Brocock Concept Lite XR (.177)

My previous airgun reviews have leaned quite heavily towards extensive paper shooting (mostly in my back yard), primarily chronograph and accuracy testing with various pellets at various speeds. In contrast, in the last two weeks, the Concept has seen action in at least three different summer rainstorms, the Gila National Forest in western NM, the Coconino National Forest near Flagstaff, AZ, and on five different “permissions” for pesting duty. (I hate the “permissions” term but it is part of the airgun vernacular and most know what it means so I guess I’ll go with it). All of this recent use has actually not been much of my typical meticulous shooting and measuring of groups from various pellets in various wind speeds from the relative cushy convenience of my out-the-back-door-of-the-garage, home range, but more representative of what the average airgunner is likely to do with their gun: simply shoot and enjoy it, out in the elements. So, the opinions and thoughts that will be shared in the next couple write-ups can be considered the real-world, typical use, banged-around-from-one-place-to-the-next, average use, rode hard put away wet (literally was put away wet at one point in all this), instead of the the babied-in-some-dude’s-backyard review.

But, before we get to the real-world use, THE TRIGGER badly needed addressed.

For those that have been following along, I was pretty disappointed with the trigger as I received the gun. It needed help. The OEM pull weight was 2lbs, 5.5oz and lots of adjectives come to mind when describing the “break” but none of them are synonyms for crisp or clean. In short, I could tell the gun was solidly built, had a good overall design, and was capable of pretty dang good accuracy, but that trigger…..ugh. For my airgun use and expectations of accuracy the trigger really is the only weak link on the Concept. So, it needed remedied but with my work schedule I couldn’t find the time to dig into it. In the match report for the Aspen Mtn Field Target match, I commented that I spent some time late one night working on a trigger, up in the mountains, literally out in the sticks. (Found here if interested: https://www.airgunnation.com/topic/southwest-airgunners-aspen-mtn-july-match-report/) That was the Concept trigger. That 20fpe silhouette game ended about an hour before dark and I thought I would have enough time to take care of the trigger. ArzRover graciously offered the use of his ceramic polishing stones. I spread out the carpet that I put my tent on, to catch any errant trigger pieces, and dug in. I was very careful not to change the geometry/shape or angle of any of the sears/trigger components. The goal was just to polish them. Just like ArzRover had told me ahead of time, as the polishing happened, the bluing of the parts came off, and the machining marks were evident. I think that EVENTUALLY those parts would wear themselves smooth, but life is too short and I wanted a good trigger much sooner than the tens of thousands of shots that I think it could take to let the parts slowly polish themselves. The sun had set by the time I got the contact points polished, but there was still a little bit of daylight left. Reassembly did not go so well. Eventually the project was relocated to the inside of a friend’s camper. The better lighting and a table helped immensely. We got it back together but it wouldn’t cock. So we took it apart again and swapped the location of two springs. Then it would cock, but only with the action out of the gun’s frame. Cocked just fine until put into the frame. Weird. After repeating these steps various times we got to thinking that the safety in the bottom of the frame must have something to do with it. Playing with that safety, we eventually got the gun back in the frame and cocking correctly. Looking back on it, I think that there is a specific trigger/lever cocking sequence necessary to make it work, but I haven’t the foggiest clue on what that is.

Some thoughts on that whole process and the outcome…….

Three pins through the aluminum frame hold all the trigger pieces in place, as represented in the parts diagram. The schematic is not 100% accurate, but close enough to figure out what needs to happen. Some of those pins fit pretty tightly and need punches to be driven out. The pins are slightly tapered and go one way, but not the other, just like the pins that hold the trigger assembly in the HW97/77 guns. I would have liked to have burnished some moly into the contact points, but was just happy to get the gun back together and functioning properly so that I could shoot it in the field target match the next morning.

Quick aside here: I had previously zeroed the MTC scope and worked out the dope chart for 10-55 yards. After all the tapping of the trigger pins into and out of the frame (while the action was upside down resting on the scope) I figured I would have to start from scratch and re-zero the scope. I was extremely surprised (the next morning) to find that the scope was still perfectly zeroed and all of my impact points were correct at the various yardages. This says a lot for the robustness of the gun’s design. I LOVE a gun that can maintain POI through regular use, and I’m even more enthralled with one that can maintain that POI through rough treatment. (Good things to be said about a scope’s ability to do the same, which I’ll touch on later in some scope-specific thoughts).

From that point I went on to the aforementioned shooting the gun in various matches and locations (which I’ll also get into the details of more in other posts). But, to keep on track with the trigger theme here……….what kind of pull weight does it have now? I had not put the trigger pull gauge on it until a few nights ago, in preparation for this write-up. So, OEM pull weight was 2lbs, 5.5oz. That was reduced to 1lb, 6oz with just adjustment of trigger screw "D" (see earlier posted pics of diagram). But, check the new reading out, after polishing and working with trigger screw "D" !!!



0lbs, 7.2ounces! NICE.

That is a ten shot average! WOW O WOW. Trigger is also breaking around that 7oz weight much more consistently than it did at the 2lb, 5oz pull before I worked on it. When I took the 10 shot average with the OEM trigger, there was some outliers, higher and lower pull weights. The ten shot average after the trigger polishing has a much smaller ES, if you will. There is no longer that "catchy" gritty-type feel as the trigger breaks. At some point during the second FT match I remember thinking to myself that the trigger hasn’t frustrated me once today, I was on lane 7 or so and was at a 100% hit rate for that match at that point (so about 28/28). Somebody told me once that objectionable triggers get noticed much more easily than good ones. Well, I wasn’t noticing it anymore because it was (and continues to be) DRASTICALLY better.

Final opinion of the trigger

It is somewhat frustrating that a gun needs trigger work, but the flip side of that coin is that the trigger in the Concept is capable of being polished into a very nice feeling one. It would be much more disappointing if the trigger design was not even capable of being turned into a good one. 

“Hunter” or “Sporter” trigger are terms that the YouTube reviewers seem to use often when trying to politely say they’re not impressed with a trigger. Hopefully I was more transparent on my thoughts of this trigger. It most certainly WAS a “hunter” trigger, but the simple polish job propelled it straight out of that category.

I no longer think of the trigger as the weak point in the gun. Yes, this particular gun’s trigger absolutely REQUIRED the polishing to be turned into a nice one, but it wasn’t too hard to do, and 100% worth the effort. The consistent and impressive accuracy the gun is inherently capable of is MUCH easier to achieve now that the trigger is smooth, crisp, predictable, and light. I’m fairly confident it would be even better with a little moly on those contact points, but I’m quite happy with its current state and don’t see a need to get into the trigger again.

(Completely safe how it is right now too. I've bumped the gun fairly hard and tried to get it to "accidentally" fire and can't induce it. It's safe enough at it's current state that I'm comfortable having it in the hands of my six year old, with general, nearby supervision of course). 

Hunting/Pesting with the Concept

(This report is going to talk about killing pests-and will include a pic of a dead critter-specifically with the Concept). If you’re not interested in that, I recommend you skip this one).

Prairie Dogs

I live in “high desert” and not much native flora grows here, mostly due to a lack of rain. Our average annual rainfall is 11 inches, but that is a bit misleading because nearly all of that falls in the summer monsoon season, with specific locations getting 75% or more of their annual rainfall in 2 or 3 storms within the same 5 or 6 week period. Juniper bushes, sage brush, and a small variety of grasses and weeds will grow, albeit sparsely. In contrast, irrigated locations grow various crops quite well, with some of the farmers getting 4 or sometimes 5 cuttings off the alfalfa fields per growing season. Now, the prairie dogs out in the non-irrigated areas are just like the ground cover, thin and sparse. However, the pdogs that have set up residence near the irrigated fields are fatties, reproducing to the extent that the farmers can’t control them. They try traps and poison and even shoot at them with firearms where possible, but to no avail. They mostly like to dig and live along the ditch banks, berms, and fence lines, creating a mess that allows precious water to be lost, either to fallow land, or their neighbor’s property. They’ll also sometimes try to make mounds out in the fields and along the dirt roads that allow the farming equipment access. Those mounds and holes are axle and suspension breakers, making driving and working the fields a dangerous game. The ground nearly crawls with them in some fields. In short, they’re a hated aspect of farming in this little high desert river valley.

When I come along asking permission, the farmers are more than willing to grant it. It’s really fun when I have an airgun with me and can quietly and discretely pop a prairie dog in the near vicinity while having this permission-requesting conversation with the farmer. In fact, I’ve yet to be told “no thanks.” The farmers are usually quite interested after they see what modern airguns are capable of, asking prices and pertinent details on how they work. By rough count, I’ve got 8 or 9 farmers that have given me verbal permission to wage war on their pdogs. Many of these areas are near roads and houses, making low power pellets a necessity. I’ve found that a hair under 20fpe (also FT legal) will kill pdogs quite effectively, with well-placed shots from any of the small bore airgun calibers (.177, .20, .22). (Would love to get after them with high power slugs to stretch out the distance, but it just wouldn’t even be kinda safe in most of my pesting areas).

So, in the warmer months (when the dogs aren’t hibernating) I’ll take an hour or two, when my schedule allows, and swing through some of the “permissions,” knocking back the dog numbers and having a ball doing it. Just like with my Field Target activities, I really enjoy trying out different airguns on the dogs, identifying various attributes that make it well-suited (or not) for this particular use. It’s fun to keep a mental tally of total kills, misses, kills/fill, distances, etc. It is great practice for shooting in the wind, as well as shooting from less than ideal positions and angles. It seems to really help me on the offhand shots in field target, basically creating a very enjoyable sort of practice for those offhand shots in competition.

About a week ago I had time to swing through a handful of the properties and I settled on using the Concept, thinking it’d be a good chance to see how it would do in this scenario, as well as a chance to report on how it does in the wind, in the general knocked-around situation of hunting, and from sometimes necessary off-hand shooting. The Concept is still sporting the MTC scope, and the ODB moderator. I used JSB 10.34gr pellets, with the power setting on HIGH. So that puts me right under 20fpe and is the same setting/pellet used for the recent Field Target activities. I have the trajectory extensively mapped out from 10-55 yards from the FT action the gun has been part of, so was able to use those numbers for the < 55 yard shots. I also have a profile for the gun in Strelok on my phone and used that for the > 55 yard shots. I dialed the turret for all the shots so can’t report on how the SCB2 reticle does when used for holdovers.

So, how’d it go? I went through some of the areas that I hit pretty hard, and sometimes they’re just not as active, so I only saw 28 dogs in areas where I can shoot. 8 of those did not offer me chances to shoot, diving into their holes and not poking heads back up. I killed the other 20. Two of them needed a follow up shot to dispatch, but the other 18 were one shot, one kill. The closest was around 20 yards and the furthest was 88 yards. I say “around” on the 20 yards because I just ranged him with the scope wheel, dialed for the focused distance, and popped him. The 88 yarder needed a laser rangefinder because I only made marks on the scope wheel out to 55 yards. I’d guess that the average distance for all the shots was around 50-60 yards. The wind was blowing a little bit that morning, but it couldn’t have been more than about 10mph. The shots past 30 yards needed windage.

As for the gun’s performance……it was excellent. The relatively short overall length worked great for the sometimes tight quarters I was maneuvering in and shooting from. Remember, gun, WITH moderator and my preferred setting for the adjustable lop measures 39.25 inches long. The shot count is WAY more than enough for a little hunting session like this. I didn’t even use half of the available shots from one fill. I hadn’t expected to, so didn’t even take an air tank with me. I like my FT rigs heavy, but for this kind of shooting, a mid-weight gun is more desirable. And that’s where the Concept falls (around 8.5lbs, scoped). The rigs (gun+scope) ability to dependably maintain zero allowed for me to simply use all the trajectory data gathered for FT use. Using a gun that is set up for FT is really convenient for hunting, but everything has to be consistent and trustable for it to work. In other words, the scope needs to be able to range by focus in a very repeatable manner, as well as able to track reliably. The gun also needs to be accurate and consistent in fps for all of this to work. Finally, the moderator needs to be quiet for being discrete and to allow quick follow up shots when the wind is misread. All of that comes together in this package. The overall rig is a very enjoyable and quite effective pest killing machine. I didn’t have many misses and it was very satisfying to be able to have such a high kill rate on so few shots.

Also, the scope clarity is up there high enough that I was able to track the flight of some of the pellets. It’s a pretty cool experience to watch a lightweight, low fpe pellet arc up and drop back down to connect with the brain of a pellet dog, in a perfectly executed one-shot, fully humane kill out to 88 yards. We’re talking about an intended impact point of about 1 inch from a 10.34grain pellet moving about 915-920fps. It’s one thing to have a piece of equipment that can do that from a bench, but for a gun to be capable of that in a fluid-situation, hunting scenario……..well, there are lots of guns and scopes out there that are simply not capable of that kind of accuracy nor the ability to see it occur. Really fun.

I didn’t find anything that annoyed or bugged me about the scope, gun, or moderator in the above pdog hunting session. Sort of like the trigger mentioned in the last report, when equipment is doing what it’s supposed to, it just doesn’t get noticed as being bothersome (squeaky-wheel phenomenon). In fact, I’ve got a hardcore powder-burner hunting cousin that was asking for my recommendations of an airgun a few days ago. I told him about this little Brocock Concept because I am so impressed with its overall performance.

Sorry, no pics from the pdog action. I don’t get too close to them because they often carry the plague in my area. In fact, the county announced yesterday that we had a confirmed case of Yersinia pestis in a human here this week.

Rabbit (and hopefully 2 ground squirrels…..eventually)

My mother in law asked me to come remove some pests at her house. She has a couple fruit trees that are loaded, and in the last stages of being ready for picking. She’s had two ground squirrels living in her firewood pile for a while, and generally she goes with a literal live and let live mentality for critters. BUT, when she saw a squirrel run by with a mostly ripe peach in its mouth the other day, it meant WAR. That’s when I got invited to bring over an airgun. I’ve been over there a couple times but have yet to find a ground squirrel brave enough to show itself while I’m present. So, I’m hoping to eventually remove them for her, and with the Concept. In the meantime though, she also asked me pop some of the cottontails that like to eat her plants.

This little guy was taken at a range by focus, 40 yards. One shot, through the head. Offhand. If you zoom in you can see the little blood trail about ½ behind his eye. That pellet had a huge SMACK on impact in the quietness of the twilight when I got him.





Couple things here…..

First, 20fpe is more than plenty to dispatch lots of small game. I know American society (and therefore the American airgun industry) is all about power, whether cars, guns, electronics, etc. But the really sweet spot for airguns is in the power range of the Concept. It is simply a fairly safe power level for many of the suburban areas that lots of us live in.

If you didn’t catch that detail, this rabbit was taken offhand. He jumped and ran, stopping right in front of a sagebrush just off the lawn area of my in-laws property. I was nowhere near anything that I could lean against or rest on. And the rabbit was on high-alert mode since I had just jumped him. He was in the crouched-down position they get when they’re about to take off again. So, I quickly ranged him, dialed, and held on his head, planning on complete miss or kill shot. I was kinda surprised actually when the pellet connected, thinking to myself, “well everybody gets lucky once in a while.” I had good results with some offhand shots at a match, and I’ll go into it a bit more depth in the write-up for how the gun performs in field target, but, this little Concept shoots VERY nicely from an offhand position. I didn’t expect that but it’s proven to do so more than once now.

Hunting/Pesting concluding thoughts

A couple of years ago, I remember reading one of Jim Chapman’s (American Airgun Hunter) pieces about the Brocock company and their guns. This would have been before Daystate acquired Brocock. I tried to find it but couldn’t so I’m paraphrasing here. He said something along the lines of really liking Brocock PCPs because the company puts out compact and smartly thought out guns that really lend themselves well to hunting situations. Daystate has seemed to keep that aspect of Brocock’s heritage alive, at least in some of their current offerings, the Concept being one of them. From someone who has arguably done more hunting with airguns than just about anyone else, that, is high praise. And from my much more limited experience, I’ve got to agree with him.

Field Target Results

As previously mentioned, I’ve now shot two different FT matches with the Concept. My son also competed in his first match, and used this gun to do so.



Gila National Forest

The first match occurred at a beautiful location in Western NM, at an elevation of 8600feet. I’ve previously, in this review, shared a link to the match report, but in case you haven’t read that report, the summarized version is that the match was extremely fun, and very challenging.

It was a 13 lane course, so a 52 shot match with a Troyer factor of 33.9 (using only the distance and kill zone size). If wind, shadowy lanes, and the increased difficulty factors for the longer ranges had been calculated, I think the overall difficulty rating would be north of a 40 Troyer. For those unfamiliar with FT, that’s pretty hard. Roughly the equivalent of making 52 consecutive shots inside of a one inch kill zone at 40 yards, with different lighting conditions, angles, wind speeds, etc for each of the shots. Not easy. There were no forced kneeling or off-hand shots during this match.

As a representation of how the gun and scope compared with other equipment used in the same course, here is a summary of the results.





I did win the Open class, with a 42/52 (about 81%), but we only had two people competing in that class. Of the 13 total competitors, the little Concept/MTC was outshot by 5 other rigs. So, it finished right in the middle of the pack. And, that is really more of a representation of me having a bad day. I just wasn’t very focused for that match. Overall I just wasn’t very steady. I knew my misses at the NM match were misses before the pellets got to the target, as I’d felt myself pull those shots. I did mis-range one of the targets. I ranged it at 13 yards and it was actually 14 yards, so I lost two points there. On that particular target I was having a hard time finding any fine detail on which to focus. In addition, it was backlit. I’ve had trouble ranging targets like that with even my best field target scope.

It was a good initial experience with the Concept in a competitive Field Target Scenario.

Coconino National Forest

The second match occurred this past weekend, about 20 miles south of Flagstaff, AZ. My son and I arrived at the match site Friday morning. After helping the match director and club secretary get the course set, Colben and I got our tent up and started to practice a bit with the Concept. He was doing the shooting and doing pretty good at various FT relevant distances. About 30 minutes into the practice session it started raining. We had set up a tarp to hide under and kept shooting for a bit in the rain but it was obvious that it wasn’t going to let up anytime soon. We left the gun under the tarp, in the caddy that I use to carry it from lane to lane, and ran over to hang out with the rest of the gang under a canopy that had been set up. It rained for almost two hours. When it finally let up, we went back to find that the Concept had gotten pretty wet. There was enough rain blowing in under the tarp to soak the gun and scope pretty good. I was mad at myself for leaving it out, but, trying to make the best of a bad situation, decided that it would be a good test of both the gun and the scope. Would the scope develop condensation inside? Would the gun rust? What other possibly detrimental effects could a good soaking have on a fine PCP? Turns out that the water did absolutely nothing to the gun or scope. The next morning there were some of those marks that steel gets on it before it starts to rust, nothing to the point of orange or red rust, but sort of like hard water marks. I had an old Rem-oil soaked rag that I keep in a plastic bag just for this, and gave it a good wipe down. The only portions of the gun that seem to be made of steel (ie, that had these hard water marks) were the cocking lever, not the handle but the actual arm, as well as the female (on the gun) threaded portion of the AR butt stock. All the other components of the gun appear to be anodized and/or aluminum and essentially impervious to water/rust. As for the scope, absolutely nothing happened to it. No condensation or any other issues arose from the rain storm. NICE. The gun had also gotten lightly sprinkled on the previous weekend, and would again get lightly sprinkled on the next day. Again, no ill effects. So, the Concept and MTC scope aren’t afraid of a little moisture. And that aluminum frame isn’t going to swell and warp with any changes in moisture levels. Pretty rugged.

The next morning we got ready for the day and I decided I better put a little practice time in during sight in. I’d had a busy week and not shot the gun since the previous weekend over in New Mexico. I didn’t have high hopes, with so little practice, but was excited for the competition anyway. Sight-in went fine, with the gun performing just like it has every time I’ve shot it, completely dependable and sending those pellets right where they should go. We also gave Colben another little practice session before the match began.

I told the club officials that Colben and I would be sharing a gun and asked if we could shoot together. I was shooting in the Open class, like I usually do. And Colben would be shooting in what our class calls Freestyle. Typically the Freestyle shooters use a tripod into which they can clamp their guns, as well as a laser rangefinder, basically no rules, other than 20fpe limit. We didn’t use a laser rangefinder, but did use a little tripod for Colben so the tripod put him in the Freestyle class, technically. I shot first, ranging by focus and figuring out the clicks necessary on the scope. He would write my score and the clicks down on the scorecard. I would take off the front grip that I was using for a knee riser (it was easier for him to set into the saddle of the tripod this way), and reduce the length of pull before he took his turn. He would then shoot second, using the range and turret info I had collected when I had been shooting. He was responsible for getting himself situated, carrying his tripod and little bucket from lane to lane, and he even used the sidewheel to get things in focus and decided which mag power he wanted to take the shot with. He also cranked the turret to the appropriate place, with a little more supervision here. Lots of things to manage and remember to adjust appropriately. Overall, he shot the match fairly independently, more so than I expected.

We started on Lane 1 and he hit 2/4 on two pretty distantly placed targets. The longer range ones had been giving him trouble during practice so I was quite pleased and surprised to see him do so well. At that point I thought to myself that if he can just finish at 50% that should be enough for him to feel like he accomplished something. He carried on with that 2/4 knockdown rate for most of the first half of the course, impressing me more and more with each shot that he took.

I was clean (no misses) up until lane 8. I missed two of my four shots on that lane during a moment of lost concentration. The kill zones were nice big ones, probably in the 1.5inch area, at targets placed at about 48 and 52 yards. Completely gimme shots but I wasn’t focusing and pulled the shots. Colben sat himself down, got situated, and proceeded to shoot 3 out of 4 on that lane! The little stinker beat me, legitimately outshot me on that lane, fair and square, none of that dad giving half effort to make his son feel better stuff either. I missed another similar gimme later on, but shot 4/4 on the offhand lane. We had Colben just shoot the offhand lane from his tripod because we haven’t practiced offhand with him at all. Heck the gun and scope, even at 8.5pounds, probably weighs a fifth of his body weight.

All said and done Colben shot a 27/48 (about 56%) and I shot a 45/48 (about 94%).

Again, here is the scorecard for all the competitors (credit to Mark, our club Secretary for compiling this chart)….





Of all 18 competitors, the only better score was a 46/48. Three people had 45s, two of us in Open class. The Open class tie going to Larry because he had a longer miss-free run. Now that’s what I’m talking about! I was REALLY impressed with how the Concept did in this competition. The misses could not be blamed on the gun, and that is what a competition shooter is looking for.

Assessment of, and thoughts on, the Concept’s FT performance

Adjustability

Colben is 4ft tall, and I’m 5’10”. Our height difference of nearly two feet REQUIRES an adjustable length of pull to be able to comfortably share a gun. The easily adjustable lop on the Concept’s AR butt-stock was exactly what we needed to be able to pull off this father/son shared gun experiment.

The gun is a little lighter than I would prefer for a FT gun, but the long pic rail underneath allowed us to customize the gun for this very specific use. We placed a bipod at the foremost slot of the pic rail, mostly to help with simply increasing the weight. That bipod also acted as a stop to keep the tripod Colben was using, from falling forward. I also used an AR front grip as a knee riser, taking it off for when it was my son’s turn to shoot.

Accuracy

As evidenced by the score, the Concept is fully capable of FT winning accuracy. Not much to say here, a gun is either accurate, or it’s not. The accurate guns are the ones that are fun and enjoyable to shoot, for many reasons. This little Concept, although not a FT specific gun in any way, shape, or form, posted up better scores than many other more expensive (and more FT specific) guns.

Offhand

(Pic credit to Mark)

I previously alluded to how well this gun does when shot offhand. I was really surprised to hit all 4 offhand shots with it, just like I was surprised to head-shoot that rabbit mentioned in the hunting piece. I have no idea what it is about the gun, but it is just pleasant to shoot offhand. And does so surprisingly well.

Consistency

This gun has been banged around. A lot. Both in all the traveling, and by a six year old boy shooting it quite a bit. It has not even batted an eye at the rough treatment. It has maintained its zero and trajectory (basically a consistent fps) perfectly. PERFECTLY. A gun’s ability to maintain its poi over various conditions is a HUGE trait that I look for. Constantly chasing a wandering poi can ruin the whole gun-owing/shooting experience really quickly.

Colben’s take on the Concept

Even though he knows that it is a review gun and will likely go back to AOA, he has been calling this sweet little gun, “my gun.” As initially envisioned, he has been able to cock, shoot, and simply use this airgun more easily than any other we have tried to place in his hands. I even cut down the stock of a different PCP to fit him, and this Concept is much more user friendly than that cut-down stock gun. The cocking is easy-peasy, very little effort. He can cock the gun without any fatigue or difficulties. I asked him what his favorite part of the gun is and he replied, “how easy it is to cock.”

Some pics of Colben getting r done (pic credit to Mark on these)





We had a blast this weekend. It was great father/son time. After closing the gate and pulling onto the highway on our way home Colben looked over to me in the truck and said, “Dad, I had a super fun time.” It’s awesome to get to spend time with my boy, doing something that we both enjoy. The Concept is making that easier. Priceless.

Air tube

The air tube has a gloss finish, while the rest of the gun is matte. Fill pressure = 250 bar and air tube volume = 180cc (lots of shots for small tube, stay with me for the continued review and you'll see what I mean).



Is that air tube 150cc or 180cc??

Just wondering, because the Brocock websites says it is 150cc. But... somewhere it is mentioned that it is 180cc

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Air Tube

I did some digging. You are correct in that the Brocock website says 150cc and the AOA website says 180cc. I called AOA about your question. They are going to look into it, but it sounded like they were leaning towards the Brocock specs and mentioned updating the spec sheet for the gun on the AOA website. 

I was also curious for myself and decided to get some measurements and see if I could calculate the volume. The length of the air tube, from breech block to fill assembly (usable volume minus whatever room the Huma reg takes up) is 12.5inches (31.85cm). The outer diameter, per caliper, is 1.252inches (3.18cm). Assuming a tube thickness of 0.095inches (2.413mm or 0.2413cm). I'm no engineer so don't quote me on the safety factor and that thickness is a complete guess, somewhat based on a random guy on the forums saying he has a 1.5inch diam tube with that thickness of wall that he pressurizes to 4000psi and worked out the numbers for a safety factor of 3:1. So, tube thickness is complete guess but, 0.2413cm x 2 = 0.4826cm. I subtracted that 0.4826 from the measured outer diameter of 3.18cm to arrive at an inner diameter of 2.6974cm. Dividing that inner diameter by 2, I get a radius of 1.3487cm. 

Moving on, using the V = radius(squared) x pie x length formula for volume of a cylinder.......volume = (1.3487cm x 1.3487cm) x 3.14 x 31.85cm = 181.92ccs. There is also a Huma reg in there taking up space, and 30ccs is as good of a guess as I have so, yeah, 150cc is probably the volume of the tube. 

Here are some pics of the tube markings and tube length.



I was also very curious to see how it would be to handpump the gun so I just did that. Hopefully this will prove useful to anyone using a handpump and considering this gun. My rarely used handpump is a Hill MK3. I'm counting 1 stroke as a complete cycle of up and down on the handle. 

So, I started with the pressure in the tube at 110bar. It took 10 strokes to pressurize the hose and crack open the check valve on the gun. It took another 90 pumps to get the gun to 210 bar. At that point I vented and let the pump cool off. On the second cycle, it took 15 pumps for the check valve to open and then 37 more strokes to go from 210 bar to exactly 50 bar. 

A total of 152 strokes, including the pressurizing of the line (twice) to get that 150cc tube from 110 to 250bar. 

(I hardly ever use that hand pump anymore, relying on my tanks and compressor. IF I was to need to go back to the handpump, I likely wouldn't fill it all the way to 250bar. When I was a 100% handpump PCP owner, I liked to stop around 60 strokes per session. So, I'd probably refill this gun around 130bar which is a bit above the reg pressure, and do about 60 strokes and be happy with however many shots that netted. I think it'd be about 40-45 shots from 180-190 down to 130bar.) 

That all leads me into........

Efficiency

With the review guns, I like to do initial chrono readings, and then again after the gun has been shot a couple thousand times. In the original chrono testing, I got 70 good shots from 250-125bar, within 1.3% of average of 926.5 (+/- 12fps). That was with the JSB 10.34gr so the fpe would have been 19.71. 

I just did another string, now that the gun and reg are thoroughly broken in.

First off, the fpe came down on the gun a bit. This is the third modern PCP that I've reviewed in the last 6 months. Two of them have been traditionally regulated guns (reg in tube like this Concept) and the other was the electronic Daystate Redwolf. It is interesting to note that all three have lost a few fpe after a couple thousand shots. I suspect it is a combination of regulators breaking in, hammer springs "taking a set," and valve seats wearing in. 

The following chrono numbers were taken using the JSB 10.34. The gun was filled to 250 bar in an air-conditioned 74 degrees, and taken out to the garage and shot in 100.2 degrees, down to 100bar. (Previously established reg set point is around 125bar). 



There was a peewee pellet in there that increased the ES and messed up the numbers, but other than that, it is about where it was with the initial testing, minus the reduction of power. 

The gun was getting 19.7fpe before, and 17.7 now, so it lost 2fpe. Brocock and AOA advertise this gun, in .177, as an 18fpe rifle, so we're right there in line with specs. 

The increased shot count (over what it did when new) is likely two-fold, less energy per shot means more shots, but the increase in heat from inside to outside also created more pressure in the tube to produce more shots. 

Some other anecdotal numbers and thought.....

I shot the entire first FT match on one fill. It was a 52 shot course, and I shot a couple into the ground. I started at 250bar that day and ended at 160 bar, way above the reg pressure. It has a plenty large enough shot count to deliver a full FT match worth of regulated shots. 

Colben and I were sharing the gun for the second match. We shot til lane 9 before we refilled. So, 8 lanes x 4 shots/lane x 2 shooters = 64 shots. 

I'd put the shot count at a very comfortable 75 regulated shots. That is very impressive for a 150cc tubed gun. 

The Daystate/Brocock engineers seem to have done some cool stuff with the innards on this gun. There are lots of theories and ways to go about getting a consistent and efficient string from a PCP. This one is advertised as having a "free floating hammer system." If the gun is de-cocked and shaken with the muzzle pointing down or up, I can hear the striker fall so I do not challenge the free floating hammer claim. Some gun makers go with the really short, really stiff hammer for reducing hammer bounce and wasted air, while others go for all kinds of other combinations. What I like about this Concept's configuration is how light the cocking effort is, while maintaining a very efficient usage of air. There is no reason why a sub 20 fpe airgun needs to have the cocking effort of a big bore. Brocock hit a home run with this aspect of the gun. That smooth cocking lever, coupled with the MINIMAL effort needed to get the gun cocked, and the free floating no-bounce hammer, culminates in a perfect amalgamation of engineering goals. (ie, focused on the end-user experience but not giving up anything in the design/efficiency of the gun to get there). 

ODB moderator on the Concept

I wanted to do a big sound comparison of various moderators, but my intentions were cut short by inadequate equipment. I was hoping to be able to pick up the difference in decibels from each with an app on my phone but the microphone proved to just not be sensitive enough. 

These are the moderators that I intended to test:

(from top to bottom: DonnyFL Tatsu, Rocker1, ODB, Huggett, Hogan Decimeater)







So, it lacks data, but my subjective take on the moderator comparison....

That Tatsu is nice for keeping overall length down, but simply doesn't reduce the perceived report of the rifle as much as the rest. The increased diameter of the Tatsu seems like it should make a bigger difference, but, in terms of sound reduction, the Tatsu is the loudest of the bunch. The next quietest is the Rocker1, at just a bit louder than the other three. The big benefits of the Rocker1 are that is lightweight and its price. The last three (0DB, Huggett, Hogan) are pretty much equal in sound reduction. Those three are also about equal in aesthetics and perceived quality also. The Hogan is the heaviest of all 5 and also needs about 3/4 of an inch of extra length over the ODB to achieve the same silencing effect. The Huggett needs about 1/2 an inch of extra length over the 0DB to achieve the same silencing effect. 

No complaints on the 0DB, it does what it's supposed to do. In fact, when Colben was shooting at paintballs after the last match, I thought the gun had broken and, either wasn't shooting, or had lost a lot of energy. Nope, just a very effective moderator. I was about 10 feet away from him and could barely hear the gun going off. The combination of the free flight hammer and low hammer spring energy, general air conservation, and the ODB at the end, makes the Concept/ODB configuration a VERY quiet set-up. 

(Some random observations on the ODB: it seems to be a sort of powder-coated finish. This one is also a .30 and I suspect it would be quieter if it was a .25 or .22 since this gun is a .177. I was surprised that it did so well with the big .30 exit hole being used on a .177. I'd be curious to know if the .22 or .25 would be even quieter). 

A tale of two Concepts

(This has been a planned write-up since before I received the review gun).

My first PCP was a Benjamin Discovery, but my next (and perhaps my first quality PCP) was a Brocock Concept Elite S6, also in .177. I still own the original Concept, and have shot many thousands of pellets through it. It has won Hunter class division field target matches at my local club, as well as an Unlimited class showing once a few years ago. It has shot an incredible amount of ground squirrels, prairie dogs, starlings, and Euro doves. It always has the same POI, and is simply a very reliable PCP.



I find it somewhat interesting that Daystate/Brocock decided to recycle the name "Concept" for a tactical, all black, AR-type airgun. But I also find something poetic in that fact. 



Have there even been two more disparate looking airguns with the same name!?!? I think not.

These pictures are a visual representation of the direction the airgun industry has gone. And I'm not talking in the course of a decade or more. I purchased the walnut-stocked Concept less than 4 years ago, and I bought it new. It is interesting to note that we, the buying public/the "market" apparently want this change. If we weren't buying these black guns, the manufacturers would quit making them. So, the airgun industry has gone the tacticool route, just like most other divisions of the "shooting sports." This is not necessarily a bad thing, just a very different looking gun. 

Some of the differences:

Old Concept

• About 4 inches longer than the new one, so longer barrel, and longer tube
• classic lines
• high quality walnut stock
• no regulator
• bolt action
• max 200bar fill pressure
• 6.75lbs (unscoped)
• 6 shot revolver type magazine (no single shot tray)
• about 38 inches long
• 200cc air tube (somewhat of a guess)

New Concept

• "black gun"
• no wood, walnut or otherwise
• pistol grip
• side-lever
• regulated
• AR style stock
• picatinny under rail
• 10 shot magazine with single shot tray option
• 150cc air tube
• max 250 bar
• about 6.5lbs (unscoped)

But, what other changes have been made, or what other advancements have been achieved in airgun design, as represented by the new vs old comparison here? 

Well, the biggest for me is efficiency. The old Concept only gets 30 good shots, and only from 150 bar to 100 bar. Without a regulator, the top end (150-200 bar) of what the air tube can handle are not useable. It also has a much bigger air tube to get less than half as many good shots. The newer Concept has a tube that is 25% smaller, but gets more than twice as many consistent shots. Both guns are putting out about 18fpe so that's not the difference in shot count. The new one is just MUCH more efficicient. 

The old Concept is much harder to cock. The new Concept's side liver is so smooooth and nearly effortless.

The old Concept does not have an easily adjustable power dial like the new one does. The old Concept does have an adjustable stroke length, but that requires disassembly of the gun.

The new Concept, in it's black tacticool guise, offers on-the-fly length of pull adjustments. Can't do that on the old one. The new one allows a bipod to be easily attached. 

The new one offers a removable barrel, for cleaning, polishing, or even complete barrel swaps. The old Concept........LW barrel is glued into the breech block, which makes it difficult to clean, and nearly impossible to swap out for a different barrel.

The old Concept has a very narrow breech cut-out for the magazine. I've never been able to figure out a way to single load it. The new one has a nice wide open loading area, for single feed or magazine use. 

Etc, etc, etc. 

About the only place old vs new are a wash, are the accuracy (they both have LW barrels and shoot quite accurately). And the only place the old Concept beats out the new one is if it's owner is just sentimental about a really nice fitting and feeling walnut stock (which the old one most definitely has). 

Conclusion

In my short time in airguns, I have seen an enormous leap forward in performance and features. I will keep the old Concept around and even shoot it once in a while. There is a somewhat nostalgic feel to that old gun, but I will not hesitate to take advantage of and enjoy the amazing improvements available in newer PCPs, tacticool appearance and all. 

Franklink.

Could you measure the OD of the barrel shroud.

Click to expand...

Calipers are saying 0.751inches for outer diameter of barrel shroud. 

The shroud/barrel is entirely free floated, but the gap between shroud and air tube is quite small. (No way to go up in shroud size).



Because of how much longer the shroud is than the barrel, there would be no limit to the od of a moderator. So something like this is entirely possible and knocks another couple of inches off the overall length (at the expense of slightly louder reports).



(It looks like AOA updated the size of the Concept's airtube on their website to match the Brocock website specs, due to you attention to detail.)

Conclusion

Well, the Concept headed back to AOA in the van last weekend. Larry is our FT club president and also an AOA employee so the AOA van is often at our monthly matches. It just worked out well to get the gun back to them that way.

I’ve taken about a week to read through my comments, review my notes, and to simply gather my concluding thoughts on the Concept Lite package, and here they are.

MTC Viper Pro Tactical

I was overall pleasantly surprised by this scope. MTC just doesn’t get much attention in scope discussions or from field target diehards so I honestly wasn’t expecting much. I was first surprised with the clarity (noticeably better than 20x SWFA SS, MUCH better than UTG/Leapers, probably about in line with the Hawkes that I’ve looked through at a comparable price point). The tracking was entirely repeatable. In fact, all of my use with this scope was done by clicking and I never experienced anything other than having the scope/gun place the pellets right where I wanted them. Nothing in my time with the scope or gun indicated sketchy or questionable scope tracking.

I didn’t see any temp shifts, either with the ranging by focus, or any other heat-induced detrimental effects.

I liked the threaded-in scope caps and that they can rotate all the way over to lay flat against the scope. I didn’t get into holdover so can’t comment on how the reticle works for taking shots like that. I also like the mechanism for resetting the zero on the scope turrets-different, but in a good way.

The biggest negative of the scope for my specific use is that it won’t focus down to 10 yards on full power. Not a huge deal, because it can be turned down to less than 30x and a clear image at 10 yards is attainable, but less than ideal for a field target scope.

0DB Moderator

There’s really not much to say on this one. It does what it does just as well as the best other moderator that I’ve ever tested/shot with/owned. My only gripe is the color of the one that sent me, and that’s more of a preference than a mark against it.

I was impressed enough with the scope and the moderator to ask my AOA rep if I could hang onto them, specifically to be used on whatever review gun I have from them at any given time. It just made sense to me, since I have a range-by-focus wheel made up and marked appropriately already. They liked the idea so these two will see continued use on review guns in the future. I suppose that’s as good of a stamp of approval as I can give.

Now, for the gun

First impressions of it being solid as a brick haven’t changed. This modern all-metal chassis design being adopted by airgun manufacturers is a good thing. The nearly all-metal construction is simply durable. The is not the gun that we’re going to see some poor soul lamenting their bad luck by sharing a picture of a broken wrist, either at the hands of a shipping company or otherwise. Just ain’t gonna happen. STURDY.

The trigger was initially a sore spot, but it was adjusted down to about 7ounces and became a very good trigger, much improved over the 2.5lb trigger pull it started with.

That adjustability of the buttstock (length of pull) was super-convenient for me and my son to share a gun during a match.

The pic rail on the forearm of the gun also was nice and slick (convenient slick, not smooth slick) for attaching a foregrip (that doubled as a knee riser) or a bipod for shooting from a bench.

I really liked shooting this gun off-hand. The general ergonomics and balance made me look like a better shooter than I really am, a couple of times.

The removable barrel greatly aides in those occasionally necessary barrel cleanings, and mates up good and solid back to the breech block.

The adjustable power wheel was completely repeatable and dependable to arrive at the same general fpe output each time. Nice solid detents to let you know if it’s “in-gear” or not. Cool feature to be able to go from low to mid to high power so easily.

The efficiency of this little dude is borderline unbelievable. That extremely light hammer spring and the sidelever make it one of the easiest airguns to cock, at least that I’ve had the pleasure to shoot. And that all works together to give lots more consistent shots than a guy would guess from looking at the tube size.

Overall, just a compact little high performer.

This is the perfect gun to introduce your firearm buddies to. It’s got the build quality of a firearm, a trigger comparable to what they’re likely used to, and makes a really good case for a general use airgun. Ie. it can pull duty as a truck gun/target shooter/pest control/and can even be competitive in a field target match. On that note, Barry in our club won the Hunter class with his Brocock Concept Lite XR this past weekend. His has a custom bright red cerakote and they call it “TOEmater.”

Cool little gun that just does what it’s supposed to do (put holes in stuff, exactly where you want holes to be).

(As usual, all thanks and much appreciation go to Airguns of Arizona and their staff for making this possible. I am not reimbursed for my opinions. It started out, and continues, as a simple arrangement, "let me spend a bunch of time with a gun and I'll do some pretty extensive assessment of its performance in various settings, up to and including competition, and share those thoughts on the forums." AOA staff is always reachable, even after hours and on weekends to answer any questions I have about the gun or that a reader poses. Lots of the behind the scenes stuff like feature or spec verification is made possible through AOA staff's availability. And it is much appreciated, by me, and hopefully by anyone interested enough in the gun to be following along. " 

@franklink, very thorough review, you set a high bar. This model is on my short list, the attributes you’ve listed make it even more attractive. Bidding my time. Thanks for the review and insights.

Click to expand...

Kind words sir, thank you. Always good to hear that my ramblings prove useful to someone interested in the particular gun that I'm reviewing.