Crossman premier boxed versus Accupell?

[CapitalBee]

I just wanted some advice on wether it's worth buying the boxed Crossman's over Accupell in .177? I've been doing some pellet testing on a Diana and have had best grouping with the 7.9gn Accupell. However, I'm getting the odd flyer amongst these, so was wondering if it's worth trying the boxed Prem's? Any thoughts welcome.

[Rapidnick]

I wouldn't bother.
Those obsessed by these things will probably say yes but you need to know things like die number and be prepared for quite a few damaged pellets. The main 'cult purchase' of Premiers were in .20 when they were the best pellet available especially for FAC .20. That is ignoring the high price and damaged pellets as a result of the idiotic packaging. Since those days JSB have intorduced excellent .20 pellets and the only shooters I know sticking to the boxed Premiers are those who bought loads of them way back when.
As .177 is easier to obtain from many reputable makers who use proper packaging I'd try the boxed Premiers only as a last resort.

[SuffolkRifle]

I use Boxed premiers for a couple of guns - gave up on so-called 'Accupel' when they were no longer produced by Crosman.
Both the guns will group sub 15mm at 30 yards with the boxed premiers, but will quite happily open the group up to around 25mm with any other pellets

[Geezer]

25 or so years ago when they came out, boxed Premiers were about the best pellets you could buy. They all came from one die (IIRC die B, or was it E, was particularly sought after in the heavy .177"). Accupells were tins containing pellets from all (5?) dies, but still good by 1990s standards.

I think the general view is that, since then, not only have better pellets come along (JSB etc) but that Premiers, even in the boxes, aren't quite as good as they once were.

Nick - I do use boxed Prems in .20", but, yes, I'm one of those guys who bought lots on discount a few years ago. I think they are now discontinued.

[tmstech]

I used boxed premiers 20 years ago and never had any damaged pellets, they are harder "antimony" mix (alloy) and are very difficult to damage by design. This also makes then slower down the barrel too, but the right die # and they were super accurate and consistent. What they are like now, I have no idea? Always better than accupell which were far softer. Best in springers/rammers too.

[Rapidnick]

I used boxed premiers 20 years ago and never had any damaged pellets, they are harder "antimony" mix (alloy) and are very difficult to damage by design. This also makes then slower down the barrel too, but the right die # and they were super accurate and consistent. What they are like now, I have no idea? Always better than accupell which were far softer. Best in springers/rammers too.

This is my experience too. The early batches were much much better than those made later on which also became horrendously expensive as their popularity rose. Whilst the higher percentage of antimony certainly makes pellets harder the skirts are relatively thin so even in old boxes I found that quite a few were damaged. In fairness I am talking about the boxed .20 Premiers as I haven't much experience of the .177 which I understand were very good 'back in the day'.

[TonyL]

I just wanted some advice on wether it's worth buying the boxed Crossman's over Accupell in .177? I've been doing some pellet testing on a Diana and have had best grouping with the 7.9gn Accupell. However, I'm getting the odd flyer amongst these, so was wondering if it's worth trying the boxed Prem's? Any thoughts welcome.

I suppose it all depends on how they suit your particular barrel, Mark, as always.

I'm certainly no "Premier expert" and it may be wise to take into account the caveats above.

However, one thing that I DO know is that my V-Mach kitted '95 absolutely loved the boxes Premiers. More accurate in that particular rifle than Exacts, AAFs and Superdomes.

But then it shot even tighter groups still with FTTs.