mag240 v hw45

[red bob]

Having at last acquired a very clean and nicely functioning magnum 240[.177] i thought i would read previous input from gentlemen well
versed with the positives and negatives of this interesting pistol. then found the comparison to the hw45 even more entertaining with
rotating views being exchanged quite strongly within the confines of good manners[great stuff].not being as disciplined as some to the
technical perspective ,i just shoot away taking in whatever feedback it gives in operation and how much input to get the best out of it.
so far i have found it to be a very light handleable pistol against the more weighty hw45 which i enjoy using but do find you are all to
well aware of its relative bulk,but being a bit more powerful i think the mass is necessary.Even in the short time i have owned it i can see
why it has its adherents and consequently why owners have gone to some lengths to iron out its few shortcomings to bring it up to spec.
My feelings are they are both in the same league but the hw45 is nearer the top for reasons that sadly could have been sorted on the
magnum .Still im glad to say its a keeper and shall no doubt enjoy using far into the future thanks to its distinct and fun personality.

[fatttmannn]

I have both of these, hw45 is in .177 and also have a .20 barell. My 240 is a series 2 in .22. I would love to say how good the 240 is and I beleve with some reservations it is a good pistol, however the rear sight runs out of adjustment far to early for myself. It can be very accurate however, I have to work much more harder to shoot it accuratley. The HW45 is an older one (without the fibre optics sights) I wasnt impressefd with grips so found a set of Packymar rubber ones for a colt 1911. Accuracey is very good its not pellet fussey and the two power settings can be useful. I allso have the walnut shoulder stock which turns the pistol in to a short range carbine thats great fun for plinking. Personnally I would say to me the 45 is an "easier" gun to shoot.

[flatrajectory]

I have both. Both are top of the class imho, but I prefer the bsa because it is less bulky and much easier to load a pellet. Both are accurate ( the 45 just pips it), triggers are equal, power wise the HW wins but not by much. The reason the bsa wins ,apart from the above, is it's British. If BSA had not run into financial trouble at the time I feel that the 240 could have been developed into a winner.

Pete.

[fatttmannn]

I have both. Both are top of the class imho, but I prefer the bsa because it is less bulky and much easier to load a pellet. Both are accurate ( the 45 just pips it), triggers are equal, power wise the HW wins but not by much. The reason the bsa wins ,apart from the above, is it's British. If BSA had not run into financial trouble at the time I feel that the 240 could have been developed into a winner.

Pete.

thats quite possible, but the world of airguns is full of maybes

[zooma]

Why not give the Magnum a run in the new 6 yard MPL postal series to see what it can do for you over the 6 month period?

Alternatively - you could alternate between the two (as I have done with different pistols in previous MPL competitions) to see which one becomes the top dog.

[red bob]

hi all ,just as an update when i picked up the .177 mag from good old proteks again i had another look at the .22 that came in at the same time
and felt it was cruel to split them up!! omg when am i gonna learn .well its under the counter awaiting my next payday.
as mentioned above the mag does have undoubted shortcomings 2/3 depending on view;but the biggest gripe has to be[in my mind] ;why did they cut the barrel short by the 20mm or so than it could have been ,there seems to be enough room ! anyone above think a suitable barrel could be inserted without major surgery?.
next thing is a suitable box to contain both ;troubled shooter gave me some great help moding the webley box to fit two nemesis so i may go down that road.
stop it bob your encouragable.lol.