Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 70

Thread: Will any springer ever beat the TX ?

  1. #46
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Folkestone
    Posts
    515
    Quote Originally Posted by WILBA View Post
    Fixed the droop on my late prosort with a tiny magnet.
    The version you picture is not the current version, which (IMO) is ugly and does not lock-up as securely as the HW97K underlever.

    None of my Pros Sport’s suffer from underlever droop!

    I note you don’t deny the god damned ugly anti-bear trap design of the TX200
    Last edited by Saxmaniac; 11-07-2020 at 09:54 PM.

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Folkestone
    Posts
    515
    Gloves off, let’s get into it!

    Why does the ugly and irrelevant anti-bear trap design of the TX200 continue to exist when other proven designs demonstrate the irrelevance? It wouldn’t be quite so bad if the anti-bear trap lever and housing were the same highly polished steel as the cylinder and barrel, but instead they are nasty rough pig-metal casting’s.

    Sort that and the barrel/underlever assembly and I’ll buy one!

    I don’t know which model it was, but the TX200 that had a barrel/underlever assembly like the HW97K was far better, IMHO.

    BarryG, you started this dude

  3. #48
    Barryg's Avatar
    Barryg is offline Registered ̶D̶i̶a̶n̶a̶ User
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Nr. YEOVIL
    Posts
    5,009
    Quote Originally Posted by Saxmaniac View Post
    Gloves off, let’s get into it!

    Why does the ugly and irrelevant anti-bear trap design of the TX200 continue to exist when other proven designs demonstrate the irrelevance? It wouldn’t be quite so bad if the anti-bear trap lever and housing were the same highly polished steel as the cylinder and barrel, but instead they are nasty rough pig-metal casting’s.

    Sort that and the barrel/underlever assembly and I’ll buy one!

    I don’t know which model it was, but the TX200 that had a barrel/underlever assembly like the HW97K was far better, IMHO.

    BarryG, you started this dude
    I'm still a bit confused by what you are saying because even though I have the older type barrel catch I wasn't aware that the new ones are weak perhaps someone else can comment about these, and although you say that you haven't had droop on your PSs yet you haven't said why you don't mind having no catch on their levers if you like strong lever catches and also why you don't mind the whole lever setup not being made of the same high quality steel as the rest of the gun if you don't like the small pressed steel ABT on the TX not being made of highly polished steel.
    I didn't really start it just made a comment

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    mountain ash
    Posts
    8,573
    Still the hw77 for me, The 77 changed springers , Its why you have the TX, ps etc, The 77 was in a class of its own at the time and is still up there with what's out a lot newer, My TX reminded me slightly of my relum tornado except the cocking was a lot smoother on the relum,

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Swansea
    Posts
    5,046
    Quote Originally Posted by madcarlos View Post
    Still the hw77 for me, The 77 changed springers , Its why you have the TX, ps etc, The 77 was in a class of its own at the time and is still up there with what's out a lot newer, My TX reminded me slightly of my relum tornado except the cocking was a lot smoother on the relum,
    Feel the same about my b&m tx bullpup. I will not sell it due to its rarity but i do not use it much as it is such a pain to use. The double cocking is a step backwards in my mind as my old 77/97 i owned were smooth as silk to cock and due to the open loading port you have better access to load the pellet. Id not buy another.

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Near Wimbledon, SW London, or Lusaka, Zambia
    Posts
    26,327
    the ugly ABT is very effective, in both main failure scenarios.. slipping lever midway through, and a failure of the trigger (or the owner) whilst loading.

    HW doesn't have this. Even the PS one only engages at the very end, to cover the latter scenario.

    Very few modern full power springers have ratchet type ABTs, with their inherent safety; in fact, I can only think of Diana
    I do agree however that it should be made from nice blued steel, not pig iron,
    Always looking for any cheap, interesting, knackered "project" guns. Thanks, JB.

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Dudley
    Posts
    9,212

    Tx200

    Let's not forget if it wasn't for the HW77 and a certain Mr Ken Turner then Air Arms wouldn't have the TX or The Pro Sport. Mach 1.5

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Selby
    Posts
    459
    Quote Originally Posted by Barryg View Post
    Maybe for power and perhaps looks but it is going to be a hard act to follow as the best all round springer it seems to have everything, what do you think ?



    Looping back to the original question, guess I’ll throw my 2 pence in (although my 2 pence is probably worth more like 1 pence )...

    Will any springer ever beat the TX?

    Firstly I guess you have to answer is the TX the best standard springer on the market today? I’d say it’s a contender yes, and the differences between all the high end springers really come down to personal choice. I hate the TXHC, got on okay with a Prosport, didn’t like the LGU, would love a Full length TX, and would also like one of the big Diana side levers. Which is best? Depends on your shooting style and preference!

    So putting that aside break down the original question, “will anything ever beat it?” In my mind splits into two;
    - Can it be beaten?
    - Is it likely to happen?

    So can it be beaten? Yes, absolutely. This question does break down at the higher end to that good old personal choice again, but there are obviously ways a springer from the factory could beat it. To name a few;
    - A better stock, adjustable as standard for example.
    - Shot cycle optimised for the power level it is being sold at (done through piston weight and stroke length etc...
    - Modern materials and technology to reduce weight in the action (again this is preference, I appreciate some use weight as an advantage)

    Is this likely to happen? I live in hope that one day a manufacturer will pull their finger out and create an actual leap forward in springer technology, but I won’t comment on how likely that is, as the answer is probably not very

    All this avoids which layout you consider ‘best’, there are advantages to all systems (BreakBarrel, Underlever, Sidelever, Hidden Underlever), and my ramblings DEFINITELY avoid recoilless systems... not getting into that haha
    Slightly obsessed with Single Stroke Pneumatics
    Also making stocks over at Daviesbuilt gunstocks.

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Guildford
    Posts
    978
    Quote Originally Posted by scorpiont10 View Post
    I had a TX for a couple of years - I used to hold the ABT down with my fingers as I cocked the gun - whilst cocking the gun your hands are in no danger because one is holding down the ABT switch/lever while the other is operating the underlever - once the gun "cocks" then I would release the ABT lever - and insert a pellet. Not sure what the problem is - unless the design has changed then the TX can be cocked silently?
    That’s exactly what I do. It just becomes second nature. If I try to cock it any other way it doesn’t feel right. Very occasionally I sometimes don’t hold down the ABT lever just to hear the clicks. It somehow gives me some assurance that the ABT is still working.

  10. #55
    Barryg's Avatar
    Barryg is offline Registered ̶D̶i̶a̶n̶a̶ User
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Nr. YEOVIL
    Posts
    5,009
    Quote Originally Posted by Shed tuner View Post
    I do agree however that it should be made from nice blued steel, not pig iron,
    Just wondering what you mean by the term pig iron

    Do you mean very poor quality steel or cast parts ? would AA use poor quality metal on their guns?

  11. #56
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    mountain ash
    Posts
    8,573
    Quote Originally Posted by Mach 1.5 View Post
    Let's not forget if it wasn't for the HW77 and a certain Mr Ken Turner then Air Arms wouldn't have the TX or The Pro Sport. Mach 1.5
    Exactly bud, The hw77 is still one of the top springers and has been for the last 40 years or so,

  12. #57
    Murphy is offline Cooee! Chase me you naughty boys!
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Wigan
    Posts
    22,359
    Does anybody know if,

    Weihrauch invented/designed the HW77 in house or did they buy somebody's idea or get a 3rd party in to invent/design it?
    Master Debater

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Narberth
    Posts
    767
    Whilst not a scientific/engineering comparison to other springers and the many that I have not tried, it is just a personal opinion that the TX200 transformed my shooting ability and it just felt right. Mainly a collector, I have the old school BSA's; Mercury S, Airsporter S, Goldstar, Superstar, etc...HW: 77, 77K, 35, 80...Anschutz 335, FWB Master Sport 127....Webley Omega...Original 35S, 45 and so on. But for me, the TX200 is the biz.

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    christchurch
    Posts
    7,130
    My TX is very accurate

    But so is my Walther LGV Comp Ultra which just needs a little lever flip and one finger cocking.
    It also has open sights

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Dudley
    Posts
    9,212

    Tx200

    Back in the day when the very first batch of MK1's TX200's were produced. AA gave a couple to very good FT shooters at the time to demo the rifles ability at a field target event. These guys were members of my very old club The Venom Pistol & Rifle Club and had won many awards. JM came 2nd & JA came 4th.They lost out to a guy using a Airmasters 77 and 3rd place went to a 77. So the question is, will the HW77 Ever be beat? Mach 1.5
    Last edited by Mach 1.5; 12-07-2020 at 05:37 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •