Diana sidelevers vs underlevers what do Diana fans prefer these days and why

[Barryg]

In the nineties I was a big fan of the Diana 52, then in 2006 Diana brought out a underlever that was lightweight very accurate and could more than match the performance of the 52.
After careful consideration I now prefer the underlever, there are pros and cons and wonder what other Diana fans here think, I notice that in the USA where the 52 has been a big favorite the underlever is slowly gaining ground.

[Drew451]

Model 75 is the best rifle they ever made but discounting that, the old underlever model 50 is my favourite.

Out of the guns/ era you mention I have had the 46. I chose it over the 52 in the shop as it looked and handled better. Unfortunately, it turned out to be a lemon and went back.

If i had the choice again I'd still go for the underlever for the same reasons. More likely, I'd go for one of their break barrels. The 52 is a very substantial unit and seems to lack the sleek looks and handiness that Diana does well in other formats.

[Barryg]

Model 75 is the best rifle they ever made but discounting that, the old underlever model 50 is my favourite.

Out of the guns/ era you mention I have had the 46. I chose it over the 52 in the shop as it looked and handled better. Unfortunately, it turned out to be a lemon and went back.

If i had the choice again I'd still go for the underlever for the same reasons. More likely, I'd go for one of their break barrels. The 52 is a very substantial unit and seems to lack the sleek looks and handiness that Diana does well in other formats.

Just one of the reasons that I prefer underlever is that the sidelever has such a long cocking stroke, you can see in this pic

http://imgur.com/rbsUg1a

[Drew451]

Certainly a bit more of a handful than a Webley Tracker. I think sitting FT style or prone with a bipod would be ok.

[cooper_dan]

Just one of the reasons that I prefer underlever is that the sidelever has such a long cocking stroke, you can see in this pic

http://imgur.com/rbsUg1a

I guess that makes it easier to cock in foreign markets where they are doing well over 12 ft-lb

I've got a couple of Original 50's and an old 52 but I think I'm going to sell them to get a 430/460 or maybe 470TH. I haven't tried anything new from Diana and I'm getting an itch

[buttloaves]

Just one of the reasons that I prefer underlever is that the sidelever has such a long cocking stroke, you can see in this pic

http://imgur.com/rbsUg1a

Wonder if its a 52 spring in the squat magic

[jonnyone]

In the nineties I was a big fan of the Diana 52, then in 2006 Diana brought out a underlever that was lightweight very accurate and could more than match the performance of the 52.
After careful consideration I now prefer the underlever, there are pros and cons and wonder what other Diana fans here think, I notice that in the USA where the 52 has been a big favorite the underlever is slowly gaining ground.

I bought a 52 in '89 after I had just been made redundant. Back in the days I think the whole world felt that nothing could touch the HW80. The 52 proved that wrong. I never really gave the 52 fair play though with only a few outings.
I've since picked up a few other Dianas and I guess that the underlever mechanism is a tad more convenient.
The 52 is a big ole lump of shooting iron and I wonder if a scaled down version would ever catch on in the European market?
There must still be a market for the sidelevers or the 56th wouldn't be around??
Dave :-)

[StellaArtois Sr]

I was going to buy the Diana 470TH which is an underlever. However when I went to the shop I saw a Diana 56TH which is a side lever. I was a bit concerned at first how a sidelever would be when cocking it, but the way I hold it to be honest is hardly any difference from an underlever. Yes it's a longer stroke to cock it but that doesn't bother me at all. The thing is the Diana 56TH is such a joy to shoot, without the recoil, and so incredibly accurate the side lever has never bothered me in the slightest. So much so I have since bought an immaculate Diana 52 Firebird (which is also a side lever) to keep the other side lever company. I do target shooting rested at a range of 60 yards so even though they are both heavy, thats doesn't bother me either.
I do like my under levers and I certainly like my side levers and also my break barrels, I think it's nice to have a change of rifle types but I don't particularly have a preference. As long as it's nice to shoot I love them all.

[derekj]

My 1987 .177 model 52 was supersonic out of the box. I couldn't hit sod all with it such was the spring torque and recoil, but it bloody sounded nice and raised a few eyebrows at Stone lodge shooting range I later had a go of a Ken Turner 12ftlb converted model 52 and witnessed the great man himself smacking 10mm spinners right up 50 metres with this rifle. His 28ftlb FAC .25 super magnum model 52 was said to be an awesome hunting rifle.

[Drew451]

My 1987 .177 model 52 was supersonic out of the box. I couldn't hit sod all with it such was the spring torque and recoil, but it bloody sounded nice and raised a few eyebrows at Stone lodge shooting range I later had a go of a Ken Turner 12ftlb converted model 52 and witnessed the great man himself smacking 10mm spinners right up 50 metres with this rifle. His 28ftlb FAC .25 super magnum model 52 was said to be an awesome hunting rifle.

There was a KT52 at BAR a wee while ago. It was snapped up almost instantly.

[derekj]

There was a KT52 at BAR a wee while ago. It was snapped up almost instantly.

It's all OK as long as it hasn't been tinkered with though. Ken's rifles carry such kudos with those who have shot them. My own .177 KT TX200SR is consistent within 4-7 fps over 20 shots over the chonograph using AA Field 4.52.