Has today's modern ...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Has today's modern pellets got that much better?

17 Posts
14 Users
3 Likes
4,864 Views
straitflite
(@straitflite)
Ohio
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 764
Topic starter  

Years ago before getting back into it, it seemed like most forum's members had scales and many posts addressed the topic...brands, weights etc. I was one of those.

Then there were the pellet sizers (I had no luck with). Some posted using dial calipers, roll testing etc. I remember the brown box Crosman premiers that were great pellets but were filthy and required a bath -pellets and then self afterwards. ? Washing waxing/lubing and so on.

From the lack of posts on the subject I surmise that maybe manufacturing processes have become that good?

 


   
ReplyQuote
sonnysan
(@sonnysan)
California
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 622
 

You definitely have more options today - pellet designs with slugs.  Unless you are in competition, I don't see a real need to go to the Nth degree with sorting.  Basically all the high-end pcp's sold today are one hole guns.  High end pellets are consistent too.  I'd imagine grouping pellets by weight would offer the most significant improvement in your groups long range.  

I wash all my pellets with water and soap, let dry, then spray a tupperware container with krytech.  Tumble the container a dozen times, then put back in tin.

No need to sort or throw away pellets.  All squirrels need lead in their diet.  They keep coming back to me for more.


   
ReplyQuote
Avatar
(@spat-the-dummy)
Massachusetts
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 173
 

You can't leave better barrels out of the discussion. 


   
ReplyQuote
RedFeather
(@redfeather)
Virginia
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 199
 

Boy, this brought back memories. I used to look forward to posts by Yrrah (Harry) reporting on long range accuracy from his station somewhere in Australia (?). Weight sorting, roll testing (a bit more callenging), to reveal just how surprisingly accurate a Blue Streak can be. Take that, PCP "one hole'rs".

BTW, weight sorting is a snap nowadays with the advent of cheap digital scales. 


   
ReplyQuote
straitflite
(@straitflite)
Ohio
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 764
Topic starter  

@redfeather

I recall some of his 100yd groups with an Eliminator. Yeah, he is an impressive individual.


   
ReplyQuote
crazyhorse
(@crazyhorse)
California
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 199
 
Posted by: @johninma

You can't leave better barrels out of the discussion. 

You just hit the nail on the head !!. A good barrel makes all the difference...and I went down the "lube",rolling and weighing route and then refocused on barrels, crowns etc...my bench rest rifle has a fabricated air stripper that a friend made...reduced my groups at 51 yards from .56" to .375". (8 shot groups)


   
ReplyQuote
Doug_Wall
(@doug_wall)
New York
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 297
 

Back when I started, the Crosman "ashcan" pellets were the only ones readily available. I live in Crosman country (less than an hour drive), so even the Benjamin pellets weren't often seen. If you happened to get lucky enough to find some Benjamins, or something imported from Germany, or England, you grabbed them up! This is an interesting read.

image

https://www.pyramydair.com/blog/2019/10/the-modern-pellet/


   
ReplyQuote

Avatar
(@hector_j_medina_g)
Maryland
Moderator
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 1316
 

Hmmmmm

The problem with phrases like "Years ago . . ." is that there is no real time frame.

Let me explain and get into details:

Back in the 90's (and that means almost 30 years ago), Crosman came out with a brand new pellet design. It was called the "Premier".

The METHOD of manufacturing was also novel, as it involved a "revolver" press that could fabricate millions of pellets per week from several dies (like a Gatling gun working in reverse), BUT the MAIN advantage was that EACH die's production COULD be separated into a channel, and therefore you could pack the production from each die independently.

Was the Premier pellet really that revolutionary? Not really, the method of manufacturing had been devised 30 years BEFORE that by RWS when they started making their "MeisterKugeln". That method was different from the then normal method because it used a TWO part die, as opposed to swaging the slug and then rolling in the waist/skirt using dented wheels (wherefrom came the striations in the pellet -Gerifelt-).

The company that made those first two die pellet making machines is still in business and its called "Vogel".

Later, the technology became free to use and H&N started making some very worthwhile pellets. To compete with H&N is when/why Crosman went "one-up" on the machine and made it a "revolver".

As with any product that breaks ground, the Premier had a few "growing pains", but by 1998, it was recognized World-wide as the best pellet in existence.

Crosman put great care in keeping the quality of those pellets up where it COULD be and so, dominated the market for a few years. No one can argue that some Premiers are STILL among the best pellets in the world, and the second hand market re-affirms that.

Corporate changes in Crosman caused the attention and budget dedicated to the manufacturing of the Premier to lapse, and then further changes brought people on board (an Ex-GM exec) that had absolutely no idea of how the airgun market worked and were focused in numbers/sales/profits. And so, Crosman's Premier devolved into a low-price/spotty quality product.

By then, JSB in the, then, Czech Republic had been making strides in the manufacturing of pellets. Starting with WC's for Olympic shooting, their attention was on quality, not volume. And Jozef Schultz built a company simply on shooter's word of mouth. He wasn't interested in becoming a millionaire, he just wanted to have enough money to buy a Porsche 😉 .

Through the years, he built up the sales and reputation to the point that he had to grow, but he was a bit tired and so, when he considered selling off, the employees, led by the very young Export Manager formed a group to buyout the company, he agreed. Since then, he has bought his Porsche (this was almost 15 years ago), and he is happily retired. JSB has continued with a strong emphasis in quality and consistency, though their method of labeling tins for head diameter has created some confusion. Their pellets are still the "high volume" benchmark.

Going back about 7 years, H&N went through a complete re-structuring (lock, stock and barrel), meaning that the company scrapped the old machinery, built new one, moved the company, execs were changed and the whole thing was re-born, like a phoenix, from its ashes. Ah!, along the way, they bought Prometheus and the Dynamic line. H&N went through their own share of "growing pains", and just recently have they been confident enough to launch completely new products, albeit at the cost of loosing some of the "not so stellar sellers".

Current offerings by H&N display more consistency, uniformity and quality of fabrication than any other pellet in the "volume" makers class. Their designs are somewhat lacking nowadays and have lagged behind, but they do have the wherewithal to correct and make some very interesting pellets.

And, so, we come to the end of our analysis: As technology has changed, and as China has changed with the largest emerging middle class and the greatest number of qualified engineers and scientists, we see some pellets coming out of China that are truly superior.
As always, the "growing pains" of a nascent projectile company go from the technical to legal and commercial and, so, QYS has had problems delivering their products to the market. But that does not mean that their products are not superior to anything else. Problem is getting them.

Barrels have, for sure, improved. L-W and FX have done really good jobs at listening to the market and catering to specifics sections. Menge will be a name that will soon be a household word in airgunner circles. And BSA/GAMO still makes some of the best barrels, just not available to anyone outside their group, and not every product in their group/lineup has the best BSA barrels.

Do we need to weigh them, sort them, roll them, wash and lube them? NOT really, not anymore. BUT, remember that shooting is 90% mental, so if doing something helps your scores, then do it.

On the practical and real side, I have chronoed lubed and unlubed pellets and there IS a difference, not great, but enough to put the muzzle harmonics in "tune" with what you want, or not. Each shooter needs to test his gun's favorite pellets in naked, lubed and waxed varieties to really come up with a conclusion for HIS system.
IN the near future, it will not be out of the question to demand absolute uniformity and consistency from our pellets at a reasonable price.

And the production of "slugs" is also evolving, as soon as they are widely available, I am sure they will be allowed in competitions and then the airgun world will be split into pellet shooters and slug shooters.

What is certain is that, even if we have made great strides, "the best is yet to come".

Keep well and shoot straight!

 

 

 

 

 

 

HM

 


   
ReplyQuote
Citizen_K
(@ck)
Virgin Islands, U.S.
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 853
 
Posted by: @hector-j-medina-g

Since then, he has bought his Porsche (this was almost 15 years ago), and he is happily retired

Small correction. Josef Schulz sadly passed away in March this year. 


   
ReplyQuote
Arkmaker
(@arkmaker)
Tennessee
Rest In Peace
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 113
 

Thanks for the history. It's refreshing to see an actual build up in time. 

As for barrels? I'm a pimp for LW. But as I have always had a lot of Crosmans and a way to do my own modifications for fit, they just have been the easiest choice. I've heard for years about BSA barrels but have never owned one. I've looked at the Buckaneer (my budget range) so many times it's image is burnt into my screen. 


   
ReplyQuote
crazyhorse
(@crazyhorse)
California
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 199
 

On the pellets I have pretty much stuck with JSB as in my many airguns, JSB is very consistant across all. 

I think the slug craze is to try and defeat the wind,plain and simple. That means more expensive airguns/barrels. 


   
ReplyQuote
ribbonstone
(@ribbonstone)
Louisiana
Rest In Peace
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 510
 

Honestly....seems like both pellets and barrels....kind of a symbiotic relationship.

 

We (the people who buy these "toys") do drive the market. really can't fulfill the demand without both a great pellet and a great barrel.

 

Not sure about barrels.   A good on is a good one.  LW's have been good ones, so have HW''s, BSA, CZ's, FX's, as well as some "issue" barrels that I just won't change no matter who made them....cost/benefit just isn't there.

 

Old, clean, undamaged, vintage pellets (like the Crosman "ash can",Benjamin HC's, Sheridan "bantams)just haven't been all that good.   Same era vintage rifles vs. today's rifles; still not good.


   
ReplyQuote
Droidiphile
(@droidiphile)
California
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 142
 

Here is an excerpt from the ISSF (International Shooting Sports Federation) concerning selection of pellets for modern competition:

"Group sizes of 4.5 mm (0.177 in) diameter are theoretically possible, but practically shot groups of 5.0 mm (0.197 in) are considered highly competitive.[5] Unbatched ammunition, especially if the air gun is not regularly cleaned, is generally thought to be capable of only 8.0 mm (0.315 in) diameter group sizes. Batch-testing match pellets for a particular gun is not generally thought to be worthwhile until the shooter reaches a high proficiency level (around the 95% level i.e 570 for the qualification round). "

I suppose this is under the category of making absolutely sure that inaccuracy is NOT due to equipment or ammo.  And if you believe all the above, they are actually saying that to get perfect one-hole groups of 4.5 mm, you MUST utilize the batch testing process to select only those pellets that will deliver world class performance in YOUR gun.  Another way of looking at this is that modern pellets are truly capable of delivering 4.5 mm one-hole groups if you jump through the necessary hoops to get there.

That "unbatched ammunition" is me, and my best ever was a 0.375" group of 10 shots at 10m.  But like Hector said above - if you think sorting pellets makes a difference for you, go for it!


   
ReplyQuote
Avatar
(@hector_j_medina_g)
Maryland
Moderator
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 1316
 
Posted by: @droidiphile

Here is an excerpt from the ISSF (International Shooting Sports Federation) concerning selection of pellets for modern competition:

"Group sizes of 4.5 mm (0.177 in) diameter are theoretically possible, but practically shot groups of 5.0 mm (0.197 in) are considered highly competitive.[5] Unbatched ammunition, especially if the air gun is not regularly cleaned, is generally thought to be capable of only 8.0 mm (0.315 in) diameter group sizes. Batch-testing match pellets for a particular gun is not generally thought to be worthwhile until the shooter reaches a high proficiency level (around the 95% level i.e 570 for the qualification round). "

I suppose this is under the category of making absolutely sure that inaccuracy is NOT due to equipment or ammo.  And if you believe all the above, they are actually saying that to get perfect one-hole groups of 4.5 mm, you MUST utilize the batch testing process to select only those pellets that will deliver world class performance in YOUR gun.  Another way of looking at this is that modern pellets are truly capable of delivering 4.5 mm one-hole groups if you jump through the necessary hoops to get there.

That "unbatched ammunition" is me, and my best ever was a 0.375" group of 10 shots at 10m.  But like Hector said above - if you think sorting pellets makes a difference for you, go for it!

It's probably worthwhile to say that what they call "Batch testing" is simply to test different batches and then buy a whole lot of them so that you can be CONFIDENT that you are using, as much as possible, the "same pellet" over and over again.

They are not taking of, within a specific batch: weighing, sorting, cleaning, lubing, rolling and even air-gauging. At 10 meters offhand, that is WAY over the top.

LOL!

I do use specific batches of pellets, and I do lube them because I do not want to go through an emergency cleaning in the middle of a match. But that is just me and my guns.

Keep well and shoot straight!

 

 

 

 

 

 

HM


   
ReplyQuote

Avatar
(@ffs1942)
Iowa
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 13
 

I say YES, but with reservations...

I haven't shot pristine vintage pellets out of new guns, like US Airgun did with Sheridan Bantam 5's and a .20 R1. 

BUT...

I have shot pristine Bantam 5's out of my 1978 Sheridan and pristine Benjamin HC's out of my 1967 Benjamin 312. 

The old pellets performed as well or better than the modern pellets I tested them against. 

The Bantam 5 is a bit heavy for a .20 pellet and that results in lower velocity and Ft Lbs from my Sheridan. 

Ron Elbe tested the Bantam 5 against the "new", pre Crosman takeover, Sheridan diabolos and the diabolos turned in better accuracy. 

In either case, vintage pellets are collectors items in themselves. Only clean pellets shoot well and these are rare. I shoot them for research purposes only. 

Crosman repeaters, like my 99 or the mighty 600, relied on the shape of the Crosman ashcan for reliable function. Any Crosman ashcans I've ever seen look pretty crude. My 99 shoots the Superdome well, but Premiers nest in each other and jam. 

So far, my 78 Sheridan favors the H&N Baracuda. My 312 and most of my vintage Benji and Crosman .22's like the JSB Exact dome. My Crosman 99, BSA Airsporter 2 and S&W 77A like Superdomes. 

So, old pellets seemed to do well out of the guns they were made for. For well or ill, they are no longer made, so its a bit of a moot point. 


   
ReplyQuote
JungleShooter
(@jungleshooter)
Peru
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 298
 

Hector, ?

thank you so much for writing up that short insider history of modern pellets.

 

Somehow, I keep being fascinated with pellets, and it's fun to read about some background details that insiders like you only know. Cool! ?

 

Just bought a sleve of H&N Sniper Lights for my PP700 — before they are all sold out and gone for good.

I'm looking forward to the day when H&N is filling that void ? that their very cool Sniper line is leaving....

 

Matthias

 


   
ReplyQuote
Avatar
(@harvey)
Minnesota
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 199
 

I'm going to stick my neck way out here and write some things I believe.  If I'm wrong, I can accept that and the discussion continues.  So here goes:

 

First of all the design of a pellet is meant to conform to the barrel.  Soft lead.  So the initial BC of an unfired pellet will be different than that of one fired under enough pressure to blast it out the far end.  But the first BC matters because that better BC somehow translates to whatever the pellet shape becomes once leaving the barrel also being a better match for that particular barrel/pellet combination.  The now conformed shape of the pellet once it's left the barrel is still a better match than a pellet which started off with a lower BC beforehand.  

Then we need to think about the leading of the barrel.  Usually around forty shots in my airguns.  I get better accuracy out of my sporters after several rounds.  True match grade barrels are a different animal.  I'm separating those from what I'm saying here.

 

I think what's important is that we're looking for pellets which consistently conform to barrels.  We may get a tighter fitting high BC pellet but if it's getting shaved on lands and grooves it isn't the same BC once it's been fired.  Likely the fired BC will be degraded.  Same on the other side of the coin.  I have an HW97 in .22.  Mine has a large diameter meaning I need oversized pellets.  Once the best fits are found, problem solved.  At least for this sporter shooting vermin setup.  Like an evenly mixed dough, whatever alloy combo is in the pellet needs to be evenly distributed.  This might be as important as balanced weight distribution in the pellet as well.  

It's never enough for an airgunner to just hit what's aimed at.

 


   
ReplyQuote

Airgun Warriors