New Webley Service

[Phil B]

Ah, non removeable barrel has just killed it for me. Take note please Mr Sterling.

It’s part fiddle factor and part that it made a “compact” package stripped.
Also, iron sights are ESSENTIAL imho.

I’ll stick to my original, maybe try and find a very sweet one for the same money.

[Josie & John]

Ah, non removeable barrel has just killed it for me. Take note please Mr Sterling.

It’s part fiddle factor and part that it made a “compact” package stripped.
Also, iron sights are ESSENTIAL imho.

I’ll stick to my original, maybe try and find a very sweet one for the same money.

On the face of it, the ability to interchange barrels has always been one of the most attractive features of the Webley Service air rifle. However, I understand why Sterling are reluctant to offer this after speaking with the rifle's 'reverse engineer' at the British Shooting Show. Sterling want to offer power levels up to the legal limit and in order to do this, they would have to set up a multi barrelled set for a heavy .25 pellet, which is more efficient ballistically than a lighter .177. Therefore a rifle set up to shoot a .25 or even a .22 would be less efficient in .177 and therefore high power could not be offered in the smaller calibre. I am a huge fan of the original and if I am completely honest with myself, I do not regularly swap barrels/calibres unless I am experimenting for a review. Doing so results in different trajectories anyway, so having just one barrel but consistently high power kind of works for me.

Agreed about open sights though. The rifle needs a quality peep sight in keeping with the original. It just so happens my friend Paul O'Donnell makes excellent replacement sights for the Service, so I'll speak to him when I next see him about this interesting project.

John

[andrewM]

As Cinedux remarked: "Never make a 'poor man's version" of anything!"

This project must also be considered from the business viewpoint or it will end up flat on its face. To whom is Sterling appealing? Is it just to those who collect? If so, I suspect the market is restricted and at the price suggested, only a small number will purchase. As per the comments here, some collectors will not purchase if the rifle varies from the original too much. Others will find the price a deterrent. The potential returns on capital suggest that the sums might not add up unless the case is compelling. Therefore the project must appeal to more general shooters. In this respect, raising the power to close to 12ft/lbs will appeal to them but to win their confidence, a telescope will be a vital consideration for hardly anyone shoots with open sights these days. The price will also detract: why buy an obsolete design when HW produce rifles just as good for less than half the price? What, therefore, will Sterling offer which makes this a 'must buy' and competes with other manufacturers? General shooters have never heard of the old Mk2 Webley, so sentiment is not a consideration for them. Will this new rifle offer better accuracy? Will the open sights provide a better and sharper alternative to existing open sights on competing rifles? What of the handling? What is the trigger like? How is the balance and what is the weight of the rifle? How do these things compare with the competition?

There are very many questions to be asked and answered. If production occurs and the reviews are poor, the project could fail. Far better for Sterling to take time and to consider all the questions that are likely to arise and, not least, to consult widely. In this respect, Cinedux's views are bang on target: this rifle must outclass the original.

I would like this project to succeed and, not least, it is pleasing to see another British manufacturer in the market again. To make a success, all the boxes should be ticked and the most careful research and consultation should be carried out to ensure this occurs. If it is also a success from a business view, perhaps further innovations will follow from Sterling.

[T 20]

On the face of it, the ability to interchange barrels has always been one of the most attractive features of the Webley Service air rifle. However, I understand why Sterling are reluctant to offer this after speaking with the rifle's 'reverse engineer' at the British Shooting Show. Sterling want to offer power levels up to the legal limit and in order to do this, they would have to set up a multi barrelled set for a heavy .25 pellet, which is more efficient ballistically than a lighter .177. Therefore a rifle set up to shoot a .25 or even a .22 would be less efficient in .177 and therefore high power could not be offered in the smaller calibre. I am a huge fan of the original and if I am completely honest with myself, I do not regularly swap barrels/calibres unless I am experimenting for a review. Doing so results in different trajectories anyway, so having just one barrel but consistently high power kind of works for me.

John

I can understand Stirling's thinking on this, John.

Webley themselves finally dropped the interchangeable barrel system on the Hawk MK2 as so few people bought the gun with both barrels.
When the Hawk MK3 came out with its fixed barrel it must have save Webley quite a bit of money in machining costs.




All the best Mick

[Garvin]

FWIW, like Andrew I have grave doubts this venture will succeed while original Mk2 Services in good nick can be bought for £500 or so. Anyone wanting a more powerful, near-legal limit, air rifle will probably go for a more modern one, while the market for a high-priced, non-original classic reproduction without the bells and whistles of the original is surely tiny?

But I applaud the innovation behind the idea.

[micky2]

FWIW, like Andrew I have grave doubts this venture will succeed while original Mk2 Services in good nick can be bought for £500 or so. Anyone wanting a more powerful, near-legal limit, air rifle will probably go for a more modern one, while the market for a high-priced, non-original classic reproduction without the bells and whistles of the original is surely tiny?

But I applaud the innovation behind the idea.

l have to agree with you Danny, why would you do a reproduction of a rifle that there are still plenty of the originals about. with the only advantage being higher power. but good luck to them if they do it.

[andrewM]

Well, after reading all these highly constructive comments, I hope someone will forward them to Sterling. As with launching any product, the views and observations of the potential users are essential. I really hope Sterling is successful with this launch, as and when it occurs, and also hope that it will, in time, give rise to a new family of air rifles from this well-known British manufacturer. There cannot be much more to invent in the field of air-gunning, so all the knowledge must be out there. That being the case, there is no reason why we cannot compete with the Germans on the technical ability - even although it would be pleasing were some new technology to emerge. This being the case, the essence is to capture the market and to do that, only the very best will succeed. An imitation of a design over 80 years old will not necessarily stimulate demand, especially at the price indicated.

[Josie & John]

Well, after reading all these highly constructive comments, I hope someone will forward them to Sterling. As with launching any product, the views and observations of the potential users are essential. I really hope Sterling is successful with this launch, as and when it occurs, and also hope that it will, in time, give rise to a new family of air rifles from this well-known British manufacturer. There cannot be much more to invent in the field of air-gunning, so all the knowledge must be out there. That being the case, there is no reason why we cannot compete with the Germans on the technical ability - even although it would be pleasing were some new technology to emerge. This being the case, the essence is to capture the market and to do that, only the very best will succeed. An imitation of a design over 80 years old will not necessarily stimulate demand, especially at the price indicated.

Hi Andrew,

The Sterling stand at the show also had a full stocked PCP on display, where the walnut stock ended in a Schnabel tip and had s Stutzen look about it. With its Mannlicher profiled spoon shaped bolt, I felt this was one of the first PCPs that actually looked stylish. I should have photographed it but was concentrating on the Service. Nigel Allen filmed it whilst I was handling it for his You Tube Airgun TV channel if anyone is interested in this classically shaped PCP.

John

[Shed tuner]

FWIW, like Andrew I have grave doubts this venture will succeed while original Mk2 Services in good nick can be bought for £500 or so. Anyone wanting a more powerful, near-legal limit, air rifle will probably go for a more modern one, while the market for a high-priced, non-original classic reproduction without the bells and whistles of the original is surely tiny?

But I applaud the innovation behind the idea.

yeah I agree.. also if you pay £500 for an original, it's only going to be worth more a few years later. Pay £900 for the repro, and it'll be worth what, £200 less ?

As said, I love the idea, but pricing is tricky to swallow...

[oneseven]

yeah I agree.. also if you pay £500 for an original, it's only going to be worth more a few years later. Pay £900 for the repro, and it'll be worth what, £200 less ?

As said, I love the idea, but pricing is tricky to swallow...

It it could be worth much more. How much were Whiscomes originally compared to what they cost now?

[Troubledshooter]

It it could be worth much more. How much were Whiscomes originally compared to what they cost now?

Just remind me, what were Whiscombe's a copy of ?

[Shed tuner]

On the face of it, the ability to interchange barrels has always been one of the most attractive features of the Webley Service air rifle. However, I understand why Sterling are reluctant to offer this after speaking with the rifle's 'reverse engineer' at the British Shooting Show. Sterling want to offer power levels up to the legal limit and in order to do this, they would have to set up a multi barrelled set for a heavy .25 pellet, which is more efficient ballistically than a lighter .177. Therefore a rifle set up to shoot a .25 or even a .22 would be less efficient in .177 and therefore high power could not be offered in the smaller calibre. I am a huge fan of the original and if I am completely honest with myself, I do not regularly swap barrels/calibres unless I am experimenting for a review. Doing so results in different trajectories anyway, so having just one barrel but consistently high power kind of works for me.

Agreed about open sights though. The rifle needs a quality peep sight in keeping with the original. It just so happens my friend Paul O'Donnell makes excellent replacement sights for the Service, so I'll speak to him when I next see him about this interesting project.

John

Two options ref removable barrel power issue...

- make the larger cal barrels shorter to reduce ME.. can be counterbored if needed to preserve aeshetics
- make the barels removable but not swappable - so you buy a gun with a .177 keyway barrel carrier, the keyway of the .177 only fits the .177 carrier. So long as the .22 key is larger in size, so it can't be fitted to the .177 carrier, you are fine. Least you preserve the takedown function

[Josie & John]

Two options ref removable barrel power issue...

- make the larger cal barrels shorter to reduce ME.. can be counterbored if needed to preserve aeshetics
- make the barels removable but not swappable - so you buy a gun with a .177 keyway barrel carrier, the keyway of the .177 only fits the .177 carrier. So long as the .22 key is larger in size, so it can't be fitted to the .177 carrier, you are fine. Least you preserve the takedown function

Now these are both excellent ideas.

Kind regards,

John

[vbull]

Ah, non removeable barrel has just killed it for me. Take note please Mr Sterling.

It’s part fiddle factor and part that it made a “compact” package stripped.
Also, iron sights are ESSENTIAL imho.

I’ll stick to my original, maybe try and find a very sweet one for the same money.

As above, killed it for me too......