hw97k 177 vs diana 48 22.
- Thread starter walter3rd
- Start date
Have had both and they each have their place. In .177 the HW really shines with serious FT accuracy. The 48 in .22 is a seriously, powerful hunting rifle. That said, I saw Mark Plough win the AAFTA Nationals in around 1990 with a bog standard RWS 48. They do shoot!
IMHO, Diana does not get the respect it deserves for producing durable, powerful and affordable springers. About a year ago I bought the Diana, .22 Mauser look-alike on a lark and was stunned by the smooth action, ergonomics and remarkable accuracy. The T-06 trigger was another surprise. It is not a Record, but ,certainly, fulfills a hunter's dreams. If current production 48s are of this quality you will be a very happy man. My old 48 loved Trophys and original, brown box Premiers ( no longer available). Both of my current RWS rifles (also have a 45 purchased in the early 80s) like Trophys and 13.9 gr AAs. You might want to give them a try. Always include them when testing a new .22 - and they often come out at or near the top for accuracy.
ENJOY!!.
IMHO, Diana does not get the respect it deserves for producing durable, powerful and affordable springers. About a year ago I bought the Diana, .22 Mauser look-alike on a lark and was stunned by the smooth action, ergonomics and remarkable accuracy. The T-06 trigger was another surprise. It is not a Record, but ,certainly, fulfills a hunter's dreams. If current production 48s are of this quality you will be a very happy man. My old 48 loved Trophys and original, brown box Premiers ( no longer available). Both of my current RWS rifles (also have a 45 purchased in the early 80s) like Trophys and 13.9 gr AAs. You might want to give them a try. Always include them when testing a new .22 - and they often come out at or near the top for accuracy.
ENJOY!!.
Upvote 0
I have 2 model 52 RWS & have been very impressed with both accuracy & smooth firing of the rifles. Both were purchased used so the break in was done. They really like the JSB pellets but also shot the Crossman Premiere well. These are .22 cal guns & I just purchased a Beeman R9 .22 cal. All are quality guns.
Upvote 0
Why is the HW97K not able to serve as a dedicated squirrel gun? I'm killing them (as pests) every week. I would think that the RWS 48 .22 is going to deliver more punch; but my .177 HW97K delivers laser accuracy--so long as I do my part.
Best wishes,
Arch_E
Best wishes,
Arch_E
Upvote 0
This. My .177 is plenty powerful to get the job done. My Diana 48 is wonderful in .22, but the hw97k does the job you speak of!!
Upvote 0
Im having a huge problem picking one as well. I was looking at the rws 56 in 22 or the hw97 but both are heavy guns. Recently upon a members advice I started looking at the rws 34 for lightwieght rifle. Its so hard to choose!
Upvote 0
Upvote 0
the 48 should be plenty powerful, and accurate enough, to fit your wants/needs.
i have a 52 and 54 both of which are highly accurate and powerful.
a critical factor here, though, is finding the correct pellet for your needs. i find heavier pellets perform better in my particular application (H&N Barracuda Match)
i find lighter pellets more accurate at close ranges and heavier domed/round nose pellets for longer ranges.
i have a 52 and 54 both of which are highly accurate and powerful.
a critical factor here, though, is finding the correct pellet for your needs. i find heavier pellets perform better in my particular application (H&N Barracuda Match)
i find lighter pellets more accurate at close ranges and heavier domed/round nose pellets for longer ranges.
Upvote 0
I've found the Diana 48/52 (and even the 54) a bit hold sensitive, regardless of how they're tuned. The HW97s can be very hold insensitive, so perhaps you just need to experiment with how you're holding it? Diana's can have a great reputation for accuracy - but not quite on the same level as the 97 or TX200 to be honest. Still amazing accuracy, but you can get spoiled with a 97 
. This being said, I'm not sure if a 97 would be as accurate as a 48 when setup to shoot close to 20fpe.
B.B. Pelletier reviewed the 48/52 and stated "These guns respond well to a tuneup. I like to lower their power by 10 percent and eliminate all the vibration, and then they are a real delight to shoot." I fully agree with this statement.
. This being said, I'm not sure if a 97 would be as accurate as a 48 when setup to shoot close to 20fpe. B.B. Pelletier reviewed the 48/52 and stated "These guns respond well to a tuneup. I like to lower their power by 10 percent and eliminate all the vibration, and then they are a real delight to shoot." I fully agree with this statement.
Upvote 0
I agree that the 97 k can take squirrels, I have taken many, but I wanted a 22 for the extra power in case my shot is a bit off and still humane. I’m only about 1/3 the way through my first tin of jsb 18gr. So I know it’s not fully broken in but does not seem to be as accurate as I thought. Maybe I’m rushing to judgement. i was wondering if the 48 would be able to satisfy my accuracy requirement as well as the extra thump of energy. what type scope are folks using to stand up to the recoil? i purchased the combo kit but switched out the mantis scope for a hawke.. glass seemed not so great on the mantis. came with the droop mount that puts the scope a bit high but added a cheek riser and seems a great fit now.
My favorites are my vortex diamondback 2-7x 35 And 3-9 x 40. Seem to hold up very well, hold zero fantastic, have clear optics, and a no hassle VIP warrantee on that rare case.....
Upvote 0
I have had great accuracy with jsb in my 97 and heard good things about the 18gr jsb in the 48 so thought I would give them a try. I’ll put 500 through her and then re-evaluate thanks
Upvote 0
Ironically as soon as I feel I have the 48 sighted in the squirrels disappear. Now I’m waiting for the first victim
Upvote 0
Thinning out the invasive starlings while I wait on mr squirrel. They are eating all my suet cakes I put out for the woodpeckers
Upvote 0
I have both. The 52 is turned to right at 14.5 ft/lb and is tremendously accurate albeit a little tough on scopes.
The 97 is a sub 12ft/lb and is just a joy to shoot but is much more wind sensitive and with a much narrower zero range.
I primarily shoot the 97 now and considered selling the 52 but just couldn't bring myself to do it, it really is a great shooting rifle.
The 97 is a sub 12ft/lb and is just a joy to shoot but is much more wind sensitive and with a much narrower zero range.
I primarily shoot the 97 now and considered selling the 52 but just couldn't bring myself to do it, it really is a great shooting rifle.
Upvote 0
Nice kill!
The HW95 is 1.3 lbs lighter than the HW97, plus it has a lighter scope--making the 95 nearly 2lbs lighter. This makes all the difference to me when I'm shooting off-hand. While both the 95 and 97 are superb shooting guns, I'm not physically capable of controlling my tremble with an 11 lb gun. With the HW95, I can aim and hit what I'm sighting, when off-hand.
IMO, just enjoy whatever you've got.
Arch_E
The HW95 is 1.3 lbs lighter than the HW97, plus it has a lighter scope--making the 95 nearly 2lbs lighter. This makes all the difference to me when I'm shooting off-hand. While both the 95 and 97 are superb shooting guns, I'm not physically capable of controlling my tremble with an 11 lb gun. With the HW95, I can aim and hit what I'm sighting, when off-hand.
IMO, just enjoy whatever you've got.
Arch_E
Upvote 0