What is the LEAST hold sensitive, “FULL POWER” spring rifle?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
In the past I tried the 95 and 98. Both were very accurate and not too hold sensitive. Even with the 97, accuracy is not automatic, but it'll group. The heavier rifles are capable of precision with a consistent shot sequence and good optics. I currently have a couple of old Diana 45s in .177 and a HW97 in .20 cal. Both 45s are 12 ft lbs with new springs and are accurate enough for targets to 40 yards. Although they are not heavy recoiling they are hold sensitive. My best results were achieved with a Maccari spring and ARH heavy tar. My goal for the 45s is to use them for silhouette out to 45 yards. 

The 97 has a PG4 12lbs kit and Rowan straight trigger blade. I just added a SWFA 12x scope in BKL mounts and at the 25 yard indoor range accuracy was easy to achieve while rested at 25 yards.

HW97 .20 JSB 13.73 grs, 6 shots.

0507221635_HDR2.1652067512.jpg

 
Upvote 0
So I never claimed that every r9 had droop. Any break barrel can have it regardless of price. All I was saying is that under lever and side lever guns are inherently impervious to barrel droop. They are not necessarily less hold sensitive. I know that many people do get great results of low hold sensitivity from them. Then again many people get great results of low hold sensitivity from lower power springers or from other springers like the hatsan 135. I shoot that very well. I think it's mostly because of the weight. Possibly the shock absorbers but who knows. My point is that fixed barrel rifles are not solving the problem of hold sensitivity..... Like at all. You may find one that really does work for you well but it's not because it's a side lever or underlever. The only benefits you get from them is no barrel droop which is not really a big problem in most airguns anyway since most the time you just adjust the turrets on your scope. Some guys get a gun that really requires some shims or other equipment and that's when a fixed barrel is really a God send. Even some high end rifles have this problem eventually over a long time or some even experience it immediately. In my experience tho and after shooting several guns from r1lover at the range I realized that I didn't care so much about the barrel droop. What little droop there may or may not have been was taken care of by scopes or adjustable sights and I can guarantee you that his break barrels were every bit as accurate if not more than the 97 underlever.
 
Upvote 0
If I remember right, the Diana 48/52 were known for droop and utg used to make 2 or 3 variations of their drooper, one was specifically for the D48.



I am pretty sure it was engineered into the design, for better use of the open sights which were a lot more popular in Europe. Or maybe just because scopes of the day were not made for the reverse recoil?



A barrel with slight droop does not require as much drop in the comb and also remedies the increased height over bore with a taller rear sight, on a gun with no droop. I suppose you could also address it with a tiny front sight or even a bead.



Now there are so many cheap copies we just blame it on poor manufacturing tolerances.


I think they changed the droop specs on the HW guns imported as/for Beeman because Americans prefer scopes. So no droop and higher comb.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Billinoregon
Upvote 0
BryanH said:
I normally dial in a hunting rifle in holding the fore end gently by the stock screws, regardless of how the gun likes to be held. I do it that way because it’s a versatile hold, I can always lean my arm or wrist on something for support, and as long as your hold is consistent it’s the most important thing.

This year I tried something a little different. I took the extra time to tweak the scope on my R9 using ten shot groups and intentionally switching holds every time, along the entire forearm. I already knew with a consistent hold and good follow through I could probably hit a squirrel in the eye ball with fair consistency, but what I learned is I can keep every pellet inside a 1” circle regardless of my hold (25 yards). I’m talking edge to edge groups a hair less than 1” so I guess that puts my CTC group of any number of shots even 20 or 30 shots about 3/4”-7/8” at 25 yards, with no regard to consistency of hold but otherwise good fundamentals. This is with good ammo. Each different hold might change center of POI by about 1/8”-1/4” at most but also different holds do not group as well as others, so that is why overall it opens up between 3/4” or 7/8”. This is not a tuned gun, it’s a factory gun with nothing other than a trigger adjustment. It has not been chronoed but when compared side by side to the RWS 34 with a Vortek sub-12 kit, my HW hits noticeably harder.

Now when I do my part my groups are about a third or even a quarter of that size. I just love my buzzy little R9 to death and I am thrilled to learn that I don’t need to worry about how the gun is held out to any reasonable range in the squirrel woods. But how much less hold sensitive is a fixed barrel gun? What can you reasonably expect from an HW97 or an TX200 with a different hold between shots?
Click to expand...
I'll grab my 97 first before my 54 or 48...
 
  • Like
Reactions: BryanH
Upvote 0
nobody1 said:
For the price of a good high-end springer (easily more than $400) you can buy a $300 PCP and a $50 pump and have much more power and accuracy.

I have tried and sold almost all my springers, and will never go back.
Click to expand...
I wonder why your lurking in the Traditional area?
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: bf1956, BryanH, Billinoregon and 2 others
Upvote 0
The least hold sensitive springers (at full power) I've owned or shot in order of least sensitive... Diana 54 A.K. Pro, HW97, Diana 470TH, HW95, ... And I'll even agree to the Hatsan 135 as an honorable mention if it's a gas ram version tuned/pressurized for a specific pellet.

If it matters, if or when I do any pesting/hunting with a springer the HW95 is my primary choice for its excellent balance of weight, power and consistent accuracy. There are others more powerful or slightly more accurate from a bench but their weight is more than I care to lug around.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: coastal drifter
Upvote 0
It's un questionally the 54. The sledge overwrites the usual issues of hold repeatability in reg of the comedy recoil of the springer. However, it brings with it other issues. You need to be quite strong to hold one steady, especially if including a decent size scope. It's a real lump if you want to drag it around on an extended hunt.
It's a true king off the bench, still undisputed king of recoiling springers in a static situation.
A winner of so many springer FT shoots for this reason, but usually used off the knee, or prone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JEFFPPC and Billinoregon
Upvote 0
My least hold-sensitive springer is also my heaviest, the .177 Diana 48. It's a heavy rifle to begin with, and I added the all steel adjustable RWS "C" mount, and an old Dianawerk steel muzzle weight. Weighs in at around 11.5 lbs as pictured. I don't mind a heavy rifle, so it works for me. The ease of installing a sling is a plus, as it needs it.

Squirrel-48.JPG
 
  • Like
Reactions: JDR, fishing43 and JEFFPPC
Upvote 0
Northwoods22 said:
My least hold-sensitive springer is also my heaviest, the .177 Diana 48. It's a heavy rifle to begin with, and I added the all steel adjustable RWS "C" mount, and an old Dianawerk steel muzzle weight. Weighs in at around 11.5 lbs as pictured. I don't mind a heavy rifle, so it works for me. The ease of installing a sling is a plus, as it needs it.

View attachment 446017
Click to expand...
Looks like a squirrel population control hammer.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Resources
Menu