by B.B. Pelletier

Crosman’s 2240 pistol is a classic single-shot CO2 pistol. It has more potential than many airgunners realize, yet it sells at a rockbottom price.

The Crosman 2240 pistol is one of those bread and butter guns that have assured Crosman’s continued presence in the airgun world. It’s as simple as dirt, and thus has a following of tens of thousands of enthusiastic airgunners, many of whom are learning about guns through this very worthy platform. In fact, I have an interesting anecdote about such airguns to share with you.

In 2001, I was at the NRA Annual Meetings and Exhibits in Kansas City, and the NRA hosted an airgun breakfast. Normally, the airgun breakfast was a SHOT Show event, but in the beginning they held it at both SHOT and NRA Meetings. Dennis Quackenbush and I were seated next to the then-current CEO of the Crosman Corporation. That was before Ken D’Arcy joined them.

We were talking about Crosman’s SSP 250 pistol and the 2240, and Dennis was telling the Crosman boss how his business had grown because of all the aftermarket add-ons he made for these guns. The Crosman guy seemed to be incredulous at what Quackenbush was saying, so Dennis summed it up for him in one simple sentence. “Yeah, you sell them the pistol for $39.95 (the 2001 price) and then I get to sell them $125 worth of modifications!”

Well, in two years, that man was gone and D’Arcy was the new head of the company. He had some things to fix right off the bat; but within five years, the Crosman Custom Shop had opened and they were starting to pay real attention to what their customers said they wanted. The result is that you can now buy many of those same mods directly from Crosman, though boutique shops like Quackenbush’s continue to make exotic parts.

This report will be an examination of the basic .22 caliber 2240 CO2-powered pistol and not an excursion into what modifications are possible. I still find the basic gun to be a wonderful value in an air pistol, as I believe I stated in the recent report on the Crosman Mark I and Mark II.

This is not the first time I’ve reported on the 2240. Back in 2005, I wrote a short report. Again in 2007, I wrote a report about modifying the 2240. The gun has appeared in a number of other reports on guns it has influenced and sired, such as the 2300T and the 2300S.

The 2240 is a .22 caliber single-shot pistol that operates via a bolt-action. The brass bolt is set into an engineering plastic receiver that’s the basis for many of the aftermarket mods. Quackenbush turned out solid steel receivers for many years, and now Crosman does the same, offering them through the Custom Shop. They also engineered the 2240 into their fine 2300T and 2300S target pistols, both of which come with a steel receiver.

The pistol might be seen as the descendant of the early model 150/157 CO2 pistols. There’s a passing resemblance between those early guns and the 2240, though time has changed many of the actual parts. The 2240 uses a brass bolt to both cock and load the gun. The 150 cocked via a separate knob located at the rear of the receiver tube, and loading was done by sliding a loading cover backwards. That cover was connected to the bolt that pushed the pellet into the breech and past the gas transfer port.

When I told Edith I was going to report on the 2240, she asked if we had one. I answered, “Of course.” Some pellet guns are just too fundamental to this hobby, and I hang on to them when I get them, because I know they’ll keep turning up over time. In fact, Crosman gave me this gun years ago. Crosman’s manufacturing director, Ed Schultz, sent it and told me to just keep it because I would find repeated uses for it. That’s exactly what happened. I keep the gun charged with CO2 all the time, and I know for certain that it’s been over a year since I last checked it. But it was still holding a full charge when I retrieved it for this report.

The gun is light, at 1.8 lbs., and with the 7.5-inch barrel it measures just over 11 inches. The ambidextrous plastic grips are raked back at the ideal angle for pointing. They discovered this angle back in 1950 and have held to it steadfastly for 60 years since. You pull the brass bolt handle up and straight back to cock the action. Here’s one place where Crosman has not yet fully listened to the market. Quackenbush discovered that right-handed shooters like the cocking bolt handle to be on the left side of the gun, but it’s on the right. So southpaws have a rare benefit with this airgun. What that means is that left-handers can hold onto the gun naturally in their shooting hand and still work the bolt, while right-handers have to take the pistol out of their shooting hand to cock and load.

I checked the blog archives for performance figures but couldn’t find any. In my feature article for Shotgun News, where I compared the 2240 to the Mark I and the S&W 78G, the 2240 came out the clear winner for power and accuracy. Maybe the S&W was more powerful, because I had Dave Gunter soup it up for me, but I remember being impressed with the 2240’s accuracy.

Plastic parts
We just had a guest blog from Brian in Idaho that explained the advantages of modern plastics in airgun manufacturing. So, where does plastic show up on this pistol? The receiver, front and rear sights, and grip panels are plastic. The barrel hanger looks like plastic, but it’s actually aluminum. These are the parts many buyers complain about, and the same ones that keep the boutiques humming. They’re actually stronger than they need be, but shooters want what they want and that’s what keeps the market lively.

The trigger is a simple brass-plated lever that a number of boutiques can improve upon. I guess TKO Airguns is the current flavor of the month for that part. They also have improved trigger internal parts to help with the trigger-pull.

Rear sight
The sights are fully adjustable, though only by sliding around. But so many shooters upgrade the gun with optical sights that I guess it doesn’t make any sense for Crosman to put more into them. One neat rear feature demonstrates the level to which Crosman has engineered this airgun. The rear sight is a square notch, but it’s also possible to flip it over to get an aperture. That’s for when you couple the pistol to a shoulder stock. Good job, Crosman!

Flip the sight leaf over and it’s a peep. Perfect for use with a shoulder stock. This gives an indication of how much thought has gone into this pistol design.

That’s my report for now. I’m sure I’ve missed a hundred details that our faithful readers will discuss for many days to come.

by B.B. Pelletier

The September podcast went live yesterday. If you enjoy hunting, you’ll like this podcast! My voice still sounds a little weak, but I think that I also didn’t set up something properly in Garage Band, which is how I record the podcast. Now, on to today’s blog.

Part 1
Part 2

Today, we’ll look at accuracy. Several years ago, I wrote a feature article for Shotgun News in which I pitted the Mark I and a Smith & Wesson 78G against a modern Crosman 2240. I thought the vintage guns would run away with the contest when it came to accuracy, but the reverse happened. The 2240 beat both other guns for power and accuracy. So, tomorrow I’m starting a special three-part test of the 2240, just to keep the playing field level. Today, it’s the Mark I’s turn in the spotlight.

I go back to school
The first couple groups I shot at 10 meters weren’t good. I wondered what had happened to me, then I remembered that I shoot a lot better without my bifocals on. For some reason, my glasses make it difficult to focus on the front sight.

So, off came the specs and on went the shooting glasses. The groups got smaller, but not as much as I was hoping for. Then I did something I’ve preached against for the past 40 years. I closed my left eye! Suddenly, I could see the front sight and the rear sight clearly, and the groups tightened right up to what they were supposed to be. So, lesson learned for the umpteenth time. Don’t shoot with your regular glasses on and cover up that non-sighting eye. My shooting glasses do all that, I was just too lazy to go find them. Besides, I wanted to see if I could still shoot without that aid.

Trigger-pull
The trigger-pull is still set rather heavy, breaking at around 5 lbs. on stage two. But, when the gun is rested, as it was for this test, that’s not a hindrance.

RWS Hobbys
Remember, the Crosman Mark I is .22 caliber, not .177. The RWS Hobby is a lightweight wadcutter pellet in both .177 and .22. It seemed to fit the breech of the pistol fairly well, with a little resistance as the bolt pushed it home. They grouped well but had a couple fliers that could have been caused by my sighting experiments. I was shooting 10-shot groups as usual, and that takes a lot longer than the same number of 5-shot groups, so I didn’t run the Hobbys again because other pellets promised more accuracy.

RWS Hobby pellets showed promise with this 10-shot group at 10 meters. Six of the 10 went into a very tight group, and this was during the time when I was experimenting with sighting!

Gamo Hunter
I initially tried Gamo Hunter pellets and got a pretty good group, despite my sighting problems. And, when I went again while doing everything right, the 10-shot group was truly rewarding!

This group of 10 Gamo Hunters was shot after I got the sighting sorted out. The first group showed lots of promise, and this was the payoff. The lower pellet was not called as a flier.

RWS Superdomes
I didn’t wait to hear from disgruntled readers that I’d overlooked the RWS Superdome pellet yet again, so they were included in this test. The first group was shot while I was having sighting problems, and also during a CO2 cartridge changeover, and it still was tight enough to recommend a further look. That further look, shot after the sighting problems had been resolved, proved to be the best of the test! So those who tout RWS Superdomes were right in this case.

And there’s the money shot. Ten RWS Superdomes went into that tiny group at 10 meters. Clearly, the best pellet of those tested.

Crosman Premiers
I did try Crosman Premiers, as well, but they fit the breech very loosely and didn’t have the same grouping potential as the others. Perhaps on another day….

The bottom line
The bottom line for the Crosman Mark I vintage air pistol is that it’s a very worthy handgun. The prices seem to have risen over the past year, but they can still be bought if you’re a careful searcher. The prize seems well worth the effort.

by B.B. Pelletier

This isn’t Part 2 to yesterday’s report, but it could be. Today, I got out to the range for the first time since February. And, man, did I need it! I took a bunch of guns that I’d never shot before and tried them all out.

1862 Peabody
This rifle was patented in 1862 as a breechloader for the U.S., but it was never ordered. However, three states did buy it for their militias, including Connecticut, which later returned all their rifles to the maker to be converted to .45/70. That is the caliber mine is, so I quickly cooked up 20 rounds of my Trapdoor Springfield load, knowing that the stronger Peabody falling block action would have no trouble with it.

Like a Sharps rifle only different, the Peabody isn’t as well-known as some of the other big bore single-shots. This one is a .45/70 made in about 1868.

The Peabody was the forerunner of the Martini falling block action. The difference is the Peabody has an exposed hammer that must be manually cocked. The rifling is Alexander Henry-type, and the bore on this rifle is perfect!

A good friend of mine takes a shot at the 50-yard bull.

Compared to a .45 ACP (bottom), the .45/70 rifle cartridge is huge and imposing.

I spent no effort making accurate rounds. These were just for function firing, and the bullets varied in weight by as much as five grains. Still, I shot a very decent first group with the rifle. Good enough that I’m now interested in seeing what it can be made to do. Anytime you get bullets landing near each other with a big bore rifle on the first go-round, you’re doing something right. I suspect this rifle can shoot into less than a minute of angle when everything is perfect.

While this is no screamer, it does indicate that the Peabody wants to shoot. Better sights, a refined powder load and finding the correct seating depth will all serve to tighten the group considerably.

This rifle recoils heavily with the test load, so I’ll have to load differently to reduce the felt recoil. The buttplate is narrow compared to other big bore single-shots such as the Trapdoor, and that magnifies the felt recoil. So, I stopped shooting after 10 rounds.

Single-Action Army
I then tried out my Uberti Single-Action Army, which was a homecoming gift this summer. All I had were light cowboy action loads, and the range was 50 yards, so although I did hit the bullseye, it wasn’t worth talking about. But the revolver certainly is! I really like the way Uberti copied the original Colt narrow grip profile, giving this replica the exact feel of an old black powder model Colt. It felt great, and recoiled with about the same energy as a .38 Special.

The Uberti SAA is a delight to shoot. The plow-handle shape of Colt’s grip makes the gun turn in your hand, absorbing most of the recoil. With the right loads, a 2″ five-shot group should be possible from a rested position at 50 yards.

I need to start loading for this revolver, because I know I can tighten those groups by quite a bit. And the cost per round will drop to about 7 cents. The only bullet worth loading in the .45 Colt is the legendary Keith 452424 semi-wadcutter from Lyman. Look for a more in-depth report on this gun in the future.

M1 Carbine
I recently scored a beautiful M1 Carbine in a large trade. It’s a 100 percent S’G’ gun, made by Saginaw Steering Gear at their Grand Rapids plant. Saginaw took over the plant when gun maker Irwin Pederson failed to deliver on their carbine contract. This builder of marine transmissions quickly organized the operation and began cranking out very acceptable carbines from the same machinery and using the same workers as Irwin Pederson. The difference was senior management. The Army was so impressed by their success that a second carbine contract was awarded to the company, plus they also made guns at another plant.

My new M1 Carbine. I’ve been searching for this rifle for 10 years!

My carbine is the most accurate M1 carbine I’ve ever owned or even shot. And it deposits the empty cases right in front of the shooter, instead of scattering them all over hell’s half acre. I really scored well on this trade!

This may not seem like a great target, but it’s the tightest group I’ve ever shot at 50 yards with a carbine. And this was just the first group!

The final tale
Last evening I did submit a bid for that David Lurch Primary New York crank airgun I mentioned in yesterday’s blog, but it was less than the reserve. So after my morning at the range, my friend and I headed over to the gun store where the Winchester 74 Gallery rifle was. I discovered that they knew what it was from reading the entry in the Blue Book of Gun Values. Because the book didn’t mention the Gallery model as such, the store personnel didn’t know what it was. And I’m sure it looked as garish to them as it does to me.

Like Marilyn Monroe, the Gallery Winchester model 74 looks better in pictures than in person.

So, I hemmed and hawed and danced around the store with the rifle in my hands, acting surprised when they told me that it shot only .22 Short cartridges. At one point, I passed on the gun at their price, and then five minutes later they knocked off $100 and ate the sales tax. Apparently, this rifle had been in their shop way too long.

And that’s the full circle of this two-day tale. I resolved the conundrum by investing in a rifle from which I know I can make good money.

by B.B. Pelletier

I was casually reading through the new NRA Guide to Firearms Assembly for Rifles and Pistols last Sunday when something caught my eye. There’s a page on the assembly/disassembly of the Winchester model 74 .22 semiautomatic rimfire rifle, which I find to be a very strange firearm. It doesn’t look like any other Winchester, and it doesn’t resemble any other rifle that I’m familiar with.

I read the brief information about the model 74 because there’s one for sale at one of my favorite gun stores. Unfortunately, that one has had about six inches of barrel whacked off, which ruins it as far as I am concerned. But seeing it there last March and again this past Friday brought it to my attention.

On the same Friday, I saw another model 74 in a different local gun store, only this one was a real clown car! It was chrome-plated — I don’t mean nickel, either. I know the difference between bright nickel on a gun and chrome that looks absurd under most circumstances. And, on this rifle, absurd is a compliment!

The stock on this freak show has an unusual forearm tip of a contrasting wood. The rifle looks like a cross between a summer camp wood shop project gone bad and a ‘57 Chevy. I wondered what deranged National Guardsman had done such an evil thing to this poor rimfire in hopes of marching in the big parade.

Then, I saw the entry in the NRA book cited above: A Gallery Special (.22 Short) version of the model 74 was also offered. Gallery rifles were furnished with chromium-plated trimmings on special order and at extra cost. This variation was discontinued in 1952.

That prompted a check in the Blue Book of Gun Values, which revealed a 25 percent premium for the .22 Short version. Okay, simple enough so far.

Now this rifle is one I wouldn’t own on a bet. It’s garish and completely foreign to my personal tastes. I don’t like silver guns, period. But it’s also a somewhat rare version of a fairly common Winchester rimfire, and I know there are a multitude of collectors out there who might be crazy about it. A check on Gun Broker located a .22 Short model that was not a Gallery model, but was like new in the box for $1,375.

So, the conundrum is this: Do I invest in a gun I don’t personally care for because I know it’s a rare one? I don’t even know what price they had on this rifle, but this particular gun store has the local reputation of underpricing rare things. It’s a sort of “sleeper shop,” if you catch my drift. All the local guys watch the used inventory looking for bargains.

Okay, let’s bring this discussion back to airguns. Now I’m at an airgun show, and I pass a table where someone is offering a Montgomery Wards model 180 CO2 rifle for $80. Yes, it holds and shoots just fine. In fact, he even has the box because it was a birthday present back in the 1960s.

Do you know what a Monkey Ward model 180 is? I do. It’s a Crosman rifle that Crosman never made under their own name. Despite what the Blue Book of Airguns says, this model is different than the Crosman 180. It’s a single-shot CO2 that you seldom see, and in the 99 percent condition this one is, it’s easily a $200 airgun, if not $250 with the box. It may not be your cup of tea, but it might delight that Crosman collector over in the corner who hasn’t come by this table yet.

I remember once seeing what appeared to be a Crosman second model (the one before the “beer keg pump handle”) pneumatic in an airgun shop. Yes, it was a Crosman, despite the total lack of writing on the gun. Yes, the breech was steel and machined (Crosman did that only in the very early days). I offered $150 for this non-working pneumatic single-shot and then held onto it until the Baldwinsville show four months laster. Then I resold it for $650 cash. I even told the shop where I bought it that I thought it was worth a lot of money. They weren’t interested because it wasn’t their mainstream business, so making a little cash was fine with them.

In the same airgun shop, I found an FWB 124 sport model. That’s the plain gun without checkering or sling swivels. And the stock finish was worn. Likewise, the barrel finish was worn. But what can you expect for $35. That’s right, I once bought an FWB 124 for $35. After applying a nice tune and a scope, I sold that gun for about $200, as I recall. I had less than $100 in it. It was a very nice shooter and the buyer got a good gun, but my point is that there’s money to be made in airguns if you know what you’re doing.

But what about those plug-ugly guns you would personally never deign to own? Are they worth your time and effort? Yes, they are. As long as you know what you’re doing, you can make money on a gun that you personally would never own.

Several years ago, a person approached me at an airgun show with a Challenger Plainsman multi-pump pneumatic pistol. It didn’t pump and it didn’t hold. The grips had been replaced by homemade scales of birdseye maple. There was no finish on the gun. All in all, it was an airgun that I would never own. But — and this is a big but — I knew it to be a rare air pistol. How rare? I couldn’t say at the time of the opportunity, but I’d recently sold a CO2 Plainsman that isn’t as rare, and it brought me a very good price. This pneumatic had a longer barrel than the one pictured in the Blue Book, and it was in the very desirable .177 caliber.

The Challenger Plainsman multi-pump pneumatic is rare. In .177 caliber with a longer barrel, it’s super-rare! This is a .22 with a standard barrel.

Even the Challenger CO2 pistol is uncommon and commands a good price.

The person offering the pistol didn’t know what it was worth. Nor did I, for that matter. He wanted something I had on my table that was priced around $200, so I took a chance and traded. Within the next year, I made $150 on that gun, and I’m sure I left something for the guy who got it from me.

So, to buy or not to buy? Well, here’s an interesting tidbit. As I was researching this very report, I stumbled across an antique crank air rifle from New York City. Nobody had bid on it, so I set up a sniping run for a few seconds before the auction expired. If I got it, well and good. If I missed it, I would visit the gun store where the strange Winchester model 74 was the next day. I will give you a follow-up on both of these.

This Primary New York crank air rifle emerged from research I did for this report. So, I set up a snipe bid.

Here’s a little story that might further motivate you to start looking for collectible guns to keep or resell. Weekend before last, a Pyramyd Air employee emailed us that she’d bought a Crosman model 112 with 10-oz. CO2 tank at a garage sale. It was the third day of the sale, so she was able to get the gun and tank for just $20. What a deal! Her .22 caliber single-shot gun was made between 1950 and 1953 and is worth $100-125. This is the first airgun she’s ever bought.

So, jump in…there’s plenty for all of us!

by B.B. Pelletier

Part 1

Testing by Earl “Mac” McDonald

The first report on the Beeman R1 received a lot of reader comments. Apparently, I’m not alone in my admiration for Beeman’s big rifle.

Kevin asked me what kind of tune I like for the rifle, and I answered that the Venom Lazaglide tune was the best I’ve ever tested for those wanting power and smoothness. I have my own R1 tuned down to 14-16 foot-pounds because it’s so easy to cock. I like how it feels at this level (read: without vibration), so I may be shooting it like this for a while. Of course, the Lazaglide doesn’t vibrate either, but it’s twice as hard to cock.

Mac’s test rifle was shipped with Pyramyd Air’s 10-for-$10 test. That gave him a chrono ticket for the rifle, and it opened an interesting window into testing and expectations. The chrono ticket Pyramyd Air sent with the rifle was for 10 .22 caliber RWS Superdomes. The velocity on that ticket ranged from 772 f.p.s. to 790 f.p.s. with an average of 779. The Superdome is a 14.5-grain pellet, so the average muzzle energy was 19.54 foot-pounds. Let’s keep that number in mind as Mac’s numbers are revealed.

Crosman Premiers
The 14.3-grain Crosman Premier pellet is pretty standard fare for the R1. Back in the day, which was the early 1990s, we used to speak of R1 tunes by referring to how fast the .22 Premiers were going. You could expect a new R1 to launch a .22 Premier at around 750 f.p.s.

Lo and behold, Mac’s R1 averaged 746 f.p.s. with the Premier dome! The spread was a super-tight 741 to 750 f.p.s., so only 9 f.p.s. separated the top from the bottom. That’s a well-behaved spring rifle. The average muzzle energy works out to 17.66 foot-pounds.

JSB Exact Jumbo 15.9-grain pellets
This is the pellet I would expect to challenge the Premier for accuracy in an R1. The JSB Exact Jumbo 15.9-grain pellet is the new world standard of the 21st century. It works in most air rifles of this power level.

In Mac’s R1, the pellet averaged 702 f.p.s. The spread went from 698 to 705, so again we see the evidence of a well-behaved springer. The average muzzle energy worked out to 17.38 foot-pounds. At this point, I began to suspect the Pyramyd Air numbers, because they were two foot-pounds above the averages of these two very consistent pellets. More on that in a moment.

JSB Jumbo Express 14.3-grain pellets
The JSB Exact Jumbo Express 14.3-grain pellet fit the R1 bore loosely and had a velocity spread of 16 f.p.s., or about double the others. The average was 731 f.p.s. and the spread went from 723 to 739. The average muzzle energy was 16.98 foot pounds. They may not be as accurate in this rifle due to the loose fit. We’ll have to test for that.

H&N Sport wadcutters
The H&N Sport wadcutter is a lighter pellet, at 13.73 grains. In the R1, it averaged 763 f.p.s., with a spread from 757 to 769 f.p.s. The average muzzle energy was 17.73 foot pounds.

RWS Superdomes
Okay, four pellets tested and not one topped 17 foot-pounds and change. So, now that 19.54 foot-pound number from Pyramyd Air is starting to sound suspicious. Mac decided to test the RWS Superdome on his chronograph and he got an average velocity of 727 f.p.s. The spread went from 720 to 731 f.p.s. That works out to a muzzle energy of 17.02 foot-pounds, or 2.5 foot-pounds less than Pyramyd Air got. What’s the reason for the big difference?

Chronographs don’t always agree
Well, two chronographs were used. That’s the big difference. I don’t know how the lighting is at the site of both chronos, but lighting will affect the numbers significantly. I remember having to scrap a bunch of R1 test figures when I was writing my book because they were 150 f.p.s. too high due to a lighting error. That’s the lesson here. The numbers don’t always tell the whole story.

You can also chrono a gun and get different velocities than somebody else, just because of how you shoot through the skyscreens. By not shooting straight through the skyscreens so the pellet path is perpendicular to the sensors, the numbers can be off. Pyramyd Air provided a chrono ticket, so it’s obvious they were sending the best information they had. But two chronographs will not always agree. That’s the lesson for today.

There’s one more big surprise coming in this test. Something Mac didn’t believe until he tried it and saw for himself. Stay tuned for Part 3.

by B.B. Pelletier

Part 1

Today, I’ll continue the story of what airguns I hung onto over the years and why I kept them. I’ll also throw in a few firearms just to spice things up.

Crosman M1 Carbine
I kept the second M1 Carbine BB gun I ever got, but I let the first one get away. It was a wood-stocked model that’s considered more collectible, though I think the plastic-stocked gun looks more realistic. I kept this one because it was a gift, and I have the original box it came in plus the original owner’s manual. I also kept it because it’s an M1 Carbine, and I have told you many times how I love that little gun.

A military M1 Carbine above and my Crosman M1 Carbine below. It’s very realistic!

S&W 78G
I kept a boxed 78G that I bought in an auction years ago, then had Dave Gunter reseal and soup up a little. It’s a fine-shooting air pistol, though it cannot compete with a 2240 accuracy-wise. I keep it because I’ve sold several boxed 78Gs and one 79G over the years. Ten years ago, these guns were being sold new-in-the-box at airgun shows for $100. I knew it couldn’t last, and it didn’t; but when there’s a pile of 50 of anything, it tends to lose value in my eyes. I’ll hold on to this one because it would cost too much to replace it.

The S&W 78G is a single-shot copy of S&W’s model 41 target pistol.

Daisy 499B
I keep the world’s most accurate BB gun because every so often I write about it. I need to have one to remind me of how really great the gun is. And I bought a case of Number 515 Precision Ground Shot, so I’d never run out for the rest of my life. I just opened the second box after 10 years. There are 23 more boxes to go, so you might plan on buying them at my estate sale.

Diana model 27
I’ve owned several Diana 27 rifles, both in .22 and .177, but the beautiful one I bought from Richard Schmidt at the first Little Rock Airgun Show I attended 17 years ago is the one I will keep. I’ve had it apart several times for photography and tuning, and I love the way it shoots. I’ve had several .177 model 27s, and I can say that I never warmed up to any of them. For some reason, the .22 caliber gun is the one I love.

I love my little Diana 27, which is a Hy-Score 807.

Airguns I no longer have – the Hakim
I’ve owned at least 15 Hakim spring rifles over the years. For a couple of years, the Anschütz-made Hakims were my weakness, just like M1 Carbine firearms are today. For some reason, I lost interest and slowly let them all get away. They’re great air rifles, and you really should shoot one, but I’m no longer fatally attracted to them.

Now, if you have a BSA Airsporter you’d like to get rid of reasonably, we should talk. The Airsporter is a BSA-made Hakim design in a sporter stock. Same for the Falke model 80 and 90, though both of those rifles are much more collectible and sell for a lot more.

The Hakim used to be on my must-have list…but no more.

The Sheridan Supergrade
I owned one long enough to learn that it is neither more powerful nor more accurate than a standard Sheridan Blue Streak. But it’s quite the air rifle from the style side. I don’t normally care about style, but the Supergrade is one exception. Mine was an early rifle that had the long bolt handle, which I find particularly attractive. I had to sell it to raise money to live on, and then the prices tripled inside two years. I probably won’t get another.

Sharp Ace
I’ve owned three Aces. Two were Japanese-made and one was made in southeast Asia. One of the Japanese guns was regulated to 12 foot-pounds and had a beautiful barred walnut stock. The other Japanese model was full-power and got up to 25 foot-pounds in .22 caliber.

The Ace trigger gets stiffer as more pumps are put into the gun. I could not reconcile that, so I let them all go. They’re terribly accurate, though. Way more than the Sheridan rifles.

Daystate Sportsman Mark II
This is a sidelever multi-pump rifle that looks and feels like a PCP. It’s just as accurate, too. But it weighs over 10 lbs. scoped, and the sidelever makes it unbalanced. I could not reconcile that feel, so I sold it. I still see it for sale every so often at airgun shows.

The Daystate Sportsman Mark II is a multi-pump made to look and perform like a PCP.

Air Arms Schamal .22
This rifle was a heatbreak to sell. It was another natural shooter, like the R8 I just reviewed for you. It had a great number of shots per fill and was reasonably lightweight. The stock was figured walnut that I thought was breathtaking. At 40 yards, it shot one-hole groups. I’ve seen other Schamals that didn’t excite me, but this one was special. I sold it to get the money to live on, but if I got it again I don’t think I’d let it get away a second time.

Baby Bernadelli .25 ACP
Forty years ago, I owned a .25 ACP Baby Bernadelli, which is an Italian copy of the Baby Browning. For some unknown reason, that little pistol was dead-nuts accurate. I could put three bullets through the bottom of a pop can at 30 feet every time. I’m talking a one-inch group! It was a natural shooter that I let get away…and have regretted it ever since.

Ruger flattop .44 Magnum with 10-inch barrel
I’ve owned eight Colt Single-Actions, including three that were first generation guns. I have also owned a genuine Remington 1875 single-action. Yet, I don’t really miss any of them as much as I miss this Ruger. It was collectible when I owned it in the 1970s, and it’s super-collectible today. I liked it because it was accurate and because I could load it to .44 Special power and it didn’t kick much. I doubt I’ll ever spend the money to buy another one like it.

Well, that’s enough sob stories for one day. How about the rest of you open up between now and Monday with your own tales of woe? I have many more to come, so don’t worry. We’re just getting started.

by B.B. Pelletier

Blog reader Brian Saada has written a guest blog for today. He wrote one the end of May (More on manufacturing tolerances), and it caused a lot of you to comment. I feel certain today’s blog will do the same thing.

If you’d like to write a guest post for this blog, please email us.

Bloggers must be proficient in simple html, know how to take clear photos and size them for the internet (if their post requires them), and they must use proper English. We’ll edit each submission, but we won’t work on any submission that contains gross misspellings and/or grammatical errors.

by Brian Saada, aka Brian in Idaho

“The best airguns are made from metals and woods.”

The above statment may well have been true years ago; but, during the past 20 years, we’ve seen increased use of plastics and synthetic materials in the airguns we shoot, and some that we have yet to buy or shoot.

The word plastics is a hugely broad and generic term that is often misused and even more often misunderstood. Even 30 and 40 years ago, plastic was being used in airgun pistol grips, some sights and other non-critical components (non-critical to the bean counters, anyway). Still, we often equate plastic to cheap, but that’s not always a fair equation. Words such as lightweight, durable, impervious to oils and acids are more in line with the use of well-made plastic parts. Many of you may remember the Remington Nylon 6 rifles — a noble but less than satisfying attempt to make a plastic stock on a firearm (Nylon ages and deteriorates in some applications and does not do well in severe cold).

Today, the term synthetic materials is much more appropriate to these so-called plastics, as many of these are highly evolved materials or fairly recent developments. Since the gun makers don’t do a very good job of describing these materials in their advertisements or literature, I thought that I would do my best to describe what some of these materials are and what their purpose is.

Thermoplastics
As the name implies, thermoplastics = thermo (heat) and plastic (moldable or malleable material condition). The difference between these plastics and the cheaper and more brittle styrene-type plastics that are injection-molded or cast is in the types of resins used and the material properties. Thermoplastics typically have greater surface hardness, greater density and can often be remolded or bent/shaped under heat. These materials also drill and machine reasonably well and are not prone to cracking like their cheaper counterparts. A well-made synthetic pistol grip would be made from thermoplastic or, as seen below, so would a Crosman 1077 rifle stock.

Crosman’s 1077 incorporates modern synthetic materials.

Engineered Plastics
This, too, is a fairly generic label or term that can be applied to a lot of materials however, it implies that the selection of resins and additives were engineered or thought through based on the application of the material to a specific part of the airgun. The breech of a Crosman 2240 pistol is one example.

Breech of the Crosman 2240 isn’t made of metal.

Somewhere back in the day, some engineer needed to reduce costs, simplify manufacturing and also pop out hundreds of these breech parts per day. That engineer also had some level of durability and surface hardness to achieve in this plastic part. Keep in mind, this is a wear area or wear surface part that will see thousands of bolt actuations over the life of the product, so the actual plastic maker had to select a recipe of resins and possibly some filler additives (solids) that would make a reasonably functional part. It’s likely that this resin already existed in a DuPont or an ICI catalog and no R&D or great development was needed. The engineer looked at a table of properties in the catalog and picked the material that met the need for cost and usefulness.

Another group of materials that fit into this category is the reinforced plastics or molding compounds. As the name implies, the plastic is reinforced with a variety of other materials. Chopped or shredded fiberglass is very common, so are carbon fibers and even nano-particles for very small parts that require long life cycle or use. Titanium particles and other metals can also be used as reinforcement or for machinability on a mating surface of a part. The higher-end airguns, such as the FX brand, likely use these types of materials in their gun stocks as they are very, very strong and their density can be “heard” by the solid thud made when tapping on the stock. More frequently, we would see these types of material under the hood of our cars in air cleaner boxes, ductwork and even intake manifolds on fuel-injected engines (my Mitsubishi V-6 has one of these).

If you’re turned off by plastic use in an airgun, think of the level of durability needed to meet low CTE (expansion by heat) and resistance to all the nasty stuff going on under the hood of a car or truck, including oil, gas and road crud. An airgun is a hospital operating room environment by comparison!

I, too, was once of the “give me metal and wood” school of thought on this issue of plastic parts. But, I can shoot my Gamo Whisper .22 with the camo synthetic stock all day long. Not so my HW97K. About 3 hours of lugging around that 9-lb. monster, and I’m done for the day! Hooray for plastics!