Cocking effort

[Bill_in_TR]

I was watching a video recently of someone shooting a Diana 48 sidelever. As I watched him cock the gun it didn't look to me like he was putting a lot of effort into it at all. I know that at my age and condition I am probably nowhere near as strong as the guy in the video. But even so his effort doesn't look like much at all. Is this because it is a side lever? Do they provide a leverage advantage I am not aware of?

I am currently shooting my tuned D34 (14.5 fpe) a lot and it really gives me a workout. I have an R7/HW30 on my wish list for some lighter effort shooting. But if a side lever is some how easier to cock It would be something to consider down the road. I believe he was shooting a stock D48 but I could be wrong. But it would be nice to get more fpe with less effort.

Or was I just hallucinating as I watched the video?

[lefeyelu]

Bill, 'Hard to beat an r7/hw 30 for pure fun/ accuracy, but a fwb 300s or mini will blow you away w/ accuracy & you can cock it w/one finger.g

[Roadworthy]

I have a 48 and a 34.  I am a 71 year old male in good health and probably average or better physical shape for my age.

That said, I really enjoy the extra power of the 48 though it is decidedly harder to cock than the 34.  Of course the technique is a bit different as well as the lever is on the side.  It takes getting used to.

My 48 was quite difficult to cock when new but after a couple hundred rounds it did loosen up a bit.  It is still noticeably harder to cock than the 34.    Unless you go with a lighter spring it is probably not the kind or rifle you want to shoot off the bench all day.

I have found shooting it off the bench I can shoot it as accurately as my TX 200.  I think I'd like to try a 460 next but that may wait awhile.

[Xraycer]

I'm 46 and have had my 48 for about 18 years now. Even in my 30's, it was a bit of an effort to cock (thank goodness for the anti-bear trap design). At 5'6" and just under 150lb, I am on the strong side, but not exactly Hercules by any means. The 48 certainly provides a good workout for my back muscles 

[Frank in Fairfield]

Here we go again...
At 72 I am in terrible shape.
High Blood Pressure
High Cholesterol
Type II Diabetes
80 pounds overweight
(All attributed to a highly toxic de-foliant used by our good uncle in Southeast Asia because of which I receive another monthly check from the afore-mentioned uncle.

That being said I have been struggling for about 6 months now trying to get the Diana 52 (The stock is a bit better looking and one inch longer than the 48) to shoot straight.

I think it is the scope.

I shot the rifle about 330 times yesterday at the range and in the yard.

There is a technique I use as most of my shooting with the 52 is from a seated position (off of the buckets).

I hold the rifle vertically on my right thigh and grasping the forearm with my left hand and then I push the cocking arm away from the action with my right hand.This leaves the action open directly in front of my face where I can inspect the chamber while inserting the pellet. The aforementioned left hand is correctly positioned to press on the anti-bear trap device allowing the cocking arm to return to battery.

Off the bags, such as off the bench, I find the cocking action to be not normal.

My other springers (see signature) are easily cocked and, no I do not slap the barrel when cocking the HW35 or R1.

I had a 48 and the accuracy was fine but the stock was a might short for my 6’ 3” frame.
The 52 is perfect, IMHO, if not a pound or two heavy.

The weight does make carrying the of my powder burning arms a bit easier especially at 7000 feet in the Wyoming Rockies.

Stay safe

[longhunter]

My routine for cocking my 48 is the same as Frank's. It's the easiest cocking gun I own.

[Artie]

I have a 48 & 54 sidelever and much prefer an underlever when it comes to cocking. For me, an underlever isn't nearly as awkward to manipulate when cocking. I would like to handle a 460 and get a feel for how it cocks. The 54 is almost new, maybe a hundred rounds downrange,  and it really takes some effort to cock, especially at the end of stroke. I have two Gamo Accu underlevers  (.177 & .22). Though not as powerful and far reaching as the Diana's, they are just as accurate and smooth cocking at 27lbs.

[Bill_in_TR]

It seems that the consensus is that the D48 is harder to cock than my D34 so that is not what I would be looking for. I have to wonder how the guy in that video made it look so easy.

[Frank in Fairfield]

Duplicate

[Frank in Fairfield]

I have a 48 & 54 sidelever and much prefer an underlever when it comes to cocking. For me, an underlever isn't nearly as awkward to manipulate when cocking. I would like to handle a 460 and get a feel for how it cocks. The 54 is almost new, maybe a hundred rounds downrange,  and it really takes some effort to cock, especially at the end of stroke. I have two Gamo Accu underlevers  (.177 & .22). Though not as powerful and far reaching as the Diana's, they are just as accurate and smooth cocking at 27lbs.

I agree with you Dick.
For extended shooting: 400-500 pellets a day, you can’t beat an under lever.
My TX, tuned by the Great One (Motörhead) has no twang with a trigger that breaks like glass shooting 8.64gr FTT at 917fps.
Deadly accurate.

More so in someone else’s hands.

[HectorMedina]

I was watching a video recently of someone shooting a Diana 48 sidelever. As I watched him cock the gun it didn't look to me like he was putting a lot of effort into it at all. I know that at my age and condition I am probably nowhere near as strong as the guy in the video. But even so his effort doesn't look like much at all. Is this because it is a side lever? Do they provide a leverage advantage I am not aware of?

I am currently shooting my tuned D34 (14.5 fpe) a lot and it really gives me a workout. I have an R7/HW30 on my wish list for some lighter effort shooting. But if a side lever is some how easier to cock It would be something to consider down the road. I believe he was shooting a stock D48 but I could be wrong. But it would be nice to get more fpe with less effort.

Or was I just hallucinating as I watched the video?

Beyond the realm of the subjective:

The usual 48-52-54 will take about 40# of peak cocking force to complete the cycle, the 34 will take about 35# of peak cocking force to complete the cycle.
Smartly modified 48-52-54's can yield between 15 and 16 ft-lbs ME with peak cocking forces of around 22-24# and no, it is not just the spring.
As long as you do not want 18-22 ft-lbs of output, peak cocking forces can be managed to whatever YOU need.

Telling you how many times I can cock my guns is very subjective and mostly depends on technique, not force.
As an FT shooter, I sometimes go through a half tin of pellets in a match day.

If you are interested, drop me a line.




HM

[Bill_in_TR]

Hector, the numbers you have given are in line with what I would expect for those guns. And they agree with the numbers given in the specs on the Pyramid Air and other sites for those guns.

I did a pretty careful job of tuning my D34 and using a GSX-OS kit from Air Rifle Headquarters I am reasonably happy with my results. The cocking and shot cycles are much smoother and quieter. But the fpe only dropped about a pound to about 14.5. The cocking effort did not improved much at all.

I don't need high velocity or high fpe for my shooting. So my current plan is to get an R7/HW30S for a more effortless shooting session. The D48 video got me interested because of the apparent light effort shown in that video. I thought a fixed barrel gun might provide some improved accuracy, although my D34 gives me some pretty good groups. But I want something with a lighter cocking effort than my D34. I also actually liked the idea of the bigger heavier gun that the D48 is.

I guess for now I will stick to my plan of acquiring an R7/HW30S.

[Harpoon1]

Bill

FWIW: I have a couple of HW30's and a R7. Straight out of the box they are excellent little guns, no doubt. Having said that, I detuned the R7, for what started out to be as strictly a target setup. Over time it eventually developed into doing double duty on occasion as a very accurate squirrel sniper.

I put a chopped down Vortek spring and VAC mainseal, drink bottle piston sleeve, Ultimox lube job. The gun is crazy quiet, smooth, easy to cock, and shoots sub-600 fps in the 5.75 FPE range at the muzzle. Is remarkably accurate out to 40+ yards. And is more than capable of taking squirrels and birds at 30-35 yds. I have several threads about its performance on squirrels over on the hunting gate, if you want to search "HW30/R7" they should pop up. If hunting is not your thing, no problem, its not for everybody.

Given a choice, if they are comparable in price. I'd get another R7 over the HW30. The stock is a little slimmer, feels more refined, and has checkering. The gold anodized trigger and set screw also give it a more refined appearance. IMO!

[Bill_in_TR]

Harpoon1,

There is an HW30S on AoA that has a walnut stained beech stock with checkering that looks absolutely gorgeous in their pictures. But when the budget is ready I will look carefully at both the R7 and HW30S and decide.

[Harpoon1]

Harpoon1,

There is an HW30S on AoA that has a walnut stained beech stock with checkering that looks absolutely gorgeous in their pictures. But when the budget is ready I will look carefully at both the R7 and HW30S and decide.

Yep, thats the "Deluxe" version, has a shorter fore end and fully exposed breech block. I personally prefer the longer fore end of the R7 and "regular" HW30 but, "to each his own"! They all shoot the same, its just a matter of aesthetics.

[HectorMedina]

Hector, the numbers you have given are in line with what I would expect for those guns. And they agree with the numbers given in the specs on the Pyramid Air and other sites for those guns.

I did a pretty careful job of tuning my D34 and using a GSX-OS kit from Air Rifle Headquarters I am reasonably happy with my results. The cocking and shot cycles are much smoother and quieter. But the fpe only dropped about a pound to about 14.5. The cocking effort did not improved much at all.

I don't need high velocity or high fpe for my shooting. So my current plan is to get an R7/HW30S for a more effortless shooting session. The D48 video got me interested because of the apparent light effort shown in that video. I thought a fixed barrel gun might provide some improved accuracy, although my D34 gives me some pretty good groups. But I want something with a lighter cocking effort than my D34. I also actually liked the idea of the bigger heavier gun that the D48 is.

I guess for now I will stick to my plan of acquiring an R7/HW30S.

Bill;

Your OP was about cocking effort and if the sidelevers had an advantage. Perhaps I was not clear enough:

The sidelevers CAN be MADE to have an advantage the break barrels cannot dream of.

Consider that in a 12 ft-lbs output machine based on the 48 general pattern, you are "investing" 22 lbs of peak cocking force. That is 0.54 ft-lbs of output per lb of peak cocking force
The R-7 architecture will give you 7½ ft-lbs output for 18 lbs of cocking force, that is 0.4 ft-lbs of output per lb of peak cocking force.

In case you think that this is a small difference, ask yourself: ¿would I rather drive a car that yields 25 mpg or one that yields 32?

Yes the R-7 can be further detuned and the lightness may be what you want if you shoot a lot from the standing, kneeling, or other field positions, or if you do any walking with the gun, but if you want stability and accuracy over extended shooting sessions, then there is absolutely no contest.

And these are just the facts.






HM

[Harpoon1]

Hector

In your opinion, whats the lowest minimum FPE output for the 48/52 platform in .177 before you need to think about short stroking it? 

Thanks

[HectorMedina]

Hector

In your opinion, whats the lowest minimum FPE output for the 48/52 platform in .177 before you need to think about short stroking it? 

Thanks

Skimpy;

I would say that anything under 14 ft-lbs needs to be short-stroked. The few samples I have tried of 48-54's with "12 ft-lbs springs" have had very "Mushy" shot cycles. A possibility in BR, but not under field conditions. SO, IMHO, the minimum is about 14 ft-lbs with a thinner spring that still uses the full OD of the piston.
Then you find an intermediate area, where short stroked pistons can yield up to 16 ft-lbs with minimal cocking effort.

https://www.ctcustomairguns.com/hectors-airgun-blog/the-wide-and-wonderful-range-of-a-short-stroked-d-54

What applies to the 54 also applies to the 48, 52 and 56.
In fact it is the shortstroking itself what allows the very drastic reduction in cocking effort by changing the fulcrum point of the lever.

The Brits are fans of the "Skinny" piston concept (sleeving the compression chambers down to 18-20 mm's and using skirtless ultra-light pistons). And for THEM that works dandy because the highest elevation difference between medium cities is about 500 feet in altitude.

We may shoot one day at 150 FASL, and the next one at 7,500 FASL. Under these conditions, the "Skinny Piston" does not work.

Keep well and shoot straight!




HM

[Harpoon1]

Hector

In your opinion, whats the lowest minimum FPE output for the 48/52 platform in .177 before you need to think about short stroking it? 

Thanks

Skimpy;

I would say that anything under 14 ft-lbs needs to be short-stroked. The few samples I have tried of 48-54's with "12 ft-lbs springs" have had very "Mushy" shot cycles. A possibility in BR, but not under field conditions. SO, IMHO, the minimum is about 14 ft-lbs with a thinner spring that still uses the full OD of the piston.
Then you find an intermediate area, where short stroked pistons can yield up to 16 ft-lbs with minimal cocking effort.

https://www.ctcustomairguns.com/hectors-airgun-blog/the-wide-and-wonderful-range-of-a-short-stroked-d-54

What applies to the 54 also applies to the 48, 52 and 56.
In fact it is the shortstroking itself what allows the very drastic reduction in cocking effort by changing the fulcrum point of the lever.

The Brits are fans of the "Skinny" piston concept (sleeving the compression chambers down to 18-20 mm's and using skirtless ultra-light pistons). And for THEM that works dandy because the highest elevation difference between medium cities is about 500 feet in altitude.

We may shoot one day at 150 FASL, and the next one at 7,500 FASL. Under these conditions, the "Skinny Piston" does not work.

Keep well and shoot straight!




HM

Hector,

Thats good intel, thanks.

Would it be possible to give us some/any details on how you go about "tuning for optimal stability" ? 

Thanks again.

[Bill_in_TR]

Hector,

Very interesting comments. I am not familiar with the notion of "short stroking" or "skinny pistons". Is there a thread or article somewhere that describes how it is done? How does a skinny piston get involved in short stroking? Skinny and short don't seem to be directly related terms. I would seriously like to understand more about these spring pistons. If I can use a D48 platform to achieve the level of cocking effort I want and also provide an accuracy potential that I like that would be great.