Pre-war Crosman rifles

[trevor1]

I often wonder if these snazzy shooters were distributed in the UK?
http://s864.photobucket.com/user/cin...urwci.jpg.html
As collectables there is a lot to recommend them. solidly and well made,all-sorts of variations, still modestly priced and rather available. Take the stock off and they make an easily posted package. Top of this,there is a host of literature,pellet boxes etc to chase after!

[45flint]

Interesting thought for me as a new collector in the US, obviously I would have an advantage over here, but need to get to a gun show next year and hold one. Not sure a painted receiver will win me over?

[Geezer]

I strongly doubt they were imported into to the UK when new. But a few have found their way over here in recent years, and occasionaly crop up for sale.

[DT Fletcher]

I've never seen anything to tell me that Crosman exported to the UK before WWII. They did export to Canada and even set up a separate Crosman Arms division in Canada after the war.

Probably the biggest thing to be aware of is that there two distinct versions of these guns and that's pre-war and post-war. Before the war, the guns were individually hand-built at the bench of two workers. After the war, Rudy Merz redesigned the gun to fit the new manufacturing processes he introduced (screw machines, etc.) Prior to the war, Crosman was located in an old turn-of-century factory which still used overhead belt-drive machines.

So, what you end up with are actually 3 distinct periods of production: (1) 1925-1929, (2)1930-1941, (3) 1945-1949. The first period is distinguished by the early design of the receiver. This receiver tended to break so the 2nd period has a beefed up receiver design. The 3rd period also has many small design changes. There is also the distinctive 1949 model that has a number of changes. There are other minor variations, such as the "click less" pump handle types that came out around 1939-1941.

The earliest guns from the 1920s are masterpieces of craftsmanship; however, these guns almost always saw heavy use and typically are in terrible shape. It took me some time to finally track down an example of a 20s gun in excellent condition. In my opinion, there are few guns equal in terms of beauty or function than a good Crosman 101.

I would't let that these are painted to be a put off. It's a well done finish that holds up pretty well and doesn't look bad, imo, as it wears. The exception to this would be with a percentage of the post-war production that have steel barrels and or pump tubes made of steel. The black paint finish looks horrible as it wears away. I suggest sticking with only the brass guns.

The paperwork of these guns is simply amazing; which is why I've been a fanatical collector of early Crosman Arms paper. It took me decades of effort and whole bunch of money to assemble my collection and it has, to my knowledge, just about every piece of paper that Crosman ever produced (up till about 1972). Today, other than for the little book "Target and Game Shooting" which still shows up with some regularly, I haven't seen anything even remotely interesting for a good number of years. However, fear not, since I put together a book that includes the entire early (up to 1952) Crosman Arms paper. Not cheap, but it's in full color and it really does tell the story, just ask Trev :-) Available at Amazonuk https://www.amazon.co.uk/Literature-...ywords=crosman

[trevor1]

The contributions of Dean and others make airgun collecting so interesting. I think the whole multi-stroke pneumatic story may be rather unknown-outside of the USA. Books like "The Literature of Crosman","An Encyclopedia of Daisy Plymouth Guns",and websites like UJay's, "Sheridan Air Guns'(with a history of post-war pumpers by Mr Trull) are incredibly enlightening. I find the collection of info and ephemera as compelling as the aquistion of guns! Such is life...for the sedentary airgunner.;-)

[suggs69]

that was a very informative read thank you

[Garvin]

I often wonder if these snazzy shooters were distributed in the UK?
http://s864.photobucket.com/user/cin...urwci.jpg.html
As collectables there is a lot to recommend them. solidly and well made,all-sorts of variations, still modestly priced and rather available. Take the stock off and they make an easily posted package. Top of this,there is a host of literature,pellet boxes etc to chase after!

If Crosman made no effort to sell in the UK before the War it was probably because they could see it would be very costly to force an opening for a pneumatic rifle in the market, what with all those BSAs and Webleys, not to mention the (cheap) 'grey' imports coming in from Germany.

Remember that 'spring is king' prevailed in the UK right up until the 1970s and '80s, when the attractions of power coupled with the low cost of US and Japanese pump ups (simultaneously with a decline in the quality of UK-produced spring airguns) finally opened up the market.

The lack of steel/blueing on the first Crosmans might have put snotty prewar British consumers off, also. It just wasn't pukka to produce a serious gun in this way!

Strange the way the pneumatic rifles of the 18th and 19th centuries, plus air canes, gave way to spring power in 20th century UK. I blame Lincoln Jeffries and Herr Mayer of Diana for their inventiveness!

The extraordinary beauty of the Webley Service Mk2 probably had something to do with it, too.

[45flint]

If Crosman made no effort to sell in the UK before the War it was probably because they could see it would be very costly to force an opening for a pneumatic rifle in the market, what with all those BSAs and Webleys, not to mention the (cheap) 'grey' imports coming in from Germany.

Remember that 'spring is king' prevailed in the UK right up until the 1970s and '80s, when the attractions of power coupled with the low cost of US and Japanese pump ups (simultaneously with a decline in the quality of UK-produced spring airguns) finally opened up the market.

The lack of steel/blueing on the first Crosmans might have put snotty prewar British consumers off, also. It just wasn't pukka to produce a serious gun in this way!

Strange the way the pneumatic rifles of the 18th and 19th centuries, plus air canes, gave way to spring power in 20th century UK. I blame Lincoln Jeffries and Herr Mayer of Diana for their inventiveness!

The extraordinary beauty of the Webley Service Mk2 probably had something to do with it, too.

I think Garvins pretty well nails it. But as a American I can say it very simply, they couldn't compete. Why do you think a Yank hangs out in the vintage area of a British airgun forum?

[45flint]

Well I took a stab at one of these old Crosman's yesterday. Maybe unfortunately I bought a post war 102 which probably isn't the best of these? But it was fairly inexpensive and what really drew me to it has what looks like a burl walnut stock, most of the post war were maple or elm. I love figured wood, will see if the pictures were correct when it arrives, and a bonus it's suppose to fire. Lol It may start me on a quest for a prewar?

[DT Fletcher]

The origin of Crosman actually relates to British history. The BSA was sold and advertised pretty widely in the US prior to WWI. It was the only .22 caliber pellet rifle offered in the US prior to that war. We know that the inventor of the Crosman rifle received an air rifle from his wealthy employer; who picked it up in Europe. I am reasonably sure that this air rifle would have been a BSA. The reason for believing this is that the Crosman inventor, prior to inventing the Crosman rifle, began producing and selling .22 caliber pellets from his home in Rochester. The most likely reason for this is that during WWI the BSA produced pellets were not available in the US.

The Crosman Rifle was, in my view, invented and produced (starting in 1923) in direct competition to the BSA, since the Crosman was then only the 2nd .22 pellet rifle ever made available in the US; Benjamin didn't make their first .22 pellet rifle until the mid '30s.

I seriously doubt that British tastes in air rifles had anything to do with Crosman not exporting to the UK. Internal politics, the aggressive P.Y. Hahn was fired by his father in 1929/30, and the depression would have been bigger factors. The elder Hahn did little with the brand during the '30s; no new products, no marketing innovations, no nothing really. It wasn't until the elder Hahn died (1939, if memory serves) and left the company to PY Hahn in his will that things started to move again (it was only after PY took over that a .177 caliber rifle was produced however, WWII then made it's impact on the company with no new rifles being produced during the war. It wouldn't be until after WWII that PY Hahn was able to pursue his greater vision of Crosman.

[45flint]

In determining if you have a prewar 102 I noticed that a retaining "wheel" screw at the back of the receiver seemed to have been eliminated after the war? See pics below. The function I guess was to help retain the cover in place? Am I wrong, just got into these rifles? (Mr. Fletcher and Trevor have got me intrigued with these rifles now!)

Wheel present:
http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u...psoygfxlvr.jpg

Wheel absent:
http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u...psxedt8wqk.jpg

[DT Fletcher]

In determining if you have a prewar 102 I noticed that a retaining "wheel" screw at the back of the receiver seemed to have been eliminated after the war? See pics below. The function I guess was to help retain the cover in place? Am I wrong, just got into these rifles? (Mr. Fletcher and Trevor have got me intrigued with these rifles now!)

Wheel present:
http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u...psoygfxlvr.jpg

Wheel absent:
http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u...psxedt8wqk.jpg

Yes, that is a retaining screw to hold the cover on.

What's best, at least to me, about these guns is that they are simply one of the best field guns ever made: simple, powerful, extremely accurate. Personally, I do not care for the repeater model. It's the single-shot model that's best. Plus, a nice pre-WWII single shot is a work of art.

[45flint]

Interesting the 102 I have coming has a walnut checkered stock, the retaining screw for the cover, but the cocking hammer is the large 5 ring, that I read was post war? I am confused as to pre or post war for the gun?

[DT Fletcher]

Interesting the 102 I have coming has a walnut checkered stock, the retaining screw for the cover, but the cocking hammer is the large 5 ring, that I read was post war? I am confused as to pre or post war for the gun?

Need pictures. There are so many of these that swapping around parts is not all that uncommon. Identifying a pre vs post war 102 is harder than for the single shot but, with good pics, I can usually spot what you have.

Yes, 5-ring cocking hammer is post war but it's not uncommon for it to be missing and the only replacements ever made available were the post war type.

[45flint]

Need pictures. There are so many of these that swapping around parts is not all that uncommon. Identifying a pre vs post war 102 is harder than for the single shot but, with good pics, I can usually spot what you have.

Yes, 5-ring cocking hammer is post war but it's not uncommon for it to be missing and the only replacements ever made available were the post war type.

Well just received my 102 and it seems a beauty. In wonderful shape except for some paint scrapes. Would be interested if it is prewar? It seems to have some characteristics: brass barrel and tube, retaining screw wheel on repeating action cover, walnut stock with checkering, and a burl that is absolutely nuts; would be almost presentation grade nowadays? Has the 5 ring post War cocking hammer, thus difficult to believe it is anything else? It seems to me that it's just in too good of shape to be too old thus my guess is just a nicely made post war?

slide show pics:

http://s168.photobucket.com/user/ski.../Crosman%20102