HW/Weihrauch Who says springers arent accurate?

[Cmiller]

I was testing pellet sorting this morning and the HW97 was fantastic. I was shooting from a rest. Top row was sorted pellets, the bottom row was the rejects. Both were pretty good but the sorted ones were a little more precise with fewer flyers.

25 yards, three shot groups so I could see all the shots.

 

[bustachip]

I was testing pellet sorting this morning and the HW97 was fantastic. I was shooting from a rest. Top row was sorted pellets, the bottom row was the rejects. Both were pretty good but the sorted ones were a little more precise with fewer flyers.

25 yards, three shot groups so I could see all the shots.
View attachment 491686

I think they're more accurate than some people realize, especially with the right pellet and practice.

 

[Bedrock Bob]

Thats some really consistent accuracy. It really shows how great these guns will shoot.

The accuracy of all my springers amaze me every time I shoot. From the $129 Hatsans to the HW97k. It's impressive how close they will group. Some better than others but none of them too shabby.

Even at crazy distances you can hit targets smaller than you can imagine.

The HW97k is a hammer. Mine is .22. I've shot lots of long strings into a 1/2" hole at 25. It's just stupid accurate and easy to shoot. I bet the full size 97 is even better farther out. And the .177 is flatter. That's going to be a hard rifle to outshoot.

 

[abslayer]

Key words here HW97 It really shows how great these guns will shoot

 

[drpietrzak]

I can get under an inch or so with my TX200 at 50-yards (.177). They can do pretty well.

see the video at 0:04:30

 

[Hateful McNasty]

My hw/r9 are just as good on there irons as scoped .. sadly the 97 ain't got irons to show you this .. but ..

7/8 circle@50y is so doable with even cphp ..

Hw... Hits Well and Highly Wanted (hw)

 

[DualMagMike]

Perfect example of the 3 things many say/think are NOT accurate but NOT necessarily true;

Springer
Break barrel
Magnum

20+fpe AA Pro Elite .22. Shot outside from a standing position but rested on my hand while grasping a door frame.

 

[coastal drifter]

Perfect example of the 3 things many say/think are NOT accurate but NOT necessarily true;

Springer
Break barrel
Magnum

20+fpe AA Pro Elite .22. Shot outside from a standing position but rested on my hand while grasping a door frame.

View attachment 491873

impressive

 

[Cmiller]

A little shooting at 25 yards with Air Arms Field Heavys. Just starting to get the hang of benchrest. I'm sure I can improve on this.

 

[Simplemann]

Thats some fine marksmanship I like your thought process on shooting 3 shot groups. I usually do a 5 shot group but I'll try the 3 shot. Thanks for saving me $$$

 

[Sean_Eason]

I was testing pellet sorting this morning and the HW97 was fantastic. I was shooting from a rest. Top row was sorted pellets, the bottom row was the rejects. Both were pretty good but the sorted ones were a little more precise with fewer flyers.

25 yards, three shot groups so I could see all the shots.
View attachment 491686

 

[Sean_Eason]

 

[Sean_Eason]

Yes, these German Springers are some of the best!!
Precision, quality, always amazing shooters!

 

[Deerstalker]

5 at 25 with my HW95L .22 from a table/bags.

 

[coastal drifter]

5 at 25 with my HW95L .22 from a table/bags.

nice!

 

[MDriskill]

I'd be lying if I said I did this very often...but hey, I did it once, LOL. No optics, shot with the OEM diopter sight.

 

[Bedrock Bob]

I like to shoot long strings to test consistency over a wide sample.

30 shots. 30 yards. HW95. H&N FTT 14.6. Shooting from a lawn chair off a camera tripod.

 

[Cmiller]

In effect I am shooting long strings in small increments. There is a fantastic tool at blackburndefense.com that allows you to evaluate multiple sets of smaller groups together. Also compares two sets of groups for statistical evaluation of accuracy. There are several really powerful tools that are very easy to use. Here are a couple of screen grabs to illustrate.

 

[Cmiller]

The conclusion is no difference between the two sets of shots even though we can see one is tighter. The reason is too small a sample to be sure. The standard for significance is. 05. This test is close at .089 so I think there is a difference just not fully proven statistically.

 

[Cmiller]

This was about twenty shots with unsorted versus sorted pellets. Fantastic tool to really evaluate your testing. Most of us shoot far to few shots to draw conclusions. It takes minimum 30 to 50 shots to see small differences.