SFS Diana Mod 34 preview

[tinbum]

Might be due to my phone but it sounded twangy.

I can fix that!

[jonnyone]

I can fix that!

Turn off sound??

[Captain Bongo]

Turn off sound??

No, just put plenty of grease into the speaker.

[bighit]

No, just put plenty of grease into the speaker.

Ha ha. There will be a video on the channel next showing no grease on the microphone of the camera

[Barryg]

Ha ha. There will be a video on the channel next showing no grease on the microphone of the camera

Just watch the video on a large TV and if it still sounds twangy perhaps SFS should send of for a tinbum kit LOL.

[jonnyone]

Its good to see a tuning house take an interest in something other than the usual offerings and going by the results the decision was justified. The 34 is a well established - solid design with all the basics correct but crying out for some wizardry.
Here are the results. Very nicely done.
Dave

[Hardrivejack]

Has anybody had one of these ? Would be interested to know what they are like.

[bighit]

I can fix that!

You could but surely a tuned rifle like this is supposed to be should not twang?

That's if it does twang. Might just be my hearing or my phone

[tinbum]

You could but surely a tuned rifle like this is supposed to be should not twang?

That's if it does twang. Might just be my hearing or my phone

I have one, in .177. Mine doesn't twang.

[bighit]

I have one, in .177. Mine doesn't twang.

Did you toon it?

[robs5230]

I have one, in .177. Mine doesn't twang.

Nether does mine

[robs5230]

I was a little surprised to see SFS tackle the 34. Its a heavy rifle at 7.5 lbs. Little in the way of custom woodwork unless they have cut a deal with CS that will improve the standard plank.
It's a long rifle too. A nip and tuck on the barrel length would be in order and could lose 4" and still be good on power though a silencer would add that back on.
It's supposed to have almost the ideal stroke though so the shot cycle when tuned well should be pretty gentle. Then again my 280 now sorted makes power very easily, is lovely to shoot and is lighter than the 34 so i don't think the 34 would tempt me.
I hope it's good for SWS and Diana and if it is it should bring Diana a little more mainstream.
The T06 is a pretty adjustable trigger though has a long first stage pull which does need reducing unless you get a finger .
extension.
The 34 in my opinion is probably better compared to the HW80, The 280 being more 95 like.
I'd be interested to see the finished product.

[clarky]

I was a little surprised to see SFS tackle the 34. Its a heavy rifle at 7.5 lbs. Little in the way of custom woodwork unless they have cut a deal with CS that will improve the standard plank.
It's a long rifle too. A nip and tuck on the barrel length would be in order and could lose 4" and still be good on power though a silencer would add that back on.
It's supposed to have almost the ideal stroke though so the shot cycle when tuned well should be pretty gentle. Then again my 280 now sorted makes power very easily, is lovely to shoot and is lighter than the 34 so i don't think the 34 would tempt me.
I hope it's good for SWS and Diana and if it is it should bring Diana a little more mainstream.
The T06 is a pretty adjustable trigger though has a long first stage pull which does need reducing unless you get a finger .
extension.
The 34 in my opinion is probably better compared to the HW80, The 280 being more 95 like.
I'd be interested to see the finished product.

My 34 was the older design of the 90s labelled under RWS....it was somehow nicer for its shorter forend stock which left the breech block exposed. The grain of the wood was better but i never had a problem with the weight which was BSA Mercury ish in general handling and in the shoulder....
I did chop my barrel and no affect on accuracy.
Its a super gun and simply needed a better fitting guide rod which today would be of delrin.
A shortened barrel reguided 34 will take some beating and the proof is in those group sizes in the earlier video.....how you going to beat that.
It def beats the 99 anyway due to no galling.....versus the 95 the HW might just clip it for general build but the 80 i always felt a touch heavy...
The FWB sport MK1.....it sits alone ..
Underlevers of any make........well you could see the extra bit of trouble he had in loading these in the video....not my choice for rough shooting!

[Drew451]

I was a little surprised to see SFS tackle the 34. Its a heavy rifle at 7.5 lbs. Little in the way of custom woodwork unless they have cut a deal with CS that will improve the standard plank.
It's a long rifle too. A nip and tuck on the barrel length would be in order and could lose 4" and still be good on power though a silencer would add that back on.
It's supposed to have almost the ideal stroke though so the shot cycle when tuned well should be pretty gentle. Then again my 280 now sorted makes power very easily, is lovely to shoot and is lighter than the 34 so i don't think the 34 would tempt me.
I hope it's good for SWS and Diana and if it is it should bring Diana a little more mainstream.
The T06 is a pretty adjustable trigger though has a long first stage pull which does need reducing unless you get a finger .
extension.
The 34 in my opinion is probably better compared to the HW80, The 280 being more 95 like.
I'd be interested to see the finished product.

I put my 34 Premium on the scales recently and it pulled 7lbs 13oz: a bit over the stated weight. Yet, it feels perfect in the hand and balance is very good. The barrel length seems fine, possibly due to the longer fore-end of the stock. I think the 34 is a better gun than the 280 in .177 but in .22 they are closer (both in standard form). The .22 34 does have a slightly under-sprung, easy going feel- not to the extent of an HW80 but along those lines. The .177 feels different- quicker, sharper in response but not harsh. No twang from mine either. Accuracy is as good as I hoped and better than I expected out of the box. A .177 34 and a .22 280 would make a good pairing and the shooter would gel with both and switch between the two easily.
The SFS 34 appears to perform very, very well in the video. I too hope that CS will offer stocks for the 34 at some point.

[clarky]

I put my 34 Premium on the scales recently and it pulled 7lbs 13oz: a bit over the stated weight. Yet, it feels perfect in the hand and balance is very good. The barrel length seems fine, possibly due to the longer fore-end of the stock. I think the 34 is a better gun than the 280 in .177 but in .22 they are closer (both in standard form). The .22 34 does have a slightly under-sprung, easy going feel- not to the extent of an HW80 but along those lines. The .177 feels different- quicker, sharper in response but not harsh. No twang from mine either. Accuracy is as good as I hoped and better than I expected out of the box. A .177 34 and a .22 280 would make a good pairing and the shooter would gel with both and switch between the two easily.
The SFS 34 appears to perform very, very well in the video. I too hope that CS will offer stocks for the 34 at some point.

I have just seen the Premium version of the 34 ....its stunning...you wont see a better looking sporter ..
I have decided to invest in one ....going .177 and will delrin guide rod it out.
Barrel cropping ....may do ...varminter style but will keep as is until sure.