Airgun Technologies The Future of Springers – Are We Still in the Game?

[mightyox]

Don't ignore .177 pellets for squirrels and rabbits! I can take my RWS Diana 48 or HW98K springers and a couple of clear plastic medicine bottles full of pellets in my pocket; a knife on my belt, a backpack full of necessaries, then disappear for a few days, a week or month in the woods and have a ball. I consider both survival rifles for small game.
Now for a viable option...if you wanted to take a PCP rifle....and a couple of clear plastic medicine bottles of pellets in your pocket, a knife on your belt, load your backpack with a couple dozen spare filled air bottles wrapped in bubble wrap to keep the rattling down, and pull a wagon with all your necessaries and an emergency high pressure hand pump... The two .22 pellet full medicine bottles will be twice as heavy as two pellet full plastic medicine bottles of .177 and volume 25% less in number so you may need 3 medicine bottles of .22's, bulging in the bottom of your pocket. The wagon will be kinda noisy and a pain in the you know what!
If I was to buddy with you on the extended woods walk...I volunteer to take the two plastic bottles of .177 pellets and 48 or 98k, knife and backpack full of necessaries......and you can take the 3 plastic bottles of .22 pellets, PCP rifle, knife and back pack full of backup air bottles and wagon full of your necessaries and emergency air pump. Sure won't be a quiet walk and listening to you complain after a few hours and may be the beginning of a miserable woods walk...maybe I'll walk a mile or two ahead, set up camp, build a fire, put a couple of rabbits and a squirrel on the spit, and wait for your grand entrance after dark.

I love my .177. Many starling and sparrow have fallen to this gamo. Even bagged a fox with it. But on the long shots with crows or even not so long on ground hogs it falls short. That why the next rifle i get will be a better rifle in a bigger caliber.

 

[borne2fly]

I found a diana 52 for 300 bucks. I dont know what to get but I feel like I cant go wrong with a 48, 52, 350, 460 or 54. I just domt know the pros and cons of each. I want a .22 I do know that. I looked at the gauntlet, notos and air arms tx200??? Pcps but I just domt want to pump it or spend the extra on a compressor. Maybe one day but not today.

The 52 is a 48 with the nicer (walnut?) checkered stock. A beautiful rifle. There are tuning kits available which trade some of the power for easier cocking and some accuracy improvement, although I’m quite happy with the stock setup. Point is, plenty of support is still available for these popular rifles.

The only drawback I’ve seen is that these big springers kick hard enough to damage a number of scopes. If you run a scope, you’ll need one specifically rated for springers. I don’t use a scope, but rather a Williams peep sight … plenty accurate for the shooting I do.

 

[Toxylon]

Am I way off with this line of thinking?

No, you are not.

 

[Toxylon]

Springers will be around for a really long time, simply because they are incredibly durable, while PCP's (and gasrams) are not. You can literally put a springer aside for years, come back to it, and continue from where you were left. I've done it many times, with different guns.

Most of my springers are decades old, but they work better than they ever did since leaving the factory. There's no end in sight. I intend to shoot these guns into my twilight years.

Last year I read about an Englishman who hunted rabbits and pigeons that season with his Lincoln Jeffrey BSA, from c. 1910. That's 114 years of use life! Guns with leather seals literally don't even require change of seals for incredible lengths of time. PCP's generally spring a leak if they're left for a year without a shot, or for a ton of different reasons. Been there.

To my mind, PCP's are a infrastructure-dependant hassle, and potentially dangerous to work on, as well. Due to the last issue there's a relative dearth of PCP servicing information around, very unlike the springer scene where almost any issue for almost any springer model ever made has an expert or three ready to share what they know on the airgun forums. So, to either the mechanically-inclined tinkerer or the no-hassle-demanding weekend shooter, springers are the best choice.

Even if the remaining quality springer manufacturers fold one by one, there will be countless thousands of quality springers around, on every continent (maybe not Antarctica), to buy, trade, and use. Parts availability is a more pressing issue, but since my go-to parts dealers still have parts for myriad guns which haven't been in production for 20 to 80 years, I'm not too concerned. Those parts dealers have never relied on the airgun-owning masses for their business; only us enthusiasts buy tiny antique screws for a couple bucks apiece, and that was so already 30 years ago.

But the main thing is this: contrary to popular views, springers still are capable hunting / target tools, out to surprising distances. Even 50 meters is not the limit (although it's getting up there). The fact that there now are more powerful, easier airguns around haven't magically made the springers any less efficient than they were, for the generations for whom they were the main airgunning weapon, to hunters and target shooters alike.

 

[cjtamu]

If the Diana 52 is in good shape then that’s a good deal. The 48, 52, and 54 all have the same powerplant, the 54 just adds the sled. If you’re going to be walking with it the 54 is much heavier.

 

[3Crows]

Consider the pumper, benjamin, sheridan, crosman pumpups, now diana, dragonfly, etc. Really have no place in modern airgunworld. Lots of effort to shoot. Lower power than most pcp and springers. No hi-tech look. Not particularly accurate. Hard to scope. Yet, have maintained a small segment of the airgun market. By not trying to compete with 1300fps Gamo springers or pcp rifles.

Springers are going the same way, but with a wider variety of quality, cost, etc. Manufacturers have gone overboard in trying to compete with pcp power and accuracy, hence the aformentioned 1300fps Gamo. I'm thinking of the old Diana 22-27 rifles, intuitive, plenty accurate, easy to cock and shoot, plenty of power within reasonable airgun distances, light weight. Nobody makes anything like these anymore. But would be excellent entry level guns, especially for smaller/younger shooters. There will always be the higher end springers, and the false promise of power from others, but the sweet shooters of yesteryear might be the best way to keep springers relevant to more people.

As a pumper guy, the reason they are still relevant is their compact size and low weight for hunting when compared to spring guns or even PCPs. Both of which tend to be very heavy and awfully long. That may be okay on the bench but it is a PITA for woods carry and the length makes them difficult to bring to point especially in confined spaces like a blind or brush. At 37 inches long and 5.5 pounds a pumper is much easier to carry than a 44 inches long and 8 pounds+ spring gun.

I would like to see some evolution, a barrel over the spring tube under lever. It could be 36 inches long, it could even be a bull pup with some clever design on the cocking lever, maybe a side cocker. And unlike break open guns, the fixed, stable barrel would provide consistent accuracy with nom concerns about lockup or wear and tear of that mechanism affecting accuracy.

 

[mobilemail]

Based on guns like Discovery/Maximus, and other similar rifles, it seems that a company can build and sell a reasonably shooting PCP than they can a springer of the same power. So I think springers will segregate into two markets, the higher priced niche guns that a few still enjoy until the purchase numbers don't justify production; and the walmart "looks like an airgun" group.

After shooting airguns for a decade plus, I have reached these conclusions for my own particular shooting:
I'm not much interested in a springer over 12-13fpe, certainly not 20+fpe. If I want that power I will go to a PCP.
I'm getting to where I'm not even much interested in a .177 PCP over 12-15fpe. It's pretty much a paper puncher, if I want more power I usually reach for a .22 PCP.
If I'm going to buy a springer I'm going to buy a good one. I really love my Beeman R7!

 

[mightyox]

If the Diana 52 is in good shape then that’s a good deal. The 48, 52, and 54 all have the same powerplant, the 54 just adds the sled. If you’re going to be walking with it the 54 is much heavier.

Its new. I want the sled, im 6'2" 260 lbs and bench 315 for fun. Im Law enforcement and on the SAR team. I hike and stay in good condition. I might get the 52 just because of how good of a deal it it

 

[borne2fly]

As a pumper guy, the reason they are still relevant is their compact size and low weight for hunting when compared to spring guns or even PCPs. Both of which tend to be very heavy and awfully long. That may be okay on the bench but it is a PITA for woods carry and the length makes them difficult to bring to point especially in confined spaces like a blind or brush. At 37 inches long and 5.5 pounds a pumper is much easier to carry than a 44 inches long and 8 pounds+ spring gun.

I would like to see some evolution, a barrel over the spring tube under lever. It could be 36 inches long, it could even be a bull pup with some clever design on the cocking lever, maybe a side cocker. And unlike break open guns, the fixed, stable barrel would provide consistent accuracy with nom concerns about lockup or wear and tear of that mechanism affecting accuracy.

I’m a springer guy first, there’s an elegance to them that I just enjoy. But pumpers are a very close second. I have a 1322 with a number of mods and I’m always impressed with its accuracy. It’s light, has no recoil, and I do like the fact that I can vary the power by the number of pumps and consequently the ammo I use for any particular situation. Furthermore, it’s cheap and easy to rebuild. Of course, follow-up shots take longer.

 

[mightyox]

I’m a springer guy first, there’s an elegance to them that I just enjoy. But pumpers are a very close second. I have a 1322 with a number of mods and I’m always impressed with its accuracy. It’s light, has no recoil, and I do like the fact that I can vary the power by the number of pumps and consequently the ammo I use for any particular situation. Furthermore, it’s cheap and easy to rebuild. Of course, follow-up shots take longer.

I see they all shoot about the same velocity. 800 to 900 fps for a 22. Pumpers, springers and pcps. So ease of operation is the selling point? Thats kinda crazy to me.

 

[3Crows]

I see they all shoot about the same velocity. 800 to 900 fps for a 22. Pumpers, springers and pcps. So ease of operation is the selling point? Thats kinda crazy to me.

Nah. PCPs can with the right barrel shoot slugs. Not apples to apples but my cute little Stoeger X20 in .177 makes 13 fpe. My Crosman 140 makes 13 fpe, my relatively stock 392 makes 14 fpe and my 392 Steroid makes 20+ fpe, my .22 Urban PCP makes an effortless 26 fpe and my strongest two M-Rods make 60 fpe. They are not equal, not equal at all. The strongest .25 spring guns may approach 30 fpe but they buck like a mule and ease of operation is not their forte for certain.

 

[Toxylon]

There are many tuned 30 fpe springers that do not buck like a mule. I have one, and all it took was replacing the piston seal, putting a well-fitting rear guide, and lubing the powerplant appropriately. Not really tuned, just made right. Then there are those actually tuned magnum springers that are amazingly smooth to shoot.

Ease of operation? The 30 fpe springer cocks, locks and loads just like any other breakbarrel. The cocking effort is bigger, but that's all. I have zero issues making 50 quick shots with it. I never shoot any springer more than that at one go.

 

[1911Tex]

The only drawback I’ve seen is that these big springers kick hard enough to damage a number of scopes. If you run a scope, you’ll need one specifically rated for springers. I don’t use a scope, but rather a Williams peep sight … plenty accurate for the shooting I do.

Why worry about the need for a scope? A RWS Diana 48 springer has excellent iron sights....and more accurate than 95% of shooters.

 

[jkingrph]

My read of the evidence is that high quality spring guns are a dying market, and therefore new R&D or investment just does not pencil out for manufacturers. The few attempts to bring innovative and/or high quality new products to market in the past 5-10 years have all failed. The new FWB pro sport, the SIG ASP20 and the LGV/LGU were all discontinued, presumably due to poor sales. Diana seems to be adrift. I'm thankful we still have Weihrauch and AA still producing quality guns, but my guess is that it is a sunset business going forward.
R

Yes FWB discontinued the Sport model. They basically got out of the springer market and went PCP and rimfire match guns across the line. HW and Diana as well as Air Arms are making some very nice springers, HW in paticular. I really don't think there is room for much more development in spring air guns or SSP for that matter. I can see the utility and handiness of a pump up for hunting as they tend to be smaller and lighter wieight, but some of the springers approach that. I can probably be labeled and old fogey but will not get into the PCP game, and will stick with my collection of nice springers.

 

[MDriskill]

In the 1950's through 70's heyday of springers, most of the big English and German makers offered them in a variety of sizes and power levels, to suit shooters of all ages and statures. But as time went on, the junior models fell by the wayside. Most springers offered today are at "adult" power levels, and apparently no maker would considering a new smaller model. BUT...if this forum is any indication...HW's best-selling model is the LEAST powerful one - the HW 30!

Robert Law at the old Air Rifle Headquarters in WV realized the accurate, sweet-shooting HW 30 junior gun would also appeal to adults, and ingeniously marketed it thusly. Dr. Beeman took the next evolutionary step with the more "adultified" stock and features of the R7, now inherited by most HW 30's.

It surprising to me that no other maker has come up with a serious competitor in this market niche - a high-quality, smooth shooting, adult-oriented, smaller rifle. The "future of springers" - at least part of it - may lay with not with ever-increasing power, but with other inherent virtues of the mechanism.

 

[jlharden]

In the 1950's through 70's heyday of springers, most of the big English and German makers offered them in a variety of size and power levels, to suit shooters of all ages and statures. But as time went on, the junior models fell by the wayside. Most springers offered today are at "adult" power levels, and apparently no maker would considering a new smaller model. BUT...if this forum is any indication...HW's best-selling model is the LEAST powerful one - the HW 30!

Robert Law at the old Air Rifle Headquarters in WV realized the accurate, sweet-shooting HW 30 junior gun would also appeal to adults, and ingeniously marketed it thusly. Dr. Beeman took the next evolutionary step with the more "adultified" stock and features of the R7, now inherited by most HW 30's.

It surprising to me that no other maker has come up with a serious competitor in this market niche - a high-quality, smooth shooting, adult-oriented, smaller rifle.

Never promoted like the HW30/R7 but the HW50 is the slightly sized up high quality, smooth shooting, adult-oriented, smaller rifle.

 

[MDriskill]

Never promoted like the HW30/R7 but the HW50 is the slightly sized up high quality, smooth shooting, adult-oriented, smaller rifle.

Very true!

Legend has it that the original HW 50 - less powerful than today's, but identically sized, and similarly a step up in size and power from the contemporary HW 30 - was the favorite HW product of the original Herr Weihrauch himself. He kept his personal 50 in his office, and was known to sneak out the back door for a bit of plinking during the work day, LOL.

 

[JaketheMeatGOD]

I'm not sure if we're talking about the future here or past, all I hear is "we're happy with what manufacturers currently offer on the low end and we want even less."
This would be the type of thinking that will kill Springer Technology. We might know what a springer is and can offer, but a newcomer looks at the paper and says, "Why would Anyone buy such things !!?"
Now I understand you guys are plinking for the most part and don't need power, but at the end of the day, a gun is made to reach out, penetrate, and destroy the target; otherwise, it enters the toy category.
I myself am also happy with some of the current models; however, I'd be happier if I saw some very nice upgrades to the current tech, which I'm going to explain below:

1) Chockless 4.5mm (.177) Sprigners:
Let's take your average HW95 Luxus in 4.5mm(chockless), which shoots the 10.0gr JSB slugs like a laser.
This will increase the maximum effective range of that gun from 40m to something like 75 to 80m.
+ Easy to implement (One step less in barrel making)
+ Pushes the rifle into a new category and range without any extra cost.

I believe it's time to move on from pellets now; they are a 19th-century projectile for smoothbore slow guns; such a waste to spend all that pure spring energy in air drag.

2) New Tech: To get the high reliability and standalone operation of Springer + Way more Oomph + Jentle shot cycle, we need to add some Heeeaaat.

a) First, we need a narrow chamber along the main tube to store our high-Cetane Diesel fuel. (I know, I know, just hear me out for sec : )

b) Then, a fuel injector, which sprays a controlled amount of fuel in the main tube every time we cock the rifle, thus atomizing the fuel and creating a perfect air-fuel mixture.

c) The piston has no rubber seal; instead three piston rings around the head area, like a piston in an engine, thus no more burning of seals, or maybe use a high-quality, high-heat-resistant rubber seal.
Diesel engines run maybe 100,000km before replacing piston rings, so if that is used, it will shoot for eternity, but it needs oiling, which is simple to add.

d) There is a mechanism that locks the piston at the end-of-travel to avoid backlash from the firing pressure; this latch lives at the middle of the main tube, where the cocking channel ends.

e) No chocks, heavy slugs, and a can of that green energy drink(for the gun), I would not touch a single PCP I swear it.

+ Cheap to maintain, cheap to operate, but fruitful.
+ Dual personality: use fuel and you have a fire breather, and don't use fuel(close the valve) and you have a nice springer.
+ Extremely legal to carry around and shoot everywhere (close the valve when Karens arrive.)
+ A mechanical Marvel.

- I need a Lathe, a Mill, and a Diana 460 Magnum to bring it to life.

And I'd like to call it the " Diana 460 Deisle Magnum "

 

[borne2fly]

I'm not sure if we're talking about the future here or past, all I hear is "we're happy with what manufacturers currently offer on the low end and we want even less."
This would be the type of thinking that will kill Springer Technology. We might know what a springer is and can offer, but a newcomer looks at the paper and says, "Why would Anyone buy such things !!?"
Now I understand you guys are plinking for the most part and don't need power, but at the end of the day, a gun is made to reach out, penetrate, and destroy the target; otherwise, it enters the toy category.
I myself am also happy with some of the current models; however, I'd be happier if I saw some very nice upgrades to the current tech, which I'm going to explain below:

1) Chockless 4.5mm (.177) Sprigners:
Let's take your average HW95 Luxus in 4.5mm(chockless), which shoots the 10.0gr JSB slugs like a laser.
This will increase the maximum effective range of that gun from 40m to something like 75 to 80m.
+ Easy to implement (One step less in barrel making)
+ Pushes the rifle into a new category and range without any extra cost.

I believe it's time to move on from pellets now; they are a 19th-century projectile for smoothbore slow guns; such a waste to spend all that pure spring energy in air drag.

2) New Tech: To get the high reliability and standalone operation of Springer + Way more Oomph + Jentle shot cycle, we need to add some Heeeaaat.

a) First, we need a narrow chamber along the main tube to store our high-Cetane Diesel fuel. (I know, I know, just hear me out for sec : )

b) Then, a fuel injector, which sprays a controlled amount of fuel in the main tube every time we cock the rifle, thus atomizing the fuel and creating a perfect air-fuel mixture.

c) The piston has no rubber seal; instead three piston rings around the head area, like a piston in an engine, thus no more burning of seals, or maybe use a high-quality, high-heat-resistant rubber seal.
Diesel engines run maybe 100,000km before replacing piston rings, so if that is used, it will shoot for eternity, but it needs oiling, which is simple to add.

d) There is a mechanism that locks the piston at the end-of-travel to avoid backlash from the firing pressure; this latch lives at the middle of the main tube, where the cocking channel ends.

e) No chocks, heavy slugs, and a can of that green energy drink(for the gun), I would not touch a single PCP I swear it.

+ Cheap to maintain, cheap to operate, but fruitful.
+ Dual personality: use fuel and you have a fire breather, and don't use fuel(close the valve) and you have a nice springer.
+ Extremely legal to carry around and shoot everywhere (close the valve when Karens arrive.)
+ A mechanical Marvel.

- I need a Lathe, a Mill, and a Diana 460 Magnum to bring it to life.

And I'd like to call it the " Diana 460 Deisle Magnum "

If I’m hearing you right … modifying an airgun into a single cylinder fuel injected engine, essentially taking full advantage of its existing tendency to diesel.
I do like these sorts of ideas.
The Feds might declare this a “firearm” because it’s capable of ignition by simply flipping a switch. They’re funny about that sort of thing. I say this because I have a Baikal Makarov air pistol which I understand is no longer available in the US because it’s made on the same line as the 9mm Makarov and “can possibly be modified into a real firearm”.
Well …. possibly, and definitely not easily. But it would be much cheaper to simply buy a real Makarov which, ironically, IS still legal to buy.

 

[Basher]

The reason I don’t see any of the above catching on is because PCPs already do what a “diesel springer” will do, and are much less complex (believe it or not). Adding fuel, injectors, latches, etc. will make things just as complex as a PCP, just in a different way.

For me, I *WANT* the simplicity and lower-power of current springers precisely because they’re simple and lower-power. People in the UK hunt all day long (and quite effectively) with sub12 air rifles, no reason we can’t over here. If I want more power, that’s where the PCP comes in.

Also, I have no interest in having a liquid fuel tank and source of ignition right next to my face. I have yet to be on fire and prefer to keep it that way. I know weed-eaters are the same idea, but they’re not right next to my face. I dunno, I just don’t like the idea, personally. And I agree it would get classified as a firearm because the Alphabet org loves to step out of bounds whenever they can!

I appreciate the out of the box thinking, though!