt. People will have to do without a lot before they agree to sacrifice. And we are very good at working around problems instead of addressing them.
      I think the best we can look forward to is trying to slow it down for the time being.

      I believe there is even talk of solar reflectors orbiting in space.
      The governments will have to contend with manufacturers not consumers.

      Now where were we, airguns right. I would like airgun companies, manufactures to be more engaging with the customers.
      I asked one company, “Who actually manufactures the airgun?” so I may contact them about getting any currently made longer springer barrel that may be interchangeable. Crickets. Staking a bolt or pushing in a spring pin is not a big deal.
      No, we don’t stock that simple to replace magazine seal. Send it back to us.
      Is that fake silencer removable? Crickets.
      So, I may be an uncommon customer, but I am a paying one and would like some acknowledgement and courtesy. Now I have received a replacement seal before, from the same company that was actually part of the internals of a pistol with no problem. So, what’s up? Is it just a matter of having some returned airguns sitting around?
      That just happened to be the situation with first company to import the Nova Freedom, but we at least discussed it.
      Just buy it and shut up will get old.

      Funny I made a simple suggestion to try and use bleed air like firearms do a while back and now Hatsan does and so does Benjamin and a lot of full autos were born. Did someone listen?
      That loose washer between the inner barrel and shroud on the Hatsan had me perplexed for a bit till I figured it out. It captured bleed air to cycle things. Simple but effective.

      As I mentioned before I think we have taken advantage of all the latest technology already and can’t imagine anything new for the airguns themselves other than more replicas or totally new looks. Ah, stackable mags. Something along the workings of the Daisy Powerline 45 but in the grip or a detachable mag. Just use stackable pellets. Square stackable pellets in a smooth twist square barrel! Just kidding.

      • Bob,

        The prep begins with Lidocaine drops. Then a topical anesthetic gel is applied four times over ten to twelve minutes. Then I get a hypodermic needle shot of Lidocaine into the eye. After twenty minutes I get the big shot, which despite all that is excruciating.

        Michael

        • A while back there was talk of potentially needing monthly eye injections if there were progressing issues. Thanks be to God, there has been sufficient improvement to indefinitely defer such injections!!!

          I wasn’t as aware then of what the injections entailed, and shivered down to my soles read about yours. I’ve heard dental work is best done early in the day when the body feels slightly less pain. Perhaps that applies to the eyes also!

          May God grant you the strength to endure and make the best choices.

          • Thank you MisterAP. You did indeed dodge a bullet.

            You probably had a retinal scan — I’ve had 25 of them. Have you also had the retinal blood vessel scan? That one involves dilation followed by an injection in the arm of a contrasting agent followed by a machine scan. I’ve never had one of those, just the retinal cross-section scan.

            Michael

            • I’m grateful to only have experienced regular dilation exams each year, and the even less invasive and less difficult Optomap exams every 6 months! It is very helpful to have those historical pictures available for review and comparison.

          • Bob,

            I agree. I have assumed they would need a certified Anesthetist on staff. But maybe I’m wrong. I’ll ask next time.

            Wait. I have to follow my doctor’s instructions a bit: “Look upper left. Upper right. Lower left,” and so on, especially, “Look straight up and don’t move.” That last one is seconds before I get stuck.

            I’ll mention it anyway, thanks.

            Michael

        • The phones of today can be set up to read the text onscreen with a simple gesture. There are some other similar assistive features also. If you’re not already using some of them, it might be worth checking them out.

  9. A number of folks here have claimed climate scientists exclude relevant contrary data from their models. From scientificamerican.com

    CLAIM: Anthropogenic carbon dioxide can’t be changing climate, because CO2 is only a trace gas in the atmosphere and the amount produced by humans is dwarfed by the amount from volcanoes and other natural sources. Water vapor is by far the most important greenhouse gas, so . . .

    Contrarians frequently object that water vapor, not CO2, is the most abundant and powerful greenhouse gas; they insist that climate scientists routinely leave it out of their models. The latter is simply untrue: from Arrhenius on, climatologists have incorporated water vapor into their models.

    CLAIM: The sun or cosmic rays are much more likely the real causes of global warming. After all, Mars is warming up, too.

    Astronomical phenomena are obvious natural factors to consider . . . climatologists, therefore, do take them into account in their models. But . . . there is insufficient evidence that enough extra solar energy is reaching our planet to account for the observed rise in global temperatures.

    CLAIM: Climatologists conspire to hide the truth about global warming by locking away their data. Their so-called consensus on global warming is scientifically irrelevant because science isn’t settled by popularity.

    It is virtually impossible to disprove accusations of giant global conspiracies to those already convinced of them (can anyone prove that the Freemasons and the Roswell aliens aren’t involved, too?). Let it therefore be noted that the magnitude of this hypothetical conspiracy would need to encompass many thousands of uncontroversial publications and respected scientists from around the world, stretching back through Arrhenius and Tyndall for almost 150 years. A conspiracy would have to be so powerful that it has co-opted the official positions of dozens of scientific organizations, including the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the U.K.’s Royal Society, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Geophysical Union, the American Institute of Physics and the American Meteorological Society.

    If there were a massive conspiracy to defraud the world on climate (and to what end?), surely the thousands of e-mails and other files stolen from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit in England and distributed by hackers in 2009 would bear proof of it. None did. Most of the few statements from those e-mails that critics claimed as evidence of malfeasance had more innocent explanations that make sense in the context of scientists conversing privately and informally. If any of the scientists involved manipulated data dishonestly or thwarted Freedom of Information requests, it would have been deplorable; however, there is no evidence that happened. What is missing is any clear indication of a widespread attempt to falsify and coordinate findings on a scale that could hold together a global cabal or significantly distort the record on climate change.

    Climatologists are often frustrated by accusations that they are hiding data or the details of their models because, as NASA’s Schmidt points out, much of the relevant information is in public databases or otherwise accessible—a fact that contrarians conveniently ignore when insisting that scientists stonewall their requests. (And because nations differ in their rules on data confidentiality, scientists are not always at liberty to comply with some requests.)

    • Dear Michael,

      While you may lack some vision, you see the state of the world clearly. I write in support of your voice and say, “keep up the good work.” I do come here each day to read about airguns, but to your detractors, who say your non-airgun related content is better left off this blog, I say, “what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.” I appreciate that you stood up for what you believe, and made reference to some of the sources of information that led you to your beliefs.

      P.S. Whatever your level of vision, I hope you will always be able to enjoy picking on the old six string.

      • History,

        I agree with keeping the comments in scope. Although, I also understand that achieving such a goal is sometimes difficult.

        Well, let’s keep the topic of environment in scope then. I say let’s get rid of the CO2 cartridges, lead ammo, plastic, and unnatural oils for a greener air gun world.

        Fish

        • Michael,

          Thank you(sincerely!) for all of the Climate Change info. As an off-topic subject, I find it as pertinent, important and timely as any, …of much more use and interest to me than “I believe that X is the word of Y”, for example.
          Those “sharing” their belief in their chosen Handbook, to the applause of some fellow thumpers, might do well to remember that many of us simply don’t care.
          I assume that the “handbooks” of most other religions also contain admonitions re. care of each other and of our planet, but they don’t happen to be the predominate references in this country. Buddhists, Hindus, pagans, NW Indians, et.al. are conspicuous by the absence of respectful comment here regarding their thoughts on the current subject, …but I realize that their membership on this blog is probably very small.

          I find it interesting that some of those opining that your subject matter is inappropriate here, nevertheless feel that whether or not they buy a certain version of some god’s words is somehow worthy of space and reading time, … of interest to the rest of us.
          Hello!…many of us would prefer that for proselytizing, etc. you attend the already too-many extant blogs where thousands-of-years-old- questions are endlessly debated(without resolution!),…and instead come here to address airgun related issues.

          Human influenced climate change is “imaginary”? That seems not to be a disqualifier for other topics some members embrace.

          CBS 2:28:23

          • CBS,

            I have taken your constructive criticism to heart. I see your points, and I actually agree with them. Christians make up roughly 25% of the world’s population, and even all four Abrahamic religions (chronologically, Judaism, Christianity, Islam and the Baháʼí Faith) still make up only roughly half of the religions of the world, and of course, a sizeable population of humanity, including my wife, are atheist.

            My purpose was not to proselytize, and I apologize if my comments were offensive or inappropriate for this context. It was only to employ an effective rhetorical tool: tailoring one’s argument to the belief of one’s audience. I am of the impression, however inaccurate it might be, that Christians of a certain extention of the religion are more likely than many to be climate change doubters.

            The irony of my responding like this, now, is that once again, I am discussing religion. ;^)

            I sincerely thank you for writing what you did.

            Michael

          • CBS, I’m confused by one of your comments, “Human influenced climate change is ‘imaginary’?” I hope I was clear enough the other day that climate change is, acording to 97% of climate scientists, a) real, b) caused by humanity, and c) a bad thing for Earth.

            Michael

            • Michael,

              You were clear as to your position. I was less clear with my “imaginary” comment, …it was directed/intended to address those who make the claim as they dismiss man’s serious involvement in what is happening to the world’s climate.

              Re. your wife -the atheist.
              No offense intended to her or any who claim to be, or denigrate others that they believe to be, atheists.

              My position is that so-called “atheists” along with “believers” (… of any and all stripes) share with their own and all other groups, belief, …not knowledge.

              They/we are all in fact AGNOSTICS , …i.e. “without knowledge”!

              The accident of our birth into a location/culture which surrounds us and indoctrinates us determines our “faith”, which is reenforced by peer and
              societal pressures, and becomes over time what we are comforted to “believe” is true. Iconoclasty takes courage, and a willingness to live with very real uncertainty.

              The believer who “knows” what is there , regarding a particular god/heaven/hell, is exactly as deluded as the atheist who “knows” that there is nothing.

              If either could shake the thought-shaping that has been applied to him/her, often from childhood, and was free of the fear(stick) and hope (carrot) that all religions apply in one form or another, they might instead be taught, and develop, a healthy acceptance of not-knowing, and live confidently while attempting obedience to the various “golden rules” offered by the wisest philosophers, past and present.

              When we consider “imaginary ” things, I think it is fair to include any god
              credited with “unconditional love”, yet whose love is very much conditioned-with a demand of particular faith and behavior, …the “or else” being merely forever damnation in whatever horrible hell one can be convinced exists.

              I consider myself better than any such god :-0 as I would not treat anyone in such a manner. If you are not afraid of shouts of “Blasphemy!”, and discover that you prefer my platform, feel free to worship me 😉

              CBS

      • History,

        I must’ve misunderstood some of your words here. I think we were on the same page. Apologies.

        Anyhow, I still say, let’s keep the lead out of this hobby at least.

        Fish

    • Michael,
      The first book I read on greenhouse gases and global warming was back in the 1970’s. It said the weather patterns would begin to oscillate with new record high and low temperatures while showing a trend to higher average temperatures. At some point the oscillations would be replaced by a more rapid warming trend; a tipping point. Since I read the book it looks to me that it was spot on. I don’t think we have reached the tipping point but it is probably getting close.

      I hope nuclear fusion becomes a viable power source soon. It may be our only chance to reduce the some of the adverse effects of global warming.

      I come to the blog to read about airguns, mostly pellet guns, but had to give you my support.
      Don

      • Don,

        The tipping point you speak of is coming soon, 2050 or so, I believe. I have a niece who will be 30 then. I don’t know about Chicago, where she and I live, but St. Louis will be like New Orleans, and Little Rock will be like Guayaquil, Ecuador. I’ve been to Guayaquil, and it was like a steambath 24 hours a day. In one of the quirks of Climate Change, cities like Guayaquil, at sea level, very near the Ecuator, might be unchanged or perhaps even slightly cooler.

        Michael

  10. Gentlemen,

    Why do you feel like driving a three cylinder Mitsubishi Mirage instead of an eight cylinder Chevy Tahoe to leave a better world to the future generations is against your religion?

    Fish

    • My wife and I drive a Kia Soul. Prior to that it was a Toyota hatchback, before that another Toyota hatchback, before that a Honda hatchback. The Toyotas and Honda were made in America. The only non-four-cylinder I’ve ever owned was a ’73 Caprice Classic sedan with a 400 under the hood. I drove that for nine months when I was 18. That was, I admit, a great car for an unattached 18 year old. The back seat was like a suite at The Ritz!

      Michael

        • My 2018 4-cylinder Camry easily gets 35+ highway mpg and 28+ city mpg. A bit more careful driving adds at least another 5 mpg to each. It is decently peppy.

          My 2013 even smaller 4-cylinder Corolla struggles to get 30 highway and 20 city mpg even with quite more careful driving.

          Both are essentially basic models with the Corolla having no frills at all. Both are standard 4cyl gas only engines. The Camry drives far more smoothly and comfortably and was the far better choice. In hindsight, ought to have skipped the Corolla.

          I’d easily recommend the 2018 and similar generation Camry.

          • MisterAP,

            Great choices. Camry is the best car in the US market in my opinion. I once drove a rental 1.8 Corolla with CVT from Sacramento to Boston. No issues at all, easily reached 45+ mpg, obeying speed limits, keeping the eco light on.

            Fish

            • Following the speed limits would easily get much closer to 50 highway mpg in my Camry. It is pretty cool for a completely standard gasoline powered vehicle without battery, CVT, cylinder deactivation, stop/start etc. I think the 8 speed transmission, low resistance tires, and the covered underside make quite the difference, with less complexity and cost than other gas saving technologies.

              • Camry is a better car than Corolla overall, but for me, the biggest selling point of Camry over Corolla is the transmission. You see, when a CVT fails, often the solution is to replace the whole tranny. However, when a traditional 8 speeder auto tranny fails, almost all times, the solution is a much cheaper repair.

                Toyota has added a launch gear to the CVTs on the new 2.0 Corollas, and the 1.8 engine was finally axed. I’m hearing good things about the new Corollas. More power, but more MPG as well. Reliability…? Time will tell.

                • Fish, this may be just right for you and anyone else who wants to lessen their impact and/or footprint on the road. It’ll require suspending or modifying some safety standards, though. If Gamo wanted to branch off into the transportation business, this could be an opportunity for them!

                  FM is sticking with his VW 181.

                  https://www.wikinone.com/Biscuter.html

                    • It would probably be fun though not on a major road. Had a relative in Spain who, as my father told me, used to say, “the two shames of Spain are Gibraltar and the Biscuter!”

                    • hihihi, still, the car I love the most was a Pontiac, a six cylinder G6. I always say that GM should have kept the Pontiac instead of Buick. I just love the Pontiacs.

                    • Fish, for me, a car is more than a means of transport. 🙂

                      The right type, like a wind-in-the-hair open top, will provide me with pleasure too. And most, if not all of us, value positive emotional experiences, don’t we?! 🙂

                      Did you see that shootski likes his convertible Saab? 🙂
                      General Motors used to own Saab and I think they used some of that in the Pontiacs, didn’t they?

                      So, what is it with you and Pontiacs?
                      Do you own/ drive a car with qualities of the G6?

                    • hihihi, what I loved about that G6 was the pleasure it gave me driving it on the interstate highways of the USA — a long, comfortable joyride. You’ve got to put that on your bucket list; this is a gorgeous country to explore in a car on the roads. On my bucket list, there is also driving the southern Europe’s curvy roads in a real GT car; I don’t think it’ll ever happen though.

                      Every single Pontiac was a sexy car, other than the Aztek — no offense to the Aztek owners here. 🙂

                      G6 was a 6 speed, 6 cylinder sedan, and she looked good. Nowadays, hard to find something like that. All we have are ridiculously priced SUVs. It was actually an Opel Vectra inside, but the way the Pontiac offered it made it a good looker and a fine car to drive. I like the predecessor of the G6 better though; Pontiac Grand Am had a lot of character.

                  • VW 181 is a great car; cherish it. Biscúter was two stroke, possibly not a ‘clean’ car. I would love to have one though, for pleasure. To be honest, I am a hypocrite at the end of the day; I ask such open ended questions to learn from others. I listen; everybody has something to teach me.

                    • Fish, your “funnest car” triggered some memories: back in my bangernomics days, I came across a cheap Fiat 127.

                      I was surprised that I could easily get in and close the door. Also, it had a running engine, brakes that worked and time left before it’s next roadworthiness test! 🙂
                      So this cheerful little car, very basic and very yellow, became my next means of transport and freedom. Happy days! 🙂

  11. BB,

    Looking forward to your Zada report. I have plenty to say about the platform that the Zada was built on, and I wonder what your impressions will be. I hope Hatsan will listen. Do you know which caliber you’ll be testing?

    Fish

  12. The Genesis Account when recounting the instruction to Adam, a.ka. “Red Clay,” instructs him to “radah,” and, “Qavash.” Those are to subdue and dominate. Those two verbs are the same when used to describe a rape of a woman! Here, however, it meant to have the power to affect the creation that IS NOT THEIRS but is under the sovereignty of YHWH. Adam’s role is that of the steward or care taker of the creation; having the real power to manipulate the Creation for good or ill. Obviously, the charge is to be a GOOD steward not an evil one.

    Genesis’ first chapters are a revolution in philosophy and theology. They posit an INANIMATE creation, contrary to the mythology of Mesopotamia, meaning that the creation is just STUFF – what we call time, space and matter. That STUFF is to be used by Adam as a creature made of STUFF who is to manipulate it by means of experimentation and experience NOT prayers and incantations! Gensis is, in the long history of Western thought, the beginning of a materialistic and ultimately scientific approach to the creation.

    If one knows this, and the place of Gensis as a revolution against Mesopotamian and other mythic forms of thought, then one is precluded from the Seven Day Creation nonsense of too many so-called “Christian” groups. What Genesis is saying is that YHWH is the creator of a good creation and we, as incarnate (or fleshly beings made of STUFF) are to work within in it by the various frameworks of the physical world. Astrophysics is NOT precluded by Genesis, but its fullest accounting as its understanding of cosmology, physics and science in general grows richer and fuller.

    This also makes us RESPONSIBLE FOR the effects of our use of the creation (the STUFF). Here, in Ohio, in East Palestine, we have an example of the effects of railroad deregulation, aging infrastructure, and just plain accidents. When we ignore the reasons for things like regulations, we end up with potential disasters and WE are responsible for those things as the appointed stewards of creation – from a Biblical/Theological perspective.

    Big questions need to be addressed to the managers of the railroad in this circumstance. Big questions need to be addressed to the Congress and prior administration that allowed a softening of safety regulations. No doubt, the decision makers would that we should look at the tracks and bearings of the train at East Palestine, but who makes the decisions? Locally, a train engineer, but systemically the bosses and regulators who ignore reality foolishly for greed or gain. The power to “radah,” and “Qavash,” is not without its consequences – the people of EP are paying the price for other folk’s stupidity and wanton disregard.

    Genesis’ point is not to describe a mythic Creation, as with the religions of its time, but to posit that what is came to be by YHWH and that it is a material creation to be lived in and used and tended by creatures. That gives immense power to humankind for good and responsibility for what evil may arise. The popular scam of “thoughts and prayers,” therefore, is not enough; we are required to be responsible and take action in the creation to address wrong and prompt the good by means of what we DO in the creation.

  13. B.B. & Readership
    I finally got around to installing the “squishy piece” that holds the barrel latch in place on my vintage metal-frame Crosman 357 revolver. I dearly wish Crosman would listen and bring these back; they are just pretty cool pistols. 🙂
    And for me, they are super-nostalgic. Many years ago, I bought the all-metal, silver-finish, Crosman 357 with the 8″ barrel (brass barrel…a class act); it was a wonderful revolver, still is, but is now in the hands of one of my grandsons. Back in the 90s, my Dad wanted to get his CCW, but our state required a mandatory proficiency course be passed at a state-approved training facility. To help my Dad out, I came over and taught him how to shoot the Crosman 357 in his own backyard. He did pretty well, and he thanked me, but said, “It’s still not the same as training with an actual firearm.”
    The day after his course, I stopped by and asked how it went; my Dad didn’t answer, but my Mom said, “Your father said they ran the course with the same pistol you used to teach him.”
    What?!?!?
    Yes, when pressed, my Dad (who hates to ever be wrong about anything =>) admitted that the instructor said that due to budget cuts and safety concerns, they would be training and shooting with Crosman 357 CO2 revolvers (all-metal 6″ barreled version in black finish), yet also added that, “They operate just like actual firearm revolvers.”
    Hahahaha! My Dad admitted that I was right…priceless!!!
    And he thanked me, since he passed the course with ease due to his training with me. 🙂
    Hence, when I saw this revolver on eBay, one identical to the one Dad used in his course, I just had to buy it. The only issue it had was a tendency to open due to a weak latch.
    So, I ordered the “squishy piece” rubber spring, and also a new latch; and I did wind up replacing both; and yes, the gun works great…now.
    Yet to get there was a bit more tricky than expected. I was going to send it off for repair; but I figured, “this should be easy,” so I just got the parts. However, when I took the side-plate off, everything came out! Springs “sproinged,” and whatever could fall out (which is a lot) fell out onto the table, and some on the floor.
    A couple of Youtube videos later, I had a good idea of how it all went back together; but the author, and airgun repair specialist, said, “Whatever you do, DO NOT take out the valve assembly! If you DO, the gun WILL leak, either right away, or within a week.”
    Well, of course, the hammer pin was out, so I had to take out the valve assembly. Actually, the sad truth be told, I had the entire revolver apart EIGHT times before I got it back together working correctly! The thing I learned is this: it would be nice to have 3 hands minimum, 4 would be better, when trying to assemble this revolver, hahaha!
    The really great thing is, I was VERY careful with the valve assembly, and several CO2 cartridges later, the gun is still working, and not leaking…yay!
    Prior to the teardown, I had it sighted in with RWS 7-grain wadcutters. I went to order more, but like a dummy did NOT read the fine print, and wound up getting 8.2-grain wadcutters.
    Fortunately, the heavier wadcutters shoot even better; I got a nice centered group of 1-1/8″ at 25 feet. And while the gun is not a powerhouse, it gets 50 good shots in the 340 to 350 fps range; on the 6th cylinder, a few shots later, I see the velocity drops down to 300 fps, then 280 fps.
    So (and thanks to B.B. who also “enabled” me to get a chronograph), I’ll stick with 5 cylinders full.
    The double-action pull is pretty smooth, and the single-action pull is excellent, nice and crisp.
    This is a great gun for teaching someone to shoot (as I did with my Dad), or just to have fun with it yourself. I love to set up a row of feral cans on the 15 yard range and see how quickly I can knock them down. You can also practice the old Ed McGivern aerial shooting at a can trick…something you’d be hard-pressed to find a place to practice with a firearm these days.
    Yes, this old vintage Crosman 357 is a classic; and due to it’s history with my Dad and me, as well as the “skin in the game” I have due to my extensive work on it, this airgun is a keeper.
    Peace & Blessings to all,
    dave

    • And yes, B.B., that is a tube of Crosman Pellgun oil in that bag; as you taught me, I ALWAYS use a drop of it on top of every CO2 cartridge…that’s probably why this gun still works! 😉

    • Dave,

      I have loved those for years. I have two. One is newer and mostly plastic, but the other is metal. It is black, but it has a silver 8 inch barrel on it. It looks strange, but it can shoot!

      If you like old CO2 wheelguns, the Crosman 38T is nice, and REALLY nice is the Daisy 44 in black and chrome (yes, chrome). They came with six and eight inch barrels. They are by far the best CO2 pistol Daisy ever made.

      Then, the ultimate is the Umarex S&W 586 with the rare 8 inch barrel.

      In my opinion revolvers are what autoloaders would be if they were cool. Glock-Glocchhh. But a Colt snake gun . . .

      Michael

  14. Comment #107?
    Talk about a lot of catch-up reading. What a fine Godfather of Airguns Blog Day and weekend to be.
    Just realized this blog is no longer called the Airgun Acadamy.
    Has everyone graduated and decided to move on to other subjects?

    It’s great that airgunners here feel comfortable enough to be commenting on their personal lives and beliefs. It’s a great escape from our daily lives and a chance to communicate with our somewhat long-time fellow air gun enthusiasts and of course our Godfather, Tom.

    But I’m beginning to feel like we have replaced the Town Square Soap Box with a modern-day version. Don’t get me wrong, I love the hell out of it all and have stood on that soap box many times myself. But, believe it or not, I always try to look for a way to include something about airguns in my comments, relating to them or included else ware.
    Even my, snied? remark about the weather was related to my inability to shoot my new airguns.
    Where am I going? Well, this is Toms blog, as far as I know, and he has shown a lot of tolerance for our rantings but how does this affect ‘his’ bottom line? I for one know absolutely nothing about his contractual obligations or agreement with P/A. Who actually owns it or if he is receiving compensation for promoting airguns or educating new air gunners? Does his obligation end with his daily Blog entry and the rest is a free for all?

    Perhaps Tom may make that clear to us some day, so we have a better idea of how to conduct ourselves here and actually support him. Things may be perfectly fine as they are? I don’t know.
    I’m sure nobody here wants this experience to end.
    With that said, I have noticed a lot of long-time bloggers fading away for who know what reasons, old age airgun retirement? but we will need some new blood to keep things diversified, interesting and continued on.
    A first-time reader may look at this and say, “What the hell is this?”

    But then again, who knows? Hope Tom can enlighten us a little here.
    It’s extremely interesting but in line with what he wants?
    Now for the Airgun Part 😉
    I would really like to have an airgun master index someplace for all things airgun related. Online or in print. Parts, services, customizing and such, even sales. Not just a bunch of you tube references but contact information and a bit more info. Something to be sold and updated regularly may make profitable or at least cost effective? Who knows, it may attract advertisers.

    • Bob,

      BB watches the blog and reads each comment every day. He looks for civility and language because this blog is family-friendly. But he doesn’t restrict the comments in any other way.

      Every few years I get people who think that only airguns should be talked about. There are other forums for that — or there used to be.

      This blog is successful because people respect each other. If you want to talk off-topic, go ahead. I often do, as you know.

      BB

  15. Just came across a picture of the new Air Venturi Avenger-X in Hard Air mag and it was in the hands of their Marketing Manager at the 2023 Shot Show. Lots of options to choose from. 8 in total. The Air Venturi Avenger was voted the best low-cost PCP hunting rifle by Outdoor Life because of its of its great features.
    Now I really like tactical looking airguns, but I could not tell where the eye candy began and ended. Given the appropriate uniform she could be a real-life version of Sgt. Connie Rodd with that rifle in her hands. Very attractive person with a wonderful smile.
    It looks like the high tech tacticals are firmly entrenched. There was also a new electronically controlled Skout Epoch that was very impressive. The way they keep upgrading airguns leads me to believe the best is yet to come.

    • Bob,

      It may interest you to know that I worked in the Maintenance Department at Fort Knox and I often researched and edited articles for PS Magazine. I knew Connie Rodd personally and often talked with her on the phone. She was a real person named Susan Bottoms, a civilian employed at Lexington Army Depot.

      BB

      • B.B.,
        I think that’s awesome that you personally knew “Sgt. Connie Rodd,” teacher of maintenance to the Army! I’m guessing that must be Susan Bottoms in the staff photo I found for PS Magazine.
        She probably saved a lot of equipment from going bad. 🙂
        Blessings to you,
        dave

        • Dave,

          It’s been over 40 years since I have seen her and I thought she was a brunette, but what do I know?

          I remember once briefing a deputy division commander going to Korea and we solved a massive deadline issue with the new M578 Tracked Recovery Vehicles his division was getting from a US depot. That was resolved with three phone calls! That’s the kind of stuff we could do when the Lexington Army Depot was on our side.

          BB

          • BB
            I remember looking through the issues of the maintenance magazine, when I was on active duty in Germany (early to mid 70’s) and wondered if there were actual individuals attached to the ‘personas’ or if they were just a figurehead for a compilation of info. Thanks for bringing back a few good memories.
            I have been pondering your group sizes/shapes with the Dragonfly Mk2, in .177. Historically, when you have vertical stringing of a group, it tends to be ‘front sight control’. But I think that this would be unlikely because: 1) I’ve seen the results of your shooting groups and 2) a telescopic sight tends to minimize that kind of error. I then considered a mechanical cause. Maybe since the pumping is on the same axis as the stringing , there might be vertical movement of the pump tube/barrel? I assumed that you have already examined that avenue but might not mind a reminder (too much).
            Keep up the good work.
            Bill

            • Bill,

              I served with the First Armored Division from 1974 through 1977. I was in Erlangen.

              Connie Rodd had a breast reduction near the end of Vietnam, to make her more politically correct. All the soldiers complained but the brass didn’t listen.

              BB

  16. BB
    Whenever I hear the word Vietnam, I immediately recall what may have been the most catastrophic event of the entire war and my close friend, the one I just admitted to a memory care home, was right in the middle of it. Fighter Squadron 74.
    There was a documentary about it on TV, but I don’t believe knowledge of the event was widespread for many years. Mainly because it was self-inflicted and pretty much the result of incompetent leadership.
    My biggest disappointment throughout my Navy career, and I believe it was prevalent throughout the entire chain of command.
    I myself did not receive any professional Leadership/ Management training until I had over ten years of service and then it really became apparent.

    For example. I went on a detachment aboard a Fast Frigate. A relatively small ship with a single helicopter on board. It was a Reservist training event and just about all the officers and a lot of enlisted were Reserves doing their 2-week annual training. The only active-duty person above me was a CPO and he commented, “Bob, I don’t know how you manage to do it, keeping track of everything that’s going on.” No big help there. All he ever did was hangout in the CPO lounge.

    In the middle of the ocean the helicopter had to return to the ship for a main rotor gearbox metal chip detector light. Turned out it was failing due to someone’s bad decision to chrome plate the worn-out gears at overhaul to compensate for wear and it was flaking off.
    Well after a half dozen metal chip detector light events. The pilots decided that if the chip light did not come on and down the aircraft, they would not have to return to the ship and could continue with their training. They obviously did not remember that the ocean is very cold and deep!
    They asked ‘Me’ to disconnect the wires to it. I was also an all-systems Quality Assurance Representative so you can figure out my answer.

    The event I was talking about in Nam was the 1967 USS Forrestal aircraft carrier fire. It was started by an accidental firing of a missile at another aircraft abord the ship and all the aircraft were fueled and armed up and ready to launch for combat.

    134 Sailors dead, 161 injured, 21 aircraft destroyed and 40 damaged. $561 million dollars in damage to the aircraft carrier, in today’s money value.

    Anyone interested in learning about it, there is outstanding written documentation of the event in Wikipedia. ‘1967 USS Forrestal Fire’. There is also an outstanding YouTube video with actual live footage and comments from survivors. ‘Situation Critical: USS Forrestal’.
    I recommend reading about it first. Makes things easier to follow in the video.

    This type of thing could have happened in peacetime as well because our military is always prepared and operating in simulated combat conditions. And I enjoyed it for the most part, for 20 years. And for the record, they have made a lot of changes for the sake of safety since then.
    You do literally sign your life over to the government when you enlist. Thank a Vet! And anybody in uniform today.
    Stay sharp and keep your head out of a dark place.
    Decided not to include any pictures here.
    Not into airguns at the time, so no connection 🙁

    • Bob,
      EVERY TIME I see a vet, especially a Vietnam Vet, I thank them for their service to our country! And I let them know that my wife’s original fiancé went to Vietnam and never made it back (as many good men did not). The vets are always happy to be thanked, especially the Vietnam Vets, as I know they did not get the proper “thank you” they should have gotten upon their return.
      Blessings to you,
      dave

      • The following I offer for a balance of opinions only:

        I have some medals, some fancy ribbon and a small piece of paper, but my relative for whom they were, I don’t have! He went to war and died.

        That is just one reason why I personally dislike the, as I see it, death and destruction worship.

        Should anyone feel offended and say so, then, Tom Gaylord (B.B. Pelletier) please delete this comment.

        • hihihi,

          Most all of the people I ever served with hated Death and Destruction and worked many hours every day to try and keep it a bay.
          Yes, we trained to execute operations that resulted in Death and Destruction to the very best of our ability. But that training and skill does not equate to the worship of it. That misunderstanding is based on a trope from the Hollywood and Mass/Social Media playbook.

          shootski

        • There are many sides, layers, nuances and considerations to all things. In this imperfect world, we do the best we can and endure as we can. The more we can understand, support and help each other, the better off we all would be. Our human nature makes it quite challenging.

        • 3hi,
          And you have every right to your opinion. Just let me offer some information.
          It’s not death and destruction worship. It’s thanks for sacrifice and brave service in defense of freedom. I myself was faced with being drafted into service. Servicemen love nothing more than peace. But once called upon to enter war are proud to serve their countries as a way of saying thanks for my freedom. Now I will do my part and try to preserve it.
          Have you sacrificed or served your country for freedom others have provided for you in another way? Military service is not the only way to go.
          There may be a lot of Bravado involved, but it’s only human nature and usually only after surviving a life-or-death situation and being proud you did your part.
          I am not disappointed in the fact that I never entered a war zone. Just a bit disappointed that after volunteering to preserve peace numerous times I am not entitled to certain rewards. Those that did, paid a higher price than I and certainly deserve it. My reward was not having to face a life-or-death event.

        • hihihi,
          I hear you, man; and I think I understand where you’re coming from.
          (For sure, you’d rather have your relative back instead of having his medals)
          But what I meant by my comment is this: I owe Teddy a debt I can never repay.
          If he’d come home, I’d never have met my wife (who is awesome, a far better person than I am, and a far better wife than I deserve). I’ll never got to meet him, or thank him. But every time I thank those who did make it back from Vietnam (and I always let my wife know when I do), I’m not just honoring them, I’m honoring Teddy, and my wife.
          She understands that, and is thankful for it.
          Peace,
          dave

      • Dave,
        Thanks for appreciating Vets. I myself, through dumb luck, have never served in a combat zone. Even after volunteering for it and serving for 8 years in the Vietnam Era.

        Naval Aviation Sailors are usually assigned to squadrons on air bases, not ships. The squadrons then deploy aboard ships for months at a time on a rotational basis. Obviously large aircraft do not and assignment to them is considered shore duty and sailors rotate between sea duty and shore duty every couple of years.
        My first sea duty squadrons deployment to sea was canceled because its aircraft were being retired. I then received orders for shore duty. The second one just returned from a deployment and was transitioning to the then new F-14 Tomcat and by the time we deployed, the war was over.
        I was subject to the undeserved wrath of protesters and now the somewhat undeserved thanks. But it is part of having served and we don’t have much choice in the mater. You do sacrifice for your country, one way or the other.

        Some VFW recruiters at an air show were kind of surprised that I was not eligible to join after 20 years of service. After I explained, their comment, while laughing, was, “So you’re the one!” The fictional guy who always got the good orders.
        It all started with me being class honor man in aviation training. They normally received a promotion to paygrade E4. However, I was still an E2. So, they gave me orders to Mildenhall England instead.

        • Bob M,

          There actually are/were a few Land Based Naval Aviation Squadrons that were considered Sea Duty and Overseas Duty.
          For a brief period of time Bureau of Naval Personnel tried to call some of our Enlisted billets Shore Duty but a quick trip back to The Hill and a few key briefings changed all that back to all Sea Duty billets. We flew both Carrier Aircraft as well as Land Based Aircraft and each Squadron covered one half of the World from North Pole to South Pole without too much publicity.

          shootski

          • Shootski
            I was trying to keep it simple. Sure, there are exceptions. Like joining a Navy Seal team.
            And there was no sea duty or reenlistment bonus in the TAR (Training Active Reserve) Command!
            However, I deployed on three different ships during my time in there. Liked the Canadian one best.

            • Bob M,

              I did a TAD with an Italian Squadron and the wine, bread, cheeses, olives, etc. on the LZ Picknicks for Lunch were great. I did a few weeks on a Dutch Warship in the North Sea and Baltic; they had a 24/7 bar! I also did some time with the IDF; talk about excellent Leadership at all levels along with competence to a man and woman.

              shootski

              • Shootski
                The rest of the world seems to have a different mindset. We still act like we are in the wild west. The Canadians also had a bar on board, table service in the chow hall and civilian clothes when not on duty. Much more relaxed atmosphere on board. But then again, I was on a dedicated auxiliary oiler replenishment ship with a hangar in the aft section.

          • More than a few of the Vietnam War vets I knew/know saw combat only in Cambodia and Laos. No publicity at all, ever. No medals, no insignia on their uniforms, no dogtags. They selected their own individual weapons. Interestingly, most chose shotguns and AKs and had contempt for M16s. Those I knew//know were recruited from the regular Navy, but others were recruited from the Rangers, Green Berets, Marines, you name it.

  17. Bob Ryan,

    PA is not stocking them nor any other source in the USA; that I could find in an extensive search.

    I looked at the price and then the fine print on the photograph the price as shown is the total cost for 1,500 Oktoberfest BBs (in Euros) to include: Value Added Tax, Rebates, along with Shipping & Handling.
    Is that as you understand it?

    shootski

    • Shootski,

      I don’t know what PA is waiting for, they should order a 40 foot shipping container of those Oktoberfest BBs.

      Or at least one tin of them, so BB can test them to see if they are worth importing in bulk 😉

      The fine print states that the price is inclusive of rebates and VAT. Shipping costs are separate though.

      • Bob Ryan,

        I know! If not a container they should at least get a number of tins into the hands of a few enablers like BB and see if their Oktoberfest results would indicate they get a container of Oktoberfest Air Rifles and a container of the CORRECT BB’s; but what do I know!
        I don’t shoot SMALL BB guns.

        shootski

  18. BB,

    I took a look at a couple of Meopta scopes at Frankonia in Dortmund yesterday; an Optika5 4-20×50 and an Optika6 3-18×50 RD FFP.

    I had been considering the Optika5 4-20×50, as the specs looked great on paper, but looking through the scope yesterday I realised the reticle (Zplus Christmas tree) is a bit too fine for my eyes and would be difficult to see in some situations, especially as it is not illuminated (the illuminated version costs 80 euros more). Apart from that gripe it’s a very nice scope.

    The Optika6 3-18×50 RD FFP was very impressive. It’s the first first focal plane scope I have ever examined. I love the fact that the reticle subtends a fixed size regardless of the zoom setting. That’s a huge advantage over SFP for estimating range and holdover rapidly at various magnifications. The illuminated MRAD1 reticle is one of the most ingenious I have seen.

    Another feature I loved on both of these scopes is the side focus knob, so much more user friendly that having to reach for the objective bell.

    I hope Meopta will bring out a series of springer-rated scopes. A 4×32 with centre dot illuminated Christmas tree reticle and side focus for starters, and maybe a 4-16×40 with the same features and FFP.

    Why are there so few FFP scopes on the market, by the way? Are they much more difficult to manufacture than SFP types?

    • Bob Ryan,

      FFP scopes aren’t well understood by most shooters and almost no airgunners.
      In the USA there are shooters who use MilDot/MRAD reticles on SFP with MOA Turrets! Then they dare complain about how confusing it all is…LOL! Of course yards always get involved along with FPS.

      I have the MEOPRO OPTIKA6 5-30×56 RD FFP with MRAD Reticle on my DAQ .308 LA Outlaw with 1:10 barrel and shoot it regularly out to 200 meters. The reticle lets me see the bullet “splash” (puff of sand or dirt) and the “tree” lets me do corrections for elevation and windage almost in my sleep. I think the difference in price to get a S&B, Swarovski, Kahles and other scopes is not worth the bragging rights. Perhaps if i was shooting at 800 meters and beyond I might detect the difference.
      I also wish MEOPTA would rate or build their scopes for magnum spring piston air rifles. I have tried to communicate that on their web page but to this date have received not one reply; unfortunate indeed!
      But I suspect sales and marketing are not the company’s strong suit.

      shootski

  19. BB,

    Apologies if the following suggestion has been effectively covered in any number of posts before now. BUT, ..the info is widespread, ..new or newer readers can’t realistically be expected to read/absorb everything that has been mentioned in the thousands of blogs(w/comments)since your wealth of offerings began ( …and “searching” often leaves something to be desired, offering terminology, without explicit photos 🙁

    I, like many assumed others, have acquired a number of airguns, older and newer (Blue Streak – Dragonfly II), and would like to be sure of what I am doing re. maintenance. When I finally find a relative mention, it usually instructs the reader ala “Oil the pump head”, or “Put a few drops of oil/grease/type X into/on the whatever” (…but never into/on the do-dad!). Other comments say “Just shoot it”(?)

    Some of us relative ignoramuses could benefit from a very clear photograph of the activity, with arrows indicating exactly what and where the “whatever” is!

    I realize that there are very many expert, experienced old-timers on this website, … but presumably there are very many who are less knowledgable, even regarding the “basics”.

    Perhaps you could consider a “Beginners’ Intro to Important Airgun Anatomy” , …a gathered/condensed blog showing photos of various exemplars of the types of airguns, with the points of maintenance interest unmistakably identified. This, of course, with the airgun properly configured/positioned(pump handle opened, rt/left side, upside down, etc).

    Thanks for any consideration. ( I submit this suggestion with sympathy, considering that you are usually bored with a lot of time on your hands, and nothing to do.) :-0

    CBS

    • CBS,

      Indeed this has been covered before and I am always open to doing it again. That’s why I give links to past reports, like I did for Roamin Greco in the comments to the TX200 Mark III Part 8 report.

      The answers are already in this blog, but they can always be refined.

      Now, what specifically is your question?

      BB

  20. BB,
    I suppose I would Ask it this way:
    Would you consider an illustrated article or blog topic describing basic lube/storage practices for each airgun type (*clear accurate photos being critical) something like this –

    ——————————————————————————————–
    AIRGUN LUBE/STORAGE

    [ LONG GUNS/RIFLES ]

    SINGLE STROKE pneumatic (Daisy Red Ryder, 400, etc.)
    1. Add one (or however many) drops of (brand or type )oil at point(s) (A,B,etc.) indicated by
    arrow(s) in the photo.
    2. store uncocked.
    3.[special note(s) if any]

    MULTI STROKE pneumatic ( Daisy 880,Sheridan Blue Streak, Dragonfly, etc.)
    1. Add x drops of (recommend) oil at point(s) A/B/etc. indicated by arrows in
    photo(s).
    2. store with 1 (2/3/ however many ) pumps of air. (cocked/uncocked ?)
    3. [special note(s) if any]

    BREAK-BARREL SPRINGER ( Beeman R-1, R-7, HW30, etc.)
    1. Add x drops of (recommend) oil at point(s) A/B/etc. indicated by arrows in
    photo(s).
    2. store uncocked
    3. [special note(s) if any]

    GAS RAM (HW 90, etc.)
    1. Add x drops of (recommend) oil at point(s) A/B/etc. indicated by arrows in
    photo(s).
    2. store uncocked (unloads trigger spring?)
    3. [special note(s) if any]

    PRE CHARGED PNEUMATIC (Discover, Avenger, etc.)
    1. Add x drops of (recommend) oil at point(s) A/B/etc. indicated by arrows in
    photo(s)
    2. Store uncocked (unloads trigger spring?)
    3. [special note(s) if any]

    CO2 (Crosman 160, Beeman QB78, etc.
    1. Add x drops of (recommend) oil at point(s) A/B/etc. indicated by arrows in
    photo(s).
    2. Add one drop (recommended) oil to tips of CO2 cylinder(s) before installation.
    3. Store uncocked (unloads trigger spring?)
    4. [special note(s) if any]
    —————————————————————————————–

    BB, I have used examples of types from my own collection, …you may prefer others.
    A similar but shorter guide could be prepared for pistols, of course.

    IMHO a one-spot page/booklet/blog covering all types such as this would be helpful to many, especially newbies. Your published work covering subjects like this and nearly everything else about airguns is wonderfully informative, …but there is an awful lot to wade through, looking for particular bits 🙂

    Thanks for any consideration of this or some similar idea! (…and sincere apologies for wasting your time, if I have missed some already existing example.)

    CBS

Leave a Comment