Is there a mechanically perfect springer?

[Scott.]

I would have thought that most of not all of the quality branded springers were mechanically perfect on paper...
(Otherwise the so-called engineer who designed it is a total walloper)

That would of course have been before the bean counters forced economical compromises into the equation and undid all their hard work

[yorkiets]

For the avoidance of doubt, my ideal springer at 12 ft-lbs or so would be a 22mm cylinder long-stroke late-model (LW barrel) Webley Tomahawk with a Venom trigger and a resettable safety catch, preferably ambidextrous. In walnut.

Which is basically the mythical unicorn Air Arms break-barrel that at least 63 people on here have been lobbying for.

Shooting my Tomahawk again at the weekend, it really is the nicest full power break barrel I’ve ever shot.

Off a bag rest at 40 yards it’s very very impressive. Re the OP’s question, I couldn’t say it’s mechanically perfect, but it’s the closest I’ve had in a ‘normal’ sporter springer.

10m guns are another issue, I have a squishy spot for my original 75, which must be a contender for mechanically perfect mantle in its class.

[Carl2]

I would have thought that most of not all of the quality branded springers were mechanically perfect on paper...
(Otherwise the so-called engineer who designed it is a total walloper)

That would of course have been before the bean counters forced economical compromises into the equation and undid all their hard work

I agree that's why I cannot fathom out why Beeman are still selling that daft rifle that fires 2 shots at the same time. I thought I may buy one just for a laugh but any test shows just how hopeless this rifle is.

[cooper_dan]

I would have thought that most of not all of the quality branded springers were mechanically perfect on paper...
(Otherwise the so-called engineer who designed it is a total walloper)

That would of course have been before the bean counters forced economical compromises into the equation and undid all their hard work

An engineer's job is basically managing compromises to produce a product with the desired cost/performance/weight/durability etc.
We don't get to design 'perfect' products, with possibly the exception of F1 but even they are working to rules.

If there is a 'perfect' design it would have to be an individual's pet project from the outset. And even then it would never be perfect because there are ALWAYS compromises to be made

[nurek]

I am surprised that no one has mentioned the Whiscombe?

It's mechanically perfect with its two pistons cancelling out recoil and it has the best trigger in the business.

[cooper_dan]

I am surprised that no one has mentioned the Whiscombe?

It's mechanically perfect with its two pistons cancelling out recoil and it has the best trigger in the business.

Depends on your definition of perfect.
The way a whiscome works with a gear rack on each side of the gear will create a slight twisting moment around the vertical axis (i.e twist left or right as you are holding it). Due to the centre of gravity of each piston being offset to one side of the cylinder axis.

Is it noticeable? Probably not
Is it 'perfect'? No

[nurek]

Depends on your definition of perfect.
The way a whiscome works with a gear rack on each side of the gear will create a slight twisting moment around the vertical axis (i.e twist left or right as you are holding it). Due to the centre of gravity of each piston being offset to one side of the cylinder axis.

Is it noticeable? Probably not
Is it 'perfect'? No

My definition of perfect? Are you having a laugh? Going by your definition nothing can ever be perfect. Spring airgun is a mechanical object which is subject to forces, stress, strain etc. etc. If we look at details like bending of the compression tube due to offsets, almost every spring gun is subject to it, if the locking mechanism is not inline with the center of the piston/spring (and it never is on conventional springers).

As for the Whiscombe, if you want to analyse bending due to moment it's actually happening in both the vertical and horizontal planes (vertical due to what you said above) and horizontal as the gear is offset from the center of the piston/springs (it's below it), hence force is applied away from the place where the load is being held, bending the cylinder.

If we go into that much detail, maybe you'd expect airguns to be 100% efficient too, or anything less is not perfect...

Please define perfect

[oldcurmudgeon]

The man himself has designed a balanced piston which addresses said problem, but unfortunately is not available as he has retired from producing his masterpiece.

[cooper_dan]

I don't think the meaning of 'perfect' is up for debate. Look in a dictionary.
My point was that there isn't a mechanically perfect springer. Cant be done.

[nurek]

I don't think the meaning of 'perfect' is up for debate. Look in a dictionary.
My point was that there isn't a mechanically perfect springer. Cant be done.

Ok, so your point is that one doesn't exist, I am of the opinion that the Whiscombe gets closest to it, unless we are talking strictly about recoiling springers.

I also looked in the dictionary which defines perfect (adjective) as “having all the required or desirable elements, qualities, or characteristics; as good as it is possible to be.”

Hence it is a subjective issue, your desirable elements may be different to mine?

If for you mechanically perfect = 100% efficient, then I agree, one doesn't exist.

[gtfreight]

This reminds me of an old joke;
Two people in a pub disscussing their work and one of them is an engineer who designs aircraft and says that he has to work to tolerances of 1/1000 of a milimetre. The second person who is a flagger for the council says "You'd be no good in my job my flags have to be perfect".
Piotr, I've had a little play with one of your Whiscombes and I must admit that it was sublime.

[Amac]

Personally, I am also unaware of a "perfect" gun. However, I am aware of many springers that are just nice to shoot. Usually examples that have received a proper tune from somebody who knows what they are doing to state the obvious.

[Scott.]

An engineer's job is basically managing compromises to produce a product with the desired cost/performance/weight/durability etc.
We don't get to design 'perfect' products, with possibly the exception of F1 but even they are working to rules.

If there is a 'perfect' design it would have to be an individual's pet project from the outset. And even then it would never be perfect because there are ALWAYS compromises to be made

Good point and well made thanks Dan.

In my ignorance I was thinking about if from the point of view of say a 1983 MK1 HW77, then the 1985 MK2 might have been a bug fix then 20 or so years later the MK3 (is it a MK3??) with the 26mm cylinder and moving forward to today with arguably cheaper components and QC corners cut in the aim of maximising profit.

I can now see the flaw in my thought process as I never really considered (again in my ignorance) that the prototypes would have been made to a costing too.

Cheers
Scott

[Baxterbasics]

My definition of perfect? Are you having a laugh? Going by your definition nothing can ever be perfect. Spring airgun is a mechanical object which is subject to forces, stress, strain etc. etc. If we look at details like bending of the compression tube due to offsets, almost every spring gun is subject to it, if the locking mechanism is not inline with the center of the piston/spring (and it never is on conventional springers).

As for the Whiscombe, if you want to analyse bending due to moment it's actually happening in both the vertical and horizontal planes (vertical due to what you said above) and horizontal as the gear is offset from the center of the piston/springs (it's below it), hence force is applied away from the place where the load is being held, bending the cylinder.

If we go into that much detail, maybe you'd expect airguns to be 100% efficient too, or anything less is not perfect...

Please define perfect

I put 5 shots into a 5p piece target at Cobham club's 100m range back in 2006. Thats fingernail group at 100m. With a springer.
As close to perfection as anything yet done.

[TonyL]

And the gun, Graham?