HW45 Some claims!

[Rickenbacker]

http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Octopussy#...red_air_pistol

Sorry! Couldn't resist it

OMG! That doesn't count It was Roger (flippin) Moore!!!

I just knew something like this would happen ...

[bullet boy]

Put it this way i plan to add another HW45 to my collection.Superb guns!!

[ChrisH00]

Just tested my (s/h. about 2006 vintage) HW45 .177 on my new chrono and it's putting out about 5.2ft/lbs with JSB Exact 8.44gr, is that about right? I haven't tested at 1/2 power setting yet.

[eyebull]

Sounds like good going for a .177!

[clarky]

Hi all. I have had both of these for a good number of years and become pretty much expert in their use and their inner workings.
I would have no hesitation in choosing the HW75.
Ive been involved in more than 1 or 2 of these pistol field target side shoots too, where again i would recommend the 75.
Both are beautifully made but the accuracy of the HW45 off hand is NOT as good as many would have us believe. I think maybe its power, looks and quality lead many to assume it is very accurate, or simply exaggerate because they are so fond of it. I will post some offhand and benched comparison results. Also pellet recommendations if anyone would like them. The real problem with the 45 is controlling the recoil, which serves to throw the gun slightly top heavy. I have carefully studied the movement through the fitting of a rifle scope and even built a small wooden rig to detect its movements in the hope i might be able to tune them out a little.
For the record there is slide rearward buck into the hand, followed a milli second later by a slight leap forward and upward by approx 1/4" There is also a very detectable anti clockwise twist as the spring unwinds clockwise but travelling in reverse of course.
I have noticed that your field target members are having trouble controlling it which does not suprise me. I have a few small tuning recommendations but its pretty much there from a design point of view.
On the other hand, the 75 delivers no noticeable recoil from its hammer or the valve release, with barely 3mm of upward movement from the pellet/air release from the end of barrel. Bench rigged it has the potential to virtually same hole at 10m, while i have managed comfortable 3/4 inch groups and less off hand.
Its light on power in comparison but can be improved a little but can still drop std field targets out to 18yds.

[Airways]

Looked for a 45 and now have two 45 and one 75. Both 45 will be stripped and cleaned then look to get to 5 ftlbs as both now at 3

[Telephonepete]

I gotta say that both options have some appeal.
The power of the 45 appeals, not so keen on the fake hammer. The hammer action of the 75 makes me want it but I'm afraid it won't even topple a match box let alone make a satisfying 'ding' when it hits a can.
Are the tru-glo sights optional or on all of them now?
I prefer just iron sights.

Chances are I'll just gaze lovingly at whichever I buy more than actually fire it. An occasional plink down the length of the hallway when the mrs isn't around, or can bash in the back yard.

i have had both i got rid of the .177 45. i now have a 75 in .177 which i prefer. at the range that you shoot a 75, 6-10 yds you dont notice the lower power and the hammer falling takes away the rather dead feel you get from a pcp. i may get another 45 again in .177 for the flatter curve. the 75 has a much better trigger.

[Airways]

Hi all. I have had both of these for a good number of years and become pretty much expert in their use and their inner workings.
I would have no hesitation in choosing the HW75.
Ive been involved in more than 1 or 2 of these pistol field target side shoots too, where again i would recommend the 75.
Both are beautifully made but the accuracy of the HW45 off hand is NOT as good as many would have us believe. I think maybe its power, looks and quality lead many to assume it is very accurate, or simply exaggerate because they are so fond of it. I will post some offhand and benched comparison results. Also pellet recommendations if anyone would like them. The real problem with the 45 is controlling the recoil, which serves to throw the gun slightly top heavy. I have carefully studied the movement through the fitting of a rifle scope and even built a small wooden rig to detect its movements in the hope i might be able to tune them out a little.
For the record there is slide rearward buck into the hand, followed a milli second later by a slight leap forward and upward by approx 1/4" There is also a very detectable anti clockwise twist as the spring unwinds clockwise but travelling in reverse of course.
I have noticed that your field target members are having trouble controlling it which does not suprise me. I have a few small tuning recommendations but its pretty much there from a design point of view.
On the other hand, the 75 delivers no noticeable recoil from its hammer or the valve release, with barely 3mm of upward movement from the pellet/air release from the end of barrel. Bench rigged it has the potential to virtually same hole at 10m, while i have managed comfortable 3/4 inch groups and less off hand.
Its light on power in comparison but can be improved a little but can still drop std field targets out to 18 yds.

Do share your tips on the 45 as will be stripping mine this week, both only producing 3 ft lbs one in .22 and one in .177

[tinbum]

Do share your tips on the 45 as will be stripping mine this week, both only producing 3 ft lbs one in .22 and one in .177

Reduce weight, polish everything, add better fitting guides with slip washers and rebuild virtually dry.

[Airways]

Reduce weight, polish everything, add better fitting guides with slip washers and rebuild virtually dry.

Taking both 45 and 75 to club tonight to see what they can do.
Then stripping both 54 and probably do as tinbum says will feed back

[clarky]

Do share your tips on the 45 as will be stripping mine this week, both only producing 3 ft lbs one in .22 and one in .177

The problem with the 45 is the guide...it sits down inside the piston to facilitate the 5.4 ftlbs or so power
but its a sledge hammer to crack a nut...
With a massively inefficent transfer port passing through 90 degress to facilitate the compact design, they wacked in a big mainspring and heavy weighting to the piston to compensate.
The compression parameter then crosses the margins and flashes over for fun with even a hint oil...and i do mean a hint ....

First turn around the mainspring guide, or better still throw it into a scrap bin very hard so it damages and you can never use it again....then beat it with a hammer to make sure.
Yep, your talking to a guy who has been tuning this bstard thing for years.
My compardres all seem to like the thing and insist on buying them and me then tuning them....bit of a nuisance getting apart and back together but im on my 15th.
Replace the guide with one of Delrin, fitted conventionally.
I prefer a very long single guide, maintaining spring straightness to all the spring length external to the piston when in the fired situation.

Due to a well fitting Delrin or Techaform guide, it now negates any need for emoilents and can be run dry.
Clean it out many times and your now close to some semblance of an accurate shooter.

[Airways]

The problem with the 45 is the guide...it sits down inside the piston to facilitate the 5.4 ftlbs or so power
but its a sledge hammer to crack a nut...
With a massively inefficent transfer port passing through 90 degress to facilitate the compact design, they wacked in a big mainspring and heavy weighting to the piston to compensate.
The compression parameter then crosses the margins and flashes over for fun with even a hint oil...and i do mean a hint ....

First turn around the mainspring guide, or better still throw it into a scrap bin very hard so it damages and you can never use it again....then beat it with a hammer to make sure.
Yep, your talking to a guy who has been tuning this bstard thing for years.
My compardres all seem to like the thing and insist on buying them and me then tuning them....bit of a nuisance getting apart and back together but im on my 15th.
Replace the guide with one of Delrin, fitted conventionally.
I prefer a very long single guide, maintaining spring straightness to all the spring length external to the piston when in the fired situation.

Due to a well fitting Delrin or Techaform guide, it now negates any need for emoilents and can be run dry.
Clean it out many times and your now close to some semblance of an accurate shooter.

Thanks Clarky sound advice, interested why you go the single guide Vs two one at each end, also your views on lining the piston to prevent lube entering the chamber

[clarky]

Thanks Clarky sound advice, interested why you go the single guide Vs two one at each end, also your views on lining the piston to prevent lube entering the chamber

Well you wont need a liner if not lubing and if you are lubing dont do it....the internal parameters generate too much heat due to the restricted transfer port versus the powerful mainspring and flash over in the gun....hence the smoke seen when any 45 is shot.

Well you got 2 choices when going the way of guide rod tuning.
You can reduce the length of the rear guide to allow the fitting of a top hat which i would whole heartedly recommend in a rifle or go for no top hat and a longer rear guide.
My most recent testing has realised a smoother, deader shot cycle when all the spring is guided that is not within the constraint of the piston when the gun is at rest.
In otherwords, with the piston fired, im looking to have all the mainspring guided which is left outside the piston and hopefully a bit inside too.
Top hats are a good spring centraliser but cost us in guiding at the opposite end....
If the mainspring is a good fit in the piston already, its more than a good enough reason to go for a longer rear guide.
You also remove any weight addition to the piston

[1shot1kill]

The engineering is excellent, my HW45 in .22 is over 20 Years old, still delivers 5.5ft/lbs and with just an occasional drop of oil I fully expect it to last as long again.
Mine is alloy but it's die cast Aluminium, not Zinc alloy and the black finish on mine is a chemical surface treatment which is impervious to solvents and has held up very well to 20+ years of wear & tear ;-)
The Beeman Version (Beeman designed it, Weirauch Didn't) review was probably of an early model, when the P1/HW45 was first released (when I bought mine) .177 was dual power only, .22 was full power only.
At a certain point all moved to dual power, I'm guessing it simplified production to do all the internals the same.
The HW75 is a Single Stroke Pneumatic, a good 75 delivers less than half the power of a 45, the 75 is recoilless though, so it's easier to shoot accurately without practice and is better for target use. Having said that although it's a very sweet gun the lack of a palm shelf roles the 75 out for serious 10m shooters,
Get Both ;-)

- Nick

This! Plus bear in mind, a HW45 takes a lot of practice to shoot well, a HW75 is nice but is not a match pistol, neither is a power house, HW40 has match quality trigger but no match grip, my opinion? Buy HW40,
John.

[Geezer]

This! Plus bear in mind, a HW45 takes a lot of practice to shoot well, a HW75 is nice but is not a match pistol, neither is a power house, HW40 has match quality trigger but no match grip, my opinion? Buy HW40,
John.

The 40 is indeed nice, and great value but, while the trigger is good, it is not match quality. The 40 gives you about 90% of the performance of a good Gamo Compact or FAS604/6004 at half or a third of the price.

The 75 is odd. A sort of pseudo-match pistol that isn't.

Pistols that are hard to shoot well help you shoot better. My current example is a BSA Scorpion. But I have a 45 on the way.