if you don't want the weight of the TX, you defo don't want a stupidly front heavy 98 with that drainpipe on the front...
Walnut stocked TX200 HC is suprisingly light and well balanced..
if you don't want the weight of the TX, you defo don't want a stupidly front heavy 98 with that drainpipe on the front...
Walnut stocked TX200 HC is suprisingly light and well balanced..
Always looking for any cheap, interesting, knackered "project" guns. Thanks, JB.
Now you mention it, I had a few shots a year or so ago with someones TX200hc & I don't remember it being ridiculously heavy, extremely accurate too.
Two very different rifles, Neil. If you like the 99s, go for another...
I love the 99s, my problem is I always think I might like something else even more!
My 30s & 99s are my favorite rifles, that's why I'm wondering if a 57 might be a good buy? It's basically an underlever version of the 99 right?
the 95 bit bigger than the 99 ,comes with a mod very nice checking excellent gun about 320 ish price
99 is brilliant and light, but for longer range accuracy I would go with the 98. 99 has a tendency to eat it's own piston too
The 98 is way heavier than the 99.
If you're happy with the 99 get another. If you're happy with the 99, then no its not worth the extra money at all.
An inbetweener would be the HW95. Same action as the 98 so essentially the same rifle without the window dressing and weight penalty.
The 57's a handy little rifle. Similar cocking linkage to the 99 with similar issues relating to that.
The marmite issue is down to the pop up breech. Earlier ones with plastic breech blocks had issues. Later ones are metal. Its just down to whether you find the pop up breech ok. Personally I liked it.
Thin barrel and can be noisy when running on song as they have a fair crack especially in .177. Ugly front sight unit is probably its worst feature. If they made the forend like a 97 I have one again.
B.A.S.C. member