CO2
Gamo P-25 air pistol: Part 3
by Tom Gaylord, a.k.a. B.B. Pelletier
Gamo P-25 is a 16-shot blowback pellet pistol.
Today is accuracy day with the Gamo P-25 air pistol. I inserted a fresh CO2 cartridge into the gun, loaded both of its 8-shot rotary clips and then slid the magazine into the grip.
I shot the pistol at 10 meters, which seems appropriate for a gun of this type. I shot it rested with a two-hand hold and my arms resting on the sandbag but the pistol free to move.
The pistol has open sights that are not adjustable. They have white dots, both front and rear, but that was cancelled by lighting the target brightly and shooting from a dimly lit place. I used a 6 o’clock hold, and the sights were very sharp and easy to align.
Because each rotary clip holds 8 pellets, I shot 8-shot groups instead of the usual 10. I don’t think it makes a big difference; and when you see the targets, I think you’ll agree.
The P-25 has blowback, so every shot except the first is single-action. I therefore cocked the hammer for that first shot, so all shots were single-action. It’s the most accurate way to shoot any handgun.
RWS Hobby pellets
The first pellets I shot were RWS Hobbys. Because they’re wadcutters, they left good holes in the target paper that were visible from the firing line. The pistol shot Hobbys to the left, as you can see, but the elevation was pretty good. The pistol’s sights are not adjustable, so to move the shots means you have to either aim off or use some Kentucky windage.
The group isn’t very impressive — 8 shots in 2.169 inches at 10 meters. Perhaps one of the other pellets will do better.
Eight RWS Hobby pellets went into 2.169 inches at 10 meters.
Gamo Match pellets
The next 8 pellets I shot were Gamo Match wadcutters. These pellets will sometimes be very accurate in a particular gun, but the P-25 I’m testing isn’t one of them. Eight shots went into 2.894 inches, though 7 of them are in 1.846 inches. Still, neither group size is especially good. They did go to approximately the same point of impact as the RWS Hobbys, however.
Eight Gamo Match pellets went into 2.894 inches at 10 meters.
Crosman Premier lites
Next, it was time to try some 7.9-grain Crosman Premier lites. These domed pellets are sometimes the very best in certain airguns. And this was one of those times. Eight of them went into 1.624 inches, though they also went way over to the left.
Eight Crosman Premier lites went into 1.624 inches at 10 meters. This was the best group of this test.
Gamo Raptor PBA
The last pellet I tried was the lead-free Gamo Raptor PBA. We know from the velocity test that these pellets go the fastest in the P-25, but now we’ll see how accurate they are.
And the answer is — not very. Eight PBA pellets made a shotgun-like pattern that measures 4.036 inches between centers. Interestingly, they did tend to group in the center of the target — the only pellet of the 4 tested to do so.
Eight Gamo Raptor PBAs went all over the place, making this 4.036-inch group. I had to reduce the size of the photo to get all the holes into it.
Shooting behavior
This was one time I found myself hoping for greater accuracy from the test gun because it was so much fun to shoot. The blowback action is quick, crisp and comes as close to the recoil of a .22 rimfire pistol as I think I’ve experienced in an air pistol. Although the trigger is long and full of stops and starts, it’s also light and can become predictable after you learn its quirks.
Bottom line
The lack of adjustable sights means you have to find a pellet that shoots to center and is also accurate. Good luck with that. If Premier lites had shot to the center, they would have made this test end on a higher note. Because it shoots lead pellets from a rifled barrel, I’d hoped for better accuracy than this. Had I seen it, I would have rated this Gamo P-25 a best buy.
Gamo P-25 air pistol: Part 2
by Tom Gaylord, a.k.a. B.B. Pelletier
Gamo P-25 is a 16-shot blowback pellet pistol.
Today, we’ll look at the velocity of the Gamo P-25 air pistol, and something interesting that happened. Normally, I report on the velocity of 3 or 4 pellets and leave it at that, but a strange thing happened with the first CO2 cartridge in the test pistol.
I didn’t screw the piercing screw deep enough into the CO2 cartridge, resulting in the gas flow being hindered. I’ve experienced this a few times in the past, but this time it was very pronounced. After each shot, there was a period of time that ranged from 5 to 10 seconds, during which the gas flowed audibly from the cartridge into the gun’s valve. It sounded like a leak in the gun, but I noticed it only lasted a few seconds before stopping, so it wasn’t venting to the outside. It was the gas flowing from the cartridge into the gun’s valve, where it would be used for the next shot.
The piercing screw wasn’t turned in far enough to properly pierce this cartridge. You can’t even see the opening through a 10X loupe, but it’s there. This was operator error.
Shooting the pistol in the rapid-fire mode proved impossible with this first cartridge. The first shot went out at the normal velocity, and shot 2…fired immediately after the first shot…clocked 88 f.p.s. through the chronograph.
It was my fault
So, I screwed the piercing screw much deeper into the next cartridge. Problem solved! Don’t be tentative when piercing a cartridge in this pistol. Do it like you mean it. After I pierced the second cartridge correctly, the pistol performed exactly as expected. Rapid-fire worked as you would expect, and the gun kept up with my trigger finger.
Hobby
The first pellet I tested was the RWS Hobby. Weighing 7 grains, the all-lead Hobby pellet tells me so much about an airgun’s powerplant. For starters, it tells me what needs to be done to get the 425 f.p.s. velocity that’s claimed for the gun.
Hobbys averaged 353 f.p.s. in the P-25. They ranged from a low of 333 to a high of 379 f.p.s., and some of that large variance may be due to the gas flow problem I mentioned. At the average velocity, Hobbys were generating 1.94 foot-pounds of muzzle energy.
The Hobbys told me what I wanted to know. This pistol wasn’t going to get its rated velocity with a lead pellet. So, I needed to try it with a lead-free pellet; and since this is a Gamo gun, the Gamo Raptor PBA sounded like a good selection.
PBA
The Raptor PBA pellet is made from metal that’s harder than lead. It weighs 5.4 grains and will generally boost the velocity of an airgun above what a lead pellet will, though the hardness of the metal actually slows it down sometimes. But in the P-25, the Raptor PBAs worked just fine. They averaged 412 f.p.s. and ranged from a low of 395 to a high of 432 f.p.s. So, the ads are right on the money. At the average velocity, this pellet generates 2.04 foot-pounds of energy.
Gamo Match
Next up were the lead Gamo Match wadcutters. They weigh 7.56 grains and are sometimes quite accurate in some guns. In the P-25, they averaged 348 f.p.s. with a spread from 329 to 357 f.p.s. The average energy was 2.03 foot-pounds. This will be a pellet to try in the accuracy test.
Crosman Premier 7.9-grain lites
The last pellet I tested was the 7.9-grain Crosman Premier lite. They fit in the circular clips of the magazine rather easily, which caused some concern they might fall out; but the way the magazine is designed, only 2 pellets at a time are exposed in its clip. So the worry was for nothing.
The way the magazine is designed, the pellets are not exposed until they’re ready to be shot. This one needs to be pressed into the clip.
Premiers averaged 344 f.p.s. in the P-25, with a spread from 330 to 360 f.p.s. At the average velocity, they generate 2.08 foot-pounds at the muzzle.
Trigger-pull
The double-action trigger-pull broke at exactly 8-1/2 lbs., which is light for a DA pull. On single-action, it broke under 4 lbs., with a huge creep at 2-1/2 lbs. That creep is consistent and lets you know when the gun is ready to fire.
Shot count
While I got just 50 shots on the first cartridge, I got more with the second one. Besides the velocity testing, I did another test with an entire cartridge, just to see how the pistol operates in the rapid-fire mode. So, the correct piercing is very important. I fired an entire cartridge, just to see how the pistol handled. Everything worked smoothly until shot 48, when the blowback failed for the first time. After that, the blowback would work if I waited long enough between shots, but not if I shot rapidly. However, if you allow time for the gun to warm up, it keeps right on shooting.
There are certainly 75 or more powerful shots in the gun if you allow the gun to rest between shots. The blowback will work reliably past shot 50, as long as time is taken between shots. Shoot fast, however, and the gun cools too much and wastes gas.
Impressions so far
So far, I like the P-25. I like its simplicity and the light single-action trigger. If it’s also accurate, this might be a best buy.
Gamo P-25 air pistol: Part 1
by Tom Gaylord, a.k.a. B.B. Pelletier
Gamo P-25 is a 16-shot blowback pellet pistol.
Okay, now for something a little different. The Gamo P-25 air pistol is a 16-shot pellet pistol with blowback and a rifled barrel. This pistol operates on CO2, and the 12-gram cartridge is hidden inside the grip.
Normally, a gun like this is a BB gun, but this time there’s a rifled barrel — and the chance to shoot many different lead pellets, plus a trigger that’s both single-action and double action. Because of the blowback action, you’re going to shoot this gun single-action most of the time.
The P-25 is a 21st century handgun is every respect. It’s nearly all synthetic, entirely black and the grip is fat, as though enclosing a double-stacked magazine. The fixed sights feature three white dots — like night sights, but without tritium inserts. Align the three dots and put the center dot over your target…and I assume you’ll have minute-of-soda-can accuracy at 25 feet. We’ll find out more about that when we test the pistol for accuracy.
I like the fact that this pistol comes with blowback. That gives a realistic feel to each shot, which makes this a good trainer for maintaining firearms proficiency. When we get to the accuracy test, I’ll let Edith shoot the pistol and give her assessment, too. The gun I’m testing is serial number 12F31301.
The P-25 is a large pistol. Maybe it looks like a pocket pistol in the photograph above, but in person it’s larger than an M1911A1 in all ways, save length.
Trigger
The trigger is very strange. Usually a single-stage trigger is crisper and lighter than a 2-stage trigger, but this one isn’t. While the pull weight isn’t that heavy, there’s a country mile of takeup even in the single-stage mode — i.e., when the hammer is already cocked. Once the takeup is done, though, the trigger breaks cleanly enough. It isn’t exactly crisp, but it is light and very predictable. I don’t think I’ll have any trouble with it.
The double-action pull is relatively light, though you’ll only feel it on the first shot after installing the magazine. Once the gun fires, the slide blows back, cocking the hammer for every successive shot.
The trigger blade is very wide. I find that gives a nice feel to the pull when I’m trying to control the let-off or point at which the trigger breaks.
Safety
The safety is another matter. It’s one of those Euro-lawyer safeties that have a center switch that’s pulled back before the lever can be moved. There’s no way to operate this kind of safety with one hand. It blocks the trigger when its on.
The toothed bar must be pulled back (to the left) before the safety lever can be moved.
Magazine
The magazine is a stick type with two circular pellet clips — one on either end. It’s a drop-free design, and the release button is on the left front of the grip frame, where a right-handed shooter expects it to be. The mag has to be ejected and turned around for the second 8 shots.
CO2
This gun runs on CO2. The manufacturer says it gets up to 425 f.p.s. with pellets, and we will test that for you in Part 2. The cartridge is hidden in the grip, and this time the enclosure is different. The bottom rear of the grip is pulled away from the rest of the grip, and two-thirds of the CO2 compartment is exposed. When the cartridge is installed, a conventional piercing screw tensions and pierces the cartridge. Don’t forget to put a drop of Crosman Pellgunoil on the tip of each new cartridge as it’s installed. That will keep your gun sealed for many years.
Recoil
The P-25 is moderately heavy, at 29 oz., so the blowback action causes a fair amount of bounce. It feels not much different than a medium-weight .22 rimfire pistol shooting standard-speed long rifle rounds.
Barrel
The barrel is rifled steel. That gives me some hope that this pistol will also be accurate. If the blowback feature doesn’t use too much gas, the P-25 could turn out to be a very nice plinking air pistol.
All things considered, at this point the Gamo P-25 air pistol looks like a good one. I hope it delivers on that promise.
The benefits of oiling pellets: Part 2
by Tom Gaylord, a.k.a. B.B. Pelletier
Let’s begin testing the effects of oiling pellets. There are numerous ways to approach this issue, and I have to pick one at a time and limit the test to just that. But I think as long as I’m testing one aspect, I ought to test it thoroughly so someone can’t come back and second-guess me later in the report.
So, today I’ll test with one rifle, and the next time I’ll test with another. What I won’t do is test with each different brand of airgun, just to see what will happen. If a powerful gas spring rifle performs in a certain way, I’ll assume that all powerful gas spring rifles are going to do the same. If the difference between dry pellets and oiled pellets is close, I may do additional testing; but if there’s clear separation, I’ll accept that as the way it works.
What am I testing?
The question that started this experiment was, “How much faster will oiled pellets shoot than those that are not oiled?” One reader has asked me to also test this downrange because he wonders if a thin coat of oil changes the laminar flow of air around a pellet. I may get to that at some point, but for the present I’m just concerned with muzzle velocity because all pellets slow down after they exit the muzzle — oiled or not.
I suppose this needs to be tested in all three powerplant types, but today I’m testing it in a spring-piston powerplant. Today’s gun is a weak powerplant, so next time I’ll test it in a more powerful gun.
I’m using an HW55 SF target rifle to test three pellets. This rifle is a variation of the old HW50 rifle, so it shoots in the 600-650 f.p.s. region with lead pellets.
Since oiled pellets will leave a film in the bore, I tested all pellets dry first, and then tested the oiled pellets afterwards. Before the first test shot with oiled pellets, I fired two pellets to condition the bore. That turned out not to be enough, but I’ll come to that later.
Pellet shapes
I’ll test the three major pellet shapes in this test. They’re the wadcutter, dome and pointed head. There are other shapes, like hollowpoints, but they’re based on one of these three main shapes, so this is all I’m testing.
How I oil pellets
I oil pellets in the following manner. A foam liner is placed in the bottom of a pellet tin, and 20 drops of Whiscombe Honey are dropped onto the foam. Then, a single layer of pellets is spread on the foam, and the tin is rolled around. I shake the tin lightly to move the pellets around…but not enough to damage them. Whatever oil transfers to the pellet is all the oil it gets. I’ve been doing this for many years and it works well.
Twenty drops of oil on the foam is what I use. Then, a single layer of pellets.
One tin for each type of pellet used in the test.
The pellets end up with a very light and uniform coat of oil. When I handle them the tips of my fingers become oily, but I can’t see any oil on the pellets. Other people use more oil than I do, but this is what I am testing.
Whiscombe Honey is a mixture of two-thirds Hoppes Gun Oil (not Number 9 bore cleaner!) and one-third STP Engine Treatment, by volume. Shake the mixture until is takes on a light yellow color. It will look like thin honey, hence the name. This mixture should not detonate easily in a spring gun.
Test one — dry pellets
Crosman Premiers
Crosman Premier 7.9-grain pellets were the domes I tested. The average velocity for dry Premiers was 606 f.p.s., with a low of 577 and a high of 616. So, the spread was 39 f.p.s. The average muzzle energy was 6.44 foot-pounds.
Gamo Match
For wadcutters, I tested Gamo Match pellets. The average for dry pellets was 652 f.p.s., with a low of 640 and a high of 663 f.p.s. The spread was 17 f.p.s. The average energy was 7.14 foot-pounds.
H&N Neue Spitzkugel
The pointed pellet I selected was the H&N Neue Spitzgugel. When shot dry, they averaged 601 f.p.s., with a low of 585 and a high of 620 f.p.s. The spread was 34 f.p.s. The average muzzle energy was 6.81 foot-pounds at the muzzle.
Oiled pellets
Now, I shot two oiled pellets through the bore to condition it and began the test.
Oiled Crosman Premiers
Oiled 7.9-grain Premiers averaged 591 f.p.s., but the spread went from a low of 545 to a high of 612 f.p.s. That’s a spread of 67 .p.s. The average energy for oiled pellets was 6.13 foot-pounds. I did notice the pellets were going faster at the end of the shot string, so I thought I might come back to them after testing the other pellets.
Oiled Gamo Match pellets
The oiled wadcutters averaged 658 f.p.s. — a slight gain over the dry pellets. But the real news was the spread, which went from a low of 651 to a high of 663 f.p.s. Instead of a 17 f.p.s. for the dry pellets, the oiled pellets gave a spread of just 12 f.p.s. That’s too close to draw any conclusions, but it’s interesting. The average energy with the oiled pellets was 7.27 foot-pounds. So, with the oiled pellets, the velocity went up — along with the energy — and the shot-to-shot variance went down.
Oiled H&N Neue Spitzkugel
Oiled Spitzkugels averaged 609 f.p.s. — which was a small increase over the same pellet when dry. The average energy was 6.99 foot-pounds. The spread went from 585 to 620 f.p.s, which was identical for the same pellet dry. Velocity and energy were both up slightly from dry pellets, and the shot-to-shot variance remained the same.
By now, it’s obvious that the bore needed more than two shots to condition it, so I retested the oiled Crosman Premiers. The second time the oiled pellets averaged 604 f.p.s., which is just 2 f.p.s. slower than the same pellets dry. But the spread that was 67 f.p.s. on the first test of oiled pellets and 39 f.p.s. with dry Premiers now went from a low of 594 to a high of 613 f.p.s. — a much tighter 19 f.p.s. total. The average energy was 6.40 foot-pounds.
Observations
From this test, I observed that these three pellets either remained at the same velocity or increased very slightly from the light oiling I gave them. In two of the three cases, the velocity spread got tighter when the pellets were oiled.
I further observed that it’s necessary to condition a bore with oiled pellets before doing any testing. As a minimum, I would say that 20 oiled pellets should be fired before testing.
These are very small differences from oiling; and although I can’t draw any conclusions yet, I would think that such a small change is not enough to matter. It hardly seems worth doing at this point. However, there’s still a test to be done in a powerful airgun. Until we see those results, I think it’s too soon to say anything for sure.
Although the question that drove this test was how much faster oiling pellets makes them shoot, I think we still have to take accuracy into account before forming any opinions.
And now for something completely different
Pyramyd Air is looking for a manager for their tech department. If you’re interested in the position, below is the job info and where to send your resume.
Directs and coordinates activities of the department in providing customers technical services and support; directly supervises employees. Responsibilities include but are not limited to:
Coordinates technical support services between management, tech support staff, sales department, and customers.
Establishes and documents department procedures and objectives.
Accomplishes department objectives by selecting, orienting, training, assigning, coaching, counseling, and disciplining employees; communicating job expectations; and monitoring performance.
Maintains and improves support operations by monitoring staff and system performance, identifying and resolving problems, and preparing and completing action plans
Provides technical assistance to customers and labor quotes. Handles escalated calls or provides assistance requiring more complex issues.
Installs common accessories and kits in accordance with customer orders.
Performs tests on guns to determine advertised performance specifications.
Required experience, skills and background:
Bachelor’s degree and 3 years managerial experience, or an equivalent combination of education and experience required. Previous industry experience required.
Must be detail-oriented with good mechanical aptitude.
Ability to prioritize and multi-task.
Good communication and customer service skills.
Good computer skills.
Hours: Monday through Friday, 9am until 5:30pm; longer hours and some Saturdays are expected, especially during our busy peak periods.
Preferred experience, skills and background:
Previous experience in airgun repair or troubleshooting desired.
Send your resume to resumes@pyramydair.com
The benefits of oiling pellets: Part 1
by Tom Gaylord, a.k.a. B.B. Pelletier
This report will be lengthy because I want to test several aspects of oiling pellets. For starters, I want to test it with spring guns, PCPs and CO2 guns just to get a complete picture of what, if anything, oiling pellets is doing in each of those powerplants. I’m interested in velocity because of the question that spawned this blog, but accuracy might also be interesting to test.
The question
We received this question in the following form. I will paraphrase, but this is the gist of it, “How much faster do pellets go when they are oiled?” That question came in on one of our social networks and was referred to me for an answer. Well, you know me! Give me a topic and I turn it into a week’s worth of blogs. But this question really begged for the full treatment because there’s so much to cover.
History
When I got interested in shooting airguns as an adult in the middle 1970s, the question of oiling pellets wasn’t around (as far as I know). In talking with the late Rodney Boyce, I learned that the oiling question really came to a head when PCPs first started being used in the early 1980s. A PCP shoots very dry air, and their barrels are made from steel; so, at the higher velocities, they tend to get leaded bores. Some shooters were also oiling pellets for their spring guns; but a lot of the time they did it because they washed the pellets, thinking the black compound on them was dirt. In fact, it was anti-oxidant to keep the pellets from turning to white dust. Had they just left the pellets alone, they wouldn’t have oxidized.
In defense of the spring-gun guys who washed their pellets, though, some brands did have a lot of lead swarf (flakes of lead from the manufacturing process) inside some of the pellets, and vigorous washing did remove it. But then the pellets needed to be oiled again, or they would quickly oxidize.
Why we oil pellets
We oil pellets for two reasons. The first is to prevent the oxidation of the lead after washing. The second is to reduce the leading of the bore, though this is principally a PCP problem. Other pneumatics either shoot too slowly or they have brass or bronze barrels that do not allow the lead to attach itself, so they do not lead up.
Do oiled pellets shoot faster?
That was the question that started this report. I’ve tested this in the past and found that with a PCP shooting .177 pellets at 850-900 f.p.s., oiled pellets went slower, not faster. But that was just one test, and I don’t want to say what oiling will do for other guns until I do some more testing.
Flimflam man
I’ll tell you this — oiling pellets became such a hot topic in the late ’90s that people were swapping their favorite secret formulas on the internet. And I know one UK company that sells an oil for pellets that they still claim gives increased velocity. Well, that’s too good to pass up, so I’ll test some of their oil in this test.
Not just oil
Don’t think that oil is the only thing people put on pellets. I remember lengthy discussions of how to apply a thin even coat of wax on pellets. Then, the topic shifted to what kind of wax to use! One guy went so far as to specify a high-tech boat hull compound called Bo-Shield for his pellets. When he talked about it his eyes got that faraway stare, as though he was transcending the real world and entering the spirit world.
What I will test
The first thing I want to do — have to do, in my mind — is test what the application of oil does to the velocity of pellets. Okay, that opens about 10 worm cans, right there:
What constitutes “an application of oil”? (I have seen paragraphs of instructions telling you how to know if the application of oil has been enough or if you need more.)
Am I testing this on lightweight pellets? Heavy pellets?
Do I test a powerful springer as well as a lower-powered springer?
Do I also test this on a precharged pneumatic?
A powerful PCP and a lower-powered PCP?
What about testing on a CO2 gun?
And on and on….
I think the best approach is to ask the question: Why do we oil pellets and who does it? We know that people who wash pellets also oil them, and we know that PCP users oil them; so that includes all the categories above. I don’t see a need to go to the extremes with this test. I’m not HP White Labs, and this isn’t a burning consumer question. If the findings suggest further testing, I could decide at that point?
What about the possible side effects?
Will oiling a pellet cause extra dieseling? Maybe. Is that what’s behind those flimflam salesmen who claim that oiled pellets go faster than dry pellets? I don’t know for certain; but as long as I’m going down the path, this is something I want to look at. Obviously, we’re talking only about powerful spring guns.
Does oiling affect accuracy?
I don’t know, but it seems we ought to find out. This gives me another excuse to unlimber my R8…so, hurrah!
Have I forgotten anything?
You tell me if I’ve overlooked any test that ought to be conducted. This isn’t a guessing game or a creativity contest, so please tell me only things that really matter to you.
Why don’t “they” make a 2240 PCP pistol?
by Tom Gaylord, a.k.a. B.B. Pelletier
On Wednesday, blog reader John said that he would really like to see a Crosman 2240 PCP pistol. I thought that I would address that as my topic for the weekend.
The Crosman 2240 pistol is an inexpensive CO2 pistol that sells for under $60. It’s a single-shot bolt action and has a deserved reputation for being both accurate and a wonderful value. That’s the gun John wants to see made into a precharged pneumatic (PCP).
I don’t know much about John. In fact, we have several readers named John, so I don’t want to make any assumptions about who wrote the question. But whoever he is, the first thing I have to say is that the 2240 PCP pistol already does exist. It’s called the Crosman Silhouette PCP air pistol, and, as of this date, it sells for $367.50.
{Sound of a needle being painfully scratched across a vinyl record!}
Okay, that was not what John wanted. He wanted a $60 pistol converted into an inexpensive PCP, so he could enjoy the benefits of the 2240 but at the higher power level of a PCP. I get that. That’s the kind of stuff that I think about all the time. So — why don’t “they” do it?
Some history
I was actually present when a similar decision was made to convert a very popular high-value CO2 rifle — the Crosman 2260 — into a PCP: the Benjamin Discovery. In fact I wasn’t just present, I was part of the development team, which gave me a unique insight into what a company goes through to do something like this.
The 2260 was selected to be the starting point for what was to become the Discovery because we wanted to keep the price as low as possible. But some changes had to be made. Where a hobbyist working out of his home might just seal the 2260’s CO2 reservoir better to hold air and call it finished, Crosman couldn’t do the same thing. They’re a manufacturer who has to build in a margin of safety into each of their products so that they present no danger to the user, even when improperly operated.
You might say to yourself that you’re never going to over-pressurize the gun you’re building, so the CO2 reservoir that’s rated to 1,000 psi is good enough, but Crosman can’t do that. They have to figure there will be a certain percentage of people who will either make mistakes with the rifle or purposely over-pressurize it in the mistaken belief that they can get more velocity from it. It happens all the time and all of you know it.
When it came time to select the tubing for the PCP reservoir, they could not go with what they used on the 2260. Not only is it not rated to operate at the pressures of the Discovery (2,000 psi instead of 900 psi), it’s also finished more coarsely. Because the CO2 molecule is very large, o-rings will still seal the reservoir even when the metal is a little rough. But it won’t seal in air, which is vastly thinner. They needed a stronger reservoir tube that also had a better finish; plus when they cut o-ring seats, they had to cut them with smoother surfaces.
The stronger tube had to either be thicker steel or it had to be made from a stronger alloy. In the end, it was both because Crosman figured that some people would forget that the Discovery should only be filled to 2,000 psi…and would fill it to 3,000 psi. In a courtroom, a plaintiff’s attourney could make a strong case that such behavior is normal when most of the world’s PCPs are filled to 3,000 psi.
But if the tubing is thicker, it has a smaller internal volume — we all know that. So, not only did they have to make the tube stronger and from better material, it also had to be longer to hold as much air as possible since they were trying to get a reasonable number of shots out of the gun at a relatively low air pressure (for a PCP).
Instead of a length of reservoir tubing costing them $2, they had to use a length of tube costing $28. That’s an increase of 14 times the material cost! These numbers are not the real ones, but they’re representative of the differential in the cost of parts for the PCP gun over the CO2 gun. And all of this is just material cost — no machining or handling has been costed yet.
The difference between CO2 and high-pressure air
Containing CO2 under pressure is one level of difficulty. Containing air under pressure is a different and much higher level of difficulty. Imagine how difficult it is for cowboys to keep cattle inside a corral. Now, replace the cattle with cockroaches and put them in the same corral. Think it might be harder to keep all of them inside? You bet your paycheck it is!
Crosman was a company that has a long history of making CO2 guns. Heck, they ARE the history of CO2 guns! Now, they have to learn how to contain high-pressure air, which is totally different. They knew it and they thought about it — a LOT. You can build one of anything if you have the skill and the inclination. Making a thousand of them, however, can kill you — or put you out of business. Crosman made more than 4,000 Discoveries the first year they were offered. They had to be ready for that, which means they had to find ways to assemble these high-pressure air containers without any of them leaking.
I used to build PCP airguns at AirForce. Every step of the assembly process was specified, and there were tests at each point in the process. We didn’t make a thousand of anything that then had to be remade or — worse yet — thrown away!
As long as we’re making it…
…we might as well make it right. Ever say that to yourself in the middle of a project? Of course you have — everyone has. So did the Crosman engineering team. As long as we’re making this gun that holds thin air under high pressure, we might as well make it last a long time.
What’s the No. 1 enemy of pressurized air?
Bad seals.
And, what is the No. 1 enemy of seals — assuming everything has been designed correctly?
Dirt.
It was no surprise that the engineering team decided to put an air filter on the intake side of the reservoir of the gun. Air is thin, so the filter had to filter thin things. As in millionths of an inch.
Don’t worry your pretty head — such things as micron filters are available — at a price.
Now, a hobby builder is far less likely to include such a thing in his gun. Indeed, a great many very expensive PCPs do not have an intake air filter. But that’s how Crosman works. You can’t change that, so it has to be factored into everything they do.
Back to the premise
Okay, I’ve gotten far afield in my report. If I were to continue talking about developing production PCPs, I would have to go much farther because there are a great many little things that have to be done to create such a gun. But I’ve said enough. Let’s return to the original question.
What can’t “they” make a 2240 PCP? Well, they can. When Crosman does it, it’s called the Silhouette PCP air pistol. You may think they’ve loaded that model with a lot of costly and unnecessary things; but given who they are and how they operate, most of the features ARE necessary.
Could a more austere 2240 PCP pistol, be produced? Without question. But don’t look for Crosman to do it. Even if they were convinced to try; with all the extra engineering I mentioned and alluded to, it’s likely that the bare bones gun they produce would still cost you at least $200.
And here’s where John comes in. John says if it’s going to cost $200, a pistol “ought” to have an accurate barrel. We all know what that means — Lothar Walther. So, he wants them to spend an additional $41 for a 10-inch barrel that they’ll have to charge an extra $79 to their largest distributors. You’ll be paying an additional $121 to get one — over and above the cost of the pistol. The popular reasoning is that we have to have that Lothar Walther name if we’re going to be asked to pay more than a certain amount for an airgun.
You might look at the Daisy Avanti 717 and 747 pistols and see only a $40 difference from the addition of the Lothar Walther barrel on the more expensive gun. Yes, there are less expensive Lothar Walther barrels, but the design of the 2240 does not support their use. The Daisy guns can use a soda-straw barrel (thin-walled), which is cheaper to manufacture, but the 2240 barrel is not supported in the same way and has to be thicker.
Having said that, can it still be done? Can John’s dream of a low-cost, high-quality PCP air pistol be realized? I believe it can — just not within the manufacturing model of Crosman or another airgun manufacturer of equal capability.
I think the entire manufacturing paradigm has to be changed to achieve what John wants.
Motorola changed their corporate paradigm several decades ago and reduced the time from order to shipping for a pocket pager from 6 months to 15 minutes. It can be done.
P-08 BB pistol from Umarex: Part 3
by Tom Gaylord, a.k.a. B.B. Pelletier
The new Umarex P-08 BB pistol is a stunning copy of the firearm.
Well, today’s the day we see how this Umarex P-08 BB pistol shoots. As you know, I think this pistol is a big deal because people have been asking for it for years. And, yes, I’m aware that there are Asian BB pistols in the P-08 style that are supposedly all-metal and have blowback with realistic toggle action. But are YOU aware that sometimes those Asian websites lie about what they have? Some of those guns don’t exist, and images are shown to see if there’s enough interest to warrant the development cost.
Think about that before you jump on the bandwagon and criticize a real product. You may be comparing it to something that doesn’t exist.
Back to the gun at hand — the Umarex P-08 is a double-action-only handgun, and I think you’ll understand what that means by now. If you don’t, click on the link to Part 2 above and look at the picture of the revolver. Some of you mentioned that the revolver also advances the cylinder with the trigger in addition to cocking the hammer spring…and you’re right. That does add some resistance to the total effort required. However, I find that it doesn’t add as much as you might think — perhaps 10 percent or so. The majority of the effort to pull the trigger is dedicated to compressing that powerful hammer or striker spring.
I learned in this test that I cannot control the P-08 double-action trigger as well as I thought. Of course, a single-action trigger that just breaks at a few pounds is much easier, but a week ago I shot a 4-inch, 7-shot group at 45 feet with my carry gun, which is a Micro Desert Eagle that’s DAO in .380 ACP. That pistol is lightweight and has a relatively snappy recoil, but the double-action trigger-pull is smooth all the way through. So, I can put the sights on target and hold them there through what is perhaps an 11- or 12-lb. pull.
That is what I was expecting to happen with this BB pistol, but it didn’t. Not quite. Oh, the trigger-pull does stack at the end, and it isn’t as heavy overall as the triggers in my firearms, but the last bit of effort seems to increase or rise a lot more. That rise is what I find difficult to control, and you’ll see the results today. The other problem is that the trigger comes very far back when pulled. It releases very close to the back of the triggerguard, and that’s the spot where the strength leaves your fingers.
The shoot
This is a BB pistol, so I shot at 15 feet, which is the normal BB gun distance. You may think that’s too close for a target pistol, but wait until you see the results of the test. It turns out that 15 feet is a very good distance to shoot, for reasons I will address in a little bit.
I shot at a target pasted to the face of a Winchester Airgun Target Cube. I’m reporting on this target cube in all of the BB gun tests I do instead of writing a special blog about it. The cube now has well over 1,000 shots on it and some of the styrofoam is crumbling off, but it still stops every BB I shoot at it. I consider it an essential part of my shooting equipment; and even though I know it will eventually wear out, I think I’ll get a lot more use before that happens.
I tape a stiff cardboard section to the side of the cube where I plan to shoot. The cube now has holes on all four sides where styrofoam has been blasted out of the center, and I can’t stick any Shoot-N-C target stickers to the center of the cube’s sides. But the cardboard is smooth and takes the stickers perfectly. All I have to do is remove the cardboard after each session, and I think the cube will last a lot longer.
I like using the Shoot-N-C targets with BB guns because of the instant feedback. I’m not going to worry too much about the group size except in relation to my dime, so I don’t care that you can’t really measure a group on a Shoot-N-C target (because the paint flakes off farther in all directions than just the BB hole). The most important aspect is the immediate feedback I get from seeing where the BB went through the target, or after many shots, the fact that there’s no feedback at all. That tells me the BBs are going through the same holes.
This pistol seems to shoot to the exact point of aim at 15 feet, which makes that distance perfect for target shooting. The sights are not adjustable, but they seem to be perfectly centerd and regulated for height in the test gun. However, it does present a problem, as I discovered on the first target.
I use a 6 o’clock hold when target shooting, which means I align the sights with the bottom edge of the bullseye. Many guns are regulated to shoot their BBs up into the center of a small bullseye, but the P-08 places them exactly where you put the sights. So, the group on the first target is low. One shot is in the center, but that was the result of me pulling the trigger to get it to break. In other words, it’s a wild shot.
All the shots but 1 are at the point of aim. Notice how wide this group is. I’m having difficulty controlling the double-action trigger.
Please understand — this is an accurate BB gun. But I’m having difficulty controlling the trigger. That’s a good thing because it means this pistol can help me learn to better control a double-action trigger.
The one thing that the first target demonstrated was that I needed a smaller target. For the second group, I used a repair paster for the first target. That’s just the center of the bullseye and nothing else. I hoped that the group would be smaller with a smaller aim point; instead, it grew in size.
The second group was larger than the first. Clearly, I’m having difficulty controlling the trigger.
Changed the shooting method
If I wasn’t able to shoot well one-handed, then I figured I’d try it from a rested position. I positioned a chair backwards and rested my arm on the backrest, where I shot the third and fourth groups. I won’t show you group 3, but it was about three inches, and I discovered something while shooting it. If you squeeze the trigger too slow, it gets hung up at the end and will never break. Struggling to break the trigger slowly is why this group was so large.
Next, I tried leaning back, so the pistol was rested against the top of the chair’s back. This did improve things, but the trigger was still causing me some problems. As you can see, this group with a rested gun is larger than when I one-handed the pistol.
This group is long and narrow — the result of a trigger that’s releasing at odd times. Only one shot went wide.
Next I decided what I had to do was use two fingers to pull the trigger. And when I did that, it worked! Now, I could control the trigger as I wanted to; and when I did that, the gun shot to the point of aim every time. Only when I struggled with the trigger release did I throw shots out of the bull.
That’s more like it! Six shots in the black and 4 in the white off to the lower right. Two are in the same hole. This is what the P-08 can do.
Real-world accuracy
In reality, you’re probably going to bounce soda cans around the yard and don’t need the pinpoint accuracy this pistol can deliver. It’ll do that all day long. You’re also going to get a workout for your trigger finger, but that will only improve all your other shooting.
Bottom line
This is the first BB pistol in a P-08 wrapper to make it to our shores. As such, it fills a demand that’s decades old. It’s all you could want in a gun for this price. It delivers the power that’s advertised and can nail the target when you do your part. A welcome addition to the marketplace.
