Bsa mercury 's' vs fwb sport

[BTDT]

Question: Before the HW77 came along, the FWB 124 was one of the most popular and successful field target air rifles.

Why wasn't the Mercury S? Was it that the FT successes of Welham tuned FWBs convinced competitors it was the rifle to have, was the Mercury S simply unfashionable, or was the 124 the better of the two for FT?

[richywilk]

I think there was a fashion in the 80's for all German gun's in the whole they were better built and better looking the look's of the FWB is still the best for a springer,and for that reason I used my Bowkett tune Mercury in the field more as I wasn't bothered if I scratched the stock as it to me wasn't as nice looking and was more 'agricultural' than the sport.

[Gareth W-B]

Ah-haa! Nails, heads, and hitting Jim. The Bsa Mercury (aka all/any British air gun), was deeply unfashionable among the competition shooting fraternity at that time. To be in with the kool kids your hardware had to be not only Teutonic, but the right model, too (eg: FWB Sport, Anschutz LG 335, Original Mod.45, HW35 et al). That is my recollection of events anyway, and no amount of post-period rhetoric here, will convince me it was otherwise . Atb: G.

[mallyally]

Ah-haa! Nails, heads, and hitting Jim. The Bsa Mercury (aka all/any British air gun), was deeply unfashionable among the competition shooting fraternity at that time. To be in with the kool kids your hardware had to be not only Teutonic, but the right model, too (eg: FWB Sport, Anschutz LG 335, Original Mod.45, HW35 et al). That is my recollection of events anyway, and no amount of post-period rhetoric here, will convince me it was otherwise . Atb: G.

nothing to do with fashion mate if the british guns were any good people would have used them at the time / used to love my mercury till i shot a HW 35/ chalk and cheese comes to mind

[BTDT]

Here's an interesting point. On the Chambers web site, the Mercury S barrel part numbers are the same as Mercury Challenger's (and different from the standard Mercury).

The Mercury Challenger was the most accurate BSA we tested in SAR, and the group sizes were half those of the standard Mercury.

[pennineway.fswo]

Both the Mercury S and the Challenger had a screw through the breech rather than a pin which certainly improved accuracy, but I always thought the Challenger had a smaller diameter barrel (although I have not owned one)
The Challenger was certainly a nice looking rifle with a beech rather than walnut stock, I believe.Now a Challenger S would have been well worth buying.

[TopDog]

Here's an interesting point. On the Chambers web site, the Mercury S barrel part numbers are the same as Mercury Challenger's (and different from the standard Mercury).

The Mercury Challenger was the most accurate BSA we tested in SAR, and the group sizes were half those of the standard Mercury.

Concur with the Challenger point. Mine was the best 0.177 spring rifle I ever had. Have had Mercury 'S' in both calibres and very fine handling rifles too. Only had the Sport in 124 flavour and admiration for the internal design and engineering will never fade but lacks the sparkle for me. Never had a modern Webley so can't comment on Omegas and Longbows, although always wanted an Omega perhaps because I kept reading that I should have one much the same as with the Sport and other German models.

I too recall the fashion of buying German rather than British in the 80's and, just so no-one gets the idea I will knock German for the heck of it, I currently have a love affair with the HW95; a worthy successor to the HW85 which I favoured when I thought the 80 or 77 were just too heavy to lug around all day!

Fit and finish applies to the rifle/shooter interface as well as the mechanics of the gun and that's a very personal thing!!

Let's face it, we should all have one or two or three of each!!

Happy airgunning and May today be the best day of your life and all your tomorrows even better!!
ATVB
David

[Artfull-Bodger]

I'm not getting into this A is better than B debate, as it simply debases our sport and doesn't even consider the pair of them are a poor substitute for a Webley Omega!

[Gareth W-B]

I'm not getting into this A is better than B debate, as it simply debases our sport and doesn't even consider the pair of them are a poor substitute for a Webley Omega!

... I like you .

[monkeywrench]

Hmmmmm

Owned and shot a Mercury in the day, and no amount of rose tinted / buy British clap trap would ever convince me that it could hold a candle to the FWB, or Original 45 for that matter, the Mercury simply was not that good.

To me it's a bit like owning / running a Land Rover, a very capable machine.
Then turning Japanese, Toyota, Mitsi ect, it's then you realise what you've been missing

Retires to safe distance, i thankyou

[Hsing-ee]

Hmmmmm

Owned and shot a Mercury in the day, and no amount of rose tinted / buy British clap trap would ever convince me that it could hold a candle to the FWB, or Original 45 for that matter, the Mercury simply was not that good.

To me it's a bit like owning / running a Land Rover, a very capable machine.
Then turning Japanese, Toyota, Mitsi ect, it's then you realise what you've been missing

Retires to safe distance, i thankyou

MERCURY-S is the comparator to the FWB Sport.


MERCURY-S

Not the standard Mercury, which is far cruder and less well engineered.

[I. J.]

nothing to do with fashion mate if the british guns were any good people would have used them at the time / used to love my mercury till i shot a HW 35/ chalk and cheese comes to mind

Ah! Now. Yes.

ATB
Ian

[RustyBuzz]

Great post Alistair.

The mercury ‘s’ is a fine rifle but the 124 edges it for me. It’s that bit more refined and the accuracy is still unbeatable. The ‘s’ is good but the sport is better. The sport’s trigger is also superior. Once set correctly it’s a good 2 stage unit giving a 2 - 2.5lbs release, the BSA unit is ok but very basic by comparison. Also there’s a gulf of difference in quality of materials used between the two, which isn’t a problem when they're both in good nick but I don’t think the ‘s’ would have been able to take the pounding the sport did as a competitive FT rifle.

Having said all that, these days, when I have a quick plink in the garden the ‘s’ is the rifle I grab. It’s soooo pointable and aesthetically perfect. It’s just booootiful (I think that’s how you spell it).

Now, the ‘wobbly webley’ Omega. Webley asked all the top FT competitors back in the day what they wanted in an air rifle. The answer they got was simple - a 124, with a LW choked barrel, a record trigger and an anschutz barrel lock - just copy these features and bobs your uncle - world domination in one easy step. A no-brainer you would think, only webley decided to ‘improve’ on all three components. It was a real shame. Sorry Gareth

[Gareth W-B]

Now, the ‘wobbly webley’ Omega . Webley asked all the top FT competitors back in the day what they wanted in an air rifle. The answer they got was simple -- a 124, with a LW choked barrel, a record trigger and an anschutz barrel lock -- just copy these features and bobs your uncle - world domination in one easy step. A no-brainer you would think, only webley decided to ‘improve’ on all three components. It was a real shame. Sorry Gareth

You cruel beast . Each to his own though. Loved my Sport 127, but not either of my 124s, as imho they were over-rated and boingy, whereas the Omega (and seemingly my latest Longbow), seem to handle .177 at post 11ft.lb far better ... Got a Bonnie & Clyde tweaked MkII HW77 in .177 to ad to the collection as of last Monday however, so apart from my LG335, all the aforementioned now have a mountain to climb to stay in my top .177 three . Atb: G.

[coburn]

This is a rediculous contest arguing about a couple of also rans. neither are anywhere near as good as the products of old Herman Weihrauch, especially the 35 or 80.

However I did have a std Mercury and so probably did most people as a first rifle and BSA did offer good value for money, I think the concept lost it somewhat when they introduced the S. Not enough improvement to warrant the extra cost.