Remington AirMaster 77 Air Rifle Kit

Powerful

Trigger pole is very hard. Unable to get a clear sharp image through Scope.

The metal compression piston; zero wiggle or side play in the pumping action/arm; solid feeling heft; solid feeling forend (even though it's plastic); metal trigger (nice touch); accuracy out of the box was spot on to hit spinning targets at about 20 yrds; pumping isn't too hard but is more than my older worn in Daisy 990; barrel shroud is beautiful; the iron sights are perfectly sized/shaped to produce a solid sight picture. I've owned 7 air rifles (2 single pump, 2 multi-pump, 1 multi-pump/CO2 dual power (Daisy), 1 springer, 1 gas ram, and 1 multi-pump that was so awful that I had to return it to the store), and I have begun to become a bit of an enthusiast. I have several future purchases planned, but this airgun is far and away the most solid feeling of the pneumatics that I've owned. Lastly, the spinning targets are fun!

I want an all metal receiver with the same power plant. It seems that perhaps an earlier version of this rifle did have a metal receiver. There's a YouTube video of a guy who stripped the paint and polished the receiver in 2010. Perhaps Crosman changed to a plastic receiver to keep cost down when they upgraded the power plant? I personally would prefer to have a version that was as the other reviewer put it, "the holy grail" of air rifles by having both the metal power plant and the metal receiver. Perhaps a special edition? Wood would be nice, but I understand that seems reserved for higher priced designs. Second is the cocking handle for the bolt. It is stiff/hard to cock as stated by others, but not that bad, unless your hands start to sweat and your grip slips. I think perhaps a longer handle length, shape change, or other ergonomics answer would address it. Butt stock is loudly hollow, compared against all my other plastic airguns of similar to lower price point.

After extensive research, across numerous websites, of nearly every YouTube video I could find, all to answer the question "what is the difference between the CR2100B, CR1000, and AM77" I finally settled on this gun due to a few references that stated this was a metal receiver and that it had a metal compression piston with the higher performance of the CR1000. I effectively expected the guts of the CR1000, the metal receiver of the 2100, with the nice look of the brushed look metal barrel shroud. This was to be my (nearly) perfect lower cost pneumatic air rifle. What I have learned is that the AM77 is effectively the CR1000 with a metal barrel shroud. It DOES NOT have a metal receiver. Also note that on the Crosman site, the CR1000 warns to only use RMCOIL (silicone) for lubrication due to higher compression. I have asked Crosman if that also applies to the AM77, but in that both guns are producing the same FPS and that their internals are the same it makes sense this needs RMCOIL.