Airsporter RB2 tune

[Shed tuner]

Yes Tone the Supersport is identical inside to the Superstar, it's just the cocking linkage is all different.

Pete

hang on.. the supersport is a break barrel, with a short TP
the superstar is an RB2 underlever with a 30mm long TP

...and the Airsporter RB2 is indeed essentially the same internally as a superstar

[look no hands]

hang on.. the supersport is a break barrel, with a short TP
the superstar is an RB2 underlever with a 30mm long TP

...and the Airsporter RB2 is indeed essentially the same internally as a superstar

Sorry Jon, I should have pointed out the internals are the same from the piston head backwards, so the piston is the same and so is the spring and guides and rear end cross pin and end plug, the trigger set up is the same as on my Supersport Custom but is slightly different than a normal Supersport.

Yes you are correct about the loading area but I think people may have grasped that, as one is an underlever fixed barrel and the other a break barrel

Pete

[Shed tuner]

Yes you are correct about the loading area but I think people may have grasped that, as one is an underlever fixed barrel and the other a break barrel

Pete

ahh.. some powerplant. Thing is, the underlever isn't the problem, it's that stupidly long tp - and the way the pellet pretty much flops into the bore.. a tighter breach would help I'm sure..

Maximus point about piston weight is also a good call - that rod will weigh around 100g, so a pretty large increase..

[Geezer]

it's better, as the lever can be returned before loading.. so much more comfy to use. Shot cycle and trigger are not quite there though

Just kidding.

So, in factory trim, does the Mk7 tap-loader actually have a nicer firing cycle than the RB2?

And thanks for explaining why I don’t like the way the Superstar shoots.

[look no hands]

Just kidding.

So, in factory trim, does the Mk7 tap-loader actually have a nicer firing cycle than the RB2?

And thanks for explaining why I don’t like the way the Superstar shoots.

Well my Carbine S shoots far better than my RB2 did, admittedly my S has a tuning kit fitted but so did the RB2.

Pete

[Big Seth]

I remember my first shots with a .177 Superstar, I asked "who tuned it?". It was standard.
I remember my first shots with an . 22 RB2 Stutzen and asked "where are my teeth?" It was standard.
Go figure..

[Shed tuner]

So, in factory trim, does the Mk7 tap-loader actually have a nicer firing cycle than the RB2?

And thanks for explaining why I don’t like the way the Superstar shoots.

yup, the tap loaders as standard all seem to shoot better than the rb2s.

and the RB2 airsporter has the additional problem compared with the RB2 superstar, of a heavier piston - which is the last thing you want when you have a large TP / lots of lost volume, as it just makes it more slammy - and of course more recoil.

hence I lightened the piston, reduced the TP, and tightened up the seal

The longer barrel on my std airsporter RB2 is much less slammy than the stutzen - presumably down to the longer barrel maintaining back pressure better, reducing piston slam. I reckon if I tune that one the same way, it could be quite nice

[Shed tuner]

I remember my first shots with a .177 Superstar, I asked "who tuned it?". It was standard.
I remember my first shots with an . 22 RB2 Stutzen and asked "where are my teeth?" It was standard.
Go figure..

yup.. but it makes sense...

the .177 superstar is less slammy, due to more back pressure, and lighter piston
the .22 airsporter is the opposite; heavier piston (with rod) and less back pressure from a .22

[Hsing-ee]

hOW HOW HOW could BSA with such a long history of making springers make something that didnt work? after all these years why the heavy piston and the mile long transfer port? forty years of making airsporters and they cannot make a decent fist of a direct loading rifle even with the competitors guns to look at. they could have invented the ProSport there and then by making the rifle a standard sliding breech like the 77 etc but they done didnt, they went back to before the first world war and the roller breech ...

Apart from the Meteor, which is a piece of cost-saving genius, the Mercury-S and the SuperStar, all the postwar BSAs are a disappointment.

The PCPs are on the whole jolly good. The barrels on all are splendid.

They had all that time and experience and they made the RB2. Was it made for the US market and did it work well at 18 fpe one wonders?

Mysteries...

[TonyL]

The mind boggles, Alistair.

Suppose the RB is nice and safe, though! But then so were the taps. And at least you do get direct to breech loading with the RB rather than that poor little pellet having to leap from the tap unto the breech.

[look no hands]

hOW HOW HOW could BSA with such a long history of making springers make something that didnt work? after all these years why the heavy piston and the mile long transfer port? forty years of making airsporters and they cannot make a decent fist of a direct loading rifle even with the competitors guns to look at. they could have invented the ProSport there and then by making the rifle a standard sliding breech like the 77 etc but they done didnt, they went back to before the first world war and the roller breech ...

Apart from the Meteor, which is a piece of cost-saving genius, the Mercury-S and the SuperStar, all the postwar BSAs are a disappointment.

The PCPs are on the whole jolly good. The barrels on all are splendid.

They had all that time and experience and they made the RB2. Was it made for the US market and did it work well at 18 fpe one wonders?

Mysteries...

The mind boggles, Alistair.

Suppose the RB is nice and safe, though! But then so were the taps. And at least you do get direct to breech loading with the RB rather than that poor little pellet having to leap from the tap unto the breech.

Like Tone says, it is probably a cost exercise (let's not forget about Gamo here) and also the safety feature, the long transfer port can't be helped because that's part of the RB design, you can't do much about it unfortunately, they probably thought because the RB design works pretty well on the Superstar, it would word pretty well on the Airsporter, which in theory it should have done but for some reason something didn't go right on the transition over to it's new platform (I think we've narrowed it down to the weight of the piston) which just goes to show how much thought BSA put into it, who knows what would have happened if they had brought out a sliding breech version, knowing them they would have buggered that up as well.

Pete

[Hsing-ee]

Well, the safety issue is a moot point as no BSA has an anti-bear trap fitted. Break-barrels can be very dangerous in this respect. In addition, it is not beyond BSA's design department's ability to come up with one, they managed a self-opening tap and the magnificently sturdy breech-latch on their break-barrels.

The alternative history of BSA shows that after the release of the Falke 80, a refined copy of the BSA Airsporter, BSA redeveloped the trigger mechanism on the Airsporter to include the sensitivity and precision of the Falke unit. They keep the centrally located barrel position.
In the 1970s they convert to a parachute seal copied from the Feinwerkbau Sport.

Then in the early 1980s on the release of the HW77, BSA redesigns the Airsporter to a sliding breech mechanism, using a long stroke narrow piston design that can fit inside the 28mm cylinder. A mechanism locking the compression chamber is added for safety, thus outdoing the 77.

The BSA Airsporter SB becomes the most successful springer in early FT and takes the market share now occupied by Air Arms.

Instead they fiddleshitted around for decades, adding stupid gimmicks like MaxiGrip rails (in 13.9mm what the hell was that about?) reinvented the roller breech which had been cast aside a hundred years ago, carried on making taploaders when they were dead in a ditch as soon as the 77 came out, rested on their laurels making Collectors Editions for the non-shooting brigade (ooh it aint never been fired, its ONE in a THOUSAND, tis my Virgin Century!) spent millions on magazine loading when no one wanted that in a springer, tried to sell an awful rehash of the Webley pistol with all its advantages removed, and so on and so on ...


The successful rifles I think they made are as above, the BSA Meteor, the BSA SuperStar, the BSA Buccaneer and the BSA Mercury-S. Even these could have benefitted from further development. BSA is a tragedy.

[TonyL]

With such fine tradition and rich vein of history, that really is a shame, Al.

And your "alternative history" may have meant BSA staying in British hands also.

At least the name survives and they're still producing, though. And the Piled Arms logo continues.

Much sadder state of affairs at Webley, especially when you consider some of the lovely break barrels they produced in the later years....

[Shed tuner]

Instead they fiddleshitted around for decades, adding stupid gimmicks like MaxiGrip rails (in 13.9mm what the hell was that about?) reinvented the roller breech which had been cast aside a hundred years ago, carried on making taploaders when they were dead in a ditch as soon as the 77 came out, rested on their laurels making Collectors Editions for the non-shooting brigade (ooh it aint never been fired, its ONE in a THOUSAND, tis my Virgin Century!) spent millions on magazine loading when no one wanted that in a springer, tried to sell an awful rehash of the Webley pistol with all its advantages removed, and so on and so on ...


The successful rifles I think they made are as above, the BSA Meteor, the BSA SuperStar, the BSA Buccaneer and the BSA Mercury-S. Even these could have benefitted from further development. BSA is a tragedy.

yup. sadly true. I might add the early airsporters as being "OK" in your postwar list, and also the scorpion pistol. The triggers on all of them are still sh!te however.
And not even being bothered to add breech bolts to the break barrels - I mean, how cheap would that have been ? We're not talking serious R&D costs here. Same with a two stage trigger - just copy the Rekord like AA did.

I think I am defo going to make my rekord triggered, sliding breech airsporter now. Just to show what they should have done.

[Hsing-ee]

I think I am defo going to make my rekord triggered, sliding breech airsporter now. Just to show what they should have done.

Great. We eagerly await the birth of the BSA ShedSporter SB.

I like the early Airsporters. the Mk I & II. The conical breech exempts them from conversion though, so I suppose a late BSA Airsporter-S with the heavy barrel would be the optimum for sliding breech. I wonder if there is enough room in there for making a 22mm longstroke, to give low recoil etc?