GTA
All Springer/NP/PCP Air Gun Discussion General => European/Asian Air Gun Gates => German AirGun Gate => Topic started by: Toxylon on February 12, 2023, 02:10:50 PM
-
Roughly a quarter century ago, I bought an antique BSF S54 Match .177 cal springer. Not knowing anything about these guns, and living in pre-Google times, I didn't really know what I had. I did shoot the gun some, using poor quality Bulldog pellets, but the gun spent most of her time inside the closet, through several moves, no less.
When I did give in to the springer game for real, the BSF entered my thoughts on occasion, but newer purchases took precedence, and the BSF kept on languishing in the dark.
This winter I've finally given the BSF some of my time. The quirky, leather-sealed, walnut-stocked (lacquered, for some ghastly reason), c. 1960's taploader underlever has been given a Ballistol+steelwool conditioning, plus a revitalizing neat's foot oil soak for the leather piston seal, administered via the transfer port. Does this sound like a beauty salon ad or what?
The BSF shoots at a very mellow 191 m/s / 627 fps with Exact RS 7.33 grainers, for a little under 9J / 6.4 fpe, but very consistently, and with a fine shot cycle (as it should, at that power level). I think the mainspring has seriously fatigued, as the early pull of the cocking lever is basically without resistance. I'm debating myself on whether to re-spring the antique gun.
The BSF's single-stage trigger is a little agricultural, but fine for what it is.
-
A couple more pics:
-
And more (due to attachment size limit):
The supposedly-never-cleaned barrel was a chore to clean, given the taploader geometry - my usual patch pullers were impossible to use here. So, I loaded the BSF with four VFG felt pellets (two in the tap, two loaded from the muzzle) to give sufficient resistance. The pellets shown tell that cleaning was sorely needed.
-
You have far to many guns, or had far to many, to let that gem languish for so long. I try and shoot all my guns at least once a year. Even then, if I do not do it more often I feel guilty.
They deserve the LOVE. :-* :-* :-* :-*
-Y
-
Nice gun. I have a c60.
-
My D 6G sat in my Mom's basement for 25 years. First shots after 25 years proved the seals were toast and it needed some TLC.
Did you just load and go, after all this time?
-Y
-
I acquired an S54 Match this year. I gotta say, I instantly bonded with the thing; it's sheer eccentricity of design is weirdly irresistible! As luck would have it, mine is no. 4707 - the very gun that Tom Gaylord once owned, and wrote up on his blog:
https://www.pyramydair.com/blog/2019/04/bsf-s54-match-rifle-part-5/ (https://www.pyramydair.com/blog/2019/04/bsf-s54-match-rifle-part-5/)
If you have a Facebook account, a new special interest group, "BSF /Bavaria Airguns," has recently started. Some good stuff is posted there, including an excellent multi-part photo-illustrated writeup showing dismantling and repairing an S54.
I hope you will post some shots of yours - and I will do the same. This forum would be the perfect place to expand knowledge of this fascinating and influential airgun manufacturer.
-
I acquired an S54 Match this year. I gotta say, I instantly bonded with the thing; it's sheer eccentricity of design is weirdly irresistible! As luck would have it, mine is no. 4707 - the very gun that Tom Gaylord once owned, and wrote up on his blog:
https://www.pyramydair.com/blog/2019/04/bsf-s54-match-rifle-part-5/ (https://www.pyramydair.com/blog/2019/04/bsf-s54-match-rifle-part-5/)
If you have a Facebook account, a new special interest group, "BSF /Bavaria Airguns," has recently started. Some good stuff is posted there, including an excellent multi-part photo-illustrated writeup showing dismantling and repairing an S54.
I hope you will post some shots of yours - and I will do the same. This forum would be the perfect place to expand knowledge of this fascinating and influential airgun manufacturer.
This should be interesting! ;)
-Y
-
The front sight assembly of my BSF turned loose from the handful of shots after the rejuvenation, not keeping in place in either plane. With no apparent hint on how to re-tighten it (unlike on any other front sight I've seen), I found help from the pictorial link that Mike provided.
Turns out the quirky gun has plenty of rococo to it, all around!
The brass front sight blade has a slide fit into a groove at the top of the sight base. A spring-loaded upright pin at the front of the blade locks the blade in place. To gain access to any kind of tightening apparati, you need to press the pin down while at the same time sliding the blade forward. Under the blade is a very narrow grub screw with an equally narrow flat head slot, where close to no modern scredrivers fit. This grub screw was loose, and tightening it made the sight base solid.
-
Exactly. Both the front sight, and open rear one, are located by rather loose-fitting cross-pins, mating with milled recesses in the barrel. But each has a vertical grub screw that locks things into place.
(https://i.postimg.cc/3Rt8z0w2/D975-D2-B1-B15-F-4-D95-842-C-F217-C3-FB9-C0-B.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
(https://i.postimg.cc/CKVx8Vtn/AD79-D2-C2-B278-4106-B78-A-3-FC2-FFE4-F4-D4.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
Another interesting detail of the sights is that the famously funky match diopter is not the standard German eyepiece thread (9.5 x 1.0 mm)...but the British Parker-Hale one (7/32" - 40)! PH sport eyepiece mounted in this pic, with big original BSF one and an old Gehmann for comparison.
(https://i.postimg.cc/htnGzBNz/AA6640-D8-83-D8-4-BB8-B57-C-0-D94903-AA88-D.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
-
There are no crosswise pins in the front sight base of my BSF, just empty holes. You can see it in the pic of the sight above. Over the years I have wondered why they are there, since even BSF wouldn't drill holes in airguns just for giggles.
The front sight has stayed put in the past and seems to be holding now, with just the grub screw, without the pins. Maybe I'll fashion my own, better-fitting pins sometime down the road.
-
Interesting, I had not noticed that in your pics!
When I took the sights off mine, I was surprised how easy it was to remove the pins, I could almost push them out with my fingers. It wouldn't be hard at all to lose them.
For whatever quick measurements from my cheapie caliper are worth, the fatter lower pin securing the base is 3.3mm in diameter, and 15mm long. The skinny upper one locating the sight hood and element plunger is 2.7mm x 20mm.
-
Thanks for pin dimensions, Mike!
Yeah, I reckon the pins have just fallen out sometime between the 60's and the later 90's when I got the gun, with the pins already missing.
-
And more (due to attachment size limit):
The supposedly-never-cleaned barrel was a chore to clean, given the taploader geometry - my usual patch pullers were impossible to use here. So, I loaded the BSF with four VFG felt pellets (two in the tap, two loaded from the muzzle) to give sufficient resistance. The pellets shown tell that cleaning was sorely needed.
Hi. You have a great Air rifle there. Seldom seen in the US. I managed to acquire one a while back form Europe
Whereas mine has the plain stock many came with either of two higher grade match stocks….You bare so very lucky to have an original diopter…Mine came with the front sight broken and partly missing so I’m using a Williams Peep sight on it to good effect. I would love to find an original front sight for it…Not real high powered and not meant to be ..Mine does about 640 w/ 8gn. Pellet….The high power in BSF lies with the S55 and it’s family which was the first commercial air gun to hit 800 fps. Back in the day. Enjoy
-
Thanks, Mark
Yeah, it's obvious the BSF 54 isn't a speedster, nor should it be. Gaylord got around 715 fps / 9 fpe out of his 54, which is now owned by our own Mike Driskill.
The cocking stroke of my 54 tells me the mainspring has fatigued quite a bit - there's little spring in the spring. Getting those missing 2 - 3 fpe back would make the gun a much better shooter.
-
I haven't had a chance to chrono Mr. Gaylord's Match since I got it, but 700-ish FPS with light-ish ammo seems about right from the sound and feel of it. The S54 and BSF's higher-powered barrel-cockers probably used the same spring, but the underlever rifle's long transfer port and loading tap add up to a lot of "lost volume" between piston and pellet, which holds the speed down.
This was also true of the classic Diana models 35 (barrel-cocker) and 50 (underlever) - they are 100% the same gun aft of the breech, but the 35 always shoots significantly harder.
BTW the OEM diopter on my Match is a little wonky, so I successfully fitted an old Williams from Air Rifle Headquarters to it with good results...posted over on the Vintage Gate.
-
Yeah, I remember reading how the diopter sight of the 54 Match isn't all that, and the gun doesn't shoot any more accurately with it than with the open sights. So I'm not too bummed I don't have the peep, apart from theoretical resale value down the line.
-
Thanks, Mark
Yeah, it's obvious the BSF 54 isn't a speedster, nor should it be. Gaylord got around 715 fps / 9 fpe out of his 54, which is now owned by our own Mike Driskill.
The cocking stroke of my 54 tells me the mainspring has fatigued quite a bit - there's little spring in the spring. Getting those missing 2 - 3 fpe back would make the gun a much better shooter.
Good day. I wonder if there’s a Ox Accelerator
That would work springwise. It would be nice to help the power a bit. I’ll let you know if do a respringing and how it works out.
Thanks for the inspiration. Also….I Want Your Stock!🕺🏻
-
I've never heard a good word for the Ox mainsprings, and wouldn't risk it. Maccari makes a replacement spring for the BSF54, and that would be a solid bet...nah, investment.
-
Yeah, I remember reading how the diopter sight of the 54 Match isn't all that, and the gun doesn't shoot any more accurately with it than with the open sights. So I'm not too bummed I don't have the peep, apart from theoretical resale value down the line.
It's definitely a weird sight. Here is it with the original eye disk...note how long the shaft is, to clear the protrusion at the rear of the sight (which houses the windage lock screws). The adjustment clicks for both elevation and windage are rather coarse, making it hard to fine-tune. And mine is a bit dinged up to boot.
(https://i.postimg.cc/R06ZDZwb/F296764-E-B899-4986-9-B4-B-DF38-CBFA88-A8.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
Again, it's threaded for English, not German, eyepieces! Here is is with a small Parker-Hale sporting one...
(https://i.postimg.cc/5Nbj21M6/ADE3-FB08-9639-48-E3-B30-B-EABBCB1800-E3.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
...and just for good measure, a Williams one.
(https://i.postimg.cc/C5H1srbh/091126-F9-040-C-4763-BE1-F-F16-EDFB57-A26.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
BUT - since the sight must adjust so low, there isn't room for the nice Parker-Hale adjustable irises with colored filters, etc., to clear the big bump at the back. WAAAAHHH!
(https://i.postimg.cc/2SX5GZLZ/3-F0-FE25-F-DB08-481-C-81-CC-4-D337149-EEF6.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
-
Good to see the missing sight "in the flesh", Mike! Your excellent photography brings 'em to life.
-
Thanks!
It's interesting that Weihrauch used a similar design in their early days, i.e. the windage adjuster built into the sight base, and elevation in a round "turret." HW switched to a more modern mechanism in the late 1950's, with both adjusters in the upper part, but BSF never modernized theirs.
Here's the BSF diopter flanked by HW sights - early 50's on the left, mid 60's on the right.
(https://i.postimg.cc/T1X94VcP/0-A0-C3-D5-B-2-ABD-4-BF3-96-F9-12-A3-D3263-CF2.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
-
Thanks!
It's interesting that Weihrauch used a similar design in their early days, i.e. the windage adjuster built into the sight base, and elevation in a round "turret." HW switched to a more modern mechanism in the late 1950's, with both adjusters in the upper part, but BSF never modernized theirs.
Here's the BSF diopter flanked by HW sights - early 50's on the left, mid 60's on the right.
(https://i.postimg.cc/T1X94VcP/0-A0-C3-D5-B-2-ABD-4-BF3-96-F9-12-A3-D3263-CF2.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
Mike,
Thanks for posting! Those older rear sight are way cool. I was lucky enought to find a later HW rear sight. Looks just like yours. The older ones look way cooler. ;)
-Y
-
I took the BSF apart, to look into freshening up its meagre output. What a learning experience!
Quirky on the outside, quirky on the inside.
The BSF's action is held onto the stock by two hex head screws, a 3mm and a 4mm. This is the earliest gun I know that has hex heads - anyone to beat this 1960's one? The complex stock inletting is very well done, by the Defunct "SILE" stock making company. Curiously, there's a layer of dry moly lubing the inletting.
On the underside of the action, in front of the trigger block, there's an upright bolt with a block head that locks the powerplant in place while housing the front trigger guard screw, similar to many other springers. The steel end cap (the gun has zero plastic parts) doesn't bear any pressure, or so I thought.
Unscrewing the end cap, a coilspring sprung out from the rear of the receiver. It was not the world's smallest mainspring, but a unique BSF feature: the coilspring pushes on the uppermost trigger sear, in a sort of a power steering type of arrangement!
-
In most guns, the trigger block is free to pull out at this stage. Not so with the BSF: the scope rail needs to be taken off for the disassembly to proceed. Who'd thunk it?
With the scope rail screw removed, the trigger block and the scope rail could be tapped out in lockstep. When the trigger block was 20mm's out, things loosened: the scope rail had reached a keyhole in the receiver top and could be lifted off. Now the trigger block came out unimpeded.
The mainspring with its rear guide and base was deep inside the receiver. I needed a deep well socket to engage the powerplant with my spring compressor. After the upright bolt was off, the innards came out.
The steel rear guide / block was extremely loose on the spring. The guide itself was a 50mm length of 13mm OD tubing, undersized in every way.
Every internal part of the BSF had plenty of still-runny grease / machine oil on them. No dry guns off the factory for them, it seems.
The mainspring had a hefty cant plus clearly diminished pitch, both on the rear part of the spring. This explains the lack of velocity. The spring had surprisingly hefty dimensions: 3.4mm / 0.134” wire, ID 14.2mm / 0.56”, 31 coils. Both spring ends were properly collapsed, ground and leveled. The spring was coated inside and out with black moly grease.
-
To take the piston out, I had to figure out how to pull the cocking arm out of the receiver. It would not lift off the cocking slot until I pulled a splayed pin pressing the arm tight against the receiver.
The piston was sealing a-ok, based on the suctiony pull and a satisfying seal-breaking 'pop' when the piston broke free of the compression chamber. It took only a couple hundred grams of pressure to push the piston inside the chamber, but that seemed fine for the leather seal, re: my LG55. The 60-y.o. seal looked fine, just a little ragged.
The piston itself is beautifully machined. It weighs 217 grams, with a couple grams of ancient grease in and on it.
-
I washed the metal parts and the compression chamber with a trio of motor cleaner, turpentine and acetone. As before, each stage took out junk the others didn't. Acetone was king, especially in removing gunked up, glue-like lube remnants from various corners.
The BSF is a combination of overdesign and fine execution seasoned with doses of sloppiness. For instance, on the receiver surface, there are a couple of places where a grinder had gouged the metal pretty unsightly (see pic), but these parts moved into the blueing process just the same. It's not like a gouge can be taken out of a tube, but some other manufacturer would've scrapped the tube.
The piston's latch rod tip has some wear on it, from the trigger sear (see pic). I think this proves the gun has seen plenty of use in its previous life.
The transfer port of the BSF has a brass lining and really quite small diameter (see pic). I measured it at 2.5mm, which is much less than on leather-sealed guns typically. It may be that the tap loading geometry with a large distance between the bottom of the chamber and the rear of the pellet requires a smallish diameter, lest the TP volume would increase too much. Another possible explanation is that the brass lining is in fact a restrictor (there is no 'F' pentagon on the gun, but I don't think they were even in use back then).
The splashes of moly seen in the bottom of the chamber were removed with q-tips dipped in acetone.
The BSF trigger has a curious outside torsion spring for the trigger blade (see pic). It looks out of place, but isn't. A cut window into the sear contact point helps with trigger adjustments. There's a single adjustment screw that I haven't needed to touch.
-
I had purchased a replacement mainspring for the BSF off Chambers. The new spring had appreciably smaller wire size than the original (3.15 vs. 3.4mm), a little smaller ID and one less coil. It was also much longer than the fatigued original. I only polished the spring ends, trusting that the spring would fit.
I had soaked the piston seal in neatsfoot oil for some 24 hours. Now I had to decide how to lube the piston / chamber. Mixing things with the animal-based oil already in the seal didn't feel right. I opted to lube the entire piston-chamber interface with the neatsfoot. This low-powered gun shouldn't diesel too bad, let alone detonate, with it.
So, I smeared neatsfoot oil liberally onto the piston body and inserted the piston into the chamber. Things were gliding and sealing. Next, I coated the undersized spring guide, base and shaft, with Maccari's Heavy tar, to get even a little purchase between the mainspring and the guide. The mainspring and guide went in. Again, I had to use the deep well socket to push the powerplant in place.
The rest of the assembly went in reverse of the disassembly. I lubed metal-to-metal surfaces sparingly, while giving the outside of the action a Ballistol bath. The solvents used had activated some points of corrosion on the surface, which I targeted with steel wool soaked in Ballistol.
With the stock attached, the rejuvenated BSF was ready and rearing to go. Everything seemed to work, while the cocking stroke had bulked up considerably. I left the gun cocked for an hour to get things going.
When I went to discharge the gun, it sent a R10 Match pellet deep inside a waste block of softwood. Back in the day the gun had trouble sticking a pellet to a piece of wood at point blank range. By this primitive test, the tuneup had succeeded.
-
Duke, thank you very much for this great series of pics and notes!
Very interesting, very well done, and very timely as I recently acquired one of these beasts.
-
Thanks Mike for the kind words - they mean a lot to me, coming from you!
I had a chance to take some shots through the chrono just now. I know it's way too early post-surgery, but I think it's still informative - and the anticipation was killing me.
After a couple of wake-up shots, the following was recorded (with shortened shot strings instead of my normal 10 per pellet):
Exact 4.52:
210 m/s / 689 fps
12.1 J / 8.9 fpe
Exact RS:
217 m/s / 712 fps
11.2 J / 8.2 fpe
R10 Match 4.50:
213.5 m/s / 700 fps
12.1 J / 8.9 fpe
Before the tuneup the BSF shot the RS's some 85 fps slower, with much lower energy. I wonder if 10 fpe is a kind of a magic barrier for this gun in .177 cal?
The R10's had by far the smallest spread, while Exacts were all over the place. From pushing pellets last night, it seems clear this gun does not like small-headed pellets, and heavyish, smallish pellets are the worst for consistency.
The BSF is smoking some, but not any more than before the relube job. Apart from having some bark, it has very mild manners, overall.
Curiously, the BSF's trigger, acting as a single stage trigger up until shot nr. 10, suddenly turned into a two-stage trigger. This isn't the first time this has happened with the BSF, either. I haven't fiddled with the trigger any, but it acts like it too needs to limber up to start working as intended. The catch itself has always been rock-solid, with no hint of sear slipping etc., which is why I'm not too worried here.
-
Great Write-up! Thanks!
Just TWO comments:
1.- Those hex head screws are not original. ;-)
2.- Try some domed GTO's, from your description of the rifling they should fit and perform well.
Thanks again!
HM
-
Very interesting!
Considering all the work you've done, I would guess the power will sneak upward a bit after everything settles in. But the 9 FPE neighborhood may be about right. While the basic powerplant was shared with the model 55 - 60 -70 barrel cockers, which were 11 to 12 FPE guns, the transfer port and loading tap add up to significant lost volume and less power. You see the very same thing with the Diana 35 and 50.
-
Great write up and thread on the BSF rifle. I like the rap loading aspect. Question. I may have missed it, but what does BSF actually stand for??
-
Copied from our friends over at the Canadian airgun forum:
Bayerische Sportswaffen Fabriken (BSF) of Erlangen, Germany founded in 1935 but only prototypes produced until after WW2 owned by the Schutt family until 1983 when bought by Herr Gayer. (The German exporter was Wilsker and Co and hence many were sold in the US, as Wischo particularly by Beeman who was pioneering adult airguns from mid 1970’s)
I would add that BSF guns were also sold under the Burgo and Bavaria brand names.
-
Copied from our friends over at the Canadian airgun forum:
Bayerische Sportswaffen Fabriken (BSF) of Erlangen, Germany founded in 1935 but only prototypes produced until after WW2 owned by the Schutt family until 1983 when bought by Herr Gayer. (The German exporter was Wilsker and Co and hence many were sold in the US, as Wischo particularly by Beeman who was pioneering adult airguns from mid 1970’s)
I would add that BSF guns were also sold under the Burgo and Bavaria brand names.
I thought that BSF was absorbed by Weihrauch? And that this marriage gave us the HW 85.........
-Y
-
Yogi, you are correct; we're talking two different transactions.
The purchase by the Gayer family in 1983 resulted in a "last gasp" under the BSF name - many of the guns were re-issued with new stock designs, muzzle weights, and other detail changes. But this did not last, and it was a few years later that Weihrauch bought BSF.
HW's acquisition resulted in the hybrid guns seen here under the "Marksman" name in around 1989 - 92 or thereabouts, including the two discussed in the recent post linked below. I think it is correct that the HW 85 / R10 and HW 98 were also fallout from this change.
https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=208544.0 (https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=208544.0)
-
Yogi, you are correct; we're talking two different transactions.
The purchase by the Gayer family in 1983 resulted in a "last gasp" under the BSF name - many of the guns were re-issued with new stock designs, muzzle weights, and other detail changes. But this did not last, and it was a few years later that Weihrauch bought BSF.
HW's acquisition resulted in the hybrid guns seen here under the "Marksman" name in around 1989 - 92 or thereabouts, including the two discussed in the recent post linked below. I think it is correct that the HW 85 / R10 and HW 98 were also fallout from this change.
https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=208544.0 (https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=208544.0)
Thanks Mike!
-Y
-
Thanks guys!
Hector,
Those Allen head screws did feel kinda out of place, and now that you pointed it out, they sure look like replacements. We'll never know how or when that came about. The BSF was 30 years old by the time I got it.
GTO's are unavailable here overseas, as much as they are recommended for the USians.
-
I've been shooting with the BSF some through the first half of the summer. The old lady has seen a couple hundred shots, which is more than the gun has done in decades. So, it was time to check the after-tune output once more.
Upthread, I commented on how the BSF shot Exacts all over the place, while shooting R10 Match pellets with great consistency.
Superdomes are well known to fit antique, "true .22 cal" bores better than other modern pellets (Well, Superdomes have been in production for some 40 years...). Some knowledgeable folk have said that this applies to antique .177 cals, as well, even when there's no "true .177 cal" issue at play. So, I purchased a tin of .177 cal Superdomes to see for myself.
10-shot averages, with each string shot after leading the bore with the pellet being measured:
Superdome 8.3's averaged 213.5 m/s / 700 fps, for 12.3 J / 9 fpe. They weren't too consistent, with a 13 fps ES.
R10 Match 8.2's averaged 216.0 m/s / 709 fps, for 12.4 J / 9.1 fpe. They were very consistent, again, with a 5 fps ES.
Exact 8.44's averaged 194.2 m/s / 637 fps, for just 10.3 J / 7.6 fpe. They weren't too consistent, with a 13 fp ES, but MUCH better than in the earlier session.
Exact RS 7.33's averaged 218.8 m/s / 718 fps, for 11.4 J / 8.4 fpe. They had terrible consistency, with a 35 fps ES.
So, the velocities and ME's increased a little from the post-tuneup situation, while consistency improved more. Both Superdomes and R10's peaked at 12.5 J / 9.2 fpe, while the Exacts had appreciably lower energies.
As far as the shot cycle goes, Exacts were clearly too heavy for the powerplant, while the lightest pellet on test here, the RS, had the best cycle (and the most usable velocity).
Overall, the BSF does have a pretty bad twang and buzz, thanks to the undersized steel rear guide - the heavy tar I used couldn't make things much better. There's no substitute for well-fitting guides.
Testing the BSF for accuracy, standing offhand at 20 meters (22 yds.), the R10's shot again most consistently, with Superdomes next, and the Exact RS the worst. To be honest, accuracy wasn't stellar with any of the pellets, but that's more due to operator efficiency than anything else. Differences between the pellets came obvious, anyway.
Maybe I should try the 7 gr. R10 Match next?
-
Very interesting info - thanks! I have yet to chrono my S54 so these are valuable benchmarks. In my experience, an extreme deviation over 10 shots of 13 FPS is not bad at all!
The classic RWS .177 designs (R10, Meister, S'dome, Hobby, S'point, S'hollowpoint) have about the largest-diameter skirts I have found. I too find that tap-loaders love them, and I no longer even bother trying anything else in the old HW 55's with the tapered breech leade.
For what it's worth, I typically do 15-shot strings, and let the chrono calculate standard deviation. If it's in the neighborhood of 1% of the average velocity, I call it good, LOL.