Zebedee
Excellent points and many believe that sourcing a stock that suits or customising one, playing with balance / weight and then getting that practice on from all the different positions is far more valuable than a fancy tune.Originally Posted by ptdunk
THE BOINGER BASH AT QUIGLEY HOLLOW. MAKING GREAT MEMORIES SINCE 15th JUNE, 2013.
NEXT EVENT :- August 3/4, 2024.........BOING!!
Dodgy Diana User
Interesting thread. But no-one yet seems to have answered the basic question: why is it generally believed, and many owners report, that the HW85/95 is unusually “bouncy” and hold-sensitive?
Two hypotheses:
1. Compared to, say, the Diana 34, FWB Sport, HW80, HW35, Diana 45, HW99S and similar, there is something particular to the 85/95 that makes it hard to hit with consistently.
2. Actually there isn’t. These days the 95 is by far the most widely-distributed high-quality break-barrel. All of the above (maybe not the 80 because of its weight) are similar. Most of today’s 85/95 shooters cut their teeth on PCPs or 77/97s or TXs and find the shooting characteristics of a light-barrelled springer challenging (see the references above to sticking half a kilo of steel on the muzzle to tame it).
Registered User
Because it is so light weight, and has a spring in it. FWB Sports are the same (I've had at least nine, tuned and factory fresh.)
What makes these sporting rifles interesting is finding a way to shoot them straight. When you do they are accurate as anything out there. By the time you do you've done a shed load of shooting and your other rifles just feel easy.
Adding several pounds of weight then just buy a TX.
Registered User
Well, thats the point of the thread really, the 95 is not lighter than a 34, a 280 or a 99 yet its harder work to shoot straight with, but why?? To me, and from what I have read on here many times there is a difference with the 95. I am 51 now and have shot spring rifles since I was big enough to hold one so am well aware of what they are capable of.
Plinkerer and Tinkerer
may also be employed in conjunction with a drawn reciprocation dingle arm, to reduce sinusoidal repleneration
It may be down to the pellet fit then. I cannot remember the article or maybe it was on here, BTDT wrote about it, but it may be that the pellet is starting its travel at a tricky part of the cycle and while it might be possible to shoot it accurately with a super-consistent hold, it's not something an actual human is capable of. If the pellet releases at a more forgiving point then maybe that will work.
Maybe try a different pellet, seating the pellets a little or sizing them. It might be more beneficial than coming on here and being told you don't know how to shoot a springer.
Registered User
Hi Alistair, I have tried all the usual suspects from my pellet selection and no real joy. Any how, this morning I could down the spring by half a coil which dropped the power from 11.6 to 10.2. Added a washer which pushed it upto 10.7 and decided to try it at that. Happy to report that accuracy is now restored and sight picture much steadier on firing.I will be leaving it at that power now, i guess 11.6 was pushing it too much for the short stroke.
Plinkerer and Tinkerer
Zebedee
Result!
A nice, sweet and accurate 10.7 beats a snappy, snarling, bouncy 11.6 anyday in my book. And maybe 11.6 was just a little too close for comfort, too?
Wished I'd picked up on the power earlier.
Enjoy.
THE BOINGER BASH AT QUIGLEY HOLLOW. MAKING GREAT MEMORIES SINCE 15th JUNE, 2013.
NEXT EVENT :- August 3/4, 2024.........BOING!!
Registered User
Im glad you seem to have yours under control and shooting better. I have been reading this thread with interest (there are two similar ones on the other main airgun forum currently also).
I have nothing very helpful to add to it but for what its worth you are dead right in your opinion of the 95 in isolation and against its competitors. Even with standard stroke and internals it has a tendency to lift the muzzle significantly on firing. Hence the fact that the rifle is usually only available in conjunction with a muzzle brake, moderator and there is a variant with a bull barrel.
Co-incidently the best one I have shot chrono'd at 10.8. It was a used example n a local dealer who had no idea what had been done to it.
I really need tweak and likely detune my own later 85K but I know its a gun I will never truly bond with, unfortunately.
may also be employed in conjunction with a drawn reciprocation dingle arm, to reduce sinusoidal repleneration
Interesting. I have a short stroked 85 and it was very accurate in .177. I am changing it back to .22 so I am going to take your experiment into account, although I think it will be OK as if it worked OK with the little pellets it should be OK with the bigger calibre. So many variables with a springer. The .177 was a short one off a 95, so maybe that made a difference?
Zebedee
Okay, maybe a bit of "wild musing" here, but I wonder if it actually does have more to do with weight distribution. I have shot lots of Weihrauchs over the years but not lots of Dianas, so I'm not as fully versed in their finer points. But one thing that always jumped out at me when I handled / tried the 280 was not just how slim it felt but also how "low" mounted in the stock the action seemed. So could be that? I appreciate that the 34 is well loved and respected, but I can't actually remember having tried one. The closest to it that I tried ( and I really don't know how similar it was) was a synthetic stocked one. Maybe a Panther 31? And I wasn't so impressed. But the 99 is super sweet and a revelation.
If I had to be hyper-picky about the 95's action feel, maybe the overall feel, tieing in with the "bouncy" wording is a perceived feel of piston bounce / surge. But perceptions can be misleading and we'd be better measuring it to get a definitive answer. If the answer lies therein and it is piston bounce that is the issue, as Al points out, different pellets may well help address this. As in, JSB derived pellets, with their lower release pressure, should help. But then I guess that, these days, many would be using JSBs anyway?
Could the answer be, rather than many tunes trying to lighten the piston to quicken the action time and reduce recoil, the answer may lie in increasing the piston weight, slowing the action slightly but the increased inertia combatting piston bounce more? Combined with a slight opening of the transfer port?
THE BOINGER BASH AT QUIGLEY HOLLOW. MAKING GREAT MEMORIES SINCE 15th JUNE, 2013.
NEXT EVENT :- August 3/4, 2024.........BOING!!
Dodgy Diana User
So that’s option 2, above.
But maximus and Barry (who, sorry Barry, may be a tiny bit biased) say the D34 (one of my favourites) is better than the 95, despite the similarities between the two. It’s also quite commonplace to hear that the 99 is, and even that the 98 is surprisingly hold sensitive given its weight.
I can’t reach a judgment, because while I own many of the classic break-barrels, I just don’t get on well with my 85, even before I pull the trigger.
As you say, it’s just not good enough to say that Rifle X is fine as long as you hang a bag of sugar off the muzzle. I fully accept the advantages of adding a muzzle “thing” to a springer, but a good springer (eg D34 or FWB 124/127) should be fine without it.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
