Crosman 2240 or 2250

[David22]

I've seen mixed posts on this, and there doesn't seem to be a definitive answer
I've got a stock Crosman 2240 and was tempted to dabble in modifications given the huge range of custom parts available but wouldn't want to create an illegal weapon which (I'd assume) is a real possibility as the stock 2240 in .22 must be close to 6ftlbs out if the box ?

Is it safer to use a 2250 (classified as a rifle) or is it the presence of the stock that makes a pistol into a rifle ? Is a 2250 with grips a pistol ?

What makes a pistol a pistol ? I can't find a decent definition. Surely it's about the overall length of the weapon ? Confused

[astraman1]

good question will be interesting to read whats put

[TonyL]

There have been many posts in the past asking the same question and, as you say, I don't think I've ever seen a cast-iron, definitive answer.

Some say that, if it started life as a pistol, it will always remain so in the eyes of the law, no matter the extent of modifications.

However, others would say that, as long as the stock is not quickly detachable (again, maybe a little ambiguous) and if the barrel is longer than 12", then it will come under air rifle rules.

[gingernut]

Don't put pistol grips on a 2250.
That makes it into a prohibited weapon as its over 6ftlbs.

The 2240 can be made better by adding parts from eg GMAC.
These are unlikely to put it over the pistol limit but you will need a chrono to check it.

[Geezer]

The 2240 makes 5+ on a warm day. So don't mess with the valves, hammer spring, port, barrel length etc unless you know what you are doing and are really careful.

Good "mods" for the 2240 are everything else: steel breeches, new grips, trigger enhancements, sights, muzzle brakes, suppressors, etc.

If you want to play with the internals of a CO2 gun, go for a stock 2250 (9ish ft/lbs) but still be careful.

[Geezer]

PS - a 2250 with pistol grips and running at 6.0000001 ft/lbs is probably a pistol in the eyes of the law. And thus a Bad Idea. So is a 6.000001 ft/lbs 2240 with a stock on it. None of statute , or case law, or official guidance is 100% clear. Best advice is don't be the test case.

[blooregard]

I'd have a go with both, the 2240 can be made a better shooter without touching the power. The trigger is easily improved, new grips and a steel breech make it an excellent pistol. While you can get more power and no doubt pass 6FPE, the barrel is a little short to make it really hot.

The 2250 does have more scope for improving power and there is more you can do to it but both are great little project guns.

[oling]

There's no law I've seen that says that once something is a pistol it is always a pistol, and a rifle is always a rifle. For me, it is quite clear: to be a rifle it needs to have a barrel at least 30cm in length and an overall length of 60cm. An easily detachable stock is a difficult one because a 'stock' 2250's stock can be easily detached by simply unscrewing some screws...

[gingernut]

I think thats right.
Also the stock on newer 2250s is secured by screws that are designed to be difficult if not impossible to remove.

[Geezer]

As I wrote above, there is no clear law, but an uncertainty.

Which I assume is why Crosman have recently started attaching the rifle variant stocks with AT bolts. Because they don't want to fall foul of the uncertainty.

And, yes, there are shedloads of things readily available, or easily modified, or readily constructed, that are more dangerous in the wrong hands than an unweidly 6.5 ft/lbs air pistol. Like cars, and bottles of petrol, and kitchen knives, and cricket bats.

But that's not the point.

If you want to experiment with power modification, you are much safer doing so with a 9 ft/lbs rifle than a 5.5 ft/lbs pistol.

[300bhp/ton]

Guess it ultimately depends what you want. If you want a pistol. Then a rifle is never going to do it. And I just don't think the risk is worth it messing with upping the power of a pistol in the UK. Also you may want to consider how much money you would be happy spending. You can sink a load of money in a 2240 and not really acheive a huge amount at the end of it.

I too think you are safer starting with a 2250.

As for the law. I'm not sure how it would know if it was a pistol or not originally. If you are modding then chances are you may replace parts with model names or serial numbers on. So there would be no way to ever say what it was originally.

For the record. The 2250 XL comes with a steel breech compete with 11mm dovetail. The 18" barrel is about optimum for performance and comes threaded to take a silencer. Apart from tarting it up to look prettier, you probably don't really need to mod it. It's more than up to the task stock.

[David22]

Guess it ultimately depends what you want. If you want a pistol. Then a rifle is never going to do it. And I just don't think the risk is worth it messing with upping the power of a pistol in the UK. Also you may want to consider how much money you would be happy spending. You can sink a load of money in a 2240 and not really acheive a huge amount at the end of it.

I too think you are safer starting with a 2250.

As for the law. I'm not sure how it would know if it was a pistol or not originally. If you are modding then chances are you may replace parts with model names or serial numbers on. So there would be no way to ever say what it was originally.

For the record. The 2250 XL comes with a steel breech compete with 11mm dovetail. The 18" barrel is about optimum for performance and comes threaded to take a silencer. Apart from tarting it up to look prettier, you probably don't really need to mod it. It's more than up to the task stock.

Thanks - That's great advice and pretty much where I'd ended up, just leaving the 2240 as a pistol and (maybe) getting a 2250 XL. Apart from the "experience" of adding a steel breech and longer barrel to a stock 2250 (14inch barrel and plastic breech) the 2250 XL is actually cheaper (like for like) and way cheaper (and it would seem, safer) than "upsizing" a 2240.

The only mods a 2240 really needs are 1) A silencer - it's VERY noisy and 2) Steel breech (only to allow fitting for scopes)

[Biker_Bob]

I have a 1377 which I've modded into a carbine with a proper peep sight, silencer and a quick detach stock (sort of like a take-down Innova).
I've steered well clear of tuning the gun for more power.
I thought it was pretty much accepted that if the serial and model number on a gun relate to a pistol then a pistol it is and always will be. But as mentioned english law is based on case precedent, I don't want to be the one in court arguing the this and that of rifle vs pistol.

[MarkHolding]

If you look at the Crosman TDR, it's designed so it can't be fired once the stock is taken off, so it points to a pistol as being a gun with no butt to the stock. You would think that adding a butt stock to a pistol, it would become a rifle, or carbine, but the law should make it more clear. Even some sub machine guns are termed at machine pistols, which is probably because they usually come with butt stocks that either compress up to the pistol grip area or fold along the side of the stock such as the schmeisser MP40. Maybe its worth asking some one at BASC to see what their legal stance is, as I am sure this has been brought to their attention in the past in cases of the Law.

[PaulR]

Getting back to the 2240/50s for a moment.

I have a bog standard 2240 bought second hand for £45. It is in extremely good condition, is a powerful plinker and great fun. I did have one which I modified - steel breech etc but it was not appreciably better i.e. worth the effort. I sold it.

I recently bought a 2250 XL - paid £150 for it. It is a great piece of kit for the price (which is much less than a 2240 plus mods).

My point? Well worth having both as they are great for different reasons.