Airmasters Mastersport FTS/Vmach

[murkywaters]

So I posted up a few weeks ago about a rifle I bought through an auction (original post), I could see it was a HW77K with a serial number dating it to 1986, with the chrome action, moderator and walnut stock I could tell it was something special, but I wasn't sure on what it consisted of being the auction was online so I couldn't try it out - sight unseen just online pictures.

With the action being chromed this threw me out and still does, I would love to more about this specific gun, why, when and where the chrome was applied, was it an Airmasters one off or a previous owner decided to have it done, either way it fits right into the mid 1980's where Airmasters were producing these beautiful guns.

Once I got the gun home you could see it had been sat around for a few years, the chrome had tarnished, the stock was flat and dull but in really good condition with no dings dents or chips, so I stripped it all down to restore. This is when I knew the internals were not FTS unfortunately, it had a Vmach kit installed and badly, the piston was really tight in the comp tube and the chrono confirmed this with 8ftlb, so I sized the piston seal, cleaned, fettled, polished and used correct lube in small amounts, its now at a consistent 11.2ftlb, the action has come up really nice with a light polish of Autosol.

The stock, I love this stock, it has some stunning figure to it combined with being an iconic shape from the era, it just needed the right treatment, after preparation I have been adding thin light coats of Trade Secrets Rapid oil and drying for a few days, this is where the figure has really started to pop, after drying I couldn't wait to rebuild it.

Now it is all back together with a Tasco scope to match the rifles age and it really is a stunner, at the moment it could do with a tin or two pellets through it just to bed in the internals properly so I'll enjoy doing that.

Below is some images I took this morning, thanks for reading

[Mach 1.5]

STUNNING...but I would pop a Tasco 2-7 x 32 AG on her. Mach 1.5

[HW777]

Airmasters stock, chromed 77 action and a V Mach kit, what a result.

The must important part though, is it a .177 ? lol

[Muskett]

So very much an 80's rifle. A very nice example indeed.
The Chrome I like as its shows where people were trying to bling and go somewhere else other than bluing. Now we have carbon, and other finishes.
A fine example to add to any collection, nice one.

[vintage]

Very beautiful indeed

[murkywaters]

STUNNING...but I would pop a Tasco 2-7 x 32 AG on her. Mach 1.5

Thanks, yeh I'll keep an eye out for one or a 3-9 x 40 of that era.

Airmasters stock, chromed 77 action and a V Mach kit, what a result.

The must important part though, is it a .177 ? lol

Yeh it is .177, obviously the stock is Airmasters but the action has an Airmasters moderator/underlever clip, its a strange one of whats happened to the internals..

[Garvin]

Thanks, yeh I'll keep an eye out for one or a 3-9 x 40 of that era.



Yeh it is .177, obviously the stock is Airmasters but the action has an Airmasters moderator/underlever clip, its a strange one of whats happened to the internals..

Wonderful pics! Pure eye candy.

[webb22]

A nice bit of patient tlc there mate - well done you - she’s a stunner 👍

[RustyBuzz]

Nice FTS stock.

We never produced a chrome 77 so that must have been done elsewhere. Silencer looks like one of ours.

Looking at the stock, it’s a good grade of walnut but missing the brass inserts in the fore-end stock screws which is a bit unusual, so it leads me to believe that this is a very early basic model.

If, as I anticipate, the piston and cylinder are standard it would have been a ‘stage 1’ tune which was very basic. I would imagine that the V-Mach kit was added when the rifle needed servicing at some point.

I would suggest that the scope is 5 years to early and the mount not really appropriate. As Mach suggests, one of the Tasco AG range would be ideal, or of course a nice Zeiss compact in an appropriate Sportsmatch mount. Then you are bang-on period.

Hope this helps,

Richard

[murkywaters]

Hi Richard,

I was hoping to hear from you on this gun so thanks for your reply.

Yes the grade of walnut does look very nice and it is the best stock I own by far, the fore-end screws do have brass inserts but just show a small lip of brass around the outside which cannot be seen that well in the pictures.

Would I be right is saying this was an early stock as it has the shallow fore-end compared to later versions with a thicker fore-grip?

Thats good to know the silencer looks like one of yours, I always felt it was complete as in action/stock but the internals not being there threw me out, so knowing it could have been basic internals as an original gun is pleasing.

The scope is something I have added and the nearest thing to the 80's I have! Over time I'll try and track down the correct scope and mount to complete this rifle.

I have to say you produced beautiful guns, this stock shoulders so well and fingers and thumbs just seem to fall into place on the grip, add to that the visual look of the stock/silencer and its a stunning rifle to own.

Thanks again for your reply I really appreciate it.
Martyn

Nice FTS stock.

We never produced a chrome 77 so that must have been done elsewhere. Silencer looks like one of ours.

Looking at the stock, it’s a good grade of walnut but missing the brass inserts in the fore-end stock screws which is a bit unusual, so it leads me to believe that this is a very early basic model.

If, as I anticipate, the piston and cylinder are standard it would have been a ‘stage 1’ tune which was very basic. I would imagine that the V-Mach kit was added when the rifle needed servicing at some point.

I would suggest that the scope is 5 years to early and the mount not really appropriate. As Mach suggests, one of the Tasco AG range would be ideal, or of course a nice Zeiss compact in an appropriate Sportsmatch mount. Then you are bang-on period.

Hope this helps,

Richard

[RustyBuzz]

Hi Richard,

I was hoping to hear from you on this gun so thanks for your reply.

Yes the grade of walnut does look very nice and it is the best stock I own by far, the fore-end screws do have brass inserts but just show a small lip of brass around the outside which cannot be seen that well in the pictures.

Would I be right is saying this was an early stock as it has the shallow fore-end compared to later versions with a thicker fore-grip?

Thats good to know the silencer looks like one of yours, I always felt it was complete as in action/stock but the internals not being there threw me out, so knowing it could have been basic internals as an original gun is pleasing.

The scope is something I have added and the nearest thing to the 80's I have! Over time I'll try and track down the correct scope and mount to complete this rifle.

I have to say you produced beautiful guns, this stock shoulders so well and fingers and thumbs just seem to fall into place on the grip, add to that the visual look of the stock/silencer and its a stunning rifle to own.

Thanks again for your reply I really appreciate it.
Martyn

Yep, it's a mark 1, the mark 2 is deeper, same depth as the trigger guard. This was introduced when the "FT Cuddle' hold became popular.

Personally, I prefer the mark 1.

[deejayuu]

Best read today. Thanks.

[AC all day]

Stunning piece of wood..... lovely gun in total...I now have an itch that will take some scratching!! Damn.

[Muskett]

Basic tunes were just that, a darn good polish and burr removal. So adding a later tune kit isn't surprising. In fact more advanced tuning was in its infancy and the "tuners" were finding their way.. Customers chose what they wanted from the list of options. Venom was doing the same. Back shed tuners doing the same.
Not every result was that great or long lasting. All this was in its infancy so anything went, and most was just a good polish up plus some add on stuff like stocks and moderators/barrel weights.

Even when they bought in stocks, or made their own up, batches were small..3, 6 or ten.. rarely 10 or 20.

I was not involved so happy to be proved wrong but suspect the numbers where very small indeed. For most buyers its was hard enough to save for a factory gun and the custom shops just a dream. A Theoben was high ticket price enough and my aspiration..

With such rifles most shooters would expect them to shoot well and accurately. To keep them that way then dropping a tune kit in isn't that terrible if the original was but a good polish up. Looking that good means it need to shoot good too.

[RustyBuzz]

Basic tunes were just that, a darn good polish and burr removal. So adding a later tune kit isn't surprising. In fact more advanced tuning was in its infancy and the "tuners" were finding their way.. Customers chose what they wanted from the list of options. Venom was doing the same. Back shed tuners doing the same.
Not every result was that great or long lasting. All this was in its infancy so anything went, and most was just a good polish up plus some add on stuff like stocks and moderators/barrel weights.

Even when they bought in stocks, or made their own up, batches were small..3, 6 or ten.. rarely 10 or 20.

I was not involved so happy to be proved wrong but suspect the numbers where very small indeed. For most buyers its was hard enough to save for a factory gun and the custom shops just a dream. A Theoben was high ticket price enough and my aspiration..

With such rifles most shooters would expect them to shoot well and accurately. To keep them that way then dropping a tune kit in isn't that terrible if the original was but a good polish up. Looking that good means it need to shoot good too.

That’s not actually true Musket.

At the point we introduced the FTS - late '85, pretty much everything people are talking about now, us and Venom, were doing by then. We may not have understood the science back then, as well as it is understood today, but we could recognise the results.

As to numbers, there were probably around 75-100 FTS and FT variations produced.