Hector's Airgun Blog

The North Carolina Classic 2023

5/31/2023

This year, the NCC was hosted by the Piedmont Handgunner's Association.

And it was a VERY NICE match.

Perhaps we should start by understanding what is "Piedmont".
Piedmont in most romance (derived from Latin) languages will mean the same thing: Foothills (Pied-Foot, Mont-Hill).
Why is this important? Because it gives us an understanding of what the "lay of the land" is.
In the USA case, the Piedmont goes from New York, to Central Alabama, and, clearly, North Carolina is well included.
Because the Piedmont is formed from the erosion of the Appalachians the lay of the land will be of smooth, undulating hills, with creeks and ravines, and sub-alpine vegetation.
The "Lay of the Land" also dictated which immigrants chose to make that region home. It is not surprising the foundational role of Scottish Highlanders, Germans, Moravians, Italians that created the populations centers and even gave the region its name (mirroring the Italian Piemonte, or the French Piedmont).
Usually, people like to settle in places that remind them of the "Old/Home Country".

For us, FT shooters, the lay of the land means specific challenges that need to be met, it means being aware, awake and alert to the changing conditions, and how the wind flows in "abrupt" terrain. How it shifts, shakes trembles, rattles and rolls, and how our "little pellets" are affected by it.

For spring-piston shooters, in particular, it also means that you need to be aware of the change in trajectory. Different elevations present different amounts of air mass per unit of volume, and so our MV sees some effect.

And, lastly, for low power shooters (sub-12 ft-lbs), it means that we need to be EXTRA CAREFUL to the "profile" of the winds along the trajectory of the pellet from muzzle to target.

Having laid down most of the premises, let's get to the trip and the shoot.

First of all I have to thank my family, for having taken the trek to this "new to us" venue. They had gone in the past to Ennice (6 hours drive), and to Pleasant Hill (4 hours drive), both NC destinations but this was the first time that we went to Lynnwood. Which ended up being an 8 hour drive due to construction and long weekend traffic. It was not easy on the kids, but they took it the best they could.

We arrived on Friday directly to the range just to make sure that the gun was reasonably in order and that we knew where the range was.
Proper road signs directed us well, and we found the range in no time flat.
There were no paper targets on the Friday session, but a plethora of spinners, bells and self-resetting targets were available and so I took the Walther LGU out of its case and started checking that everything was good to go.

I had shot the same rig at the local DIFTA match and the Palmyra match of a few weeks before, and I was still fine tuning some things. For this outing, the lesson from Palmyra had been that a buttplate that helped in making the shouldering repeatable was important, and the results at DIFTA confirmed the fact.
So I mounted a WKP buttplate and it proved to be exactly what I needed.

I had already mounted a WKP buttplate in my DIANA 54, but I had not taken into account the different cocking mechanisms and that brought problems. More on that later.

After some shots to settle in and then some more to confirm that everything was in order, I was pleasantly surprised to see that it was, zero was within 2 clicks and trajectory had not changed, so we adjourned to the hotel to do the check-in and settle down till the next morning.

Next morning, we arrived in time for the sight-in and, again, gun proved to be stable, which is quite interesting in a spring gun.
Zero and trajectory confirmed, family went off to the North Carolina Museum of Transportation (son is a fan of railroads), and I settled into the Chrono certification and the Shooter's Meeting.

All due formalities covered, we went to the lanes. I was shooting with my good friend Gerald Long. And he started cleaning lane after lane after lane. I didn't start too well, but I was not worried.
The course reminded me a LOT of the WFTC's in Portugal. Two of the courses were set up at the top of a small hill and the winds were a headache. They switched and swirled coming from all directions and the course was laid out in such a way that you had to move from one shot to the next. Not only rotate, move.

Apologies for my pictures, as they were taken with a waterproof camera that is "basic" to say the least.

To add, the position of most targets was about 18 degrees UP, and so it was VERY tiring (even more without a Hamster or a special FT Stock). Not enough to warrant a POA correction for elevation, but extremely demanding of those shooters that shoot unaided/unsupported.
By the time we reached the "cul-de-Sac" of the course (lane 20), I had let go a lot of points. Another lesson.

We were about halfway through the course when the standing lane came up and I forgot to keep track of where I was putting the force in the gun during the cocking stroke, and the upper "wing" of my buttplate snapped.
I was mad at myself and I never thought it would have such an important effect.

I still got three of the standers, and thought that everything would be OK.

Nothing further from the truth, after more inexplicable POI's, I decided to put a correction to the scope of -0.4 mRads, and I stopped posting big fat zeros. Still the proper correction would have to wait till the end of the match.
My partner Gerald was also having a hard time. He began the match by cleaning lane after lane, but suddenly he posted a zero. We thought he had been one revolution off, but upon further shooting, it was not the case.
He decided to not shoot the rest of the competition, and he was kind enough to stay with me as my scorer.
Day ended with a dismal 24/60.
But there was still another day and, even if it was forecast with nastier weather, I hoped that I would be able to redeem myself.

After turning in our score cards, we adjourned to the sight in range, and we confirmed that Gerald's scope had taken a dive into unknown territories.

First day of the Match went well, except for a couple of cold lines called to fix some targets; after that, everything went smoothly and we finished shooting at about 13:30 hrs. AND the weather held for us, as it started raining by the time we were having lunch.
We even had a chance to smoke our yearly (yes, only once a year at every NCC) stogie during the raffle:

(which, for a change, was good to me, LOL!) we agreed to convene at the Outback for dinner, and went home.

The forecast for the second day of the competition was that it would stat raining from 08:00 hrs.
So, after breakfast with the family, we arrived at the range and I started checking everything.
Wind was blowing somewhat violently, but some lulls could be used and there was no rain.
Targets were raised, some of them weighted and we proceeded.

I found that zero was still out, after -0.5 mRads of correction, finally I was on again.
Almost a full (-0.4 -0.5 = -0.9 )mRad! and just on account of a change in shoulder positioning.
I have always advocated the curved rifle pads for the DIANA 54, but this experience tells me that recoiling spring guns are even more unforgiving of small changes in shoulder positioning. Big lesson.
Several groups were shot at 55, 40, and 25 yards. The one I could not shoot was the 10 yards because the target had been blown down. And I thought it would not make too much of a difference. Again, a big mistake.
Chronoed the gun and there was only 1 fps between the day before (733.9 fps) and this day's reading (735.2 fps), so that was good.

After the shooter's meeting and the squadding, we proceeded to the lanes and the second match began.

I was squadded with Aimee DeLaCruz, as we shot lane after lane, Aimee was having problems. But as a good trooper, she stuck to the issues, corrected a few things and started connecting.

Photo by Russell Sauer, used by permission

Again, apologies for the bad pictures.
BUT, Aimee's father (Russell Sauer) was also taking pictures! And his pictures are very good indeed. You can see some of them HERE.

As the shoot progressed I was doing much better, till we reached the short 3/8"s targets. The first miss at 10 yards told me that something was dramatically wrong on the short ranges, and so more "zero hunting" took place over the next lanes.
When I felt I had some serious data, after lane 4, I took out my Tablet and re-calculated the whole trajectory. There was ½ mRad of correction that was needed in the short ranges (9 to 15 yards), from there on, I started connecting with the 3/8"s KZ's of the Yellow course.

One target in particular was an interesting lesson: It was at the top of the ridge and the wind was blowing over from the rear/left, so even though the wind was blowing left to right, most misses were a bit wide on the left and low. It was not a far away target and most shooters were shooting at 18-20 ft-lbs ME, so that was strange.
What was happening was that the wind was curling and started rolling over the ridge, creating a high pressure zone on the UPPER/RIGHT of the target which tended to shift the pellets to the left and down.

;-)

As I said, interesting course with much to learn from.

Overall, the end result for the second day was a much better 42/60 and the total for the 2 days a 66. Not bad for the third outing with a gun and pellet combo.

Only the last two lanes were shot under rain, so the weather was not as nasty as it had been forecast.

Could it have been better? Sure! ALWAYS! I don't think we can ever be completely happy; it's our nature. To polish, to perfect, to strive to improve. If we weren't like this, we would be probably be playing something else, LOL!
Perhaps we are somewhat masochistic in cherishing the opportunity to shoot in the rain, wind, and darkness but I have to say I had a ton of fun!

Photo by Russell Sauer, used by permission.

I am still looking into this QSC thing. Next step will be to implement the technology in a DIANA.

Question still lingers: What will I take to the WFTC's?

Keep well and shoot straight!

HM

2 Comments

The 0.20" cal. DIANA 54 Project

3/13/2023

1 Comment

In the way of an Introduction

Because Steve is well known to our readers, having spent considerable time creating "The Sled" and then tuning a DIANA 56TH, I will not introduce him again.

Those interested in his previous appearance here need to look into the following links:

https://www.ctcustomairguns.com/hectors-airgun-blog/the-saga-of-a-56-th

https://www.ctcustomairguns.com/hectors-airgun-blog/the-saga-of-a-56-th4603110

https://www.ctcustomairguns.com/hectors-airgun-blog/the-saga-of-a-56-th8042880

https://www.ctcustomairguns.com/hectors-airgun-blog/the-saga-of-a-56-th2541108

So, without further ado,

¡Enjoy!

HM

Guest Blog by Steve Herr

This project began in January of 2022 with email correspondence between Hector Medina and myself. I
was seeking advice on caliber choice for optimum accuracy at longer ranges in the D54/56 platform. My
current rifles at that time were two Diana 56's, both in .177, and I was questioning the performance of the
.22 caliber. Hector mentioned the .20 caliber as an option, and the possibility of testing one of his D54
CCA .20's. After a few more emails back and forth, I agreed to take on this project. Within a couple
weeks a package from Hector was received containing a D54 CCA .20 (minus the stock), along with a
Titan XS #4 spring, an O-ring Light piston and a couple tins of the JSB 13.73gr Exact .20 pellets. Also
included was a Harmonic Muzzle Tuner. Everything was packaged nicely in a foam lined hard case.

This was a new, old stock rifle that Hector had set aside in storage. It was complete with the Lothar
Walther .20 caliber barrel and OEM powerplant just as it had arrived from the factory. The outside of the
action was finished in matte black like the D56’s, and was marked 14 von 30. Since I started off with the
action only, the D54 CCA action was installed in one of my D56 thumbhole stocks to kick things off.
Hector's instructions for this project were quite simple
• Complete the 300-shot barrel break-in as per his guidelines
• Make it what I want after that
That was simple enough and gave me a blank slate to work with. I had read about the D54 CCA .20's in
the past, but never expected to have one in my hands to test, so this was an exciting adventure. With both
OEM and O-ring light pistons, along with the OEM and Titan XS #4 springs available for testing, I was
ready to go!
The outline for testing looked like this;
• Barrel break-in
• Velocity and Consistency
• Accuracy and POI Repeatability
Before moving on, let me explain the difference between accuracy and POI Repeatability. In my opinion,
you can have a very accurate rifle that is able to print nice tight groups, or hit a spinner target on every
shot. But, that does not necessarily mean it will have a repeatable POI. As the rifle is set up at slightly
different angles from shot to shot, things can change. Things like shot cycle, recoil and hold sensitivity
come into play, all of which can make a rifle less tolerable to changes in position when aiming at various
targets. Another critical component is rifle fit, which will be covered later in this article.
During the POI Repeatability portion of testing, I aim at various spots around the target, from top to
bottom and side to side, with a single shot at each spot. The target is then evaluated for shifts in POI from
one spot to another. I have seen minor changes in preload, and even TP size have an effect on this in my
sub-12 fpe rifles. On the D54/56, the sled tension comes into play as well. If you are too tight (or too
loose) on your sled tension, POI repeatability could suffer.
Ok, lets move on to the first part of this project...the barrel break-in.

Barrel Break In

The project began with a 300-shot barrel break-in as per Hector’s guidelines. This was a tedious process,
which involved shooting 3-5 pellets, and then pulling several patches through the bore using a Crown
Saver (see below). You then repeat this process for a total of 300 shots.

During the barrel break-in, velocities began to drop. There was a fair amount of spring buzz too, so I was
anxious to move on so that I could machine a delrin guide to fit this spring.
After the 300-shots were complete, the final step in the break-in was to fire lap the barrel with 5 shots
using pellets coated in JB non-embedding bore paste. Velocities dropped even more during this exercise,
and I could smell something burning. It turned out that the original breech seal had eroded severely.

The rifle was pulled apart and the original (black) breech seal was replaced with a Maccari OEM style
seal.
While the rifle was apart, I polished the ends of the main spring and machined a fitted delrin guide to
eliminate the spring buzz. A quick test at 13-yards showed a reasonably uniform group and a much better
feel on the shot.

Before moving on to the next phase of testing, I decided to make a dedicated press for this rifle.
Knowing that there would be numerous combinations tested, I wanted to make something that would not
stress the rifle in any way when pressing. While I have an Air Venturi Rail Lock compressor, I did not
want to use that for the amount of times this rifle would need to be compressed.
My press was based on a couple different designs that I had seen on the internet, with a few changes. The
action is supported in a rubber lined cradle to minimize chances for scuffing, and the barrel is not stressed
in any way when pressed. The barrel slides through a delrin collar, and all of the pressure goes against the
end of the receiver, which presses against the delrin plug that was machined for an exact fit into the
opening in the end of the receiver.

Velocity/Consistency testing

This was an eye opening experience for me, with many ups and downs. My goal was to achieve the
highest possible velocity, while at the same time maintaining target accuracy and repeatable POI.
Going into this project, the targeted velocity was 870-875 fps range. This idea was eventually abandoned
after seeing the rifle was gradually settling in at lower velocities, and any attempts to retain the higher
velocities were unsuccessful.
For the most part, the highest velocities were achieved when there was a certain degree of detonation
taking place, and this occurred mostly when using the original compression tube. As a side note, I
discovered that the original compression tube had a low spot, which was allowing the piston seal to skip
over it during the piston stroke. This resulted in unstable velocities.

After this defect was discovered, a brand new Compression Tube was installed and the detonation with
extreme spreads in velocity went away.
I was still seeking velocities of 870-875fps. With about 4 different tests already complete, I continued on
through approximately 14 additional tests of various combinations before accepting the fact that the
spring was settling, and 875 fps was not going to happen. It now looked like the max velocity might be
around 815-820fps. Time to accept that and move on.
Throughout the velocity testing, a number of mechanical variables were evaluated in different
combinations;

Original OEM
Compression Tube
Piston
Main Seal at 28.35mm
Main Spring

New OEM
Compression Tube
Piston
Main Seal at 28.58mm
Main Spring

Other
O-ring Light Piston
D460 Blue Breech Seal
Maccari OEM style Breech Seal
Maccari Main Seal at 28.42mm
70% Moly Lube
Krytox GPL205
Ultimox 226

Transfer Port Inserts
Brass
Alu-Bronze
416 Stainless Steel
Various sizes ranging from 4mm down to 3.65mm

Discoveries during the Velocity/Consistency testing

Original Compression Tube - The Original compression tube had a low spot on the inner wall, and was
unstable when using smaller sized main seals. This cleared up after a larger main seal was installed,
which measured 28.58mm at the lip. Much smaller than that, and the issues returned.

Transfer Port Inserts – A number of Transfer Port sizes were tested using machined inserts that were
based on Hector's design. I found that using softer metals such as Brass or Alu-Bronze would ovalize
under the pressure. When this happened, velocity would gradually start dropping off. Hector
recommended using steel for the TP inserts, so I switched to 416 stainless and have had no problems ever
since.

An added bonus to this insert design is that the pellets are seated into the breech at exactly the same depth
shot after shot. This contributes to more consistent velocities.
This is a pellet after being inserted by hand

This shows the pellet after the breech was closed, and it had been seated by the Transfer Port Insert.
The pellets seat to this same depth shot after shot.

D460 Blue Breech Seals – My results indicated that the D460 blue seals would tend to bleed off some
pressure when installed onto the Transfer port insert with the wide side facing out. Even with the thin
base on my Transfer Port inserts, the wider portion of the D460 seal was riding right on the edge of the
opening in the Compression tube. The inconsistent velocity due to pressure bleeding off was most
apparent when adding more preload on the main spring, or using transfer port inserts that were sized
below 4mm ID. Reversing the seal and placing the wide side down against the base of the insert resolved
this issue.

D460 Blue Breech Seal

Wide side facing out

Reversed with wide side down – The better choice

In order to properly seat this seal into the compression tube, I made a simple tool using an Allen bolt.
The inside of the bolt head was machined so that it could press the seal into place without damaging the
metal TP insert. A few taps with a small ball-peen hammer and the seal was solidly in place.

Maccari OEM style breech seals – Although these work quite well, they are an extremely tight fit within
the compression tube. Changing them out is not an easy task. Additionally, they are made of a harder
material and must be drilled out in order to fit the TP inserts. In comparison, the D460 blue seals are a
softer material, require no drilling and are easily removed when changing port sizes.

Original OEM Spring – A couple things happened with the original spring. First, the spring settled and
velocities eventually dropped to around 815fps. Next, the spring developed a very noticeable twist. This
was due to the fact that there was no tophat installed from the factory. For anyone who has used a tool to
compress a main spring, you know that they will twist and buckle in all sorts of directions unless you use
a properly fitted guide and tophat. When compressed on the shot, you should have little to no space
between tophat and guide in order to keep the spring straight. Having too much space between them will
only allow the spring to twist itself out of alignment. I eventually machined a 2.7mm tophat for this
spring to help keep it straight.

OEM powerplant and Transfer Port sizes – After the spring finally settled, the OEM powerplant did
not appear to do well with transfer ports much less than 4mm ID.

Titan XS #4 Main Spring – This was tested with the OEM powerplant several times. Before the original
spring settled in, the Titan spring was usually showing lower velocities. However, after “both” of these
springs settled in, I would say they were relatively equal in power output.
The difference I saw was that, unlike the OEM spring, the Titan #4 seemed to prefer smaller Transfer Port
sizes. In the end I chose this spring. In my opinion it is more consistent and has a better feeling shot
cycle.

OEM piston vs O-ring Light – In my opinion the O-ring light piston is more consistent, and has a better
feel on the shot. Just smoother all the way around. This piston is about 43.5g lighter than the Diana
OEM pistons, and may provide a slightly quicker shot cycle.

The supplied O-ring Light piston was a touch longer than the OEM piston, which reduced the stroke and
resulted in lower velocities. In order to correct this, I machined 1mm off of the nose. The pistons now
match in overall length and strokes are identical.

The only time I saw instability with this piston was when the Transfer Port size was reduced below 4mm
ID without reversing the D460 breech seal. After reversing the seal, the problem was resolved.

Krytox GPL205 vs Ultimox 226 – When I first started testing the O-ring light piston, I thoroughly
cleaned the compression tube out with acetone. This lube worked great for about 200-300 shots, but then
began to gum up and velocities dropped and became unstable. After disassembling the rifle I could feel
that the piston movement was sticking and very sluggish. I reached out to Hector and he recommended
using a 3-step process to clean things out to make sure all remaining traces of moly were removed. As
per Hector’s recommendation, the following three products were used in this order;

1) Citrus Cleaner (I used a product called De-Solv-It)
2) Lacquer Thinner
3) Acetone

Products were used in the order listed above, thoroughly soaking and scrubbing during each step. I was
amazed at how much black moly was still coming out of thecomp tube. This process took about 45
minutes until the rags were coming out completely clean. Both piston and compression tube were cleaned
in this manner.
Hector also recommended switching to the Ultimox 226 lube, which I did. At the time of this writing, I
am well over 500 shots into it and have had no further issues.
In the chart below, you will also see that at one point the new OEM piston was used. This was done after
I noticed that the piston rod was quite wobbly on the original piston. I don't think this was causing any
issues, but the new piston was purchased just in case. I never really noticed a difference between the two
other than the fact the new piston rod was nice and tight.
I could outline in detail each of the 26 individual tests that were conducted, but that would be a VERY
boring read for a lot of folks. Instead, I decided to post a chart below showing the specifics of each test in
the order of which they were conducted. On the right hand side of this chart you will see comments
indicating the success or failure of each test. You can also see that I began to overlap the accuracy and
POI testing. I would routinely test for accuracy and POI on calm days as a sense check of how the rifle
was doing on target. Velocity means nothing if you don’t have accuracy so it is important to watch both.
As you will see, the velocity eventually settled to around 812-815fps, at which point all of my attention
moved to Accuracy and POI repeatability.

Accuracy and POI Testing

With the velocity testing complete, my attention was moved to the target accuracy portion of this test.
Listed below are some key items that contributed to the final results on target, some more than others.

Scope at Mechanical Center - With the velocity testing complete, the barrel was tweaked for POI. I like
to run my scopes as close as possible to mechanical zero with POI set at around 30 yards. Prior to
tweaking the barrel, even with the compensated ZR mount, the POI was still a few inches low and left at
30 yards with the scope at mechanical zero. Mechanical zero allows the internal springs to balance out,
and can result in more consistent accuracy and long term durability of the scope.

Establish Rear Sled Tension Setting – This step was actually completed much earlier in this project. In
the early stages of tuning a D54/56, I like to pull the rear sled mechanism apart and polish things up. The
main thing that I polish are the base of the adjustment screw, and both ends of the coil spring. I feel that
this allows for smoother adjustments and movement of the ball. I also like to polish the surface on the
base of the sled rail bracket that the ball rolls against.

After the polishing is complete, all oil, dirt and old Loctite, etc, are cleaned from the threads before
reassembling.

Next, I establish the best tension setting for the rear sled, or at least get it in the ballpark. As a starting
point, I generally begin somewhere around minus 1 turn from max. With sled in the unlocked position,
turn the adjustment screw in (clockwise) until it bottoms out. You then turn counterclockwise 1 full turn
to begin your testing. From there, make tiny moves in either direction (maybe 1/8th turn at a time) while
observing performance on target. When making changes, always take a few shots after an adjustment was
made before monitoring performance on target. Sometimes the disruption of removing the rear stock
screw in order to make an adjustment will cause a few erratic shots until things settle back in. This really
applies anytime you pull things apart to make changes.

Documentation is key here, so take notes as you go. When you find what you believe is the best setting,
you will then need to verify this setting.

In order to verify your setting, make sure that the sled is in the “unlocked” position. Counting the turns
as you go, turn the sled tension adjustment screw clockwise until it is maxed out. You then turn it
counterclockwise this same amount. You have now returned to your original setting. Document this
setting.

After the setting has been documented, loctite the adjustment screw using blue, medium strength. The
process I follow is outlined below;

1) Add a drop of blue medium strength Loctite above the screw as shown below

2) Insert your allen wrench and back the screw out counter-clockwise 2 turns, and then turn it back in
that same amount. The threads will now be coated with Loctite and it will be set to your desired
setting

3) Immediately dab out the excess Loctite from above the adjustment screw and you are done.

The process above will insure that no Loctite migrates down into the spring/ball mechanism. If any
Loctite gets to the spring and ball, the ability of the sled to unlock and travel smoothly will be greatly
diminished, and accuracy will suffer. So, you must be very careful in not allowing this to happen.

For the majority of this project I was battling with fliers on target, even after setting the rear sled tension.
The rifle would perform well and show some nice tight groups, but would then have a couple random
fliers, some of which were fairly substantial. I began to move away from 5-shot groups in favor of 10-shot
groups as I was working to resolve the issue with fliers.

Even on my 13-yard indoor range, the effects of the fliers could be seen.

Harmonic Tuner - I am a big supporter of Harmonic Tuners and went through several tests to verify
optimum settings during this project. Even with the unstable groups and fliers, I could still see which
settings resulted in the tightest core groups on target, while ignoring the fliers.
Multiple tests revealed that 4 and 8 o-rings continually came to the surface as the best settings. The fine
tuning of the HT allows you to closely time the exit of the pellet from the barrel to an end point in travel
of the muzzle on the shot. It does not take much to make a change on target.

Let’s shift all focus onto the things that were contributing to the fliers.

It was quite evident that the rifle wanted to shoot. I had many tight core groups, but the random fliers
were ruining things. There were a number of things contributing to the fliers, which I will outline below;

Harmonic Tuner coming loose – Even the slightest movement of this tuner will change POI and allow
the barrel shroud to slide back and forth resulting in accuracy issues. The HT must be pressed snug
against the o-rings and barrel shroud before snugging up the set screws. The supplied screws kept coming
loose, and I did not want to loctite them.

Here you can see the effects of a loose HT on target at 28 yards

The supplied set screws were replaced with nylon locking screws from McMaster Carr, which took care
of this issue.

Barrel Shroud (Inner Sleeve) moving – The thin inner sleeve that surrounds the barrel started sliding
backwards within the outer shroud. This happened several times and it did not want to stay in place.
Accuracy was immediately impacted as soon as it began to shift. Hector recommended that I flare the
back end of the inner sleeve to keep it from sliding underneath the outer shroud. After doing this, the
sleeve hasn't budged. I marked it so that I can always see it at a glance that it is staying in place.
In the attached pictures you can see how far it would shift.

After flaring the end of this sleeve it has not moved

Tight spot in breech – Pressing pellets through the bore revealed a tight spot in the area where the barrel
is pressed into the outer breech cylinder at the factory. I would like to mention that many spring piston air
rifles have this issue to one degree or another, so this is not just an issue with the Diana.
As I slowly pressed a pellet through the breech, it would get tight at this one spot, and then free fall with
no resistance until it hit the choke. Because lead is soft and does not spring back, the tight spot essentially
resizes the pellet, allowing it to lose contact after the tight spot until it hits the choke area. This is not
good and can definitely contribute to fliers as pellets are unstable through much of their travel down the
bore until they hit the choke.

At first I attempted to polish this out using felt pellets on a brass jag, but that did nothing. I then decided
to hand lap the tight spot using form fitting lead slugs screwed onto a brass jag. This was a tedious
process where I used a number of lead slugs and compounds of 120/220 grit, 400 grit and then a final
polishing. The slugs were an exact fit to the rifling and once removed could not be reinserted. After
pulling them from the breech, and new slug had to be made.

A generous coating of grease was applied as a carrier for the compounds, while I worked solely on the
tight spot, testing pellet fit often. When I was satisfied that the tight spot was leveled out, I worked the
entire length of the breech to blend things in, followed by an overall polishing up to the choke with felt
pellet on a jag using JB followed by a mild polish. After this was complete, pellets pressed through the
bore had a nice even pressure from breech to choke with absolutely no free fall.
In the photo below you can see the difference in the rifling engagement on the pellet. Pellets were
pressed up into the barrel, but stopped before they reached the choke, and then pressed back out through
the breech. The pellet on the left was “before” the hand lapping, and the pellet on the right was “after”.
Big difference.

Front Sled – The front sled was a little rough and had inconsistent tension when moving. It also had a
slightly loose fit to the rail.
For most of this testing I had worked solely on the rear sled tension, and although the rear sled tension is
absolutely critical in maximizing accuracy on the D54/56 platforms, it did not get rid of the fliers.
After studying the design of the front sled and its single rail, I decided to modify it in a way that would
tighten things up and remove the looseness, while at the same time allowing tension adjustment similar to
the rear sled, but with smoother movement than the OEM ball bearings.
A summary of what was done:

• Existing springs/balls were drilled out and removed.
• Balls were replaced with pads machined from phosphor bronze, using the original springs (minus
1 coil) for tension. Nylon locking set screws were added so that spring tension on the feet could
be adjusted.
• Two holes were drilled on either side of the sled block, and PTFE gibs were added to hold tension
against the rail using nylon locking set screws.This eliminated the slop between the sled block
and rail.

This idea was borrowed from Hector's accurized ZR mounts.

After both front and rear sled settings were established, screws heads were marked and scribe marks
added to the top of the sled blocks to enable a quick check that settings were holding

While on the subject of the front sled, it is worth mentioning that sled tension is a critical component in
accuracy on this platform. I initially thought that running the front sled with the least amount of
tension/resistance would give the best accuracy, and when the spring loaded bronze feet were first
installed I had extremely low tension on the front sled. Accuracy was much worse.

The front sled must have tension on it for maximum accuracy and repeatable POI. It kind of acts like a damper for the rear sled, smoothing out the unlocking during the shot, and adding consistency to the
overall sled movement. It is a balancing act and with the added adjustments on the front sled, fine tuning
can now take place for optimized accuracy. Set it too loose and accuracy will suffer. Set it too tight and

you will begin to feel some recoil and the rifle will become more hold sensitive. I found it best to tighten
up until I felt a little recoil and then back off a little bit. Same goes for both front and rear sleds, if you
begin to feel some recoil, you went too tight.

The two things that had the most impact on getting rid of the fliers were the breech lapping and
the front sled modification, with the front sled modification having the most impact overall.

Results on target were clear, fliers were gone. Here is a 10-shot group at 25 yards

In addition to the fliers, I was also experiencing random shifts in POI whenever I attempted to run the
metal self-leveling washers in place of the OEM metal and rubber washer assemblies inside the stock.
With self-leveling washers in place, the rifle would shoot well, and then all of a sudden the POI would
shift. I would then adjust my scope and be fine for a while, but the POI would then shift again and I
would have to adjust once more. The problem was eventually discovered as outlined below.

Self-Leveling Washers – When the self-leveling washers were first installed, I polished the mating
surfaces to allow them to level out more smoothly when the stock was in place. I also added bronze
bushings for a tighter fit onto the post of each sled. While the bronze bushings were a nice modification,
the polished surfaces were not. I discovered that they were too smooth and would allow the washers to
shift when shooting, resulting in shifting POI.

Polished

Hector installs them unpolished, so I decided to purchase another set from McMaster Carr and test them
unpolished. I still added the bronze bushings, but did not polish them. I tightened the stock mounting
screws up to 30 inch pounds and have had no problems since. They stay put and offer what I believe to
be a more consistent and rigid sled movement without having the variability of the OEM rubber washers.

Unpolished

With the fliers now under control and no more POI shifting, there were some
additional changes made to enhance accuracy and improve repeatability of POI

I eventually received the OEM D54 stock from Hector and installed it for the remainder of this testing
.
Recoil Pad – After switching over to the Original D54 stock, the length of pull was too short for me, and the cheek rest was way too low. This caused neck pain and issues on target.

The first step taken was to install a Morgan Premium Curved adjustable recoil pad. This has an aluminum
base that requires custom fitment to your rifle, and you must pick a size that is closest to the dimensions
of your butt stock. I ended up letting the OEM plastic spacers in place for some added length, which
worked out perfectly.

Cheek Rest – The cheek rest was way too low and I was unable to align myself properly to the scope
without lifting my head off of the stock. I reached out to Hector for suggestions, and ended up purchasing
one of his leather, padded cheek rests. I had used one of these before on a previous project, and
remembered that they were quite comfortable.

With the leather cheek piece installed, it was still too low. The ZR mount has the scope sitting a little
high, which creates a need for additional height on the cheek rest. After some research I decided to make
a custom fit cheek riser out of EVA Foam. The EVA foam is easily formed and shaped, and could be built
up to the perfect height, while fitting nicely under the leather cheek piece. A total of 25mm of additional
height was added in order to position me properly behind the scope.
In order to hold this EVA foam riser in place beneath the leather cheek piece, a thin piece of silicone
rubber was added between the wooden stock and the EVA foam riser. This held things in place nicely as
if it were glued.
In the pictures below you can see the difference before and after. The time spent making small
adjustments to the recoil pad position and cheek rest height was well worth it. This process reminded me
of my years spent shooting target bows. The fit of my bow was so critical in being able to repeat my
shots on target.
Fine tuning the rifle fit greatly improved the ability to repeat POI around the target. Being able to
position yourself consistently shot after shot is extremely important for both accuracy and POI
repeatability.

Before

After

HT Tuning – Tuning the HT is another critical part of getting the most out of the rifle. As mentioned
above, I had already been through a couple sessions of tuning the HT. However, now that the fliers were
under control, the OEM stock installed and the rifle fine-tuned for fit, I wanted to run one final test to
verify the ideal setting.
The results were now more clearly defined, and when I reached 8 o-rings it was quite clear that this was
the winner. This was the 3rd test where 8 o-rings had made the list. This test was test conducted at 37
yards. You can see the pattern changes as the muzzle swing transitions from vertical to horizontal, and
then settles close to an end point at 8 o-rings.

The target was then moved to 50 yards and I was pleased to see 7 shots under 1⁄2” ctc

Knowing how much even the tiniest change of the HT effected target performance, I wanted to take this a
step further. The o-rings are about 1.4mm thick when installed on the barrel, so each additional o-ring
moves the HT that amount. I wanted to fine tune in smaller increments in either direction of the current
setting of 8 o-rings. In order to accomplish this, I made up some delrin spacers of various thickness.
From that point on, my settings were identified in millimeters rather than # of o-rings. My starting point
was 8 o-rings, which was 11.2mm's. After some time on target I found that going over 11.2mm's hurt
accuracy. However, going slightly less than this improved it. Final spacing ended up at 10.88mm's,
which falls somewhere between 7 and 8 o-rings.

Sled rails – The sled rails can shift a tiny amount from front to back during the shot. Although it is only a
small amount, it can alter sled tension when sled first starts to move on the shot. In my opinion, having
the sled movement as consistent and rigid as possible is best for optimum accuracy. Shims were added
under the e-clips to take up this slop.

Trigger Work – The T06 was completely disassembled, cleaned, sear surfaces polished, then re-lubed. I
also removed 1.5 coils from the trigger tension spring. The OEM trigger adjustment screws were
replaced with TX200 adjustment screws for improved adjustability. I also added a set screw for adjusting
the length of stage one. Press nuts were installed after reassembly to keep the cross pins in place.
Trigger is now set for just under 10oz. I have had it as low as 8oz, but bumped it back up a little.

I also installed a shim under the plastic spacer at the front of the trigger assembly. This allows for a
slightly better fit within the receiver

Transfer Port Insert Sizes – During this project, a selection of transfer ports of various sizes were
machined for testing. While the OEM powerplant preferred a larger port, the O-ring light piston along
with the Titan XS #4 spring performed best with smaller ports. The 3.75mm port performed well, but the
3.65mm port seemed to have the edge with more consistent velocities straight off the rack cold and no
apparent loss in velocity over the 3.75mm port.

Pellet Lube – A series of tests were conducted indoors at 13-yards comparing lubed pellets vs unlubed.
Testing consisted of the following;

• T-9 (Spray) Lubed
• Unlubed
• Pledge Polish (Baked)

In the end, the Pledge baked pellets won for consistency, accuracy and POI repeatability.
Note: The Pledge baked testing was the only test that started out with a cold bore, and you can see that the
first shot was a touch to the left.
Shots are numbered on the target and coincide with the chronograph numbers

Preparing for another batch of Pledge Polish baked pellets

The next day I moved outdoors for a quick test at 37 yards to verify things at distance. This target was
shot first thing in the morning, cold off the rack. I wanted to include the cold bore shot so that you could
see that there is a slight difference in POI on first shot cold off the rack. This mirrors what I saw the
previous day on the cold bore shot (circled on the target above)
Cold bore shot slightly left, then 5 shots under 1⁄4”.

Other Modifications

Stock – After receiving the OEM D54 stock from Hector, I wiped it down with denatured alcohol and
sealed it inside and out with 3 coats of Maccari's Royal London Oil.

Cocking linkage pin – After breaking several OEM cocking linkage pins at the back of the threaded
adjustment rod, I replaced it with a hardened steel pin from McMaster Carr as per Hector's
recommendation.

Stock Mounting Screws – The Phillips head screws were replaced with button head allen screws,
machined to fit into the recess of the OEM washers.

Cocking Handle – A rubber stopper was added on the inside of the cocking handle to keep it from
smacking against the pull rod hinge at front of compression tube. This also helps to add a little more
space between the threaded cocking linkage rod and the sled reset bracket. You do not want the threaded
rod to contact this bracket as it will negatively impact sled movement and your results on target. You will
also feel the rifle begin to kick if this rod starts to make contact with that bracket.

Cocking linkage threaded rod adjustment block (rear) – This block had a sloppy fit to the linkage
pins, which may have been contributing to the broken pins. After several broken pins, I removed this
block, drilled out the hole and machined phosphor bronze bushings. The bushings were installed with
loctite 638 and have an exact fit to the linkage pins. I had no broken OEM pins after this, but opted to
replace them with hardened steel pins anyways per Hector's recommendation.

Rifle Info
Piston – O-ring Light
Lube – Ultimox 226
Main Spring – Titan XS #4 with fitted delrin guide, 1.8mm tophat and 3.2mm spacer
Breech Seal – D460 Blue reversed with wide side down
Transfer Port Insert – 416 Stainless Steel at 3.65mm ID
Trigger Pull – 9.9oz
Rear Sled Setting – Minus 9/16 turn from max
Harmonic Tuner Setting measured from end of shroud – 10.88mm
Stock Screws – 30 inch pounds using the spherical washers from McMaster Carr (Not the OEM rubber)
JSB 13.73gr at 20.21fpe

This has been another enjoyable project and in the end, I liked the rifle so much that I ended up
purchasing it from Hector. At 20+ fpe it is extremely accurate with a repeatable POI. With the addition
of the adjustable recoil pad and custom cheek riser, it fits me like a glove. As mentioned at the beginning
of this write-up, until now I had only read about the D54 CCA .20's. I feel honored to now have one in
my collection.

Hector, I cannot thank you enough for offering up this rifle for my testing and eventual purchase. Your
trust in me is much appreciated and it was a pleasure to work with you from start to finish on this project.

Closing Comments by the Editor

As a long-ago Teacher/Professor, I know how thrilling it can be to have a good pupil.
The slow and deliberate process of changing one thing at a time is well reflected in Steve's process and work.
His way of leaving no stone unturned, even in the face of difficulties and extensive waits, starts, stops and fits speak volumes about Steve's character.

It was truly a privilege and a pleasure to accompany Steve along this long path of research, enlightenment, discovery, and innovation.

In the old days Apprentices needed to present to the Master a piece that demonstrated that they had learned the skills needed for a trade. And then, fully-fledged tradesmen needed to present a piece to the Heads of the Guild to achieve "Master" status.
This is the origin of the word "masterpiece".
And this is what Steve has presented today to the airgunning community.

I hope it has been enjoyable to read, and I hope Steve's work will motivate others to do a systematic, scientific, exploration of different parts and sections of the "lowly piston airgun". A machine so complicated that we are still in the process of beginning to understand in all its complexities.

Thank you, Master Steve, for your hard work, your dedication, and your unswerving focus.

I hope we can continue to cooperate in the future.

Keep well and shoot straight!

HM

1 Comment

12/21/2022

0 Comments

This is a long story, but I'll try to make it short.

It all started about a year and half ago when I received a somewhat "peculiar" question from a person that signed his Emails as being part of "Small Arms Dev-Com/US Army"
And the question was peculiar because they asked if I thought that a Daisy Red Ryder could be powered up to shoot steel BB's at 690 fps.

¿HUH?!!!

OK, this merited some research!

As with any other customer, I got in contact with the young man and tried my best to find out what they really needed.
Because I knew what they wanted: A Daisy Red Ryder capable of shooting steel BB's at 590 FPS and that wasn't going to happen!
After some EMails were exchanged I understood the need.

In essence, these are the guys that CALIBRATE the gel blocks used for terminal ballistic testing.
To calibrate the blocks they shoot BB's at them, every shot gets chronographed and the penetration has to fall within certain parameters for the block to be "acceptable" for testing.
So, not only do they need to shoot the BB's at 590 FPS, but they need to keep to a Std Dev of 15 fps.
Once the gel blocks are calibrated then they get shot with serious stuff or form part of the safety equipment testing procedure (helmets, goggles, gloves, vests, chest plates . . .) everything gets tested with the "real thing", but that "real thing" needs to be tested in calibrated gel blocks. A sub-standard Gel block might give "passing grade" to a piece of equipment that can end up being dangerous to our guys in the field.

Now, from my experience in the pellet rifle world I thought that would be a piece of cake.

¡HA!

The Std Dev. proved to be the harder spec to meet, but we're getting ahead of the story.

So, coming back to setting up the project specs, I sent them a communication stating that there would be two possibilities: a spring gun (just not a R-R), or a PCP.

We analyzed the advantages and disadvantages of each powerplant, and originally, it seemed they had settled on a sidelever, I even tested an SPA SR900S sidelever to see what sort of MV's we could get, but then the ideas changed. It so happens that the system they were using was powered by Dry Nitrogen, and so the supply of compressed gas was absolutely no problem.

So, a proposal was made and sent.

Some months passed and I had already thought that the project had fallen through, but then I got a request to "update the proposal". OK, so got that done, and sent.

Some more months passed and another request came in for an update. Got it done and sent.

After some months had passed I was not really expecting anything when I get an EMail from a different person. Telling me they needed to submit the project for funding. That they needed a formal proposal.
OK, so I drafted a two page sheet with terms, conditions and specs, and sent it.

Some more months passed, and then I get an EMail from someone asking me to take a third party liability insurance for a Million Dollars. She also sent the full "Legalese" package.

As a gunsmith I am, above all, pragmatical, and if that was the ONLY way to do business, well . . . . Thanks, but no, Thanks.

And so I communicated what would be acceptable to CCA: I would deliver the system and provide all the information for safe operation. When the system had been tested, approved, and the technical personnel had signed off on the equipment as "fit for duty", then I would collect.

Some more "Legalese" was exchanged, and we finally agreed to a framework. To their credit, it was easier negotiating with the Army than with some construction contractors I know.

And then came a "purchase order". All formal and nice. With the request of some tax forms! . . . WHAT?????

Quick call to my accountant and then to my contact at Dev-Com and it resulted in a simple print-out of a form issued on line by the IRS. Phewwww!

At every step, my wife kept asking: "Are you sure this is all about a BB gun?" LOL!
And yes, I had to admit that it began to sound more and more "barroque".

But I decided to toe the line and get everything started.

The Build

After much discussion, we had settled on a DIANA Stormrider, black, 2nd Generation.
We would install an Altaros vented regulator, and a custom Lothar Walther smoothbore barrel.
We would tune the gun to shoot to the required speed using the techniques we developed many years ago.

Orders were placed for the parts, and within a week, parts started to arrive.
Pyramyd Air delivered the Stormrider
Altaros delivered the vented regulator

And we waited for the barrel.
Just two weeks after, the barrel arrived.
Wow!

So, now chips could start flying!

First was the disassembly of the OEM rifle, and "presenting" the parts available:

After the regulator and the additional manometer/quick-fill were installed, we tested for leaks by pressurizing the air tube and letting it rest for a week.
Meanwhile, we took the L-W smoothbore blank and turned it to fit the action:

Then the TP and a cavity had to be milled. The cavity would house a magnet that would hold the BB just in front of the point of the probe:

ORing grooves cut and a bit polished, the barrel went into the gun:

Action was presented and semi-assembled:

Variable, self-blocking TP was installed:

And gun assembled:

And then we tested.

WHAT A DISASTER!

With the initial calculations pointing to the idea that we should be getting about 12 ft-lbs, the gun yielded 1,016 ± 22 fps Not only too high, completely unacceptable from a regulated gun.

And so, we reduced the TP diameter.
And reduced it.
And reduced it.
Once we reached the 1.19 mm's, we could not reduce that anymore, and MV was still at 616 ± 75 fps
Hmmph!
Something was tricky here.
And I started measuring the BB's.

What I had obtained as "Precision Ground Shot" had diameter differences in the 0.0025" region.
Got another lot . . . same thing.

Then I spotted something Daisy calls "Premium BB's"; hmmmm . . . . let's try those.
MV came out at 623 ± 16 fps
Good; now we're cooking!

Since PCP's are nothing but mechanical amplifiers, I thought: "let's reduce the input signal".
Clipped one coil from the hammer spring , output came out to 649 ± 13 fps ¿¡Huh!?
So, we clipped and clipped the hammerspring till we were getting an MV of 587±10 fps

We let the project rest for a week and took a 30 shot string every hour
@ 11:30 .- 583 ± 16 fps
@ 12:30 .- 587 ± 13
@ 13:30 .- 585 ± 9
@ 14:30 .- 583 ± 12
@ 15:30 .- 587 ± 13

I sent the results of the tests to my guys and back came a question:

"If, for whatever reason, we need to change the MV, how do we do it?"

Aaaarghh! I should have seen than coming from the start!
IF (big if) I had known the wide variation in the diameter of the different productions of BB's, I would have, but I was ignorant of that.
And now, I was going to pay the price.
If negotiating the initial "contract" had been difficult, getting a "change order" would be even more. So, chuck it to experience, and service to the country.

Back to square ONE.

Because of the nature of the projectile, the small differences in diameter really throw a wrench into any calculation you might come up with. On top, the fact that there is no rifling means that the projectile is Ultra-Efficient in absorbing energy from the powerplant. No energy is taken form the shot cycle to "swage" the pellet to final shape, and virtually no friction means there is no energy lost there.

I considered a number of solutions but, in the end, settled on doing something that I should have done many years ago: design a free flight hammer system for the Stormrider. Back then, the results obtained by changing the TP were deemed more than acceptable on all grounds: efficiency, uniformity, consistency, and simplicity.

This project was different.

We procured the new hammerspring (because a FFH only makes sense if you start from a full hammerstrike and then reduce the output in a metered way).

We had to reset the regulator, re-do the TP adjusting, and recommence the whole testing protocol.
The stock in the SR had to be modified to accommodate the FFH device, and this posed another small challenge; as the SD's were inexplicably high, we first re-checked the whole pneumatic section but, in reality, it was a simple, intermittent, mechanical interference problem.

By the end of the 12th adjustment/setting. we finally settled nicely on a string of 30 shots that gave 592 ± 12 fps and then another 30 shot string of 585 ± 14 fps

The gun yields 4 strings of 30 shots at these power levels between 230 Bar's and 115 Bar's, though we recommended refill after every 90 shots.

And so, the gun was shipped to Picatinny Arsenal, and the reports so far is that the system is working "great".

The future

Yes it was a complex project, we learned a lot and it opened our eyes to an avenue of research that no one had gone into recently: Smoothbore barrels and their projectiles.
Airguns do not achieve the hypersonic MV's that some current military designs require to work well, but there are alternatives, and the new technology to "turn" lead makes for a VERY interesting duo.

We will follow a bit this development because it truly is an interesting avenue that I hope will garner some interest from the industry.

The next smoothbore L-W barrel is here... ;-)

Closing thoughts

I am very proud to have been able to help our military, even in the minuscule way we did.
The fact that, perhaps, some safety equipment will help keep a soldier safe in the field due to the thorough Terminal Ballistic Testing that the Army puts the protective equipment through is a matter of consideration to me.
And, it was really a pleasure and a privilege to deal with technically qualified people. Would love to meet them one day, but as with many friends in this airgunning world, I know it's going to be hard to meet them in person.

AND I need to add that without the support from great companies like DIANA, Lothar Walther, and Altaros Air Solutions, this project would have been MUCH more difficult to tackle properly.

To all our readers, thanks for one more year of your time and attention, we wish you all the very best of the Holiday seasons, do not eat too much Ham, nor drink too much Eggnog, and remember that everything is better in moderation . . . even moderation itself!

;-)

Ho Ho Ho!

HM

0 Comments

12/6/2022

0 Comments

Every now and then someone asks why I insist on proper lubing.

Another common question is: "¿What IS proper lubing?"

Still some others that think that offense is the best defense, ask: "Why do you lube your pellets? I shoot them straight out of the tin!"

;-)

Fair enough, we all know that each rifle is different but, still, in my years of professional gunsmithing I have found two basic "truths" that apply in airgunning:
1.- Pellets fly best at or below the 875 fps region
2.- PROPER lubing of pellets AND rifles DOES make a difference.

Perhaps in some guns the difference is small enough that it is impossible to measure, but IMHE, there is always a difference.

My mind follows very peculiar paths; "tortuous" would be the word chosen by my wife, but I prefer to think that I am always looking at all problems, sometimes simultaneously, from different points of view. Just part and parcel of being a Gemini, LOL!

In any case, as a pre-requisite experiment to a new design of piston that I need to tackle a complete "re-do" of some military replicas, I wanted to start by testing the new design in a well known platform. Normally, at this stage I would start looking into the classifieds and the whole thing would take some time but, luckily, I had already sourced it some months ago and that was covered. And no, it is not a DIANA.

All good experiments start by laying a "baseline". A point from where all other comparisons are going to be set-up, and so I proceeded to test the gun, after being in storage for some months.
Starting with a good 20 shot string just to bring the gun back to "operational" status, I started chronoing pellets that I knew usually shot well in that brand of airgun.
They are reputed to have bores on the "generous" side, so the first pellet chosen was the JSB Exact 8.44/4.53
As an aside, here I have to remind everyone that the numbers stated for the head size, in the case of JSB, are not exactly measurements taken from the heads of the pellets, but rather obey an indirect method of measuring where they test in different barrels and then assign the head size of the barrel that shoots them best.

I also added to the mix the H&N BFT, both in 4.50 and 4.51 head sizes. My experience is that the head weighs enough to be "upset" by the pressure blow and have a good contact with the rifling.
My DIANA guns (54 and 430L) prefer the 4.51 size, but some other guns prefer the 4.50

Finally, I added the QYS pellets that have been taking most of my time lately. Very uniform, and accurate when the bore likes the land-riding design of the head. Of course, creating a land riding pellet starts with the premise that people know that the design is handicapped in the power it can take. We'll get to that later.

So, all in all, 5 pellets that I consider the best among the current production runs.

AND then I started taking apart the "test mule".

Horror of horrors!

Gobs and gobs of black tars of different densities and viscosities. :-P Dughhhhhh!

It was going to take 3 hours to clean this mess!

But then, looking at the other side of the problem: ¿WHEN would I EVER get a better chance to test what has become the "traditional American grease tune"?

I was not going to do one of those tunes, LOL! .

I do not even have those heavy lubes at hand anymore! It's been YEARS since I stopped using those heavy petroleum derivatives. Paraphrasing a friend "That's dinosaur juice!"

So I closed again the gun, and got the pellets out to create that "baseline".

And a lightbulb flashed in my head: If I am going to compare lube jobs, why not compare also pellet lube jobs?
And the 5 became 7.

The test was simple enough once all the parameters were laid down, we would look at MV and KE of the 7 pellets chosen with the "grease" lube-tune and then clean the whole thing with lacquer thinner, and re-lube with Ultimox 226.

Because we had pellets with different leads and different lubes three shots were allowed between each change of lube, and 5 pellets between each change of lead. And then 10 shots were taken for the record for each pellet.

I did find that the pellet lube was a more important change than the change of pellet lead. Which is an interesting conclusion in itself. Many shooters believe that you need to completely clean the barrel and then take 20 shots with each different type of pellet you test, what I have found over the course of years, is that if you lube your pellets you need to worry more about change of lube than about the change of pellet/lead itself.
I have also found that most bores exhibit a definite preference for certain lubes. I used to use three lubes, but for a few years I have only used two now: Pledge and T-9. Both products that come from the non-shooting world, are inexpensive and widely available, and hold no "secret sauce".

Well it was a rainy and depressing day anyway, and I had just delivered a project to one of our Armed Forces, so I had the time before tackling other projects.
I shot the full 100+ shots test with the "Traditional Lube", and then spent, literally, a couple of hours cleaning that stuff, then re-lubed with Ultimox 226 and ran the whole test again.

And, here are the results:

So, how do we analyze this?

For starters, you can see that for identical pellets in the same rifle, under the same conditions, the difference in lube can mean between 2 and 8 fps in the case of the "dinosaur juice" lube-tune and between 2 and 5 fps in the case of the Ultimox lube-tune. In both cases, the fact that the difference was smaller for the H&N 4.51 pellets, tells me that we should try to achieve maximum accuracy with those pellets from the H&N family.
We can also notice that this bore seems to prefer the Pledge lubed pellets.

Some may say: 2 to 8 fps is not worth the work to lube pellets. While that is true from the energy standpoint, when you look for maximum precision and accuracy, those 2 fps can mean that the harmonics in the barrel "jive" to a good tune or produce a cacophony. Many times have I found that a harmonics tuner tuned to a "naked" pellet needs to be moved a tad when the pellets get lubed. And that some bores that "do not want to shoot" as the user wants, in reality are just asking for the pellets to be lubed to start shooting up to snuff.

Now, if we move ACROSS the lube-tunes of the SAME GUN, there are other things we can conclude, and basically, it's that if you are still using the old lubes, you are leaving a LOT of energy on the bargaining table. In other words you are not getting the efficiency that you COULD be getting, at least in a finely crafted gun like the one on the experimentation table.
Kinetic Energy gains of between 15% and 22% are nothing to sneeze at. And if the "quality" of the shot cycle was about the same, lowering the Ultimox tuned rifle to the same energy level as the Dino-juice tune, will certainly enhance the quality of said shot cycle. In brief: There are less inefficiencies that go to produce twang, vibration, heat and other residual energies (like noise) when using Ultimox.

Now, while some GAINS are impressive, you still need to consider which pellet will yield the best result at the target, and that is something we will be exploring soon.

Prime candidates for testing, especially at longer ranges would be:
H&N BFT both head sizes, as well as the Heavy QYS domed all lubed with Pledge, need to be tested, also the JSB 8.44/4.53 needs also a thorough testing and a testing with Pledge.

We can safely assume that the QYS light Streamlined is simply a bit light for the increased power transfer, and so it is deforming in the barrel, and loosing all efficiency. This may NOT pass, once the total power yield has been turned down to the proper level for FT.

Anyway, now that the questions about lubing (pellets AND rifle) have received an answer (limited to a sample of 1, agreed, but at least it is more than what we had before), it will be up to each shooter to decide if a lubing job of their gun and pellets is warranted or not.

Precluding any misunderstanding: we need to clarify that there is no substitute to the performance at the target.
Getting a uniform MV with low SD's certainly is a requirement to have a good performance at the target, but it's not a sufficient condition. Let's hope the weather will allow us to test these pellets outdoors soon.
Once that is done, we can continue with the next phase of the development.

Keep well and shoot straight!

HM

0 Comments

12/5/2022

0 Comments

Following on our "Unintended Coincidence" post, a friend with a LoA DIANA 34 EMS wanted to change calibers.
He was not happy with the 0.177" caliber as it seemed to be on the "loose" side and pellets fell when he swung the action closed.

So, we sourced a few barrels from DIANA and, while it took some time, I think the results are good.

Process is not complicated but it does require a specific order of operations.

You start by taking the action out of the stock, a simple three screw operation that we all know how to do.

Then you need to take out the rear sight and the front sight. Rear sight is no problem because the screws are visible. Just make sure that you do NOT loose the 0.5 mm's ball that creates the "clicks" in the rear sight elevation knob.

The front sight however, is a bit more tricky because under the visible "thread protector" there is a nut, and in the rear sight ramp itself, there is a grub screw:

Front sight assembly

Thread protector removed and nut loosened.

After the grub screw has been loosened, the whole ramp can come off.

So, now without the sights, we can start working on the action

Unlock the "knee" in the compound linkage and disconnect the linkage from the piston

You can now undo the main barrel block bolt/axle. Be sure to use TWO wrenches. Since there are Loc-Washers on BOTH sides, when "undoing" the bolt, you will feel it tightening and then releasing.

If the cocking linkage bothers you, now is the time to disconnect it from the block. There is a small grub screw on the distal end that "locks" this screw in place. Loosen that, and then remove the affixing screw.
Personally, it does not bother me so, I always work with the linkage connected.

You can even work with the rear sight on, but then you should be careful

And now you can slide the barrel block out of the forks.

There are two thick washers that provide for clearance between the barrel block and the forks. Those can be lifted with a strong magnet.

Now you need to insert a tool that prevents the barrel from rotating when you loosen the barrel locking castle nut

Using this special socket. And a 3/8" breaker bar, you give the breaker bar a good "Whack" with a plastic mallet

Once it has broken loose, you can remove it using any other socket handle

As in most gunsmithing that involves actions, it is best to set everything under tension and then "whacking" the wrench than to try to break the tightness smoothly. This is one of the more complicated things because it seems that you would need three hands. You don't, but you need to do it suddenly.

Once the castle nut comes out, it is easy to remove the breech seal/O'Ring

Using a PP/dead-blow hammer, you separate the barrel from the block

If you are just changing barrels, you just follow the reverse procedure to install the new barrel.

BUT, the truth is that now is the time to do whatever you want done to the barrel. From re-crowning to polishing the rifling with JB, or lapping the bore if you are so inclined.
Personally, I like to clean the barrels very well and then polish the bore and rifliig with JB bore paste.
In this picture you can see clearly, from left to right how the "exiting" pellets show less and less scratches and deformations as the process goes along:

From left to right: OEM barrel finish, then after a few passes with JB Bore paste, then after the whole treatment has been done.

If you think that the difference is purely cosmetic and wondering ¿"what does it matter if a pellet looks ugly when it comes out of the bore"? then look at the edges of the skirts:

The rougher edges always translate in a skirt that is more uneven.

Every bit of lead scraped out of place, instead of swaged into a new shape of the pellet is a disturbing influence not only on the pellet exit from the crown, but also on the pellet path.
Shards left in the bore may adhere to the next pellet and create a "vane" that will send a flyer out of the aimpoint.

This barrel was additionally re-crowned.

In the end, the work performed paid out.

What counts is performance at the target, and with the barrel's favorite pellets, it did quite well for a break-barrel in the 15 ft-lbs class:

Top group is 10 shots from the FT position at 15 meters (about 16½ yds) with a 4X scope, and the bottom group is also a 10 shot group, but with open sights at 10 m.

I don't know how it was shooting before, but I do know that any reasonable target at normal break barrel airgun range is in danger with this rifle.

;-)

Keep well and shoot straight!

HM

0 Comments

<<Previous

Hector Medina

2012 US National WFTF Spring Piston Champion
2012 WFTF Spring Piston Grand Prix Winner
2013 World's WFTF Spring Piston 7th place
2014 Texas State WFTF Piston Champion
2014 World's WFTF Spring Piston 5th place.
2015 Maine State Champion WFTF Piston
2015 Massachusetts State Champion WFTF Piston
2015 New York State Champion WFTF Piston
2015 US National WFTF Piston 2nd Place
2016 Canadian WFTF Piston Champion
2016 Pyramyd Air Cup WFTF Piston 1st Place
2017 US Nationals Open Piston 3rd Place
2018 WFTC's Member of Team USA Champion Springers
2018 WFTC's 4th place Veteran Springer
2020 Puerto Rico GP Piston First Place
2020 NC State Championships 1st Place Piston
2022 Maryland State Champion WFTF
2022 WFTC's Italy Member of TEAM USA 2nd place Springers
2022 WFTC's Italy
2nd Place Veteran Springers