BSA Lightning XL experience

[harvey_s]

Just thought I'd share my experience of purchasing a new BSA Lightning XL air rifle....

I had been reading the mags and seen the XL tactical and the wood stocked XL's and thought Ooh, I like them.
Can't make my mind up which, So off to my local dealer who had both in stock in my preferred .177 flavour.
Whilst demonstrating them the poor dealer finds the wood stocked one won't cock unless the safety is on.
this isn't right - so that makes the choice for me and the deal is done on the tactical...

Anyway I get it home and find that the stock has a horrible long dent in it behind the safety.
Now I've seen enough review models to know this isn't right...

Not only that, but the breech has not been finished at all which makes it impossible to seat pellets with your thumb and leaves about 0.5 to 1mm of skirt sticking out and loses 1-2ft/lb unless you seat the pellets into the rifling (laughably BSA Storm pellets are the worst )

So a quick call to the dealer gets an apology and the promise of another gun...
The replacement rifle arrived today and guess what - it's got the same long dent, which having done a bit of reseach is obviously now a poor cover-up for a mould modification for the safety catch postion on either or both the ultra or scorpion rifles and to add insult to injury a chunk of blueing is missing on the top of the main cylinder just behind the breech (no-one will notice it there eh Juan?)

So thats 3 guns all unsaleable - to say I'm disappointed in what Gamo have done to what was a great company is an understatement, rather than BSA having a positive influence on Gamo - its quite the opposite it seems - I wanted to buy the gun but if Gamo think I'll accept unsightly marks like that in a plastic stock - think again my friends -I wouldn't if it was a wood stock, why would the synthetic one be any different and Senor Gamo the best rifling in the world is wasted if you can't be bothered to finish the breech properly

Thankfully the dealer was excellent and refunded me without a quibble...not exactly what I was expecting given the glowing praise the rifle has recieved in the airgun press (perhaps rifles should be tested at random from the shops rather than supplied for test...)

[weebster]

personally i would take what the mags say with a lb of salt,they're not going to upset the gun maker by telling the truth about some models,after all these people pay handsomely to advertise their products in the glossie's which also goes some way to paying the wage's of the magazines staff etc,the worst ones are fishing mags like sea angler ......if you want honest advice on any gun then consult the forums and talk to those who use them day in day out and they'll be only to happy to tell you the pros and the cons of the gun,the mags only tell you the pros in most case's.

[R. P. McMurphy]

Another Great British name going to the dogs it seems.

[kevmar]

I bought a new one,and after cocking it only a few times
the breach scribed an arc in the edge of the barrel block,it was shiny steel and looked a mess.
Going back to the proper BSA's ,i.e 70's meteors mercs,and airsporters ,they were built better then the modern rubbish that's wearing the name but has nothing
in common with it.
Spanish made ,or assembled guns should stay there,let them keep their own rubbish.

[fensportsman]

I used to own a Lightning quite a few years ago, how does the newer version compare? Is it much different?

[fok]

I've owned a few and apart from a crap trigger they were all good reliable, accurate guns.

[airgunjon]

Are these made in Spain now? Mine has got 'Made in Birmingham England' moulded into the stock (above the trigger on the opposite side to the safety catch). But I agree about the snug fitting breech, you do have to thumb the pellets in pretty firmly.

[lucky trigger]

I own a tuned .25 xl and consider it a better springer than either the hw97k and the tx200 mk2 that i previously owned. The trigger on the xl has been 'fettled' and is much improved over the original.
Its a shame to hear that quality control seems to be slipping on the new ones.

[kevmar]

I was happy with the performace,and they do look good
but as I say mine had a very bably put together breech.
I'm not being funny at all but you must have had a couple of badly
mollested hw and tx's even the brand new (butchered spring hw's )
aren't that bad.

[lucky trigger]

I was happy with the performace,and they do look good
but as I say mine had a very bably put together breech.
I'm not being funny at all but you must have had a couple of badly
mollested hw and tx's even the brand new (butchered spring hw's )
aren't that bad.

Im not saying that the hw and the tx i previously owned were inferior as they definatley were not. Its just that i only hunt with my springers and allthough the hw and tx were both superbly accurate the weight ,length and safety catch on both were a pain in the field where as my tuned xl is shorter ,lighter and has a manual 'safety'.

[Coney]

I own a tuned .25 xl and consider it a better springer than either the hw97k and the tx200 mk2 that i previously owned. The trigger on the xl has been 'fettled' and is much improved over the original.
Its a shame to hear that quality control seems to be slipping on the new ones.

I have to agree with Mick, I have owned various well respected springers but I do love my .25 Lightning, I wish I had tried the .25 option years ago.

Lovely light weight springer, recoil is not bad at all considering the lack of weight to absorb it.

Just wish the trigger was better but hopefully with Mick's help, I might be able to sort that ( PM on it's way Mick )

Alan.

[g60bv]

i've owned 2 xls
the .25 i tuned up and got it running 'right' , it came at 8fp and after a tune it was 11.5 but the barrel wobbles in the breach and the barrels are so tight you could shoot it for long before you had a sore thumb. i had to use rhinos which turned out to be perfect.
the .22 one was equally as bad, i made it a .177 and it ruined it. could not get over 9fp. sold them both, wont buy another bsa springer again.

[harvey_s]

I bought a new Parker Hale Striker in the end... £100 cheaper and old BSA quality.

The lesson I have taken from this is mainly how unreliable the reviews are in the shooting mags - this is not the first time I have been hugely disappointed by the quality I have purchased vs. the projected quailty presented by the magazine reviews (this comment is aimed at at least 3 mags rather than any 1 in particular).
I know they earn a portion of their income from the advertisers, but without the readers who buy the damn things they don't have a magazine at all and I think they've forgotten that

BTW the gunshop where I purchased the PH from said they had also had sufficient quality issues with BSA guns that they too had written a letter of complaint to the same guy I had (Peter Martineau - BSA's Sales & Marketing Manager)

[g60bv]

thats exactly the reason i bought the bsa XL in the first place. had excellent reviews but in real life utter ####e. i saw a new mag doing a comparison against a XL and a theoben evo. omg. the bsa's a table leg when compared to a evo.! hardly a comparison

[hirsute]

I have the bsa xl tactical in all three calibres - started with the .22 about 8/9 months ago and loved it.

Then had the opportunity to buy second-hand a .25 - fitting pellets was a nightmare but my rfd had it back to bsa to get the breech reamed - didn't cost a lot and its now my favourite.

Recently started doing some hft and as you will appreciate felt the need for the flatter trajectory so purchased, new, a .177. Been using it a couple on months now and am still in love.

Sorry to hear about all the poor experiences others have had - based on my three would be happy to recommend the tactical to anyone.