Will any springer ever beat the TX ?

[WILBA]

i'm a little confused by what you mean when you say you the TX underlever catch is ugly and not secure as my catch is very secure and you say the PS is the best when it has no catch at all and can sometimes get droop.

Fixed the droop on my late prosort with a tiny magnet.

[Saxmaniac]

Fixed the droop on my late prosort with a tiny magnet.

The version you picture is not the current version, which (IMO) is ugly and does not lock-up as securely as the HW97K underlever.

None of my Pros Sport’s suffer from underlever droop!

I note you don’t deny the god damned ugly anti-bear trap design of the TX200

[Saxmaniac]

Gloves off, let’s get into it!

Why does the ugly and irrelevant anti-bear trap design of the TX200 continue to exist when other proven designs demonstrate the irrelevance? It wouldn’t be quite so bad if the anti-bear trap lever and housing were the same highly polished steel as the cylinder and barrel, but instead they are nasty rough pig-metal casting’s.

Sort that and the barrel/underlever assembly and I’ll buy one!

I don’t know which model it was, but the TX200 that had a barrel/underlever assembly like the HW97K was far better, IMHO.

BarryG, you started this dude

[Barryg]

Gloves off, let’s get into it!

Why does the ugly and irrelevant anti-bear trap design of the TX200 continue to exist when other proven designs demonstrate the irrelevance? It wouldn’t be quite so bad if the anti-bear trap lever and housing were the same highly polished steel as the cylinder and barrel, but instead they are nasty rough pig-metal casting’s.

Sort that and the barrel/underlever assembly and I’ll buy one!

I don’t know which model it was, but the TX200 that had a barrel/underlever assembly like the HW97K was far better, IMHO.

BarryG, you started this dude

I'm still a bit confused by what you are saying because even though I have the older type barrel catch I wasn't aware that the new ones are weak perhaps someone else can comment about these, and although you say that you haven't had droop on your PSs yet you haven't said why you don't mind having no catch on their levers if you like strong lever catches and also why you don't mind the whole lever setup not being made of the same high quality steel as the rest of the gun if you don't like the small pressed steel ABT on the TX not being made of highly polished steel.
I didn't really start it just made a comment

[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

[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?

[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