The SAGA of a DIANA 56 T/H

[truck driver]

Not sure where I should ask this question so I'll start here.

The theory of the soft bedding has been discussed else where but in actuality the 54 with it's rubber washers is soft bedded yet with changing out those rubber washers you have proven a more solid bedding is more consistent.
Hector where can one get the cone style replacement washers /spacers used in this project?
Also can one use flat washers instead?


Rodger;

The idea of the self-leveling washers is that small variations in humidity of the stock will have less effect when you travel if there is a way to keep the sled-pins in line even with a small stock warpage.
So, the solid bedding has proven more repeatable, specially from assembly to assembly, but in Steve's opinion, the shot cycle is better/smoother with the OEM arrangement AND it added one more aspect he could "tune".

If you want a set of self-leveling washers, I will take one next Monday night.

Keep well and shoot straight!





HM

Thanks Hector it would be appreciated. I'm also sending you a PM.

[Buldawg76]

Hector, I agree with all you stated and to be honest I am still just crawling when it comes to understanding all the idiosyncrasies and relationships between all the variables involved in spring guns much less other platforms for sure. I was not aware that there were issues experienced in the worlds with 22mm kits by some shooters but I do understand that a one day match is far less difficult to achieve good results than three days in a row under varying conditions. 

Both my TX and B40 have older hawke varmint scopes on them in the 2.5x10x44 version and the UKHFT game we shoot now does not allow for any scope adjustments during a match so once the scope is set to the power and parallax desired for each match it is not touched again. I am not sure if this has any real affect on scope life or performance but my varmints have held up well for several years now with both the factory kits and the 22mm kits in them. In both 15 fpe tunes and 12 fpe tunes. I have read that the 22mm kits are harder on scopes but have not experienced that issue myself, I do know my D48 broke two varmint scopes back to back with a vortek PG2 SHO kit in it and therefore was detuned to 12fpe.

BD 

[HectorMedina]

Hector, I agree with all you stated and to be honest I am still just crawling when it comes to understanding all the idiosyncrasies and relationships between all the variables involved in spring guns much less other platforms for sure. I was not aware that there were issues experienced in the worlds with 22mm kits by some shooters but I do understand that a one day match is far less difficult to achieve good results than three days in a row under varying conditions. 

Both my TX and B40 have older hawke varmint scopes on them in the 2.5x10x44 version and the UKHFT game we shoot now does not allow for any scope adjustments during a match so once the scope is set to the power and parallax desired for each match it is not touched again. I am not sure if this has any real affect on scope life or performance but my varmints have held up well for several years now with both the factory kits and the 22mm kits in them. In both 15 fpe tunes and 12 fpe tunes. I have read that the 22mm kits are harder on scopes but have not experienced that issue myself, I do know my D48 broke two varmint scopes back to back with a vortek PG2 SHO kit in it and therefore was detuned to 12fpe.

BD

You are absolutely correct, Mike.
As long as you do not "click" the harmonics energy that the 22 mm's kits produce will not affect you.
As a matter of fact, not clicking the scope is the solution advanced by Tony Leach himself. We had a good, long, conversation while at the 2019 WFTC's

I do not click, long story, too many years of shooting with "cluttered" scopes, LOL!
But the majority of WFTF shooters, do click. And so, without knowing that, it was a guessing ¿What's wrong with my shooting? game. Sadly, the WFTC's is not the place to guess.

Hawkes are not particularly reliable scopes. After, at least, 4 instances of severe issues and one refusal to sustain the warranty, I NEVER use them.

Spring-Piston Airguns are jealous mistresses, if you even look at another airgun, they will slap you in the face with a flyer, LOL!
Yes they are complicated, but the idea behind solid, scientific, testing is to start understanding all the interconnections between the components, and Steve did an admirable job at making sure everything was stable and performing consistently, and then changing just ONE thing.
We'll go into that in Part 4.

Thanks for reading!






HM

[Buldawg76]

Yes the WFTC's are not the place to be guessing as to why your game is suddenly off the norm is not good at all.

I do agree that hawke scopes are not particularly robust in 1" versions but the two my D48 broke were replaced promptly with no push back, although it was 3 to 4 years ago. Actually one my second returned scope I was contacted and given an option to upgrade from the 1" varmint to a 3x12x50 AMX 30mm sf scope for only 80 bucks and I gladly accepted. I was also informed that while they would stand behind the 1" scope warranties their recommendation for spring guns is to use the 30mm scopes instead. So for me at least I have not had your issues and can say for sure if they do treat me the same in the future they will also lose my business.

Yep spring guns are indeed jealous mistresses.   My 124 is one such mistress with regards to scopes. shooting one holers and all of a sudden the reticle falls out of place in erector tubes, granted I do not use high dollar scopes on her for just that reason.

Looking forward to part 4 as well.

BD

[fwbsport]

Hector, I agree with all you stated and to be honest I am still just crawling when it comes to understanding all the idiosyncrasies and relationships between all the variables involved in spring guns much less other platforms for sure. I was not aware that there were issues experienced in the worlds with 22mm kits by some shooters but I do understand that a one day match is far less difficult to achieve good results than three days in a row under varying conditions. 

Both my TX and B40 have older hawke varmint scopes on them in the 2.5x10x44 version and the UKHFT game we shoot now does not allow for any scope adjustments during a match so once the scope is set to the power and parallax desired for each match it is not touched again. I am not sure if this has any real affect on scope life or performance but my varmints have held up well for several years now with both the factory kits and the 22mm kits in them. In both 15 fpe tunes and 12 fpe tunes. I have read that the 22mm kits are harder on scopes but have not experienced that issue myself, I do know my D48 broke two varmint scopes back to back with a vortek PG2 SHO kit in it and therefore was detuned to 12fpe.

BD

You are absolutely correct, Mike.
As long as you do not "click" the harmonics energy that the 22 mm's kits produce will not affect you.
As a matter of fact, not clicking the scope is the solution advanced by Tony Leach himself. We had a good, long, conversation while at the 2019 WFTC's

I do not click, long story, too many years of shooting with "cluttered" scopes, LOL!
But the majority of WFTF shooters, do click. And so, without knowing that, it was a guessing ¿What's wrong with my shooting? game. Sadly, the WFTC's is not the place to guess.

Hawkes are not particularly reliable scopes. After, at least, 4 instances of severe issues and one refusal to sustain the warranty, I NEVER use them.

Spring-Piston Airguns are jealous mistresses, if you even look at another airgun, they will slap you in the face with a flyer, LOL!
Yes they are complicated, but the idea behind solid, scientific, testing is to start understanding all the interconnections between the components, and Steve did an admirable job at making sure everything was stable and performing consistently, and then changing just ONE thing.
We'll go into that in Part 4.

Thanks for reading!




HM

..."Spring-Piston Airguns are jealous mistresses, if you even look at another airgun, they will slap you in the face with a flyer, LOL!..."

HA HA! Boy are you not joking! I've been shooting all my other "hunting" springers while my .22 HW80K has been resting!  And what these rifles are doing to me to make me spend MORE time with THEM!

I got out my .20 97K-T and sighted it in to hit with an OLD scope, the Leu VXII 3-9X 33mm from decades ago, and it's doing nice but it DOESN'T do what my HW80 .20 DOES after it! With HEAVIES.

Then I pumped back the Beeman Falcon .25 to 195 BAR and put JSB KING in there and it still shoots exactly where it's pointed using a BugBuster 4-12X.

Now I feel the NEED to go back and pull out the HW80K .22 to let it know I NEVER FORGET!

[HectorMedina]

Part 4 has been published:

https://www.ctcustomairguns.com/hectors-airgun-blog/the-saga-of-a-56-th2541108

Sorry for the delay, but there's been so much advance in the "aftermath" that I think we will need to put out two or more really serious entries.

Anyway, I hope you enjoy!





HM

[truck driver]

Part 4 has been published:

https://www.ctcustomairguns.com/hectors-airgun-blog/the-saga-of-a-56-th2541108

Sorry for the delay, but there's been so much advance in the "aftermath" that I think we will need to put out two or more really serious entries.

Anyway, I hope you enjoy!





HM

Thanks Hector for the link. You said in the blog the tuner would be available as an after market add on but there would need to be some gunsmithing to put one on a TO1 ? My TO6 48 Barrel and the TO1 54 barrel look the same with the front sight removed so maybe you can expand on the comment.
Thanks

[HectorMedina]

Thanks Hector for the link. You said in the blog the tuner would be available as an after market add on but there would need to be some gunsmithing to put one on a TO1 ? My TO6 48 Barrel and the TO1 54 barrel look the same with the front sight removed so maybe you can expand on the comment.
Thanks

They should not!

T01 rifles had a metallic muzzle piece that aligned with the barrel's "Vertical" using two dovetails at the top of the barrel itself.
T05 and T06 rifles have a slant cut at the muzzle end and a corresponding slant in the plastic piece that aligns the verticality of the front sight.

If my suggestions were heeded, that slant is no longer there (a reduction in production costs), and the HPM is completely cylindrical, as there is no need to align anything. But if the barrels have the slant, then a small hollow will be there, but if the barrels had the dovetails, then they will need careful filing off of the RAISED portions of the dovetails. Do NOT eliminate the dovetails, very little filing will be required to obtain a snug fit.

Hope this clarifies the situation.






HM

[truck driver]

Thanks Hector for the link. You said in the blog the tuner would be available as an after market add on but there would need to be some gunsmithing to put one on a TO1 ? My TO6 48 Barrel and the TO1 54 barrel look the same with the front sight removed so maybe you can expand on the comment.
Thanks

They should not!

T01 rifles had a metallic muzzle piece that aligned with the barrel's "Vertical" using two dovetails at the top of the barrel itself.
T05 and T06 rifles have a slant cut at the muzzle end and a corresponding slant in the plastic piece that aligns the verticality of the front sight.

If my suggestions were heeded, that slant is no longer there (a reduction in production costs), and the HPM is completely cylindrical, as there is no need to align anything. But if the barrels have the slant, then a small hollow will be there, but if the barrels had the dovetails, then they will need careful filing off of the RAISED portions of the dovetails. Do NOT eliminate the dovetails, very little filing will be required to obtain a snug fit.

Hope this clarifies the situation.






HM

Thanks for the reply Hector.
The birth date on the rifle is August 2001 and I've had the front sight off so it diffenetly has the slant machined on the barrel. Maybe they ran out of barrels when changing over to the TO5.

[Kerndtc]

I'm unaware of the second person on the team who had issues with their 22mm setup. The only one I know of would be Matt.

Matt TX200 w/ 22mm
Leo LGU
Ray D54
Jay HW97
Nathan LGU
And me TX200 w/ 22mm.

Even though I was the lowest scoring team member I did not have issues with my 22mm kit, and luckily never have had issues with clicking using one. Lucky? I might be, but I've been successful with using a cheap Tac Vector Scopes at the price of $200, and my newest scope Falcon X50 which I had mounted on my 22mm TX in England.

My issues were almost all mental and also had visibility issues. To my knowledge nothing to do with the gun and it's internals.

Besides all that, I've been enjoying the comparisons between the two powerplants. The next test should be dropping these internals into a Diana 48/52. You will most likely see a rise in power/ efficiency in both powerplants having them in a non sliding action won't rob power from the powerplant. The sliding action adds it's own element to the performance of each kit, being that the sled itself no matter how well tuned/ smooth it is can add a variable to the performance and accuracy over time.

Cam

[HectorMedina]

.
.
.

You will most likely see a rise in power/ efficiency in both powerplants having them in a non sliding action won't rob power from the powerplant.
.
.
.
Cam

Interesting POV Cameron.
Do keep us posted if you do the tests.
In my experience, holding a spring piston rifle tightly almost always yields lower MV's (therefore lower ME's), while holding them lightly almost always yields higher MV's.

In this sense, the sled system provides the shooter with a uniform and constant "hold". Which can be tuned to be as "tight" or as "loose" as the combination of pellet, barrel, and MV needs. Tuning your own personal "hold" takes a lot more ammo. ;-)

The variability over time can come from many things, but once a sled system is well run in, it shouldn't change much, if at all.
Just the results of a few million rounds fired by a good lot of shooters all over.

Keep well and shoot straight!





HM

[Kerndtc]

.
.
.

You will most likely see a rise in power/ efficiency in both powerplants having them in a non sliding action won't rob power from the powerplant.
.
.
.
Cam

Interesting POV Cameron.
Do keep us posted if you do the tests.
In my experience, holding a spring piston rifle tightly almost always yields lower MV's (therefore lower ME's), while holding them lightly almost always yields higher MV's.

In this sense, the sled system provides the shooter with a uniform and constant "hold". Which can be tuned to be as "tight" or as "loose" as the combination of pellet, barrel, and MV needs. Tuning your own personal "hold" takes a lot more ammo. ;-)

The variability over time can come from many things, but once a sled system is well run in, it shouldn't change much, if at all.
Just the results of a few million rounds fired by a good lot of shooters all over.

Keep well and shoot straight!

HM

Hey Hector!

There's no doubt that the builders at the factory are the only people who have had their hands on more Dianas. Maybe this was just a fluke, but when I took my 12fpe setup in my 48 and put it in my 56 (piston, seal, comp tube, spring and quide) I had a loss in power by 2fpe. Then I took one of my homemade 22mm kits at 12fpe and put it in the 56 and it was down as well.

There are many more variables than a sliding action such as the barrel potentially being tighter than others. I have pushed pellets through the three that were on the bench that day and while my arm hasn't been calibrated by my local weights and measures office they all felt very close. I just assumed the whole equal and opposite reaction robbed power. Which I'm sure is true, but I'm unsure as to what percentage. I'd personally be Interested to see if you had a similar experience!

Cam

[fwbsport]

This reminds me of the Browning Boss:

https://www.browning.com/support/frequently-asked-questions/boss-system.html

[HectorMedina]

This reminds me of the Browning Boss:

https://www.browning.com/support/frequently-asked-questions/boss-system.html

Yes, and No.

The airgun equivalent of the Boss was the Vortek Muzzle Tamer (VMT).
Fine threads, adjustable weight, marks for "reproducibility" .
I used one for a couple of years.
In airguns, ANYTHING that is adjustable, WILL get out of "adjustment" at the WORST POSSIBLE TIME", and for me the last straw, was the WFTC's in Lithuania.

By the time I had discovered and fixed the wandering weight of the VMT, the 3 day Match was over.

What I decided then was to try a weight and started shaving weight by cuts of 0.005" till I found the right weight for 12 ft-lbs, which I found was not the right weight for 20 ft-lbs. So, I determined THAT weight also.

Recently, a friend who is truly a vibrations professional came up with an interesting comment and I developed the next generation, that is a Harmonics REDUCER, and it works, but it is extremely expensive to make (9 precision parts). And so the decision with DIANA was to offer the much simpler HT/HPM.

Why does the HPM cannot get out of adjustment? Because the forward recoil of the guns actually settles the HPM in place EVERY TIME you shoot. The ORings that are used as "spacers" can be had in two hardnesses and, actually, tests have proven that using two hardnesses actually allows finer adjustments than the 1.5 mm's - "set" that the original spec called for. There are no threads to lock, no fine lock nuts to jam.  Add or delete ORings and the spacing will change. Settle the gun with three shots and see what the gun is doing. The repeat till you are happy.

What the Boss document refers to benchrest reloaders developing special loads is what we do when we change the spring and add or remove spacers.
Our barrels are MUCH slenderer than the powderburner's, and yet the proportion of mechanical energy / lateral vibrations to stiffness in the spring-piston airgun exceeds that of a powderburner that adds to the stiffness of the barrel metal and diameters the enormous pressures that "stiffen" the barrel like an inflated sausage balloon.

The original spec of the HPM called for 6 screws to hold it in place, and I am afraid that in the end, DIANA uses 1 (we're still exchanging EMails about it), but that is an easily solvable problem even with hand tools. The main thing is that the users can START with the right approach.

Keep well and shoot straight!






HM

[HectorMedina]

Hey Hector!

There's no doubt that the builders at the factory are the only people who have had their hands on more Dianas. Maybe this was just a fluke, but when I took my 12fpe setup in my 48 and put it in my 56 (piston, seal, comp tube, spring and quide) I had a loss in power by 2fpe. Then I took one of my homemade 22mm kits at 12fpe and put it in the 56 and it was down as well.

There are many more variables than a sliding action such as the barrel potentially being tighter than others. I have pushed pellets through the three that were on the bench that day and while my arm hasn't been calibrated by my local weights and measures office they all felt very close. I just assumed the whole equal and opposite reaction robbed power. Which I'm sure is true, but I'm unsure as to what percentage. I'd personally be Interested to see if you had a similar experience!

Cam

Hello Cameron!

Yes there are a ton of aspects that determine the "efficiency" of a powerplant from beginning  to end. That was one of the LENGTHY discussions we had with Steve. In the end, we decided we did not want to detract from the basic concept of the article.
We ARE working in some way to analyze things cooly and objectively. We/I will undoubtedly post something in depth in a few weeks. With the same spirit, to post facts, and just facts.

Now, to your experience:
A too loose barrel (like most 56's, for example, they prefer 4.53 pellets) will create a loss of energy.
The fit between the two "cones" in the respective breeches are also different (the 56's are much more flat faced than the 48's), and that will create a loss of energy (as is often the case in the 430L).
And there are other factors.

BUT, a test you can do EASILY with just a gun and a chrono:

Shoot a 5 shot string with the "artillery" hold, and shoot a 5 shot string holding the gun like you would a 0.308" Win hunting gun. In almost all cases, I have found that a tight hold will produce LOWER ME's.

Guns in which I have experienced this:
D48
Walther LGU
Walther LGV (original piston)
TX-200 (I finally got one, LOL!)
FWB 124 (old version, but powered up by a PA tuner)
Mauser AM03 (traditional piston, NOT the ABP)
HW95 (my wife's "engagement rifle")
An HW97 that a friend asked me to tune for him, a blue stock/electroless nickel action specimen of uncommon beauty.

The ONLY guns I have NOT found this to be true are the ones equipped with an ABP, and those that are remarkably underpowered for their weight (which makes sense), like the old 10 M Match guns.

So, that is the extent of my experience. In SOME CASES, the difference has been a few FPS (3-7), in others it has been not more than 20 fps, but never 2 full ft-lbs.

It would be interesting to look at your tests in detail.

Just to finish off this post, I would like to point out (as I emphasized in the Epilogue) that the post was NOT intended as a 22 vs. 28 comparison (I've clarified in other posts that I am no longer interested in discussing that), it was intended to prove that for TWO VASTLY DIFFERENT POWER-PLANTS, the HT concept works. Perhaps more, perhaps less, but it works on both, and therefore, by the law of natural continuity (only suspended in Quantum environments), it should work in every other powerplant.

Thanks for reading, and for taking the time to comment.

I will miss you in SouthAfrica, but I fully understand the current predicament, having two little ones myself (3 and 4 YO's).

Keep well, give my best to Jessica and to her parents, that are a blast; and let us know how everything is going.








HM

[TonyL]

22mm and scopes.

I have sold over 300 TX kits now, 2 people have come to me with possible scope issues, one the gun/scope works and then does not then does then does not, i try my best to help the gent but i have no clue what else to suggest as i feel there is little to no issue, the other is Matt, a shooter at the worlds who Hector is talking about. For the record i feel Matt has something else going on, nothing wrong with the tune on his gun and here is why.

22mm TX's produce way less surge and recoil on the actions, how do i know this? years ago it was measured, the gun was 23mm but the results are very close. A gent in the UK built an airgun test rig that clamped where the scope sits, the unit measured surge/recoil etc, also data recorded the moment the pellet leaves the muzzle so true locktime can be recorded also. My rifles were compared to others, at that time the gent doing the data collection commented he had no idea how it was done but the small piston guns were quite awesome.
Also one of my kits has been tested on the Airgunforum here in the uk more recently, it again shows reduced recoil and surge. So now lets chat about Danny, a mate of mine who like Steve had a Diana 56, this 56 had 28mm. 22mm, 20mm tunes and was sold with 25mm tune, he sold it 25mm as we had an issue taming power with 20mm  he now regrets selling the gun as it was so accurate (think 12mm 10 shot group at 80 yards running 11fpe+ shoting JSB express outdoors) This 56 was incredible, and lucky for us Danny shot video with a scope cam with 28mm and small piston conversion, 28mm destroyed the camera image totally, the small piston conversion allows the pellet to be seen flying shortly after leaving the barrel and just missing the target, this gun was pushing 800fps + with 7.9s and yet you can watch pellets fly on a scope cam and the scope recoils back with the gun on a sled!! Incredible.

So, 22 ,21 or 20mm tunes, bad for scopes? I feel they are no more harsh/dangerous than .22 rimfire, i think recoil sleds are harsh on scopes, i think scopes can wear, i think rifles dovetails can wear as can risers and i feel this has all gotten out of hand with basically opinions being taken as fact. If 22mm killed scopes, Myself, Jon Budd, NickG, Cameron, Bruno Silva and many others would be inundated with owners complaining their scopes were dying on their rigs, the fact is they are not. I have sold over 300 TX kits and converted over 50 Diana rifles now, 20+ HW97 and 77's too, sure there will be the odd one or 2 with issues, and i do my best to help, BUT i resent this notion that 22mm is bad on scopes, it could even be softer imo.

So 2 people with scope issues, both personally i feel are not down to the tune within the gun, more the scopes being worn or other issues with mounts etc, zero other complaints. I have people winning competitions, providing me feedback they are loving the guns now, find them so much easier to shoot, watching pellets fly, watching where the wind is taking the pellets at target so they can essentially allow for the wind so much easier on the next shot, all this made possible as the scopes are now barely moving at all!

So by the shear number of none complaints about scopes and 22mm i get...i feel its a none issue. Scopes do wear though, people often forget that point.

[TonyL]

To add to this, Optisan are about to launch 2 new HFT scopes, one is already announced being 3-12x32 side focus etc. Optisan spent a long time on this cope beefing up the side parallax/turrets etc to cope with the abuse a springer will inflict on it, its a scope specifically built to withstand recoil and surge. That said it will work on much anything else as a scope that survives a springer can survive easy on most firearms also. The prototypes have been shot near a year in the UK on rifles with my kits installed...no issues at all Many FT scopes are not that good on springers, they are more built for PCP rifles, it pays to choose well what FT scope you choose to use on a springer.

[Yogi]

Tony any chance that you will do a kit for break barrels?  HW 50's and 95's in particular.

Thanks,

-Yogi

[Buldawg76]

No scope issues with either my B40 or TX 22mm kits with 150 buck Hawke varmint 1" scopes mounted to them. I can say the 22mm kits increased my HFT scores by 25 to 30% easily by just the reduced recoil and consistent velocities from the power plants.

I am a happy camper.

BD

[IanV]

Just to echo what buldawg said, no scope issues on my 22mm TX too. It's had a sidewinder 30, an mtc viper connect and an ole reliable 1 inch tube vantage, (my very oldest scope). The vantage is still going strong on the 22mm TX. Although, I haven't really been shooting the TX that much due to a sweet shooting D52 that also has Tony's 22mm piston. The 52 has a Mamba Lite that's not really known as a magnum rated scope like say an Airmax 30 but the Mamba is also going strong. But just wondering, I'm no expert but shouldn't these 150 gram-ish pistons and softer springs in these kits actually produce less recoil/shock that could harm scopes? The shot cycle seems indicate that there's less recoil going on. Guess we won't know for sure unless someone has an accelerometer and some spare time out there but yeah, shouldn't light piston = less recoil?