Diana/Original 35 Super Question.

[mrto]

Can any learned fellow explain the differences to me between the Diana/Original Model 35 of the 1970's and the Model 35 Super of the same decade.

[Drew451]

The differences that I am aware of lie in the following areas:

Stock- heftier, squared off affair on the Super
Cocking lever- articulated on Super
Anti-beartrap safety- present on Super
Front sight- mounted on a synthetic barrel sleeve on Super- all metal on dovetails on standard 35
Trigger guard- different shape

[Geezer]

The differences that I am aware of lie in the following areas:

Stock- heftier, squared off affair on the Super
Cocking lever- articulated on Super
Anti-beartrap safety- present on Super
Front sight- mounted on a synthetic barrel sleeve on Super- all metal on dovetails on standard 35
Trigger guard- different shape

Agreed.

[Drew451]

I've never made up my mind as to which version I prefer. For me the Super is the better gun scoped for target/ range use. The regular 35 has handier dimensions and I think its a better gun than the Super for field use or for plinking with open sights.
Nice to have both to cover all scenarios.

[mrto]

Thanks for the responses.I have a 'regular' 35 and agree it's a very handy,sleek gun.I was asking for a friend about the Super as he was contemplating buying one and I didn't really know the differences the variation had.

Other than the articulated cocking link on the Super it sounds like it shares the same action as the regular version,which is good to know.

Presumably,the Super commands a premium over the regular version?

ATB.

[Geezer]

Presumably,the Super commands a premium over the regular version?

ATB.

Maybe, but not a lot. They are much rarer, but not particularly sought after. In no way are they in the same league of 70s desirability as FWB124/7, HW35E, BSF55/60, Diana 45, etc. And the 70s angular looks are a very acquired taste. A 35S is worth less than a Sterling HR81, despite being a much better rifle.

I’d think that the most valuable 35s are the 1950s through mid/late 60s ones, with metal sights and great fit and finish on both metal and wood. Especially upmarket target variants with contemporary aperture sights.

The least valuable are the later ones with poorer finish, plastic rear sights, lacquered stocks. Though they may shoot just as well as many of the earlier ones.

The S is somewhere in between.

Maybe a £10-20 premium.

Obviously, a mint or near-mint one would attract a bit more. There can’t be many around.

[Geezer]

PS. As there aren’t many around, and they are good, I’d recommend that your friend buy it if it’s not a stupid price or in awful condition. Either he likes it, or can flip it for little or no loss, or even a small profit.

Ballpark guesstimate figure for a functioning rifle with sights: £90-150 for a private sale, depending on condition.

I agree with Drew (again). A better target gun than the standard. But the regular item feels more classically “sporting”. That said, most “sporting” stocks since have evolved to a more “target” style.

[mrto]

PS. As there aren’t many around, and they are good, I’d recommend that your friend buy it if it’s not a stupid price or in awful condition. Either he likes it, or can flip it for little or no loss, or even a small profit.

Ballpark guesstimate figure for a functioning rifle with sights: £90-150 for a private sale, depending on condition.

I agree with Drew (again). A better target gun than the standard. But the regular item feels more classically “sporting”. That said, most “sporting” stocks since have evolved to a more “target” style.

Thank you,Geezer for the further info' very useful.

ATB.

[Hsing-ee]

PS. As there aren’t many around, and they are good, I’d recommend that your friend buy it if it’s not a stupid price or in awful condition. Either he likes it, or can flip it for little or no loss, or even a small profit.

I agree with Drew (again). A better target gun than the standard. But the regular item feels more classically “sporting”. That said, most “sporting” stocks since have evolved to a more “target” style.

The standard stock is indeed sporting, slim and easy to handle. With the open sights it lines up on target when you point it, easy as looking. More like a shotgun than a target rifle.

[Drew451]

I've pondered this more than once: what was the point of the Super series? Or more correctly: what was the point of offering regular and Super versions of the 35, 27 etc?

[jonnyone]

I've pondered this more than once: what was the point of the Super series? Or more correctly: what was the point of offering regular and Super versions of the 35, 27 etc?

Hmmm. Tricky one that. I'm no.marketing guru but it does beg the question does it make financial sense to offer what are basically the same model gun alongside each other in the manufacturer's range? I'm not uber familiar with the 35 or the 27 but would guess that the S series has better cosmetically pleasing lines? Only by seeing the prices of each back in.the day could one make a judgement as to whether the extra you were paying for was worth it?
But is there more to this? In doing a little research other evening I stumbled on a thread possibly from right here that seems to suggest that in respect of the 35 at least its possible that it had a different piston set up on the S variant quite likely with a view to higher power output. If I recall BSA achieved the same by giving a nicer stock n stronger mainspring on the Super Meteor model.
I would certainly be interested if someone in the know could throw some light on any possible differences in.the action??
Dave

[Geezer]

I've pondered this more than once: what was the point of the Super series? Or more correctly: what was the point of offering regular and Super versions of the 35, 27 etc?

They are odd aren’t they? I think they came out in 1977, so only a year before the 45, which was much more on the late 70s and 80s zeitgeist for high power at all costs.

I have always assumed the idea was entry-level budget target rifles aimed at the big German 10M match market, sized for kids (25DS), youths (27S) and adults/big adolescents (35S) - all running at German sub-7.5J power.

I strongly suspect that the regular and S models competed heavily against each other, to the detriment of M&G’s bottom line.

Accepting my German 10M hypothesis, i’m not sure what “better” entry-level rifles were eating into Diana sales that would make the S guns a good idea. The stock 27 has a good case as being a near-perfect lightweight mid-power plinker, barn gun, or base target air rifle, especially in the 70s. The 27S (I have one) isn’t so much better as different.

The Webley/BSA/HW/everyone else model of making the same gun in standard and fancy stock deluxe models is a much better business model than making mechanically different variants of the same action at the same level of finish.

[Drew451]

They are odd aren’t they? I think they came out in 1977, so only a year before the 45, which was much more on the late 70s and 80s zeitgeist for high power at all costs.

I have always assumed the idea was entry-level budget target rifles aimed at the big German 10M match market, sized for kids (25DS), youths (27S) and adults/big adolescents (35S) - all running at German sub-7.5J power.

I strongly suspect that the regular and S models competed heavily against each other, to the detriment of M&G’s bottom line.

Accepting my German 10M hypothesis, i’m not sure what “better” entry-level rifles were eating into Diana sales that would make the S guns a good idea. The stock 27 has a good case as being a near-perfect lightweight mid-power plinker, barn gun, or base target air rifle, especially in the 70s. The 27S (I have one) isn’t so much better as different.

The Webley/BSA/HW/everyone else model of making the same gun in standard and fancy stock deluxe models is a much better business model than making mechanically different variants of the same action at the same level of finish.

They certainly do have the look of the 70s match guns and lend themselves to off hand shooting very well. They must have been one of the earliest angular/ slab sides mainstream springers of that period before others followed suit.
The regular 27 is near perfect in my opinion, but its a tad too small, esp. in the area of the pistol grip for average sized adult hands. The 27S must be an improvement in this regard or looks to be.
Walters book says 1973 for the introduction date of the 35S but thst it didn't appear in Britain in any numbers until, I think, 1977. Mine is a '77 as are the majority (a handful) I've seen are '77's. Not sure when the S series died.
Super owners: let us know your dates.

[Drew451]

Hmmm. Tricky one that. I'm no.marketing guru but it does beg the question does it make financial sense to offer what are basically the same model gun alongside each other in the manufacturer's range? I'm not uber familiar with the 35 or the 27 but would guess that the S series has better cosmetically pleasing lines? Only by seeing the prices of each back in.the day could one make a judgement as to whether the extra you were paying for was worth it?
But is there more to this? In doing a little research other evening I stumbled on a thread possibly from right here that seems to suggest that in respect of the 35 at least its possible that it had a different piston set up on the S variant quite likely with a view to higher power output. If I recall BSA achieved the same by giving a nicer stock n stronger mainspring on the Super Meteor model.
I would certainly be interested if someone in the know could throw some light on any possible differences in.the action??
Dave

I have never had either apart but I know Chambers list different pistons for 35 and 35S, the 35 item having a part no and that of the S being N/A. To me, the piston rod on the S looks shorter, which may give thst gun a slightly longer stroke.

[landymick]

The 35S was still around with the 45 in 1980 for the Anniversary model.