That's an interesting barrel shroud - is it specific to a Beeman model?
That's an interesting barrel shroud - is it specific to a Beeman model?
I don't think so, but I don't think Beeman had them put in many of their packages. This gun's serial number is just over 100,000 it would be a 1978? The postmark on the Beeman box is January of 1979. I don't think many were with the long tang guns. I love the look of it cause the long thin barrel gives it a pencil look without it. They did make a heavier barrel as well. I have been looking for a while and I have never seen a Beeman with a shroud weight for sale or even in a picture. Whether this gun needs more weight is another question. Only had it for a day will be fun experimenting. One downside already. The shroud would have to be removed to attach the clip to stop the recoil less action, but doubt I would want the recoil?
Last edited by 45flint; 30-06-2016 at 12:18 AM.
I think when they say no lube it refers to the internals. I would lightly lube the external linkages.
Did you know that if the recoil less plate is fitted the recoil matches a .22 rimfire target pistol for cheaper practice.
When I die don't let my wife sell my guns for what she thinks I gave for them!!!
I am a fan of the FWB spring pistols. http://smg.photobucket.com/user/Airs...l?sort=6&o=125
From the classic 65 to the odd ball 90.
Founder & ex secretary of Rivington Riflemen.
www.rivington-riflemen.uk
good catch, I have never seen that shroud before.
These are Rolls Royce pistols. Or I suppose that should be Maybach. You have to admire the engineering and quality
Does the shroud preclude the fitting of weights?
Did the 65 accept weights? I don't actually know having owned only a Mod. 80.
The shroud was the weight for the 65. There was a after market weight system that screwed in the hole for the recoil shield. FWB came out with the better weight system on the 80.
Here are closer pics.
http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u...smrknwlez.jpeg
http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u...sd8gs9geb.jpeg