I bought a Beeman 2004 ten days ago. I was really enjoying it and finding it to be incredibly accurate (even in my novice hands) when it developed a trigger problem such that the trigger would intermittently fail, especially when pulled slowly.

I took it back to the shop today and had it replaced. The man in the shop agreed to replace immediately and seemed genuinely surprised at the fault, telling me that he’s been selling them for years with very few problems.

However when I got the replacement pistol home I found the sites were way out of alignment. Then, on examination I discovered a small dent on the scope rail. Also, the piston compression action of this pistol feels easier than the first, the same pellets fit much more easily into the barrel and there appears to be more grease on the piston. Perhaps I’m being overly suspicious but I began to wonder if this was a reconditioned rather than new pistol.

I was able to correct the sites myself , well enough to hit cans at the end of the garden at least, but it meant major adjustment to the windage in particular, so that the notch was adjusted from extreme left (where it was originally set) to now being to the right of the hammer.

My question is whether others think this replacement is acceptable. The dent is cosmetic, as can be seen in the photograph, but the sites concern me. The first pistol was accurate out of the box and the windage notch was about even with the hammer (centred on the gun). On this pistol the windage is now to the right of the hammer. Is this unacceptable or are such variations to be expected? I had thought that with no adjustment for wind the notch should be centered on the gun and the sites should be accurately set up when new.

John

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images...nfault014.jpg/
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images...nfault019.jpg/