BRK Ghost Review
- Thread starter Franklink
- Start date
"...Underbelly picatinny rail is too short. OEM only has 3 slots. This is a general gripe I have with all of these bottle guns. Prophet, Impact, etc...."
Assuming it's similar to the Delta Wolf, that underbelly picatinny rail is perfect for a quick release bag for PRS/NRL:
"...Excessive scope height. Even without using high mounts, that scope is WAY up there...."
I agree with that. I’m one of those that likes lower scopes. I got my scope height on my Delta Wolf down to 2.55”. Not as low as I’d like but better than it was. I used a lower height dovetail to picatinny adapter and made a low profile cover for the back of the dovetail to act as an ambidextrous cheek piece.
"...The presence of non-removable side picatinny rails. I personally have ZERO use for the side pic rails...."
I like the upper bilateral picatinny rails for attaching a two piece bipod. I used picatinny to m-lok adapters and a UTG m-lok bipod.
"...The valve the review Ghost was sent with had a leak...."
My Delta Wolf has the regular valve. Balanced valves allow big FPE without a massive hammer strike. They can be more susceptible to leak down. Though, the fact that other users have not experienced it is encouraging. I think that type of valve could be a perfect match for the electronic hammer used in the Delta Wolf.
A different criticism/small annoyance with my Delta Wolf at least, are the sharp edges/corners around the trigger guard. I ended up covering the corners with dense foam tape.
My plans for the variety of matches for my Delta Wolf are similar to your Ghost plans.
Assuming it's similar to the Delta Wolf, that underbelly picatinny rail is perfect for a quick release bag for PRS/NRL:
"...Excessive scope height. Even without using high mounts, that scope is WAY up there...."
I agree with that. I’m one of those that likes lower scopes. I got my scope height on my Delta Wolf down to 2.55”. Not as low as I’d like but better than it was. I used a lower height dovetail to picatinny adapter and made a low profile cover for the back of the dovetail to act as an ambidextrous cheek piece.
"...The presence of non-removable side picatinny rails. I personally have ZERO use for the side pic rails...."
I like the upper bilateral picatinny rails for attaching a two piece bipod. I used picatinny to m-lok adapters and a UTG m-lok bipod.
"...The valve the review Ghost was sent with had a leak...."
My Delta Wolf has the regular valve. Balanced valves allow big FPE without a massive hammer strike. They can be more susceptible to leak down. Though, the fact that other users have not experienced it is encouraging. I think that type of valve could be a perfect match for the electronic hammer used in the Delta Wolf.
A different criticism/small annoyance with my Delta Wolf at least, are the sharp edges/corners around the trigger guard. I ended up covering the corners with dense foam tape.
My plans for the variety of matches for my Delta Wolf are similar to your Ghost plans.
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Very interesting Scott. I hadn't even considered using those side rails for a two piece bipod like in the photos you shared. I like the concept though. How do you feel a side-rail mounted two-piece bipod like this compares to a traditional one-piece using the under-belly mount, in a stability sense?
Also, not being a PRS guy, I didn't know your quick attach bag even existed. Looks great for the barricades and obstacles and such that I've seen photos of in PRS/NRL. One question though....you didn't share a straight on photo, but just proportionally eye-balling it, it appears that the rear section of the back would be right up under the trigger and trigger guard. I assume that's not caused any trigger accessibility or ergonomic issues for you?
Regarding your bipod and under-bag, it appears that there is more than one way to skin a cat. I like your solutions and may look into pricing out the two-piece bipod using the side rails.
Of the various items I listed, the leak from the initial balanced valve it arrived with is the potentially most serious issue. So far, so good with this second one though. I do really like how little cocking effort is required. For the .177/20fpe tune the cocking effort isn't much more than cocking an electronic Red Wolf or Delta where of course there isn't even any spring to compress. In other words, barely any cocking effort for 20fpe. Even at around 50fpe with the longer .22 barrel, not much cocking effort, relative to the energy output, which I view as a positive.
Seems like I remember that you've got a .177 barrel with this Delta...what other calibers are you going to play with?
Also, I'm not seeing your 3d printed (and then cast aluminum) barrel support in the photos....did you arrive at another way to ease your concerns there? perhaps something out of view/inside the shroud?
(your comments, insights, and photos further reinforce that: a BRK Ghost = a mechanical Daystate Delta Wolf).
Thanks for sharing Scott, I truly appreciate another perspective. And I'm sure anybody following along this discussion will as well.
Also, not being a PRS guy, I didn't know your quick attach bag even existed. Looks great for the barricades and obstacles and such that I've seen photos of in PRS/NRL. One question though....you didn't share a straight on photo, but just proportionally eye-balling it, it appears that the rear section of the back would be right up under the trigger and trigger guard. I assume that's not caused any trigger accessibility or ergonomic issues for you?
Regarding your bipod and under-bag, it appears that there is more than one way to skin a cat. I like your solutions and may look into pricing out the two-piece bipod using the side rails.
Of the various items I listed, the leak from the initial balanced valve it arrived with is the potentially most serious issue. So far, so good with this second one though. I do really like how little cocking effort is required. For the .177/20fpe tune the cocking effort isn't much more than cocking an electronic Red Wolf or Delta where of course there isn't even any spring to compress. In other words, barely any cocking effort for 20fpe. Even at around 50fpe with the longer .22 barrel, not much cocking effort, relative to the energy output, which I view as a positive.
Seems like I remember that you've got a .177 barrel with this Delta...what other calibers are you going to play with?
Also, I'm not seeing your 3d printed (and then cast aluminum) barrel support in the photos....did you arrive at another way to ease your concerns there? perhaps something out of view/inside the shroud?
(your comments, insights, and photos further reinforce that: a BRK Ghost = a mechanical Daystate Delta Wolf).
Thanks for sharing Scott, I truly appreciate another perspective. And I'm sure anybody following along this discussion will as well.
Upvote 0
Any of you know if the hammer on the Ghost Carbine .22 is the same as that on the HP version?
Upvote 0
I can't answer your question, but here's some interesting related info.
This is the weight of the hammer than came in Arzrovers Ghost. It is unblued and I think he received it with a .25 and a .22 barrel. I've lately been considering that Ghost somewhat of a prototype gun but he can offer better info there...
The next one is the hammer that came in the Ghost Carbine .177. It is skeletonized and I've been told it was likely for the UK/sub 12fpe market. It's mighty sweet for low power .177 though.
This last one is the hammer I received last week. AOA told me this is what is in the Ghost HP.
For the last 5 or 6 weeks I've been running the skeletonized hammer + 38grains of weight I added to it, to total about 493grains.
I've yet to do any testing with the 545.3 gr hammer.
Upvote 0
Thank you Franklink. Are the cutouts on the hammer that is on the Ghost .177 visible when looking at the hammer still on the rear subassembly, but with the hammer still intact? At any rate, I'll call Shane at AoA tomorrow and ask.
Upvote 0
Here's a different image that makes it a bit more clear. There's also flats milled out of it to make it almost cube shaped, only the rounded corners allow it to still operate within a rounded tunnel like it needs to.
Very obvious that weight was reduced as much as possible, with the very intent to get a light hammer.
It sounds like you're wanting a heavier hammer for your .22 Carbine? I see where you're going with that but I'm not sure it's the wisest decision. I believe the .22 Carbines also have only a 17inch barrel. You're not going to get blazing speed or power out of that barrel, even by adding a heavy hammer. You're likely to reduce your shot count and have air waste. Furthermore, the lighter hammer set-up is a much more mellow (read ENJOYABLE) shooting experience. On the flip side, if you've got a .22 HP barrel kit on order, going with a heavier hammer makes more sense.
And finally, it's quite possible that the .22 Carbines already have the 545grain hammer in it. There was some disbelief from more than one AOA employee when I told them about the light hammer that came in the .177 Carbine. They acted like that wasn't supposed to be in a gun that got shipped to "this side of the pond."
Upvote 0
Yes, the possibility is there to swap the 17-inch barrel on the Carbine for the .22 HP barrel kit in the future. I'm just curious if the provision of the heavy hammer that is on the HP is for the Carbine as well and that the HP barrel kit would only include the barrel, probe, and shroud. I think the heavy hammer being on the .177 Carbine would be counterproductive, but not on the .22. Perhaps the shooting character is different on the .22?
Upvote 0
"...How do you feel a side-rail mounted two-piece bipod like this compares to a traditional one-piece using the under-belly mount, in a stability sense?..."
The tilt adjustment is slower. But the high mounted bipod allows for a lower shooting position, and they fold up better, and can stay attached when cased or when not being used. They shoot as well or better than bottom mount bipods.
"...One question though....you didn't share a straight on photo, but just proportionally eye-balling it, it appears that the rear section of the back would be right up under the trigger and trigger guard. I assume that's not caused any trigger accessibility or ergonomic issues for you?..."
No issues though I have not yet put it to serious use. I got the picatinny "Backbone Bag Frame" with the "Flat Bag". They also have a "Little Cuddle Bag" that is taller, and would probably fit. Anything much longer than 8" would be a problem, so their "Mega Bag" would not work for that rail.
"...Seems like I remember that you've got a .177 barrel with this Delta...what other calibers are you going to play with?..."
My other barrel is a 17" .177 caliber. This one is a 23" .25 caliber.
"...Also, I'm not seeing your 3d printed (and then cast aluminum) barrel support in the photos....did you arrive at another way to ease your concerns there? perhaps something out of view/inside the shroud?..."
I removed the right bipod leg so you can see the current barrel clamp:
We made a few of them and they are out there being tested by me and others.
The tilt adjustment is slower. But the high mounted bipod allows for a lower shooting position, and they fold up better, and can stay attached when cased or when not being used. They shoot as well or better than bottom mount bipods.
"...One question though....you didn't share a straight on photo, but just proportionally eye-balling it, it appears that the rear section of the back would be right up under the trigger and trigger guard. I assume that's not caused any trigger accessibility or ergonomic issues for you?..."
No issues though I have not yet put it to serious use. I got the picatinny "Backbone Bag Frame" with the "Flat Bag". They also have a "Little Cuddle Bag" that is taller, and would probably fit. Anything much longer than 8" would be a problem, so their "Mega Bag" would not work for that rail.
"...Seems like I remember that you've got a .177 barrel with this Delta...what other calibers are you going to play with?..."
My other barrel is a 17" .177 caliber. This one is a 23" .25 caliber.
"...Also, I'm not seeing your 3d printed (and then cast aluminum) barrel support in the photos....did you arrive at another way to ease your concerns there? perhaps something out of view/inside the shroud?..."
I removed the right bipod leg so you can see the current barrel clamp:
We made a few of them and they are out there being tested by me and others.
Upvote 0
Okay, according to Shane at AoA, all Ghosts for the US market are equipped with the standard (heavy) hammer, so converting a .22 Carbine, for example, to an HP would only require the longer barrel, shroud and probe, which are all part of the kit. Of course, installing the larger-capacity air bottle would be at the discretion of the owner.
Upvote 0
Thank you for the clarification. Sounds about like what they were implying when I talked to them, regarding the light hammer and UK/sub 12fpe market.
Upvote 0
Took a bit of a break from testing the Ghost these past few weeks, mostly for the holidays but also just busy from my real job, and an obligatory nieces wedding over 500miles away.
Just got home from the wedding and realized I don't go back to work til Thursday. That means.....some fun with the Ghost in the next couple days!
Current plan is to drop in that heavy hammer and the 0.052" wire hammer spring and see where the fpe ceiling is for the .22 polygonal barrel. That'll likely also include some slug testing (will push it out to long range if 50 yards is promising-can go to 140yds here at home) , as well as an assessment on whether accuracy with the .22 MRDs is any better at 960-980 (somewhat educated guess that they'll top out around there) than it is at 920-940. And finally, working up 20-100 yard dope sheet for whatever "tune" is most promising and will be what gets shot at the January Xtreme Field Target match in a few weeks.
And of course, I'll share all the details here in the ongoing report.
Just got home from the wedding and realized I don't go back to work til Thursday. That means.....some fun with the Ghost in the next couple days!
Current plan is to drop in that heavy hammer and the 0.052" wire hammer spring and see where the fpe ceiling is for the .22 polygonal barrel. That'll likely also include some slug testing (will push it out to long range if 50 yards is promising-can go to 140yds here at home) , as well as an assessment on whether accuracy with the .22 MRDs is any better at 960-980 (somewhat educated guess that they'll top out around there) than it is at 920-940. And finally, working up 20-100 yard dope sheet for whatever "tune" is most promising and will be what gets shot at the January Xtreme Field Target match in a few weeks.
And of course, I'll share all the details here in the ongoing report.
Upvote 0
Got the two hammers next to each other and there's more differences than just weight.
The HP hammer on the left, the hammer that came in the .177 Carbine on right....
The Ghost HP hammer is shorter, which would accomplish at least two relevant things: allow more room for larger diameter wire on the hammer spring before b coming cool-bound, and allow the hammer to travel further before hitting the poppet (which typically increases power, versus shorter "throw").
Very interesting.
For those who haven't been following along, we think that skeletonized hammer is the UK sub 12fpe hammer.
The HP hammer on the left, the hammer that came in the .177 Carbine on right....
The Ghost HP hammer is shorter, which would accomplish at least two relevant things: allow more room for larger diameter wire on the hammer spring before b coming cool-bound, and allow the hammer to travel further before hitting the poppet (which typically increases power, versus shorter "throw").
Very interesting.
For those who haven't been following along, we think that skeletonized hammer is the UK sub 12fpe hammer.
Upvote 0
Upvote 0
For the purposes of this post....
I was really hoping to throw that heavy hammer and heavy hammer spring in the Ghost and be up in the high 900s with MRDs. As noted, the plan was also to do some 23-27grain slug testing while I was up there in energy output But that's not what happened. And I'm not too sure why.
The swap over was pretty uneventful. Simple enough to take out the lighter hammer and lighter hammer spring, and put in the heavier ones. Reg pressure still at about 140 bar. Hammer spring tension wheel at "MAX" (original design). First shot over the chrono was 900fps with MRDs. Next couple were also right there around 900fps. This is LESS than I was getting with the lighter hammer and spring. Scratch my head for a minute.....Maybe needs more reg pressure since I'm theoretically smacking the valve harder so, increased the reg pressure.....to no avail. I got as high as 165-170bar and fps went DOWN to 885fps. More head scratching. Dropped the reg pressure down to 120 bar, fps of 860 with MRDs. Highest energy output was with a reg pressure of 135-140 bar.
At this point, I've got a heavier hammer, with a stiffer hammer spring, and a longer stroke. All three of which should equate to hitting the valve harder, therefore producing more energy. But it was producing LESS energy. Thought maybe too long of a stroke? So threaded out the nose of the hammer, fps went down about 25fps. Maybe too much hammer spring? So swapped back to the light hammer spring but kept the heavy hammer in the gun. FPS with MRDs went down to 770fps. What the @&%#@ he77?!?!?!
Assessed the smoothness of the hammer traveling in it's little home and compared the two, they're both smooth as silk, so no apparent friction or roughness issues there.
At this point, I'm wondering if I've got a failing valve or something horrible. So I go back to the configuration that I shot the XFT match with in December. Put the light hammer + my weight and the light hammer spring back in the gun, essentially replicating my settings from before this recent heavy hammer/heavy hammer spring adventure. First MRD over the chrono with my previous settings was 940, right where it should be (had reg at about 137 at the last match and fps was 920-930. New reg of 140 bar so expected fps to be up just a bit from that) . Shot ten over the chrono and they were something like 932-940fps. MAX on the hammer wheel will take them back up to 965, all of that is just like it did before with similar settings.
So, I'm stumped. All of the above taught me that I don't understand that valve very well. It DEFINITELY functions differently than a typical valve in a PCP.
Texting with @Arzrover after all this and his final suggestion was potentially sear drag with the new, heavy hammer, but by that point I was frustrated and discouraged and had concluded that I'm done futzing with chasing power or max output or slugs (at least for awhile). I know that the Ghost will shoot the MRDs REALLY well at these settings, and I'm leaving it here for now and just enjoying the gun, by gosh!
For as much as I find myself tinkering and "tuning" airguns, I despise it. I enjoy immensely the act of shooting but I've sold guns before that were "tinkerers delights." I was too often pulled into that never-ending nightmare of chasing improvements through tuning.
So, after the above head banging against the wall, I needed to have a good day, rekindling my good feelings towards the Ghost. And that I did!
Too windy for true accuracy testing (been gusting up to 30mph these last two days at my place) but I realized I hadn't ever shot a full string over the chrono to see how consistency is. For sure didn't want to just do that into a trap in the garage so I set up so that I could do it outside. Also got the crazy idea to try to hold on the same impact point at 75 yards (lasered out to 76) for the entire shot string and see what the wind and pellet quality and shooting through a whole "fill" would do to impact points.
This is the first fill.
(before commenting about the apparent inconsistency...queue up the Karen voice "that line is all jagged
" please note that I have the increments of the vertical axis to be only 5fps).
And I thought it'd be educational to repeat it with a different batch of MRDs, to see if wider spreads could correlate with what I've deemed the less accurate batch, from previous testing sessions.
Second fill (different batch of MRDS)
Couple conclusions from the above...
Finally, after all this I was verifying dope at 20-100 yards for Xtreme Field Target when a dove landed at a lasered 162 yards. Ho boy!!! Missed him the first shot but could see where it went. Dove moved a few feet but didn't fly off. Took a couple clicks off and NAILED that sucker on the second shot!!! He dropped like a rock and I sat there mouth-hanging-open SHOCKED. That is my new record long shot on a Euro dove. With the Ghost HP and 25.4grain Monster RDs. And from sticks and a stool!! Strelok told me 83 clicks initially and that's the first shot that went over him, and to the right from the wind. I took off 11 clicks, for 72 clicks, or 7.2mils of hold over and held into the wind about 1.5mils on the second shot. (scope is zeroed for 35-45 yards)
And THAT was just what I needed to get over my earlier "tuning" frustrations and fall back in love with the Ghost.
(For those of you who have been hanging around for slug testing, I apologize. I had every intention of doing it while I had the gun cranked up with the heavy hammer and heavy hammer spring but, those two things didn't crank the power up, as described above. Slug testing may eventually happen but it won't be any time soon. As good as this gun shoots with .22 MRDs, that's what I'm sticking with, at least with the high power side of the Ghost barrels currently in my possession. Also, as @zx10wall pointed out, this slow twist poly barrel is not likely to produce the sort of accuracy most would like to see. And for that matter, my method of testing and reporting, where I actually show ALL the results, isn't going to do much for the slug lovers amongst us. Simply put, I've shot A LOT of .22 slugs at 45-60fpe, from a lot of different barrels and guns.....and they've never done better than what .22 Monster RDs can do. If there's any slug magic in airgunning, it ain't with .22 cal in the 45-60fpe realm).
- "Heavy hammer" = 545.3grain hammer that comes in GHOST HP.
- "Heavy hammer spring" = 0.052 wire hammer spring
- "light hammer" = 493.2grain (455.2grain hammer that is probably a sub 12 fpe UK hammer + my home brew 38 grain hammer weight)
- "light hammer spring" = 0.047 wire hammer spring that came in the .177 Ghost Carbine
I was really hoping to throw that heavy hammer and heavy hammer spring in the Ghost and be up in the high 900s with MRDs. As noted, the plan was also to do some 23-27grain slug testing while I was up there in energy output But that's not what happened. And I'm not too sure why.
The swap over was pretty uneventful. Simple enough to take out the lighter hammer and lighter hammer spring, and put in the heavier ones. Reg pressure still at about 140 bar. Hammer spring tension wheel at "MAX" (original design). First shot over the chrono was 900fps with MRDs. Next couple were also right there around 900fps. This is LESS than I was getting with the lighter hammer and spring. Scratch my head for a minute.....Maybe needs more reg pressure since I'm theoretically smacking the valve harder so, increased the reg pressure.....to no avail. I got as high as 165-170bar and fps went DOWN to 885fps. More head scratching. Dropped the reg pressure down to 120 bar, fps of 860 with MRDs. Highest energy output was with a reg pressure of 135-140 bar.
At this point, I've got a heavier hammer, with a stiffer hammer spring, and a longer stroke. All three of which should equate to hitting the valve harder, therefore producing more energy. But it was producing LESS energy. Thought maybe too long of a stroke? So threaded out the nose of the hammer, fps went down about 25fps. Maybe too much hammer spring? So swapped back to the light hammer spring but kept the heavy hammer in the gun. FPS with MRDs went down to 770fps. What the @&%#@ he77?!?!?!
Assessed the smoothness of the hammer traveling in it's little home and compared the two, they're both smooth as silk, so no apparent friction or roughness issues there.
At this point, I'm wondering if I've got a failing valve or something horrible. So I go back to the configuration that I shot the XFT match with in December. Put the light hammer + my weight and the light hammer spring back in the gun, essentially replicating my settings from before this recent heavy hammer/heavy hammer spring adventure. First MRD over the chrono with my previous settings was 940, right where it should be (had reg at about 137 at the last match and fps was 920-930. New reg of 140 bar so expected fps to be up just a bit from that) . Shot ten over the chrono and they were something like 932-940fps. MAX on the hammer wheel will take them back up to 965, all of that is just like it did before with similar settings.
So, I'm stumped. All of the above taught me that I don't understand that valve very well. It DEFINITELY functions differently than a typical valve in a PCP.
Texting with @Arzrover after all this and his final suggestion was potentially sear drag with the new, heavy hammer, but by that point I was frustrated and discouraged and had concluded that I'm done futzing with chasing power or max output or slugs (at least for awhile). I know that the Ghost will shoot the MRDs REALLY well at these settings, and I'm leaving it here for now and just enjoying the gun, by gosh!
For as much as I find myself tinkering and "tuning" airguns, I despise it. I enjoy immensely the act of shooting but I've sold guns before that were "tinkerers delights." I was too often pulled into that never-ending nightmare of chasing improvements through tuning.
So, after the above head banging against the wall, I needed to have a good day, rekindling my good feelings towards the Ghost. And that I did!
Too windy for true accuracy testing (been gusting up to 30mph these last two days at my place) but I realized I hadn't ever shot a full string over the chrono to see how consistency is. For sure didn't want to just do that into a trap in the garage so I set up so that I could do it outside. Also got the crazy idea to try to hold on the same impact point at 75 yards (lasered out to 76) for the entire shot string and see what the wind and pellet quality and shooting through a whole "fill" would do to impact points.
This is the first fill.
(before commenting about the apparent inconsistency...queue up the Karen voice "that line is all jagged
" please note that I have the increments of the vertical axis to be only 5fps).And I thought it'd be educational to repeat it with a different batch of MRDs, to see if wider spreads could correlate with what I've deemed the less accurate batch, from previous testing sessions.
Second fill (different batch of MRDS)
Couple conclusions from the above...
- The lowest shots from both strings were in the last couple shots. Which suggests that either the reg manometer is a few bar off, or more simply that the reg slightly misbehaves if shots are taken all the way down to set point. From now on will be stopping and refilling around 145 bar.
- Filling all the way to 250 bar, versus only 240, doesn't gain much in the way of shot count.
- The previously decided less accurate of the two batches DID produce a wider ES.
- One of the two batches actually shot slightly faster as well. No visually discernable difference in pellet shape, but perhaps an average head size difference from one batch to the other.
- I am well-pleased with the consistency.
- Will fill to 240 bar and shoot down to 142-145 bar from now on, planning on a solid 50 shots per fill at just the slightest smidge under 50 fpe each.
- That is from a 480 cc bottle. Do what most would and add a bigger bottle and of course shot count will increase. Personally, with lots of time with tube guns, I'm pretty dang happy with a 50/50 tune (50 shots of 50 fpe each, between needing to fill up the gun each time).
Finally, after all this I was verifying dope at 20-100 yards for Xtreme Field Target when a dove landed at a lasered 162 yards. Ho boy!!! Missed him the first shot but could see where it went. Dove moved a few feet but didn't fly off. Took a couple clicks off and NAILED that sucker on the second shot!!! He dropped like a rock and I sat there mouth-hanging-open SHOCKED. That is my new record long shot on a Euro dove. With the Ghost HP and 25.4grain Monster RDs. And from sticks and a stool!! Strelok told me 83 clicks initially and that's the first shot that went over him, and to the right from the wind. I took off 11 clicks, for 72 clicks, or 7.2mils of hold over and held into the wind about 1.5mils on the second shot. (scope is zeroed for 35-45 yards)
And THAT was just what I needed to get over my earlier "tuning" frustrations and fall back in love with the Ghost.
(For those of you who have been hanging around for slug testing, I apologize. I had every intention of doing it while I had the gun cranked up with the heavy hammer and heavy hammer spring but, those two things didn't crank the power up, as described above. Slug testing may eventually happen but it won't be any time soon. As good as this gun shoots with .22 MRDs, that's what I'm sticking with, at least with the high power side of the Ghost barrels currently in my possession. Also, as @zx10wall pointed out, this slow twist poly barrel is not likely to produce the sort of accuracy most would like to see. And for that matter, my method of testing and reporting, where I actually show ALL the results, isn't going to do much for the slug lovers amongst us. Simply put, I've shot A LOT of .22 slugs at 45-60fpe, from a lot of different barrels and guns.....and they've never done better than what .22 Monster RDs can do. If there's any slug magic in airgunning, it ain't with .22 cal in the 45-60fpe realm).
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Upvote 0
@Franklink don't take this the wrong way. I have enjoyed everything you have written on the Ghost! I have watched every step with interest. And your stories hold my attention. But when push comes to shove you are telling us about a gun that most of us will never have in our hands. Different barrel, hammer and spring we will probably not have access to. BRK should have made sure you had a US production gun. I'm sure you have sold more than a couple.
Upvote 0
Rc4fun... what you're saying is true to some degree but the only part he has not readily available in the USA is the light hammer. It SHOULD be available but the factory has been unable to supply everything for every rifle all the time, so far. The rifle he has was a low power version for him to test and use for ft. I have been the instigator in most of the changes because I've had a prototype since August with different barrels and valves and can machine some things as needed, as well.
He did a good job of showing us what it could do in its original setup, then I talked him into trying the 22 HP. His latest experience is a puzzler and he is just relating that to us. We confer frequently so at some point, we'll get this figured out but as he mentioned, he really prefers to shoot, not tinker. Same for me but I'm also interested in how things are designed and how they function so typically have all of them apart at some point to see what might be done better.
Anyway , even though we chat frequently , I still enjoy his reviews and methodical approach .
Bob
He did a good job of showing us what it could do in its original setup, then I talked him into trying the 22 HP. His latest experience is a puzzler and he is just relating that to us. We confer frequently so at some point, we'll get this figured out but as he mentioned, he really prefers to shoot, not tinker. Same for me but I'm also interested in how things are designed and how they function so typically have all of them apart at some point to see what might be done better.
Anyway , even though we chat frequently , I still enjoy his reviews and methodical approach .
Bob
Upvote 0