Canadian Airgun Forum

Don't mean to speak for sniper, but the B51s he has are .22 only, no? In that case, his HW100 .22 would be the superior (!) choice. I think he's going on the basis that .177 has some advantage here. Canshooter's BAM was .177, I remember he talked about it and there was some pics...

_________________
Why, whenever there's a shooting, do the politicians go after the people who didn't do it?

A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well. - Murphy's Other Laws

hmmm..... how could I forget the B51/50 .177, I have some of those
barrel ... darn.... another good idea.
Thx. for reminding ....

we have some in stock the .177 B50/51, NOT the D, are on sale
for $ 350.00 if anybody interested.

well there you go, the B51 for $350.. that'd be the cheapest entry into PCP. I'm sure with the right amount of TLC, they could be tuned to be real good shooters...

Thanks for all of the great replies guys! Here's a couple more silly newb questions.
First regarding the HW97K that has been recommended a couple of times. I have fired a tuned Phantom, tuned Quest and a Diana (forget the exact model) and I'm not really a big fan of how the action/recoil feels. Is that "sensation" comparable to a rifle of the quality level of the HW97K, or am I comparing apples to oranges?
Secondly, I see that .177 seems to be the caliber of choice, but I'm wondering which brand/weight of pellets are preferred and why?
Thanks

No offense to anybody intended because I love my (relatively inexpensive) B51, but IMO/E they were designed to work WELL and properly in .22. The Daystate design that was copied was a .22 gun. If you get one in .177 you will become very familiar with all the stuff in "the book". But in .22 you can toss all that info, they don't have any of the "performance curve" issues the .177 ones do, remarkably similarly match the Daystate. The BAM .22 barrels seem to be lots better in general too. I'm just saying the B50/1 may become frustrating and/or time-consuming to a competitive FT shooter in .177...

OTOH, you can check out "Tony" on the yellow forum who owns just about all the current guns we wet ourselves over ($$$ appears to be no object to him). He swears his tuned B51 with a HW .177 barrel (MAC1 ??...probably) is as accurate at FT-type ranges as any of his others. So it can be done, and can be worthwhile, but in Canada it may be more cost-effective to just plunk down the $$ up front for one of the cheaper British PCPs if you want to be quite competitive in the PCP-allowed classes.

BTW, I am not an FT or any other type of competitive shooter, just tossing general AG info out...

_________________
Why, whenever there's a shooting, do the politicians go after the people who didn't do it?

A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well. - Murphy's Other Laws

You are comparing apples to oranges. An HW 97 is a much different rifle in that it is heavy and relatively low power for its size. I believe they are about 14 to 15 fpe out of the box and have a very pleasant recoil action.

Pellets are still what works the best in your rifle, but now it is no longer at 10 to 20 yards, but out to 55 yards. Better pellets, like CP Elite Lights in the brown box (no canned pellets from Crosman need apply for this job), JSB Exacts, JSB Express, and H&N Field Target Trophy are pellets that you should be looking at using. I know others might work great in your rifle but these pellets have been shown to work with their ability to handle wind and long range accuracy. Why no Baracuda's?? Simple, we are strictly talking about spring powered air guns well under 20 fpe in muzzle energy, and for the most part, under 14 fpe.

One last little bit of advice. Because you can use spring air guns up to 20 fpe, does not mean you should use it. It has been proven that spring rifles tend to work best for this sport at around 11 to 14 fpe and no more. The heavier, the better, as light springers tend to jump around like the proverbial Mexican Jumping Bean. Those with rifle and scope combinations that are lighter than 8 pounds, should think seriously about adding a bit of weight to them to help settle the rifle and tame the felt recoil to a minimum. Take care.

_________________
Keyrigger
CAFTA Governor

When you are long winded, is that a sign of Wisdom or Old Age?

cfraszer:

I am trying to figure out where you got the information from that states the .177 is a frustating gun to work on?

_________________
Keyrigger
CAFTA Governor

When you are long winded, is that a sign of Wisdom or Old Age?

I shoot my HW97 at 12fpe. Generally, when shooting a piston, you want less then 1fpe per lb - i.e. a 12lb gun shouldn't be more then 12fpe.

I've add lead to my rifle, as well as a mercury recoil absorber (designed for shotguns) I've never weighted my rifle, but I'd guess its 15lbs (I really need to weight it sometime so I can know!)

ALL the info/posts etc. plus "the book" where people spend ages doing things that aren't necessary to the .22 B51. The .22 B51 pretty much emulates the Daystate Huntsman performance curves for shots/velocity/consistency up to 30fpe (not that I'm recommending that). None of the ridiculous curves I've seen for the stock .177 guns. Really. The .177 B50/1 tuning info is of no use to those with .22s. The people who've made a "career" out of trying to get the .177s to have a decent power curve seem to have no idea re the .22s. Just my experience, from asking them, not the slightest clue or help. Probably they're not interested, since competition guns are typically .177 and Americans are big on that caliber in general (compared to the rest of the world outside of competition).

The quantity of work and posts makes me think it would be frustrating. Not necessarily for everybody though... As mentioned, Tony's gun proves it's doable. I did not say *I* find it frustrating. I did my research first. OTOH, I have more $$ than time to dick with stuff, in that I'd rather put the good $$ in up front and get something right. Not that I always do...

Have you tested an out-of-the-box .22 B51? Remarkably how right, compared to the original, they are. Not that I wouldn't rather have the original in every way... In .177 you are fighting the original's design, and I hope nobody thinks the Chinese would *improve* on it, or make compensations for the caliber. Not at this stage of their industry anyway, soon though. I just think it would be more sensible to start out with one of the name-brand British PCPs that shoot right straight out of the box. Close to zero frustration. Doesn't have to be expensive either. The ONLY reason to buy a Chinese gun is because they're CHEAPer, no other reason at all.

_________________
Why, whenever there's a shooting, do the politicians go after the people who didn't do it?

A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well. - Murphy's Other Laws

Thanks for all of that information! An HW97K+Leapers8-32x=10.6lbs (approx), so in stock tune it sounds as though it would be a great setup to start with. I wonder if anybody local sells the HW97K so I can take a look....

I can tell you that I have worked on a box stock B-50 in .22 and I will tell you that they are not even close to the original. There are some obvious differences and then there are those that take an expert to see. The Huntsman was a hunting rifle that was meant to fire a limited number of shots and then be refilled. That is the rub. By the time the BAM version hit the market, most people had been accustomed to seeing a larger number of consistant shots from a regulated rifle, so now they want to force the BAM to shoot a regulated rifle's shot string. That is not going to happen.

Unless you drop the power way down, as the B-51D has been done, you will never get it to have a flat curve and high power. A Huntsman usually gets about 25 good full power shots, and even then, it must be reset to each different pellet with the start pressure in the tank. The .177 and .22 share most parts but others are calibre specific. Canshooter has a .22 version that was tweaked to get a fairly good velocity curve, then it was changed to .177. Now, the power had to be seriously reduced for FT, so it was very simply done and the velocity was set to around 840 with Baracuda's. The shot count went way up and is in and around 45 or more per charge of air.

Most of the "Tuners" you see, are "by accident" tuners and not by design. Both the .177 and .22 Huntsmans are simple to work on and if you can't get a simple answer to what you want to do, then the person doesn't know what they are talking about. If they can tune a .177 and yet not tune a .22, they are incapable. You must understand the system being worked on, or it will always be a difficult thing to work on, and without the understanding, success may never happen. As to accuracy, the .177 barrel on Canshooter's rifle can place them under a half inch at 50 yards.

_________________
Keyrigger
CAFTA Governor

When you are long winded, is that a sign of Wisdom or Old Age?

Illingworth, SSS, and D&L carry the 97 in their inventory, and I am not aware of any gun shop in Ontario that does. Come out to a match and have a look at one. It will only take a short time to ship one in and that is better than finding you may not like it for some unusual reason. One added bonus is that you might get the chance to shoot one and see what it is all about, which is an even bigger reason to come out to a match.

_________________
Keyrigger
CAFTA Governor

When you are long winded, is that a sign of Wisdom or Old Age?

I am not an expert as you know. Maybe I got a lucky gun, though I don't think so. But I do have TONS of performance data for it. It very closely matches what .22 Huntsman data I've seen posted. Which is what made me say the gun was probably designed for .22. Compared to the .177 data I've seen posted, which is comparatively rubbish before adjustment. I would like to see some good data that shows the gun was NOT designed for .22, all indications so far are it was. Based on what reports I've seen, there is always the possibility the B51Ds were a little better "selected" before getting the D than the others. Some of the B50/1 guns people have got for very low bucks in the U.S. seem like junk in comparison, just as the springers labelled "Crosman" are typically not what "quality" you see when bought from the crate. There is some selection process going on. Bottom line is, if you want quality, why would you buy Chinese? For now... Competition demands quality. Just my opinion.

_________________
Why, whenever there's a shooting, do the politicians go after the people who didn't do it?

A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well. - Murphy's Other Laws

I think you spend way too much time on the Yellow forum looking for answers and should have directed your questions to the other side of the pond. There, you would get some straight answers and not those from wannabe's. On Airgunforum.net, ask Sam what the .177 Huntsman was normally set to in .177. For that matter, you could always join in the Air Arms Owners Club and ask them, just don't mention you have a BAM 51, lol.

_________________
Keyrigger
CAFTA Governor

When you are long winded, is that a sign of Wisdom or Old Age?

^ Actually, I spent little time after quickly determining they knew less than I did about the .22. Hard to believe, but true based on their responses...

Yes, get an AA and save your time/$$ in the long run. That is the point. I am kinda surprised you are "recommending" or encouraging use of the .177 B50/1 for comp. I am not. It's that simple, and I won't change my mind. I am a cheap bastard, not a stupid one...AA is a better investment for a beginner *in my opinion*. If I save one Canadian from thinking they are going to get a competitive .177 B50/1 for overall cheaper (let's include some value to effort and sweat here) than an AA S400-series (or some other British, on sale or used) PCP then I have done a good deed.

And it's not that I have anything against the B51, mine's IMO a keeper.

_________________
Why, whenever there's a shooting, do the politicians go after the people who didn't do it?

A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well. - Murphy's Other Laws