HW/Weihrauch Matching caliber to rifle, Weihrauch style...

[Kragman1]

Hi all

Since my first exposure to the HW30, HW50 and HW95 trio, I've had an almost subliminal assumption that the most effective pairings of rifle & caliber would be: HW30/.177, HW55/.20 and HW95/.22 (not that I've adhered to that myself - )

But without at least having the use of all 9 combinations, all I really have is an educated guess, right?

So let's see who agrees with my premise, or who can change my mind....

 

[Sqwirl57]

I feel like an entire book could be written on this topic alone just because there are so many factors involved. I think any HW short of an 80 or 90 is pretty much optimized for a .177 pellet. That being said, a tuned 95 or 97 shot cycle feels best (at max power) in .22 caliber. Even then its still hard to hate on the 8.xx pellets at 900fps. Love those little lasers.

That being said again, inside 35yds or so I really do like the .22 cals in lower powered guns too. The shot cycles are pretty dead and I really just like the sound they make compared to a .177 and the loopy trajectories are pretty easy to figure out.

.20 cal is a weird one. I have a few and I do like them but the only one I really love is my Crow Mag and that doesn't apply to the topic at hand.

 

[Wildcatter]

I think intended purpose plays more on my decision of what caliber is best, than velocity. For me I like shoot targets, but no airgun I own is for just target shooting.

They have to be hunters. If I am going to use them for anything bigger than squirrels or rabbits, I want mine in 22. Small nusance birds or mama's smaller than a squirrel, I like the 177.

I especially like the 177 if I were ever to buy one for target use at unknown distances. But most of the time I take the terminal power of the 22 for whatever I'm wanting it for. I just think it is the most versatile caliber for use in every situation.

 

[SteveP-52]

Honestly never gave it much thought...lol. Don't own a 50 but I've got a pair of Beeman R7's in .177 and .20, an R9 in .20 and an HW95 in .22. They all shoot very well.
Right, wrong, somewhere in the middle?? They fit my wants and that's all that matters at least to me

 

[EquivalentDelta]

I only have 2 rifles, a D48 in .177 and a HW77 in .22. I really regret getting the D48 in .177.

The power plant is so stout that the .177 just makes it into a very unpleasant shooting experience.

The HW on the other hand feels like a tuned gun right out of the box and I am pretty sure it’s just due to how much more breathing room .22 gives the piston.

From the mechanical perspective I think:

0-12fpe is .177 only
12-16fpe is .177, .20, or .22 with the nod to .20 and .22.
+16fpe is .22 or larger.

Pellet choice can play some role in this, but then you risk being stuck between a nice shot cycle and accuracy or terminal performance

 

[coastal drifter]

interesting topic, I guess velocity would play a roll in caliber.

 

[Mycapt65]

With my shooting environment, range estimation skills and too many guns to know all their hold overs, I need 700fps. At the very least 650fps. That's with standard weight lead pellets. That means I'm adjusting the caliber to the gun.

Some guns will do multiple calibers well. The Hw95 family does well in 177, 20 and 22. I have one in 177 and 22 and two in 20. FWIW so far my 177 is my most accurate and the easiest to cream targets of opportunity that show up at random distances. At nearly 900fps there's a lot less chance of hold over/hold under errors.

I've either owned or tuned almost all the current Weihrauchs in 177 and 22 and a few in 20. The larger the caliber the more power they make and the smoother the shoot cycle. Large volume springs guns like an Hw80 may be very fast and flat in 177 but they shoot very harshly compared to the larger calibers. My R1 was bought as a 177. I've run 20 and 22 caliber barrels on it and I prefer the 22 because it makes more power and the cycle is smoother.

I think its more important to match the caliber and gun to your shooting conditions and needs. I shoot small pest and hunt squirrels at random distances so I prefer a flat gun. A flat gun isn't important to someone that only shoots targets at one or two fixed distances. For them a 22 cal Hw30 is just a splendid gun. Where as all three of mine are 177 and wouldn't have it any other way.

Also if you're going to use only one gun, learning your holdovers isn’t hard so you can get by with a loopier gun. That's as long as your range estimation skills are sharp. If you're like me and have multiple guns youll find its very hard to be proficient with all of them. There's alot of truth to the old saying, "Beware the man with one gun, for he knows how to use it."

 

[Bear-of-Grayling]

I need 700fps. At the very least 650fps. That's with standard weight lead pellets. That means I'm adjusting the caliber to the gun.

Absolutely totally agree. 680-740 fps is the magic number for optimal accuracy and firing behavior. Pick the next gun and then the caliber that obtains these numbers.

 

[beerthief]

I prefer .177 and a sub 12 FPE in any gun .

 

[Deerstalker]

I prefer the .22 Calibur in my HW95 as it seems that I can load this size easier than a .177 but that is just me.

 

[Kragman1]

So, I own an HW95 in all 3 calibers, and I feel that it's awfully good with all 3. I have done little so far with my .22 HW95 (just got it) but it seems like the 95 shoots all 3 equally well, as the velocity advantage of the .177 is equalled by the shot cycle & power advantage of the .22. That said, the .20 may be the "Goldilocks" caliber for that rifle as mine shoots awfully smooth and carries those 11 & 13 grain pellets nearly as well as the .22 carries 14's and 16's.....
Only time will tell.

For the HW30, mine is making good power, which means 7 to 8 fpe with lead. I like it just the way it is (though I may go with a Vortek piston seal just to see what happens). I could maybe see one in .20, but I'd say that .22 sounds like too much and that you would lose something unless you stuck with very light pellets.....

I've barely handled a 50, but I could see it performing well with all three calibers, and .20 would likely be the best overall....

 

[JDR]

HW 30 and HW 35 in 177. Shoots smooth and accurate. Not a great shooter so a .20 or .22 cal in those guns looping trajectory would give me trouble shooting at different ranges. Close to buying a HW98 in .177 cal but this thread has me thinking on .20 or .22. Next gun would be a HW 80 or 90 but convinced now a .20 or .22 would be the best for me. Probably a .22 cal for ammo choice.

 

[Mycapt65]

HW 30 and HW 35 in 177. Shoots smooth and accurate. Not a great shooter so a .20 or .22 cal in those guns looping trajectory would give me trouble shooting at different ranges. Close to buying a HW98 in .177 cal but this thread has me thinking on .20 or .22. Next gun would be a HW 80 or 90 but convinced now a .20 or .22 would be the best for me. Probably a .22 cal for ammo choice.

If you're gonna get a 98 for accuracy (which is its only purpose as far as I'm concerned) go with the 177. I have one in 20 and it's a nice gun but I really only have a choice of two maybe three pellets for it. My plain Jane Hw95 in 177 out shoots it all the way to 50 yards. And don't get me started on the Weihrauch 22 cal barrel lottery. Weihrauch 177 barrels are pretty much a lock. If you only target shoot I highly recommend 177 over all the calibers. EXCEPT the R1/HW80. Those guns need the lower start pressure of 20 or 22 to keep the shot cycle good at full power. If you don't want them full power your light years better off with a 95.

 

[wgd]

I feel like an entire book could be written on this topic alone just because there are so many factors involved. I think any HW short of an 80 or 90 is pretty much optimized for a .177 pellet. That being said, a tuned 95 or 97 shot cycle feels best (at max power) in .22 caliber. Even then its still hard to hate on the 8.xx pellets at 900fps. Love those little lasers.

That being said again, inside 35yds or so I really do like the .22 cals in lower powered guns too. The shot cycles are pretty dead and I really just like the sound they make compared to a .177 and the loopy trajectories are pretty easy to figure out.

.20 cal is a weird one. I have a few and I do like them but the only one I really love is my Crow Mag and that doesn't apply to the topic at hand.

Sorry, but what’s a crow mag?

 

[Sqwirl57]

Sorry, but what’s a crow mag?

Beeman Crow Magnum which is a Theoben Eliminator. Its a fairly heavy hitting magnum gas ram break barrel

 

[Sawney Bean]

The vast majority of my airguns are only used for plinking and informal target shooting, so what really matters most to me is the fun factor of them. I'm sure I'd love an HW30 in .25. Imagine watching those big, slow pellets arc towards the target at 300 fps.

 

[Toxylon]

From a velocity / trajectory point of view, the .177 cal is what it's about for the small-powerplant guns. But for every other aspect, and for every aspect in the big-powerplant guns, the .177 cal loses out, so it's a last-choice caliber for me.

Every .177 cal I have is so loud at the muzzle ("POP!") it immediately alerts outsiders / wildlife, and hurts my ears after a dozen shots or so - and hearing damage is both cumulative and permanent. Same-power level .22 cals can be almost silent in comparison ("thud").

.177 cal pellets are definitely harder to load / easier to fumble than the bigger cals. This can be a biggie in a time-restrained / low-light / high-stress situation, and a nuisance anywhere.

A .22 cal pellet makes a hole 50% bigger than a .177 cal. With body shots, the bigger cal is simply deadlier, also due to delivering all its energy into the target instead of zipping through.

The big-powerplant guns I have have nasty shot cycle characteristics in .177 cal; kicking, shaking, mech noise etc.. I have done a number of caliber changes in my springers, and every one of 'em has seen a huge improvement in the shot cycle from going bigger bore.

Of course, with the big boys it is a chore to keep velocities low enough for accuracy, unless you go at least .20 cal. And those extra-heavy .177 cal pellets are at least as expensive, and harder to get, than the normal-weight .22 cal pellets, that shoot fine in the HW80, 350 Mag, D48 etc. etc.

 

[c_m_shooter]

.20 in the 95 if at full power. .177 in the others.

 

[Mycapt65]

From a velocity / trajectory point of view, the .177 cal is what it's about for the small-powerplant guns. But for every other aspect, and for every aspect in the big-powerplant guns, the .177 cal loses out, so it's a last-choice caliber for me.

Every .177 cal I have is so loud at the muzzle ("POP!") it immediately alerts outsiders / wildlife, and hurts my ears after a dozen shots or so - and hearing damage is both cumulative and permanent. Same-power level .22 cals can be almost silent in comparison ("thud").

.177 cal pellets are definitely harder to load / easier to fumble than the bigger cals. This can be a biggie in a time-restrained / low-light / high-stress situation, and a nuisance anywhere.

A .22 cal pellet makes a hole 50% bigger than a .177 cal. With body shots, the bigger cal is simply deadlier, also due to delivering all its energy into the target instead of zipping through.

The big-powerplant guns I have have nasty shot cycle characteristics in .177 cal; kicking, shaking, mech noise etc.. I have done a number of caliber changes in my springers, and every one of 'em has seen a huge improvement in the shot cycle from going bigger bore.

Of course, with the big boys it is a chore to keep velocities low enough for accuracy, unless you go at least .20 cal. And those extra-heavy .177 cal pellets are at least as expensive, and harder to get, than the normal-weight .22 cal pellets, that shoot fine in the HW80, 350 Mag, D48 etc. etc.

Big holes are certinaly better for hunting when put in the same spot. The trick is getting them in the right spot. Slower calibers are harder to land accurately. Is a smaller caliber in the right spot better than a bigger caliber that's not? It's an argument that will go on forever. Look up 243 vs 30-06 for whitetail. You'll be lost for days.

 

[Toxylon]

Big holes are certinaly better for hunting when put in the same spot. The trick is getting them in the right spot. Slower calibers are harder to land accurately. Is a smaller caliber in the right spot better than a bigger caliber that's not? It's an argument that will go on forever. Look up 243 vs 30-06 for whitetail. You'll be lost for days.

The thing is, when matching caliber to gun, springer-wise, there are no slow calibers. My .22 cal springers shoot high-BC, mid-weight lead pellets at 800 to 900 fps at the muzzle. That's as fast as any diabolo pellet should travel, when accuracy is the goal (and when is it not?).

I'm well aware of the caliber debates in the firearm world. They have very little to do with springer external ballistics, as the small springer pellet simply makes a small hole, and the big pellet makes a substantially larger hole, which isn't the case with modern firearms and live targets at all.

Sure, if you take a tiny HW30 or something, described as a junior gun in the literature, and hitch a larger-bore barrel in it, you'll end up with rainbow-reminiscent trajectories, but that is just mis-matching the caliber to gun.