Just got a Beeman Webley Tempest 177 cal (aluminum frame but made in England). Shooting at 300fps with 4.52 H&N Trophy (8.64) and 346 fps with H&N Match Light (7.5). Thing is the 4.50 mm pellets are very loose in the breach and often fall out when cocking the return stroke. Even the 4.52 pellets fit loose although they do not fall out. Wondering what pellets fit tight and do you think I am loosing any velocity with the loose pellets. Thinking it should be shooting 420 fps. Any ideas on better fitting pellets and getting the velocity higher.
Other Webley Tempest
- Thread starter JDR
- Start date
could a loose pellet have lower FPS i think it could
i took some RWS R-10 4.50 7.0gr and they are loose in the barrel end but if i took a small dowel and pushed them in that were tight
so that what i would suggest is to seat the pellets and test
no FPS numbers but it cut a perfect hole
i took some RWS R-10 4.50 7.0gr and they are loose in the barrel end but if i took a small dowel and pushed them in that were tight
so that what i would suggest is to seat the pellets and test
no FPS numbers but it cut a perfect hole
Upvote 0
The Tempest does have a long tapered breech leade, and tends to like ammo with larger-diameter skirts.
Note that pellet head size - 4.50mm, 4.52mm, whatever - has little to do with breech fit. The head's job is to lightly ride the rifling lands so the pellet doesn't tip in the bore; it's the larger-diameter skirt that cuts into the rifling grooves and seals the airflow. ".177" pellet head diameters are usually right at .177, where skirts run .182 or bigger.
The older RWS pellet designs (Hobby, Meisterkugeln, Superdome, Superpoint, Super H-point) have the largest skirts of any .177 pellets that I know of - up to .188 or so. And even those may want to be seated lightly, as marflow suggested. The Hobby is the lightest will probably get the best velocity out of the Tempest.
Note that pellet head size - 4.50mm, 4.52mm, whatever - has little to do with breech fit. The head's job is to lightly ride the rifling lands so the pellet doesn't tip in the bore; it's the larger-diameter skirt that cuts into the rifling grooves and seals the airflow. ".177" pellet head diameters are usually right at .177, where skirts run .182 or bigger.
The older RWS pellet designs (Hobby, Meisterkugeln, Superdome, Superpoint, Super H-point) have the largest skirts of any .177 pellets that I know of - up to .188 or so. And even those may want to be seated lightly, as marflow suggested. The Hobby is the lightest will probably get the best velocity out of the Tempest.
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Thank you. I bought the RWS Hobby 7.0 grain and the RWS Hypermax 5.2 grain from PA to try. I also had those Crossman Fast Flight 5.4 grain pellets to try. In a year of 2, I will send the pistol in for a reseal and a new spring. Really fun to shoot.
Upvote 0
As said, the Tempest has a very heavy taper at the breech but also the barrels were designed to shoot the pellets we produced in England at that time, namely the Webley special pellets at 4.60, Lanes 4.60 and Eley Wasps.
Milbro Caledonian and Bulldog were others ....all 4.6
None of these are avail now so the best you can do is Superdomes, or Hobby which are slightly up on size compared to European pellets. Still not quite enough but best you can do...
I once re-worked a .22 barrel Tempest to accept a .177 liner. Drilling it out slightly and adding a .177 liner of European barrel at the request of a customer.
The gun could now accept regular 4.5s and perhaps should shoot more accurately.
As it turned out, the project was probably not worthwhile. Despite acceptance of most regular 4.5s and potentially better accuracy the user could never achieve the sort of accuracy from the rest of the guns mechanics to realise the difference....Quite costly and labour intensive.
Milbro Caledonian and Bulldog were others ....all 4.6
None of these are avail now so the best you can do is Superdomes, or Hobby which are slightly up on size compared to European pellets. Still not quite enough but best you can do...
I once re-worked a .22 barrel Tempest to accept a .177 liner. Drilling it out slightly and adding a .177 liner of European barrel at the request of a customer.
The gun could now accept regular 4.5s and perhaps should shoot more accurately.
As it turned out, the project was probably not worthwhile. Despite acceptance of most regular 4.5s and potentially better accuracy the user could never achieve the sort of accuracy from the rest of the guns mechanics to realise the difference....Quite costly and labour intensive.
Last edited:
Upvote 0
I put several thousand rounds through a Tempest I had in the 1980s on the fever-dream
I could get good enough with it for NRA Silhouette competition.
For that reason I used Eley Wasps to maximize down-range ballistics of the ballistically-challenged, most difficult pistol on Earth to shoot well.
Suffice to say I got as good shooting a Tempest offhand as is humanly possible; however it isn't humanly possible to do anything but humiliate One's-self with a Tempest in NRA Silhouette competition. Thankfully I had just (BARELY) enough sense to realize that fact.
I did find best results against TINY silhouettes came from combining multiple elements/techniques- 1) 'Aiming' with the rudimentary sights
, 2) Instinct shooting like old-school traditional archers and baseball pitchers do, and 3) 'Supplements' like some re-gaining popularity a half-century later.
I could get good enough with it for NRA Silhouette competition. For that reason I used Eley Wasps to maximize down-range ballistics of the ballistically-challenged, most difficult pistol on Earth to shoot well.Suffice to say I got as good shooting a Tempest offhand as is humanly possible; however it isn't humanly possible to do anything but humiliate One's-self with a Tempest in NRA Silhouette competition. Thankfully I had just (BARELY) enough sense to realize that fact.
I did find best results against TINY silhouettes came from combining multiple elements/techniques- 1) 'Aiming' with the rudimentary sights
, 2) Instinct shooting like old-school traditional archers and baseball pitchers do, and 3) 'Supplements' like some re-gaining popularity a half-century later. Last edited:
Upvote 0
I tuned perhaps 20 or so in my time. The issue (if we ignore the basic sights, shortish sight base and 5lb trigger pull) is rear moving piston guns seem to provide more problems than we first supposed they would.
We imagined (mid to late 80s) that the rear moving piston must be beneficial as it puts the recoil direct into the palm of the hand. While this is true, it offered no help whatsoever, making things much worse.
As the piston recoil hits the palm, it seems to rebound in the hand and pivot, very slightly down and to the left.
An equal and opposite pivot shunt off the hand.
In comparison the forward moving piston like the RWS 5 jumps forward slightly but does not have this rebound pivot thing going on. As a consequence this much more appealing pistol always got trounced by others it was competing against.
Slip rings, pellet types a free rotating piston head....you name it I tried it and failed.
We imagined (mid to late 80s) that the rear moving piston must be beneficial as it puts the recoil direct into the palm of the hand. While this is true, it offered no help whatsoever, making things much worse.
As the piston recoil hits the palm, it seems to rebound in the hand and pivot, very slightly down and to the left.
An equal and opposite pivot shunt off the hand.
In comparison the forward moving piston like the RWS 5 jumps forward slightly but does not have this rebound pivot thing going on. As a consequence this much more appealing pistol always got trounced by others it was competing against.
Slip rings, pellet types a free rotating piston head....you name it I tried it and failed.
Upvote 0
The I've noticed is the further you seat a pellet the lower the velocity. I think it's because the pressure never gets high enough for Adibatic heating which increases the pressure dramatically. If the pellet moves to easily then will never see the pressure it would with a tight fitting pellet. Have you tried flaring the pellet skirt so it fits tighter?
Upvote 0
No luck with the RWS Hobby, fits loose and gives velocity of 300 fps a little bit less that the H&N light match. (320 fps). With the pellets, I have to careful after I load the barrel as the pellet will drop out. One time I missed it and I dry fired. Is there anyway to flair out the pellet skirt without damaging the pellet? I think I can do that to the plastic skirt on the Crossman Fast Flight 5.4. It got 400 fps: the highest so far but accuracy was bad. Not sure if some tool you could use. Attempts to flair the skirt while the lead pellet is in the breech just pushes the pellet father down the barrel. Looked on Ebay and could only find vendors selling 177 cal Wasps empty tins for a great deal of money. In summary, I guess 300 fps is not bad for a plinking pistol that probably limited to 10 yards anyway. In a year or so after my wife cools down, I will send it in for a reseal and a new spring but doubt I will ever get more than 400 fps due to these loose pellets.
Upvote 0
Well said! That pivoting action works in two directions: a) when the piston is first released rearward, the equal-and-opposite reaction pushes the gun forward, moving the muzzle down; b) when the piston stops, it shoves the gun rearward, moving the muzzle up. This all happens so quickly, we just notice the latter...but in fact the pellet exits whilst the muzzle is down.
This is why the Tempest's sights are so far from aligning with the bore (rear is much higher than the front). Compare to the sight alignment on the recoilless FWB 65:
Neither here nor there, but I've wondered about making a lifting-barrel, reverse-piston pistol with the powerplant low and in front of the hand, instead of above it; in other words, laid out more like a PCP match pistol. The recoil would thus be in line with your arm, and theoretically kill the pivoting movement. Such a design would lose the Tempest's endearing compactness...and I'm not sure exactly how you'd work out the trigger mechanism!...but it might be interesting.
Last edited:
Upvote 0
You have received responses from people who have forgotten more about the Tempest than I know. However, I am getting 420 to 440 feet per second out of mine (177). I keep the main spring oiled so the pistol has plenty of fuel. I shoot light weight pellets (Hobbys) because they exit the barrel early in the recoil cycle and for me are a bit more accurate. I have had good luck with alloy pellets ( GTA wadcutters). The Tempest is a strong design and will handle the lower grain weight pellets. As stated by others the bore is oversized but I have not had problems.
Read the UK forums, our friends across the pond and their fathers grew up with these pistols. Cancuk air on YouTube rebuilt his father's Tempest and has a lot of good information.
Read the UK forums, our friends across the pond and their fathers grew up with these pistols. Cancuk air on YouTube rebuilt his father's Tempest and has a lot of good information.
Upvote 0
There maybe more things to explore...
I think because it's such an appealing snub nosed thing, pistol enthusiasts want it to be better and keep trying things.
I might take one last excursion into this gun, probably for a customer, putting this idea to him , who is now considering it.
The idea is based on the Webley Mk1.
I've had one of these and tuned 2. It's about the best I've had out of the entire range from 1926, in accuracy terms.
Ok, so there is an element of the Mark 1 having the adjustable trigger down to a perilous 1lb pull (not recommended) but a 2lb is safely doable.
Let's put that on one side however, as I wound this trigger up to the 5lbs typical of a Tempest, or Senior but surprisingly revealed still better accuracy.
I had to assume that the extra damping coming from the old style Leather seal with inner spacing buffer..
It's seems so much more cushioned in shot cycle.
So.....I've offered to do a Leather head seal for a customers Tempest..
I'll keep you informed of how this pans out..
I think because it's such an appealing snub nosed thing, pistol enthusiasts want it to be better and keep trying things.
I might take one last excursion into this gun, probably for a customer, putting this idea to him , who is now considering it.
The idea is based on the Webley Mk1.
I've had one of these and tuned 2. It's about the best I've had out of the entire range from 1926, in accuracy terms.
Ok, so there is an element of the Mark 1 having the adjustable trigger down to a perilous 1lb pull (not recommended) but a 2lb is safely doable.
Let's put that on one side however, as I wound this trigger up to the 5lbs typical of a Tempest, or Senior but surprisingly revealed still better accuracy.
I had to assume that the extra damping coming from the old style Leather seal with inner spacing buffer..
It's seems so much more cushioned in shot cycle.
So.....I've offered to do a Leather head seal for a customers Tempest..
I'll keep you informed of how this pans out..
Upvote 0
You already have your answer but I thought that I would mention that my Webly Vulcan has an oversize breech as well. Back in the Robert Beeman erra we used a Beeman pellet pusher to fully insert them, or they would just fly out on the close stroke.
Upvote 0
At the time 1982 ? when i bought my Tempest , Webley offered Free a pellet skirt sizer Measured from your exact barrel IF you sent the pistol into the factory to be measured and made for your barrel . That would have meant sending to UK and back to USA at my penny .
"What ???for a BB gun ??? " Foolish idea . !
Upvote 0