I tried one and preferred the old 124/7 - especially at half the price
Does anyone have one over here ?
my direction with springers has taken a funny turn recently. The last 3 to come onto my hands have been a mk1 85, a FWB300s and just a few days ago a Feinwerkbau 124 of early 70's vintage. 3 rifles with a combined age of around 125 years.
The 124 was bought as I'm absolutely smitten with the 300s and after a shoot with it this morning, I'm really pleased I bought the 124, though the trigger is like stepping back in time to before I used a Rekord.
Anyway as a brand I've not shot much better and wierdly, my thoughts are turning toward the new sport. It could be prettier and it could be far cheaper but I just wanted to know whether the FWB quality is still there in the new sport ??
Particularly I'd like opinions on the trigger on the new sport. Is it any good ? Is it a serious contender for the likes of the CD and the Rekord ?
Has anyone any idea if any have been imported here or is it just a case of buying from Europe (while we still can) ?
Cheers
B.A.S.C. member
I tried one and preferred the old 124/7 - especially at half the price
Always looking for any cheap, interesting, knackered "project" guns. Thanks, JB.
Myself and I hope he doesn't mind me saying - Rustybuzz own them. Build quality is FWB standard and the trigger is good. Barrel lockup is fantastic. I had mine imported by vmach who then upped the power from 5.5 to 11.4 with one of their springs. Overpriced, underpowered in original form, only .177 but...I love it. Mach 1.5
I have been in the very fortunate position to see and try two of the new FWB Sports, the one belonging to the very nice aforementioned RustyBuzz and one that belonged to the importers that WonkyDonky brought to a Boinger Bash.
Now, looking at the photos that breech block and its "ears" I thought looked dreadful. Far, far better in the flesh. Fit and finish lovely. And RustyBuzz reported a lovely internal finish / tolerances etc.
If I were in the market for a top-end break barrel (ie if I had the money and space), I'd love to give one a home. However, I think it's more than fair to say that better value for money can be had elsewhere.
As also mentioned, breech lock-up and trigger far nicer than the earlier Sports.
THE BOINGER BASH AT QUIGLEY HOLLOW. MAKING GREAT MEMORIES SINCE 15th JUNE, 2013.
NEXT EVENT :- May 17/18, 2025.........BOING!!
I could live with the ears and I need no convincing the mechanicals would be as expected. The stock and the trigger guard however, are another matter. They've got a rifle that they want custom money for that looks like the HW95's ugly little brother.
Now to an extent I'm happy with a springer costing me £550-600, and many have when they've been fitted up with a CS500 to rid them of the angular germanic plank. To get an angular germanic plank on a rifle of a similar price sort of sticks in my throat a little especially one designed for opens.
I've actually emailed FWB today. An option for a more UK acceptable stock (and trigger guard), would I'm sure make this a seller over here.
B.A.S.C. member
This is a case were FWB didn't seem do there research. Only two power versions available 5.5 ft lbs European market or 14 ft lbs US market. So Mr FWB. Please do one in .22, Sling Swivels, 14inch barrel, open sights or screw cut, 11 ft lbs, beech stock for £350 and walnut stock for £450. I can dream. Mach 1.5
I love some Weihrauch’s , they’re great guns but they’re not well made. I’m sorry, they’re just not.
Everything is stamped or swaged or pressed or rolled, barely nothing is machined. Then they are assembled with bits of shim and pressure to compensate for the resulting tolerance range.
Most parts on the new sport have been machined and surface ground. The result is a machine that slides together to assemble. I have never worked on an air rifle that is built to the same tolerances, it’s close to perfect.
The trigger is good, it’s not adjustable for pressure but it’s plenty light enough.
It’s not a small air rifle. Though the design makes it seem a 95 rival it’s actually the same size as an 80. The piston is incredibly heavy, half as much again of the 80s piston, so it’s not at its best below 12ftlbs and there is a substantial thwack on discharge. The good thing is there is no twist or any discernible bounce. It’s unlike anything I’ve ever shot, I like it.
As it comes, it twangs like a inebriated West Country farm hand on a pogo stick playing a jews harp. Reason for this is the ‘top hat’ is considerably larger diameter than the spring guide. It has no bearing on performance but if these things bother you, it’s an issue that you need to sort.
I love the whole aesthetic. The ergonomics of the stock are very good. It would be wonderful in walnut.
My only criticisms are that it’s expensive and pellet fussy, both criticisms that could be made of the first 124.
It’s capable of great things but you have to work hard to make those things happen. If you’re like me and just shoot for fun it’s perfect, a real challenge and very rewarding on the days you nail it. It’s not a rifle I would choose for competitive shooting, it’s too hard work compared to a 77, but just like Mach, I love it.
Some images below, some of 80 parts and old 124 parts as comparisons
http://s1067.photobucket.com/user/wh...ow/New%20sport
Mr Pope also remarked on how well it's built when he fitted a new main spring to mine. Mach 1.5
I can't afford one but I do want one.
Thanks for that Richard. The engineering on FWB rifles certainly grabs me.
The reports I've read from American users don't attest to huge power. How would you say it does shoot sub 12 ? Would you be able to compare to another rifle ?
Also you state its pellet fussy, could you elaborate ? I'm guessing with the huge piston it would prefer something heavier than the 7.9 I normally use.
Walnut ? Well a CS500 would surely swing it for me.
At the minute this does appear to be right at the top of my want list. Strangely enough, the more I look at it, the less I dislike the looks.
B.A.S.C. member