Longbow power level

[Darrenm]

What's the best power level for a .177 Webley Longbow.

[Geezer]

About 11 ft/lbs.

There has been some debate on here about whether the L'bow was designed for sub-12 (many people) or for 14ish (me).

I maintain that it, like many other great springers, is designed to be a bit over the UK limit, but still Ok below it.

Most springers in .177" shoot a bit nicer at lower levels, as opposed to chasing the mythical 11.9.

[Darrenm]

Thanks

[PCPShooter]

About 11 ft/lbs.

There has been some debate on here about whether the L'bow was designed for sub-12 (many people) or for 14ish (me).

I maintain that it, like many other great springers, is designed to be a bit over the UK limit, but still Ok below it.

Most springers in .177" shoot a bit nicer at lower levels, as opposed to chasing the mythical 11.9.

Webley never changed sweep or capacity from Vulcan design, so they are designed for UK market, and shoot ideally for that in 22, but require a bit of modification to shoot as well in 177. So they are really a 22 Vulcan, with better stock, central pivot point allowing bolt instead of pin, and nothing more refined than than that -

[TonyL]

Webley never changed sweep or capacity from Vulcan design, so they are designed for UK market, and shoot ideally for that in 22, but require a bit of modification to shoot as well in 177. So they are really a 22 Vulcan, with better stock, central pivot point allowing bolt instead of pin, and nothing more refined than than that -

Which will be why I seem to remember seeing long-stroked Venom / V-Mach ones, then?

Also the Longbow has the much improved trigger mechanism and re-designed breech block with the breech seal now located there as opposed to at the exit of the transfer port? So, a fair amount of re-engineering there?

[PCPShooter]

Yep they changed breach and put in a trigger which is possibly a tad more refined than the late series used on Exocet / Stingray

Now they are going for same / less than hw95 probably about right.

At the time they were selling for 400 etc, lots of people in air gun trade laughing -

[PCPShooter]

Oh- yes the long stroke was shortening piston to give sweep suitable for 177, generally speaking

The Tomohawk was a different design - not be be mixed up with Longbow. Apparently they designed the breach on those based around the spare O rings Webley had rather than a good design ! I guess it's what happens if non shooters and bean counters are in charge, as opposed to shooters and engineers Kinda explains a lot about what happened to Webley .....

[Artfull-Bodger]

Bore stroke of a Vulcan is 27mm x 79mm for a capacity of 45cc,

I seem to recall the longbow being in the 78mm range? either way more than enough capacity for 12 ft lbs.

[Geezer]

I'm not sure I get this. You're saying Longbow is a modified Vulcan, despite the fact that it has a different trigger, stroke, piston, mainspring, safety catch, method of attaching the stock, stock, trigger guard, stock bolts, breech and barrel?

Whereas the Longbow is a different design from the Tomahawk despite sharing the same breech, barrel, cylinder diameter, trigger, safety catch, method of attaching the stock, trigger guard, stock bolts, and basic stock design, the only obvious external difference being a shorter cylinder?

[Artfull-Bodger]

Vulcan is in the Victor/Excel family and directly related to the Hawk, ignoring stocks and safety catch slides, the only major changes were the bore being bigger 27mm vrs 25mm on the Hawk, these then morphed into the Exocet/Stingray family which then adopted the longbow style breech but were otherwise identical to the Vulcan, Longbow/tomahawk was a new design completely as were the Omega/Patriot .

[Rickenbacker]

[...] Most springers in .177" shoot a bit nicer at lower levels, as opposed to chasing the mythical 11.9.

I'm not at all comfortable with ::waves finger about:: this ^^^^.

[Geezer]

---

Vulcan is in the Victor/Excel family and directly related to the Hawk, ignoring stocks and safety catch slides, the only major changes were the bore being bigger 27mm vrs 25mm on the Hawk, these then morphed into the Exocet/Stingray family which then adopted the longbow style breech but were otherwise identical to the Vulcan, Longbow/tomahawk was a new design completely as were the Omega/Patriot .

Yes, though to be fair to PCPShooter, the new breech came out first on the Stingray/Xocet in 2000, being carried over to the Tomahawk in 2001 (though Chris Thrales' book suggests the Tommie had been in production in 2000, just not announced or in the shops) and the Longbow in 2002.

[Clanchief]

My own Longbow when new was a .177, within a week or so I swapped the barrel for a shrouded Sidewinder .22 barrel, testing this back in the day with standard Webley .177 innards if there was a difference, it easily was hot at about 13.5 to 13.9.

It was not the nicest to shoot, a bit fast in its cycle for me and was stuffed in the cupboard without a tin of pellets being emptied, moving on over a decade I installed a vmach kit with two washers, and it ran hot at the same output, pulling it open again and removing the washers got me to 11.6 and it's a totally nice rifle, and far more accurate, if I were to shoot a .177 it would be lower in power.

And I can see the modified Vulcan reference, I grew up with a Mk2 Vulcan after selling a C scope metal detector and a Rush(fly by night album) to buy it, and shot more with that than any other rifle since, shame I bought an 80 in 1982 to replace it, though I do know where a Vulcan Delux is sitting dusty on a shop shelf.

[Artfull-Bodger]

My own Longbow when new was a .177, within a week or so I swapped the barrel for a shrouded Sidewinder .22 barrel, testing this back in the day with standard Webley .177 innards if there was a difference, it easily was hot at about 13.5 to 13.9.

It was not the nicest to shoot, a bit fast in its cycle for me and was stuffed in the cupboard without a tin of pellets being emptied, moving on over a decade I installed a vmach kit with two washers, and it ran hot at the same output, pulling it open again and removing the washers got me to 11.6 and it's a totally nice rifle, and far more accurate, if I were to shoot a .177 it would be lower in power.

And I can see the modified Vulcan reference, I grew up with a Mk2 Vulcan after selling a C scope metal detector and a Rush(fly by night album) to buy it, and shot more with that than any other rifle since, shame I bought an 80 in 1982 to replace it, though I do know where a Vulcan Delux is sitting dusty on a shop shelf.

A Deluxe eh?, any chance of a sale?

I just bought a mint Mk3 Vulcan, in .22 unfortunately, so there's a .177 conversion on the cards with a LW barrel, I started work on a piston this afternoon, full house lightened job with delrin bushes and a thrust bearing mounted top hat, next job is an alloy spring guide fixed to the end cap and my usual reworking of the trigger geometry, I love old Webleys

[Clanchief]

A Deluxe eh?, any chance of a sale?

I just bought a mint Mk3 Vulcan, in .22 unfortunately, so there's a .177 conversion on the cards with a LW barrel, I started work on a piston this afternoon, full house lightened job with delrin bushes and a thrust bearing mounted top hat, next job is an alloy spring guide fixed to the end cap and my usual reworking of the trigger geometry, I love old Webleys

I'd love it but my new 1987 85k is under the tree, and I have a Sidewinder scope to sneak in tomorrow by the missus that I work with, and it's goin to the office, and my Mot on Tuesday, and with any luck Jane will call to say Gary has finished my stock for my 80, I hate all this waiting,,,, I'm not a patient fella.