Looks like this was published earlier today. Looks great!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2kXeVJfUFc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2kXeVJfUFc
Airmaks CaimanX review
- Thread starter Mr.H
- Start date
Ha, Just happens that I put a few magazines thru my Caiman (shorter than the "X") this morning.
I like the little gun. I find it rests at my shoulder (6', 250lbs) very easily and has very little movement while holding on target. I shoot offhand only. The factory silencer does a good job of cutting the bark to an acceptable level. During my shooting today, one cat was at my feet and the other was about two feet away on the back of the couch. Neither bothered heading for a quieter location for four magazines full.
Happy that I bought it.
Mike
I like the little gun. I find it rests at my shoulder (6', 250lbs) very easily and has very little movement while holding on target. I shoot offhand only. The factory silencer does a good job of cutting the bark to an acceptable level. During my shooting today, one cat was at my feet and the other was about two feet away on the back of the couch. Neither bothered heading for a quieter location for four magazines full.
Happy that I bought it.
Mike
Upvote 0
Sweet looking bull pup. Enjoyed the video.
@MikeW, any additional impressions on your part? I like how solid the gun looks. I could see it being very good for pesting in and around farm structures... i like the wooden stock, looks warm.
@MikeW, any additional impressions on your part? I like how solid the gun looks. I could see it being very good for pesting in and around farm structures... i like the wooden stock, looks warm.
Upvote 0
I too like how it looks kinda beefy.. easy to handle. I think I like the x better ..on any of these stocks I've seen ..doesn't matter which one they all float my boat.
HYNZIE 4s
HYNZIE 4s
Upvote 0
After watching this video I went to the .22 video he did earlier. Although he had 130 shots on a fill, the ES was all over the place. How does yours perform? Is the power easily adjustable? How many shots do you get per fill and at what pressure?
At first I thought they were butt ugly with that thick stock, but the more I look at them the more I like it. I just wish there was more info available.
At first I thought they were butt ugly with that thick stock, but the more I look at them the more I like it. I just wish there was more info available.
Upvote 0
Hmm, tough one.
As from the factory -
Look - Camain
Trigger - Camain, no adjusting required (very good as shipped). The BP17 has no second stage stop. Is supposed to be adjustable, haven't looked into adjusting it yet
Silencer - Camain. The BP17 is just an open can. I filled it with moveable parts (three chambers) and springs. It's an odd sound now, but quiet now.
Cocking - The BP17 is backward (push forward, "then" back, the Camain is more "normal" rotation. No preference.
Magazine - Camain. The Camain has a spring, the BP17 does not, I like no spring. The BP17 is only 8 shots, Camain is 10.
Overall feel - No preference
Accuracy - Shooting offhand, pretty much the same with a red dot (different) sight on both.
Pellet speed - no chronograph. Haven't looked into adjusting either.
Shots per fill - haven't counted. When the tank needs filling, I fill it.
Fill probe - BP17. Its probe has the Foster fitting on the end. Neither have fill socket protection.
Fill pressure - Both, 300bar fill.
Adjustable butt pad - Camain
Safety - BP17 is fiddly, don't like it. Camain is good, but placed way back in an odd position. Don't use them much anyway.
Overall, I think I like the Camain just a little more. Being that the same designer had a hand in both guns designs, I think that the Camain (Camain X) shows the next level up in refinement in overall design.
Mike
Upvote 0
i am liking the trend of air source mostly being covered by the stock (bp17, caiman, reign), even if it does make the gun look a little bit bulky. forward air sources already look bulky to me, might as well give it a little extra protection.
at 6.7 and 5.6 lbs unscoped, also seems on the medium to lighter side for bullpup weights
at 6.7 and 5.6 lbs unscoped, also seems on the medium to lighter side for bullpup weights
Upvote 0
I'd guess it depends on "your" muscle tone.
They really are not heavy. 12lbs should be a smap to lift.
Mike
Upvote 0
LOL! Well 12lbs would be 3-4lbs more than the max that I'd consider for an airgun to hunt with in the mountains. I'm a mountaineer, I scrutinize everything in my pack down to the scale of ounces. That extra 3-4lbs might as well be 300-400lbs traversing 2500' and several miles both ways
Upvote 0
LOL! Well 12lbs would be 3-4lbs more than the max that I'd consider for an airgun to hunt with in the mountains. I'm a mountaineer, I scrutinize everything in my pack down to the scale of ounces. That extra 3-4lbs might as well be 300-400lbs traversing 2500' and several miles both ways
mtn.
Seriously...?
I'm kidding, joking, pulling everyones freaking leg, pulling your chain..! 12lbs...seriously, you bought that ?
All you have to do to call me out would be to go into the Utah Air Guns and read the advertised specs..! Or is that too much work.
MIke
P.s. - I'm 70yrs old, and yeah, as I said, I have no problem with the weight of either gun.
Upvote 0
LOL! Well 12lbs would be 3-4lbs more than the max that I'd consider for an airgun to hunt with in the mountains. I'm a mountaineer, I scrutinize everything in my pack down to the scale of ounces. That extra 3-4lbs might as well be 300-400lbs traversing 2500' and several miles both ways
mtn.
Seriously...?
I'm kidding, joking, pulling everyones freaking leg, pulling your chain..! 12lbs...seriously, you bought that ?
All you have to do to call me out would be to go into the Utah Air Guns and read the advertised specs..! Or is that too much work.
MIke
P.s. - I'm 70yrs old, and yeah, as I said, I have no problem with the weight of either gun.
Well there in lies the problem! I followed the early development progression of the rifle on AirMaks' InstaGram. There were contradictions in the claimed weight and some had commented that the Caiman's were HEAVY. I think 68Whiskey was one of them that even mentioned that recently, so with conflicting specs and observations - it doesn't hurt to ask.
Some air gunners seem to prefer 12lb airguns, but I can't say that I'm one of them
With all that wood, surrounding the Caimans, I would believe anything!Upvote 0
I agree MtnGhost, heavy airguns are no fun hiking. Every now and then I make the mistake of buying one & soon sell it. Anything over 6 pounds w/o scope is too heavy. Fine if you shoot from bench or hunt farms shooting over your truck/bipod etc. But hiking in the hills several miles a day, no.
The Caimans do have something about them tha tis in an odd way appealing. A featherweight synthetic minimal stock would be a plus 4 me. .25 cal in the mid 900s was kind of cool.
The Caimans do have something about them tha tis in an odd way appealing. A featherweight synthetic minimal stock would be a plus 4 me. .25 cal in the mid 900s was kind of cool.
Upvote 0
I thought that by saying 12lbs. that they would shake their heads thinking I must be crazy..!
No, the gun is nowhere close to 12lbs. I don't have a scale, but I'd guess that the advertised weight is very close. The BSA Defiant, at about 9lbs., is the heaviest gun that I own. The Caiman is not even close to being as heavy as the Defiant.
Mike
No, the gun is nowhere close to 12lbs. I don't have a scale, but I'd guess that the advertised weight is very close. The BSA Defiant, at about 9lbs., is the heaviest gun that I own. The Caiman is not even close to being as heavy as the Defiant.
Mike
Upvote 0
From the description on UA webpage on the CaimanX, the .25 weighs in a 6.7 pounds. The .22 is 5.6 pounds. By contrast, my .25 Cricket with my 17 ounce scope weighs 10 pounds. Great gun, but it is heavy walking around my property. And I don't have any elevation to navigate.
https://utahairguns.com/airmaks-caiman-x/
https://utahairguns.com/airmaks-caiman-x/
Upvote 0
Hapo -
As it turns out I ended up with both the Caiman AND the Caiman X.
Other than the shorter barrel, shorter air cylinder and shorter stock in the Caiman, the mechanical stuff is the same. Receiver, trigger mechanism, all that's the same. Trigger to butt stock is the same on both.
With the shorter barrel, the Caiman is set to shoot a little slower (don't recall the numbers right off hand), but in messing with mine, I'd bet that you could get the Caiman to shoot a little closer to the stock fps of the "X". BUT at the cost of shot count. I see no accuracy difference, BUT, I shoot offhand and a little shorter distance than most shoot, so take that for what it may be worth. Comfortable at the shoulder, easy to aim. Both guns are plenty accurate shooting the JSB 18.13, "standard" and the "redesign" seems to work well also. I've put some lighter pellets through the Caiman. The point of impact changes a little, but still repeatability accurate with that pellet.
I actually like shooting the shorter Caiman a little better, don't really know why.
Mike
As it turns out I ended up with both the Caiman AND the Caiman X.
Other than the shorter barrel, shorter air cylinder and shorter stock in the Caiman, the mechanical stuff is the same. Receiver, trigger mechanism, all that's the same. Trigger to butt stock is the same on both.
With the shorter barrel, the Caiman is set to shoot a little slower (don't recall the numbers right off hand), but in messing with mine, I'd bet that you could get the Caiman to shoot a little closer to the stock fps of the "X". BUT at the cost of shot count. I see no accuracy difference, BUT, I shoot offhand and a little shorter distance than most shoot, so take that for what it may be worth. Comfortable at the shoulder, easy to aim. Both guns are plenty accurate shooting the JSB 18.13, "standard" and the "redesign" seems to work well also. I've put some lighter pellets through the Caiman. The point of impact changes a little, but still repeatability accurate with that pellet.
I actually like shooting the shorter Caiman a little better, don't really know why.
Mike
Upvote 0