Air rifles....

[Shinesintx]

Living in the city kinda blows. Air rifles are outlawed where I live also...so I have no clue who the scofflaw is that keeps eradicating wrascally wabbits.

[The Annoyed Man]

(2)
Firing or discharging of an air gun on property owned by the party firing the air gun and his immediate family, provided that the discharge is no closer than 150 feet from any structure, except that of the owner, used for human habitation. Nothing contained in this exception shall permit the discharging of an air gun whereby the projectile falls on the land of another.

My home forms a "U" shape, with the open end facing the back yard. My back patio is at the bottom of that "U", and the table on the patio is about 15 yards or so from a 4' high railroad timber retaining wall backed by earth and trees. IF I were a scofflaw.........I would pin a target to those timbers and sit at my patio table and shoot at it, and the sound would be completely absorbed by my house, the retaining wall, and the jungle of trees on my neighbors' properties..........IF I were a scofflaw......

Living in the city kinda blows. Air rifles are outlawed where I live also...so I have no clue who the scofflaw is that keeps eradicating wrascally wabbits.

I think I might know who it is.....

[The Annoyed Man]

I had considered the effect of going supersonic. I note that the Gamo videos don't claim that the suppressed gun is silent. They claim that game can't detect where it's coming from........which is pretty much exactly what happens with a suppressed AR15 or AR10. It's quieter for the shooter, and the diffused report makes directional location difficult, but there is still the crack of a passing bullet.......if you miss. I can see where a velocity of 800-900 fps would be just fast enough to make it quiet for a shooter while still not dealing with aerodynamic upset. Actually, the perfect goal for me would be the duplication of .22 LR in a 16" barrel, which would be somewhere between 1100 and 1200 fps for a standard load. That would actually duplicate the ballistic performance of my M&P15-22.

But I would think that a suppressed air rifle of that ballistic capability with a .22 caliber pellet matching or coming close to a standard .22 LR load would still be quiet enough to shoot in my back yard. Once you take the muzzle report out of the equation, the crack of the bullet has to be nearby to be nearby for a listener to hear it well, if at all.

Yeah, I agree that the noise issue is not significant. It's an odd double-edged misconception - you have to explain to people that you'll still hear a shot of standard ammunition fired through the best suppressor in the world, but then explain that, no, the sonic boom of the bullet isn't what makes the report so loud. Meh, whatever.

The main thing I was getting at is that I would THINK that aerodynamic upset would be more of an issue with a wasp-waisted pellet than a more geometrically-straightforward bullet, but that's pure speculation on my part. It's further complicated by the fact that there are variations on the standard pellet geometry, some of which might be more inherently stable at trans-sonic or supersonic velocities. Interesting stuff. I'd be a little worried about an attempt to match up the ballistics to an actual firearm being an apples-to-oranges affair since the flight characteristics of the projectiles are different. But maybe they're not different enough. No doubt someone out there actually knows the answer, but it's sure not me.

I'd be interested in following what you come up with. I'm sure you'll come up with a better and more useful analysis than most of the stuff I was able to find online.

Until that video with the hogs, I had never seen an air rifle pellet/bullet that wasn't wasp waisted.

[TheDude]

I have had a RWS Model 54 .22 caliber air rifle since i was about 14. Its an awesome weapon but not cheap. I believe it was over $500 when I got mine. I don't think it would take a hog but many a cottontails and squirrels have fallen in its sights. It is accurate out to about 50 yards. The .22 cal pellets don't have the velocity of the .177 cal ones but I was young when I purchased it and thought that bigger is always better. I have not researched .177 vs .22 pellet performance enough to know if the .22 is really that much more powerful. I think probably not.

I can vouch for RWS's quality and accuracy. It is a side cocking rifle and not a barrel break type. At the time I thought that it would be more accurate since the barrel stayed secure. Now i know that's not really the case unless you use a scope since the scope is stable but the barrel moves and has to lock back up exactly the same every time. Not sure if that really matters or not but my rifle is definitely accurate. Be sure and use an Air Rifle scope if you decide to put optics on it. Apparently the vibrations and odd recoil impulse of Air Rifles cause problem with regular scopes. My rifle is plenty accurate with the iron sights but I decided to put optics on it after I got older. I had no luck with rim fire scopes holding their zero. I will admit that I tried cheaper ones though. I eventually settled on a BSA AR4X32. Works great. Air rifles are a lot of fun and pretty cheap to shoot.

Here is a link about air rifle scopes. It does does mention the problems of using optics with the break barrel cocking rifles.

http://www.airgundepot.com/air-rifle-sc ... rview.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[TheDude]

I have had a RWS Model 54 .22 caliber air rifle since i was about 14. Its an awesome weapon but not cheap. I believe it was over $500 when I got mine.

Correction I went online and searched current pricing and when I saw pics of the models I remembered that I have the model 48 not 54. Mine doesn't have the fancy stock with the checkering and raised cheek piece. Saves some money by excluding those features. Both models fire a .22 cal pellet around 910 FPS. Which is comparable to a .22 short. They are still running around $500. That might be a little more than you were thinking of spending. I was fortunate enough to have loving parents who gave it to me as a Christmas present when I was a young teen. The Gamo rifles are priced much better and I have heard really good stuff from people that own them.

[Topbuilder]

"Is there any inherent advantage of a cocking lever with a fixed barrel over a hinged barrel like the Gamo has?"

Well, if accuracy is what you are looking for, breaking the barrel open and closing it would not seem to be the best idea going. Intentionally changing the line of site and point of aim every shot, then lining it back up. That being said many of the manufactures have figured it out. The Beeman R7 at 10 meters will put 'em in the same hole once you find the pellet the gun likes best. When you buy a more affordable rifle this is one area where quality may suffer and contribute to opening up of shot patterns.
My boys and I shoot an animal silhouette target. pretty intense competition... Bench resting with a 4 x 12 scope at 10 meters. I have not resorted to weighing my pellets to the nearest 10th of a grain yet... if I start losing I'll do it. You bet!

[punkndisorderly]

Crossman has an ar-15 upper I've been lusting after.

Seems like the hot ticket for working on the fundamentals.

[RX8er]

Does anyone know the city code for Fort Worth?

[Shinesintx]

Saw another four dead rabbits today. It looked to me liked they died of natural causes.

[The Annoyed Man]

OK, the more I look around, the more I can see that it would be worth it to step up for an RWS 48. I'm looking at the one with the upgraded Hawk scope, and the only thing I haven't decided yet is .177 or .22, but I'm leaning toward the .22.

http://www.airgundepot.com/rws-airguns- ... s-kit.html


So, what is the difference between an RWS 48, and a Umarex 48? They look like the same rifle to me.

[esxmarkc]

TAM let me throw this out there in case no one else has.

They kick funny. I too have an RWS model and also owned a Beeman rifle and pistol. The Beeman rifle and pistol are long gone but the RWS is still one FINE gun that I have fired thousands upon thousands of rounds through. The model I have was imported by RWS as the "Diana" model 36 carbine in .177 cal. It is now over 20 years old and was hundreds of dollars when I bought it. It shoots well into the supersonic range. You had to use special silicone based lubricants or it would diesel fire the round - you would both hear it and smell it. I was hard on the mechanics so if you accidentally used the wrong oil it took some cleaning out to get it back to normal. 20 years ago about the only place to get good ammo for it was mail order. Even so It was still real cheap to shoot.

Never had a scope on it but it has very fine sights. According to the manufacturer normal rifle scopes would not handle the vibrating kick so you were urged to only use air rifle scopes that were specially designed to handle the vibration. And i would never sweat the accuracy issues of the break-over barrel as it was built with such precision that after 20 years it locks up without a thousandth of play in any direction. The forward sight plane (all sights on the barrel) made it really easy for me to shoot. And now that I'm in my 50s my eyesight really likes it when all of the sight elements are at arms length.

Now back to that kick thing. The forward motion and inertia of the piston and subsequent deceleration of the piston as it squeezed out the airmass made for a very strong vibrating kick which was nothing like the clean backwards acceleration of a normal rifle. In fact, this thing out-kicks a .22 rifle. I never had much luck off of the bench but offhand I was a crack shot with this thing. No matter how I bean-bagged it it just did not like the bench.

You might not like the kick at first but quickly learn to appreciate what the mechanics are up to and learn how to really maintain a very consistent but light grip and form when shooting it. As soon as you get your head around the consistency thing it starts to group really well. Offhand I use to love tossing a golf ball out about 25 yards and shooting it until it was too far away to get that last lucky hit in.

Keep in mind that after 20 years thy may have resolved some of these issues with newer lightweight piston materials etc. Even 20 years ago they were toying with two opposing pistons as well as counterweights etc. Back then it was understood that it would take some practice to get the accuracy you would see out of a pump type or CO2 powered rifle but if you put in the practice it could be done.

Anyways, I still love this thing and consider it one of my favorite guns. Worth every dollar I paid for it then some. Hope you enjoy your choice as much as I have mine!

[Shinesintx]

That is awesome...where can I get bedspread like that?

[The Annoyed Man]

That is awesome...where can I get bedspread like that?

LOL.

Find anymore dead bunnies this morning?

[TheDude]

OK, the more I look around, the more I can see that it would be worth it to step up for an RWS 48. I'm looking at the one with the upgraded Hawk scope, and the only thing I haven't decided yet is .177 or .22, but I'm leaning toward the .22.

http://www.airgundepot.com/rws-airguns- ... s-kit.html
[ Image ]

So, what is the difference between an RWS 48, and a Umarex 48? They look like the same rifle to me.

You won't be dissappointed. I am not sure about the Umarex vs the RWS. They looked to be priced about the same so i would just go with RWS if i were you. One thing I don't know if you noticed it or not but they aren't light. They weigh about 9 pounds with an optic.

[anygunanywhere]

I got motivated yesterday and refabbed my youngest son's old Daisy Red Ryder. Cleaned it out and relubed everything up. Found an old zinc plated BB stuck in the bore. I bought that BB gun back in 1982.

Shoots good.

Anygunanywhere