I can see why the Webley Mark3 vs the Airsporter debate was never resolved

[45flint]

I remember from other posts here that “in the day” lines were drawn between who was a Webley Mark3 fan and who was a BSA Airsporter fan. I now have the tools to relive and feel the pull of each. I have two early rifles a 1956? Webley Mark 3 and a BSA Airsporter Mark 2. Early enough so rot hadn’t started to take a toll on some issues.

Was out in the back yard with the two this morning. First take:

1. They both shoot ruffly 10 FP, so pretty equal.
2. Style point obviously to the Airsporter, still looks good even now
3. Build quality, as many say the Webley is as good as it gets. Machined Blued masterpiece. But the early BSA’s are pretty nice as well, my stock finish probably beats the Webley?
4. Cocking, Webley is a real pain with its short arm, BSA purposely engineered a much easier pull and by a large margin. I really doubt I could have a real long session with the Webley.
5. Balance, BSA balances perfectly, Webley barrel heavy.
6. Comfort, the BSA feels like a balanced modern rifle, not just a Airgun. Like the slim feel of the Webley but your support hand is directly under the long gap in the stock left for the cocking lever.
7. Open sights, I give to the Webley but that might not be the case if I had a Airsporter Mark 1? The folding sight of the Mark 2 just is not as easy to use. Let’s not go to the scoping possibilities.
8. Accuracy I would probably give a edge to the Webley but it’s close. Better sights and a little better trigger.
9. Innovation, BSA ease of cocking and automatic opening of loading tap (pretty cool).

The divergence of atributes makes you have to own both rifles. There really is no winner. But I do come away with a appreciation of BSA’s innovations. But BSA may have let rot take it’s told more quickly as time went on?

[coburn]

Yes both have their own merits, the good thing is now you have both to compare and enjoy.

However try an early 1960's Original Model 50, apart from a power advantage to the Webley and BSA, neither comes close.

[Geezer]

Yes both have their own merits, the good thing is now you have both to compare and enjoy.

However try an early 1960's Original Model 50, apart from a power advantage to the Webley and BSA, neither comes close.

I think flint has one of those too. With a diopter.

I have 2 pre-57 “Series 4” MkIIIs (one in each calibre), a Mk1 Airsporter (refinished and repaired, an inexpensive shooter rather than a collector’s piece) and a 1970s Diana 50. They all have their merits and demerits. I could not choose between them easily.

Well, the 70s Diana is not as appealing as the late 40s and mid-50s guns. But a 50s Diana would be.

On flint’s analysis, I suspect point 5 (Webley is barrel heavy) correlates with point 9 (accuracy).

Am I right in thinking that the BSA was cheaper than the Webley at the time?

[Kevin2306]

I’ve still got the mk3 that I had when I was 14 (55 now!), love it then and still do.
Mate had an Airsporter and another had an origional 50.
All were great back in the day.
Best plan here is to do what I am doing and look for a mint example of each and enjoy them equally.

Kev

[Shed tuner]

On flint’s analysis, I suspect point 5 (Webley is barrel heavy) correlates with point 9 (accuracy).

Sticking that underlever beneath the barrel will do that...
Pro sport vs TX200 anyone ?

[Geezer]

Sticking that underlever beneath the barrel will do that...
Pro sport vs TX200 anyone ?

Let’s not go there?

But, in the words of Scotty from Star Trek - “ye cannae change the laws of physics”.

[Abasmajor]

I found the answer was to own both and appreciate their individual attributes rather than directly comparing them. For me, the rear sight on the Mk1 Airsporter is better than the Mk2, but a nice peep sight fitted to either model would no doubt assist my ageing eyes.

If I was forced to choose between the two, I would go for the Airsporter partly for its more elegant appearance, but perhaps more importantly because it was an original British design rather than a copy of the pre-war German Diana 45.

Brian

[Hsing-ee]

Sticking that underlever beneath the barrel will do that...
Pro sport vs TX200 anyone ?

AA could have solved that by putting a solid bull barrel on the ProSport instead of pandering to the hunters (who use PCPs and magic twigs anyway) who wanted a silencer and not so much weight...

[45flint]

I think flint has one of those too. With a diopter.

I have 2 pre-57 “Series 4” MkIIIs (one in each calibre), a Mk1 Airsporter (refinished and repaired, an inexpensive shooter rather than a collector’s piece) and a 1970s Diana 50. They all have their merits and demerits. I could not choose between them easily.

Well, the 70s Diana is not as appealing as the late 40s and mid-50s guns. But a 50s Diana would be.

On flint’s analysis, I suspect point 5 (Webley is barrel heavy) correlates with point 9 (accuracy).

Am I right in thinking that the BSA was cheaper than the Webley at the time?

Yes I could bring out the the Diana 50 with the Diopter, lol That’s for another day!

Curious what the price comparison was between these two guns in 1956?

[Geezer]

Yes I could bring out the the Diana 50 with the Diopter, lol That’s for another day!

Curious what the price comparison was between these two guns in 1956?

According to Tom Gaylord it was reckoned (by WHB Smith) in 1957 that an Airsporter, if imported, would sell in the US for $55 - which is just under $500 now, corrected for inflation. Presumably including the costs of transport, import duties, etc. A little more than a Sheridan.

The MkIII sold on introduction in the UK for a bit over £14, but temporarily went to over £16 due to increases in sales tax. The former, inflation corrected, runs in the high £400s. So about $600 as a ballpark figure? Without US transport and import duties.

By contrast, by 1985, our forum sponsor JSR was asking £98.50 for a Mk6 Airsporter S, £84.10 for a standard Airsporter, £98 for the short-lived Diana 50TO1, and their most expensive Webley was the newly-introduced Omega at £99, the next the walnut Vulcan at £85.

And the HW77 at £89.90, and the HW80 at £84. Which goes a long way to explaining the decline of the U.K. air gun manufacturing business.

[Airsporterman]

Does there really have to be a winner? - can they not both be winners in their own way?

To me, older rifles just have something very special about them - it's not really 'quantifiable' - it's just there, the smell, the 'feel' of them - everything. Indeed if that has to be explained to someone, then they would probably not understand it!
A couple of my Airsporters are actually older than me, I also have one produced in the same year as me - and all in better condition too!

I'm going to shut up now!

ASM

[45flint]

Does there really have to be a winner? - can they not both be winners in their own way?

To me, older rifles just have something very special about them - it's not really 'quantifiable' - it's just there, the smell, the 'feel' of them - everything. Indeed if that has to be explained to someone, then they would probably not understand it!
A couple of my Airsporters are actually older than me, I also have one produced in the same year as me - and all in better condition too!

I'm going to shut up now!

ASM

Correct but I was going back in time to the days when these were the two available and you had to choose. Luckily I in retirement can afford both. It’s just a excercise and by doing it you find out more about each gun?