Fas 6004 v 604

[I. J.]

I had a 6004 two days before it broke. (the back sight). I took it back to the suppliers and got a refund.

[mikehill]

Hi Ian, did did they fix the fault on later guns ?

[Sgibbar]

I have seen a few 6004’s through pony club (low use, carefully used) with loose pins, oval pin holes that just suggest that the frame metal is just not as good, the triggers are also just not as good. So these 5-6 year old guns are already showing signs of wear whereas 40year old 604’s generally just need a £6 set of seals if not working and maybe a coat of paint if badly worn. The old 604’s definitely had more hand finishing on the internals. Where there are breakages on the 604’s it’s usually the top cover where it sweeps up over the grip and that is usually as a result of being dropped.

[zooma]

I have seen a few 6004’s through pony club (low use, carefully used) with loose pins, oval pin holes that just suggest that the frame metal is just not as good, the triggers are also just not as good. So these 5-6 year old guns are already showing signs of wear whereas 40year old 604’s generally just need a £6 set of seals if not working and maybe a coat of paint if badly worn. The old 604’s definitely had more hand finishing on the internals. Where there are breakages on the 604’s it’s usually the top cover where it sweeps up over the grip and that is usually as a result of being dropped.

Your observations would tend to suggest (to me at least) that the soft alloy that failed to retain a 3mm sight adjusting screw in the new 6004 that IJ had problems with was not limited to this particular area of the air pistol?

If a softer alloy has also been used in the main body of the 6004, it would help to explain why the "low milage" 6004 air pistols had "loose pins in oval holes" as they had simply worn away the soft alloy that was used to retain them.

40 year old 604 air pistols will probably have had a lot more use than the pony club 6004 air pistols that you mention here and many may well not have had such careful use either - but they are not known for having sloppy pins in oval pin holes - probably because the alloy used to cast the parts from was harder?

Let's hope the manufacturers of the 6004 air pistol are now using a harder alloy that will resist wear better as well are correcting any other defects that have contributed (over a fairly lengthy period of time) to give this fine looking air pistol such a poor reputation.

I have always said that I really like this neat looking and nicely finished air pistol, and if I could be certain that the manufacturer has corrected its well know and well documented faults, I would still most certainly like to buy a new one. I would actually be surprised if they had not taken any notice (if they want to stay in business) !

[I. J.]

Hi Ian, did did they fix the fault on later guns ?

I dont know. Mine was one of the early ones. I had waited weeks for them to arrive. What a disappointment.

[clipper]

Never used a 604, but had shocking experience with a 6004, poor consistency, pellet fussy, poor build quality, replaced it with a Gamo Compact which after spending about £5 on some files, wet&dry and some time to fettle trigger was everything the 6004 should have been for 1/3 of the price

[candleman]

Sorry but I believe I'm reading a lot of BS on this thread.
Human nature I guess but it's wrong to judge in the context of a few isolated incidents.
I bought a new Ford Focus some years ago which spent more time in the garage than it did on the road in its first six months.
So all Ford Focus's are bad then.
I mean that's the logic being applied here.
As for components on earlier models being hand finished, what a crock.
Please evidence that stupid claim.
BS of course.
The 6004 is made by the same company using the same parts and tooling.
I challenge anyone here to strip a 604 and 6004, put the components side by side and illustrate the differences.
Won't happen or course because the people spouting this ill informed nonsense are I believe just making stuff up.
Feel free to prove me wrong.

[I. J.]

Sorry but I believe I'm reading a lot of BS on this thread.
Human nature I guess but it's wrong to judge in the context of a few isolated incidents.
I bought a new Ford Focus some years ago which spent more time in the garage than it did on the road in its first six months.
So all Ford Focus's are bad then.
I mean that's the logic being applied here.
As for components on earlier models being hand finished, what a crock.
Please evidence that stupid claim.
BS of course.
The 6004 is made by the same company using the same parts and tooling.
I challenge anyone here to strip a 604 and 6004, put the components side by side and illustrate the differences.
Won't happen or course because the people spouting this ill informed nonsense are I believe just making stuff up.
Feel free to prove me wrong.

Oh dear. It appears my experiences with a single example of a 6004 has ruffled some ones feathers. Someone asked for opinions so I gave them mine. Sorry if it doesn't meet with your approval.

Of course I cannot comment on all the examples of 6004 sold ( but see post # 4 and 6 ). What I can, and did, was comment on the one example I owned for a brief period. Of course, perhaps this was just a bad example - but then again it could also be a true example.

[andyals]

There was a major design flaw in the 604.
Due to the sharp angle at the upper rear of the barrel shroud it was prone to cracking due to the forces it was subjected too.




Here you can see the slight change in the design that was done to address this.
I'm no engineer but it looks like the less sharp more sloping angle provides more even distribution of forces.

[zooma]

Sorry but I believe I'm reading a lot of BS on this thread.

The 6004 is made by the same company using the same parts and tooling.

Won't happen or course because the people spouting this ill informed nonsense are I believe just making stuff up.
Feel free to prove me wrong.

The 6004 is not made by the same company using the same parts and tooling as the 604.

When the 6004 was first introduced and being marketed the new business owners (two brothers if my memory serves me right) contacted myself and many others to promote their new business and their new design SSP air pistol that was intended to be a "next generation" variant of the successful and popular 604 that had been manufactured by the previous FAS company.

For what its worth, I thought that the newly designed 6004 was a good looking and nice handling air pistol that showed a strong resemblance to its highly regarded 604 predecessor and I was very tempted to buy some of them for our club as it was no longer possible to buy any more new 604 pistols due to the original manufacturers no longer being in production.

A trawl through the previous threads on the BBS regarding the various 6004 owners experience's will help you to see that these claims were certainly not bullshit but genuine concerns and disappointments from new owners who had spent their cash on these poorly executed models that had all the hallmarks of being rushed into production without being thoroughly tested

The 604 was (and still is) a highly regarded SSP air pistol. The 6004 is not so highly regarded.

I am aware of the problem mentioned regarding the fracturing of the upper shroud casting on a few 604 air pistols but I have been lucky with every Mk1 and Mk2 604 that I have owned and/or used over the years to have never seen or experienced this fault - but they did exist as the pictures on this thread clearly shows.

If the current 6004 air pistols have been revised and had the early faults corrected I would be pleased to own one as I still like the look and feel of them.

The 604 was the first air pistol that I stripped and re-sealed many years ago. I found the 604 to be a very simple air pistol to work on and I would not hesitate to strip another alongside a 6004 to compare them to see if any of the components would actually fit each other. If they did, it could provide a useful source of spare parts for the many ageing 604 air pistols that will need some replacement parts as years go by.

It would certainly be an interesting exercise.

[I. J.]

The 6004 is not made by the same company using the same parts and tooling as the 604.

When the 6004 was first introduced and being marketed the new business owners (two brothers if my memory serves me right) contacted myself and many others to promote their new business and their new design SSP air pistol that was intended to be a "next generation" variant of the successful and popular 604 that had been manufactured by the previous FAS company.

For what its worth, I thought that the newly designed 6004 was a good looking and nice handling air pistol that showed a strong resemblance to its highly regarded 604 predecessor and I was very tempted to buy some of them for our club as it was no longer possible to buy any more new 604 pistols due to the original manufacturers no longer being in production.

A trawl through the previous threads on the BBS regarding the various 6004 owners experience's will help you to see that these claims were certainly not bullshit but genuine concerns and disappointments from new owners who had spent their cash on these poorly executed models that had all the hallmarks of being rushed into production without being thoroughly tested

The 604 was (and still is) a highly regarded SSP air pistol. The 6004 is not so highly regarded.

I am aware of the problem mentioned regarding the fracturing of the upper shroud casting on a few 604 air pistols but I have been lucky with every Mk1 and Mk2 604 that I have owned and/or used over the years to have never seen or experienced this fault - but they did exist as the pictures on this tread clearly shows.

If the current 6004 air pistols have been revised and had the early faults corrected I would be pleased to own one as I still like the look and feel of them.

The 604 was the first air pistol that I stripped and re-sealed many years ago. I found the 604 to be a very simple air pistol to work on and I would not hesitate to strip another alongside a 6004 to compare them to see if any of the components would actually fit each other. If they did, it could provide a useful source of spare parts for the many ageing 604 air pistols that will need some replacement parts as years go by.

It would certainly be an interesting exercise.

Well, thats the final comment and end of this subject for me - and I didn't get called once!

[andyals]

The 6004 is not made by the same company using the same parts and tooling as the 604.

I've just ordered a spare seal set for my 6004 and was assured that they were identical to the 604.
I'm curious about this rear sight issue.
This seems to be the main grudge against the 6004.
Nothing has been mentioned about its overall reliability and accuracy and these are the things that interest me.
I suspect Candle man is correct.
The "new inferior to old" is an argument prevalent in many fields, especially motoring and it's usually unfounded.
I've been using my 6004 for quite a while now and have not experienced one single issue.
It certainly performs just as well as the 604 I owned in the late 80s.
The rear sight on mine has undergone a series of adjustments without issue.
Honestly I didn't mean to open a can of worms here and had no idea of the hostility I was going to be bombarded with simply for expressing an opinion.
Based on my actual experience of owning and using this great pistol I'd say its equal to its predecessor in every way and is still the great target pistol it once was.
I suspect the people who are going to spit nails at me for daring to suggest that do not have any ownership experience themselves.