Theoben gasram collection

[topgun35]

SLR88 ultra carbine .22, second rarest variety!

[guy]

SLR88 ultra carbine .22, second rarest variety!

Think I would disagree with you there mate, know of more slr ft's than i do ultra carbines!!

[crosswind]

Greetings all, first post on the forum.

I have a Fenman Profile in .22 from Nov 1996, never had any reliability issues and still going strong on it's 21 year old seals.

Previously had an HE Eliminator (around 93-94 vintage without the evo trigger and using moulded piston crown) that I regretfully sold, originally in .20, then bought .25 and .22 barrel assemblys for it, .22 was by far the best performing caliber for me.

[JohnnyPiston]

Greetings all, first post on the forum.

I have a Fenman Profile in .22 from Nov 1996, never had any reliability issues and still going strong on it's 21 year old seals.

Previously had an HE Eliminator (around 93-94 vintage without the evo trigger and using moulded piston crown) that I regretfully sold, originally in .20, then bought .25 and .22 barrel assemblys for it, .22 was by far the best performing caliber for me.

21 years, same seals...wow!

[I. J.]

Ive shots loads. Never owned one - never wanted to. The only Theoben I own is a Mark 2 Rapid and the only adjustable gas ram break barrel rifles are two prototype Webleys.

ATB
Ian

[transporter]

Greetings all, first post on the forum.

I have a Fenman Profile in .22 from Nov 1996, never had any reliability issues and still going strong on it's 21 year old seals.

Previously had an HE Eliminator (around 93-94 vintage without the evo trigger and using moulded piston crown) that I regretfully sold, originally in .20, then bought .25 and .22 barrel assemblys for it, .22 was by far the best performing caliber for me.

My 1985/1986/ sirocco classics and country man are still on their original seals and still shoot sweet

[oldcurmudgeon]

I have to correct I.J. here, the two Webleys are not the only power variable models made. I have an adjustable power model and also know of others who own various models with variable output.
Back in the day a few slant face receivers were produced with an extended valve which could be accessed without removing the stock. I believe that while a few stayed in the country, most were exported. I have seen a thumhole stocked Eliminator in .177 with this modification.

[I. J.]

I have to correct I.J. here, the two Webleys are not the only power variable models made. I have an adjustable power model and also know of others who own various models with variable output.
Back in the day a few slant face receivers were produced with an extended valve which could be accessed without removing the stock. I believe that while a few stayed in the country, most were exported. I have seen a thumhole stocked Eliminator in .177 with this modification.

Every day is a school day.

The example of Omega (W & W lot 1168) and Vulcan (W & W lot 1167) I have with adjustable, not to be confused with the gas strut, were from the Wallis & Wallis auction and appear in the catalogue as '...converted by Theoben to gas ram system...'. .
I contacted Theoben to make further inquiries and they had no knowledge of these guns. I have never seen or heard until today of another example of a gas ram Vulcan or Omega. Was Webley being naughty?

http://smg.photobucket.com/user/Airs...ml?sort=6&o=90

ATB
Ian

[crosswind]

My 1985/1986/ sirocco classics and country man are still on their original seals and still shoot sweet

I don't doubt there's plenty around older than my Fenman that haven't been touched, kind of makes you wonder about people having owned more than one Theoben that lost pressure from day one, o'rings, backup rings and seals aren't rocket science to make super reliable even in far harsher environments than an airgun, I would've thought older guns that maybe haven't been used for long periods would have been more likely to suffer from o'ring embrittlement or damage through sticking.

As an aside, I was looking at this http://www.dursley.org.uk/air/gasramsstrip.pdf and was surpised to see in step 9 what looks like a Fenman action with a stepped back up to 31mm piston head, did they stop sleeving them down to 27mm on those later ones?

[severnsider]

As an aside, I was looking at this http://www.dursley.org.uk/air/gasramsstrip.pdf and was surpised to see in step 9 what looks like a Fenman action with a stepped back up to 31mm piston head, did they stop sleeving them down to 27mm on those later ones?

Well spotted. I'm not sure whether to call it a Fenman or an Evo. It's certainly in a Fenman stock, but has dovetails rather than fixed mounts, and was sold to me as a Fenman. The s/n makes it seem to be rather late to be a "real" Fenman, so what differences are there between what you see in the photos and an older Fenman (or newer Evo) action?

[bighit]

my supposed 2003 evo is 81 rifles from that serial number in the dursley link.

might be the barrel it left the factory with that or swapped at some point . given that some may prefer a .177 but bought a .22 and did a barrel swap .

[guy]

Well spotted. I'm not sure whether to call it a Fenman or an Evo. It's certainly in a Fenman stock, but has dovetails rather than fixed mounts, and was sold to me as a Fenman. The s/n makes it seem to be rather late to be a "real" Fenman, so what differences are there between what you see in the photos and an older Fenman (or newer Evo) action?

The ones with the dovetails are real fenmen but are the transition to the evo, very very late crossover guns before they diluted the brand somewhat with the evo (yes I do have an evo in my collection so beforenthenflaming starts!)

[crosswind]

Well spotted. I'm not sure whether to call it a Fenman or an Evo. It's certainly in a Fenman stock, but has dovetails rather than fixed mounts, and was sold to me as a Fenman. The s/n makes it seem to be rather late to be a "real" Fenman, so what differences are there between what you see in the photos and an older Fenman (or newer Evo) action?

So the one in the PDF is yours?
Going by memory and the old eye-ometer, mines TB10557 and late 96 according to a record of serial numbers I saw online somewhere and the piston on mine has quite a bit more material wasted away further towards the back of the piston, and no welded on end where the crown is, plus it isn't stepped up in diameter like that one in the pictures which definitely doesn't look like it has a cylinder sleeve in it when looking at the picture of the cylinder slot with the piston head pulled back to where the cocking groove is, the stroke may be different as the pictured one looks to have the sear engagement further towards the piston crown whereas mine engages right at the very end of the piston.

The dummy piston or inner sliding spear assembly on mine isn't retained by circlip and doesn't have a central shrader valve or big o'ring around the back of it, instead being retained by a crosspin and a central grub screw to retain that, plus schrader port on the top edge of the spear assembly and the older soldered on scope mounts the rings screw to.Also the forward articulated cocking link on mine is two halves with spacers inbetween not solid like that one.

I've only ever taken the piston out of mine once not long after I got it as curiosity got the better of me, and I didn't separate the spear from the piston but I'm sure I don't remember a brass seal carrier being in mine, I've read from others that Theoben experimented quite a bit with different material seal carriers along with o'ring and seal arrangements, inertia weights with holes and without holes, what interests me most about the one in that PDF is the bigger diameter piston head, considering the sleeved down cylinder and wasted away piston was big enough deal to put in the advertising, I'm wondering maybe this one was an FAC version with a slightly longer stroke, no sleeved cylinder and a slightly heavier piston, I'm surprised if it is considering it looks like it has the 7.5" barrel and as far as I was aware the FAC version was only available with 10.5" barrel, I guess it could have been shortened after by someone if it was an FAC version, or alternatively maybe they were getting back some swept volume in the 12 ft lb models to improve the cycle in .177 caliber which I don't think was even available when I got mine.

Would love to know for sure, but that's my thoughts