Will any springer ever beat the TX ?

[madcarlos]

Still the hw77 for me, The 77 changed springers , Its why you have the TX, ps etc, The 77 was in a class of its own at the time and is still up there with what's out a lot newer, My TX reminded me slightly of my relum tornado except the cocking was a lot smoother on the relum,

[WILBA]

Still the hw77 for me, The 77 changed springers , Its why you have the TX, ps etc, The 77 was in a class of its own at the time and is still up there with what's out a lot newer, My TX reminded me slightly of my relum tornado except the cocking was a lot smoother on the relum,

Feel the same about my b&m tx bullpup. I will not sell it due to its rarity but i do not use it much as it is such a pain to use. The double cocking is a step backwards in my mind as my old 77/97 i owned were smooth as silk to cock and due to the open loading port you have better access to load the pellet. Id not buy another.

[Shed tuner]

the ugly ABT is very effective, in both main failure scenarios.. slipping lever midway through, and a failure of the trigger (or the owner) whilst loading.

HW doesn't have this. Even the PS one only engages at the very end, to cover the latter scenario.

Very few modern full power springers have ratchet type ABTs, with their inherent safety; in fact, I can only think of Diana
I do agree however that it should be made from nice blued steel, not pig iron,

[Mach 1.5]

Let's not forget if it wasn't for the HW77 and a certain Mr Ken Turner then Air Arms wouldn't have the TX or The Pro Sport. Mach 1.5

[madcarlos]

Let's not forget if it wasn't for the HW77 and a certain Mr Ken Turner then Air Arms wouldn't have the TX or The Pro Sport. Mach 1.5

Exactly bud, The hw77 is still one of the top springers and has been for the last 40 years or so,

[Murphy]

Does anybody know if,

Weihrauch invented/designed the HW77 in house or did they buy somebody's idea or get a 3rd party in to invent/design it?

[SRV1]

Whilst not a scientific/engineering comparison to other springers and the many that I have not tried, it is just a personal opinion that the TX200 transformed my shooting ability and it just felt right. Mainly a collector, I have the old school BSA's; Mercury S, Airsporter S, Goldstar, Superstar, etc...HW: 77, 77K, 35, 80...Anschutz 335, FWB Master Sport 127....Webley Omega...Original 35S, 45 and so on. But for me, the TX200 is the biz.

[gingernut]

My TX is very accurate

But so is my Walther LGV Comp Ultra which just needs a little lever flip and one finger cocking.
It also has open sights

[HW777]

Does anybody know if,

Weihrauch invented/designed the HW77 in house or did they buy somebody's idea or get a 3rd party in to invent/design it?

I did read somewhere ( I don't know how true it was ? ) the first Hw77's were based on a 30mm comp tube but the overall weight of the rifle was 12lbs plus, I wonder who owns that prototype ?

I'd say yes the Hw77 was a in house design but with ideas taken from a previous sliding comp tube rifle.

[Geezer]

Let's not forget if it wasn't for the HW77 and a certain Mr Ken Turner then Air Arms wouldn't have the TX or The Pro Sport. Mach 1.5

It always amused me that when the TX was announced, Airgunner magazine wrote up the news story but accidentally illustrated it with a picture of a Venom 77.

[Barryg]

I do agree however that it should be made from nice blued steel, not pig iron,

Just wondering what you mean by the term pig iron

Do you mean very poor quality steel or cast parts ? would AA use poor quality metal on their guns?

[Geezer]

Just wondering what you mean by the term pig iron

Do you mean very poor quality steel or cast parts ? would AA use poor quality metal on their guns?

Pig iron or not, the ratchet on the Diana 48/52 is huge, and very reassuring.

[Barryg]

Still the hw77 for me, The 77 changed springers , Its why you have the TX, ps etc, The 77 was in a class of its own at the time and is still up there with what's out a lot newer, My TX reminded me slightly of my relum tornado except the cocking was a lot smoother on the relum,

You could say that the TX is a copy of the 77 and a lot later the LGU was a copy of the TX.

But the TX does have some improvements over the 77

Piston rings

Rotating piston

Central transfer port

A cocking shoe for less wear in that area

Simple easy to dismantle construction

And if you like or not It does have a ABT

More power for FAC



The LGU has had a fair few years to think of how to improve on the TX so how many improvements are there

- Zero

So again will the TX ever be beat as a production springer if so by who

[Mach 1.5]

Last year was the inaugural UKAHFT recoiling championship. A one off shoot held at one of the toughest courses in the country. Top 3 places were taken with TX200's.
Also the UKAHFT and FT world championships (springer class) were won with TX200's.

In that case it's only took 36 years for the TX200 to be the so called best under lever. Well done AA. In the meantime the 77 / 97 has won everything. Is it a case also of trends? Being are Underlevers more accurate than a break barrel? Or is it just down to the person behind the trigger? But that might be a thread for another day?
Mach 1.5

[Barryg]

Just for interest are these the first models? the full length looks different look at the gap between the barrel and lever is this the PS type that you have Pete? am I wrong but the barrel seems longer than the new type.