Spring gun revival (again.....)

[ChrisC]

Aye ... I've heard that a few hundred times over the years. Usually ... the lower the scores ... the more they were just shooting it for fun. Weird though how those same 'Fun' shooters turn up for the next one with a new gun or scope.

Robs

Fair comments matey. I've no concerns over a 4x or 6x fixed mag with no PA. If the shooter has the PA on the scope set at the right range and sticks to ranges between A and B then that's as good a way as any ... particularly with standers where high mag shows loads of wobble.

We can actually give a perfect example of what Bozzer is talking about there.

How many have heard of Vermin Hunters TV?....long distance springer hunting shots?

Now have a look at the scores that Si Pittaway and Davy Thomas get at HFT comps. nuff said.

Don't get me wrong, one of the best 'natural' shooters i know is an out and out Hunter.

Maybe we should challenge clarky to prove his shooting skills?

[BTDT]

We can actually give a perfect example of what Bozzer is talking about there.

How many have heard of Vermin Hunters TV?....long distance springer hunting shots?

Now have a look at the scores that Si Pittaway and Davy Thomas get at HFT comps. nuff said.

Don't get me wrong, one of the best 'natural' shooters i know is an out and out Hunter.

Maybe we should challenge clarky to prove his shooting skills?

Clarky isn't very far from Nomads, and if he cared to pay us a visit to have a crack at a 30 target HFT course, he'd be made very welcome.

[cooper_dan]

Bozzer, I'll write my comment again as you tactically removed the middle line

I shoot a lot of HFT now and I'm trying to get more people shooting springers. As part of this I'm going to be reviewing a whole load of springers next year. Testing loads of things including accuracy at 45 yards. Starting off with budget guns, and hopefully moving up in price/quality as funds or lending allows.
I want to show that springers, even cheaper ones can be accurate if you learn them

I don't want to get lumped in with the 'springers are just as good as PCP's' debate because I never claimed that.

But lets say a group of people were to come up to me and say 'I fancy a go at HFT, what do I need?'
If my reply is, 'you need an HFT500, and some charging equipment, and a £250 scope, and a £70 mat, and some special shoes. Call it a £1300 to be safe'. How many people do you think will end up having a go?
If I said, 'you can start with this springer and scope for £300 and some pellets', I bet a lot more people would try it.

I started a year ago with a Walther Terrus and £50 scope, and had enough fun to get really into it. If I'd been told it was pointless and I needed to spend a grand first I wouldn't have bothered and would probably still be sat in front of my playstation at the weekends.

[bozzer]

Bozzer, I'll write my comment again as you tactically removed the middle line

I shoot a lot of HFT now and I'm trying to get more people shooting springers. As part of this I'm going to be reviewing a whole load of springers next year. Testing loads of things including accuracy at 45 yards. Starting off with budget guns, and hopefully moving up in price/quality as funds or lending allows.
I want to show that springers, even cheaper ones can be accurate if you learn them

Dan

I'm not that bright to be tactically removing anything.

The point I was making is that even if using expensive springers that have been highly tuned, it's no where near as easy, especially for newcomers, to shoot them as accurately as a PCP, and especially when shooting them at various angles and various positions. Hence the comments about testing them at various angles/positions. Loads of talk on the internet about springer resurgence and tuning. There are people who give springers a go at club level on HFT courses, but at National level only a few shoot enough rounds to qualify, and even these dedicated souls don't score that brilliantly on tough courses.

I'm not anti springer ... or anti springer for HFT. I'm quite the opposite. If you've read some of my posts on this topic the point I am constantly making, is that the stable HFT prone stance and the accuracy of 0.177 PCP ( in a variety of angles/positions ) has pushed courses to a point where newcomers turning up with a basic springer will struggle and may not stick at it. Ironically, HFT was designed to give people with basic kit a chance to turn up and do quite well. People, like you mentioned, that have a basic springer and scope, and who don't want to spend several hundred quid on a PCP, scope, bottle, may give it a go with their springers, but may walk away because they score badly on courses that have evolved to test the best shooters with top end PCPs. We'll get people saying that you can win HFT comps with a AA S400 and 80 quid scope ... and you can. Newcomers trying HFT for the first time with a cheap springer on a tough course in some wind ... they will need big hearts to keep turning up and knocking down a low percentage of targets.

If someone said to me that they have a springer and a basic 3-9x40 scope and that they weren't going to buy any more kit but wanted to give HFT a go and asked me if I thought they should ... I'd beg them to go and give it a go, as they will enjoy the banter and atmosphere, but would warn them that it would be tough with a springer and they may not knock a lot down. I'd drag them there and hope they get the bug and then let them decide if they wished to continue shooting springer, or move to 0.177 PCP.

If someone said to me that they wanted to give HFT a go and weren't that bothered about what type of gun they used, but just wanted to knock down as many targets as soon as possible, and they were thinking of either buying a top end springer, spending money having it tuned, popping it in a heavy custom stock, as they'd heard that these are self contained and can be shot as accurately as a PCP, or spending similar money on a S400 and bottle and asked me what I would suggest ... then that's a dead easy answer.

[Zomboid]

I left shooting in the mid 90s with PCPs taking over everything on a range. Although the springer was still king in the field. I've shot PCPs and I even briefly worked for Daystate (this was when they were still being run by Don Lowndes and Mike Seddon and that other chap whose name evades me) and they were releasing their Huntsman with a straight trigger blade and the QC at the time I think. Lovely looking rifles too with the brass cylinders.

I readily admit I'm not a PCPs fan. All I read and hear about are people complaining about losing air, sweet spots, filling cylinders and other niggles. I'm not saying springers are immune but this does sound like a lot of on-going hassle. I've tried shooting them and after 20 shots I hand it back - bored. To some the benefits must out weigh the niggles. And fair play to you.

However, what I think the PCP does better than a springer is allow someone who hasnt shot before the experience of hitting targets consistently - and at long range. This can only be an encouragement to get involved. A PCP is also an excellent way of spotting problems with technique without worrying about hold sensitivity - eg. pulling your shot or for standing targets. At the elder end of the age scale I know of a few older shooters who have had to give up using springers because of the effort so now use PCPs. Again this is brilliant.

I can see the benefits but I'll always be a springer shooter until the moment I can't cock my own gun (fnar). I understand them and I like it that I have to work each shot. I likethe idea of just popping out for a plink with a rifle and a tin of pellets, which I could feasibly shoot all 500 in the tin. If I got into some serious FT/HFT shooting maybe my mindset would change and I'd be saving up for a Ripley or perhaps looking for a JB1.

On the rare occasions I do pit myself against competitors I get a buzz from using my boingers and trying to match the PCP-ers.

Alls fair in love and plinking.

[robs5230]

We can actually give a perfect example of what Bozzer is talking about there.

How many have heard of Vermin Hunters TV?....long distance springer hunting shots?

Now have a look at the scores that Si Pittaway and Davy Thomas get at HFT comps. nuff said.

Don't get me wrong, one of the best 'natural' shooters i know is an out and out Hunter.

Maybe we should challenge clarky to prove his shooting skills?

There's a big difference between target shooting and hunting. All my shots when hunting are pretty much instinctive. I may take 6 shots in a 2 or 3 hour session.
Not sure how I'd fare taking 40 shots over an hour at knockdown targets I'm not familiar with.
I'm familiar with shape and size of my quarry but an unknown size of steel plate with an unknown size of kill area at a guestimated range would certainly make it hard for me to judge distance and place a shot accurately.
I'm aware shooters do get familiar with courses so get to know the target size and distance.
Last I heard, digital rangefinders weren't allowed in competetive shooting but are invaluable when hunting

[ChrisC]

There's a big difference between target shooting and hunting. All my shots when hunting are pretty much instinctive. I may take 6 shots in a 2 or 3 hour session.
Not sure how I'd fare taking 40 shots over an hour at knockdown targets I'm not familiar with.
I'm familiar with shape and size of my quarry but an unknown size of steel plate with an unknown size of kill area at a guestimated range would certainly make it hard for me to judge distance and place a shot accurately.
I'm aware shooters do get familiar with courses so get to know the target size and distance.
Last I heard, digital rangefinders weren't allowed in competetive shooting but are invaluable when hunting

i've done a lot of hunting in the past but it's slowed down a bit now i'm not on the farm. I agree that quite a few shots are 'instinct' as you'll be lucky to get your crosshairs onto a squirrel for more than a couple of seconds so 'pre-shot' mental calculations (wind/range/cover) have to be done whilst making sure the bugger doesn't do the inevitable vanishing trick. I've found that HFT shooting has honed my 'mk1 eyeball' rangefinding a treat and because of the need for super accuracy, made me keep my hunting kit as accurate as my comp kit. Personally, i started with shotties at 8 and went onto HMR and rimmie before joining the Navy and being in the stations 25m prone team. Came out and had a decade out of shooting before getting bitten by the air rifle bug but have kept my hand in with Shotties and .223/.270. The vast majority of my shooting has beeen FT and HFT but i still have a dabble with other bits n bobs. I've owned loads of boingers over the years but admit that i can't shoot them for toffee.....well that's not strictly true.....i just didn't devote enough time to learn each rifle, got frustrated and went back to the PCP. I suppose it's because i was shooting so many comps that i thought i should be shooting a comp rig as much as possible.

IIRC the maddest thing i bought was a Longbow venom but still couldn't master springers...even with a 1k boinger.

[robs5230]

i've done a lot of hunting in the past but it's slowed down a bit now i'm not on the farm. I agree that quite a few shots are 'instinct' as you'll be lucky to get your crosshairs onto a squirrel for more than a couple of seconds so 'pre-shot' mental calculations (wind/range/cover) have to be done whilst making sure the bugger doesn't do the inevitable vanishing trick. I've found that HFT shooting has honed my 'mk1 eyeball' rangefinding a treat and because of the need for super accuracy, made me keep my hunting kit as accurate as my comp kit. Personally, i started with shotties at 8 and went onto HMR and rimmie before joining the Navy and being in the stations 25m prone team. Came out and had a decade out of shooting before getting bitten by the air rifle bug but have kept my hand in with Shotties and .223/.270. The vast majority of my shooting has beeen FT and HFT but i still have a dabble with other bits n bobs. I've owned loads of boingers over the years but admit that i can't shoot them for toffee.....well that's not strictly true.....i just didn't devote enough time to learn each rifle, got frustrated and went back to the PCP. I suppose it's because i was shooting so many comps that i thought i should be shooting a comp rig as much as possible.

IIRC the maddest thing i bought was a Longbow venom but still couldn't master springers...even with a 1k boinger.

I think part of it (and a big part at that) is knowing your kit inside out (learning the rifle as you say). I rarely if ever have more than one hunting springer. All my rifles, pcp and springer have the same scope so I'm familiar with bracketing my quarry. I also tune my springers to my liking. I

[bighit]

There's a big difference between target shooting and hunting. All my shots when hunting are pretty much instinctive. I may take 6 shots in a 2 or 3 hour session.
Not sure how I'd fare taking 40 shots over an hour at knockdown targets I'm not familiar with.
I'm familiar with shape and size of my quarry but an unknown size of steel plate with an unknown size of kill area at a guestimated range would certainly make it hard for me to judge distance and place a shot accurately.
I'm aware shooters do get familiar with courses so get to know the target size and distance.
Last I heard, digital rangefinders weren't allowed in competitive shooting but are invaluable when hunting

laser range finders mostly have a +/- 1 metre accuracy so it would not be to their advantage any way

LEICA GEOVID "EDITION 2017" (8 x 42 HD-B EDITION 2200)

and costs http://www.swillingtonshootingsuppli...-Edition-2017/

was £2550 now £1825 . so even the expensive ones are not totally accurate

Measuring accuracy ± 1 yd / m to 547 yds / 500 m
± 2 yds / m to 1,094 yds / 1,000 m
± 0,5 % beyond 1,094 yds / 1,000 m

[cooper_dan]

Bozzer,

Points well made. I think my problem is I have trouble putting myself in other people's shoes.
I have a friend who started HFT the same time as me. He started with a PCP and over about 4 months he upgraded two more times. Final gun was a very expensive Daystate. That didn't last long though. He'd bought the best kit but didn't practice range finding or technique so didn't get amazing scores and got bored very quickly. Doesn't shoot anymore.

I've been of the opinion that starting with a springer is a good idea because it exaggerates poor technique so you can learn from it. Then upgrade to a PCP when you want to start upping your scores. But I can definitely see why people would want to go straight to PCP

[robs5230]

laser range finders mostly have a +/- 1 metre accuracy so it would not be to their advantage any way

LEICA GEOVID "EDITION 2017" (8 x 42 HD-B EDITION 2200)

and costs http://www.swillingtonshootingsuppli...-Edition-2017/

was £2550 now £1825 . so even the expensive ones are not totally accurate

Measuring accuracy ± 1 yd / m to 547 yds / 500 m
± 2 yds / m to 1,094 yds / 1,000 m
± 0,5 % beyond 1,094 yds / 1,000 m

I know.
What I was getting at was I'd have no chance really on an FT course as I have no idea of the plate sizes. However I do know what a rabbit looks like. And I have the ability to range find If i need in the field.
Regular FT shooters will have a big advantage over me in the FT course and I reckon some FT shooters may likewise struggle in the field. I took a mate out recently who's just got into ft and bought himself a r10mk2. He's very good considering he's not been shooting long.
He took a shot at a rabbit at 20 yards when out with me and had a clean miss. He's not asked to go since.

[Murphy]

He took a shot at a rabbit at 20 yards when out with me and had a clean miss. He's not asked to go since.

Thats called Buck fever.

[robs5230]

Thats called Buck fever.

I get the same shooting at inanimate steel plates and paper

[harvey_s]

I used to use a spring rifle when I was younger - but that's because mass-produced PCP's were in their infancy.
Later as my interests progressed to loose women and fast motorcycles any further interest took a back seat.
After that came the demands of a young family and my interests were confined to air pistols for many years.
As the family grew up, free time became available and my interest in rifles bubbled to the surface again.
I couldn't be arsed to kit myself out with all the divers kit for a PCP - so I purchased a PH Striker which ultimately disappointed with it's harsh nature and my mediocre performance .
After a while my interest in this gun was starting to wane when I was asked to dispose of some guns from an estate of which the last rifle to sell was a PCP & hand pump - namely an A-A S200 with FX 3 stage pump .
I decided to try it out before I sold it and what a revelation!... Smooth and almost effortlessly super accurate out to 50 yards and with no divers bottle malarkey.
The PH got sold and the A-A joined the household, much later followed by a Crosman 2250XL (superlight and very handy out to 25 yds) which I like and shoot a lot.
Just recently my eye was drawn by another Crosman - an MTR77 which had the dual selling point of looking exactly like a certain black rifle and having a gas ram (so no fannying about spring tuning, top hattery or Colonel Saunders special formula grease nonsense).
However, it has required a fairly steep learning curve to get it to group and even now its a demanding mistress and to become similarly proficienct to a PCP would require (a lot of) continued practice to keep the skill sharp I feel.

And that's the PCP's winning feature I think...it's very easy to live with despite the extra complexity of charging apparatus and nowhere near as demanding as the true springer which probably requires tuning from the off to optimise it and continual checking and maintenance to keep that consistency plus regular practice or competition.

However, to those bored by the clinical precision of PCP's and an interest in tinkering I see the attraction.

But these things tend to cyclical and in a few years the novelty will wear off for some and PCP's will become the next big thing (again)