Other What's your preference?

[MDriskill]

Love 'em all three really, in the right context. Each has pluses and minuses - if one was truly "best," the other two would go extinct.

Break-barrels always light, simple, efficient. If the idea of a sprung auto latch bugs you, check out a classic locked-breech design - HW 55, Anschutz 335, Walther LGV, etc.

Underlevers are cool, my personal faves are the classic old tap-loaders which are slimmer and lighter than the sliding-breech types, and the safest of all springer designs to use (it's impossible to discharge a pellet or slam the piston when the tap is open).

Sidelevers make the most sense in lower-powered target guns I think - as pointed out above they can work much better for multiple shooting positions. And I can literally cock an FWB 300S with my little finger, how can ya not love that?

 

[Zeke G.]

Have them all and love them all, but prefer a break barrel.

 

[Sawney Bean]

So far, I like break barrels the best. They're just so much easier to load, plus they have a weight advantage. I'd like to get a good sidelever at some point too though. I do about 1/3 of my shooting from a bench and I can see where a sidelever would be better for that. The only one I've ever shot extensively though was a Chinese KL3B Fast Deer and those are basically junk guns.

 

[SpiralGroove]

First of all: it should be said, each of the three are excellent guns ........ like anything else, we need a variety of designs .

Each does something better than the others, in my hierarchy of needs, I choose less weight/ease of use ... so it's a Break-barrel.

Never had a Side-lever and don't want one, even though they're supremely accurate. Had the best Under-lever's ....... and sold them because they weren't used enough to justify the $$$ sitting.

 

[Bear-of-Grayling]

“Side levers” have the advantage over “under levers” on the bench. You can cock and load a side lever while keeping your rifle in its original bench oriented position. “Barrel cockers” have the advantage over “under levers” also. They are lighter and easier to load. Some find the weight of an under lever to be a bonus. Helps steady the muzzle end. The added weight works against me. Under levers are my least favorite. FWIW.

 

[Sawney Bean]

I spent about an hour last Saturday shooting a TX200 and an HW95 back to back, both in .177. The TX is tuned to around 12 fpe and the HW to around 15 fpe. Both were shooting 8.64 H&N FTTS. I started out by shooting paper at 50 yards to zero them and then moved on to shooting padlocks that I have hanging from strings from 25-60 yards.

The TX did slightly better across the board. It shot tighter groups on paper and took fewer shots to hit the padlocks. I think the weight was what made the difference though. It didn’t seem like the gun itself was more accurate, but rather that I could hold it on target more easily.

I never once felt like the extra velocity of the HW gave me any trajectory advantage over the TX, but I was shooting at known distances with plotted holdovers.

 

[DeanB]

I like them all I voted sidelever and underlever but have owned way more break barrels.