My current love | SouthernPaddler.com

My current love

Running Boar

New Member
Dec 14, 2006
4
0
I just had to share, the walnut on this gun is to die for and it is in perfect shape, shoots very well. I wanted one of these when I was a kid so bad I could taste it but it was a bit out of my families price range, I got a daisy powerline instead, 30 years later I have one and it is everything I dreamed it would be. :D

Picture697.jpg
 

oldsparkey

Well-Known Member
Aug 25, 2003
10,479
123
Central , Florida
www.southernpaddler.com
When I was a kid (about the age of 9) I became the proud owner of a Crosman in 22 cal. I have used that rifle since then with iron sights and still have it.

rifle%20001.jpg


Now that the years have gone by, glasses and all of the pleasures of getting older, at 62 (last year) I had plenty of points with my Cabelas Club Membership so I used those points to get something that I can punch holes in cans with, or unwanted small critters.
It is a Benjamin 177 caliber...... Not as nice of a stock as yours but it will drive a nail , if the shooter can see and hit it.

rifle.jpg


Chuck.
 

bearridge

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2005
3,092
4
way down yonder
Friend Chris,

One of the elder geezers on this forum, a tall fellow frum up on Buzzard's Bluff over in the Ozarks, knows a heap bout airguns....Sheridans, Benjamins 'n BS too.
843.gif


Ever run a pellet test ta see which kind yer gun likes? I got a heap a pecan trees here.....been eatin' a lotta big red bushy tails lately.

regards
bearridge
bodine rod 'n gun club

The mystery of government is not how Washington works but how to make it stop. P. J. O'Rourke
 

Tom @ Buzzard Bluff

Well-Known Member
Aug 25, 2003
196
0
Ozarks of N. Central Arkansas
Chucks 140

Chuck it's hard to tell from the pic but your Crosman 140 appears to have an aluminum breech. Is that true or have you just used it so much that it is worn shiny? If it IS a first model with aluminum breech it should also have the 'spoon handle' breech cover. If it is the 1st YEAR (1954) then it would require manual re-cocking.

If it is the aluminum breech model with the spoonhandle then you have a 'good'un' because that was the first model of 140 production from 1954-57 after which they went to the steel breech and smooth breech cover along with a trigger block in place of the thru the stock trigger like yours has. Tom
 

oldsparkey

Well-Known Member
Aug 25, 2003
10,479
123
Central , Florida
www.southernpaddler.com
Re: Chucks 140

Tom @ Buzzard Bluff said:
Chuck it's hard to tell from the pic but your Crosman 140 appears to have an aluminum breech. Is that true or have you just used it so much that it is worn shiny? If it IS a first model with aluminum breech it should also have the 'spoon handle' breech cover. If it is the 1st YEAR (1954) then it would require manual re-cocking

That is the one. You have good vision on recognizing air rifles. Told you I have had it a long time.

Chuck.
 

Bullhead

Well-Known Member
Mar 27, 2005
172
0
Indiana
I just got a new Gamo, it is a Shadow Sport in .177 and is just great. I have an old RWS and a 40 year old Sheridan but this thing is just plain fast... 1200 fps. Squirrels and Starlings don't even wiggle after being hit, I know I should have gotten a .22 for hunting but I talked to alot of people and saw the tests and testimonials so I made my choice. This is very flat shooting and so far Fox Squirrels to 30 yrds or so never complain.
 

Tom @ Buzzard Bluff

Well-Known Member
Aug 25, 2003
196
0
Ozarks of N. Central Arkansas
Bullhead said:
I just got a new Gamo, it is a Shadow Sport in .177 and is just great. I have an old RWS and a 40 year old Sheridan but this thing is just plain fast... 1200 fps. Squirrels and Starlings don't even wiggle after being hit, I know I should have gotten a .22 for hunting but I talked to alot of people and saw the tests and testimonials so I made my choice. This is very flat shooting and so far Fox Squirrels to 30 yrds or so never complain.

I'm very glad to see you are happy with your new purchase. And it certainly sounds like you have been doing some good shooting with it to get instant kills on Fox squirrels. But now I must become the 'Devils Advocate:

Velocity alone, despite advertising hype that would make it seem so, does not produce clean, humane kills. Those are the result of adequate energy delivered to a kill zone with surgical accuracy. In fact, high velocity small caliber projectiles, unless delivered with that requisite accuracy, are often counterproductive, creating a 'hypodermic' wound that passes through without expending all of the energy it carries and fails to anchor the game, leaving it to suffer a slow and painful death.

Pellets, by the very low-powered nature of airrifles, do not have excess energy to waste. To be maximally effective they must impart every ounce of their energy to the target in a fatal zone. Light, high-velocity pellets with a small frontal area can fail that requirement. They are the ones that impart the 'hypodermic' wounds that allows the quarry to escape capture only to die later. In short, if your pellet is passing all the way through the target then it is wasting energy. The ideal is to have it pass through a fatal zone and end up just under the skin on the far side. That is proof positive that they have expended every erg of energy they carried into the target. High-velocity, small frontal area pellets often fail that test of terminal ballistics. Who among us have not experienced with a .22 rimfire a solid, center-of-mass hit on a squirrel that failed to anchor it, allowing it time to reach a hole and disappear? Even a low-velocity rimfire imparts @ 3 times the energy of the most powerful spring-piston powered airguns. Yet even so if their energy isn't delivered to the proper area on the target they can fail to kill it in situ.

So I applaud your shooting. It has obviously been of the highest caliber.

You are certainly correct that higher velocities produce a 'flatter' trajectory. But that velocity comes at a price. To achieve it requires a lighter pellet with a smaller frontal area. That is the precise prescription for lower energy delivery also. As well as being blown off target by side-winds. And less retention of energy with distance.
Even Chuck's old Crosman 140 with a .22 caliber, 14 grain pellet at about 600FPS will deliver more energy to the target at 35 yards than a much higher velocity .177 caliber, 7.5 grain pellet. And 35 yards is the practical hunting limit of the vast majority of both shooters and airguns.
Ultimately the only criteria of value is the ability of the shooter to direct the pellet to a kill zone that averages @ 1/2". If that one factor is met then the energy required is minimal. Nothing can ever take the place of a competent shooter who knows his own and his weapon's limitations and honors the quarry by taking only those shots he KNOWS will be instantly terminal.

The very best discussions of airgun terminal ballistics by the American airgunning community came on the old 'Airgun Letter Forum' on the net. The last I knew they were still archived. Perhaps Bearridge can verify that. Look for the posts by Mike Pearson, our leading domestic terminal ballistics expert. Tom
 

bearridge

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2005
3,092
4
way down yonder
Boy did that bring back memories. I tried ta look up airgunletter.com, but the forum iz dead. I bet the few years it ran may be archived somewhere. If anyone wants ta know, I'd go ta ttp://www.network54.com/Forum/79537/ and ask. If you look at the top of the home page, there iz a link ta the Gamo forum.

I know folks who have had swell times with Gamos, but I gotta warn ya, they lead ta the hard stuff. :wink: Most folks would be shocked ta know how many folks have $600 airguns with $700 scopes on 'em. Rich airgunners spend even more....but the high mechanikle fellas kin take a $100 gun 'n create a gun that will impress the top notch rimfire shooters.

Tom, I reckon ya heard how Don Matezeder come in high in the big time rimfire shootin'?

regards
bearridge
bodine rod 'n gun club

Remember not only to say the right thing in the right place, but far more difficult still, to leave unsaid the wrong thing at the tempting moment. Unknown
 

Tom @ Buzzard Bluff

Well-Known Member
Aug 25, 2003
196
0
Ozarks of N. Central Arkansas
bearridge said:
Boy did that bring back memories. I tried ta look up airgunletter.com, but the forum iz dead.>

Well----Hecky-poo & Darn!

<Tom, I reckon ya heard how Don Matezeder come in high in the big time rimfire shootin'?>

Hadn't heard. But the buddy from the left side of the state who just spent the weekend with me was bemoaning the fact that Don had went over to the 'dark side'. 'Course the fact that he won several categories at Don's airgun events mighta had something to do with the sour grapes. :lol:
 

Bullhead

Well-Known Member
Mar 27, 2005
172
0
Indiana
Like I said, I know a .22 airgun would be better but at this point in my life I am not going to spend big bucks for a .22 airgun that shots in the 850 to 900 fps range. My old Anshutz .22 running boar rife is my weapon of choice for longer range squirrel and small varmit shooting, even got a crow once at 113yds sitting with it. I have shot a fair amount with guns starting with a Sheridan .20 many years ago and going to .22 rimfire later and at 14 (with my Dad's encouragement) shot on a YMCA team for 2 years. At 17 I took up muzzleloaders and shot at re-enactments and at Friendship Indiana at the nationals with my .45 flintlock. I quit going to Friendship for a variety of reasons 26 years later but I still shoot flintlocks including my old .45. Anyway, I only take head shots and only under 30 yards with my air rifle. I understand ballistics and know about velocity versus energy and have reloaded shotgun shells and various rifle and pistol rounds for many years from .223 and 22/250 to 9mm and .45acp. I do appreciate the advice though especially for new shooters. :)
 

bearridge

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2005
3,092
4
way down yonder
Friend Bullhead,

Ole Tom likes ta talk bout airguns near bout az much az he likes ta talk bout fishin. :mrgreen: I hope he writes all that stuff down so the little pardners kin read it someday.

Did ya ever "re-enact" down ta Shiloh? I used ta figger all that wuz kinda silly, but last spring it looked like a mitey fine time. There were tents, homemade wood chairs, horses, campfires, Dutch ovens, etc. I seen a heap a Indiana 'n Ohio tags on the cars.

I didnt much care fer the drummin'. Folks who play the drums are a bit............strange. 8)

regards
bearridge

Fear of death will not prevent dying - but it may prevent living. Anonymous
 

Bullhead

Well-Known Member
Mar 27, 2005
172
0
Indiana
I agree, he really knows his stuff. I never made it down to Shilo, I did French & Indian war period...1758. I have done re-enactments all over Indiana, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Ft. Niagra in New York, Kentucky, Tennessee and even one down in Georgia. I haven't done any in over 11 years but am going to get back into it this year... same period.
 

Bullhead

Well-Known Member
Mar 27, 2005
172
0
Indiana
Tom, could you help me out with a barrel length? I have bought a Crossman 2240 and want to do a valve job, trigger job on it. I have read all kinds of things about barrel lengths... 10 inches too short (I agree) and 14 being right, or even 18 inches. All I want its a pistol with good accuracy and good velocity.... what would you recommend?
 

Tom @ Buzzard Bluff

Well-Known Member
Aug 25, 2003
196
0
Ozarks of N. Central Arkansas
Bullhead said:
Tom, could you help me out with a barrel length? I have bought a Crossman 2240 and want to do a valve job, trigger job on it. I have read all kinds of things about barrel lengths... 10 inches too short (I agree) and 14 being right, or even 18 inches. All I want its a pistol with good accuracy and good velocity.... what would you recommend?

Toom much depends on what you do with the valve to be able to provide a definitive answer to your question.. If you dump a lot more liquid CO2 into it there's simply no getting around the need for a longer barrel to provide enough time for maximum expansion of the gas or you're just wasting it.
So I guess I'm providing nothing more than a cop-out when you get to the bottomline. With stock porting and valve then 14" is 'close enough for government work', but if you push more gas thru the system then only experimentation will provide a solid answer. Even then it is difficult to imagine needing more than 18".
Even on some of the early prototypes I never found the need for anything more than 16", but a lot of people have long since surpassed the developement work I originally did on the 2240. HTH, Tom
 

bearridge

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2005
3,092
4
way down yonder
Friend Jim,

Send Tom that pichur of the ole flintlocker yer Dad made. I cleaned out my mailbox before I did. He likes ancient stuff....so does Miz Winnie. :wink:

regards
bearridge

ps On second thought Tom, it mite be useful if ya put that post on here? That kinda stuff iz why Chuck come up with the airgun/shootin' section.