Fas 6004 v 604

[candleman]

Sorry but I believe I'm reading a lot of BS on this thread.
Human nature I guess but it's wrong to judge in the context of a few isolated incidents.
I bought a new Ford Focus some years ago which spent more time in the garage than it did on the road in its first six months.
So all Ford Focus's are bad then.
I mean that's the logic being applied here.
As for components on earlier models being hand finished, what a crock.
Please evidence that stupid claim.
BS of course.
The 6004 is made by the same company using the same parts and tooling.
I challenge anyone here to strip a 604 and 6004, put the components side by side and illustrate the differences.
Won't happen or course because the people spouting this ill informed nonsense are I believe just making stuff up.
Feel free to prove me wrong.

[I. J.]

Sorry but I believe I'm reading a lot of BS on this thread.
Human nature I guess but it's wrong to judge in the context of a few isolated incidents.
I bought a new Ford Focus some years ago which spent more time in the garage than it did on the road in its first six months.
So all Ford Focus's are bad then.
I mean that's the logic being applied here.
As for components on earlier models being hand finished, what a crock.
Please evidence that stupid claim.
BS of course.
The 6004 is made by the same company using the same parts and tooling.
I challenge anyone here to strip a 604 and 6004, put the components side by side and illustrate the differences.
Won't happen or course because the people spouting this ill informed nonsense are I believe just making stuff up.
Feel free to prove me wrong.

Oh dear. It appears my experiences with a single example of a 6004 has ruffled some ones feathers. Someone asked for opinions so I gave them mine. Sorry if it doesn't meet with your approval.

Of course I cannot comment on all the examples of 6004 sold ( but see post # 4 and 6 ). What I can, and did, was comment on the one example I owned for a brief period. Of course, perhaps this was just a bad example - but then again it could also be a true example.

[andyals]

There was a major design flaw in the 604.
Due to the sharp angle at the upper rear of the barrel shroud it was prone to cracking due to the forces it was subjected too.




Here you can see the slight change in the design that was done to address this.
I'm no engineer but it looks like the less sharp more sloping angle provides more even distribution of forces.

[mikec4]

I had a 6004 two days before it broke. (the back sight). I took it back to the suppliers and got a refund.

Sorry but I believe I'm reading a lot of BS on this thread.
Human nature I guess but it's wrong to judge in the context of a few isolated incidents.
BS of course.
The 6004 is made by the same company using the same parts and tooling.
I challenge anyone here to strip a 604 and 6004, put the components side by side and illustrate the differences.
Won't happen or course because the people spouting this ill informed nonsense are I believe just making stuff up.
Feel free to prove me wrong.

The example bought by I.J. was brought up to Rivington to set up on the 10 metre range.

On adjusting the elevation, on the second occasion, the adjusting screw parted company with the pistol.

When it was examined, the 3mm screw was tapped off line into a very soft aluminium mounting block.

Poor design and execution; no comparison with an FAS 604 at all. (We had one of those in the club at the time to compare)

I was there - do you have a time machine or do you just comment with no knowledge..

[candleman]

I was there - do you have a time machine or do you just comment with no knowledge..

Yes I was there and had a lot of experience shooting the 604.
You're telling me a fault with the rear site which is easily repairable is reason not to buy the 6004.
Meanwhile the OP points out a far more significant design flaw in the 604 which you choose to ignore.
Unbelievable.
I hear these stupid old is better than new cases all the time related to all sorts of things and most of it comes from ill informed forum sages who set themselves up as experts but in fact haven't a clue what they're talking about.

[I. J.]

Yes I was there and had a lot of experience shooting the 604.
You're telling me a fault with the rear site which is easily repairable is reason not to buy the 6004.

But it wasn't. A 3mm threaded hole taped into ally? There was no way of increasing the size of the hole because of the lock up. We have a few engineers and mechanics in the club and everyone who looked at it commented on its poor design.

Im no expert - Ive only been shooting match pistols over 10 years - but sights on a match pistol , any make of match pistol are very important.

'Yes I was there' ???? What? At Rivington Riflemen when this happened?

Ive never owned a 604 so dont know about any flaws so I wont comment on that. I have owned a 6004 for a very short period and it was cr*p.

[mikec4]

Yes I was there [not at Rivington on the day in question you weren't] and had a lot of experience shooting the 604.
You're telling me a fault with the rear site which is easily repairable is reason not to buy the 6004.
Meanwhile the OP points out a far more significant design flaw in the 604 which you choose to ignore.
Unbelievable.
I hear these stupid old is better than new cases all the time related to all sorts of things and most of it comes from ill informed forum sages who set themselves up as experts but in fact haven't a clue what they're talking about.

I'm sorry I touched a nerve; the fault with the 6004 was a steel 3mm screw badly aligned into a soft alloy block. It stripped the thread in the alloy and was totally u/s.

As a skilled engineer - toolroom fitter and production machinery maintenance technician as well as an ill informed forum sage I can usually recognise a design fault.

You can wind your neck in now; I don't argue with idiots as they tend to bring you down to their level and beat you with many years of acquired experience.

[zooma]

Sorry but I believe I'm reading a lot of BS on this thread.

The 6004 is made by the same company using the same parts and tooling.

Won't happen or course because the people spouting this ill informed nonsense are I believe just making stuff up.
Feel free to prove me wrong.

The 6004 is not made by the same company using the same parts and tooling as the 604.

When the 6004 was first introduced and being marketed the new business owners (two brothers if my memory serves me right) contacted myself and many others to promote their new business and their new design SSP air pistol that was intended to be a "next generation" variant of the successful and popular 604 that had been manufactured by the previous FAS company.

For what its worth, I thought that the newly designed 6004 was a good looking and nice handling air pistol that showed a strong resemblance to its highly regarded 604 predecessor and I was very tempted to buy some of them for our club as it was no longer possible to buy any more new 604 pistols due to the original manufacturers no longer being in production.

A trawl through the previous threads on the BBS regarding the various 6004 owners experience's will help you to see that these claims were certainly not bullshit but genuine concerns and disappointments from new owners who had spent their cash on these poorly executed models that had all the hallmarks of being rushed into production without being thoroughly tested

The 604 was (and still is) a highly regarded SSP air pistol. The 6004 is not so highly regarded.

I am aware of the problem mentioned regarding the fracturing of the upper shroud casting on a few 604 air pistols but I have been lucky with every Mk1 and Mk2 604 that I have owned and/or used over the years to have never seen or experienced this fault - but they did exist as the pictures on this thread clearly shows.

If the current 6004 air pistols have been revised and had the early faults corrected I would be pleased to own one as I still like the look and feel of them.

The 604 was the first air pistol that I stripped and re-sealed many years ago. I found the 604 to be a very simple air pistol to work on and I would not hesitate to strip another alongside a 6004 to compare them to see if any of the components would actually fit each other. If they did, it could provide a useful source of spare parts for the many ageing 604 air pistols that will need some replacement parts as years go by.

It would certainly be an interesting exercise.

[I. J.]

The 6004 is not made by the same company using the same parts and tooling as the 604.

When the 6004 was first introduced and being marketed the new business owners (two brothers if my memory serves me right) contacted myself and many others to promote their new business and their new design SSP air pistol that was intended to be a "next generation" variant of the successful and popular 604 that had been manufactured by the previous FAS company.

For what its worth, I thought that the newly designed 6004 was a good looking and nice handling air pistol that showed a strong resemblance to its highly regarded 604 predecessor and I was very tempted to buy some of them for our club as it was no longer possible to buy any more new 604 pistols due to the original manufacturers no longer being in production.

A trawl through the previous threads on the BBS regarding the various 6004 owners experience's will help you to see that these claims were certainly not bullshit but genuine concerns and disappointments from new owners who had spent their cash on these poorly executed models that had all the hallmarks of being rushed into production without being thoroughly tested

The 604 was (and still is) a highly regarded SSP air pistol. The 6004 is not so highly regarded.

I am aware of the problem mentioned regarding the fracturing of the upper shroud casting on a few 604 air pistols but I have been lucky with every Mk1 and Mk2 604 that I have owned and/or used over the years to have never seen or experienced this fault - but they did exist as the pictures on this tread clearly shows.

If the current 6004 air pistols have been revised and had the early faults corrected I would be pleased to own one as I still like the look and feel of them.

The 604 was the first air pistol that I stripped and re-sealed many years ago. I found the 604 to be a very simple air pistol to work on and I would not hesitate to strip another alongside a 6004 to compare them to see if any of the components would actually fit each other. If they did, it could provide a useful source of spare parts for the many ageing 604 air pistols that will need some replacement parts as years go by.

It would certainly be an interesting exercise.

Well, thats the final comment and end of this subject for me - and I didn't get called once!

[zooma]

Well, thats the final comment and end of this subject for me - and I didn't get called once!

Hello once!

[brucieboy]

I had a 604 years ago, that's why I bought a 6004, it was supposed to be an updated 604. Mine went in the bin. Tiny steel screws into soft aluminium, glass rear sights etc. The final nail in the coffin was the bracket that holds the barrel in the over- lever. It kept coming loose and letting the barrel move back failing to seal against the breech seal.
Nipped it up a few times and the tiny bolts stripped. There's not enough metal to drill out and re-tap for a bigger bolt so it was a write off.
Never had a problem with the old 604.

[I. J.]

Hello once!

I had a 604 years ago, that's why I bought a 6004, it was supposed to be an updated 604. Mine went in the bin. Tiny steel screws into soft aluminium, glass rear sights etc. The final nail in the coffin was the bracket that holds the barrel in the over- lever. It kept coming loose and letting the barrel move back failing to seal against the breech seal.
Nipped it up a few times and the tiny bolts stripped. There's not enough metal to drill out and re-tap for a bigger bolt so it was a write off.
Never had a problem with the old 604.

So another victim of tiny screws into soft aluminium.

[candleman]

I had a 604 years ago, that's why I bought a 6004, it was supposed to be an updated 604. Mine went in the bin..

No it didn't
Stop lying.
No one throws an item they paid hundreds of pounds for in the bin.
Now you're just making stuff up and I don't believe you ever owned one.

[brucieboy]

No it didn't
Stop lying.
No one throws an item they paid hundreds of pounds for in the bin.
Now you're just making stuff up and I don't believe you ever owned one.

Ok then, not all in the bin, I did sell some bits.

http://www.airgunbbs.com/showthread....highlight=6004

But the rest went in the bin. So there You need to back up calling someone a liar with some provable fact, your opinion doesn't matter.

[andyals]

The 6004 is not made by the same company using the same parts and tooling as the 604.

I've just ordered a spare seal set for my 6004 and was assured that they were identical to the 604.
I'm curious about this rear sight issue.
This seems to be the main grudge against the 6004.
Nothing has been mentioned about its overall reliability and accuracy and these are the things that interest me.
I suspect Candle man is correct.
The "new inferior to old" is an argument prevalent in many fields, especially motoring and it's usually unfounded.
I've been using my 6004 for quite a while now and have not experienced one single issue.
It certainly performs just as well as the 604 I owned in the late 80s.
The rear sight on mine has undergone a series of adjustments without issue.
Honestly I didn't mean to open a can of worms here and had no idea of the hostility I was going to be bombarded with simply for expressing an opinion.
Based on my actual experience of owning and using this great pistol I'd say its equal to its predecessor in every way and is still the great target pistol it once was.
I suspect the people who are going to spit nails at me for daring to suggest that do not have any ownership experience themselves.