Reply To: TX200: second impressions (first impressions w/Vortek 12 FPE kit)

Forums Springers, Pumpers, C02, & Vintage TX200: second impressions (first impressions w/Vortek 12 FPE kit) Reply To: TX200: second impressions (first impressions w/Vortek 12 FPE kit)

Link

Smaug
Participant
Member

“gamyrick”Did Air Arms use preload washers to attain the 16 ft/lbs of energy? 
Would you describe the Vortek components as high quality? 
Was the Vortek spring properly finished at both ends?
Would you recommend the Vortek Kit?

Q: 
Did Air Arms use preload washers to attain the 16 ft/lbs of energy? 
A: No. Seems like stock is a larger diameter spring

Q: Would you describe the Vortek components as high quality? 
A: Yes

Q: Was the Vortek spring properly finished at both ends?
A: I couldn’t tell on one end, as it is contained. On the other end yes.

Q: Would you recommend the Vortek Kit?
A: Yes!

I was shooting it indoors at 14 yds. last night, seated in the field target position. Pretty consistently shooting 5-shot groups of one ragged hole (1/4″) with AA Diabolo Field 4.51mm, 8.4 gr. pellets. That was including a lot of human error too.  I can only imagine what the gun itself is capable of. Cocking is smoother and easier, and there’s no twang or buzz upon firing the shot. These last bits aren’t necessarily related to accuracy. It seems like the stock configuration is for maximum velocity while still retaining good accuracy. Air Arms is probably seeing how many high velocity guns Gamo and Crosman are selling in the US and figures that’s what we yankees want.

The stock setup has the spring rubbing the inside of the spring chamber with every cocking and shooting cycle, while the Vortek kit seems to have plastic and rubber rubbing on the bore, and the spring not touching the bore at all. Stock configuration has a metal piston weight too.

The Vortek design doesn’t require a lot of tar or grease to dampen vibration; just a very thin coating, probably to prevent corrosion more than lubrication.

The breech seal is a different material, and is vibration-isolated by an extra O-ring that isn’t present on the stock config.

I DO think the stock configuration is more durable in the long run, since metal doesn’t age and break down over time, like rubbers and plastics do. So if I had this gun with the idea of not touching it for 40 years, I guess I’d stay stock, and accept the twang and buzz.

The bottom line is that the original Air Arms quality is good. The Vortek kit doesn’t improve upon that in this case. But the original configuration is set up to get maximum power and longevity, rather than going for maximum accuracy and a more pleasant shooting experience. (at the cost of 4 FPE) This is a kit for connoisseurs, not velocity-focused newbies.

As a point of comparison, the stock TX200 configuration is the most buzzy and twangy springer I’ve shot, even compared to Chinese springers I’ve owned. (Stoeger X20, Crosman Raven) It’s just a lot of metal in there with not much to dampen it. It’s not due to the power, because my X20 shoots at about the same power level as the stock TX200.

I did take some quick pictures when I had it all apart, I’ll try to remember to post them later. I didn’t document the whole thing though, as I was so excited to get it together and try it out.

I’m going to try it out in the field target match this Saturday. If I don’t win my class, I surely won’t blame the rifle or Vortek kit. (unless the darn screws back out again)