think I figured out the Challenger PCP attraction.

[Ribbonstone]

Think I know what I like about the Crosman Challenger:

One fill
+105 shots
Accuracy
Cheap to shoot
Simple gun

5 shots each @ 20 yards with the CHEAP RWS “Basic” pellets:

[Kailua]

Geez Ribbonstone you make shooting look to easy.   Looks like you go another keeper there in the Challenger.  Looks like that Lothar Walther barrel makes the rifle not so pellet picky.

[Ribbonstone]

Pretty sure the next 5 tins of Basic's are going though the Challenger.  JSB 8.4's shoot as well or maybe a tiny bit better on average, but the difference is so small as to be a matter of 1:100 shots.


Yes...the barrel would probably show a filthy patch if I cleaned it. am waiting for some  notabl accuracy change.  Looks like this LW barrel will foul to a certain point, past which it really doesn't make much difference. Am 325 shots in from a cleaning, and I can't measure a real difference in groups from "clean".

[PackingHeat]

That is seriously impressive. I may have to investigate the Challenger as I don't have a pure target shooting rifle yet. I would be really excited with performance like that.

[sperho]

Tell me that was offhand at 10 m and I'll be really impressed.    That gun will outshoot 99% of shooters who are using it for what it was designed for.  Thanks for posting more results!

[William273]

I thought that was a ten meter rifle and am impressed again with those groups at twenty meters. What sights were you using...Diopters? I know you mentioned them in another thread.

William

[Ribbonstone]

In the process...today, will shoot with the apt. sights for a comparison.
Predict the groups will be larger than the ones shot at 9X, but how much bigger?  Whatever the increase, will be a biologic incease rather than a mechanical one (gun didn't get less accurate, but the shooter did).

[Ribbonstone]

Doesn’t really “prove” anything other than my eyesight (and at +60, that ain’t so great).

Swapped for a set of aperture sights (same type that Crosman sells with the gun, just taken off an older Challenger co2).

Took 20-25 shots to get it roughly dialed in, and even so had to make some adjustments on the test target (dialed in some “right” between the 2nd and 3rd target and dialed in some “down” between target #4 and #5).  Good contrast targets, well fitted to the sight size, and well lighted.



OK…here is the verdict with my eyes @ 20 yards using 5 shot groups:

1. Iron sights more prone to “oops” shots.  Either my attention wandered or my eyesight  was off (and at my age, there are occasional “ocular fluid floaters” that plague me).

2. Over all, the average for the first 60 shots with a 9X scope came out at .201”. Average with match sights came out .238”.   That’s reasonably close to 18%.

(BTW: the 105 shot string in the first post ran from 2000psi to 1200 psi.  Took all of 38 pump strokes (Hill) to bring it back up to 2,000psi. 

[William273]

Well we have the same eyes...floaters and all...hate getting a solid sight picture and have a floater come scrolling across the target when I'm about to squeeze the trigger. Good shooting with the Diopters though.

Can I ask what you used for a rest? I'm using front and rear bags on a not so stable TV tray with metal legs in the dirt. I tried out my new scope yesterday and never new how much wobble there was with my setup...I mean I knew it wasn't completely stable but I thought it was enough until I shot a few rounds with my scope and could see all sorts of movement and instability/wobble going on that I never noticed with my Diopters. I'm thinking now I might need a better shooting platform...I could go out to a range and shoot off the benches there...rock solid.

William

[AmBraCol]

Well we have the same eyes...floaters and all...hate getting a solid sight picture and have a floater come scrolling across the target when I'm about to squeeze the trigger. Good shooting with the Diopters though.

Can I ask what you used for a rest? I'm using front and rear bags on a not so stable TV tray with metal legs in the dirt. I tried out my new scope yesterday and never new how much wobble there was with my setup...I mean I knew it wasn't completely stable but I thought it was enough until I shot a few rounds with my scope and could see all sorts of movement and instability/wobble going on that I never noticed with my Diopters. I'm thinking now I might need a better shooting platform...I could go out to a range and shoot off the benches there...rock solid.

William

William, it's not too hard to put up a fairly solid shooting bench. Three legs are better than four.  They sell a flange for galvinized pipe that lets you use said pipe for legs (cap the bottom end to keep them from filling with dirt)  Three legs on an "L" shaped piece of plywood makes for a decent bench and fairly portable.  Or keep your eye open for a solid core door.  Again, three legs instead of four. It's much easier to level and much steadier.

[rsterne]

105 shots, 800 psi drop (and I assume a 135 cc Disco sized reservoir), all I need is a pellet weight and velocity (or average FPE) to calculated the efficiency, which I 'm really curious about....

Bob

[William273]

Will keep that in mind Paul...thanks.

William

[PackingHeat]

I'm 42 and just developed floaters in my left eye over the last week. Talk about annoying. It's kind of like a built in bouncing screensaver effect for the eyeball. It is the worst when using the computer or driving. I guess I'm officially "getting old".

[Ribbonstone]

2000 - 1200psi using 7gr. Basics, 105 shots, average of 601fps.

Pushed it a bit, should have stopped at 90 shots to stay inside of 3% (call that 18fps), and the last 15 shots brought it to about 4.5% (27fps).

Really not an impressive efficency...something like 12.7 bar/cc?

[rsterne]

5.6 FPE x 105 = 590 FPE.... 800 psi / 14.5 = 55.2 bar.... 135 cc / 16.4 = 8.23 CI.... 552 x 8.23 = 454 CI.... 590 / 454 = 1.30 FPE/CI.... Not stellar, but not bad.... I'm thinking that doing a bstaley O-ring buffer might increase the shot count.... You already have the hammer and preload adjuster, just drop in four #113, 70 D O-rings and see what happens.... Worth a try....

Bob

[Ribbonstone]

That odd striker transfer part might not leave 4-o-ring room, but will get a test.  Be interresting to see what interaction the o-ring mod would have in conjunction with the spring loaded transfer rod.

[bstaley]

You'd also want a bigger transfer port....otherwise it'd be even SLOWER.

[Ribbonstone]

You're right...and i'll delay that experiment until I have another transfer port in hand (am going to want to put it back the way it is).