Reply To: Crosman 2100 vs Daisy 880

Forums Springers, Pumpers, C02, & Vintage Crosman 2100 vs Daisy 880 Reply To: Crosman 2100 vs Daisy 880



The first gun of any kind that I shot was a Daisy 880 in the mid 1980s. That was not new then; it had a metal receiver and everything was well-finished. I think they were about a $100 gun back then, and $100 in 80s money is a lot more than that in today’s money. I wish I had that gun, still.

I had a 760 Pumpmaster in the later 80s, and my brother had a PowerMaster. As you said, the Crosmans get harder to pump as you go. I think the Daisy did too, it’s just that the 880’s design has SO much more leverage it is not readily perceptible.

Today, the 880s have plastic receivers, which tend to crack over time from pumping stresses. I think the 2100 stil has a metal receiver, which is worth something. But it’s harder to pump, which means it won’t get shot as much and also harder to load, so I’d take my chance on the Daisy or maybe try to find an old one and rebuild it.

BTW – I have a Daisy 953 and I love it. Very accurate and a neat, simple 5-shot clip design. Only issue with it is that it doesn’t cut clean holes in normal paper; you need a fresh backer board or fancy target paper. Awesome plinker though!  I find myself reaching for the HW30s instead; It’s triple the power for more range and feels like about the same amount of effort, and with a much better trigger. Same accuracy at close range too. Still made of steel and wood, but triple the price.