Seems like new quality springers hit a wall ,dare I say decades ago.
Ram air, that came out decades ago.
We can keep our old German and English models running like forever because many of them have never been out of production and parts are still available.
Looks like what happened is the manufactures efforts went into PCP...those are always coming out with new models and also more affordable than ever.
Seems like the main thing (to me) that has improved in the last decade or so, is more consistency in compression tube manufacturing. It seems like 20 or 30 years ago it was somewhat more likely that a new gun would have an out of spec tube. I'm with you that the 'premium' springer is about as good as its going to get. Most notable changes appear in stock designs. I miss the Goudy like stocks that are no longer available on new models, not to mention available options offered through Doc Beeman days. However, in todays dollars I think the cost would be much higher in standard or custom options of old when compared to current offerings. Doubt we'll ever see custom options like the days of old with springers (from the manufacturers) but todays guns seem to be pretty consistent out of the box. Think current metallurgy of mainsprings and newer guides have got better as well. I think there is room for improvement in air transfer ports. I may be wrong but I believe ports should vary in size with reference to caliber rather than a "one size fits all", for a given model. I think it's merely more economical for the manufacturer. A notable tuner in TN agrees with that. Like you said, parts are plentiful -and many many businesses have been successful making custom parts for those springers.
So 'ya say you want a revolution? Me too.. I agree in that PCP's are getting more attention and ownership ratio may be higher currently but much has already been tried there as well. I personally don't think springers will ever lose a foothold in the market unless PCP manufactures figure out a way to split the atom onboard requiring a recharge only once every 30 years ?
PCP's are just glorified plumbing, so any company can make a decent PCP for about $100 COST (in developing countries) or about $200 cost in the developed world.
If you think that the ONLY really critical component is the barrel, then it is easy to dilucidate that PCP's still have some room for price dropping.
Add to that that the price of compressors is falling like a rock and you have an interesting combination.
On the other hand, Springers are the result of quality materials made into quality components by qualified labor. A springer that can really hold its own vs PCP's runs at around $600 to $800 and has some trouble selling in numbers that would bring that price down by 20% So, you are still looking at $480 to $650
With that budget, you can buy a number of "starter PCP's" AND a compressor and still be ahead by a little.
Technology is there/here, what is missing are the shooters that are actually able to buy what they dream about.
Are they still making revolvers and lever actions? It's pretty much the same thing with springers. Proven technology which will get the job done, be it target shooting, small game hunting or pest control. For a lot of people the springer remains the best bang for the buck. That said, there probably is at least some room for improvement. Manufacturers could do a little more in the way of finishing slot cut outs and lubing. Even "quality" guns can arrive with nicked seals or dry.
As to the old "custom" touches, I doubt those were ever more economical in the old days, given what guns cost then, adjusted for inflation. I, for one, miss the nice touches such as grip caps, well sculpted cheek pieces and good checkering. That old R1 stile has style. ?
There are other tuners and other great brands to choose from.
Wise thoughts about transfer ports, springs and pellet calibers.
Some tuners will tune their air guns to specific pellets...
Back in the day tuners did hone the compression tubes,button the piston and offer "super tunes".
I see a number of the older springers with custom stocks,they are beautiful and cost a lot,fact is more than the rifle itself....got to love your springer to pay that much,it is worth it if you can do it.
Seems like all the "expensive" PCP's use the same brand barrels.
When you buy a PCP you are buying a system,not so with a springer.
Springers are like a broom, everyone should have one and know how to use it.
Just bought a Umarex Synergis and a few years ago a Hatsan Proxima. I think those are innovative. Don't care for the Gamo system. But I also have a Mendoza Rm2800 and 2000 that are repeaters that have been around a long time and work good.
Dual caliber is not new but could be better. Like two guns for the price of one. I'd like to see Beeman come out with a set of .20 and .25 barrels for their dual cals. and a set of barrels for their double barre .177/.22 in .20 and .25.
I think they should work on dual spring guns like the old fwb 300's and less expensive recoilless springer. Sterling in the UK is working on a opposing piston side lever but the estimate price is $1000+.
They could give up on the gas ram research as far as I'm concerned.
I have long been of the opinion that the last significant development in the evolution of the springer was the introduction of the synthetic lipped or 'parachute' piston seal. Second would be the sliding cylinder (both I think originally from FWB target rifles), and of course the two came together in a sporting air rifle in the HW77.
I have long been of the opinion that the last significant development in the evolution of the springer was the introduction of the synthetic lipped or 'parachute' piston seal. Second would be the sliding cylinder (both I think originally from FWB target rifles), and of course the two came together in a sporting air rifle in the HW77.
Have followed your work since the late '80 and was wondering if your AGW articles and other publications have ever been, or ever will be, available in a single or multi-volume format.
I think they should work on dual spring guns like the old fwb 300's and less expensive recoilless springer.
?Yeah! ?? I personally consider the two biggest draws to PCP's over springers are:
▪ No recoil,* e.g., no hold sensitivity + no scope killers
▪ More power, e.g., more range + bigger quarry + projectiles with better wind drift resistance
?More power in a springer will make the recoil even worse. So, to reduce recoil significantly — and affordably so — would be a giant step forward for springers.
?And if more came with "tacticool" stocks (or however you want to ridicule that particular style) I might even buy such a springer (you see, I do nostalgia when it comes to Christmas, but not when I shoot.... ?).
*To clarify: I mean "not very significant recoil/ hold sensitivity" when compared to typical springers
? If you are a springer fan and you feel I have been too hard on springers — consider this: ?
I was going to sell all my springers — just never got to it. But recently I had my source of air go South on me (that would be Chile, since I live in Peru).
?And so, a couple of days ago I was sans PCPs — but still got to shoot a pigeon dead with a springer, a pistol of all things (Benjamin Trail). ?
That felt good! (for me, at least — the pigeon wasn't available for comment).
@jw652 I hope you found some of my ramblings interesting! The publishers have been asked that question many times, but have never shown any inclination to publish a compilation.
One other thing did come to mind. While I like my Diana 34's and 340, it might have been nice if at some point in time they had gone over to the articulated cocking system such as the 350 uses. The old muscles and tendons would sorely appreciate something that employs a bit better geometry. ?
There are some technologies that seem to only evolve so far and then hit a wall. There is only so far an existing tech can go until you reach the point of diminishing returns, there simply isn't anything left to develop. Reciprocating engines are one, engineers are beginning to get to the point where there's nothing left. Firearms is another. Every "new" firearm is just a slightly different way of doing the same thing that's been done for 100 years prior.
Springers are nearly there, too, in my opinion. The best of the best springer can only be so smooth, so powerful, so easy to cock, so light, until there's no place else to improve. Meanwhile, there will still be people wanting more of something that simply cannot be delivered.
My thoughts are the best thing that could happen to springers today would be for a quality company to develop a rifle that incorporates all of the best tuning tweaks and tricks known to the business and offer it in a mass produced form. It would be so expensive nobody, or few, would buy it. Piston buttons, piston design and shape, special transfer port geometry, bearings, glides, exotic materials, deep product material analysis, special lubes, premium barrel materials and manufacturing, polygonal rifling. For years already there have been available upgrades to a factory built springer but the manufacturers have left them out due to costs. How much would you pay for an ultra maxed out, exotic, best of the best, light weight for it's power, nearly indestructible springer? What caliber would it be? What would be an acceptable performance level for the price?
It's fun to think about. Consider the Rolex. You can tell time much, much more accurately with a $15 quartz watch than you can a $30k Rollie. But the Rolex still has a market, yes? Just a very limited one. Someone could develop a $15k springer that would be the performance dream of any half serious airgunner. But who'd buy it?
I've rambled long enough and slipped off topic, sorry.
There must be too much money to be made right now on pcp airguns. Cheaper to manufacture than a well made springer, and a higher profit margin to boot.
I was thinking along the same lines as straitflite. Springers are so bonehead simple in their basic operating principle, that new conceptual leaps forward seem unlikely. BUT...it's fascinating how the performance improvements from refining details - piston weight, seal design and material, transfer port details, lubricants, spring metallurgy, rifling twist rates, better triggers, cylinder precision, etc., etc., etc. - seem to be endless.
So, seems like manufacturers could improve performance without TOO much extra trouble and expense by building in a higher level of such "tuner stuff," if so inclined.
As already mentioned, a cheaper form of springer recoil reduction might be a very interesting thing to develop too. In a way it's surprising that hasn't happened, to better compete with PCP's? New ideas in that field seem to have stopped in the 80's when springer match rifles became obsolete (that being said, the FWB "sledge" may be about as simple as this can get!).
I would like to see Diana, BSA, or HW make a side lever fixed barrel rifle capable of two power settings similar to a Beeman P1/HW45 pistol. Having a barrel system to switch calibers and integral shroud would be a good option.
Likely not since only changes made for any number of years were cosmetic or the few magazine fed break barrels.
Anymore, everything seems to be about PCP. More power, bigger calibers, slugs, no recoil, now the semi or full auto guns. Lots of other parts and pieces along with it but still PCP's because they all want that mouse fart quiet rifle with more power than any real airgunner should need.
S'ok by me, they can have them...leaves more springers for me...lol
I am with you Steve ! To me airgunners have lost their minds and have totally forgotten what airguns are about. Air guns are not susposed to be firearms. They are meant to be low powered to shoot indoors or in the backyard.
If airgunners keep wanting more power and bigger cal soon the regs and the government will step in and we will have to have a permit to shot them because of the high power.
In short we will kill our hobby. I have rimfires if I want power and most rimfires are priced lower than a quality springer, most of the time. I love to sit out on the pool deck with my old school FWBs and HWs and just relax and shoot paper and plink in the back yard. I can shoot all day and not bother anyone.
We as airgunners had better wake up. In todays world there is always some idiot who wants to regulate every little stinking thing.
wiz out
Excellent post, I agree with every word. Airguns in some countries are already regulated to the point of anemic. The US will be next if it keeps going. Want firearm performance, get a firearm.
AirgunWizard's post is a truthful prediction. Powder burners give consumers what they desire. Leave airguns alone.
To address springer new products, I would buy any NEW recoiless rifle. I prefer Giss System and don't care about price. The sledge system is fine too and would be more affordable. The TRICK with sledge is to make an easy way to adjust/calibrate the resistance of the sliding sledge system. Seems to me like it should be pretty easy for a product engineer to do. Using bearings in the sledge system instead of pinching delrin blocks seems more logical to me. My TX200 SR is a good format to copy with bearings utilized. I once owned a Park 93 (Poor Man's Whiscome). It was my very first air rifle and I loved it. Sadley Jim Maccari stopped stocking springs for this Giss System rifle that shot Perfect. I won many Field Target events with this 12 ft/lb kit. So did Roz Sumpter as well as other guys. The Giss system could also be modified by eliminating 2 compression pistons converging with seal like Whiscome and Park. Instead use 1 BIG power piston and a balanced counterweight. I'll betcha a 30mm piston with simple pivot/fulcrum would yield 13 ft/lbs. The Park used a "bicycle chain" to separate pistons. Whiscome used horizontal rack and more than 1 cocking effort for power above 12 ft/lbs. There has to be a more efficient way than chains and multiple stroke rack to achieve the separation of pistons and/or counterweights.
Are there any plumbing guns (PCP) that don't develop leaks after a month, a year, 5 years? Maintaining 3000 psi in a vessel dependent on seals is asking for a leak. That's one of the biggest drawbacks to PCPs that I see. How many times does a threat start out, "My XYZ gun is leaking?"
I do love the simplicity and independence of a springer. I've had pneumatics in the form of Crosmans, Benjamins and Sheridans. It's not that I didn't love them but they had their issues. I've also had CO2s in the form of more Crosmans and a Chinese 160 clone. They have their issues too. I've never felt the urge to go PCP. They just aren't for me.
I finally found my "forever" guns in a P1 and an R9. They are everything I wanted and nothing I didn't.
The only gun I may still be looking for is an R7. I was never interested in one before. I used to think; why would I want a rifle with barely more power than my P1? Then something special happened. My adult daughters were home for a weekend and one of them came down into the "mancave" while I was shooting. I let her try the P1 and the R9. She loved shooting them and we had a little impromptu competition. The only thing was I had to cock the gun for her each time. She just couldn't quite complete the cocking stroke. Or at lest she didn't quite feel completely safe doing so. We still had a blast.
But if I ever come across an R7 in .22, particularly one with the "clean" barrel (no sights, no screw holes, and a muzzle device from the factory) I'll probably leap on it. Wouldn't say no to one with factory sights but I just love the clean look with a small light scope.
Don't get me wrong. I love and have great nostalgia for the American made pumpers. I just also love the simple, easy, quick power of the HW's.
Don't know about the big manufacturers but there are independents working to bring out a new power adjustable, recoilless break barrel springer. Of course being independent means that time and money are not in abundant supply so it may take time or fizzle out completely but it shows that there is still a flickering flame of interest.
A Diana 27 is a nice, easy to cock, lower powered springer. About as powerful as the R7/HW30 but not as scope friendly. You can scope them, its just the dovetail isn't milled into the comp tube - it's affixed to it. 3 ball sear trigger is very nice.
I don't know why but pcps never grabbed me despite being the grandaddy of all airguns. Other than the Sheridans I've never connected with one I shot. Much prefer rimfire when I want a little more. Just as with airguns it's all about shot placement.
Strangely, CO2 guns do interest me. A little. I suppose because of the fun factor you can get out the pistols.
I always enjoyed the pump-up rifles. One of my favorite rifles was the Crosman 2100. That rifle could be accurate out to 25 yards. I wish they'd offer it with a Lothar Walther barrel and wooden stock or solid composite.
As for springers, I think a bullpup with sidelever with rotary mag might be good for field work. Another design that could work is a larger P1/HW45 type action at 700 fps, longer barrel, and fitted to a modular stock.
I always enjoyed the pump-up rifles. One of my favorite rifles was the Crosman 2100. That rifle could be accurate out to 25 yards. I wish they'd offer it with a Lothar Walther barrel and wooden stock or solid composite.
Look up the Crosman Model 1. It had a "precision" brass barrel liner instead of steel, a wood stock, better trigger, Williams rear sight. It's .22 but ticks most of your boxes.
P1 .177 have,R-9.20 yes and an old no safety R7.....the R-7 and it's like are a lot easier to cock and shoot than the others.....and quite accurate to boot,a better choice for informal indoor shooting....Tell Santa you want one and how you will share it with loved ones.
@airgunwizard High power airguns are not a new thing . People wanted them long ago also. The air rifles used by Louis and Clark over 200 years ago were high power, easily capable of killing large game- hunting.
I do agree somewhat , that us consumers generally take things to far and wantingto push the limits more and more, but some of this issue also falls upon the manufacturers.
I personally do not see anything wrong with airguns that achieve up to 30 FPE for small- mid sized game dispatching.
Im curious, is there anyone here, that would argue that a multishot airgun is NOT a more convenient system then a single shot , single load airgun, when shooting small game/ hunting ?
Surely it is logical, that the ability to get off a 2nd or 3rd shot, more quickly , when hunting, is a positive aspect , comapred to having to grab a small lead pellet for each shot and fumble putting it into the barrel...especially in cold winter months/ temps.
This is yet another reason why I will never purchase another single shot- single loading airgun.
And to give a more direct answer to the question of this thread :
IMHO, I do not think the airgun technology going forward is concentrating on bringing back high quality, more expensive, single shot springer airguns.
I do not see that trend coming back.
I doubt there is a strong enough market for major companies to try and manufacture top grade single shot springer air rifles that would cost $500 or more to produce . I see it as a dying technology- outdated technology. The mutlishot airguns and PCP platform airguns seem to have guaranteed that the era of hi quality and hi cost single shot springer airguns is locked in history.
Just bought a Umarex Synergis and a few years ago a Hatsan Proxima. I think those are innovative. Don't care for the Gamo system. But I also have a Mendoza Rm2800 and 2000 that are repeaters that have been around a long time and work good.
Dual caliber is not new but could be better. Like two guns for the price of one. I'd like to see Beeman come out with a set of .20 and .25 barrels for their dual cals. and a set of barrels for their double barre .177/.22 in .20 and .25.
I think they should work on dual spring guns like the old fwb 300's and less expensive recoilless springer. Sterling in the UK is working on a opposing piston side lever but the estimate price is $1000+.
They could give up on the gas ram research as far as I'm concerned.
Are you happy with your Umarex Synergis ? Is it accurate consistently ? Any issues with it ?
I have 2 of em, and I think the recoil is way to harsh. I do like the power...getting around 28-30 FPE with .22 - 14.3 Gr pellets.
but the power is not very useful if the gun is inaccurate or to difficult to shoot accurately on a consistent basis.
Id much rather my Synergis shoot 20 FPE and have much less recoil.
I am claiming that IMHO, the era of high priced- performance single shot springer air rifles, is dying out. I do not think there is a large market for it, like there was decades ago.
Air Arms should bring back the Pro Elite break barrel rifle. Also, BSA could bring back an under lever rifle and offer a couple different stocks similar to their PCP line.
I haven't shot the Syergis enough to comment on accuracy. It works fine. The Proxima works fine. One inch groups at 20 yards. Heavy hard to cock. They both recoil pretty hard.
LOL ! shooting is about hitting the target, not about how fast one can reload or squeeze the trigger. There is a place for that but nogun shooting. Lots of emotion here which well you know.
wiz
I have a nice assortment of spring-piston air rifiles, and it would be hard to replace any of them with anything currently being made.
But if I could dream of something special, it would be along the lines of my HyScore 810M (Diana 60)... recoiless (GISS system), break barrel, made for 10-meter shooting, but you can mount a scope... I have a Leupold EFR 3-9x33 scope on mine, which was the very first airgun-rated scope that I ever purchased many years ago... it's one of the most pleasant and accurate rifles I have.
Of course this was intended for 10-meter shooting more than anything else, so it averages somewhere around 490 fps, depending on the pellet.
So for something new and improved, having a very similar recoiless rifle a little more powerful that could reach out to 50 yards or so would be nice.
I wouldn't mind an underlever setup, like my HW77K... it's also a joy to shoot.
I like the sleaved barrel om the 810M as well... I also like the short carbine shrouded barrels like JM made for the R9TK.
I have absolutely no desire for a multi-shot spring-piston airgun... you would still have to cock it each time, and some sort of safety to prevent you from dry firing it.
I love the calmness of shooting my springers... it's very relaxing !
Of course a nice walnut stock would be expected as well... here is my HyScore 810M.
Hyscore hijacked my post about springers.,he is a rookie here and may not know about starting his own posts...
On the other hand, Hyscore has provided an opportunity to remember one of the reasons we love springers -- both upscale and down -- in the first place: Their incredible thermodynamic efficiency that makes hunting-capable muzzle energies possible with just a single, human-muscle-compatible, cocking stroke.
Ty for the compliment. ROFL.
It is interesting though. I remember when the Beeman P1 .177 came out, and I remember reading so many articles of how it was gonna be near impossible to beat its FPS-FPE in a pistol springer format. Its 500 fps was considered incredible....but of course time passed and technolgies improved. Now we look back and that 500 FPS has been surpassed by several springer pistols . I got a .22 springer pistol that gets 580-600 with 11.9 Gr - 22 pellets.
Okay...I had my fun...you guys get back to your group hug springer nostalgia.
Ths will be my last post on this tread as it has been beat to death.
I love airguns, all of them and some more than others. But here is the thing at my age pumping is not so easy anymore. PCPs always leak,its just a matter of time and I have had more than a few.
Springers on the other hand are simple and a few spare parts and you are good for a longggggg time. My old FWB 124 bought by the long gone ARH has only needed a spring and seals once in over 30 years of constant use. Say what you will but history and experience means something to most of us
I've never been all that interested in the inflatables. As Hector said, they are basically plumbing projects, and as others have said, plumbing will eventually leak. I'm a vintage spring gun guy. Somebody once said a proper air rifle has three ingredients: steel, hide, and timber. I have many air rifles, but one of my favorites is a Haenel Model 3, made some time in the 1930's. It is elegant in it's simplicity, and very satisfying to own and shoot.
I've never been all that interested in the inflatables. As Hector said, they are basically plumbing projects, and as others have said, plumbing will eventually leak. I'm a vintage spring gun guy. Somebody once said a proper air rifle has three ingredients: steel, hide, and timber.
And thus Jim sums things up with his usual clarity!
I'm purty much in exactly the same spot (personal faves: the original HW 50 and its cousin the HW 55). And I've never really understood these debates about which type of airgun is the "best;" they are all basically simple mechanical devices, whose operating and shooting characteristics are different, and thus appeal to different folks, for different reasons. It's a hobby - to each his own.
I also don't understand why threads deviate so far from where they start (OP's questions were about springers), or why a fellow who hates them would used the name of one as his forum handle LOL, but maybe I'm just not that smart.
I've never been all that interested in the inflatables. As Hector said, they are basically plumbing projects, and as others have said, plumbing will eventually leak. I'm a vintage spring gun guy. Somebody once said a proper air rifle has three ingredients: steel, hide, and timber.
