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?