Why I chose the TX200 MKIII over the HW97K

[GatorGunner]

I'm certainly not trying to flame any HW97K owners with this post, but thought this topic might interest some who are on the fence between the two guns.

I debated long and hard as to which higher level springer I would buy.  I researched forums, reviews, and general information primarily about these two guns.  I narrowed the selection to the two underlevers rather early as I currently own a couple of break barrels and have shot several that I don't own.  I also have a Mrod that quite nicely fills my needs in the PCP area and  I also own a Hammerli 850 Airmagnum that covers the Co2 niche in my collection.  I have a sidelever RWS 48 that's a real hammer and my first springer.  I have yearned for a high end underlever since I first became interested in spring guns.  I do admit, the TX was the first to catch my eye due to its good looks and that fish scale checkering.   

But that is not the central issue that pushed me over the top for the TX.  What I began to notice as I was doing my research was that the TX200 was often referred to as a "tuned gun" right out of the box.  Even Tom Gaylord used this term to describe it as well as several others.  In fairness to the HW97K, it was often touted as an equally accurate gun, but I would consistently see where someone would say, "my HW97 shot like a dream after I sent it to such and such a tuner" (no tuner mentioned because there was several different ones).  I rarely found where the TX200 was sent to anyone to make it a better gun in stock condition.   I'm sure that some do send their TX200's to tuners, but not to the extent that I noticed with the HW97.   

I still don't have my TX200 MKIII yet (it's on back order from PA), but I'm rather excited at the prospect.  Perhaps some day I will own a HW97K as well.  I recently looked one over at Chuck's Firearms on Peachtree St. here in Atlanta.  Truly a good looking gun and no doubt worth the comparable price of the TX200.  But for now, I'm gonna shoot the puddin' out of my TX when it gets here. 

Would love to hear your thoughts on this, especially if you own either one of these guns.

Ain't the airgun community a great place to live?

Regards,  Larry

[gene_sc]

Well I have tuned many TX 200's and just as many HW-97's. IMO both models benefit from being tune professionally. With that said both are equally as good guns out of the box. Both are as accurate as the finger is behind the trigger. Both are equally as heavy when scoped. As you say both are underlevers as well.

Also IMO it is a personal issue which gun each individual likes to shoot best or is most comfortably shooting. I own both the TX-200 and HW-97 and personally I would pick up the HW-97 first to shoot. This is just my personal preference. I like the way the HW-97 feels in my hands a tad better than the TX-200.

Both guns are at the top of there class and both guns are top quality builds and designs and are two top rated guns in their class, being underlevers. The only underlever that can equal them is the AA Pro Sport which I own as well. It is a fine gun out of the box to shoot as well and also benefits from a professional tune.

IMO anyone who buys any one of these guns have made an excellent decision regardless if they have them tuned or not.

[GatorGunner]

Well, looks like I gotta start saving for that HW97K .

[PhantomF4E]

England beats Germany yet again !!!!! Truth be told, I may add a 97k to my rack next to my TX just to be P.C.

[deanda]

Yep.......the TX200 is very nice. I don't have a 97 yet, but I'm sure I will

[Rocker1]

you guys are killing me !!!! i mean it jeez!!! just stop talking about them makes me have dreams. thanks david

[clip]

I have em both and I don't find an advantage in one over the other. One is as accurate as the other. Both of mine are .177 and shoot much better than I can hold. You can't go wrong choosing either of these fine rifles. I do find that each of mine has a certain "twang" when fired and that made my decision to have em tuned. Right now, I'm waiting for my HW97K to be returned from a TurboTune...which will be this week. I'll have the TX200 tuned in the near future. I agree with Gene,any rifle will benefit from a professional tune.

[Yellowstone]

I was on the fence with the TX200 or HW97. As some of you my have read in a post I replied about supporting your local Air gun shop. My shop sells HW97 and not TX200.
I went in asking about the TX200 they told me I would have to go to PA for one. He likes the TX200 he just doesn't sell them. That's a pretty big man to send you to their competitor without trying selling you something else. I had to ask about a comparable gun. So it's a HW97 then the TX200.  LOL

[lillysdad621]

i actually own a tx in .22 and a HW77k in .177. they are both unbelievably accurate, the tx is tuned (or actually detuned for less power but more smoothness) and the 77K is just broken in. The tx is so smooth that it can be benched like e pcp, and you would want to as it does weight more than the 77k. the 77 is more manageable in the field, and a great long distance hunter. I only thank God that i don't have to choose between them, as i would not know which way to go. I do like the tx aesthetically more, but i like that though look the 77k has... it feels like a nice winchester lever action.... Save for both....

[DanoInTx]

I have both, like both, LOVE the HW97K.  Tit for tat they come up pretty even, but the HW97K has a loading port that goes across both sides, and I load left handed, then shoot right handed.  Other than that you can't go wrong, but I will probably have my HW97K longer:)

Dan

[tml]

Anyone using the HW97 in .20 cal? I'm thinking about one in a 20
Tim

[lillysdad621]

better hunter...imo

[Crimson Sky]

I have the Beeman HW 97 up for review soon, and first impressions here at the studio are these:

HW: Larger, wrap around breech opening that is easier to load when scoped
HW: A bit twangy out of the box, but not terrible at all
HW: Slightly shorter cocking stroke
HW: Stock is a tad more comfortable (for me anyway)
HW: Amazing accuracy
HW: Front facing button to release underlever from the muzzle catch is a nuisance

TX: Firing cycle feels more 'tuned' as I've said before. No twang, just a dead 'thock!' I like this.
TX: Smaller breech, justified to the right side. I dropped more pellets in the chamber with this design.
TX: Simply beautiful blueing..deep and almost translucent
TX: Beefier stock, gorgeous checkering. Best looking walnut stock on the market IMHO
TX: Crazy accuracy that has won National Titles in Field Target (Was designed by a champion FT shooter)
TX: Ball/Indent catch on the underlever makes for quicker loading

These are just base observations. Both guns are at the top of their class.

[GatorGunner]

Thanks for that input, Paul.   I look forward to your review.  Any idea how far away you are from posting it?

Larry

[Motodad]

Please post the review. I am having a hard time deciding which AG to get between these two for a retirement gift for myself.

*well my first career anyway, 21 years in the Air Force.

[tpw]

ill have a tx200in my hands in a few days

[oldpink]

The TX is one of those rifles that should make any Brit swell up with pride that it came from his country.
Gorgeous, super accurate, and is said to feel expertly tuned right out of the box.
I only wish I could afford one.
Possibly the finest production springer in existence today.
Don't start pelting me, all you RWS/Diana and Weirhauch fans!

[longislandhunter]

I spent some time yesterday afternoon shooting my TX200 in the backyard range, beautiful and deadly, what a great combination

Jeff

[tml]

I have the Beeman HW 97 up for review soon, and first impressions here at the studio are these:

HW: Larger, wrap around breech opening that is easier to load when scoped
HW: A bit twangy out of the box, but not terrible at all
HW: Slightly shorter cocking stroke
HW: Stock is a tad more comfortable (for me anyway)
HW: Amazing accuracy
HW: Front facing button to release underlever from the muzzle catch is a nuisance

TX: Firing cycle feels more 'tuned' as I've said before. No twang, just a dead 'thock!' I like this.
TX: Smaller breech, justified to the right side. I dropped more pellets in the chamber with this design.
TX: Simply beautiful blueing..deep and almost translucent
TX: Beefier stock, gorgeous checkering. Best looking walnut stock on the market IMHO
TX: Crazy accuracy that has won National Titles in Field Target (Was designed by a champion FT shooter)
TX: Ball/Indent catch on the underlever makes for quicker loading

These are just base observations. Both guns are at the top of their class.

So if one gun has twang, doesn't feel as tuned and has a lever release that's a nuisance.... there not on equal playing fields. The TX 200 is a better gun?
Tim

[Mug08]

I went through the same thing as everybody else. I couldn't decide for a couple of months which to get. Both have their fans. I started to see a lot of posts on other forums similar to Clip's. Guys that have both and still can't decide which is better. Just a matter of personal taste. I wound up getting a new TX in .177 with a walnut stock.The thing is so accurate it's sick. Now I'm on the prowl for a used HW97 in .177 , just to have both. So many good things said about both guns , I just gotta see for myself.

       Mark