Original 50T01

[jonnyone]

I recall a variant of the above rifle- possibly done by RWS- having a "Parkerised" finish to it.
I am sure I saw an article in an old copy of AGW which showed the above rifle with a rather plain "ambi" stock and I seem to recall there being no safety catch?

Anyone recall these or indeed got one?

Dave

[Hsing-ee]

Ah, it was the RWS 50T01 that you remember. Original Diana made rifles for the RWS ammo company which were frequently less 'frilly' than the ones they released, the RWS models had plainer stocks, no safety catches etc. I think they were for export to the US, and a few got dumped in the UK now and then. The RWS 45 had the stock from the 35, so maybe they were using them to use up parts as well.

The Original 50T01 had a very nice ambidextrous stock, however that was the best thing about it. I had one and I cannot recommend them. Get a nice Original 45 instead, by far the superior stablemate, or even one of the 'old' Original 50s or 35s.

[jonnyone]

Yeah I have 2 RWS 45's and they share an identical action to the Original. I also have an old '50 as well as the T01 version. I remember being mesmerised by the field test Rod Lynton did on the 50T01. The reality is not quite the same however

As I've said before, the HW77 was the nail in the coffin for this rifle.

Its the RWS version that intrigues me though. I will try and dig out the article- but the finish is definately different to bluing. I seem to recall power being rather low as well. It was definately the later type though as I recall the extended underlever- which rather spoils the lines of the later marque.

I wonder if anyone out there in BBS land has got one of these?

Thanks for the reply.
Dave

Dave

[Hsing-ee]

version. I remember being mesmerised by the field test Rod Lynton did on the 50T01. The reality is not quite the same however


Dave

Dave

I bought mine on the basis of the review and I didn't want to believe it was not as good as the hype for months. The review said sub 1" groups at 40 yards, but that was what I got at 20 yards no matter what I did. Was really disappointed, cost me a whole summer holiday of working to buy it, it was as or more expensive than a FWB Sport. You know, the gun that took all the prizes. To be honest its a good thing the 77 came and wiped it out.

[coburn]

Sorry but did anyone ever believe what Rod Lynton wrote. I spent ages as well trying to achieve what he said certain rifles were capable of.

[Hsing-ee]

Sorry but did anyone ever believe what Rod Lynton wrote. I spent ages as well trying to achieve what he said certain rifles were capable of.

Well, I was only just into my teens and I didn't know better, or that consumer magazines are there to sell products and not necessarily tell the truth all the time. Actually I owe him, because instead of believing blindly in the printed word, I did then pick up the habit of getting second and third opinions on things, or if possible, finding things out for myself.

The rifles I bought on the basis of magazine articles were

Crosman 766, Hammerli 401, Original 50T01, Anschutz 335.

The Hammerli was mostly 'as described' but was not nearly as powerful as AGW said. The others were OK but not amazing like the articles made them out to be.

The one rifle of my youth that really was great, amazing and worth every penny, was a 10 year old Weihrauch HW35 Export. Extremely accurate, well balanced, powerful, beautifully engineered, lovelly trigger, walnut stock and pi$$-easy to strip, I bought this after seeing an old chap at my club whack down every target on the course with an old HW35 Standard in .22.

Best to do your own research!

[coburn]

Yes I used to blindly follow what AGW said, however I bought my HW80 on the strength of the add before AGW had even tested one. Best thing I ever did, all the blokes at my club (Merton ARPC) had the usual mix of Airsporters/Ospreys, Original 35/45 and a 335. The 80 made them all look very silly indeed.