Weihrauch HW 97K rifle.
This report covers:
- Scoped
- The test
- Sight-in
- Group one — JTS 10.4-grain dome
- Sandbag rest
- RWS Superdome
- Qiang Yuan Sports dome
- Air Arms 8.44-grain dome
- Trigger
- Cocking and shot cycle
- Summary
Today we begin looking at the accuracy of the HW 97K underlever spring-piston rifle. I will tell you up front that I was surprised by what I saw. I understand why people like this rifle so much.
Scoped
I scoped the rifle with a Hawke 4.5-14X42 scope that’s no longer available, but is quite similar to the Hawke 4.5X44. This scope has many great features like quickset lockable turret knobs. and a fine reticle. I especially like that the point of impact (POI) adjusts immediately when the scope is adjusted. There is no lag time. The reticle can also be illuminated, but I didn’t do that today.
I did shim the scope in the rear when I mounted it, just to eliminate the possibility that barrel droop could be a factor. I find I can almost always adjust the POI down; it’s only when I go up that I run into trouble. If I have to adjust up too far the erector tube return spring will relax and the point of impact will begin to shift.
The test
This will be a day of getting acquainted with the rifle. Does it need the artillery hold or can it be rested directly on the sandbag? Is it pellet picky or will almost anything do?
I shot five-shot groups from 10 meters. I’ll tell you about the hold I used as we go. Since I wanted to learn several things about the rifle I only shot three different pellets today.
Sight-in
I sighted-in with JTS 10.4-grain domes. The first shot was from 12 feet. Finding the POI on target, I went back to 10 meters for the next two shots and was where I wanted to be in three shots. Shot four landed in the bull pretty much where I wanted it so I completed the first group of five shots. Let me show you.
The sight-in took three shots. From 12 feet the shot hit below the dime. At 10 meters it rose to the upper left. After adjusting the scope I shot the 5-shot group inside the bull.
Group one — JTS 10.4-grain dome
From 10 meters the HW 97K put five JTS 10.4-grain domes into a 0.214-inch group. I used the artillery hold with the rifle rested on my off hand under the rear of the cocking slot.
The first group showed a lot of promise! Five pellets went into 0.214-inches between centers. A great start!
Sandbag rest
That first group was shot with the artillery hold. But since I don’t know this rifle I had to try a second group with the same pellet and the rifle rested directly on the sandbag. This one is slightly better! Five shots are in 0.195-inches at 10 meters.
When rested directly on the sandbag, the HW 97K put five of the 10.4-grain JTS pellets into a 0.195-inch group at 10 meters.
These two groups are so close in size that either way of shooting works. I will continue shooting with the rifle rested directly on the sandbag because it’s easier.
RWS Superdome
I tried the RWS Superdome next. Five went into 0.362-inches at 10 meters. In my opinion, that’s not so good. Either the HW 97K doesn’t like Superdomes or it is just pellet picky in general.
The 97K put five RWS Superdomes into a 0.362-inch group at 10 meters. It might look okay, but not when compared to the first two groups shot with the 10.4-grain JTS. Perhaps the next pellet will be the deciding factor?
Qiang Yuan Sports dome
Next to be tested was the 8.48-grain Qiang Yuan Sports dome. They did show that the 97 isn’t pellet picky by grouping five in 0.17-inches at 10 meters.
Five Qiang Yuan Sports domes went into 0.17-inches at 10 meters. This HW 97K can shoot!
Air Arms 8.44-grain dome
The last pellet I tested was the 8.44-grain Air Arms dome. Five went into 0.117-inches — the smallest group of the test. Yes, this HW 97K is a shooter.
The Air Arms 8.44-grain dome is the best pellet in today’s test. Five are in 0.117-inches at 10 meters.
Trigger
I know from using it that the Rekord trigger on the test rifle is set too heavy. I need to work on it.
Cocking and shot cycle
For some reason the 97 seems to cock easier for me than it did previously. I don’t think the effort that’s required has reduced; I just think I’m getting use to it. Also the sliding compression chamber moves more freely as the rifle breaks in.
The rifle still buzzes just a little when it fires. It’s not objectionable, but it is noticeable.
Summary
I am starting to understand what so many people see in the HW 97K. It seems to be quite accurate. It doesn’t seem to be pellet picky but more testing is needed to affirm that.
I still prefer the TX 200 Mark III for several reasons (it has a better trigger and is easier to disassemble and tune) but the 97 is keeping pace on the accuracy side. After I adjust the Rekord the next test will be accuracy at 25 yards.
B.B.
I’m surprised that your surprised? The HW 97 is supposed to be the most accurate Weihrauch of them all.
Pity that under-levers and side cockers are so darn fiddly.
-Yogi
Please change the “your” for “you are”, in the first sentence.
-Y
YOGI: I’ve taken my TX200 apart several times now and eventually my new 97K will need a Vortek tune, so I ask, why fiddley? Orv.
Dear Hoppalong,
Cocking is a crime against ergonomics!
Loading is like finding a key hole in the dark!
-Y
Tom,
That underlever seems very neutral with the pellets that fit it’s bore properly. Was the RWS Superdome too easy or too hard to insert into the breech?
Siraniko
Siraniko,
It went in hard.
BB
Tom,
Makes me think that the head diameter of the Superdomes are bigger than what this rifle’s bore likes. One of these days maybe somebody might test if accuracy will improve by creating a gentler leade for oversize pellets. It would be a one way trip though since normal sized pellets would end up deeper into the barrel than normal, so it might end up as a waste of time and money.
Siraniko
Hey Siraniko
I have 2 Walther LG55’s. One of them it looks like somebody opened up the barrel on the breech end of the barrel.
The only thing it did that I can see is eliminates marking the head of the pellet with the rifling of the barrel when you load. So the pellet is all the way flush at the skirt and still doesn’t contact the rifling when loaded.
Both guns are equally accurate. Don’t know if this answers anything put figured I would share the info.
“After I adjust the Rekord the next test will be accuracy at 25 yards.”
BB,
Things are looking good so far; I’m really looking forward to that 25-yard test. 🙂
Blessings to you,
dave
P.S. On a semi-related topic (since it relates to spring guns), my .22 caliber Haenel model 1 has finally given up the ghost; I saw the velocity dropping; then it failed to penetrate one side of a Pepsi can from 10 feet away; there were pieces in the barrel, which I realized were bits of leather from the now defunct leather piston seal. I’ve got the new leather seal, and I’m looking to put it in, but first I am building a spring compressor (I’ve seen enough info on this site that that shouldn’t be too hard. =>); the C-clamp below is the main item for that; thankfully, it has an aluminum body, so I can easily cut on the dotted yellow line, then mount it to a piece of deck board with some 1/4-20 screws that will go into the two threaded holes in the base. I found an ancient link to a forum where someone did a complete takedown of a model 1, however, it was so old that the pics are no longer available, just the text. Do you know of another link to anyone who has rebuilt one of these Haenel model 1 rifles? The one I have is identical to the one you reported on here:
https://www.pyramydair.com/blog/2009/03/haenel-model-1-part-1-a-compulsive-airgun-buy/
Thank you! 🙂
dave,
Sorry, I don’t know anyone who has taken one of these apart. I hope that’s true, I just can’t remember.
BB
Thanks, BB; I’ll go back and read some of your tutorials on spring piston rifles to get a feel for it. 😉
As you know, “Walnut and Steel” has posted several videos about your rifle within the last 5 months.
I would suggest you reach out to him and ask him to post a disassembly video. HTH?
-Yogi
Yogi, good point; I just reached out to him about that; thank you. 🙂
Dave,
The best advice anyone could possibly give you concerning your disassembly project is to “hurry slowly”. After you have determined that your spring compressor will work properly, you should read and then read and reread what disassembly notes you may have.
This air rifle “should be” easy to disassemble, but there are no guaranties. Sometimes on these “old gals” the designer likes to do something “a little different”.
I do not have any experience with Haenel air rifles and can provide you with zero guidance. This does sound as if it will be a good blog for you to write about. Take many notes and pictures of each step please. My favorite part of these blogs is the learning it provides.
If something seems questionable, stop and ask. Somebody here just might have the answer. Hurry slowly.
“hurry slowly”
RidgeRunner, you said a mouthful there, alright! That’s some great advice. 🙂
Yes, I’ll take a lot of photos.
If all goes well, perhaps a guest blog will be in order.
If all goes badly, I’ll ask BB to delete these comments, and pretend nothing ever happened! 😉
No, no, no, no. Even if it goes badly, we want to read/hear about it. That way we know what not to do. 😉
BB all the time tells us about when he messes up. I do sometimes also. Nobody is perfect, although BB is approaching that. 😉
We do indeed wish to read/hear of your attempts to reseal this air rifle. I am certain there are many who would not mind looking over your shoulder as you build your spring compressor also. Please do let us follow along.
OK, man; you’ve got me there; I’ll let you all know either way. 🙂
🙂
Dave,
the barrel latch looks very similar to the one on the Baikal IJ-22.
Rebuild info here:
http://anotherairgunblog.blogspot.com/search/label/IJ-22
I’ll venture that the mainspring is canted and compressed. May need to source something after you get it apart and can get some measurements.
More rebuild info here on a vintage Hyscore that should also be similar:
http://anotherairgunblog.blogspot.com/2011/07/belgian-hy-score-801-part-1.html
I doubt you’ll find much preload on the mainspring. go slow, have fun!
Derrick,
Thank you for those links! The new seal looks just like the one in pic #4 of that Baikal link. 😉
Hence, those links should prove helpful. 🙂
Blessings to you,
dave
Pooky,
I so want one of these HW97K’s, most especially the one in a walnut stock. I went back and forth and around and around between buying a walnut HW97K, a Brocock Compatto or a BSA R10 SE. The BSA won. Ah well, you cannot have them all. Needless to say Mrs. RR was not happy with me, again. It is looking like she will get her carport AND a screened in porch. Such is life at RRHFWA and RRHHMM.
Ouch. I hope you are REALLY enjoying the R10!
RG,
The truth is I have not fired it yet, but I am quite certain I will enjoy it immensely.
RR,
It must have been a tough choice between those three air guns, especially between the HW97 and the BSA R10. I got one of those BSAs also and it is beautifully made and shoots better than I can. It was something I drooled over when I saw pictures and read reviews, back when they were new and over my budget. I couldn’t resist the lowered price and am happy I bought it, hope you enjoy yours, too!
I’m sure it will be worth the effort of building the carport and screening in the back porch, with a shooting perch designed into maybe both.
I am certain it will be worth it also. They are indeed most beautiful things.
As for shooting perches, I did build a pretty nice shooting bench and range within easy walking distance of RRHFWA and RRHHMM. It would be a real shame not to use it.
RR
Reminder for possible change of mind for Mrs. RR:
Build a warehouse and it gets filled up; build a carport and soon there’s no room for car.
Deck
Deck,
That changing of mind thing has gone ’round and ’round already. I decided there would be a carport and I would screen in the back porch.
RidgeRunner,
Please read your email! I need a pic from you!
BB
B.B.,
Looking forward to your 25 testing.
Is it really as hard to load as Yogi claims? Like finding a keyhole in the dark?
Me thinks Yogi needs an ENC (Every Night Carry) flashlight/torch.
shootski
shootski,
I found it fairly easy to load, but I am used to loading a TX which is harder. Breakbarrels are easier.
BB
B.B.,
I can see where the break barrel is considered to be an easier loading design. I only own two of those. All the rest have some kind of magazine, an opening to the breech similar to the HW 97K or with a loading trough with a bolt that does the actual projectile loading.
Looks to me from the pictures that there would be ample finger room for loading. Would a pellet pen work with this type of loading arrangement?
shootski
PS: Could you do a top down (overhead) photograph of the open loading area? I looked for one but no joy so far.
Happy to see this review! The HW 97K was an all time favorite of mine, never pulled the trigger on a TX 200. Curious to see if the Air Arms still comes out on top all these years later.
FWIW my 14 year-old son has been testing air rifles pretty extensively (by our standards) in the past couple of weeks and we have been collecting a lot of data on Crosman 362 barrels which I’d like to comment on more if BB continues any testing of the 362 or 3622 guns. Our basic goal was to separate guns/projectile combinations into those that could be relied upon to shoot 3/4″ groups at 25 yards when bench/sandbag rested (with >= 90% reliability) and those that cannot.
The final three guns tested were the TX200, HW97K, and the Diana 54 (all in .22 and tested with 10-shot groups at 25 yards) and those were thrown into the mix because of their claims to be on the higher end of readily available high-precision piston air rifles. In line with what has been claimed, all of these rifles shoot with a high level of precision and it is difficult to discern the difference between the results if you look at them side-by-side. I was initially disappointed in the results of TX200 as the initial four different pellets resulted in groupings which were in the 1″ to 1.6″ range but after shooting H&N FTT, the rifle “eeked” out a slight advantage over the other two rifles with a 1/2″ group compared to around 5/8″ inches for the other two which is phenomenal (for us) compared to the many other air guns (all non-PCP) we have tested. We found all three guns did not require the “artillery hold” to achieve exceptional results, but we are not experts in executing the artillery hold so there may be some further precision gains to be had there. Of course, the Diana has the slide mechanism which may compensate for having to use the artillery hold but we did not see any advantage of this over the other two guns. It does do well in significantly reducing the recoil though which appears to be its only real advantage.
We also tested a Marlin 981T, a CZ 457 Lux, and a CZ 457 American with CCI “quiet”, CB long, and Super Colibri rounds which we felt was fitting and would allow us the best chance to group this class of guns with pellet guns. Maybe a stretch but this is always something that intrigued me – why buy a pellet gun when you can “simulate” one with a regular .22 rifle using low-noise, low-power rounds? I know BB tested this also and had some interesting results. In our testing, only the CCI quiets proved acceptable.
Some of the main points we took away with testing these guns follow. Please keep in mind these are *our* experiences and are not meant to imply everyone will have the same experiences. Some of these points are obvious of course, but I wanted to enumerate them for completeness.
Some of the non-surprising results:
1.) Piston air guns perform commensurately to the price you pay for them
2.) Projectile (bullet/pellet) selection is more critical than one with little experience may initially conclude
Some of the more surprising results (for us):
3.) Expect a Crosman 362 to be a 1″ grouper at best. This is from a sample size of over 15 different barrels tested on a standard 362 with a steel breech. Yes, it can do better (and worse of course) at times but on average it’s a 1″ grouper. Anything better is unusual. There were also quite a few barrels that could not do better than 1.5-2″ groups no matter which pellet we tried out of about a dozen of the most common types. Being a pump gun and not having the issues that, in theory, could be attributed to poor precision due to a spring piston we expected better. It also showed us spring piston guns do not have any inherent deficiencies vs. other designs depending on the build quality.
4.) It would be easy to “blame the shooter” for poor precision when the majority of the precision is inherent to the gun/projectile selection. Things like artillery hold, trigger characteristics, wind, breathing, and similar are not the major contributors to gross precision. This being said, we believe these things certainly do effect the final results, but in our experiences, these items likely only result in minor percentage differences in the final results under our test conditions (i.e. not shooting during a hurricane or having physical conditions which adversely affect outcome (not drunk – lol)). Again, our fundamental goal was finding guns that would consistently do 3/4″ groups at 25 yards with 90% or greater confidence (at least 9 out of 10 shots.)
5.) The precision of a standard .22 rimfire rifle with rounds simulating those characteristics of a pellet gun (i.e. low noise and similar energy) *can* rival that of the pellet guns we tested. That being said, for those who don’t want to invest in another line of weapons, they would be prudent to acquire a .22 rimfire and find out if “low energy” rounds meet their needs. In our testing, CB caps and the Super Colibris were not good performers although the Marlin was able to do 1″ groups with the CCI CB longs consistently. The CCI quiets shot well in all rimfire guns with all in the 3/8″ to 3/4″ range. It is likely the differences are due to round consistency vs. rifle capability or shooter consistency but we did not attempt to confirm this as we do not have a definitive way to do so.
As always, thanks BB for continuing to test and share your data! Hopefully the data we collected is helpful to some also.
Airgunner,
Your first comment “ Piston air guns perform commensurately to the price you pay for them“ is a truism that many never learn! If you buy quality, you can sell quality if the purchase doesn’t suit you.
I’‘ve owned a number of HW’s including 95, 85, 30, 97K models, some Dianas and Air Arms and Benjamin Marauder PCPs. While all are very accurate, the 97K is the only one that can group with the PCPs. It shoots quarter inch or better groups at 20m. They do need a Vortex tuning kit to shoot as smoothly as a TX200. Yes, you do use a spring compressor to disassemble but working on it is very straightforward.
I do prefer the HW97K ergonomics better than the TX200 but they are both great rifles. I think every serious air gunner with the $$ should try a premium underlever.
Great posts,
Indeed. The only exception to the “get-what-you-pay-for” conclusion as far as precision goes in my experiences are the Daisy 880 and Seneca Dragonfly MK2. Outside of its precision, the Daisy is nothing spectacular with its ultra low cost plastic construction and its trigger pull is horrendous. The Dragonfly has much better relative construction of course. Both guns are very precise shooters and I have see very few “flyers” with their matched pellets. I almost hate to write this but since this group of readers seem “open-minded” and slow to flame, I personally am going to group the Daisy, Seneca, TX200, HW97K, and Diana 54 in the same precision category for my purposes. Of course I would always choose a TX200 over an 880 and the TX200 will undoubtedly produce more precise groups on average but I’m impressed with the 880 after spending the time on the Crosman 362 guns which I cannot group with the above listed guns in general as far as precision. Certainly there is a lot more to guns than I had imagined when I first was introduced to them. I guess that’s part of what keeps our attention…
With the exception of the triggers on the Daisy and the Dragonfly. They are no contest against TW200, Redford or high end Diana triggers.