More Airgun questions...

S

ShadowChaser

Guest
Oh boy, the deeper into this I get, the more questions I have...

For Airgun Benchrest accuracy, which is the better caliber, .177 or .22?

I'm looking at BSA Super10 series and Air Arms S200 Sporter and S400 MPR and MPR FT, The BSA is well regulated, the S200 is not, the MPR is and the MPR FT is not,
So, which is best for Airgun benchrest, a regulated gun such as a 10 mtr match rifle or an unregulated gun such as the FT type models?

What about moderators, do they do anything for accuracy or hinder it?

Thanks for your help,

Mitch...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ShadowChaser,
The .177 pellet is considered to be much more accurate, and with higher velocities the trajectory is much flatter.
10 meter and benchrest are short range, field target is outdoors and much longer ranges, so more power is needed. More power=more compressed air = fewer shots = much louder.
Regulators are designed to control the air pressure to the exhaust valve, giving even velocities throughout the tank pressure range. It is one more set of seals and moving parts. Most well designed exhaust valves self regulate to a certain extent. I am sure some with personal experience will log in.
A full power precharged rifle is loud, a match type, not so much, moderators make quite a difference and don't usually affect accuracy. The legality of moderators is murky, with the authorities being purposefully vague, do a search.
 
Regulated!

If you want all out accuracy for unlimited class a regulated FT is the way to go. Don't forget, not only do you have 25 record rounds but all the sighters. With an unregulated gun the velocity starts dropping unless you hook it up directly to the scuba tank. As for .117 or .22 I can't tell you as I haven't any experience with the .22. I have .177 and .20 barrels for my Steyr and I can't see any real difference at 25 yards. The .20 MAY have a little less wind drift but I can't really tell for sure, very slight. Velocity for the .177 is 975 and the .20 is 870.

Dennis
 
Update and more questions...

At last an update and more questions about airgun calibers as I go through the learning process...

Since attending the Feb. 7th AGBR match at Holbrook, I purchased an Air Arms S400MPR-FT in .177 caliber and I have now competed in two matches with this gun and my own equipment. For a new gun and related gear its going well and I'm learning a lot.

However, I'm seeing a trend that has me wondering a bit about the claim for the .177 caliber guns to be more accurate and that is the last two matches I participated in, it was .22 caliber airguns that took the top positions and won the matches. As I learn about airgun competing and in my own efforts to compete, I'm wondering if the opinion of the .177 caliber guns being more accurate is largely due to the availability of top end airguns that are made for match competition shooting in the 10 meter matches as well as the availability of match grade pellets for these guns in .177 caliber, something that seems to be lacking in .22 caliber guns and pellets.

Now that I'm actively participating in matches and learning a lot in the process, I've purchased a second Air Arms S400SL series gun, this one in .22 caliber. My initial intent is to build this gun up into a full benchrest gun with a benchrest stock to be used in the outdoor matches this spring. This gun is in process however even with the original sporter stock, this .22 S400SL gun is a very accurate shooter and compares very favorably with my S400MPR-FT gun as far as accuracy is concerned. This comparison between the .177 gun and the .22 gun has largely been made using JSB Exact heavy pellets with both guns and I'm weight sorting pellets to eliminate the odd fliers as I find these pellets vary by more than 3% in weight per tin.

For my tests at ten meters, using a 44% scaled down AGBR target with a .050" dia. 10 rings and a .200" dia. 9 rings, both guns produce 250 scores regularly. My theory for the 44% scaled target as the ring diameter is comparable in scale to the regular AGBR target at 25 yards.

Unfortunately my only test data has been obtained by comparing the two guns on my own indoor 10 meter range, I've only had one opportunity to shoot the .22 caliber gun at a 25 yard range and that one opportunity to compare it to the S400MPR-FT at 25 yards has led me to believe the .22 caliber pellet is more stable at ranges beyond 10 meters/25 yards than the .177 caliber pellet.

At ten meters using the scaled target, I have also made the same comparison with Beeman Kodiak pellets, again weight sorting is used and the results are similar.

To date, I have not seen any availability of Match grade guns in .22 caliber and more importantly, there does not appear to be any .22 caliber pellets being factory graded to the quality specifications of the .177 caliber match grade pellets. For example, my own weight sorting has proven the Beeman Kodiak Match grade pellets are considerably more consistent in weight than the standard Beeman Kodiak (non match grade) pellets.

Ok, Folks, thats what I'm learning, anyone care to provide any constructive information about any of this?

Folks, I'm putting this report of what I'm learning and seeing here on the forum with the hopes it will start a discussion. Please feel free to add your comments and thoughts...

Happy Shooting...

Mitch & Shadow...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
All I can add to this discussion is that when the S&W 78g .22 CO2 target pistol first came out it was found to shoot well only with S&W contracted Fiochi pellets.
The skirts of the Fiochi pellet were examined and found to be thinner and more uniform than others of that type used in the American Rifleman tests.

I have a 78g, its a very accurate pistol for its type but never acheived true matchgrade performance and was quickly downgraded to plinker status. The design was then sold off to Daisy and quality went downhill from there.

The Beeman wadcutter performs best in all the .177 caliber guns I've tried it in.

Examining the skirts of pellets is a key to consistent grouping.
There are tools made specifically for rounding out pellet skirts.
I use a home made tool for the purpose, but I've found no need to use it with Beeman pellets.
There aren't many brands available here so I'm sure there are some pellets that are better suited for individual rifles.

As with high power rifle bullets the condition of the base is more important than the nose of the projectile, so the pellet skirt would seem to be the key to accuracy all other factors being equal.


PS
I've found that while wadcutters perform best in the .177 rifles the heavier field point seems to be far more accurate than wadcutters in the .22 rifles and pistols.
.177 field point pellets just don't seem that well made these days.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have an old airgun manual that lists the ballistic coefficient of every available pellet at that time, the .22 cal pellets did have a higher B.C. The problem with the heavier pellets is that they travel much slower from the same power source. The amount of wind drift is a function of how long the pellet takes to get to the target, twice as fast, half the drift, the same can be said of vertical drop. If you had the power to drive the heavier pellets as fast as the lighter ones, and were of similar quality, wind drift would be less.
There is the fact that a pellet is not a great shape for all velocities, some performing well only at certain velocities, and the whole field of external ballistics has not really been applied to sub sonic pellets. The rate of barrel twist is another factor usually ignored. At this point trial and error is about the only way to test most pellets. I have a large box full of every type of pellet I could find, in the end, I found Crosman Premiers out shot almost every other field pellet, JSB's coming close. One other detail, I found choking the barrel at the muzzle to eliminate fliers.
 
One other detail, I found choking the barrel at the muzzle to eliminate fliers.

Reducing bore size at the last few inches of travel?

Lead lapping the bore from breech to the last few inches might work, but leave the original of rifling oversize.
t might be possible to swage the last few inches. This has been done with cut down or bored out Shotgun barrels with some sucess to restore the choke.

Reducing bore diameter would reduce blowby which is the main cause of flyers.

The newest US Military Sniper rifles use a new rifling patern with rounded edges to reduce blowby and erosion.

I'd seen this principle recommended in an article on long range match rifles years ago.
Perhaps rounded edges or lands and grooves could benefit air rifles as well.
 
This post is primarily in response to the posts above by jlmurphy and by Old Gunner.

JL, You make an interesting point about the power sources being equal vs trajectory for the .177 vs .22 caliber pellets. I have read where some of the modern PCP type guns allow one to change calibers by changing the barrel and I think its Theoben that does this however I have little experience with Theoben, certainly not enough to know how this is achieved...

However, with the Air Arms S400 guns that I shoot, the S400SL-FAC in .22 caliber is a much more powerful gun than the S400MPR-FT in .177 caliber that I shoot at the indoor AGBR matches... While the mechanism is nearly identical, both being S400 series guns, the S400MPR is rated at 12.6 fpe and the S400SL-FAC is rated at 27-30 fpe and I believe the S400SL-FAC is also capable of higher velocities as claimed by Air Arms in their specifications...

Where the S400MPR-FT is a fixed power gun, the S400SL-FAC has a power adjustment knob that allows the shooter to vary the velocity to the conditions while shooting. I believe this difference between the S400 in .177 caliber vs the S400 in .22 caliber compensates for the difference in pellet weight and bc for the larger pellet pretty much taking the difference you mention for the same power level out of the equation...

Regrettably I do not have a chronograph and can not make any comparison measurements myself, hopefully some day I'll be able to do that. However, what I'm seeing of the S400 in .22 caliber as well as several .22 caliber Theobens in the matches I shoot in, its the .22 caliber guns that get the high scores consistently in the AGBR matches in this area...

Just to add to the potential for confusion, I have recently added an AA S400SL-FAC in .177 caliber to my collection and the real comparison will be between these two S400SL-FAC guns of different calibers.

Old Gunner, Yes, barrel choke would seem to be a major contribution to accuracy, Anschutz certainly seems to believe this and the few modern high quality guns that I've slugged the barrels all seem to be choked in the last couple inches at the muzzle end. Even the Chinese QB78 gun that I started pellet gun shooting has a choked barrel. However your comment about having rounded edges to the rifling lands is a new concept to me and it makes sense, can you provide barrel manufacturer names that supply barrels with this feature? I'd like to follow up on it...

Thanks...

Happy Shooting...

Mitch & Shadow...
 
Additional comment to above...

jlmurphy

I too, have a excessively large collection of various pellets of many makes and styles and what I find is that Diablo pellets, often called round and referred to as shaped like badminton birdies or shuttles are more accurate than wadcutter pellets in general however I suspect this may be a result of the velocities of the PCP guns used in match shooting today.

I have a large collection of RWS and Beeman match wadcutter pellets plus a few Crosman types and none of my guns (which are all 650 fps velocity or higher) will shoot these pellets accurately compared to diablo type pellets. I find "JSB Exact Diablo Heavy" in .177 caliber and "JSB Exact Jumbo Heavy" to shoot most consistently and accurately out of my Air Arms S400 series guns and "Crosman Premier Heavy" in .177 caliber shoot just as well at 10 meters as the JSB and possibly are slightly more accurate at 10 meters however at 25 Yards, (AGBR range) the JSB Exact Diablo pellets very noticeably outperform the Crosman Premiers by 12 points or so in a 250 point scoring AGBR target.

However for all this, I take it you are a FT shooter where as I am a AGBR shooter and one thing I am learning is that what works best in FT does not necessarily apply to AGBR shooting. For one thing AGBR shooting seems more friendly to shooting different calibers as shots are scored on the measured center point of impact and the demands for ultimate pellet/gun accuracy would seem to be more demanding in AGBR but then I have never shot FT so may not be seeing the entire picture...

Your comments on this are most welcome...

Happy Shooting,
Mitch & Shadow...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
air gun questions

If your shooting out side say @25yds out to 50yds .177 heavy crossman domes 10.5 at around 950-1000FPS.if your gun will spit them out at that speed you can't miss. the match is yours.:) some practice on your part will help. and keep an eye on that wind and there is a few other things, but others will tell you i'm sure..:rolleyes:
 
The power level in a PCP rifle is controlled by how much air is released for each shot. Most use a weighted striker to temporarily knock an exhaust valve off a seat, many can vary the amount of spring tension for the striker. The down side is fewer shots and more noise. I use my air rifles for plinking and pest control, besides the fun of building them, so the convenience and relative silence of spring piston rifles appeals to me.
One fact about pellets that is overlooked is that most are made from soft lead, and when used in low powered airguns, there are no problems, but high power air rifles generate enough pressure to distort the thin skirt of many pellets, throwing off accuracy. One of the reasons Crosman Premiers are successful is that they are made from a harder alloy than most imported pellets, and their skirts don't deform. Another concern is that most magnum air rifles achieve at least some of their power from oil dieseling during firing. PCP's don't suffer from that problem, but they their own issues.
 
Old Gunner, Yes, barrel choke would seem to be a major contribution to accuracy, Anschutz certainly seems to believe this and the few modern high quality guns that I've slugged the barrels all seem to be choked in the last couple inches at the muzzle end. Even the Chinese QB78 gun that I started pellet gun shooting has a choked barrel. However your comment about having rounded edges to the rifling lands is a new concept to me and it makes sense, can you provide barrel manufacturer names that supply barrels with this feature? I'd like to follow up on it...

Thanks...

Happy Shooting...

Mitch & Shadow...

I don't know of any production barrels other than the barrels made specifically for the lastest US Military sniper rifles that use the Rounded edge lands and grooves.
The concept was mentioned in an article on Long Range match rifles that I found on the net several months ago and I then ran across this principle being incorporated in the new Sniper rifle barrels only recently.

The principle is that rounding the edges reduces blowby by leaving no sharp angles that would prevent jackets from filling out the grooves completely.

The only other rounded land and groove system I know of off hand is the Metford pattern rifling used when the .303 British still used compressed balck powder pellets before Cordite was invented. Ultra high temperatures of cordite rapidly burned out bores regardless so its not a cure all, but so long as only lower temperature propellants or air or CO2 were used the principle should be effective.

The Lancaster "Oval Bore" is another BP era idea that might serve well for air rifles. There being no distinct lands and grooves, only a slight egg shap in cross section that has the same spiral as rifling.
Bullets fired from an oval bore look about the same as those rifled from a smooth bore. Only direct measurement would reveal the oval'ed shape.

Choked rifle bores are another BP era technique that has made the leap to airguns.
I'm not sure but I think progressive rifling has been tried in the past as well.

The lands increse in width and the spiral cut tightens as the bullet travels up the bore. Some Remington revolvers used this pattern, and some custom target rifles also used it. Sometimes the groove depth is lessened as well.
Needless to say its not that easy to manufacture.
Probably hammer forged rifling would be the best method to achieve this.

PS
I would expect that lead lapping a bore would tend to give a slight rounding of land and groove edges no matter how carefully done.

PPS
I just remembered an old crosman rifle belonging to a neighbor.
It was a long dicontinued magazine fed CO2 that was designed to use a steel BB surrounded by a thick plastic coating, perhaps nylon. Bore size was a nominal .22 but standard .22 pellets would not fit the magazine.
No round shot of the type was available so I filed the tips off some field pellets to fit the short chambers of the revolver type magazine.
The rifle was very accurate though there was no visible rifling. Apparently these rifles had bores similar to the Metford type though there was so little difference in groove and land height that it was not visible to the naked eye.

Also the S&W 78g has adjustable striker spring tension, you can dial in the best velocity for whatever pellet you are using.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
more air gun questions

boy this is getting good,alot of good info. keep it up , i'm learning new stuff every day this is a good forum to learn new stuff. thanks all.:D
 
I have read some postings on the British sites about Ben Taylor working on a new barrel type for FX. I can't remember exactly what was said about it other than part of it being smoothbore and I believe minimal rifling towards the end.
 
Back
Top