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