Fixed barrel springers, will there ever be a better setup than the sliding breech

[TonyL]

Didn't Hitler's people dream one up like that that could shoot round corners?

Well, for a few shots anyway!

[bighit]

Didn't Hitler's people dream one up like that that could shoot round corners?

Well, for a few shots anyway!

Yes




Krummlauf Curved Barrel on an StG-44

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSsFiS2Voxg

[Geezer]

Didn't Hitler's people dream one up like that that could shoot round corners?

Well, for a few shots anyway!

The Krummlauf. Or, more correctly, the Vorsatz J (or I) and Vorstaz Pz. Originally a way (Pz = Panzer, 90 degree bend) of letting tank crews engage infantry without sticking their heads above the open hatch. Also developed (I or J, 30 degree bend) for infantry in trench or urban warfare.

Not sure it ever saw service. Never replicated by any other army. Which tells you something about its utility, 72 years later.

Back on topic. Tap-loader, anyone? Surely it's not just me?

[Rickenbacker]

Back on topic. Tap-loader, anyone? Surely it's not just me?

Yep, it's just you.

Any system where the pellet isn't seated in the barrel = Pants.

And I'm including the Steyr 5 in that.

[Hsing-ee]

Yep, it's just you.

Any system where the pellet isn't seated in the barrel = Pants.

And I'm including the Steyr 5 in that.

I have a couple of accurate pistols that are gate loaders, one of them like the Steyr, and also a Hammerli tap-loader rifle that was egregiously more accurate than the others of its time. I am going to test it with modern pellets once I have overhauled it and got the odd size scope mounts it needs from the post office, where I get most of my kit.

I also have an Original 50 which has been converted by an amateur to direct-breech loading, but it has been done rather imperfectly, giving 2 fpe which I do not think is an improvement on the original Original Diana power. I have yet to strip it to see how it has been achieved, I think it might have been by putting a huge lump of metal in front of the piston which slides back and forth. This combines a shorter stroke with a massively long transfer port.

Overall, I don't like non-direct-loading systems though, they are just not robust enough - how can it be consistent?

[Rickenbacker]

I have a couple of accurate pistols that are gate loaders, one of them like the Steyr, and also a Hammerli tap-loader rifle that was egregiously more accurate than the others of its time. I am going to test it with modern pellets once I have overhauled it and got the odd size scope mounts it needs from the post office, where I get most of my kit.

I also have an Original 50 which has been converted by an amateur to direct-breech loading, but it has been done rather imperfectly, giving 2 fpe which I do not think is an improvement on the original Original Diana power. I have yet to strip it to see how it has been achieved, I think it might have been by putting a huge lump of metal in front of the piston which slides back and forth. This combines a shorter stroke with a massively long transfer port.

Overall, I don't like non-direct-loading systems though, they are just not robust enough - how can it be consistent?

To be fair, I think Geezer is right about a well fitted and fettled loading tap being a wonderful thing... however, I've used a lot more bad ones than wonderfully good ones. And with modern production methods being what they are (more automation - less skilled human involvement), I wonder if a new tap-loader would be viable... is it possible with modern machinery/materials? Or is it just too tricky to get the thing perfectly sealed and aligned every time...?

Your Mod. 50 sounds like an interesting project, Ali.

[Geezer]

To be fair, I think Geezer is right about a well fitted and fettled loading tap being a wonderful thing... however, I've used a lot more bad ones than wonderfully good ones. And with modern production methods being what they are (more automation - less skilled human involvement), I wonder if a new tap-loader would be viable... is it possible with modern machinery/materials? Or is it just too tricky to get the thing perfectly sealed and aligned every time...?

Your Mod. 50 sounds like an interesting project, Ali.

Thank you.

Indeed, there is no way it would be economic to make a well-made taploader now to pre-WWII standards if it involved any hand-fitting. It would cost more than, say, a sliding breech, and not perform as well.

Maybe there is some theoretical way of making one using ultra-precise computerised machinery from the space industry, without the hand-fitting. Or 3D printing, or nanotechnology or some other thing I don't understand. But still not economically. And the sliding breech would still be more efficient.

The last vaguely good taploaders were, IMHO, the 1980s Air Arms Camargue/Khamsin. And they weren't cheap, selling for more than an FWB Sport or HW77 (and the Sport or 77 were the 1980s FT champs, not the AAs).

[TonyL]

Although less efficient than a sliding comp tube rifle, and potentially not as accurate, one absolutely wonderful thing about those tap loaders is the ease and safety.

Once, at one of the Bashes, I had a go with various tap loaders. And the speed and ease of loading was great. From a safety point of view, brilliant.....for the first few shots, having been conditioned to safe handling practices with break barrels and slidy guns, I was holding the under (or side) lever. Once re-conditioned though, it was great.....cock gun, return lever, flick the tap, drop a pellet in, close tap and shoot. Takes far longer to describe than to do.

And the one that I simply MUST have is one of the Lincoln Jeffries / BSA pre-war underlevers. I've loved every single one that I've tried.

One day, one day........

[Hsing-ee]

Your Mod. 50 sounds like an interesting project, Ali.

I got it from Protek, they also had a Webley Mk III done by the same chap. I didn't really look at it properly before I got it, I was just amazed that someone had had a go at doing this. The guy was an engineer, but I don't think he knew a lot about spring rifles. The breech has a MASSIVE chamfer on it which must amount to a good bit of lost volume, although probably not as much as that in a tap. The other odd thing is there is a groove cut in the face of the sliding breech but it is too shallow to put anything in it to seal the breech. I will see how much 'meat' there is behind it and maybe deepen it or I might go the bodger's road and glue a ground-down 'O' ring in there. The power loss must be due to the breech seal, or more likely some kind of shit piston seal. The gun is very heavy to cock and the 2 foot-pounds is really a joke. I might keep it as it is if I can get some decent power out of it, otherwise I think I will break it for parts as its kind of dangerous, I will have to make up a block to put in the breech when loading as there ain't no safety and no anti-bear-trap, so its goodbye fingers if the trigger lets go.

An interesting attempt to recycle a taploader though.

[maximus]

To be fair, I think Geezer is right about a well fitted and fettled loading tap being a wonderful thing... however, I've used a lot more bad ones than wonderfully good ones. And with modern production methods being what they are (more automation - less skilled human involvement), I wonder if a new tap-loader would be viable... is it possible with modern machinery/materials? Or is it just too tricky to get the thing perfectly sealed and aligned every time...?

Your Mod. 50 sounds like an interesting project, Ali.

This is why I am advocating a well engineered pop up breech. Easy to add breech seals, pops up ready to load, short tp no problem light and safe. Also, a Steyr type mag could be worked in. It's the future I tell ya!! 😉