Where does hw97 fall in springer ratings?

I would say certainly not magnum. Medium seems to be a good description for one in stock form.

I'd say medium. I have an Air Arms TX200 and know that the TX200 and HW97 are often favorably compared. I also have a Diana 460 Magnum and know that my TX200 is not as powerful, nor as hard hitting, as that 460. In fact, the 460 has already destroyed one of my scopes.

So, to tame the 460's recoil, I bought a Bullseye ZR (Zero Recoil) mount for it. I have since placed a Hawke Vantage 3-9x40 AO scope back on the 460 and now it's doing fine (knock of wood).

I own three '97s, and while all have been modified, they are not "hard" shooting compared to others. All of mine have +/- $400 scopes, either Hawke Airmax or Vortex Diamondback Tactical FFPs in 30mm and 6-24x50. Never a scope issue. I use the RWS Lockdown droop compensating mounts - not expensive and solid.

Hope this helps.

Modern day description for a magnum is 20fpe and above by many and the 97 will not produce that unless substantial machining is done. Medium would a good moniker at around 16fpe in .22 for the 97 untuned.

I constantly suggest to everyone to ask the maker (scope, gun, ammo, etc) about specifics or applications and do it by email. Save the email and use it for any occasion down the road for warranty work or replacement, after all who knows better than those who produce the items what the application(s) will be? There is no mount in the world that I am aware of that will supplant a scopes warranty or pay for the repair or replacement of one! The Bullseye mount makes the scope quite high and may substantially alter the way you place your face to the cheekpiece.

Definitely medium but what a shooter. I use Optisan evx 6-24x56 on RWS lockdown mount with no issues after about 5k shots.

12-16 FPE medium

18-24 FPE is Magnum to me

I'm new to airguns, but how poorly made does a scope have to be for it to get destroyed by springer recoil? Seems like a scope that susceptible to recoil could easily be damaged just by knocking a rifle over accidentally or something. Is this just normal and acceptable?

If so, I think I'll be looking for a lightly used basic Leupold or something for my next air rifle. I've got one mounted on a .270 bolt action powder burner (kicks like a shotgun almost, LOL) and it's over 35 years old -- still working fine last I checked.

Medium, although we have a 12ftlb limit here. A nice gun though, just feels good in the hands.

not poorly at all just differently, plenty of scopes that will hold up to centerfire rounds will fail under the "dual recoil" a piston gun produces.

I'm new to airguns, but how poorly made does a scope have to be for it to get destroyed by springer recoil? Seems like a scope that susceptible to recoil could easily be damaged just by knocking a rifle over accidentally or something. Is this just normal and acceptable?

If so, I think I'll be looking for a lightly used basic Leupold or something for my next air rifle. I've got one mounted on a .270 bolt action powder burner (kicks like a shotgun almost, LOL) and it's over 35 years old -- still working fine last I checked.

Click to expand...

As DualMagMike said, springer recoil is different - and destructive. Unlike a firearm that has one rearward push when fired, a springer goes a little bit backward...then a whole lot forward milliseconds later...with some weird vibration tossed in. Even the best-quality scope which is not specifically designed for this will be spitting lenses pretty quickly.

The Leupold EFRs seem really tough to withstand Springer recoil as do Japan made scopes.

I have been trying Centerpoint and UTG lately on springers and so far so good. Went for them since there were so many positive reviews about these scopes taking the punishment from springers rather well.