Diana 45

[jonnyone]

I have found this discussion most interesting.

I did not know a new FWB Sport had been introduced but, upon googling this, I then discovered that it appears only to have been exported to the USA market. The comments about the new Sport, on this forum - largely in 2014 - are critical of the new Sport and provide a poor impression of it. I had hopes, for a minute, that my desire to purchase a modern springer could be met by the new FWB Sport.

Back to the 45. My own was produced in 1980. In those days, the 45 was a tad under 12ft/lbs but some, I gather, were a little over. I cannot see how the 34 could have been more powerful - as some have suggested here - unless it was an FAC model. Mine seemed to perform best with Silver Jet pellets (in .177), with remarkable accuracy at 60 yds, albeit they did not produce the best power. I gather those pellets have long been discontinued.

I also had an FWB 127 but, if it came to it, I narrowly preferred the 45. I suspect the FWB obtained support from some because of its better looks. That said, the FWBs seem to obtain a considerable premium on the second hand market, perhaps because fewer were made.

I have never fired an HW80, so cannot compare and contrast. However, judging from the comments here, it seems the old 45 (produced, remarkably, nearly 40 years ago) is preferred by some to the new Diana break-barrels and, it seems, is not far away in quality and ability from the best of the modern HWs. I would certainly buy a new version, were one produced, but would it be up to the quality of the old 45? It would also be uneconomic to produce a new version, given the Diana 34 and 280 are in production.

I shall read further comments with interest.

Rgds to all
A

Morning Andrew.
Thanks for your input. Yes the new FWB has seemed to attract lukewarm reception at best by the look of things. I think.it appears to have the same qualities of the old but in a much cost inflated package. I think cost grounds is maybe why it hasn't been released here.

Diana appear to show the 34 has a higher top end than the 45 and this has been borne out from overhaul and service articles from the US. I think I have read there that perhaps power approaching 18 ft llbs is possible with it and I seemed to recall perhaps 15 with the 45- so the latter is no slouch in FAC trim either. If you had a 34 and 45 alongside each other in cocked position you will note the extra stroke that Diana have built into the 34 over the 45. I still personally feel the 45 shoots sweeter though.

Its interesting that you owned a .177 model back in the day when the airgun fraternity was by far and away shooting .22 at that time? I think.back then some perhaps more enlightened airgunners bought .177 for the flatter trajectory and were more than confident of its killing ability whereas many back then argued the extra momentum of the .22 was best for hunting. Some bought .177 for the newly emerging sport of FT- then in its infancy. So its interesting you didn't follow the crowd. Some guns seemed to.lend themselves to the smaller calibre for some reason and I've a tendency to think the 45 does though.I have to say in owning both calibre guns its a competent gun in either. Its interesting you comment that you compared it more than favourably with the 127- itself a quality, and capable gun. As you know that premium on the second hand market is still enjoyed by the 127 to this day. But for those in the market for a presentable 45, they can still be had and for sensible money by and large. And will still perform well if in good order and maintained.

I think for the reasons you and others here have acknowledged there would be little hope of a 45 being re made and marketed amongst today's modern offerings. Possibly we have reached saturation point maybe on variety of makes n models available. But given it's quality of design, careful engineering, high quality of finish, and not least of all the admiration of many who have owned and used the gun and its current availability on the second hand market, you could ask yourself the question "has the 45 really gone away"?
Dave

[andrewM]

An interesting post, Dave.

I seem to recall, at the time (1979-80) , that the .177 calibre was attracting attention for the flatter trajectory, to which you refer. There was, of course, the view that the .22 calibre possessed greater 'stopping power', so thesis and antithesis led to synthesis in the form of the .20 calibre. Probably, this debate still continues to this day and remains, generally, inconclusive. I have never used a .20, so have no views on it.

Yes, on balance I preferred the 45 over the FWB Sport. I found it slightly more accurate but that might merely have been a matter of pellet selection. I don't think people made the same connection then, with pellet variety, as they do today and so, therefore, there was less experimentation. Indeed, from recollection, many did not appreciate there was a difference in size between .22 and the German 5.5. Whilst the old Eley Wasp was an excellent pellet, gunsmiths quite happily recommended it for German rifles, despite the tighter fit.

I dare say this preference between the 45 and the FWB Sport has the makings of a more modern equivalent of that between the BSA Airsporter and Mk3 Webley - a debate still occurring!

The FWB certainly fetches a premium over the 45 but that might be down to fewer of the former having been manufactured, although I do not have any figures. It could be better looks and, from recollection, the slightly lighter weight.

I am thinking of purchasing a 45 in .22 to see how it performs and am keeping half an eye open for one. On the other hand, perhaps I should simply buy a 34 instead.

I am not technically minded, so the debate between leather and synthetic washers, piston size/diameter, transfer port size and length, various internals, etc, is beyond me. I do recall is that both FWB and 45 performed well out of the box. There seems to be a habit these days of tuning new rifles and that, to me, seems akin to tuning new sports cars upon purchase from the garage forecourt - which should not be necessary.

Perhaps, as some have observed, there is very little more that can be done to improve the springer. If so, I would argue that it was the FWB and 45 that made the quantum leap (in the break-barrel format), from which all the others followed. Perhaps there is an equation, somewhere, that identifies the optimisation of efficiencies in terms of all the internals and recoil factors, at various powers and rifle weights. There lies a question for the technicians on this site. Alas, I am not qualified even to contemplate such complexities!

Rgds
A

[Geezer]

FWB made 60,000 or more Sports. They aren't that rare.

They are just very nice. Despite their flaws.

I agree that in terms of factory springer offerings in the 11-15 ft/lbs bracket, the best of the older guns (BSF 55, 60, 70; HW77, 80, 85; FWB Sport; Webley Omega, Tomahawk, Longbow; BSA Superstar, AA TX Mk1/2; Diana 34 series, 45) are as good and in some respects (fit and finish, for one) as anything you can buy now.

[Drew451]

FWB made 60,000 or more Sports. They aren't that rare.

They are just very nice. Despite their flaws.

I agree that in terms of factory springer offerings in the 11-15 ft/lbs bracket, the best of the older guns (BSF 55, 60, 70; HW77, 80, 85; FWB Sport; Webley Omega, Tomahawk, Longbow; BSA Superstar, AA TX Mk1/2; Diana 34 series, 45) are as good and in some respects (fit and finish, for one) as anything you can buy now.

A class selection. It's a pity that Diana, HW and AA are the only ones from that list offering top springers now. You are totally right to include the Superstar. I shot one for the first time in well over 20 years last week and was very impressed.
I missed the top end Webley breakbarrels but may pick one up someday. And I'm almost ashamed to say I've never had a FWB Sport either. They just didn't capture my imagination somehow.

[buttloaves]

Whats the bore and stroke of the 45?

[jonnyone]

Whats the bore and stroke of the 45?

In all the times.I've been inside mine I still don't know lol. But I'm guessing bore is 28mm as this seems common through the larger Diana guns. Stroke- really not too sure on that. I'd be interested to know that one myself as I suspect that whilst it might have been longish compared to similar guns back in the day, I think in modern terms and certainly amongst other current Diana's it is relatively short. Barryg is usually the one good on that information and he's never around where needed
Dave

[Barryg]

In all the times.I've been inside mine I still don't know lol. But I'm guessing bore is 28mm as this seems common through the larger Diana guns. Stroke- really not too sure on that. I'd be interested to know that one myself as I suspect that whilst it might have been longish compared to similar guns back in the day, I think in modern terms and certainly amongst other current Diana's it is relatively short. Barryg is usually the one good on that information and he's never around where needed
Dave

Hi Dave I got your message
I'm not really a big fan of the old Diana's
I have had a 34 and a 45 at the same time and compared both with each other, although my 34 is the old Firebird version and seems the same quality as the 45.
The 34 has about 10 mm longer stroke and the same 28 mm bore as the 45 and the same TP.
Because of the shorter stroke on the 45 it will take a bit longer spring, so don't fit the spring in your 34 without removing coils
IMO the 38 was and perhaps still is the best of It's class

[Geezer]

A class selection. It's a pity that Diana, HW and AA are the only ones from that list offering top springers now. You are totally right to include the Superstar. I shot one for the first time in well over 20 years last week and was very impressed.
I missed the top end Webley breakbarrels but may pick one up someday. And I'm almost ashamed to say I've never had a FWB Sport either. They just didn't capture my imagination somehow.

You should give the Webleys and the FWB a go. If I was forced to own one break barrel, it would be one of those - probably the Longbow. Though I'd miss the BSFs, Supersport (I meant Supersport!), Xocet, and Anschutz 335.

I ought to really like the HW85, but somehow it doesn't appeal in the same way. Bloody good gun, though.

[Drew451]

You should give the Webleys and the FWB a go. If I was forced to own one break barrel, it would be one of those - probably the Longbow. Though I'd miss the BSFs, Supersport (I meant Supersport!), Xocet, and Anschutz 335.

I ought to really like the HW85, but somehow it doesn't appeal in the same way. Bloody good gun, though.

Well the trouble is I'd probably like them and have to accumulate a few.
I did mean Superstar! Don't tell me I'll have to try the Supersport as well now. A slippery slope into BSA collecting..

[Geezer]

Well the trouble is I'd probably like them and have to accumulate a few.
I did mean Superstar! Don't tell me I'll have to try the Supersport as well now. A slippery slope into BSA collecting..

I was trying to stay on b/bs. Though I know I mentioned the TXs. Supersport gets mixed views. Personally I like it.

Under and side levers would include the Superstar (good to great), HW77/97 (great), and any number of Dianas, Airsporter models, sidelevers AAs, and other stuff.

[andrewM]

FWB made 60,000 or more Sports. They aren't that rare.

They are just very nice. Despite their flaws.

I agree that in terms of factory springer offerings in the 11-15 ft/lbs bracket, the best of the older guns (BSF 55, 60, 70; HW77, 80, 85; FWB Sport; Webley Omega, Tomahawk, Longbow; BSA Superstar, AA TX Mk1/2; Diana 34 series, 45) are as good and in some respects (fit and finish, for one) as anything you can buy now.

I did not know so many FWBs were produced. Not many come up for sale, either, so their owners clearly value them.

Very interesting remarks on your choice for break-barrels. I had forgotten about BSF, too, but also interesting to see your mention of three brands from the Webley stable.

Rgds
A

[original45]

Keep meaning to get to the back of the room I keep my bits in where my air guns are kept.just not got their yet.
My happiest shooting memories were with my m 45.
It was sweet as a nut out the box and loved the old wasps .
Took me years to buy another and then I was hooked .
I'd guess at one point I had 20+45 s. All cals ,dedicated scope models.
I sold several last couple of Years and have never had to advertise one.
I got the buzz for the side leavers then too along with other air guns I personally liked not for value or I guess I didn't see it as collecting I just loved them.
Everyone should have a m 45 ,not all were sweet out the box as I found but most certainly were.
Their was a factory recall but few were bought back for a all nylon safety unit instead of the sprung steel blade that failed.
I did manage to buy one that was recalled too out of interest.
I like the earlier 45 s myself.
Very pleasurable rifle I just rarely get to enjoy them these days.
Nice to see they still attract interest

[Drew451]

Very interesting. Never had one out of the box as all of mine were bought used long after the gun was introduced. All have been good with a couple needing just a simple lube to fettle. Two others have been absolutely superb- both .177's. These two have seen the most use over the years, I'd say, and came expertly lubricated.

[landymick]

I think the fact it had a leather seal was why most were good out of the box just like the 35 though some were very twangy.Back in the eighties most if not all springers were tawngy from new, my HW35 was a good one & shot nice from day one; it is still on its original seal & spring with just some added moly to this day.