Category: Gear

The Gunsmith's Tune; Parts 3 & 4.- Making the DIANA 430 all it can be.

3/11/2021

Part 3.- Full Power Diana 430L

This post will also serve as closure to the first part of the "Semi-Custom" job on the 430L.

The same disclaimer applies!

The conversion done here was carried out by a professional gunsmith. No warranties implied, or otherwise are intended in this article. The milling operations carried out here are sensitive, not devoid of dangers and of a high precision nature.
Do NOT attempt this conversion if you are not completely qualified to do so.
This conversion has NOT been sanctioned by Diana nor by Mayer & Grammelspacher.
This conversion proved safe IN THE GUN that it was performed. We cannot guarantee that all other guns will receive the conversion in the same way.
Please do not ask for measurements or dimensions, Connecticut Custom Airguns cannot provide these data.
All OEM designs and parts' shapes and dimensions are proprietary to Mayer & Grammelspacher and their Diana brand.

So, with that out of the way, let's get into what would be Part 3 of the "Gunsmith's Tune" series.

Full power means different things in different guns and to different people.

We had looked into the USA available springs for the 430 before and found a good performance with the long stroke piston and a Vortek spring from a kit, BUT we knew that the gun could deliver more.
The experiments performed with the Walther LGV gave us some ideas and the results of those ideas, as applied to the DIANA 280 have already been published, so we will not repeat ourselves here.
What we will report here is what happens when a FULL sixed Titan XS spring #1 is used in a 430L.

After installation, we were painfully aware of the increase in Peak Cocking Force (PCF) to about 46 #;
with H&N's BFT we were obtaining 842 ± 2 fps for a ME of 15 ft-lbs.

Accuracy was "Hunting good", as you can see from this target shot under windy conditions at 20 and 40 yards:

The very high cocking effort (> 45#) still remained as a problem. Efficiency was not bad at all, though not on the par with efficiencies obtainable in larger platforms.
For a hunting gun it was good, as seldom in a hunt will you take more than a couple dozen shots, but for some target shooting, it was too high a cocking effort .

What was an interesting experience was that the accuracy of the BFT prevailed over a wide range of MV's.

So, now that the full power of the 430L had been found (15 ft-lbs is the top limit), it was time to use the same spring, but cut back to achieve a better cocking effort that would be sustainable for some target shooting.

Part 4.- What can we get for a 36# PCF?

So, now we come to the end of our quest.

Can we get good efficiency, with a good shot cycle, a usable PCF for a useful return in ME, with good accuracy?

Well, the answer is yes, with some qualifications.

Once the Titan XS #1 spring came back to me, we ran a benchmark and found that it was doing pretty much hat it had been doing before it was lent over (right after the LGV tests) at 14.9 ft-lbs.

Based on the tune of the breakbarrel "brother" of the 430, we knew we would have to lop-off 4 full coils, and so, after cutting, sanding, forging closed and relevelling and polishing the ends, we chronoed the best 3 pellets at :

BFT 9.57/4.51 .- 727 ± 5 fps for 11.2 ft-lbs
JSB 8.44/4.53.- 797 ± 5 fps for 11.9 ft-lbs
QYS 8.49/4.50.- 777 ± 3 fps for 11.4 ft-lbs

Right where we wanted to start! Good idea this one of taking notes, LOL!

And once we determined that the cocking force did measure up to close to 35#:

We mounted a scope:

This little jewel deserves some discussion.
It is a very inexpensive scope, usually sold for less than $80 in various configurations

Funny thing is that when I looked for it again, to post the reference, though, it seems to have disappeared from the face of the earth!
Amazon doesn't sell them anymore, even AliExpress does not recognize the "brand".
Go Figure . . . one more mystery.

As you can see above, it is a 2.5-7X range variable with a 28 mm's objective lens.

And for sure what does not attract many airgunners is the "coarse" turret adjustments:

What people do not often realize is that at airgun distances, this is perfectly acceptable.

It is usually sold with a 100 yards parallax, but in the same way that we modified the Traditions rifle scopes, we re-parallaxed this scope to 55 yards.

Why 55? the targets where we tested the system will give away the intention of this rig.

So, what sort of performance, where it counts, is the rifle delivering now?

At 10 meters, with the proper timing and support it yields nearly match grade accuracy:

Testing different pellets at some distance re-affirmed my opinion that the BFT is a great pellet in this barrel:

With the wind blowing in the 10-15 mph range, the BFT's clearly show less wind drift than the QYS's

Moving back to extended ranges, taking the time to dope the wind, and supporting the gun in crossed sticks:

We can see that the gun is capable of 2¼ MOA's / 0.66 mrads
And at 72 yards, the gun delivers about the same (2.4 MOA's) / 0.69 mrads

Now, is this a FT gun? Nope!

It lacks the stock, the weight, the stability, and using 7X at 72 yards was an "interesting experience" LOL!

But the gun is eminently SHOOTABLE. It points well, it reacts well, it "stays in the shot" after recoil, it's comfortable to cock and easy to load with the loading port wide open due to the small scope.
It could be a great pigeon popper, or a tree rat - 'radicator.

And there is one more discipline that is dear to me and close to my heart: Siluetas Metálicas; where the shootability of a gun trumps hair-splitting precision. So, we did a test following the Pyramyd Air Cup distances, and shooting against the clock (53 shots in less than 4 minutes), and this was the result:

I still need to work on my hold, on my "purposeful" trigger squeeze, and on reading the wind.
I took TWO ranging shots on each target, as I had an idea, of where the reticle of this peculiar (and "ephemeral"?) scope was going to take me and, as usual, the turkeys proved to be the hardest.
But I would take 7 misses with a "new" gun, of unknown trajectory, and just "guesstimation" aiming any time, LOL!

Conclusions

It is interesting to see where the 430L architecture COULD have taken DIANA.
As interesting as the story is, it is quite fascinating how much MORE the platform could have yielded with a bit more real airgun engineering.
By no means is this the true MAX. But for expanding the capabilities further, we would have to alter the cocking linkages beyond what any, even the advanced, tinkerer would be able to do.

And, in so doing we would be touching on the heels of the 460, where this gun was derived from.

So, possibly, this points out to our USUAL way of doing things: Starting from the large platforms and seeing where we can increase the efficiency to the point where at least half the work put into the gun goes into the pellet.
We will explore that in the near future, when we develop the K-98 Mauser (by DIANA) into a ballisticaly optimized, 0.177" cal sniper games tool.

There is still some work that COULD be done with the 430L:
Some spacing of the spring could improve the shot cycle still further.
A heavier Top-Hat could improve the yield for the relatively heavy BFT
Different material ORings could increase the rail speed and the yield, though that would probably require a stouter pellet and runs the risk of changing drastically the very mellow shot cycle the gun has now.

We will continue using the Titan XS springs, they provide reliable, consistent energy over time and their tolerances work well for professional tuners that do not have the time to tailor a guide to a spring that is slightly different than the next one.

Apologies for having taken so long to finalize these two series. As for most of us, life has not been what it used to be before the "Year of the Masks".

Keep well, stay healthy and sane, get vaccinated, and shoot straight! ;-)

HM

3 Comments

Eine Großartige Dame

2/14/2021

15 Comments

Bringing back to life a Walther LG55

Doubtlessly, among the spring-piston airguns of the middle of the past century, the Walther line of "LG" rifles (LuftGewehr) must stand among the "Great Ladies".

We often forget that, until 1950, Germany was forbidden to produce rifles by the occupying Allies.

Walther was one of the first companies to resume activities in 1950, by 1951 they already were marketing their model 51, development continued for a few years along the same lines, achieving the final design and production of the LG55 in 1955.

The successor to the LG55 would be the "LGV" that was, for many, the epitome of the recoiling match springer.

After the LGV, Walther would opt for the Single Stroke Pneumatic (LGR), while DIANA went on to develop the "Giss System" guns (truly recoil-less) entering the market in 1963 with the model 60.

According to Walther, the LG55 was in production between 1955 and 1968

Now, in those days, the "Tyrolean" style stock had not yet been outlawed in competitions, and so quite a number of airguns from the three large brands of those times are so stocked.

Our adventure began back in November when, out of the blue, someone contacted me about repairing an "older German Target gun". As you can imagine, in my mind, that could mean almost anything, so we started exchanging EMails.

As the details came through it was obvious it was not a DIANA airgun and, so, I was very candid in telling the prospective customer that those jobs were as much a risk for the gunsmith as they were for the gun owner.

In the end, we achieved a consensus of how to work and with some links we found on the internet, he was able to locate a replacement spring and piston seal.

After a very nice (and socially distant) visit, he dropped off a rather nice (and hefty) Walther LG55, plus the spare parts he had been able to acquire.

Among the first things that popped into my head was : "That thing cannot shoot"

WHAAAT?? you're going to ask!

Well, simple, just look at the rear sight: It is "Mounted" onto the rear action closing knurled piece.
And the front sight is WAY TOO LOW!

But the gun was "toast" it would not build up pressure, so it was impossible to test it for a "Benchmark" experience.

The next thing that popped into my mind was: "This beauty must have shot thousands upon thousands of rounds". Boy was I going to be proven WRONG (yes, with capitals).

There was no information about how much the gun had shot or if it had shot well from the previous owners to the current possessor and, so, without much more to go by I was handed the gun, the baggie of spare parts and a box to contain everything.

Some time passed, as I am real busy, and when time came around to tackle this gun, I decided to take as many pictures as humanly possible, as well as to attempt the job in two stages:

On a first stage, I would try to bring back the gun it was supposed to be, with all the right parts and components. This to experience the REALITY of what a 1950's gun shot like.

On a second stage. we would upgrade the function to more modern standards, ease the maintenance of the gun, and ensure that now it will be properly used, cherished, and passed on. As the heirloom it is (or as the "cultural icon" that the German shooting world thinks it is).

So, let's tackle this!

First Stage.- what the LG55 was designed to be

We kicked off the repair with a huge problem:

The rear sight would not budge.
As noted above the rear sight had been "mounted" onto the knurled screw-in action closing cover. When trying to remove the sight, it broke!

Close inspection revealed a badly abused sight. Clearly the owners had serious troubles trying to sight in the rifle and they had filed and removed material from several places.

So, this is when I started thinking that the relationship between this gun and its first owner must have been a love-hate one.
The other thing that was discovered is that the sights were NOT designed to be so far back.
There are round "cross-troughs" at the top of the action where the single tightening knob's enlarged stem goes in and affixes the rear sight to the action, and there is NO way to get it mounted onto the rear closing cover.
This sight was mounted with a hammer!

Anyway, in the end, the sight came off (do note that the sight is designed to come off by sliding up front), it was repaired and it is now working well.
Oversized washers were used to take up the space of the filing the first owner had done, and the tightening knob was re-set with the E-Clip properly retaining the screw in place.

After this, I conferred with my customer and he graciously accepted the problem while at the same time asking if I had any way to procure another rear sight.
That rear sight has been ordered and has been in transit from Germany for the last 4 weeks.
Still, life had to go on and so the spring had to come out.

The first thing we did was to remove the knurled closing knob.
SLIGHT pressure from the spring compressor allowed an easy and orderly removal with any sort of wrench or tool.

The needle nose pliers are there just to support the knurled screw-in cover and the spacer
What you see is the trigger block's rear.

The trigger block is a unitized piece that has strategically located holes. One of them in particular allows you to see the "anti-bear trap" transfer bar and how it hooks from behind into the trigger obstruction release.

Turning the rifle around (for right handed persons), allows the trigger unit to be lifted up to the rear and slid out:

And that frees the transfer bar:

We can now remove the transfer bar:

It is fairly easy at this point to raise the cocking linkage and remove the transfer bar completely.
This allows us now to put pressure into the mainspring so that the spring holding nut can be released:

To do this properly we created an extension that houses the rear "horseshoe" of the trigger housing and prevents any slippage.

Once pressure is taken off, the holding nut can be loosened:

Proper size for this wrench is 11/32"s

Once the nut is loosened, the block can come off. Do note the side towards which the transfer bar slot is oriented.

And now we can release the spring retaining block

Which has a fair amount of pre-load.
I was surprised at the very good state of the spring, specially for an airgun that does not truly have a fully guided spring.

On top is the JM replacement spring
On the bottom is the OEM spring.
The level of "finish" in the spring was absolutely amazing. Clearly not an outsourced part.
Now, we can extract the piston and see what we are facing.

Obviously the seal was "toast", but the DEGREE to which the old synthetic polymer had degraded was quite astonishing.
USUALLY, seals from these times "crumble" in the sense that once the plasticizer in the polymer has evaporated, the whole thing just crumbles to pieces (as in the DIANA GISS guns), but this one was a gooey mess quite unlike anything I had seen.

Now, to be fair to the German gunmakers of that era, we need to remember that 1954-1955 was the year that the plastics were introduced into airgun's seals. Up until that time, leather had played the dominant role.
The introduction without proper testing under duty (endurance tests), as well as without the proper information to the customers produced mixed, but always bad, results.

In the case of Walther, the synthetic seals dissolved with the "normal" habit of oiling the compression chambers.

AND Walther did precious little to prevent this, as the actions STILL kept the oiling holes.

I don't know if the LGV still has these holes, but I am planning on finding out soon.

;-)

What came out of the compression chamber was a bit depressing:

There are four things that really worried me:
a) you can see that the seal holding nut is fractured (we'll see that in some detail later), and this happened at the original assembly.
b) there is a "lump" of the conical washer that has been "extruded" into the transfer port, as the rest of the washer is flattened. but this "lump" is really raised.
c) IF this was a "design trait" then it was really bad design to not use something that "keyed" all the elements in proper alignment AND this extrusion would have been impossible in the OEM mode because of the design of the seal.
d) there is a HUGE dead volume there that, for sure, did not exist when the gun was leather sealed.

After cleaning the debris:

We were faced with the task of getting the nut out. Not a simple one because it was already fractured.
So, we made a special tool for this:

Using an impact driver gently and patiently, the whole nut/washer assembly was tapped out:

And the washer presented into the new seal to see how it would work:

You can see that the seal was deep enough that with a good seal there was no way that bump could have been extruded into the TP.
And the nut?

Well, as we said above, it is cracked.

What you see here is the nut still inserted in the conical washer:

Here we have already extracted the nut from the washer

And here is another view:

The thread is a peculiar spec, as it seems to have started life as a M7X0.75 thread (fine).

How do we know that the nut fractured during initial assembly? Because the inside of the compression chamber is in very good state, and "shrapnel" such as this would have left a mark if it broke after first use.

So, we flattened the washer into (What I think was the original shape), made and inseerted a liner into the spring cavity, and assembled the piston.

Seal was EXTREMELY tight and so, it had to be sized

The OEM spring was inserted into the cavity and the assembly was just the disassembly process in reverse.

Upon trying to reassemble the gun, I noticed that the screws were not long, and yet they went far into the stock's recesses, when measured, we were alarmed that the thickness of wood remaining between screw and action was VERY thin.

So, we mixed a bit of sawdust with CA and thickened the wall, AND added steel washers at the bottom, to give the OEM screws (that have a serrated undercut) to have some "purchase".

I still think this signals the fact that the gun was taken apart MANY times before.
But at least, the stock now has been "stabilized".

When assembly was done, I tried cocking the gun.

The cocking linkage "jumped" the slot.

Hmmm . . . this needed reassessing.

We looked into the channel in the stock and we found that there was a linear bearing that could be adjusted for "push" once the stock was assembled to the action:

At the bottom of the cavity under the steel bearing, there were two thin discs. What German gunsmiths call "JustierScheibe"

After careful measurement, I decided that the "justification" needed almost doubling, and so I decided to remove one of the steel discs and add a rubbing surface on TOP of the bearing to provide a smooth glide:

Now the gun was able to be, and stay, cocked.

BTW, to de-cock these guns that have a transfer bar, you need to pull back all the way to the cocking point and then release the trigger, this will allow the sear to drop and the gun can be de-cocked easily. You do NOT need to fire it,

Trigger proved to be a little creepy, so adjustment took place.

And we tested.

Results were somewhat underwhelming:
MV's ranged between 467 fps to 414 fps.
These guns were supposed to generate about 5.5 ft-lbs (German limit for the "F in Pentagon" denomination that allows anyone over 18 years of age to purchase one. Anything above require a license.

Hmmm, OK, so we expected a 50 years old spring with "Thousands of rounds fired" to be a little tired, so we opened the gun and changed the spring for the ARH spring.

And we chronoed:

467 fps to 414 fps.

Cocking was a little heavier, and absolutely no gain?

Hmmmm something must be wrong here.

Actually, there isn't.

The power limit comes from the "ventilation" of the compression chamber that worked initially as oiling ports. It now limits the stroke of the rifle and therefore the "swept volume" is rather poor.

When the guns were leather sealed, the oil in the leather undoubtedly provided SOME energy to add to the shot cycle, but I am sure that these guns would not generate more than 500 fps with the light pellets of yesteryear, such as the Hobby and the MeisterKugeln.

Accuracy was not bad, but upon trying to shoot offhand, it became PAINFULLY obvious that the first impression I had was correct. You had to really stick your face into the stock to be able to see both sights and still hit the target.

It was SO UNCOMFORTABLE, that I decided to stop the First Stage here and pass on to the second.

Second Stage.- Let's turn this gun into what it CAN be

This stage started with careful measurements being taken.

There was some room for improvement in the swept volume, but that would require building a completely new piston just to gain 3.25 mm's of stroke.
So that was not cost-effective to the customer.
The obvious solution was to create an HMO piston (Oring sealed) and get rid of the cracked nut, the red seal with a "deep hollow dead space", and the washer.

After some machining, the piston was finished and an ORing was installed.

We reassembled with the ARH spring and chronoed the rifle.

Results were more than gratifying:
MV's ranged from 603 fps to 569 fps. Now, we were cooking!

However, cycle became a bit rough, AND most importantly, the cocking stroke started to honk like a Canada goose!

Another disassembly and careful inspection of the piston's slot and I discovered tool marks and a roughness of finish that we would associate today with a mid-priced gun like Norica, or Cometa.

So, WHERE were all the "Thousand of shots???"

And then it dawned on me:

It was so uncomfortable shooting this gun that there had been NO "Thousands of shots".
The first owner/owners had become so frustrated with the gun that he/they had filed the rear sight to give it more travel, they had pounded the rear sight into the knurled action closing cover because they thought that they were too far from the peep to be accurate; and probably disassembled the gun trying to find something wrong on the inside.

In short, the gun had not been shot. But not because of the users, because there was a BASIC, FATAL, FLAW with the combination of a Tyrolean stock (high cheek piece), the low "Korntunnel", and the somewhat complicated idea that the rear peep had to be installed from the front and that it SHOULD NOT be put all the way to the back.

IF this hypothesis was true, then the OEM spring SHOULD provide a better shot cycle.

Another aspect that was "tale-telling" was that when I disassembled the rifle, the piston's ORing exhibited a very marked dark spot.
That is VERY unusual.

Further research showed that the ORing had been "cut" upon insertion!

THREE huge gouges (for an ORing), in the seal!

Wherefrom?

And then I remembered that this gun was "new".

So I passed my finger along all the cutouts in the mechanisms tube just to discover burrs and sharp edges.

Again, what we would expect if we bought a mid-priced airgun today.

After extensive de-burring of all the cutouts and polishing of the piston's slot, the gun was reassembled with the OEM spring.

The surprise was that MV's climbed even further to between 622 to 598 fps.

Now we were nearing the 7 ft-lbs level. And with a shot cycle to die for, from cocking to trigger release to follow through. Absolutely impeccable. A small bit of recoil, but nothing that a good shooter cannot master.

I tried again shooting with the OEM setup and though it did give an indication, I knew there had to be a better way.

So, I procured a taller front sight from my parts box:

And now you could shoot to your heart's content!
No more scrounching into the cheek piece.
No more neck ache.

So now, proper accuracy testing could start

Clearly, we are exceeding the limits of the WC pellets, but the JSB RS's are performing formidably.

Proper sighting in yielded some surprises:

And a proper "card" shoot showed that the gun has definitely Olympic class potential.

Conclusions

It was an extremely interesting "trip through time".
What doomed the rifle in the first place and consigned it to a closet, was what protected the parts and the spring and allowed us a "peep into the past".
It was a great lesson in the sense that what we see as "great guns from the past" are the RESULT of thousands upon thousands of rounds smoothing things out and running things in.
It also tells us that the "Goldfen Age" of airgunning is yet to come.
It was a sobering experience in the sense that the "Old World" craftsmanship that so many wax nostalgically about is just that: Nostalgia. A mirage in the desert. An illusion.

It also tells me that we DO understand bettter today how airguns work. What are positive traits and which ones do not contribute much to performance.

The gun will go back to its home soon.

It's time for the current owner to take possession and own his results at the target.
The gun is capable of fantastic accuracy within the limits imposed by the design.

It is an easy gun to maintain (just keep it clean), and it will be cheap to reseal (ORings are notoriously inexpensive). It also likes best inexpensive pellets (there is a factor of 2 in price between the RS's and the top end target pellets). And so, should afford lots of practice.

It has been a joy working in such a "Grand Dame", to get acquainted with her as a teenager, only to see her develop into a wonderful, refined, serene, lady.

Keep well and shoot straight!

HM

15 Comments

The Gunsmith's Tune; Part 2/4.- 12 ft-lbs Walther LGV

9/29/2020

0 Comments

DISCLAIMER.- The operations performed in this rifle void all warranties. Nor I, nor anybody else, has control over what each individual decides to do, so no warranties are given, or implied. It's up to each tinkerer to be safe in his/her endeavours.
The modifications performed were safe within the objectives and the context of the gun in question.
Which may not be exactly the same as yours.
All machining operations carry some risk, be safe, be careful and always err on the side of caution.
When working with open flames, specially the high temperatures one, extra care needs to be taken with all liquids and gases present in the area. Do NOT risk it.

For those that do not like to devote time to reading long blogposts, let me save you the hardship:

It didn't work.

For those that enjoy the trip more than the destination, welcome aboard and read on!

As any "de-tune", this started by cutting down coils from the Titan #1 spring.
I will assume that readers are conversant with the operations of cutting, sanding/grinding, forging closed and then squaring an airgun spring. So I will skip those details.

Where we left last entry was that the QYS's were coming out of the muzzle at 879 fps ± 3, and BHE's at 876 fps ± 3. With a pre-load of 64 mm's
The goal was to get MV's of 797 fps for the QYS's, so we cut off two coils. Now pre-load was 47 mm's and MV's were for the QYS's: 877fps ± 6 and the BHE's 870 fps ± 4.

So, two coils off and we only lost 2 fps????!!!!!

We took off two coils more, this time pre-load was 29 mm's and MV's were 838 fps ± 3 for the QYS's and 796 fps ± 5 for the BHE's

Since we were still some distance off the goal, I took off one more coil. Preload was now 18 mm's and MV went down to 766 fps ± 3 for the QYS's and 729 fps ± 3 for the BHE's.

To recover some of the MV, I added a 0.081" spacer at the bottom of the spring, and that drove the MV's to 801 fps ± 3 for the QYS's and 757 fps ± 2 for the BHE's

With those uniformities, I had high hopes for the de-tune. so I started shooting test targets. This is where we were in for a disagreeable surprise.

But let's get to the pictures:

Tested the QYS, JSB 8.44/4.52, and the JSB 8.44/4.52. While short range tests were interesting, at 40 yards the whole thing unraveled.

I thought that indicated that we needed to treat this gun as a different gun, and so we were back to square 1 testing different lubes in the pellets:

It seemed that the barrel really liked Pledge as a lube, so we tested different pellets:

But again, at 40 yards the whole thing fell through.
And so I decided to test something else, the harmonics tuner:

The fact that the HT made little difference told me that there was something wrong.
Completely frustrated, I decided to test myself, and this is the benchmark:

As you can see, it was not a shooter's problem.
I started thinking that the spring and the guide were simply not in agreement with the rest of the gun.
What followed then was to check the gun with a Walther kit, to see how it behaved.
And so, I installed a Walther 12 ft-lbs kit (piston, spring and guide). MV's were quite satisfactory:
QYS's: 786 ± 5
JSB Xp: 825 ± 3
JSB Xact: 786 ± 2
Testing pellets with the barrel's preferred lube:

Indicated that at this power level, the light Express pellet was performing better, so I decided to tune the HT to that pellet, with this process:

From this test, I selected the setting of the HT at -5.14 mm's and proceeded to shoot some medium and long range tests:

Again, while results for 19 and 39 yards were satisfactory, when taken to 50 yards, the results were poor.

So, clearly, this barrel simply does not want to perform at long range at this power level. Yes, there are barrels like that. I would say that MOST barrels are like that.

CONCLUSIONS:

While it was somewhat disheartening to see the good behaviour not carried out to the low power level, it did confirm that the ABP, as a technology, is more reliable at these power levels that a large pre-load.

I have reverted the gun to its higher performance and, MAYBE in the future, I will shoot a "Hunter" course with it, as the performance of the slightly heavier pellet at the limit of stability is indeed interesting.

And, so we learn more from our "failures" than from our successes. Yes that is science, that is life.

Next will be the application of these findings to the 430L.

Keep well and shoot straight!

HM

0 Comments

Mandarins to Oranges

5/26/2020

7 Comments

INTRODUCTION

Most of you will know me as a "Science guy" and, yes, I guess I am more than a common NERD.

But life and experience have taught me that there is a lot of worthwhile knowledge to be gained from just listening to the users. Especially if the users are experienced and UNCOMMON persons, in the sense of having been endowed with more than a passing grade of "COMMON SENSE".

When I was much younger, my GrandMa used to tell me that the least common of senses was the common sense. After almost 64 years I have come to agree wholeheartedly with that.

Bill and I met by "accident" in one of the fora, we both love airguns, and German Airguns more precisely; and I cannot but see a future me (result of a strongly driven and purposeful youth with lots of physicality to it) in him.
One day my body will present the "bills" for all those strenuous activities.
And, while growing old is mandatory, it's growing up what I plan on keeping "optional" ;-)

To keep a capacity of wonderment, and the love of life, is what will make the next decade (or two), what it is supposed to be.

And so, in that spirit, I present you with a notable person, in the sense that he makes a lot of sense.

Oh!, and what does the title mean? Well it's sort of a private joke because while discussing the idea of this Blog entry, Bill asked me (and rightfully so), "Won't we be comparing apples to oranges here?"
My response was that there were sufficient characteristics shared by BOTH guns (HW30 and AM03) to think more about a comparison between Mandarins and Oranges: about the same, just slightly different size, zest and flavour.

¿Isn't that what life is all about?

;-)

I yield the floor to Bill:

Guest Blog by Bill Rickvalsky

Bill with the two guns he was charged of comparing: in his left hand, an HW30, in his right a modified DIANA Mauser AM03

Let me begin with a little background information. A few weeks ago I was involved in a discussion on a web forum about the possible acquisition of another air rifle. I had not too long ago acquired a Weihrauch HW30S as an addition to my Diana Model 34. The reason for that purchase was because the cocking effort of the Diana 34 had become rather fatiguing. The HW30S was a considerable relief in that regard. But then I began investigating the purchase of another rifle that might provide power similar to the Diana 34 but not be as difficult for me to cock.

The reason the cocking effort is an issue for me is that I am in my 70's and have a chronic health condition that occasionally affects my muscle strength. But I thoroughly enjoy my shooting and regularly have somewhat lengthy shooting sessions. The HW30S allowed me to do this without wearing myself out.

As a result of that forum discussion I was offered an opportunity by Hector to compare my HW30S to a Diana AM03 Mauser that had been modified with people in just my situation in mind, older folks with health issues. The AM03 started life as an NTec gas piston rifle. It now has a steel spring operating an anti bounce piston (ABP). The rifle is putting out 13 fpe and has a cocking force of 23 pounds. My objective was to report on the perceived cocking force and the shooting characteristics of this rifle and the HW30S.

From top to bottom: DIANA Mauser AM03; DIANA 34; HW30S

After receiving the AM03 and getting it set up to shoot everything went very smoothly and the rifle fit me well just as received. My quick impressions from the first shooting sessions were very favorable. The AM03 is heavy. The all up weight is 9 lbs. 11 oz. which is heavier than my Diana 34 at 9 lbs. exactly. My HW30S weighs in at 6 lbs. 12 oz. Both rifles are scoped. The cocking effort of the AM03 was perceptibly heavier than the HW30S but not by a significant amount. The difference between the two would not make me choose one over the other just based upon the work involved in cocking. My Diana 34 is significantly more work. The trigger on the AM03, which I understand is an Ntec T06, is very light and has a clean, crisp break. A very nice trigger so I can't blame my sometimes poor shooting on the trigger.

Do any of you think this is poor shooting? Heck, No! It's good shooting in anybody's books.

As I was able to get in more shooting sessions I was paying particular attention to the shot cycle characteristics. The AM03 seems to shoot at an equivalent power level to my Diana 34 although my chronograph is not operational I had previously determined my Diana 34 put out about 13 fpe. But the shot cycle characteristics were very different. The AM03 has a sharper, crisper shot cycle than either the HW30S or my Diana 34. By that I do not mean the shot cycle is harsher. It just seems quicker and more stable. While the HW30S has a softer shot cycle it is only about a 6.5 fpe rifle. My impression after several shooting sessions was that the AM03 is less hold sensitive than my Diana 34 and is almost on the same level as the HW30S in that regard.

A couple of the shooting sessions I had were fairly lengthy with over 200 pellets down range. On those occasions the cocking effort of the AM03 and HW30S became an obvious advantage for me. I believe I could shoot either of those rifles all day long. I eventually would lay the Diana 34 aside while shooting the other two. I know there are people who do not find the Diana 34 difficult to cock. But it apparently crosses a threshold of work for me. I like the rifle and can shoot it for a while but there are limits.

One side comment I would like to make here is about the length of the cocking arm (barrel) and how it affects this. While many people say the longer barrel provides more leverage it also requires a longer reach, particularly when sitting. When reaching up to the end of the barrel my arm is fully extended and then has to swing out and down while still fully extended until more than half way through the cocking cycle. This actually is as much of a disadvantage as it is an advantage. I find it easier to not reach all the way to the end of the barrel.

Someone else's technique may give different results in this regard.

The AM03 seems a little louder from behind the gun than either of the other two rifles. It is not very much at all and may be related to the crisper shot cycle. But I am fortunate in being able to shoot without any concern for the noise levels of any of these rifles as none of them is really offensive in my rural neighborhood. And just as a check I asked my son to listen to them from about 20 yards away to the side. He felt that the Diana 34 and the AM03 were about the same. The HW30S as expected is quieter.

I would love to have a hybrid of the AM03 and the HW30S. I like the extra reach of the AM03 without paying a significant price in cocking effort. The AM03 that I am shooting is heavy, especially for occasional offhand shooting. But there are times I wish the HW30S had just a little more weight for offhand shooting. This light, short rifle sometimes seems a little twitchy without a rest of some sort. It would also be nice to have the barrel on the AM03 be two or three inches shorter. For me anyway the shorter overall length would balance better.

I would like to thank Hector for this opportunity to participate in this comparison and to possibly contribute slightly to upcoming design decisions. And I told him several times how much I love the set up on the trigger in this AM03. It is an absolute pleasure to shoot.

I hope everyone learns a little something from this old guy's comments. I know there are others like me out there who may have the same concerns.

Bill Rickvalsky

N.E. I would like to finish this entry by thanking Bill for his time and effort.

And yes,I learned things that we expect to put in place with the new EMS line at DIANA.

The 34 EMS will allow users to "tailor" the gun in such a way as to suit THEM.

Particularly in Bill's case, I am already envisioning a 34 EMS with the NTec trigger, a lightweight ABP unit inside the OEM piston, a shorter barrel, and a Carbon Fiber moderator/Harmonics Tuner in place. The short barrel will save 1 full pound of weight, the Carbon Fiber mod/HT will save another ¼ lb, and a beech stock will also save another ¼ lb, so, all in all, with a Traditions lightweight scope in small ZR Mounts, we could be looking at a 7 to 7¼ lbs all up rifle still capable of delivering 12 ft-lbs at the muzzle with a bit over 25# peak cocking force.

Now, THAT would be an interesting little gun, LOL!

Keep well and shoot straight!

HM

7 Comments

New "Super Custom" trigger for the Walther LGU/LGV

4/29/2020

5 Comments

BEFORE ANYTHING ELSE, I am required to post this, the legal disclaimers:

1.- Swapping the trigger blades WILL invalidate the warranty of your rifle.
2.- ANY user intervention in the triggers MAY result in an UNSAFE condition. Once you get into the trigger you are on your own.
3.- I have no control of YOUR actions, so I can take NO responsibility for the results YOU get. This process proved safe and sound in MY gun. I cannot guarantee that it will be the same in YOURS.

Back in May 2018, I wrote a note about the then available "Super Custom" Triggers for the LGU/LGV rifles.
In the original post we discussed European versions, but on this one we will discuss an American design.

For those that have not followed my interest in these fine guns, I would suggest you take the time to read these entries:
https://www.ctcustomairguns.com/hectors-airgun-blog/the-walther-sport-family
https://www.ctcustomairguns.com/hectors-airgun-blog/swapping-the-walther-lgus-trigger
https://www.ctcustomairguns.com/hectors-airgun-blog/a-yankee-tune-for-the-walther-lgu https://www.ctcustomairguns.com/hectors-airgun-blog/a-yankee-tune-for-the-walther-lgu-second-version
https://www.ctcustomairguns.com/hectors-airgun-blog/the-walther-lgv-a-second-look
https://www.ctcustomairguns.com/hectors-airgun-blog/the-walther-lgv-pushing-the-power-limits
https://www.ctcustomairguns.com/hectors-airgun-blog/the-supercustom-triggers-for-the-walther-lgu-and-lgv

As you can see, I am a great fan of the LGV, considering it the best breakbarrel rifle in recent production. We would have to go a few decades into the past to get something better.
These models had been in production for less than 6 years, and in those 6 years, not less than 4 trigger blades came into the market, WHY?
Savvy airgunners have been puzzled about how could Walther put such a bad trigger on such a good gun.

And here is where I sometimes ask myself questions that I know would be very "uncomfortable" for a manufacturer to answer, but that definitely point to a marketing strategy that fails to take into account the simple truth that "There are no second 'First Impressions' "

If we analyze the cold facts, they are:
- Rifles are very good rifles, among the breakbarrels, the LGV has no peer. The LGU faces stiff competition from other fixed barrel rifles that are just as good, if not a bit better, depending on the criteria used for judging.
- Price, when they hit the market was high. Granted, ALL airgun prices were high back then; in general, prices have come down as demand has grown, production volumes have gone up, and more brands/models are available.
- Simultaneous to the launch of the rifle itself, Walther launched a "Match Abzug" (MA) that promised a better release but, again, price was high.
- In at least one market, the rifles were ONLY available WITH the MA, at considerably higher price still.
- At some point, up to 6 different "variants" were offered of the LGV. From "De Luxe" models to "Workhorse" models.

To be honest, as a marketing strategy, this is a recipe for trouble.
Those that could ONLY buy the expensive versions thought about it and probably didn't, or if they did would always question their decision.
Those that bought the "economy" versions would not buy the accessory trigger.

Everyone agreed that the guns were between good and great, but still the market response did not justify the costs of production, one by one, the different variants of the LGV were dropped. Unconfirmed information says that Walther has decided to discontinue ALL breakbarrel rifles. Even when the attempt was never made to market the "Century" (a sort of economy LGV with all the good characteristics, but none of the fineries) in the USA
Which is a pity.

And it is what brings us to this entry.

As with many things in this "CoVid-19" world of "stay at home and do something", some people with the skills and the machines in their workshop now have the time to actually do some serious stuff.
In my cybertravels through the airgunning community, I came across an interesting post about "yet another offering for triggers" for the LGU/LGV, and it piqued my curiosity.

And this is how I met Eric. Eric lives in Texas, and he is a great guy. Modest and unassuming, it's a pleasure to deal with him. He is also talented. At first he said he had developed another trigger for the LGV/LGU rifles but that he needed to polish some aspects, a few months later, he comes up with fully finished prototypes. So many corporations would LOVE to have that time of "Start to Finish R&D", LOL!
SOooooo...
Let's get to the trigger:

As you can see, it uses a quite novel way of making it adjustable without making it expensive. At $80 retail, it is in line with what European triggers cost, and it does provide some advantages.

Among the advantages: there are two possible positions for a second stage, one that provides for a light pull, and another one that provides for an even lighter pull, at the expense of a little "crispness".
In a way this is similar to the Rowan Engineering version, but if we compare them side by side they are not quite the same:

From left to right: Walther's MA, Eric's trigger, and Rowan Engineering (RE) Trigger.
While the RE trigger allows the user to move the whole trigger blade back, it also ends up needing a "shoe" that is far too wide to operate/work on the trigger. If you want to remove the stock, or adjust the second stage (in the "heavy" position), you need to remove the blade and the holding post.
Eric's trigger does away with that.
Eric's blade is further back, and one of the common complaints about the LGU/LGV stock is that the pistol grip is really big and seems to be made for giant's hands.
Some shooters (even one previous World Champion) hold that huge pistol grips prevent the shooter from inadvertently twisting the gun when releasing the shot, and that is very true, but it is also true that techniques exist to teach ourselves to apply a slowly increasing force that does NOT twist the gun and therefore does not affect the shot. IN any case, the most common versions of the LGU that you see in the competition circuit have ALL had their stocks replaced.
As far as adjusting the distance between pistol grip and trigger blade, Eric's trigger uses a novel approach, and that is a pressure plate that can be moved in/out meaning that it shortens or lengthens that distance.
Eric's trigger is also a bit more swept back, and so the pressure plate could be used as a "Register Mark", ensuring uniform trigger finger placement.

When comparing the positions of the three screws we see that RE's trigger uses a fairly uniform spacing between screws, whereas Eric's trigger uses a skewed distribution that, while providing for an even "lighter" trigger pull, will definitely loose some "crispness" to the release.
We also note that RE's trigger has rounded screw faces, while Eric's trigger has pointed faces. This is a result of the market they are oriented at; RE's trigger is sold mostly to fairly amateur airgunners, as a "drop-in", while Eric's trigger assumes that users have ALREADY taken the time to stone and polish all interacting surfaces.

Yes, if you are looking for the LIGHTEST possible trigger pull in an "untreated" trigger block, then RE's trigger will give you that, BUT, if you are looking for a compromise between extreme lightness and total crispness and you are willing to stone and polish your trigger parts, or send them out to a Pro, then Eric's trigger can more easily accomplish this, and with less fuss because you can adjust all aspects of the trigger pull with the trigger blade in the gun, without the trigger guard (more on that later).

To install Eric's trigger is simple; you take apart the gun and when you have the trigger block out and the clamshell disassembled, you take out the old trigger (on the left is the OEM "economy" trigger with the lengthened screw of the "Yankee tune", on the right is Eric's trigger):

And put in the new one:

Eric recommends cutting one coil of the extension spring that is the return/no slack spring, but I did not find it necessary.
You will need a crochet hook or some other hook to get that spring out and then in again, so DO REFER the blog entry about "Swapping triggers" above mentioned.

Once you have swapped the triggers, you will need to adjust the screws.

Eric sends a very interesting manual that details STARTING points for the protrusion of those screws and I found the manual absolutely right. SO, DO READ IT!

Once that is done, you can close the gun and start the actual fine tuning.

It's important to note that once assembled, the gun should be checked that everything is in its place and the clamshell is properly closed and aligned.

Upon some extensive testing, I found that FOR ME, the flat pressure plate gave a "strange" feel, to the point of being distracting, because the pressure plate always keeps the same orientation, when lowered to the last hole, the feeling was that I was pulling in a "crooked" way.

While this would be ideal for shooters with custom stocks that almost always have a "vertical" pistol grip, it was somewhat off-putting to use with the sporter stock.

So, Eric agreed to make two versions: one with a curved blade, and another with the "flatish" trigger blade

I found also another solution that is truly viable only at very low trigger pulls, and that is replacing the screw with a button headed allen screw that presents a hemispherical shape to the touch of the hand:

The other thing I like is that I can use a locknut at the rear, to ensure that the setting does not get "out of place".
At trigger pulls above 1# this is somewhat tiring in the long run, but below that it is an eminently usable solution.

If you note, here I have a fully assembled and functional gun without the trigger guard, how is this possible?
Well, Eric designed and will include as part of the kit two plastic "D"s that allow you to get the gun back together to the point where you can actually shoot it, and still have completely open access to the screws for adjustment.
You can see one of the "D"s in the picture above.

I tested the trigger in an "untreated" LGU trigger block (my LGV being "on loan" for a lengthy and really serious experiment), mainly to see what difference the 40-60 minutes of stoning and polishing parts would gain a shooter, but also to get a feeling of how narrow the market would be for Eric (difference would be between a few hundred to a few thousand).
And I found out that the lightest trigger pull I could get was an extremely rewarding 1# 2 oz. with great consistency.
Almost anyone should be able to live with that.

In a stoned and polished trigger block, pulls can be lowered to levels that I would not consider safe for 90% of the shooters (just watch Eric's video referenced below), but in the end it is each and every one of us who are responsible for our actions.

Eric has also agreed to send, to those that request it, a "ball end" for the pressure plate, something like this:

Have not tried it, but it makes a lot of sense.

I was very happy to work with Eric on this project, and since he is still in the pre-production phase, there are some changes that will be inevitable.

BTW, you can see Eric's video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvndvLfzug0&feature=youtu.be

If you are interested in finding out more about this trigger, or if you want to buy one, drop Eric a line at:
epianori@gmail.com

Let him know you saw this, please.

;-)

Keep well and shoot straight!

HM

5 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

Hector's Airgun Blog

The Gunsmith's Tune; Parts 3 & 4.- Making the DIANA 430 all it can be.

Part 3.- Full Power Diana 430L

Part 4.- What can we get for a 36# PCF?

Conclusions

Eine Großartige Dame

Bringing back to life a Walther LG55

First Stage.- what the LG55 was designed to be

Second Stage.- Let's turn this gun into what it CAN be

Conclusions

The Gunsmith's Tune; Part 2/4.- 12 ft-lbs Walther LGV

Mandarins to Oranges

Guest Blog by Bill Rickvalsky

New "Super Custom" trigger for the Walther LGU/LGV

Hector Medina

Archives

Categories