Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 28

Thread: Recoiless vs recoiling FWB experiment

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,674

    Recoiless vs recoiling FWB experiment

    Hi all,
    I wanted to compare the accuracy of a recoiless FWB 150 vs a Recoiling FWB 110 (basically the same rifle, one with and one without the sledge system) and do a little video on it.

    Just tried 10 shots rested with each at 20yds and accuracy is the same.

    Going to do 5 shots standing at 10m with each (I’m not a proper 10m shooter though)

    Any suggestions on other ways to compare accuracy?

    Ideally I’d get a pcp only shooter to try as I suspect they’d find the 150 more accurate.

    150 has a Tyrolean stock so I’ll put this on the 110 too for a fair comparison on the standing shots.


    Any ideas?

    Cheers,
    Matt

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Bruton
    Posts
    6,616
    It would be interesting if someone tried that with an FWB65, which comes with a facility to lock the sled, intended as a rimfire training feature.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    City of London
    Posts
    9,896
    I think the fact the two rifles were comparably accurate says more about your shooting rather than the guns themselves, in that you are conditioned to ignoring recoil. It could be interesting if you showed the different firing characteristics in slow motion, perhaps?
    Vintage Airguns Gallery
    ..Above link posted with permission from Gareth W-B
    In British slang an anorak is a person who has a very strong interest in niche subjects.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Bruton
    Posts
    6,616
    Wondering if anyone has an archive of contemporary match scores from the 60s, which might demonstrate any edge the 150 had over the 110, or early recoilless rifles in general over the recoiling kind?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,674
    Quote Originally Posted by Garvin View Post
    I think the fact the two rifles were comparably accurate says more about your shooting rather than the guns themselves, in that you are conditioned to ignoring recoil.
    You might be right… maybe I’ll do a string of shots using good springer technique, and another string of shots gripping the rifles more tightly.
    It may be that the recoiless FWB’s gave new shooters more accurate results.

    Cheers,
    Matt

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Bruton
    Posts
    6,616
    Quote Originally Posted by ptdunk View Post
    You might be right… maybe I’ll do a string of shots using good springer technique, and another string of shots gripping the rifles more tightly.
    It may be that the recoiless FWB’s gave new shooters more accurate results.

    Cheers,
    Matt
    I think their real success was in being more forgiving of minor user errors by the better shooters over the course of a match.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Near Wimbledon, SW London, or Lusaka, Zambia
    Posts
    26,987
    you need to intruduce hold sensitivity. Bench rested using perfect technique, I'd not expect much if any difference.

    Remember this thread ?

    http://www.airgunbbs.com/showthread....tivity-testing
    Always looking for any cheap, interesting, knackered "project" guns. Thanks, JB.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,674
    Quote Originally Posted by Shed tuner View Post
    you need to intruduce hold sensitivity. Bench rested using perfect technique, I'd not expect much if any difference.

    Remember this thread ?

    http://www.airgunbbs.com/showthread....tivity-testing
    Ah, I didn’t see this.
    As you said shame you didn’t have a standard TX to compare.
    Good thread.

    Cheers,
    Matt

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Retford, Notts
    Posts
    37,287
    Nothing to add other than to agree with the above points. Many recoiling rifles will be just as accurate as their recoilless counterparts per se. It's the hold sensitivity that might separate the two. And even that may be pretty minimal in this experiment taking into account the narrow bore / light internals vs high all-up rifle weight.
    THE BOINGER BASH AT QUIGLEY HOLLOW. MAKING GREAT MEMORIES SINCE 15th JUNE, 2013.
    NEXT EVENT :- May 17/18, 2025.........BOING!!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,674
    Quote Originally Posted by TonyL View Post
    Many recoiling rifles will be just as accurate as their recoilless counterparts per se..
    Are there any other examples of a factory recoiling version of any of the match rifles? I only know of the fwb 120/150, the Diana 70/72 junior rifles and the full power TXSR.


    Cheers,
    Matt

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Glenrothes
    Posts
    1,356
    Quote Originally Posted by ptdunk View Post
    Are there any other examples of a factory recoiling version of any of the match rifles? I only know of the fwb 120/150, the Diana 70/72 junior rifles and the full power TXSR.


    Cheers,
    Matt
    Not match rifles but Dianas 52 and 54 Airking would make an interesting comparison.

    I think the posts above have hit the nail in the head..

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    malta
    Posts
    646
    Quote Originally Posted by ptdunk View Post
    Are there any other examples of a factory recoiling version of any of the match rifles? I only know of the fwb 120/150, the Diana 70/72 junior rifles and the full power TXSR.


    Cheers,
    Matt
    Hi Matt,
    Maybe I'm missing something and can't see your objective, but the actions of the 70 and 72 are very different from each other.
    The idler gear covers on the latter are an instant giveaway to what would otherwise look like identical guns.

    The recoilless mod 6 pistol upon which the 72's action is based, was the budget version of the proper target mod 10 pistol.
    The mod 70 was based on the recoiling mod 5 pistol.

    Recoilless will outscore recoiling when the senses begin to wane at the end of the competitive day.

    Aren't airguns fun?

    David

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,674
    Quote Originally Posted by dvd View Post
    Hi Matt,
    Maybe I'm missing something and can't see your objective

    David
    Hi David, it’s just to see how much difference the Feinwerkbau sledge system makes to accuracy.
    I have a 150 & 110 which are identical apart from one recoils and one doesn’t.

    Seems everyone was right…
    I just did 10 shots with each, rested. Once with my usual light springer hold and once holding it a bit tighter.
    Full results to follow but in the meantime I can say there was no real difference in accuracy.

    The recoiling 110 preferred the lighter hold, and the recoiless 150 preferred the tighter hold (???)

    I have to say I’m surprised, I thought the 150 would be noticeably more accurate, although they are both great rifles, and I’m secretly a bit pleased the 110 did well.
    Makes me think it owed a lot to the rifles general design, based on the Anschutz 220.

    Here are some some slo-mo shots of the mechanisms to compare, interestingly the sledge system on the 150 seems to travel the exact distance that the 110 moves as a result of its untamed recoil.

    https://instagram.com/p/CSo38xZH10M/

    It’s my understanding that Feinwerkbau made the 110 first, and within a year had patented their sledge system and made the 150. I wonder if they used the 110 to work out exactly how far the sledge system would need to travel?

    Anyway I’ll post the groups and full vid soon.
    And yes, airguns are fun.

    Matt

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    malta
    Posts
    646
    Ah, ok I get it now. Thanks for the vid.
    Good of you to give a mention to the grand daddy of the "modern" target rifle, the Anschutz 220.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Bruton
    Posts
    6,616
    Anyone remember the 80s ads (Sussex Armoury, I think) for discounted HW55s claiming scientific proof that the pellet had left the barrel before any recoil-induced movement took place?

    I always thought they were BS.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •