97k vs 97K long
- Thread starter JEFFPPC
- Start date
K. I would imagine the long would be beneficial in the 77 variant due to the longer sight radius for iron use, but in the 97 I dont see any reason to go for the long aside from slightly lower cocking effort. The K is easy enough though. One of my K's has a PG4 HO kit in it and I can shoot that thing all day.
Upvote 0
I was told velocity in springers can begin to drop in barrels after 12" to 16".
I had both 97K and 97 full, and the longer version balanced well for silhouette shooting. Both were tuned to about 12 ft lbs and capable of one hole groups at 25 yards while rested. If I was going to shoot iron sights I'd go with a 77 full length.
I had both 97K and 97 full, and the longer version balanced well for silhouette shooting. Both were tuned to about 12 ft lbs and capable of one hole groups at 25 yards while rested. If I was going to shoot iron sights I'd go with a 77 full length.
Upvote 0
Fwiw the 97 uses the 97K cocking arm so there's no leverage advantage like between the 77 and 77K. I know it's counter intuitive, but it's true.
Being scoped I don't think there's any advantage to the longer 97 barrel. At least my 97k never leaves the bench so without a longer cocking arm I'd rather have the K. Plus I think the 97 looks odd with the staggered barrel and cocking arm lengths.
Just my opinion
Upvote 0
A bit better balance forward. I have never noticed any difference in FPE. The biggest difference is the long is MUCH less common. Only a handful are made each year.
Upvote 0
In the early days of field target one of the most popular mods custom shops were doing to the very prolific 77 was cropping the barrel. It's my understanding that Weihrauch copied that and a few other popular mods when they released the 77K.
The general opinion is shorter is better for accuracy because the pellet has less time to be affected by movement.
Is it that important? Meh. Unless you're a competitive shooter you'll never see the accuracy difference. There's a million other more important variables to screw with you when shooting springers. Buy what you like.
IMO a 97 is a tank long or short. Mine is only shot off a bench so a tiny amount of additional forward weight would never be noticed.
The general opinion is shorter is better for accuracy because the pellet has less time to be affected by movement.
Is it that important? Meh. Unless you're a competitive shooter you'll never see the accuracy difference. There's a million other more important variables to screw with you when shooting springers. Buy what you like.
IMO a 97 is a tank long or short. Mine is only shot off a bench so a tiny amount of additional forward weight would never be noticed.
Upvote 0
There is absolutely no reason at all to buy an HW97 "LONG". No advantage whatsoever.
Get the common 97K and go.
Get the common 97K and go.
Upvote 0
I heard the same thing and that's why the tx200 doesnt have a long barrel...I think the tx is 14 inches long
Upvote 0
The TX200 has been made in both "long" and carbine for many years. As stated earlier the biggest real world difference is the long is much less common and is prized by many collectors.
Upvote 0
When I ordered my TX200 a few months ago, I went with standard, or long barrel version. I just never cared much for carbines. One of my favorite centerfire rifles is a 1929 vintage Swedish Husqvarna Model 46 in 93x57, it has a barrel almost 26" long.
Upvote 0
"Collecting" and which is better for 50 yds are two entirely different subjects. Collecting something useless because it's rare happens all the time. Because something is more collectible doesn't mean it's worth having if you intend to use it.
My uncle had a very very rare 327hp early corvette. It was rare because it had a Powerglide two speed transmission. Very few were sold because at the time of production the tranny was a dog. Back in 63 "real" sports cars were driven by real men that drove stick shifts. Unfortunately the stout 327HP burned out several "Slip-n slide" Powerglide transmissions in the first few years. My frustrated uncle swapped the original 327 HP for a lesser powered 327 because it was easier than converting it to stick shift. Thus the car lost most of it "collector" value 55 years ago. More importantly the car is isn't and never was worth driving original "collectible" form.
Collector value and function can be mutually exclusive and should not be of much concern to someone concerned with getting a job done. You could give me a very rare tyro R1 and I'd have to sell it or take a belt sander to it to make it useful.
Upvote 0
This morning I took out 3 77’s, .177, .22 .25 and a 97 .177. Came in for lunch and read this post. After few hours working with tractor I went back on the range with the 77 and 97 both in .177. 
. 10 shots each, 42 yds. 97 on right. 
. Half dozen to one 6 to the other. Very similar. The only difference was jacking it, the 77 was easier but noticeable stretch to reach it. I like the short barrel for looks and manoeuvrability. Both guns are equals IMO. Good luck, Crow
The 9th shot clean through with 97.
. 10 shots each, 42 yds. 97 on right. . Half dozen to one 6 to the other. Very similar. The only difference was jacking it, the 77 was easier but noticeable stretch to reach it. I like the short barrel for looks and manoeuvrability. Both guns are equals IMO. Good luck, CrowThe 9th shot clean through with 97.
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Agreed.
Lots of times, "rare" means they probably sucked to begin with or they didn't sell well because something better was available.
Collectors don't care, because they never use them. They just want them because other people don't have them and they look good when you have "the set".
Not that there is anything wrong with that, whatever floats your boat.
But RARE does NOT mean BETTER. Oftentimes, it's exactly the opposite.
One of the lessons I've had to learn the hard way for myself, is to never buy a gun from a collector. Because if they are willing to give it up, it's probably a pretty sad piece. I just recently taught myself that lesson again on an HW35 I had to have.
Upvote 0
I understand some of the sentiments here, however rare/common and better/worse are not necessarily related terms. I completely disagree that more rare somehow equates to less quality or performance. Using the previous example of cars, categorically stating that something rare must be lesser in some way is not typically the case. A lot more mustang's than GT40's or Edsels, a lot more Nova's than ZL-1 Camaros or 4 cylinder Cadillacs. Rarity no more guarantees quality than it negates it.
No claim was ever made in this thread that the long was in some way superior. I did mention it provides a more forward balance if preferred. An awful lot of springers have muzzlebrakes or other appendages to improve balance. To suggest it is somehow lesser because it is more rare is simply not true. Many FT matches have been and will continue to be won with them.
By the logic that the most common sold is somehow the best, then there is no better PCP than a Hatsan and no better springer than a 100 dollar Wally world special.
There are reasons a 97 long may be preferred besides collectability.
Thank you Crow for the example that there is minimal practical difference.
No claim was ever made in this thread that the long was in some way superior. I did mention it provides a more forward balance if preferred. An awful lot of springers have muzzlebrakes or other appendages to improve balance. To suggest it is somehow lesser because it is more rare is simply not true. Many FT matches have been and will continue to be won with them.
By the logic that the most common sold is somehow the best, then there is no better PCP than a Hatsan and no better springer than a 100 dollar Wally world special.
There are reasons a 97 long may be preferred besides collectability.
Thank you Crow for the example that there is minimal practical difference.
Upvote 0
You totally misunderstood my post. Read it again. I didn't say high rarity always meant it was less functional. My point was rarity and collector value have no bearing on functionality. Some rare collectables are very functional, some are not.
When looking for a functional rifle rarity and collectability only matters if you plan on selling it or you want something few others have. Personally I'm a function over form guy. Some stuff I have is too nice to drag around the woods. All of my hunting rifles are run of the mill production rifles. Most with plastic stocks for durability. The only rare gun I own stays at home so it doesn't get banged up. They all function very well or I wouldn't own them.
This and my other response was not an attack on you or anyone else who likes collecting. I was just pointing out that collectability and function are two separate things. That's all. Lots of fine people love collecting rare stuff. It's what they love and that's cool by me.
Be well
Ron
Upvote 0
Either the long or carbine models are excellent but like many things it comes down to personal preference. I have won FT matches with both a modern 97KT and a nearly unheard of long 97 Tyrolean model. I decided to go with the K model because I was too leery of banging up the Tyro. If you can find an older long model with a 25mm piston you might really like that! I split the difference so to speak and installed a 25mm piston into a modern KT model along with some other mods and really enjoy the feel and accuracy, the Tyrolean long has a special place with superb accuracy as well.
Upvote 0