Crosman 105 pistol early version

[45flint]

Couldn't resist this Crosman 105 .177. (1947-53) This was the first pistol Crosman made and this was the first version. Dovetailed rear sight, changed to a different sight in second version. There is no mark on this pistol except the Crosman logo on the grips. I liked that the entire upper body is brass, that would change. Also old type hammer valve, that would change as well. The pumping handle wouldn't last either some couldn't fit their fingers in it, but I love the double cut out. It's not a powerhouse, but cool piece for a Crosman collection.

http://s168.photobucket.com/user/ski.../Crosman%20105

[Abasmajor]

Couldn't resist this Crosman 105 .177. (1947-53) This was the first pistol Crosman made and this was the first version. Dovetailed rear sight, changed to a different sight in second version. There is no mark on this pistol except the Crosman logo on the grips. I liked that the entire upper body is brass, that would change. Also old type hammer valve, that would change as well. The pumping handle wouldn't last either, but love the double cut out. It's not a powerhouse, but cool piece for a Crosman collection.

http://s168.photobucket.com/user/ski.../Crosman%20105

Hi,

Thanks for posting the pictures of what I consider to be the most elegant pump-up pistol ever made. I also have an early version with the two open loops as present on your example. The cocking arrangement may seem delicate but, with a little care and restriction to no more than six strokes I wouldn't anticipate too many problems. Iv'e found six strokes to be perfectly adequate at 10 metres with the lack of recoil and long sight radius making this a very accurate pistol capable of quite easily reproducing 1" groups at that range.

If I were judging on appearance alone, I would still go for the Crosman 105 / 106, but the self-cocking mechanism on the Crosman 130 is a really nice touch.

Regards

Brian

[45flint]

I really don't like the plain stamped metal pumping arm of the 130. To me it looks unfinished and cheap. I love all the brass of the 105, even the cocking arm, plenty strong if used as intended. I agree with the 6 pumps on the 105 and not a whole lot of effort, be interesting to chrony it this week. It just to me is a good mate for the 102, kind of the same mold. It's really the only Crosman pistol I was interested in, and not expensive to collect.

[Abasmajor]

I really don't like the plain stamped metal pumping arm of the 130. To me it looks unfinished and cheap. I love all the brass of the 105, even the cocking arm, plenty strong if used as intended. I agree with the 6 pumps on the 105 and not a whole lot of effort, be interesting to chrony it this week. It just to me is a good mate for the 102, kind of the same mold. It's really the only Crosman pistol I was interested in, and not expensive to collect.

Hi,

I know where you're coming from with the 130 pumping arm although I still prefer it to the variant with the wooden handle.

My Crosman 130 is from the Canadian factory and sports a very nice pair of white grips similar to those found on the later Co2 powered Crosman 150.

Brian

[--ped--]

I've the same Canadian built 130 and whilst the white grips are nice I prefer the wrap round ones I've fitted a few 113 o rings onto the press steel handle to stop it banging into the tube
link won't open for a pic of yours but I have a 112 which is the same gun but bulkfill co2 instead of pump and .22 rather than .177

[DT Fletcher]

I completely agree that the 105/106 "Bullseye" pistol is a great design. It is almost a blueprint copy of the Benjamin pistol introduced in the mid '30s. Internally, it uses the exact same valves and seals found in the 111-120 models, so, parts are easy to get. The valves screw a part, so all that is really needed are the seals for maintenance.

Regarding the cocking handle, just don't put your fingers inside the loop when closing, instead use your palm on the outside of the loop and there is little chance of the lever breaking.

There is a very specific reason that this model was replaced by the model 130: valve lock. Valve lock is when the gun is over pumped to the point that the valve will not open when the hammer hits it. The only solution is to disassemble the gun and manually force open the exhaust valve. At Crosman, when a gun is "repaired" without anything being wrong with it that is assigned as a design failure. So, the designers (Rudy Merz at the time) were under management pressure to fix the "faulty" design.