I wanted to get some feedback before I invest--or should I say 'waste'--yet more money on yet more useless .177 caliber ammo. This post is related to the pellet size consistency issue (again), and your experience and suggestions when it comes to the currently-sold 10.5 gr. CPH pellets in the box, versus the 10.5 gr. Crosman Ultra Mag pellets that are being sold in the tins. Are the CPH's in the box more consistent than the UM's in the tins? Anyone know?
Details...
I just finished a complete tune on a (San Rafael) Beeman R1. It had an aggravating out-of-tolerance receiver tube issue that I had to resolve, but I got it fixed. Power/velocity was moderately-high, which is what the owner wanted, and consistent as to extreme spread.
Worth mentioning: You guys who only like the 12 FPE springers might not like what I did with this R1, but I promise you the shot cycle would fool you as to FPE when it comes to its calm firing behavior. My sincere thanks here to ARH/James Maccari for making a piston seal that is a big part of the success story when it comes to that, at its above-average power level.
Moving on...
When I proceeded to the accuracy/ preferred-pellet-testing part of the job--something I include in my better tune--I primarily stuck to testing heavy pellets for the most part because that's what the owner said he preferred to shoot. Barracuda Match pellets were VERY-good in the rifle, but I also tested JSB Heavy and Crosman 10.5 gr.
JSB Heavies were fairly loose in the bore, so I wasn't surprised that they didn't give me good groups, even at a close distance.
When I went to test the CPH pellets, I had purchased a tin of "Crosman Ultra Mag" pellets. Those are the ones they sell in metal tins of 500, instead of the ones in cardboard boxes of 1250 pellets. Both are listed at "10.5 gr.", and also look identical.
The results were, let us say, 'interesting'.
The fit inside the bore of the Ultra Mag pellets was noticeably inconsistent. When I shot the ones that exhibited a moderately-snug fit, they pretty-much stacked one on top of the next. But, when it came to testing the ones I could tell were smaller from how they felt when I inserted them into the bore, they were pretty-much all over the place on the target. I had to say "Totally no go" when it came to them.
My question: Are the ones that are currently being sold in the boxes more consistent as to size?? If so, the owner of this rifle might love them. If not, I'm not going to waste $30 on another box of ammo that just gets thrown into the 'reject' pile. And, I'm going to tell him that I don't suggest he do it either. (FWIW, I found a good use for reject ammo. I use it for very-lightly re-leading up the bore of a springer barrel after cleaning it, as long as the fit isn't TOO-loose).
So, CPH .177 caliber in the boxes--yes or no?? I know there were QC issues in the past, so what's the current state of affairs?
Here are the Uttra Mags to which I'm referring:
https://www.amazon.com/Crosman-LUM77-Premier-Target-Pellets/dp/B000FEUUBA
And, here are CPH's in the boxes:
https://www.pyramydair.com/s/p/Crosman_Premier_Heavy_177_Cal_10_5_Grains_Domed_1250ct/154
Thanks for any and all help.
Ed,
I have also (fairly recently) shot both the Ultra mag tins and the brown box heavies and saw the exact same thing as far as fit. They are definitely not the same QC as the brown box. For my HW guns, about 1/2 the ones in the tin were really tight (they almost hurt seating them into the bore); the other half seemed to be "about right." Shortly after, I acquired a brown box of CP's (9/17, M die) and found them to be much more consistent and not too snug. Never really shot statistic-worth groups with either, so can't speak with authority on how they performed. Over time, I got kind of annoyed with the CP's or the CPL's - the box, the graphite stuff they're covered with that gets all over you fingers, their tendency to lead bores in magnum guns...so now I just stick with H&N FTT's and/or Baracudas for my HWs (at least one of which seems to work well in every HW gun I try), along with various JSBs thrown in the mix.
Interestingly enough, the big box CPHP's (which are the same weight as the CPLs) seem to be quite consistent and shoot better than just about anything in my TX200 mkII. They also have the benefit of being cheap as can be!!
Take this for what it's worth. I have one gun out of about 30 that will shoot the Crosman pellets anywhere close to good. I have a RAW HM1000 and shoot weighed and lubed, with Slick 50, 10.5 Crosmans. When weighing to +- 2 tenths of a grain, l get about 50% good to bad. If l could find any pellet that shot as good, l would quit the Crosmans in a heart beat. Don
Ed, your question couldn't hit closer to home. I have a couple of rifles that shot the .177 heavies extremely well, at least those that were produced back in the 2012 - 2013 time frame. Not the boxed pellets, just the supposedly inferior tins from Walmart shelves. Most tins would flirt with MoA at 25 yards and a few would do ragged holes out to 40 - 45 yards.
I thought, great, I need to get some of the single die boxed pellets. So in late 2013 I ordered a few boxes. They were very disappointing. Die J. Thorough writeup here: http://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=59397
I held off on trying them again until just a couple of weeks ago. Received Die M. Suffice it to say they were even worse this time:
https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=150013.msg1533093#msg1533093
I have to assume if they can't get their act together in 5 years, they aren't interested in doing so.
My thanks to all of you, although any further input is also most welcome.
I'm getting the picture that I really ought to spend my money on other ammo. It's too bad Crosman apparently doesn't care about it more than that, but that's just 'Deja Vu all over again'. I'm saying I remember the exact same type of comments being posted many years ago, when the problem first surfaced. I just forgot some of it until today. Crosman is obviously missing out on a lot of pellet sales because of it, but apparently it just doesn't bother them. I guess they make enough profit elsewhere, OR retooling costs are just too high, OR...(etc, etc).
As mentioned, the rifle seems to like the 4.51 mm Barracuda Match pellets better anyway, so the owner has a high-quality pellet to use. FPE is in the 15+ range, so the trajectory at field distances is very-acceptable. I suggested he also try them in 4.52 mm, just for a comparison.
I didn't post this part: I also tested the H&N FTT pellets in the same rifle (sorry I don't remember the head size, but that's an individual, gun-to-gun thing anyway). Those FTTs also look fairly-hopeful if he ever wants to try some mid-weight ammo. We have a workable plan in place, so it should be fine.
Ed,
If you would like to try the CPHP boxed 177, email me your address, I have about 400-500 left that are cleand and Lubed with Napier. I would be more than happy to send them Priority Mail with no charge to you for testing, This would be great info for members wondering the same thing.
Noodles
Njnoodles at verizon dot net
Ed, a thought on your last post. I agree that Crosman is not interested in changing. I think their focus is on the wally world client. There are a LOT more casual shooters that will buy by price than serious shooters who will pay for accuracy . When their sales drop, they will change. Don
My recent experience is pretty much the same and it makes me sick
to see what Crosman has done with ammo over the years. There was
a time when you couldn't buy a better pellet than the 10.5 gr Premiers
and to find out that now the boxes of 1250 are also "iffy".........wow.
Here's an example of how it used to be.......
Ron
Well, this thread pretty much confirms what I was a afraid of. Wishful thinking I was originally convinced that the 7.9 gr CPHP found in the 1250 count box were the exact same as the 7.9 gr CPHP found in 250 and 500 count tins one can get at Wally World and PA (CORRECTION: CPHP do NOT come in a 1250 count box!). Although I had mixed results with both in a number of different shooters (Crosman 1750, Crosman 1377, Slavia 634, HW35E, etc.), I blamed it on my scopes and lack of shooting skills rather than the pellet(s). Also worth mentioning is that last year I ordered a bunch of tins online and while sitting down during a serious shooting session I was appalled to find .22 caliber pellets mixed inside the same container as the .177 pellets - not just a few, a LOT. I chalked it up as perhaps just one bad tin but have yet to look into the others.
Overall, though, the .177 CPHP from the tins worked best in the 1750 and CZ 634 over the boxed CPL we well as H&N FTT 8.64 gr and AA 8.4 gr in 4.50, 4.51 and 4.52 mm sizes. I just figured I got lucky that my two favorite shooters just happen to prefer the cheap CPHP opposed to the more expensive and harder to find import pellets. Go figure.
Thanks, gentlemen, for sharing your posts and experiences on this matter. ?
CORRECTED 11/10/2018 after pulling my head out of my butt.
Ed,
If you would like to try the CPHP boxed 177, email me your address, I have about 400-500 left that are cleand and Lubed with Napier. I would be more than happy to send them Priority Mail with no charge to you for testing, This would be great info for members wondering the same thing.
Noodles
Njnoodles at verizon dot net
Wow, Noodles, thank you for your generous offer. I don't think it's going to get me where I'm trying to go, though (or will it? Please read the rest of this post).
Chalk it up to alphabet soup, I think--lol.
By "CPH" I'm referring to the 10.5 gr. Crosman Premier Heavy.
I THINK CPHP refers to the Crosman Premier Hollow Point, which is a 7.9 gr. pellet. (?)
Correct me if I'm wrong. Now that I've posted this, let me go do an official search to see if I have the letters right!
Oh, yes, another thought suddenly occurs to me here. Maybe you really ARE referring to the 10.5 gr. CPH they sell in boxes, and you inadvertently added an extra 'P' on the end. In that case, I think I would like to try some.
(Dog on alphabet soup). 🙂
Ed,
If you would like to try the CPHP boxed 177, email me your address, I have about 400-500 left that are cleand and Lubed with Napier. I would be more than happy to send them Priority Mail with no charge to you for testing, This would be great info for members wondering the same thing.
Noodles
Njnoodles at verizon dot net
Wow, Noodles, thank you for your generous offer. I don't think it's going to get me where I'm trying to go, though (or will it? Please read the rest of this post).
Chalk it up to alphabet soup, I think--lol.
By "CPH" I'm referring to the 10.5 gr. Crosman Premier Heavy.
I THINK CPHP refers to the Crosman Premier Hollow Point, which is a 7.9 gr. pellet. (?)
Correct me if I'm wrong. Now that I've posted this, let me go do an official search to see if I have the letters right!
Oh, yes, another thought suddenly occurs to me here. Maybe you really ARE referring to the 10.5 gr. CPH they sell in boxes, and you inadvertently added an extra 'P' on the end. In that case, I think I would like to try some.
(Dog on alphabet soup). 🙂
My recent experience is pretty much the same and it makes me sick...
I'm not too happy about it either. I remember when the situation first came to light something like 5 or 6 years ago IIRC.
We didn't just complain among ourselves. Several forum members on the Old Yellow phoned Crosman to explain the situation, while I seem to remember that others even emailed the URL's of post threads like this one, begging them to rectify the situation because some well-loved ammo. was falling by the wayside. I seem to remember that the total reaction from the Crosman Consumer Rep. was a few brief words of explation and the verbal equivalent of a shrug.
Having lived more than a few years, I've been forced to accept such things with resignation--having favorite products disappear that is. OTOH, if someone here figures out a way to fix it, I think the rest of us will gladly chip in and buy him the first couple of high-quality, properly-re-tooled pellets!
This is all sad to hear. Many moons ago an early PCP Daystate shooter turned me on to Crosman Premier Domed. I bought a box of the heavies and tried them in my R1. The gun loved them! I was hoping to fall back onto that same pellet today but such seems to be not the case. This experience was probably 18 years ago.
By "CPH" I'm referring to the 10.5 gr. Crosman Premier Heavy.
I THINK CPHP refers to the Crosman Premier Hollow Point, which is a 7.9 gr. pellet. (?)
Correct me if I'm wrong. Now that I've posted this, let me go do an official search to see if I have the letters right!
Oh, yes, another thought suddenly occurs to me here. Maybe you really ARE referring to the 10.5 gr. CPH they sell in boxes, and you inadvertently added an extra 'P' on the end. In that case, I think I would like to try some.
(Dog on alphabet soup). 🙂
I am most likely wrong, but here it goes as far as Crosman Premiers in .177 caliber weighing 7.9 grains:
- Crosman Premier Hollow Points, aka CPHP - .177, 7.9 grains, hollow point, available in 250 and 500 count tin containers.
- Crosman Premier Lights, aka CPL - .177, 7.9 grains, domed and NOT hollow pointed, available only in 1250 count boxed containers.
Does this make sense or have I confused myself and perhaps others?
I am most likely wrong, but here it goes as far as Crosman Premiers in .177 caliber weighing 7.9 grains:
- Crosman Premier Hollow Points, aka CPHP - .177, 7.9 grains, hollow point, available in 250 and 500 count tin containers.
- Crosman Premier Lights, aka CPL - .177, 7.9 grains, domed and NOT hollow pointed, available only in 1250 count boxed containers.
Does this make sense or have I confused myself and perhaps others?
I'll just address a little of that plus add another point or two of my own. The CPL and CPHP are both 7.9 gr. pellets.
I don't know about the qty. sold regarding the CPHP, but the CPL used to come only in the 1250 ct. box.
You will sometimes find a tin of Benjamin 7.9 gr. HP pellets in the 500 ct. tin. I know I have that right because I have a tin of them here right now. They can be good in some guns. My .177 caliber Chinese-made SM-1000 shoots them pretty accurately, if maybe not quite as good as the FTT pellets.
While we're on the subject, the Benjamin HP pellet is also available in 14.3 gr. .22 caliber, and sometimes you can find them (and/or the .177 version at Wally World). I was surprised to find they shoot as well or even better in some HW and RWS springers than the FTT Pellets.
Last, don't let the "HP" part of the name fool you. The 'hollow point' is barely more than a tiny dimple. It probably isn't going to do much expanding for you, but that's probably good news. According to Steve in NC, based on some BC tests he did, the dimple isn't going to wreck the BC performance of the "HP" pellets compared to the regular versions that have a regular, non-dimpled dome. (That's in a post of his that's around here somewhere).
Good stuff, Ed...while we're on the .22 subject, briefly, the CP .22 Ultra Magnum version, 14.3 grs, is a recommended pellet for the often finicky Crosman 600 semi auto pistol. They're a Wally World 500 per tin deal and were recommended by the gent that rebuilt my 600. They are accurate and the pistol runs %100 on them. They are very shiny and seem a harder lead compound than their cardboard- boxed brothers. That reminds me, I haven't taken her out for a spin in a long time. Maybe tomorrow.
