Hector,
I purchased a Dragonfly when they first came out. I enjoy the simplicity of MSP guns as well. I replaced the compressible rubber bushing with a nylon bushing of the same thickness as the uncompressed rubber one. I posted pictures of the mod on here a couple of years ago. I get the following average numbers with 7.9G pellets:
3 pumps, 670, 4 - 740, 5 - 780, 6 - 820, 7 - 850, 8 - 870.
I do most of my shooting in the basement, and rarely go over 3 pumps. When I do shoot outside, I rarely go over 5 pumps. I put a Williams peep on the rear end, and painted the back face of the front sight with fluorescent orange nail polish.
It's a handy gun, and fun to shoot, but it lacks the stoutness of a classic Sheridan. I make sure to keep the pivot points lubricated.
I was intrigued to see a Dragonfly with a scissor-like pump linkage in some photos of a show, but have heard little about it since.
I found your assessment of Sheridan/Benjamin rifles as being hard to work on and of inferior quality somewhat interesting. Perhaps by that you were referring to the fixed barrel/breech design that makes it very difficult to change calibers? I've worked on many of these built from the mid 1940s to the late 70s and they are fairly easy to work on with the proper valve removal tools. I cannot discern much of a difference in quality between Sheridan and Benjamin. Many of these guns have been used and abused for 40 years before needing a rebuild.
The Dragonfly numbers are intriquing. It would be nice if they were built as serviceable and stout as a vintage Sheridan or Benjamin MSP.
I found your assessment of Sheridan/Benjamin rifles as being hard to work on and of inferior quality somewhat interesting. Perhaps by that you were referring to the fixed barrel/breech design that makes it very difficult to change calibers? I've worked on many of these built from the mid 1940s to the late 70s and they are fairly easy to work on with the proper valve removal tools. I cannot discern much of a difference in quality between Sheridan and Benjamin. Many of these guns have been used and abused for 40 years before needing a rebuild.
The Dragonfly numbers are intriquing. It would be nice if they were built as serviceable and stout as a vintage Sheridan or Benjamin MSP.
Bill;
First of all, thanks for reading.
Remember that, in the corresponding paragraph, we were talking of year 2K. At THAT point in time the accessibility to special tools for the disassembly of the Sheridan took me 4 weeks to locate and another 4 weeks for the tool to arrive from Ron Saul's (RIP) company, to Mexico. Internet back then was not as straightforward as is it today, and "one click" commercialization was still sort of a pipe-dream. Moving "air gun parts" across borders was also a little bit more difficult then than now.
Besides, the brass barrel welded to the compression tube of the actions was something that I disliked deeply. I did re-solder a few using TIX solder, and that was strong enough, but clearly, a gun designed in the 1900's with methods of fabrication corresponding to the era, and the impossibility to provide proper service without sending the gun back to the factory, as Sheridan so often insisted, was "hard to work on" for me.
As to the Benjamins of the time, I had to create a special tool to de-burr a number of transfer ports that had been drilled in a hurry and left enough swarf to scar the pellet to absolute inaccuracy.
It was with some trepidation that I bought the "1 of 500" limited edition one in the picture, and only after I heard good things about them.
After that, my attention was devoted to other stuff.
The Dragonfly/LR700 is completely user-serviceable, Orings are standard (except for the proprietary Orings between barrel and receiver, and those can easily survive several changes as long as you take the pre-caution to de-burr and smooth all contact surfaces). Receivers in different calibers are available, and even left handed ones, if you need them.
Valves, and springs are also available.
Pump components are also fairly easy to mod/replicate/improve, AND the pump stroke is adjustable, so that you can fine tune the power output to a specific number of pumps and a given pumping force. AaMoF, THIS was the idea. Two pumps in this configuration take the same force as two pumps in a 2100, a UX NXGm, or a Mk 177, yet, it produces the same energy as those guns at 8 pumps, an acceptable energy to shoot target, and get rid of pesky chipmunks and other bird-feeder raiders. In short, a gun useable by a 10 years old.
The DF/700 gun accepts a scope freely, and if that is not desired, a fine open sight is installable, even if the barrel is not changed to a SR one. It would take a bit more effort, but it is doable. A peep sight is easy to add, the open sights are screw-adjustable, not step-ladder.
The old classics were LOUD, as all dump-valve guns are, BUT the DF/700W CAN be fitted with either an LDC equipped barrel, OR a dedicated LDC can be made. There is space at the muzzle to affix this. Not so much in the B-S's.
Trigger can be finely tuned. Yes, it is a trigger that needs disassembly to adjust, but at least you CAN do it. Try adjusting an old Sheridan trigger.
THAT degree of flexibility is, what I think, is greatly superior to the older designs.
IIRC, Mac-1 airguns had a special "billet" pump arm for Sheridans and Benjamins, so the same could be done for the DF/700.
The forearm is attached to the pump arms via post screws, as opposed to the rolled pins (with single/entry holes in the B-S rifles of the 2000's).
If you plink seriously, ¿what will happen when your barrel needs re-welding? SOME writers have claimed that barrels needed re-welding when the scopes were mounted onto the old guns using the two piece "Intermount". I found that the mount had some clearance from the pump tube, and therefore the mount was not "pulling" the barrel apart from the pump tube, but it was the STRESS of pumping a lot to high power shots what fatigued and broke the soldering.
Since they were relatively hard to pump, and since most shooters took their shots with MUCH less than 8 pumps, this was not an issue for the majority of shooters, but the design and execution, was clearly NOT made for an all full power diet of 100 shots a day.
If you collect, and you only take a few shots every week/month/year, by all means, Sheridans and Benjamins offer a vast field for almost endless amusement.
If you want to teach a youngster to shoot, there are better tools for that nowadays.
If you want to go hunting, why risk a collectible?
So, between all these points, IMHO, the recent gun is more desirable for a shooter than the classics, even if they are of recent build, like the VPAR currently on the Benjamin catalogue; as usual, this is JMHO.
Now, I do note that the current VPAR is NOT the original, I have to assume that some improvements have been made, so, perhaps it is time to check in and see what Benjamin has been doing with their original product.
I hope I didn't bore you to death with this long post, and I am sorry that I didn't include all this in the Blog entry. Apologies.
Keep well and shoot straight!
HM
@jiminpgh
Jim;
Question: Where do you find the "stoutness" in an old Sheridan? The weight?
It would have to weight 25% more to have the same stiffness/resistance as the DF. Simply the difference between brass and steel. Yes brass is heavier, but it has a lower yield point.
Thanks for any input!
HM
@hector-j-medina-g
Hector, RE Sheridan "stoutness," I've owned Sheridan rifles that are older than I am (62) that were fully functional and had never been serviced. The soldered construction makes for a single solid action, which evidently can withstand time. I love my Dragonfly, but by its very nature, it is substantially more fragile than a Sheridan. A Sheridan rifle is essentially a one-piece gun, and the Dragonfly is an assembly of parts. The Dragonfly is MUCH easier to work on, but if I still hunted with an MSP, I'd feel better dragging a Sheridan thru the thick brush. For me, it's still hard to beat and old slim-forearm hold-down-safety Sheridan with a Williams peep.
Your writing is always interesting AND educational.
While I do envy those who can make 11 word posts, I'm more grateful to those who take the time to spell things out.
