HW95 Range

[Amac]

The TX is also a cracking gun. However, it is considerably more heavy and is not as easy to load as a break barreled springer. This might be worthy of consideration if thinking about introducing somebody to our sport who isn't built like Garth.

I have lost count of the number of beginners/returners who I have advised to buy a 95. They really are that good, with the new model variant looking even better than the original. Hell, they even now come ready armed with the exemplar Weihrauch silencer unit. The 95 is the gun that both myself and my three sons all used to great effect, in both calibres for everything from rabbiting to organised target shooting for years when I couldn't afford to enter the PCP fray. A modern classic in my opinion!

Andy

[marci]

I have both the tx200 and the 95 for 6 or 7 years.The TX is not hold sensitive but heavy and harder to cock.Accuracy wise there is nothing beetwen them.If it helps I reach for the 95 more often ,the easy loading, handling and light weight makes it near perfect IMO.(my 95 is more pellet fusy tough)

Marton

[DaveC_24]

I have both an HW95k and a TX200HC (the carbine version). Both of these are excellent rifles, but have a very different feel to them and are different animals to shoot. Out of the box, the TX200 is the easier rifle to shoot well with, at least it is for me. It is however significantly heavier than the 95k, but by no means unmanageably so, though I do find the HW95k easier from standing due to it being a bit lighter. The TX200 is a bit dearer than the HW95k, but then the overall quality of the finish is better (this is cosmetic really, but the blueing and the stock on the TX200 is a thing of beauty!).

At longer ranges (above 35 yards) I find the groups to be tighter with the TX200, though this is probably due to its relatively sedate behaviour on firing, as it doesn't really have muzzle flip-up like the HW95k is prone to. Also, I prefer the Air Arms trigger to the Weihrauch trigger (comparing them "from the box"), and the HW has a fairly long "reach" to the trigger, which isn't ideal for every shooter. I would say try both and see which you prefer the feel of and go with that.

[Rambo23]

You won't regret buying a HW95, however be prepared to own a TX200 in the not too distant future.

I have recently seen some new HW95's in .20 cal and although I haven't shot one myself have been told they are the "dogs".

[ljgolf@vdubb.or]

go to your club and ask the members , I have a hw 98 love it got .177 and .22 .

[Theobenrules]

This guy is punching holes with his springer at 110 yards http://www.luchtbuks.net/index.php?s...dpost&p=643229 ! !

[Rapidnick]

I have a TX200HC in .177 and an HW95 in .20. I love them both but in the past I have always had trouble with the HW95 as it is very susceptible to muzzle flip especially with the light HW silencer stuck on the end. Even ones in the highest state of tune like the SFS Banshee and the Venom Lazaglide suffered from flip- in my hands at least. With my current rifle which I tuned myself I have cured the 'flip' with a reasonably heavy steel muzzle weight and it is capable of surprising accuracy. I shoot it at my club up to 55 yards and it is great fun and shows impressive performance even in my hands. It is also remarkably handy and pointable. However, you will probably find a TX200 with its underlever adding balance and weight to the front easier to shoot well initially. As you want the rifle for targets, of the 2 I think the TX200 in .177 would be a safer option for you. However, for mixed use-a bit of target shooting and a bit of hunting- I would choose the HW95 in .20. As has been said try and handle them both.