Recommendation on a tier 1 springer

If you are forced to tune a spring gun any way then get the FWB Sport that were $495 new.

Some swear by their tuned FWB Sport.

I would try to find a used FWB 300 or 124.

I got the chance to shoot couple of the older FWB collectable guns and they were really pleasant to shoot especially the 300.

You probably find a used FWB 300 for the price of a TX200 and a 124 for less than the price of the HW97.

I would want a FWB 300 because the accuracy is unbelievable. You could actually hit things easily 50 yards with practically no effort.

If you miss it's either your fault or the wind.

I noticed they are very quiet to shoot compared to a Beeman R7. I think it's even quieter than my R7.

I have multiples of the 97s, TX200, 98s, ProSports, etc. all meticulously tuned, and all super accurate and a joy to shoot. But if I could only have one “Heirloom” rifle it is hands down the 97. 

I have two HW97Ks and absolutely love them. They are both in .22 cal and are lights out accurate. I tuned them myself and they are actually very easy to work on. They are so well built, they will absolutely out last you. As far as a TX200......I have always wanted one, but haven't owned one as of yet. But........I have one on the way as we speak. Good luck with what ever you choose.

I have a TX200HC, a Pro Sport, and an HW97K. The TX200 is the prettiest. It also has a nice balance. It shoots very well, but the safety doesn't always set. It also has some barrel droop. I added a Vortek kit as it had a bit of twang. It now has a nicer shot cycle. The Pro Sport is quite nice. Nice walnut. Deep blueing. It is not quite as accurate, but it is still breaking in. It is harder to cock. An hour of shooting wears me out. The shot cycle is nice straight from the factory. The HW97K is mechanically perfect. Cocks silky smooth and quite easily. Accuracy is very good. Finish is not as high end as the Air Arms, but it is consistent and appropriate for the rifle. If I could only have one of these 3, I would pick the HW97K. I feel the HW97K will hold up to years of shooting and the abuse of field use.

I didn't see any comments on the Diana 54, so I will offer mine. As a very heavy rifle generating around 18 ft-lb of energy it is in a completely different category compared to a tuned TX or HW97. I had one for a while, and enjoyed the almost complete lack of hold sensitivity, and the ability to shoot off a bipod. But in the end it was no more accurate than my TX, and just more rifle than was needed for target shooting at distances to 50 yards, which is what I do. If you are looking for an accurate, flat shooting springer in .22, it might be your ticket.

For accuracy in a springer I believe there are definite advantages to the combination of modest power and relatively high weight. Recoil is reduced making the gun less sensitive to human error in my experience. Either the TX200 or HW97 tuned down to 12 ft-lb should make for a very sweet shooting rifle. The TX because it does not have the threaded breach block of the HW and also has very little preload is easier to work on. This can be a real help if the gun has to be torn down several times to dial in the desired power, or for experimenting with different springs or lubes.

If you want something old school with lots of nostalgia I'd look for a Feinwerkbau 124 or 124D. Paid $400 for my 124D Jnc stamped version and it a nice shooter. It's not in mint condition by any stretch but still a nice rifle. They can be tuned to shoot quite smooth with ample punch. Here's a couple recent chronographs With Air Arms 7.87 gr weighed @ 7.9 gr. It loves these pellets for both accuracy and power. Also a result using JSB 7.33 gr weighed at 7.3 gr.

Air Arms 7.87 gr



JSB 7.33 gr

If you’re going to be shooting 50 yards and under and want something more tame and classy I would go with the tx200 or pro sport. I don’t own either but they look better than the hw’s. 
On the other hand if you want the ability to shoot out to 100 with no recoil I would go with the 54. My first springer was a Diana 48. It is accurate and powerful but kicks hard. When I got the 54 it was a night and day difference. It’s amazing how the sled system completely takes away the recoil. The 54 is like an abrams tank; not classy but built like a “tank” and gets the job done reliably. 

I bought a TX200 3 months ago. My first air gun. I had it tuned by John Thomas and have been shooting it indoors at 24 yards. Average 5 shot group is about .250. Lots of groups smaller, a few in the zeros. It's a blast, cheap to shoot, no cleaning and no reloading. I shoot it off bags just like my centerfire benchrest rifles. Beautiful rifle, walnut stock, excellent trigger and very accurate.

Wally guns tend to be on the light end of spring rifle weights. I don't know what your purposes are but all of the guns you mention are from heavier to much heavier. Keep that in mind.

If you want to stay on the lighter weight side and still have a top quality rifle perhaps you should consider the HW50 that so many airgunners are leaning towards lately. Several tuning options are available to get what you want from them.

Something else to consider. Wally guns (break barrels) usually don't require all of the arm waving and hand grip swapping most underlevers require. And button pushing.

My right hand is for holding the gun. My left hand is for cocking and loading. Bang

Just some thoughts after owning a dozen or more Weihrauchs and shooting TX's occasionally. And several other tier one brands. I still own most of them.

I'm getting an HW50 soon. I already bought a custom stock for it. Good luck with your choice!

Glad to see you found a kind soul to let you try out some rifles, my hat is off to them for giving you that opportunity !!! Be aware, you might just enjoy this way to much....could cost you more than one rifle !!!! Use caution....lol

I have a tx 200 walnut and I feel it's the best Springer you can buy period and is very accurate . I have mine setup with a vortex Spring shooting aa pellets at roughly 900 fps. This is the list of springers I had and sold.

Rws 350 22 cal 

Beeman r10 20 cal

Rws 3500 22 cal

Rws 34 177

Beeman r9 22 cal

Rws 54 22 cal

Cz 634 (still have )

Benjamin np2 22 (hated it)

Hatsan 125 25 cal (think that's the model hated it)

Might of forgot a few but get the tx and my friend Chris might be selling his walnut model soon. He posted a pic of his In the post I started show your eye candy. 

jschwartzlow said:

I have a TX200HC, a Pro Sport, and an HW97K. The TX200 is the prettiest. It also has a nice balance. It shoots very well, but the safety doesn't always set. It also has some barrel droop. I added a Vortek kit as it had a bit of twang. It now has a nicer shot cycle. The Pro Sport is quite nice. Nice walnut. Deep blueing. It is not quite as accurate, but it is still breaking in. It is harder to cock. An hour of shooting wears me out. The shot cycle is nice straight from the factory. The HW97K is mechanically perfect. Cocks silky smooth and quite easily. Accuracy is very good. Finish is not as high end as the Air Arms, but it is consistent and appropriate for the rifle. If I could only have one of these 3, I would pick the HW97K. I feel the HW97K will hold up to years of shooting and the abuse of field use.

Click to expand...

I'm considering trying the TX200HC, but I would have to give up my HW97K to do so (.22). Just the situation I got my self committed. I have yet to shoot a TX200 / HC, so wondering if I'm in that scenario that the grass is always greener on the other side. I don't tune or upgrade, just shoot'em as-is and if we hit the target/pest = happy. Backyard plinker and pest control. Is it worth the switch or just quit and call it done?

Raden1942 said:

Hey guys I am looking into buying a family heirloom springer. I have tuned many wally world springers and always give them away. It's time to get a permanent edition to my stable. I have been looking in to options and while I believe FWB is probably the best it's also probably out of my financial ability. I have been looking at hw97, diana 54 or 56 and of coarse the tx200. I plan on tuning them myself or having it professionally tuned. If I get the TX or the 97 I would get them in 177 and tune for 12fpe but if I got the 54 I would just smooth it out and keep it powerful due to the recoil eliminating receiver. I believe the TX has the best stock but any info on why you would choose one over the other would be great. Also if you guys know what kind of finish the TX uses on the stock it would help me out. I'm hoping it's an oil like boiled linseed or something like that. I find poly finishes look great for a bit but are a huge pain to restain years down the road. Thanks ahead of time you guys really have helped me grow as an airgunner these last few years.

Click to expand...

Pre- change up D 54 in .22 cal for the win.

I'm a sucker for a beech and especially a walnut stock with striking character. Shouldn't be that way but its like a moth to a flame. Those TX200's, resistance is weak. Scored a used Diana 54 in beech in .177, stock looks like one of those contour maps.

Personally I would go with the FWB Sport if I could find one. Beautiful gun good trigger, better safety that the HW or TX, and the factory rear sight is light years better than any other out there. If you want heirloom think a HW 77 over the 97, at least you get open sights, and have that option, who knows someone in the future family might prefer irons over optics. I took mine and put a good globe front, Anschutz rear, and removed the factory rear leaf.

I do have a TX 200 and a pro sport, I did get optional walnut, and that on the pro sport is very good, the TX 200 is absolutely spectacular, just wish they had the option for iron sights.

Another you might consider is the HW35e, it has a walnut stock and nice irons.

Batman2 said:

If you are forced to tune a spring gun any way then get the FWB Sport that were $495 new.

Some swear by their tuned FWB Sport.

I would try to find a used FWB 300 or 124.

I got the chance to shoot couple of the older FWB collectable guns and they were really pleasant to shoot especially the 300.

You probably find a used FWB 300 for the price of a TX200 and a 124 for less than the price of the HW97.

I would want a FWB 300 because the accuracy is unbelievable. You could actually hit things easily 50 yards with practically no effort.

If you miss it's either your fault or the wind.

I noticed they are very quiet to shoot compared to a Beeman R7. I think it's even quieter than my R7.

Click to expand...

Another thing no one seems to mention is that the FWB 300 is one of the easiest cocking springers. If they had put that powerplant and barrel in a lighterweight sporter stock it would be outstanding.

If I could only have one springer...Either a HW97K or a HW98 in .20 at about 14 ft/lbs.

One of these would be my choice. Just because.

The HW97 from the choices you listed. It's solid, been around forever with few known shortcomings and parts will be plentiful for decades to come. Buy a custom stock to dress it up and it takes a backseat to nothing else on the market.

The FWB is not anything "top tier" as far as performance goes. They need lots of work to shoot as good as they should, and even then the powerplant dimensions make them less pleasant in the end. Keep in mind, if it's going to be an "heirloom" you might want something that you can actually get parts for down the road. They made a boatload of the junky old 124s, and parts are nearing impossible to come by every day for those.

The Diana's arent in the same class of quality and finish as the Weihrauch or FWB. The 54 is a giant heavy cannon of a gun and not likely something you'd grab to plink with. At 12fpe, putzing around with the added complexity of the sled system and dethrottling the huge powerplant is a bit of a waste. Especially when the underlevers shoot happily at 12fpe as-is.

The TX200 is a beautiful rifle. No dispute there. But, they can be plagued with issues that an "heirloom gun" shouldn't have such as lockup issues, cracked cocking shoes, and so on. But if you're not going to look at it more than shoot it, it's the clear winner by looks.