Slight potential problem.
If M&G are fitting synthetic piston seals, I've no doubt the 45 as originally (no pun intended) sprung will be over the UK limit, so I suspect it's made with a puny spring for the home market and a beefier one for the USA, but none for a 12fpe market.
Ah! The RWS 45. Now that was a abomination. DM80 will be on here soon shouting its praises but then he loves Relums so
Doesn't look the same according to these examples. I bet its got even more plastic.
ATB
Ian
Founder & ex secretary of Rivington Riflemen.
www.rivington-riflemen.uk
Founder & ex secretary of Rivington Riflemen.
www.rivington-riflemen.uk
I agree completely. The stock design is so simple and elegant I have never seen it bettered on a full-size rifle. Ambidextrous and well-balanced, there was a Ruger centrefire which had a similar stock but it was not so angular. The whole thing was so easy to handle, which is genius design work considering how large the rifle was. The interference-fit foresight was a bit though. Nice open-sights on Originals, rearsight very adaptable.
The barrel on my 50T01, the fixed-barrel sister of the 45, was indeed made of plasticene, as was the rest of the metalwork. The 50T01 was an 'orrible rifle and one of the biggest disappointments in terms of the money laid out. Could have bought a FWB Sport but I wanted a fixed barrel....
Jim i remember your gun review on the first omega in SAR and knew back then that i should give it a chance and support webley in their hour of need but as a naive 14yr old i wasnt to know was i!! wish i bought one all the same and it would have been the carbine version in .177
I would like to add that as breach loaders goes the Theoben TB90( what a fantastic rifle) in .177 is as accurate any thing ive shot including my .177 KT Tx200SR.
This is a class old FWB Sport thread. There haven't been any in a while so its worth chewing it over again.
Been thinking; would it be a good idea to put a FWB barrel on an HW77?
1.Baked-on paint finish instead of blueing
2.Bendy black plakky trigger
3. Plain beech slabby stock made of wood rejected by school desk manufacturers
4. Breech pin instead of bolt allowing loosening of breech jaws and consequent inaccuracy
5. Plastic sights that broke when you wiped them over with a cloth
6. Scope grooves so shallow that would only hold a cheap 4x20 3/4" telescopic sight, all others would slide down the rail and lose zero after three shots.
They were horrid for the reasons stated above. I think you have the rose-tinted spectacles on, also you may be drunk.
The Mercury-S and the Challenger corrected all these faults, but alas too late.
Just IMHO of course!
Haha all your points are valid. I am not drunk though I like mine as it only cost me 38 quid a couple of months ago
I would like an "S" in .177 but have not found one yet.
In terms of the comparison with the FWB I haven't shot an "S" but I do have 2 x 127 and 1 x 124 and they are superb
If the "S" is comparible in terms of shooting quality to the FWB, then it's next on my shopping list (that will be number 56!!! )
Opportunity is missed by most people, because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work.