I've probably asked this one before, but I have forgotten the answer.
Why did BSA not go ahead with the RB1 roller-breech?
The taps on the Lincoln Jefferies design needed hand-fitting and look a right old faff to turn up.
The roller-breech would surely have been an easier, faster design to make? As well as being more efficient as a direct-load system.
In general I cannot see why the sliding breech system was not adopted sooner and instead of the rubbishy old tap system.
I mean if the Chinese Communist industry of the 1970s could make the sliding-breech Lion after a quick look at the Anschutz, realising this was a cheap and easy way of making a fixed barrel rifle for low cost, then why the blazes did no one in Germany, Britain or Czechslovakia realise the same thing 50 years earlier?
WHY WHY WHY????
Too many airguns!
I like the RB1 breech on my Superstar rifles.
I do find the .177 version a bit more awkward,with the pellets facing the wrong way on occasion.
A nice safe system .
Les..
What’s an RB1?
I thought the RB Airsporter, Superstar and maybe some Gamos were RB2?
Which does beg the “what was an RB1?” question.
RB1 was the very early roller-breech patented by BSA in the early part of the 20th century. I don't know if any prototypes were made or if it just stayed as a paper idea.
The RB2 is the modern one as used on the SuperStar, the Airsporter RB2 and the Firebird PCP.
I had a Firebird PCP for a short time, the breech worked well on it once the barrel was seated correctly (thanks to advice from John Bowkett, who I think designed it) and it was very accurate.
Thought it was something like that.
And, yes, JB designed the Firebird and the Spitfire.
I’m guessing that if you were BSA in 19-not much and had tooled up to produce the LJ, and demonstrated it with approval at Bisley to King Edward VII or whoever, and told everyone it was a Tesla to everyone else’s Morris Minor that your inclination to change then would be about zero?
But, yes, pity that it took them about a decade or two from the first direct-breech guns to try one of their own.
hahaha yes the King Edward effect is strong.
The Anschutz slidy breech thing was out in the late 50s so they had time to think about direct-breech... I can see inertia stopping it, but the design could be made cheaper I am sure than the fiddly tap things. They could have made more money with fewer machining operations and time and cheaper labour. Maybe it is the idea of a compression chamber INSIDE another tube that looks like a compression chamber but isn't got them confused.
'So, you want me to make a small compression chamber and put it inside another one and it slides back and forth, and that gets rid of our famous loading tap, is that right? Get away with you, 'tis foolhardy and blasphemy and may the spirit of Lincoln Jefferies look down on you with a frown. Gaffer, get the scrubbing brush and the paraffin, here is another needs his brains scrubbed clean of nonsense. '
God knows what they would have made of the Anschutz 380 which had a whole rifle sliding inside a fake rifle 'skin' just like the lizard people who are running the world.
Things that killed the U.K. mass-production airgun industry:
1. Nationalism. Assumption that the 1940s and beyond prejudice against foreign, esp German/Japanese products would continue forever.
2. Practicality. Being stuck with old machinery, personnel, organisation, the unions, etc.
3. Lack of government intervention/investment (though that hardly helped, say, the car industry).
4. Lack of vision/foresight. Airguns were dangerous toys for kids, or rat-shooters in barns.
5. General economics - eg the DM/Yen/£ exchange rate in the 70s and early 80s.