Updated thinking on air rifles for training.

(Okay, so all this week I have been just giddy with the success of last weekend's introductory gunhandling sessions with Feral Daughters One and Two, which culminated not only in reliable hits with the Airsoft 1911 from about five yards, and also not only with exemplary attention to safety and basic handling, including load and reload...but also with conspicuous smiles.  More on this effort later;  for now, that's the context of my starting to think again about the broader context of airgunnery for training.)

I wanted to set down a couple more thoughts about the use of precision pellet guns for training, as the landscape has evolved a bit since I last did that.  I've now been freshly reminded of the viability of using appropriate Airsoft replicas for true gunhandling, and really for any training in which the gunhandling is more important than great precision in marksmanship...but in the end, there will also remain a need for low-cost, high-volume training using something more precise.

Previously, I've written on the Scout-Rod concept, and I'm still keen on making this happen.  The problem of course is that even aside from the ridiculous "safety" on the otherwise-excellent Benjamin Marauder base gun, there would still appear to be much custom work to do to get it up and running in full form, and of course along with the base gun, that's expensive.  But then I noticed the Diana Stormrider, which seems more promising in several ways, especially with the ability to add an additional barrelband for the possibility of a true Scout Scope setup without extensive gunsmithing.

And then today, I happened to notice both the Diana Trail Scout, and also the Diana Mauser K98 repeater.  Both of these are at the very least, interesting options!

The Trail Scout is clearly a derivative of the Stormrider, with the same bolt and breechblock, magazine, trigger and safety group, sight setup, and presumably it would accept the same second barrelband, if possibly requiring some stock inletting.  The Trail Scout seems to be about half the cost of the Stormrider, runs on CO2 instead of HPA, and currently only comes in synthetic stock garb.  Would CO2 be the way to go?  It sure might.  The Stormrider produces velocities, in .177" caliber, high enough that you can (maybe) start to lose some precision, and it seems to get about 20 good shots on a fill, with attendant blast for the not-strictly-necessary oomph.  The CO2 gun advertises much more sedate velocities, and 100 shots on a fill, using three standard powerlets.  Presuming the CO2 powerplant is as accurate a platform as HPA, this lower cost option might be a great training tool!  (Hell, might need to have both...)

The K98 Mauser replica was also a pleasant surprise.  I'd seen Tom Gaylord cover the single-shot version of this rifle before, and hadn't paid it much attention because I've already got a wonderful trainer for single shots in the Air Venturi Bronco.  But this one is a repeater...and hmm, look at that bolt!

I'm pretty sure that is the closest I've seen to a full-size rifle bolt on a non-Airsoft airgun.  No, it's not going to duplicate a real Mauser bolt in travel or even in feel, but it is so much closer than anything else I've seen, at least in a precision, rifled pellet gun, that it immediately becomes a serious contender for a precision trainer.  It's not cheap, by comparison to other HPA alternatives like the Stormrider, and it will have some of its own flaws--for starters, a true scout scope is going to require true custom work, the "safety" is a...let's call it comically primitive crossbolt in the trigger itself (good gawd, people!), and it probably will fit the same 20-shots-per-fill, 200-bar fill pressure, 20-foot-pound envelope as the Stormrider.  But hmm...that bolt, plus the onboard sights, the friendly stock (for shortening and mounting a Ching Sling), and what appears to be an overall excellent base platform...well, I now need to meet one, and am glad that the option exists!

Finally, I'm also curious to dig a little more into what SIG has been doing with EBR-pattern, semiauto rifled pellet guns.  This seems a distinct "third", in terms of training importance (where "first" would imply Airsoft blowback replicas capable of precision gunhandling and gross marksmanship, and "second" would imply rifled pellet guns capable of gross gunhandling and precision marksmanship), but those lines are of course at least a little blurry.  But still, to have the ability for some real rifled-pellet precision, in a semiauto*, AR(-ish) pattern carbine, would seem to be quite useful, and certainly worth the initial investment for inexpensive trigger time.

Anyway, SIG seems to have some options in their MCX and MPX rifles, and boy, I'd love to meet those too, to get an idea of what they're like.  (Tom has covered both an MCX variant and an MPX variant, and I'll cogitate further on the idea.)


______________________
* In the pistol realm, I already went through this thinking a bit ago, though I don't seem to have written about it specifically yet;  the core idea is to come up with a faithful replica of a "semiauto" design that can shoot rifled pellets rather than Airsoft or steel BBs--to be able to work on precision, across multiple shots.  Pistols are difficult for this, at least for 1911 lovers like me:  no pistol design I've yet seen seems to have been able to combine both rifled-pellet feeding, and a single-action trigger.  However, what is available--and what I would argue is viable enough for the concept--are a few designs employing a small internal rotary magazine, against a "double-action" style trigger (technically, this is really a CO2-powerplant revolver, in the guise of an auto pistol), and no blowback.  It's by no means perfect--I'd want the blowback and reciprocating slide if I could get it, and of course I'd want the option of a 1911 design as well--but then I stopped and considered the S&W M&P 45 variant simply on its own terms...and I think it's worth pursuing.  Whether or not the 1911 might be a preferred platform, this still captures a good base gun to train on (the M&P is well-established) and the long trigger is a good exemplar of striker-fired pistols like my own beloved Kahr.  I figure:  use it for precision singles and doubles;  the long trigger roll is the focus of the exercise here, and requires the same sort of sight-settling focus that blowback provides, without needing the actual blowback.  No, it won't combine with authentic reloads or clearance drills, but it is pretty clearly the best option for precision work in a pistol that is anywhere close to ergonomically authentic to a design you'd want to train for.

See, now this is an intelligent contribution to the safety discussion.

I don't regularly follow John Farnam these days, but he remains a valuable observer on tactics, technique and attitude, in much the way that I recall Mas Ayoob used to be.  And so I just ran across this post from Farnam, on the use of the rifle's manual safety, specifically within the context of the hot range.

It's worth reading, and considering.  Unlike anonymous commenters who try to suggest that Onlier Operatorer types are somehow above Cooper's safety rules,  Farnam has documentable street cred, and a known capacity as an analyst.

And so:

Most modern pistols (Glock, XD, M&P, SIG320, Walther PPQ, H&K VP9, FNS, Ruger AA) don’t have manual safeties, yet we still routinely move with them in our hands during training exercises, relying mostly upon a strong “register” position of the trigger-finger to prevent NDs. Still, we don’t prevent them all, no matter how careful we try to be!

Can we do the same with our rifles, or do we insist students keep the manual safety in the “on” position except when in the process of firing intentionally?

My answer to that question is:

Yes!

I accept it either way, but I teach the former.

Of course, I tell students that I want the manual safety “on” when the rifle is slung, and I want them to check it frequently. Scant argument there.

However, when the rifle is in their hands, the position of the manual safety becomes optional.

The whole article is worth reading;  one of Farnam's particular eloquences is his ongoing defense of the hot range (as ultimately safer than the cold range), and you get a lot of it here.

This discussion of the rifle safety is interesting.  For a rifle with a truly ergonomic safety, like the Steyr Scout's tang-mounted roll switch, I don't really think I could be any faster one way or the other, as with a 1911 pistol.  Many other boltgun safeties are nearly as good as that (e.g., M700, M70, Sako).  But most "battle rifle" and "battle carbine" safeties I've met are not ergonomic to engage;  one has to shift hand positions to do it, and that does take time.

And there is this:  I suspect that Farnam's point is both in acknowledging a measurable raw speed value, and also in the attitude surrounding the use of the manual safety.  We should remember that one can observe all Four Rules with a cocked and unlocked piece;  none of the Rules makes any mention of a manual safety anywhere.  Presentation of the piece for firing always, always includes disengaging the weapon's manual safeties, if it has any.  For any drill that has the student randomly in and out of his sights, this doesn't need to change:  whether or not he re-engages a safety in between, every time the gun comes up to fire, that safety gets wiped off.

So, the discussion of when to re-engage any manual safety becomes intentionally decoupled from the discussion of when to dis-engage...and that does seem like an important observation to make.  There is no need to use a manual safety as any sort of bolster to Rule Three, and in fact it might be too easy to rely on it, however slightly, as a separate "proof" of a safe condition.

If it's really the attitude, and not the hardware--as we all love to say--then Farnam makes a good point here.  I'm happy for the reminder.

Another fun shop installment.

Worked a fun shop visit in to our business today, and wanted to document a few observations.

Mossberg MVP boltgun

This one wasn't the "scout" model that I still hope to meet some day, but it was the same turnbolt action on which the "scout" model is based, and I'm happy to have learned what I did.  As expected, extraction is (very small) sliding-plate and ejection is boltface plunger, so boo, but other than that, it was actually pretty nice.  Loading/ejection port access is actually not as restrictive as I would have guessed, even with the Weaver rail straddling the receiver rings.  Bolt operated smoothly, with a convenient bolt stop and friendly cocking effort.  The safety was ergonomic and pleasantly positive;  I'd prefer that it lock the bolt as well as prevent discharge, but that seems a minor point.  I'm not a fan of "open" rear sights on rifles, but this one was well-done, and hey, kudos that the rifle has them at all, in an age that seems to automatically presume conventionally mounted moonscopes. 

I'm happy to say that the trigger is no joke.  No, it's not a Savage Accu-Trigger, much less a Mannlicher Scout or Blaser R93 trigger, but it's good enough that you'll not need to improve it.  Presuming the rifle runs reliably and durably, it seems like a reasonable platform, and I look forward to seeing the "scout" trim, both the glassed and glassless models.

Mossberg 464 levergun

Now having met this piece in person, it seems to be just exactly what I figured it might be, and I think I may need to add one to my stable some day.  It feels just a hair long with the fancy flash hider, but it balances like a '94 levergun, which is always a win.  I'm happy to say that the fore-end is slimmer than I was fearing, and the rail segments seem to be integral with the fore-end composite.  Presumably they can be either replaced with a separate fore-end, or simply cut off, if like me you prefer keeping things as compact as possible.  (I might keep the bottom one for a sling attachment point, although it does seem rather grandiose for that simple purpose....)

The tang safety works, and is a welcome addition to a levergun which is to serve "serious social purposes" as well as traditional hunting ones.  (I could tolerate Condition Zero in an urban levergun if necessary, but would prefer Condition One if I could get it.  The tang safety makes that possible.)  The sights are excellent, but again as on the bolt, why bother with an "open" rear sight when the 464's receiver has a beautifully placed rearward ring in just the right place for a compact ghost-ring aperture?  I simply do not understand why anyone would prefer open sights to an aperture:  the latter is superior in every way that matters.  (And then, of course, the top of the fore-end could get its own rail space for forward mounting of "scout" glass or dot sights.)

The buttstock is exactly what it should be, and the quick adjustments are very nice to have.  An excellent feature for working with noobs, especially the smaller-statured.  Action seems smooth enough, and presuming it runs--it's a '94, and should work well.

The trigger...is rough.  Nearly painful, actually.  Consider all the bad press you've heard about levergun triggers before;  that's because of triggers like this one.  Okay, so it needs work. Theoretically, with a '94 action, gunsmiths should know how to do that--and the effort would be worth it.  With a crisp trigger in the 3-4 pound range, this seems a seriously useful rifle.  As a 6+1 in .30/30, it really is a full-blown rifle, limited mostly by the range limitations of iron sights, not horsepower.  I still think it would also be worth offering as an intentional carbine, chambered in .45 Colt, .44 Magnum, or even .357 Magnum, with a 9- or 10-round capacity.  Again, within the limitations of iron sights, these revolver rounds have surprising reach, and more thump than I'd have guessed.  And if we ever sort out The Great And Pointless Rimfire Shortage, there is the idea of this levergun as a 14-round .22...

Browning 1911-22 pistol

Wanted to check this fit in the 6yo's hand today.  Glad I did.  She can get a good grip, with thumb on safety and no H-gripping, and the pad of her trigger finger is within a quarter-inch of right on.  Essentially, she's ready, ergonomically.  She's also strong enough to rack the slide, properly.  Squee!

Great.  Now I just need to get the whole "earn a living" problem sorted out, and find some .22 ammo, and add this lovely little piece to the stable.  

Ruger LCP pistol

6yo very sweetly requested to see an LCP accoutered in pink camo, and an LC9 in solid purple.  Very well then!  She learned a little about ergonomics when she tried to rack the wee slide on the LCP, against the DAO hammer, but this gun fit her hand nicely if she consciously took a high grip.

The LCP seems okay.  .380 doesn't thrill me, but with the right ammo and the right attitude, I'd sure use one over throwing rocks.  It doesn't seem that much smaller, to me, than the Diamondback DB9, which I still see here and there, and I'd take the DB9 in a heartbeat for the pocket gun role.

Ruger LC9 pistol

I was a little less impressed with the LC9.  In 6yo's hand, trigger reach was much too far, and sizewise, the piece seems right in there with the Kimber Solo, DB9, Kahr, G43, etc., designs, all of which have better ergonomics.  Well, now I know!  :-)

Kimber Solo pistol

Dang if I don't continue to like this little pistol, even though I've heard some unflattering things about it here and there--that I haven't fully vetted one way or the other.  Trigger, at least on this sample, was really excellent, with a somewhat long but positive reset, and despite the diminutive size, controls and ergonomics are very nice.  Sights are excellent.  The manual safety design in particular seems outstanding, and perfectly intuitive to 1911 aficionados.  It seems to be right on the cusp between true "pocket pistol" (such as DB9, DB380, LCP, etc.) and "subcompact" (such as Kahrs, G43, S&W Shield, etc.) and with a lightweight frame, would become my instant first choice in a 9mm pistol.  (It's not exactly heavy, even with a steel frame, but its weight does exclude it from the sub-one-pound class.  Suffice it to say that if I were to choose a 9mm based on weight and size alone, it would be the DB9, and if I were to choose the best shooting subcompact--suitably small but still requiring a holster for support--I'd probably go to the Solo.)

Kimber Micro 380 pistol

This was unexpected.  Got to see Kimber's mini-1911 in .380 ACP;  more than anything it seems to be exactly the sort of update to the Colt Mustang that I always hoped for before the Browning 1911-22 and 1911-380 came along.  It's small.  It's 1911ish, but with pivoting trigger, slightly different safety lever, and the full-on Kimber treatment.  Looks promising in many ways, but again, .380 does not thrill me, and there is now the 1911-380, which may be the superior choice for most uses.  

Will keep an eye out, and look again as .380 options become more immediate for up-and-coming kids.  :-)

S&W Shield pistol

The "what mood will Shield be in today?" effect continues.  I continue to like the general ergonomics, and the price point is actually pretty compelling too.  But today, this one's trigger had horrible backlash and a mushy, very un-positive reset.  Hm.

Still, I like the piece in general.  The safety still works every time, despite its diminutive appearance.  Grip comfort is conspicuous.  It has a reputation for running without fuss.

S&W M&P pistol

I wanted to renew my acquaintance with a standard M&P pistol frame, mostly because I am intending to go this route with airguns.  (A separate topic for another post;  suffice it to say that I needed a core design among the polymer-framed, striker-fired, doublestack guns to go with, and the S&W is getting the nod based on several factors, including ubiquity of models across the spectrum of pellet guns, BB guns, and Airsoft guns of multiple powerplants.)

After a few minutes in the hands, I think it's the right choice.  The M&P frame is pretty comfortable, for a double-stack, and otherwise ergonomics are plenty good enough.  Trigger on this one was surprisingly good;  perhaps a bit heavier than ideal, but with a very nice, positive reset, and without the noticeable backlash problem of the Shield.  

I'll be posting more about M&Ps as the airgunnery experiment unfolds.  Given that I don't like doublestack designs as a rule--on simple account that they feel like two-by-fours in the hand--M&P is definitely one of the friendlier ones.

Springfield Armory XD-S pistol

Picked up one of these again, just to compare it on the same day with Shield.  Glad I did, too:  it confirmed that I really like this pistol.  Ergonomics suggest a much bigger gun, but XD-S is slim and compact.  This one's trigger was crisp (for a striker gun), reasonably light, and with a notably positive, short reset.  I still think that the XD-S "4.0" is the logical heir to the Colt Lightweight Commander, for the working man's general purpose pistol.  Now having seen probably a dozen examples each of XD-S and Shield, I think I'd always opt for XD-S first, for my own purposes.

Colt Commander CO2 BB pistol

Saw this in blister pack on the way out of the gun section.  I hadn't come to look at airguns today, but it caught my eye, and I'm considering this piece as a possible training/education tool anyway.  It's a reasonably faithful 1911 reproduction, powered by a CO2 12-gram cartridge contained in the detachable magazine (which also houses the BBs), and is developing a decent reputation for accuracy ("accuracy" being something you have to adjust your thinking to, with smoothbore round-ball shooters like 'BB guns' and Airsoft guns).  The gun does "blowback" on firing, which is good in a trainer to disrupt your sight picture, and in general the manual of arms is nearly straight 1911 firearm.  It's really only missing a ducktail grip safety among the most common updates, and with the minimal blowback of a CO2 BB pistol, I suspect it won't be the problem it is with a .45 ACP anyway.

So there it was, and I took a second to look at it.  It is indeed "full metal", as weighty as a steel 1911, with good sights, functional safety, and in general looks well-built.  I look forward to trying one out, especially with some of the new low-ricochet plated BBs that have become available.  

Until next time, then.  Much cogitation to do.  :-)

Apparently Mossberg has been busy.

I haven't paid hardly any attention to Mossberg in...a long time.  By complete accident today, I encountered a couple of items that seem quite interesting.

Scout Rifle

I never realized they had an entry in the "scout rifle" space, but lookee here:

Oh, I can immediately see problems.  It doesn't make weight.  The glass on the "with-glass" model seems to offer most of the problems of a conventional eye relief without delivering the value of a true intermediate eye relief.  The rail with integrated ghost-ring sight is indeed nice, but it ruins access to the loading/ejection port without offering anything of real value.  The bolt design appears to be push-feed, plunger-eject, and sliding-plate-extract--exactly what the Scout Conferences codified as the configuration of last choice*.  The LOP is too long, with no apparent means of adjustment.  And there is no stud for a Ching Sling.

But at least someone is trying, and there are a couple of nice features here.  The ability to use both AR10 and M14 magazines?  Yeah, that seems like a goodness thing--provided it turns out to be suitably rugged and reliable.  The trigger may be nice as well, but I've got no sense of field feedback on it yet.

All in all, from the look of it, this might yet be a decent platform for the concept.  It should be reasonably trivial to shorten the LOP and round the buttpad, cut out the rail space obstructing the objection port (or replace with a more suitable alternative), and add a middle stud for a Ching Sling.  Acquire a Leupold M8 2.5x Scout Scope and mount it as low as possible with QD rings, add the Ching Sling itself, and include some magazines, and--again, provided it runs--this might be a very nice little rifle.  It would have the magazine advantage over the Ruger, but require a bit more fiddling to get it close enough to spec to get the complete system synergy--and the Ruger's bolt is closer to the Scout Conference spec.  Hey, if nothing else, choice is good, and I'm happy to see it!

Lever Gun

I also--and again, accidentally--ran across this levergun, offered both as a 6-shot .30/30 and a 14-shot rimfire:

This struck me as a cross between "very encouraging" and "total facepalm".  On the "encouraging" side, I love the adjustable LOP idea, and a tang safety on a levergun is the right way to include what is arguably a not-strictly-necessary feature in the first place.  The front sight base seems reasonably sturdy, and the rear receiver ring should both permit a compact ghost-ring sight, and clear access to the ejection port.  Very nice.  I've got no idea how it runs or how the trigger is, but presumably any kinks could be worked out with some comparatively light gunsmithing.

Then I noticed the fore-end rail space.

Seriously, Mossberg?  You put rails on all sides except the top?  Okay, look, I admit I don't really speak tactard in the first place, but I think most of us would look for a top rail first, and then maybe--maybe--a bottom.  One of the principal attractions of the levergun in the first place is its luxurious flatness, and side rails would seem to be inherently counterproductive to that end.

Look, it's a levergun, not a plumbing main.  The more stuff you hang off those rails, the further away you get from what attracted you to the design in the first place.

Despite that irritation, though--a single rail on top would have permitted scout scope or dot sight options and still allowed a svelte fore-end--I like the idea of this piece, and hope I get to meet one some day.  May it sell well enough that Mossberg offers it in other calibers too--I'd love to see .45 Colt or .44 Mag, and even .357 is a worthy option for an iron-sight carbine.

Youth Boltgun

Finally, Mossberg also seems to offer a youth-scaled rimfire boltgun:

I'll have to look into this one some more, but I like the concept of the single-shot adapter/plug, plus the ability to take 10-round magazines as well.  Gives the kid something to grow into.  I've no idea about trigger or accuracy, but the safety seems well-located, the receiver sports a dovetail that should permit a good ghost-ring rear sight, it's light enough and looks amenable to some light gunsmithing should that prove necessary.  The fore-end looks a little short for a proper shooting sling, but I'd have to see it in a kid's hands to know if it was too short.  The LOP is just about right for adults (12.25") but should be shorter for kids;  since it's wood, this should not prove to be a daunting problem.

Again, I'd love to meet one and see how it feels in the hands.  

So, cool!  Mossberg has been busy.  Will have to cogitate, investigate, and see what if anything comes of it.  :-)

_____________________

* Once again, full disclosure is that even the Steyr Scout is not controlled-feed, nor inertial-eject.  The Scout Conferences were clear enough in their preference for controlled-feed, inertial-eject, full-claw-extract...but Cooper must not have thought it a deal-breaker for the production Scout, as I'm not sure he ever even mentioned the Steyr SBS's use of plunger-eject and Sako-style mini-claw extractor.  The Steyr also has restricted access to its ejection port, and (just barely) doesn't "make weight" either.  Clearly, this arrangement can run just fine despite being "out-of-spec", and I always try to apply a few grains of salt when evaluating another take on the concept.  :-)

A little more chrono love.

I think I figured out, today, how I can rig up a chronography session so as to shoot off my front porch, mostly rested (right elbow unsupported), and shoot through the chrono at a measured distance (15') enroute to a target at a measured 10m (the de facto airgun standard).  This can be the basis of combined chronography and accuracy work for the relative quick-testing of new pellet/powerwheel combinations.  Notably, after setting chrono up at the further distance, I no longer had any errors from it.  Sure, it was a sunny day today, but I think I learned something and will go with it.

I continue, as well, to learn about the Caldwell Ballistic Precision app that I'm using on my smartphone.  It's got its quirks, but it's proving to be pretty handy.  Apparently it's set up so that you can designate (upfront, not after-the-fact) a "saved group" and capture a bit of metadata along with your shot string (e.g., temperature, humidity, distance to chrono, pellet used, etc.), including a photo of the target grouping.  I suppose I should start carrying in my pocket a dime and a quarter, which are often used in airgunners' pictures to give context to the group size.  (Airgun hunters speak of the one-inch "kill zone" for most quarry, which is just about the size of a quarter, and of the 3/4" zone for some critters, which is just about the size of a dime.)

I'll have to develop the practice a bit, to arrive at a consistency in picture framing, naming, and repeatability of setup, but I think this is going to be workable.  The distances are known, and at the 10m target distance one can probably successfully weed out which pellets just aren't shooting as well as others.  Check out these two strings, in the context of my first experiment with the powerwheel set as low as it could go.  This string was shot with the wheel set at "2.1":

#     FPS  FT-LBS

12    794      43.43
11    806      44.75
10    820      46.32
9    817      45.98
8    831      47.57
7    830      47.46
6    844      49.07
5    853      50.13
4    839      48.49
3    845      49.19
2    811      45.31
1    775      41.38
Average: 822.1 FPS
SD: 23.0 FPS
Min: 775 FPS
Max: 853 FPS
Spread: 78 FPS

Note how much more consistent this string is, than the other one.  The deviation and spread are much tighter, and the velocities begin to drop off steadily at the end of the string (once they do this, you can stop shooting, as you've got the answer you came for).  Based on what I've learned from Tom Gaylord, I believe I can "read" this data as suggesting that this configuration is good for about 10 shots (#2-#11) where the spread is even tighter, and since there is only one shot before the valve "wakes up" into that ideal series, that means that the starting pressure of 3000psi is pretty close to ideal.  (Sometimes, if the string starts to tighten up after several shots, it may suggest that the ideal fill pressure is not the 3000psi max, but maybe something lower, like maybe 2700psi.)

This string was then shot with the wheel set at "4.10":

#      FPS  FT-LBS
11    803      44.42
10    812      45.42 
9    832      47.69
8    847      49.42
7    859      50.83
6    870      52.14
5    881      53.47
4    884      53.83
3    886      54.08
2    880      53.35
1    885      53.96
Average: 858.1 FPS
SD: 30.5 FPS
Min: 803 FPS
Max: 886 FPS
Spread: 83 FPS

Now in terms of statistics, this one is starting to look interesting.  In particular look at how tight those first five shots are, with a pretty steady decline thereafter.  This one seems to suggest that the fill pressure is right on.

And at this point I had just figured out how to set the target in the right spot to get a group while chronographing.  This is what the final ten shots of the string did at 10m:

That's just about a quarter inch, center-to-center.  (The black dot is my crude aim point.)  Hey, I'll take that.  The rest was improvised, my right elbow was unsupported, and I wasn't exactly bearing down for these shots.  Looks like it may be worth trying at 25, and possibly even 50.  Especially since the power level seems more than acceptable.

At this point I decided to adjust the power wheel to 6.10 and shoot a few more shots, to set the valve for a full test at 6.10.  These were just fun shots, not chronographed;  they each clanked with a satisfying smack on the rimfire spinner at 25 yards.

When refilling after this series of about 20 shots (which took it down to about 1200psi), the behavior of the Hill pump seemed a little quirky.  I will have to pay attention to how it behaves going forward!

Chronography note.

Had a brief chance (everything's brief, with a seven-week-old in the house) to set up the new chrono and run a string over it with the TalonP set to absolute minimum power on the power wheel.

Some notes, mostly for myself, in no particular order:

• Used the chrono without skyscreens at all, based on a Tom Gaylord comment I saw recently.  This seemed to work well in the direct sunshine.
• I tried a very close distance-to-chrono this time;  about one foot.  Mostly this was in order to do it fast, rather than perfectly;  I will want to back off to about three feet as there is noticeable muzzle blast from the TalonP, and one foot seems kinda rude.
• The .25 pellets may be less susceptible than the .177s to get "missed" by one or both screens unless they are "close enough" down to the top of the chrono unit, but it can still happen.
• Power wheel was set to absolute minimum;  I wanted to see what the gun did here.  AirForce owners would refer to the setting as "1.1" on the wheel, and I understand that this is highly individualized to each gun;  that is, a setting of "8.11" on one gun is not going to translate to a second gun sitting right next to it.  It's a relative measure for that gun of how wide open the valve is.  The shooter uses it to make his own notes.
• Top hat was also set to the most polite setting, and over 20 shots later it is still tight.  We'll see how long that continues!
• Performance was interesting.  It was much more erratic than I was expecting, and it may be that this is my first taste of what Tom Gaylord calls "finding the right power curve" for a given gun and pellet.   Here's the string data--note some wide variations between successive shots:

#    FPS / FT-LBS

20    657 / 30

19    673 / 31

18    690 / 33

17    898 / 56

16    727 / 36

15    739 / 38

14    848 / 50

13    774 / 41

12    ERROR 3

11    ERROR 3

10    806 / 45

9    811 / 45

8    829 / 47

7    ERROR 3

6    847 / 49

5    850 / 50

4    791 / 43

3    846 / 49

2    791 / 43

1    793 / 43

Average: 786.5 FPS

SD: 68.6 FPS

Min: 657 FPS

Max: 898 FPS

Spread: 241 FPS

Starting fill was about 2900psi (two un-chronoed shots down from a 3000psi fill), and based on what the Hill pump told me when refilling afterwards, the end pressure was about 1200psi.  I was deliberately shooting until I could clearly see the gun dropping off, and after shot #17 threw me for a loop (how did that happen?), the next three pretty clearly showed the trend I was looking for.  These guns are known for maintaining a pretty tight spread over their ideal "shots per fill", and owners of TalonP and Escape models (which use the same 210cc air tank) seem to confirm a very reliable 10 full power shots per fill--sometimes more, but almost never less--once you've found the right setting(s).  (Interestingly, the ideal string of tight-spread, full-power shots doesn't necessarily begin with shot #1, but sometimes after a few "wake-up-the-valve" shots.  

It's quite possible that this "absolute minimum" setting is just not right for the gun, and next time I am going to try going up to "2.1".  (Of interest:  the test-fire data from Pyramyd Air, when I bought the gun, with a different pellet and power wheel setting at "4.6", showed a much tighter ES (118fps) and SD (42fps) for their 10 shots, with a clearly linear pattern of slightly-descending-velocity for each shot.)  

I'm interested to see what this gun's "miser mode" (whatever that turns out to be) can give me in terms of shots-per-fill;  also what "max power mode" (whatever that may be, and it may not be "full open", either) will yield, and finally I suspect I'm going to settle on whatever setting gives me the tightest spread for the 10-15 shots I think I can expect from the piece.  (For anyone reading this who is new to PCP guns:  there are many PCPs out there which can get many more shots-per-fill than this one;  AirForce's own "Talon" rifle, with a different valve and tank than the "TalonP", is one of them.)  The attraction of the TalonP, for me at least, was 1) short carbine length, 2) adjustable LOP, 3) more power for its size and ergonomics than anything I have yet found, and 4) "quickly" and easily topped off (refilled for a new string) with a hand pump.  The idea of having 10 shots at hand for hunting or pests, and then hand-pumping a refill in a matter of minutes, is just fine for what I wanted.  (Once I can afford a SCUBA tank and/or a 3000psi compressor, it could get just plain addicting.)

And jeez, look at the power at this minimum setting.  An It's actually so high that I again wonder if this is out of the valve's optimum range, and I might see some more sedate performance with the power wheel set a little higher.  At any rate, I was figuring that even at minimum wheel settings this gun (known for its gonzo valve) would have power to spare for whatever I'd want to do, and--yeah, you could say that.  That last shot, at 30 foot-pounds, is still pretty whopping for a smallbore airgun;  if my charts are correct, it will still retain about 12 foot-pounds at fifty yards.  

Thus all the testing.  Ultimately,  I don't know how serious I'm going to get or be about maintaining a statistically tight spread over those 10-15 shots, but I do want to see the data myself and maybe start to develop a spidey sense with it.  At heart I'm a functional guy:  I'll obsess over data just long enough to find the pattern I want.  And here, what I want is:  1) enough field accuracy to hit that 1" squirrel brain at 50 (yes, that's gonna be through glass), 2) enough power to anchor a snowshoe hare at the same distance, and 3) enough consistency from shot to shot that I can learn one trajectory and lean on it.  I suspect that the TalonP is going to provide multiple pellet options that can do a half-inch at 50 off the bench, leaving me a little wiggle room to guarantee the inch from a field position when it counts. 

_____________________

I also ran a string through the Bronco with the half-pint-milk-box wadcutters from Crosman (mostly to test the chrono before firing the .25s over it) and learned only afterward that the otherwise nice iOS app for the "Ballistic Precision" chrono does not allow you to capture and save a string in arrears--you have to declare that you're going to save the string before you shoot it!  Okay, so this is a minor matter and I'm glad I figured it out now rather than later, but you should have seen this string!  Other than a few errors when I got the tiny pellet too far above the screens (this is becoming a consistent pattern), there were probably 20 shots in the string and the extreme spread was less than 5fps (first standard deviation was under 2!)  I was impressed, and will have to try that again to see if it was a fluke.

I'd like to construct/fashion, if I can, a "plug-and-play" bench for doing chrono testing with the airguns, since I plan to do a lot of that:  something that I can quickly lay the chrono and the gun on and have their alignment be very close to ready-to-go.  The initial thought was a simple board that would "mount" the chrono, on a small tripod, at a height in the middle of the tripod's adjustment range, and at the other end perhaps mount my "Site-N-Clean" cleaning vise/rest to match it.  In theory, small elevation adjustments for different guns could be handled by the tripod's vertical crank, and I would just point the aligned shebang at a suitable target, permitting me to do both accuracy testing and chronography at the same time.  (Not so much an issue for the Bronco, where pellets and powerplant are both cheap, but right now at least--still looking for work--.25 pellets do cost noticeably more, and as marvelous a device as that Hill pump is, I'm not going to be able to do hundreds of rounds at a time with a hand pump only.  :-)

Nothing like a few quick shots off the porch to brighten your day.

Took a few minutes this morning to reconnect with the TalonP carbine I put together last November, which has apparently been on back-burner for a while.  

Click for more bigger awesome.

Just a few offhand shots on the 25y rimfire spinner, off the front deck, followed by a top-off fill to 3000psi.  Total time from the first thought of "hey, I should work the airgun" to refilled, clean, tightened piece and accoutrements all put away, was probably twenty minutes.  And this is the complicated pellet gun, which trades a few operational conveniences for the potential of nearly half the power of a .22 Long Rifle.  (I could have put the same number of shots downrange with the breakbarrel AV Bronco in under half that time, from first-thought to all-put-away.  The Bronco is not about power at all, but rather about easy, high-volume practice shooting--and it is very, very good at that.)

Yeah, I have become a fan of airgunnery as a valuable personal training tool.  :-)

Confirmed:  I really do like this piece, and look forward to learning more about it this year with working chronography, a goodly supply of .25 caliber pellets, and a whole lot of manual pump strokes into the Hill pump.  With a little luck, I'll be able to work with the six-year-old on some select tasks as a school subject (physics, arithmetic, and statistical concepts in chronography and in accuracy testing), and of course work on my own as well.

For whatever reason--maybe it's just warmer now and things have loosened up--I was able to roll the power adjustment wheel with little issue, and so adjusted it all the way down to the bottom of the scale, where I fired the last few shots of the session.  This should set things up well to begin testing how miserly the gun can be in terms of shots-per-fill, and what power it generates at that level.  I suspect even at the lowest setting there will still be plenty of power available for the sort of game I'm most likely to pursue (think spruce grouse and snowshoe hares), and as anticipated I am already beginning to appreciate the effort required to feed a PCP ("precharged pneumatic") airgun with a high-pressure (2000-3000psi) hand pump.  I still love the concept, but it's enough effort that it does tend to keep you from wasting shots needlessly.

Once we get things dialed in for chronography testing and most-accurate-pellet choice, I look forward to swapping out that lovely but huge and heavy Leapers glass for the Walther dot sight, and adding a Giles sling to make the piece more wearable.  The whole plan for this piece in the longer term, after all, is to serve as a knockabout carbine of minimum bulk and weight;  someday I still hope to acquire a "slightly bigger brother" in the form of the AirForce EscapeSS, which features both readily interchangeable barrels (and a reputedly subtler valve) and sound suppression built into the frame.  (That's the piece I think the Leapers glass would be ideally suited for.)  The two guns could share air tanks and parts, and I like the idea of having one set up as a .22 (for higher-volume shooting) and the other as a .25 (for maximum power and range).

I did notice that the top hat came loose again, which was a little aggravating.  I may have to use threadlocker on those tiny set-screws after all.  (If I'm reading things right, the top hat is mostly a set-and-forget item anyway.)  We'll see how a really good scrunch goes.

Functionally, there's still only one thing I have reservations about, and that is fumbling the load in really cold weather.  I seem to notice that every time I shoot the piece, even when (like today) the weather is just fine and there is no trouble at all.  It's as though now that I've thought about it, the brain can't let go.

Very well, then, I'll make it a matter of practice and habituation.  Shucks.  :-)

TalonP - preliminary field notes.

Got a chance to tote the new hunting airgun on a quick hike today, representing its first real field trip.  The purpose of the hike was not hunting, and no shots were fired, but I'll still document a couple of useful notes here nonetheless.

Sling.  A good sling is going to be essentially necessary, but which one is still up in the air.  What I'm most familiar and competent with is the magnificent Ching Sling for rifles, but it may be that a variation on the Giles sling is the way to go.  (I'm still learning the -fu of both hunting airguns and carbines in general, and each of these seems to be distinctly different than with full-house rifles.)  With a gloriously short carbine like this, the concept of "wearing" the gun seems distinctly possible, whereas you are always "carrying" a rifle, even when slung for walking.  If it turns out that you can get a really solid shooting lockup with a Giles sling, its carry flexibility would seem to rank it above the Ching Sling for this application.  But if you can't...well, airgun hunting is all about precision, and the TalonP is known for being a tack-driver, and I know how much more precise I can be with a good shooting sling...  I will have to cogitate on this more.

Short.  I wanted short, and I got it.  Carried in the cradle position on either side, you really notice how little muzzle there is past the elbow.  I got plenty of chances to switch sides as the trail wrapped around itself (we were a column of 6, and I mostly trailed caboose), and "the short" does rather assert itself.  With this gun there are several possible means of hand-carry, including by the forend (unusual balance, but not necessarily bad), by the glass' ocular bell with the fingers through the frame-top window (well-balanced, but a bit strange to have the fingers right on the bolt handle), and of course simply carried by the pistol grip, pointed down (very secure in one sense, but different than you're used to with all that weight forward).  In general it's easy to tote, but the dimensions are different enough from a traditional rifle that I always had to think for just a second about how to set it down when necessary.  (Keep in mind that Dad is often the one who totes the drinks and snacks, and who in the rear notices when a little person inadvertently walks out of her stretch-over-soles ice studs.  I got quite a lot of set-down, pick-up practice over the course of little over a mile.)

Optic.  Stipulating that it's big and heavy, this Leapers is a very nice glass.  I took a few looks through it at various safe backstops in various light, both at low and high magnification.  Light transmission is really excellent, with that 44mm objective and 30mm tube.  The illuminated reticle options are kinda nice, if you have the time to use them.  The lens caps are easily accessible as mounted.

I will still have to see how it looks when tracking a real game animal, but somewhat to my surprise thus far, I simply do not notice the increased field of view when sighting--at any magnification.  This has been stated as the real raison d'etre of the Leapers unit, but it may be that field of view is simply a lesser concern with a longer eye relief, true binocular tracking, and the technique of a good field mount.  Again, the jury is still at least a bit out, but I think I can now say with increasing confidence that any  functional improvement (over a traditional "scout scope" like the Leupold M8 2.5x) is minimal, and probably does not outweigh the weight and size disadvantage, for fidelity to the scout concept.  (The light-gathering, on the other hand, for a dedicated hunting arm, yet might.)

Low-light shots at home.  We arrived back at home after the hike as light was truly running out, and I decided to take a couple of shots off the porch at the steel rimfire spinners, using the lowest illumination level on the reticle.  At 10m, the speed was nearly at the snapshot level--I was impressed.  And just to test it out, I thought I'd try engaging my 25yd "through-the-trees" spinner, using the first holdover dot on the mil-dot reticle (as it is currently zeroed), using a lovely new flashlight from the in-laws.  Held alongside the forearm, I mounted the gun, hit the light switch, and got a very satisfying clank right off the bat.  The light's rating says 960 lumens, and based on this experiment I believe it--wow!  A good way to end the excursion.  (Incidentally, the three shots took me from a full 3000psi down to about 2700.)

I do notice the limitations of the single-shot mechanism.  The potential for fumbling, in the cold with gloves, is not a trivial consideration.  The .25 caliber pellets are far easier to manipulate than the bitty little .177s, but they're tiny compared to any centerfire firearm cartridge, and you do need to seat properly.  I'll want to put some more thought into this as well.

Top hat.  I noticed that the air tank had started to loosen during the walk (I hadn't checked it since first bolt-up) and took the time to locate not just that wrench, but the tiny little one that secures the top hat.  Everything is now nice and tight, and ready for some serious testing.  Some day, I may mess with actually adjusting the top hat, but I expect I've got a good while in front of me just trying out the power wheel, and I might as well get the top hat screwed down to stay put while I do it!  :-)

Next up:  actual velocity testing with the power wheel, and accuracy testing with a few different pellets.  And of course a little more thought behind sling and field practices.

Very well then!

Squee. Assembly and first shots.

Boy, I have so much learning to do.  :-)

The AirForce TalonP arrived a couple days ago, along with the Leapers "scout scope" for sighting and the Hill pump to fill the tank.  Today, I got to put it all together and take the first shots.

I'd say "awesome", but that would shortchange the experience considerably.

So much of this is new to me that it will take a number of posts to cover it all, but I do intend to get around to it.  Here, I'll offer a simple pic or two and a short list of initial observations.  (And my next step is to tap the community of AirForce owners at Tom Gaylord's commentariat, for several no-longer-so-abstract questions.)

This is what I have now.  Stipulating that it is not yet tested, it matches the concept I had in mind nearly perfectly.

Click to behold the glorious embiggenationment of a totally quickie photo.

Really, all the elements except a viable Ching Sling are in place, and if this thing proves to shoot as configured, I'm going to be pretty stoked.

A few of the details of the other side (note the power adjustment wheel midway down the barrel housing, and the onboard pressure gauge at far right).

I was actually expecting that the scope just wouldn't clear the frame bridge, requiring me to get taller rings, but instead it just did.  Awesome.

Okay, so here's what I need to know next:

• What is the proper way to think about zeroing this airgun?
• How difficult should it be to rotate the power wheel?  (It seems really stiff.)
• Can the gun be dry-fired without the tank attached?
• What is the "lowest low" one can run the tank down to safely?
• What's the preferred way to store the gun?  This is more of a conundrum than you'd think, since if the action is closed and the power source (the air tank) is on the gun, it's kinda like storing a half-loaded gun (missing only the pellet);  and if the action is open, there's always the possibility of grit getting where it shouldn't.
• How might one go about getting a middle stud for a Ching Sling?

Here are a few observations in general:

• I do think this is going to be what I wanted it to be.  Sweet!
• There are so many details to this system that are new, to learn.  Sweet!
• There are several things that I now understand much better from having now held things in my hands.  Proportions and dimensions especially, but also more subtle things like the distinct advantages of the (two) different styles of onboard tank.
• I intend to try two different sighting systems, as I learn about the gun.  One is this Leapers glass, representing the potential ideal, and the other is a small, nonmagnifying dot sight, representing the potential for maximum compactness.  (I may even try a Leupold scout scope on it some day;  at one-third the weight of the Leapers glass, it may prove to be the right "in-between" option.)
• This, I think, is going to be how I really learn about sight offset.  Very well!

Here are a few about the gun:

• The power is obvious.  Steel rimfire spinners...spin.  No, it's not a .22LR, but I doubt I'll need to quibble about pellet weight for any of the game I'm thinking of pursuing up here.
• I now understand a lot better how this gun can be thought of as loud, for an airgun, while its stable-mate in the AirForce lineup, the EscapeSS, can show very nearly the same peak SPL on a simple meter, but be considered far quieter.  The shape of the sound signature seems to explain that, to my ears.  But...even though it is considerably louder than my Bronco, this is not a sound that is going to scare my girls, and that is important to me.
• The carbine-ness of it is right on.  Total length is 26" on the nose, with a 12" length of pull, and both sight height and cheek weld on the tank is comfortable.  The balance is definitely forward, with that giant glass, but it seems to mount easily enough.
• Trigger seems to be very workable, at least initially.  The (Garand-style) safety is smooth.
• I now understand the value of a valve protector.
• This is a very clever design;  unconventional looking perhaps but well-thought-out.

Here are a few about the scope:

• Holy crap-tons, Batman, this thing is large and heavy!
• Truly impressive light gathering and optical quality.
• Build quality seems pretty solid.
• The illuminated reticle gizmo may actually be useful, and "fails over" to plain black. 
• I look forward to learning the mil-dot system, at least for my airgunning.

Here are a few about the pump:

• I suspect I'm going to be happy I ponied up for the Hill unit (there are other hand pumps that are cheaper, but everyone seems to suggest that the Hill is truly that much better a pump).
• There are lots of little things that I'm learning about dealing with high-pressure air in a small tank.  For just one example, I've already noticed the gauge on the pump and the gauge on the AirForce tank being out of sync (and you're supposed to trust your pump, first!).
• Refilling in the field is a great idea, but must take into account that pump is heavy!  I may choose to acquire a spare tank or two for field work--they would be much more portable.
• It seems pretty clear that safety procedure for high-pressure air is worth investigating further.  Very well, here I go!

Yeah, that's "brief" for me.  There will be more later, when the new chronograph (many thanks to my parents for that) arrives and I get to do some meaningful performance testing, and of course for the zeroing operation.  Perhaps this weekend...  :-)

Squee.