Prewar BSA vs Webley Rifles

[45flint]

New to Webley prewar rifles but it seems that the BSA has the reputation as the superior rifle? My question is why you think that is so. I look at the Webley design and it has much in its favor. The barrel is actually longer given the power plant is below the barrel. In the Mark 1 it is much more compact. Of course that reduces its sight radius? In the Webley Service it seems everything was done to make this design the best rifle possible? But I don’t hear it argued that it’s performance exceeded the BSA? Curious why?

[Josie & John]

I'm a self confessed fan of both the prewar BSA and Webley designs.

Admittedly I am more used to the BSA but have found the Webley Mk2 Service at least as accurate when I used one for bell target a little while ago as well as a vintage HFT competition I entered. I prefer the rearsight position on the BSA as it is further away from the eye but prefer the peepsight on the Webley 3rd Series to the BSA peeps, as much as I like and use the latter.

I think I'm in the minority but have at least proved to myself that both designs are equally good.

John

[Geezer]

The case for the BSA: iconic and innovative design that was copied by scores of makers and lived on, with more modern stocks, in things like the Diana 50 that were still being made in the 1980s. Much more efficient design that the Webley, and comfortably capable of 12 ft-lbs.

Case against the Webley: the opposite of the above. An odd enlarged pistol action that no-one else thought to copy, and an inefficient design that struggles even in the “Service” to make 2/3 the power of the BSA.

I’m not “dissing” the Webley. It’s one of the all-time classic collectibles, instantly recognisable and quite fascinating. It’s just a bit of an evolutionary dead end, whereas the BSA raised the bar for spring airguns.

[Abasmajor]

As with any shoulder mounted air gun or firearm, fit and balance are very important in determining how well we will get on with their use. For me the BSA is better balanced and comes up on aim more naturally than the Webley. I have also found the BSA to be more forgiving of poor technique and somehow still results in good accuracy even with minor imperfections in technique on my part. The old BSAs also seem to perform better for me when I use light weight .177 air pistol pellets with H&N Pistol Match being the favourite. RWS Hobby also provide a satisfactory and cheaper alternative, but I prefer to use the best irrespective of a slight increase in the already minimal cost of shooting air guns compared with live firearms. Having said that, I must admit to being pleasantly surprised by how well the Webley Mk2 Service performed using Rhino pellets in .25 which far exceeded my expectations for that large calibre
Brian

[harvey_s]

Interesting question... Most of the old photographs I've seen of Bell target shooters would seem to reinforce the view that the BSA's were the rifle of preference.
Some of the feats of accuracy claimed for these are incredible.
I'm not sure what the pre-war prices where at the time, but I have seen it recorded that Webley rifles were expensive - so if there is cheaper rifle capable of these amazing displays - why spend more?
The above is true now - back then I would guess it was even more so...

[Geezer]

Interesting question... Most of the old photographs I've seen of Bell target shooters would seem to reinforce the view that the BSA's were the rifle of preference.
Some of the feats of accuracy claimed for these are incredible.
I'm not sure what the pre-war prices where at the time, but I have seen it recorded that Webley rifles were expensive - so if there is cheaper rifle capable of these amazing displays - why spend more?
The above is true now - back then I would guess it was even more so...

The Mk1 was introduced in 1925 at £3.12s6d.

The Service was introduced in 1932 at a price of £4 retail or £3 wholesale. By late 1937 it had risen to £4 and 15 shillings.

(Hat tip: Chris Thrale’s book.)

I have found BSA pricing harder to track down. I have seen a 1932 advert for the BSA break-barrel at £2.5s, which does suggest a price differential between the two brands.

[Josie & John]

The Mk1 was introduced in 1925 at £3.12s6d.

The Service was introduced in 1932 at a price of £4 retail or £3 wholesale. By late 1937 it had risen to £4 and 15 shillings.

(Hat tip: Chris Thrale’s book.)

I have found BSA pricing harder to track down. I have seen a 1932 advert for the BSA break-barrel at £2.5s, which does suggest a price differential between the two brands.

The retail price of the No 1 Standard remained at a constant £4-0-0 throughout the 1920s but adverts for the BSA Breakdown in publications such as Meccano Magazine from November 1932 also showed a reduction for the No 1 to £3-10-0. This reduced price then remained constant throughout the mid 1930s and had increased back to £4-0-0 by 1939 or possibly a little earlier as some BSA leaflets from the late 1930s were not dated. During the same period, the price of a No 2 Standard and CS was initially £4-10s, reducing to £4-0-0 in 1932 and back up to £4-10s by 1939.

Pretty much the same price for both the BSA and Webley models then. Whilst the BSA was well established by the time the Webley Service came along, the latter must have been seen as groundbreaking as it came with features that were unique, such as interchangeable barrels, two sighting systems as standard and a working bolt.

John

[duomatic410]

My first air rifle, mk 11 service cost me £4 /10 shillings in 1953
My friend had a BSA standard and it shot harder.
I have a mk11 and standard now, the mk11 is lighter ,easier to cock, nice trigger and very accurate.
I tend to pick up the mk11 for tin canning down the garden.😊👍🇬🇧

[45flint]

No experience with the Webley Service but I would imagine that a quick change barrel option which is incredibly cool, also would make possible a little less stable platform vs the BSA fixed barrel?

[Josie & John]

No experience with the Webley Service but I would imagine that a quick change barrel option which is incredibly cool, also would make possible a little less stable platform vs the BSA fixed barrel?

Agreed re. the cool factor. BSA often made a lot of their fixed barrel design in adverts but I have never noticed a zero shift with any of my Services after taking them down and assembling again. I used to place a disassembled Service in a backpack for the 2 mile walk to the club years ago and found this very handy as it attracted less attention than a gun bag.

John

[duomatic410]

[QUOTzE=45flint;7946825]No experience with the Webley Service but I would imagine that a quick change barrel option which is incredibly cool, also would make possible a little less stable platform vs the BSA fixed barrel?[/QUOTE]

Ha, But this was made when we were top of the engineering scale and they are very accurate, not powerful but 30 yard rabbits when eyes were good (no scopes then)
Put a lot of rabbits etc on the table in my younger days.👍🇬🇧

[Geezer]

The retail price of the No 1 Standard remained at a constant £4-0-0 throughout the 1920s but adverts for the BSA Breakdown in publications such as Meccano Magazine from November 1932 also showed a reduction for the No 1 to £3-10-0. This reduced price then remained constant throughout the mid 1930s and had increased back to £4-0-0 by 1939 or possibly a little earlier as some BSA leaflets from the late 1930s were not dated. During the same period, the price of a No 2 Standard and CS was initially £4-10s, reducing to £4-0-0 in 1932 and back up to £4-10s by 1939.

Pretty much the same price for both the BSA and Webley models then. Whilst the BSA was well established by the time the Webley Service came along, the latter must have been seen as groundbreaking as it came with features that were unique, such as interchangeable barrels, two sighting systems as standard and a working bolt.

John

Thanks John, that’s interesting.

[duomatic410]

Agreed re. the cool factor. BSA often made a lot of their fixed barrel design in adverts but I have never noticed a zero shift with any of my Services after taking them down and assembling again. I used to place a disassembled Service in a backpack for the 2 mile walk to the club years ago and found this very handy as it attracted less attention than a gun bag.

John

Mine was barrel up my sleeve, action in a poachers pocket, hand in pocket kept it from dragging coat out of shape. Happy days.👍🇬🇧

[Powderfinger]

BSA were in the bell target and miniature range market right from the start including putting up prizes. They also had a major advantage over Webley of sending reps to every bicycle or motorbike dealer in the land. These commercial advantages must have been a big factor in their market presence, sales figures and ubiquity at target clubs or leagues. Commercial factors like this often outweigh the pros of cons of the product over it's competitors.

[Shed tuner]

.... an inefficient design that struggles even in the “Service” to make 2/3 the power of the BSA.

I’m not “dissing” the Webley. It’s one of the all-time classic collectibles, instantly recognisable and quite fascinating. It’s just a bit of an evolutionary dead end, whereas the BSA raised the bar for spring airguns.

exactly this.... I have a Service. I look at it a lot... but I prefer shooting the BSAs