Did any other manufactures rival the BSA Prewar Standard?

[Shed tuner]

Nope....

[45flint]

I meant for my question to be more narrow. Rifles that copied the Lincoln Jefferies underlever spring cocking with that distinctive pistol grip and no wood forearm. I guess the German company's used a breaking barrel to cock the spring? But the look and feel were similar.

It is a interesting question whether Crosman's original inventor, probably using his BSA Standard, came up with a totally better solution to a pellet air rifle? Having a 1930 Crosman it's a question I got to think about. Certainly in machining quality BSA's are more of a work of machining art. But as a functional field rifle the question becomes a little more interesting? But as I said it's not really the question I meant to ask, but it's one I will ask as I take both rifles out to the backyard for a William McLean honorary shootoff.

[DT Fletcher]

I meant for my question to be more narrow. Rifles that copied the Lincoln Jefferies underlever spring cocking with that distinctive pistol grip and no wood forearm. I guess the German company's used a breaking barrel to cock the spring? But the look and feel were similar.

It is a interesting question whether Crosman's original inventor, probably using his BSA Standard, came up with a totally better solution to a pellet air rifle? Having a 1930 Crosman it's a question I got to think about. Certainly in machining quality BSA's are more of a work of machining art. But as a functional field rifle the question becomes a little more interesting? But as I said it's not really the question I meant to ask, but it's one I will ask as I take both rifles out to the backyard for a William McLean honorary shootoff.

IMHO, a good prewar Crosman 101 bests a prewar BSA in every way possible.

[harry mac]

IMHO, a good prewar Crosman 101 bests a prewar BSA in every way possible.

Oooooohhhhh, you're going straight to hell for that one!

[micky2]

The Japanese also copied the prewar BSA underlever and break barrel rifles. but l have not seen one in the flesh so l don't know what the quality was like. they are in Smiths book if you have a copy.

[DT Fletcher]

Oooooohhhhh, you're going straight to hell for that one!

Understood, the truth hurts.

[smallholder1]

The answer is no........the bsa standard in .22 still takes some beating now

[Geezer]

1. Pumper v springer for hunting. We kind of did that here in the UK from 1975-85, when there was a group of shooters and writers who favoured the pumper. But the market said quality springer.

2. However, that result may have been slanted by the arrival of FT in 1981, where the easier cocking per shot of the springer was a huge advantage.

3. But the best springers (HW, FWB) were made to a higher standard and had much better triggers than the typical Sharp/Sheridan/Crosman/Benji pumper. Which also appeals for sporting use.

4. The later British pumpers (Daystate, Titan, Dragon) were competitive in the hunting field with the best springers, just expensive, less wieldy, and (Dragon) less reliable.

5. So if I compare my 1980s Sheridan to its springer competition, it loses. Beyond the effort and slowness of pumping, it has a poor trigger, worse sights (even with a Williams peep), and is a bugger to scope. It is still a nice gun, though. Ditto my Crosmans (of which the 2200s are clearly built down to a price and do not compare in pride of ownership in any way to a good UK/German springer of the same vintage).

6. But if it had a good trigger and decent scope mounting, my Sheridan would be competitive for a lot of pest control type shooting. Just slower between shots. Not better, just different - principally lighter and handier.

7. And this is surely what led to Beeman and ARH in the 70s and 80s making good business out of selling European springers in the US. Because they were a bit better.

8. Back on topic. I imagine the Japanese BSA copies were great. Were they?

[Telephonepete]

round about 1960 just after i started shooting. when one got the"serious" gun it had to be a bsa airsporter the one with screw back sight and no scope rails, or a webley mark 3. the diana was considered to be very second best as also was the meteor. i went thw mark 3 .22 route all my mates had .22 airsporters except one who had a .177 club. (lovely gun). pete

[45flint]

IMHO, a good prewar Crosman 101 bests a prewar BSA in every way possible.

Wow, that kind of statement should get the juices flowing for a William McLean - Lincoln Jeffries shoot off. But looking at my 1923 BSA I have an adjustable trigger? Seems the "every possible way" may be a little strong?

[DT Fletcher]

Wow, that kind of statement should get the juices flowing for a William McLean - Lincoln Jeffries shoot off. But looking at my 1923 BSA I have an adjustable trigger? Seems the "every possible way" may be a little strong?

Crosman 101 doesn't need no stinkin' adjustable trigger. It just works like an airgun should.

[ccdjg]

Crosman 101 doesn't need no stinkin' adjustable trigger. It just works like an airgun should.

Of course, if you don’t mind pumping away like a Dervish on the Crosman, while the BSA meanwhile is getting off the same power shot with a single smooth stroke (and a self-opening loading port to boot), then I guess you might imagine the Crosman could be the better gun.

[DT Fletcher]

Of course, if you don’t mind pumping away like a Dervish on the Crosman, while the BSA meanwhile is getting off the same power shot with a single smooth stroke (and a self-opening loading port to boot), then I guess you might imagine the Crosman could be the better gun.

There you go again. Everyone understands that the BSA only takes a single stroke, but, it's also a damn heavy spring that jumps when shot. If you're a lazy shooter and don't care about anything else but the number of strokes, then the BSA is ideal. It's just not a true hunting weapon like the Crosman. Period.

[Josie & John]

The BSA from 1904 to 1939 was the industry standard. Whilst other designs existed alongside copies, none IMHO could touch the BSA for simplicity, quality and performance.

I have used Diana and Haenel copies and whilst well made, they did not perform as comfortably or consistently in my hands.

The Webley Service is often compared to the BSA and is probably the nearest, although some say the Webley is harder to shoot accurately. It is also a little less powerful.

John

[45flint]

The BSA from 1904 to 1939 was the industry standard. Whilst other designs existed alongside copies, none IMHO could touch the BSA for simplicity, quality and performance.

I have used Diana and Haenel copies and whilst well made, they did not perform as comfortably or consistently in my hands.

The Webley Service is often compared to the BSA and is probably the nearest, although some say the Webley is harder to shoot accurately. It is also a little less powerful.

John

I had a chance to hold a Webley Service at my last gun show, just a totally different animal. The BSA Standard as I shoot it reminds me of the grace of the classic American Kentucky flintlock rifle.