HW97K owners and experts, mystery solved actual barrel droop =1.6157 MOA

[TOM aka critter99]

Bought a HW97K so I would not have to have a special scope mount ala Diana to change scopes.

Using Chairgun I simulated a 31.7 yard zero at 8 yards in basement.

I tried 4 scopes and 3 sets of mounts. BKL 260 1 piece high, Leapers 1 piece high, and a terribly canted on the HW97 RWS Lockdown with droop compensation.

Only one scope the Hawke 4-12x50AO HD IR had enough adjustment to do a zero for 31.7 yards and it was at the very end of it travel.

The Leapers 4-12x40AO ran out of adjustment and didn't even get close...its adjustment range was HALF that of the Hawke I was surprized!!!!!

I shot a pellet with scope full up, full down, half way in mechanical adjustment range, and then I tried the simulated zero

The Hawke with a straight mount was able to zero but 1.5 turns from full up out of a range of about 7.75 turns

I tried the RWS Droop mount same scope and the zero point for 31.7 yards zero was almost exactly at my mechanical center of scope adjustment range

My conclusion is this 97 has droop!!!

I consider that a defect AM I WRONG?

Theses were one inch tube scopes everybody else with straight mounts on 97s are you using 30mm tubed scopes with more adjustment range???

I paid $700 plus for a scope only rifle to avoid special mounts

Am I just jinxed with springers??  first the 34PRO from *(&^ now this....none of PCPS have ever gave me this much trouble

[RedFeather]

Tom, if you didn't have bad luck, you'd have no luck at all!  So, your gun has droop.  Is it a defect?  I don't know.  Does that gun have iron sights?  Does it shoot with them within their range of adjustment?  Is your theoretical zero or whatever actually valid?  Chairgun is probably OK within limits and taking variables into account, but, well, I've got to say that you seem to be over-thinking a lot with your guns.  I do hope this isn't going to turn into another 8 VS 12 land series.  Money isn't a guarantee of anything, especially when it comes to springers.

[TOM aka critter99]

Red its a scope only model absolutely no provisions for open sights.

The Chairgun predictions are quite valid if you have good speed, pellet BC and scope hieght over bore measurement.  I have used it quite alot and when you plug it in simulate the best zero and plot it out it validates in the real world at full ranges with minor adjustments.

Chairgun data is absolutely close enough to identify this large amount of droop.

I was hoping to hear how many if any HW97 owners have to use drooper mounts with theirs.  

and everybody says springers are so much simpler that PCPs not tanks and hoses etc just a rifle and a pocket of pellets ...yeah right

[dukemeister]

My conclusion is this 97 has droop!!!

I consider that a defect AM I WRONG?

You likely have a HW97 with significant droop - not impossible, perhaps uncommon but it does happen.
It's a defect if you can't adequately compensate for it.
Read this blog for more info. AFASK, the HW underlevers are pretty well aligned.
https://www.pyramydair.com/blog/2006/01/barrel-droop/

[s10gto]

Not sure if this helps but I had a similar experience with my HW97K. My HW had a leapers 3-9x40 on it with a leapers mount. Zeroed just fine. I put my Hawke 4-16x50 eclipse SF on and could not site it in.The scope came off my RWS 52 that I thought had droop so I had it on Sportsmatch adjustable mounts. Once I adjusted the rear up it zeroed perfectly. I then put the leapers with reg mount on the 52 and it zeroed just fine with no drooper mount.

So what I learned is sometimes it is just the scope and not the barrel. 

 

[TOM aka critter99]

This is the plot I was trying to simulate.  I tried multiple scopes all came in about the same

[TOM aka critter99]

Not sure if this helps but I had a similar experience with my HW97K. My HW had a leapers 3-9x40 on it with a leapers mount. Zeroed just fine. I put my Hawke 4-16x50 eclipse SF on and could not site it in.The scope came off my RWS 52 that I thought had droop so I had it on Sportsmatch adjustable mounts. Once I adjusted the rear up it zeroed perfectly. I then put the leapers with reg mount on the 52 and it zeroed just fine with no drooper mount.

So what I learned is sometimes it is just the scope and not the barrel. 

 

Pretty sure its drooping used 4 different scopes and 3 sets of mounts.  results when shot was darn consistant between them....scopes varried in amount of range of adjustment but all showed consistant low hits as compared to point of aim of about the same amount

[s10gto]

I would have to say it must have droop. I don't think I would return it though. I would just get a nice pair of adjustable mounts. JMHO.   

[TOM aka critter99]

I have been doing some reading......I sure wish one of you would mechanically center your scope on a 97 and shoot at 10 yards.

I think most of the 97s have some droop (20-30 MOA)and nobody notices since they are using scopes that adjust from 60-80 MOA

Why droop is set up on a scope only rifle I have no clue

[Scotchmo]

It sound like your barrel is "straight". And by "straight",  I mean parallel in relation to the scope rails.

20 MOA provided by a compensating mount is about enough to compensate for pellet drop and scope height. That allows a near optical/mechanical center for the scope.

It sound like you want to optically center your scope AND use a non-compensating scope mount. The only way to achieve this is to bend your barrel upward about 20 MOA. A lot of people do this.

If the rifle is a PCP, the barrel band often applies a small upward deflection to the barrel, and break barrel rifles can sometimes have the lockup adjusted to compensate. On a fixed barrel springer, you either have to use a compensating mount, a scope with plenty of adjustment, or an upwardly bent barrel. A slow (600fps) pellet trajectory, close in zero (<15yards), and medium to high scope mounts all accentuate the geometry.

Larger MOA discrepancies could be the result of actual barrel "droop". The smaller amounts (20 MOA) that most people refer to as "droop" is really just the normal result of of having a parallel barrel and scope rail. Check the geometry, that is just how it is.

[Bandit_46]

I have never seen a HW rifle with Droop,(Especially the HW97K). The 85 Luxus I had had 0 droop. According to the people I buy my rifles from,(and they sell as many HW's as anyone) and to this day they have never sold one that had any droop.

[Scotchmo]

See the area circled in green from your Chairgun screen shot.

What does it represent?

[TOM aka critter99]

I will verify some distances on targets but I think you just pointed out something very useful. 

To measure my amount of actual barrel droop I need to deduct that amount from the total as that much is introduced by mounting sighting system to zero for 31.7 yards

I am learning something here but slowly

[TOM aka critter99]

I overlooked the mounting system effect in the math

When I account for it the barrel actually droops 1.6157 MOA

I still need a drooper mount to get into the center third of the scopes adjustment but the rifle is actually fine 

I am happy!!!

[Scotchmo]

Good - now you see it!

1.6157 MOA is almost nothing. The weight of a muzzle break can add that much.

That 18.9 MOA is the required angle between the barrel and the line of sight. It can be achieved by:

1) Clicking the scope
or
2) Bending the barrel upward.
or
3) Using a compensating mount with 18.9 MOA of compensation.

For #1, Try zeroing your scope at the apex of the trajectory and you may have enough adjustment on your Leapers in order to use a straight scope mount. A lighter (higher velocity) pellet can also help.

I have done #2 but I don't really like to bend a perfectly straight barrel.

I use #3 in order to have a scope that is close to optical center. It does not have to be exact. Most compensating mounts are near 20 MOA. So they are close enough for your case.

It should be called "drop" compensating mount instead of the common term of "droop" compensating mount. We are usually trying to compensate for pellet drop below the line of sight. This includes the scope height above the barrel added to the pellet drop at the zero point. If I had a barrel that really had significant "droop", then I would straighten it, but I would not bend up in order to compensate for pellet "drop". That is what the compensating mount is for.

[WHITEFANG]

Put you a shim under you scope ring and shoot the thing. If THAT CORRECTS THE ISSUE just buy those fully adjustable mounts. That first Remington had the barrel bent upward and I made some mounts that would work. The gun shoot fine as long as you shoot it all the time from the same spot and distance you sighted it in at. I am throwing a bit of my GOOD luck at you so hope you catch it. You can always take the scope off and lay a straight edge on the scope rail and run it down the the gun and measure the distance between the SE at very rear of the barrel and then the distance between the SE at the front of the barrel. The difference between the front ant back is your drop or rise.


PS:
ADJ. MOUNTS ARE NOT CHEAP!!!!!

[hendrick]

One 97 K I tested had 4 inches of low POI at 11 yards. Even a droop comp low Sportsmatch mount with 3 MOA comp needed shimming to get it optically centered with the 6-18x40 Trophy. I call that a bit "steep", indeed....My older 77 and new TX both were spot on at the same distance without any comp needed. Also for windage, which the 97 was not. Horizontally the 97 k was about 1 1/2 moa off...
So much for qualcontrol..
You may want to read my comparison review of the 97 K and TX 200 in the next Varmint Hunter Mag.

Do any of you have the Mac1 droop comp tie-rodded mount and experiences ?

Hendrick

[TOM aka critter99]

I think he is just keeping the one piece mounts in stock pre drooped ready to go.

Not sure he regularly still does the ones with tie rods anymore since the one piece Centerpoint and Leapers are so inexpensive now

[condor22]

One 97 K I tested had 4 inches of low POI at 11 yards. Even a droop comp low Sportsmatch mount with 3 MOA comp needed shimming to get it optically centered with the 6-18x40 Trophy. I call that a bit "steep", indeed....My older 77 and new TX both were spot on at the same distance without any comp needed. Also for windage, which the 97 was not. Horizontally the 97 k was about 1 1/2 moa off...So much for quality control..

You may want to read my comparison review of the 97 K and TX 200 in the next Varmint Hunter Mag.

Do any of you have the Mac1 droop comp tie-rodded mount and experiences ?

Hendrick

Glad you called out the poor QC card, a few weeks ago I got my head chewed off about how it was opinionated that the only reason RWS had barrel droop was poor QC. I have accepted that barrel droop is to be expected on spring guns and some do and some don't. I can live with it, so it really don't bother me, I have and administer the cure.

thanks

Sam 

[WHITEFANG]

We are in the world of droop at some point with any break barrel. Droop is better than BENT ANYTIME.