As tiltle chaps, yes realise the finish and construction of the Mk1/Senior and Premier better, but do they shoot well - accuracy wise and power? If fettled and in good order are they the same power?
As a left-hander, I hate the grips on the Tempest and have custom wooden grips on mine. I have recently handled a MK1 Webley and it feels far better than a Tempest.
Thanks.
I am by no means any kind of expert on Webleys (or any anything else for that matter ) but Ive owned a few Tempests, a Mk1 and currently have a Premier.
The Tempests did not feel as nice to shoot as my current Premier - the recoil felt harsher and they didnt sit in the hand so well. I see no point in having a safety. I had great difficulty in shooting them accurately or consistencly. Probably says more about me then them. The .22 felt smoother - mind you, I prefer .22 in pistols anyway so Im biased.
The MK1 was awful and nearly put me off the older ones alltogether. A .22, it had not been looked after well, had a bodged welding repair to the cocking mechanism and was very low on power. It was a late 50's one I think. Even after spending money to have it fettled I couldnt shoot it at all well - it was an achievement just to hit the target at 6 yards. I guess that spending more money etc would have made it nicer but I thought that £60 was enough in addition to the purchase price of about £100. To be fair it wasnt that bad by the time I sold it but I had kind of lost faith in it if you know what I mean. Hopefully it lives on and its current owner loves it.
My Premier is a new aquisition from the sales section here. I though that it was worth one last try. A 1975 model in tip top condition - .22 again. Shooting it for the first time earlier this week was a revelation. Smooth to cock, very nice trigger and lovely to handle. I can manage to get most shots in the black at 10 yards and with some practice hope to improve in this. Ive shot about 500 pellets so far and I am very impressed by its performance. An excellent buy.
In consequence my faith is restored in the older models - I guess like most things you just have to take care when buying.
As regards the comparison the older ones appeal more to me, mainly on the basis of feel and looks - though I think the Tempest is still well worth having .
Probably an idea to have both
Im sure those with more experience (and capability) will be along to add their views soon
Cannot agree - the new shape Senior knocks it into a cocked hat for quality of manufacture IMHO.
With regard to the OP's original question though - Funnily enough I took my Tempest and Senior to the club this week to have a play before a vintage pistol competition.
Over the chrono the Tempest averaged 419 fps over a 5 shot string and the Senior with a NOS leather and brass breech seal averaged 440 fps again over a shot string which I was chuffed at.
Physcially the Senior is a much more compact gun and feels better in my hand, they both have heavy triggers but the Senior has a longish creepy pull which is a function of the trigger design (this can be geatly reduced with careful polishing if you wish)
That said it doesn't seem to affect the gun adversely and I could actually produce tighter groups with it.
Last edited by harvey_s; 13-04-2012 at 03:28 PM.
I own the Senior, Premier, Huraracane and 2 Tempists, each to me have there pros and cons. I find the Pre war Senior the most substantial to use , its a real piece of metal. The Hurracane and Tempists are alloy bodied and I have to admit I find the older gun easier to use as I like a pistol with a bit of weight. Saying that love my Tempists just as much.
I have a late model black coated all steel .22 premier that has had very little use so is nice and tight when I got it a couple of years ago of this site the first thing that I did was to strip it down and give it a good clean and put molly paste over all of the moving parts. I have now sold all of my other guns but this is one that I will never sell on as I just love shooting it and with practice it is surprisingly accurate.
I have never seen it written down but I think that it was model'd on the colt 1911 as I had an airsoft 1911 and out of curiosity one day I put them one on top of the other and they are almost exactly the same size and shape. Both of them fit in your hand like a glove for me this is where other makes of gun go wrong they are to big to grip properly.
I have always preferred shooting .22 over .177 quite why I do not no if there is any fault to be found in them for me it has to be that they could do with more power. I find that the .22 is good over 7m but not to much more and the .177 is good for over 10m I would love to be able to shoot longer distance up to 20m but there is no way that they will do that.
At one time I had a .22 Hurican and I am shore that it was more powerful people have said that is not as powerful but for me it should be as the tube is larger in dia so must hold more air.
"But we have our own dream and our own task. We are with Europe, but not of it. We are linked, but not comprised. We are interested and associated, but not absorbed."
Winston Churchill 1930
Love my Webley Premier E series,
even had walnut grips made for it, shoots like a pistol should the weight is just right the trigger pressure just right. Looks wise,.. not as good as a Tempest or Hurricane but that old chestnut don’t judge a book by its cover comes into play here. This old boy is as good as my Hurricane but smoother to shoot.