Disclosure:
The first "Dialed Spinner from DoAll was purchased from an online store.
The second version was sent under warranty by DoAll.
The first "Dialed Spinner from DoAll was purchased from an online store.
The second version was sent under warranty by DoAll.
A bit of History:
Back in the year 2K, while I was barely starting to scratch the surface of this enormous "rabbit hole" of airguns, I came across an idea that was good, but clearly needed some strong re-development.
Back in the year 2K, while I was barely starting to scratch the surface of this enormous "rabbit hole" of airguns, I came across an idea that was good, but clearly needed some strong re-development.
Yup!
Crosman used to sell a target comprised of 5 "sectors" that swung independently:
One central "bullseye" and 4 quadrants of a circle divided at 3, 6 and 9 O'Clock.
It was OK, except for two factors:
1.- It had been discontinued for years
2.- It was rated for their CO2 rifles and pistols (so, about a 13-14 ft-lbs max.)
When a year later I saw one at the Little Rock Airgun Show (AR), priced @ $50 (of year 2k $'s), I decided it was time to act.
And so, the "Quadrant Spinner" came to life:
Crosman used to sell a target comprised of 5 "sectors" that swung independently:
One central "bullseye" and 4 quadrants of a circle divided at 3, 6 and 9 O'Clock.
It was OK, except for two factors:
1.- It had been discontinued for years
2.- It was rated for their CO2 rifles and pistols (so, about a 13-14 ft-lbs max.)
When a year later I saw one at the Little Rock Airgun Show (AR), priced @ $50 (of year 2k $'s), I decided it was time to act.
And so, the "Quadrant Spinner" came to life:
A first production batch was made in Argentina and was thoroughly tested. Back then 20 ft-lbs were more than enough. These spinners were designed to be reactive enough at 12 ft-lbs, and "pellet proof" at 20 because we followed AAFTA's power limits and springers at 10,000 FASL were not particularly powerful. PCP's were JUST coming down in price enough to be contemplated.
This was the year 2002.
Fast forward 7 years and when I started moving to the US, I had to leave my beloved set of spinners behind.
Once established, I set about finding a company that would make the spinners because no one offered the concept.
And I found a company in upstate NY that would build them.
Sent pictures and drawings and even went up there (I was living in CT back then) to see the first prototype.
We agreed on the prototype, and the first small batch was made. That was in 2012.
When they arrived, my heart sunk. The maker had added a horizontal cross member above the upper quadrants "to make it more robust". Fine, but that prevented the spinner from spinning! ¿huh?
He also took the liberty to add a couple of gauges to the material, and make them "extra strong"; based on his experience with shooting, it was needed (I also think it was the material he had at hand). The increase in gauge also created another problem: the counterweights were now not enough to ensure a true "return to vertical" from a low power hit in any of the lower quadrants.
In any case, they were not as reactive as they should have been at lower powers, and the result of a good hit was a bit "underwhelming" when the bullseye didn't circle around even once (due to the "hard stop" added).
They DID their job; and that was to allow people to "sight in" without needing to constantly change paper targets, without making a mess of used paper, and allowing fine tuning of FT skills because the "bullseye" followed WFTF recommendations: ½", ¾", 1" and 1½"
A few friends still have those.
Our design then was copied by a few companies.
Yes, people are like that. Without any improvement, redesign, or even name change, some outlets started marketing them.
Issue with those crudely made ones (to comply to a low cost barrier), was that 0.177" pellets could get in BETWEEN paddles and not indicate any hit.
Of course, by then the user had used the target and there were no refunds.
"Caveat Emptor" and all that.
But I always kept a soft spot in my heart for the concept. I tried to resurrect the production to no avail (cost was prohibitive), and the idea went dormant.
One day, looking at other things (as usually happens), I came across DoAll's version of the old Crosman 444:
This was the year 2002.
Fast forward 7 years and when I started moving to the US, I had to leave my beloved set of spinners behind.
Once established, I set about finding a company that would make the spinners because no one offered the concept.
And I found a company in upstate NY that would build them.
Sent pictures and drawings and even went up there (I was living in CT back then) to see the first prototype.
We agreed on the prototype, and the first small batch was made. That was in 2012.
When they arrived, my heart sunk. The maker had added a horizontal cross member above the upper quadrants "to make it more robust". Fine, but that prevented the spinner from spinning! ¿huh?
He also took the liberty to add a couple of gauges to the material, and make them "extra strong"; based on his experience with shooting, it was needed (I also think it was the material he had at hand). The increase in gauge also created another problem: the counterweights were now not enough to ensure a true "return to vertical" from a low power hit in any of the lower quadrants.
In any case, they were not as reactive as they should have been at lower powers, and the result of a good hit was a bit "underwhelming" when the bullseye didn't circle around even once (due to the "hard stop" added).
They DID their job; and that was to allow people to "sight in" without needing to constantly change paper targets, without making a mess of used paper, and allowing fine tuning of FT skills because the "bullseye" followed WFTF recommendations: ½", ¾", 1" and 1½"
A few friends still have those.
Our design then was copied by a few companies.
Yes, people are like that. Without any improvement, redesign, or even name change, some outlets started marketing them.
Issue with those crudely made ones (to comply to a low cost barrier), was that 0.177" pellets could get in BETWEEN paddles and not indicate any hit.
Of course, by then the user had used the target and there were no refunds.
"Caveat Emptor" and all that.
But I always kept a soft spot in my heart for the concept. I tried to resurrect the production to no avail (cost was prohibitive), and the idea went dormant.
One day, looking at other things (as usually happens), I came across DoAll's version of the old Crosman 444:
I started using it with good success at Palmyra, when we started shooting LR FT.
And it held well for airguns in the 50-60 ft-lbs range.
So, on an outing to check out some very accurate 22 RF rifles (a DIANA 22R bolt action, and an SPA Toggle Bolt), I took it along.
Hmmmm, the target had reached and exceeded its limits:
And it held well for airguns in the 50-60 ft-lbs range.
So, on an outing to check out some very accurate 22 RF rifles (a DIANA 22R bolt action, and an SPA Toggle Bolt), I took it along.
Hmmmm, the target had reached and exceeded its limits:
Even at 100 yards, these rifles can keep their impacts very close together, if not in the same spot, and that created a problem, especially when hitting a bit "high" on the bullseye.
Things look even more dramatic from the rear:
Things look even more dramatic from the rear:
Even packing the target becomes a problem when it cannot lay "flat":
Now, we did manage to "pound it into submission" with a good "dead-blow" mallet and some paint:
But clearly, the targets could not be sold as "rated for RF's" without creating some sort of customer dissatisfaction.
And, it was in this spirit that I wrote to DoAll.
I stated that the targets worked marvelously well with airguns up to 50-60 ft-lbs, and that they COULD be rated for 0.22" RF Short, but not for LR, even Standard Velocity.
I had to admit that I wasn't expecting a personal answer from a large company, like DoAll but, surprise, surprise!
I received an answer in 2 days and the kind person that answered showed me their "improved" version:
And, it was in this spirit that I wrote to DoAll.
I stated that the targets worked marvelously well with airguns up to 50-60 ft-lbs, and that they COULD be rated for 0.22" RF Short, but not for LR, even Standard Velocity.
I had to admit that I wasn't expecting a personal answer from a large company, like DoAll but, surprise, surprise!
I received an answer in 2 days and the kind person that answered showed me their "improved" version:
I asked what gauge material they were using and he responded, candidly, that he didn't have that datum, but that he would send me one to test.
WOW!
Clearly someone interested and, knowledgeable of the MARKET, if not of the product itself, of the MARKET (and that is really his job as customer relations). He understood he was talking to a person that was willing to go the extra mile.
I promptly furnished my postal address and waited. Not much, the target arrived, just in time for the first snowfall..... grrrrrrrrrrr.
Over the winter there was no opportunity to test it at the appropriate range (100 yards), and THIS PAST winter in Maryland was peculiar: Early snowfalls, then a sort of very short "indian summer", then more snowfalls separated by a few days in such a way that the range was closed for most of the season.
Range started opening in earnest a few weeks ago.
So, taking advantage of a sunny and not quite calm day, but with tolerable wind, I headed out to the range and tested.
Using Aguila 40 grs, standard velocity ammo (about 1,080 fps) in both the "Competición" and the "Super Extra" grades in my two favourite RF's (an old Voere bolt action, and the SPA Toggle action), this was the result:
WOW!
Clearly someone interested and, knowledgeable of the MARKET, if not of the product itself, of the MARKET (and that is really his job as customer relations). He understood he was talking to a person that was willing to go the extra mile.
I promptly furnished my postal address and waited. Not much, the target arrived, just in time for the first snowfall..... grrrrrrrrrrr.
Over the winter there was no opportunity to test it at the appropriate range (100 yards), and THIS PAST winter in Maryland was peculiar: Early snowfalls, then a sort of very short "indian summer", then more snowfalls separated by a few days in such a way that the range was closed for most of the season.
Range started opening in earnest a few weeks ago.
So, taking advantage of a sunny and not quite calm day, but with tolerable wind, I headed out to the range and tested.
Using Aguila 40 grs, standard velocity ammo (about 1,080 fps) in both the "Competición" and the "Super Extra" grades in my two favourite RF's (an old Voere bolt action, and the SPA Toggle action), this was the result:
There are 30 shots in that target, see if you can count them.
Several hits were aimed at corners and edges and results were good.
Important part is that repeated hits at three different points in the vertical support of the "bullseye" created NO distortion.
There are 6 hits in that vertical portion, three pairs, exactly ¼ mildot (milDOT, not mRad) apart.
Reason for that is I wanted to see if the inertia of the heavy bullseye was enough to act as a "hold" on the rotating part, therefore creating a "bend", therefrom the three chosen places tested for a "mid-weight" hit, a ¼ skewed weight hit and an extreme top hit.
None of them had any effect.
The vertical element is as straight as ever:
Several hits were aimed at corners and edges and results were good.
Important part is that repeated hits at three different points in the vertical support of the "bullseye" created NO distortion.
There are 6 hits in that vertical portion, three pairs, exactly ¼ mildot (milDOT, not mRad) apart.
Reason for that is I wanted to see if the inertia of the heavy bullseye was enough to act as a "hold" on the rotating part, therefore creating a "bend", therefrom the three chosen places tested for a "mid-weight" hit, a ¼ skewed weight hit and an extreme top hit.
None of them had any effect.
The vertical element is as straight as ever:
AND, BTW, that steel is a full 6 mm's thick, just shy of ¼" thickness.
The twists and bends do act as reinforcing points in an effective manner.
The twists and bends do act as reinforcing points in an effective manner.
Does this version of the target reacts as well as the older one for airguns?
A bit. It does flip completely over at 50 ft-lbs and 100 yards, but not as "energetically" as the older one.
I will keep both because they BOTH have a role to play in my shooting, if you come across some of the older versions, and you are interested more in airguns of 60 ft-lbs and under, do get it, it is a lot of fun and very useful.
If you are more into RF's or airguns in the 70-150 ft-lbs, do look for the new version.
Retailers are not making much of the difference, so it is up to the customer to ensure they are getting the "Ver 2.0". THE thing to look for are the twists and bends in the vertical supports and that the only welds are the spacer tubes between vertical hangers in the targtet. There are no other welds.
This target allows you to sight in and practice all at the same time.
Thanks to DoAll for their customer support and for putting on the market a product that does a needed job well.
Now, if they made a set of four.............LOL!
Keep well and shoot straight!
HM
A bit. It does flip completely over at 50 ft-lbs and 100 yards, but not as "energetically" as the older one.
I will keep both because they BOTH have a role to play in my shooting, if you come across some of the older versions, and you are interested more in airguns of 60 ft-lbs and under, do get it, it is a lot of fun and very useful.
If you are more into RF's or airguns in the 70-150 ft-lbs, do look for the new version.
Retailers are not making much of the difference, so it is up to the customer to ensure they are getting the "Ver 2.0". THE thing to look for are the twists and bends in the vertical supports and that the only welds are the spacer tubes between vertical hangers in the targtet. There are no other welds.
This target allows you to sight in and practice all at the same time.
Thanks to DoAll for their customer support and for putting on the market a product that does a needed job well.
Now, if they made a set of four.............LOL!
Keep well and shoot straight!
HM
RSS Feed