Author Topic: .177 side lever worthwhile? (Read 33994 times))

darryl · « **on:** February 23, 2011, 02:11:24 PM »

Hi gang (wow a whole new gate!),
I have the side-lever jones (as some of you know), and gravitate towards the .22 caliber. Bur recently I've seen two interesting RWS pieces: a 48 and a 52. Both in .177. For those who know, are these good rifles in this caliber? Or is the power plant wasted on this pellet size? I've read opinions to that affect. I know the .22 hits hard and is very accurate. I shot Gary's 48/.22. My 54 is a great shooter too.
Anyway, let the edumacation begin!

darryl

Rob Hawkins · « **Reply #1 on:** February 23, 2011, 02:24:36 PM »

As long as you keep the velocity below transonic levels, the RWS sidelevers are awesome platforms.
I used to have a 48 .177 that was super accurate.
HTH
Rob

Mark 611 · « **Reply #2 on:** February 23, 2011, 02:55:48 PM »

IMOP the .177 is a waist in this power plant, and know the .20 or .22cal performs much better from my experiences. the shot cycle is much smoother which makes it easier to shoot, most of the .22cal I've owned shoot CPHP's supper accurate and you can buy them at WallyWorld cheap! and have lots of funn shootin your gun, the .177cal shoot better with the 10.5gr pellets but you can't buy them at WW.

darryl · « **Reply #3 on:** February 23, 2011, 03:06:12 PM »

thanks for the replies fellas,
I have a line on a 52 in .177 for $271.00 shipped. I can understand using heavier pellets. I'm just having trouble making up my mind to go with that caliber, and that rifle (I know of a B30 in the same caliber that's been CDT-tuned for sale too, but I figure the 52 is a better quality rifle).
darryl

RedFeather · « **Reply #4 on:** February 23, 2011, 03:43:21 PM »

You figure right as to quality. I keep seeing 48/52's for sale in .177. Most likely due to the owners shooting standard weight pellets. The heavier pills are what these are designed for. $271 is a good price. Did you see the link to the 48 in .177 for $200, shipped, that I posted on the DWC? Now, that was a steal. Bear in mind that you can also drop in the Vortek kit to make them even better.

darryl · « **Reply #5 on:** February 23, 2011, 03:54:16 PM »

Hi RF,
I knew of the 48 being for sale, but I wasn't interested in the .177 then ( a week ago:apologies to Bluzjammer). I contacted the seller earlier today.
darryl

amb5500c · « **Reply #6 on:** February 23, 2011, 04:31:18 PM »

I have a RWS 48 in 177 cal. I love it. It's an awesome gun. I plan to have it tuned very soon so I can see just how good it can be. Waste? I don't think so at all. In fact, that don't even make sense to me. I have guns in both 177 and 22 and like them all. Some get used for this, and some get used for that, but all get used.
Richard

clip · « **Reply #7 on:** February 23, 2011, 04:33:21 PM »

One of the first rifles I purchased was a 52 in .177. I bought that caliber because I didn't know any better. I feel now that I should have bought this particular rifle in a .22 because it's so powerful. That said, I love this gun! I use a heavier pellet (9 and 10 grain) and get excellent accuracy. I'd love to have a 52 in 20 caliber too.
Larry

Bullit · « **Reply #8 on:** February 23, 2011, 05:00:57 PM »

Heck Yeah it's well worth it !!!!

I'm hooked on .177 JSB Exact Heavies for my 52.
If you think you'd be "undergunned"......Look this link over.

It's a comparison of a RWS 52, shooting 24 different pellets in both .177 & .22.

http://www.straightshooters.com/ourtake/ottest52.html

Past 30 yards, Most of the .177 pellets BEAT the .22 in energy!
I Like the accuracy of my 52 for that reason...flatter downrange with Plenty of power to take fur.

To me, it's a "waste" of a powerplant when you can't get the energy out a larger projectile. Now....it would sure be nice to get a .22 scootin' downrange at 900FPS.

But Then, I'm not sure I'd like to be cocking it all day

Hope This Helps

AirScopes · « **Reply #9 on:** February 23, 2011, 05:55:01 PM »

I think the RWS 48 is better in the .22. .177 is a little light for it. That's part of the reason I sold mine.

Gary · « **Reply #10 on:** February 23, 2011, 06:13:47 PM »

Hey Darryl, Its been a while since you shot my 48 in .177 cal. and you have let that slip from your mind because of your awsome 54 in .22 cal. My 48 really likes the C.P. 10.5 gr pellets. I do think this power plant is a little better suited to the .22, but I still enjoy shooting it and it is a hammer.
The price you mentioned is very good for the 52 just don't tell your better half that I twisted your arm. LOL.
Gary

AirScopes · « **Reply #11 on:** February 23, 2011, 06:31:56 PM »

Gary.... ooooh, the 54! I moved from like to loving mine. Way better than a 48.

s10gto · « **Reply #12 on:** February 23, 2011, 07:28:29 PM »

The 52/48 is nice in .177. My shoots best with 8.4 and up grain @ 940fps. Very accurate. My brother has the 48 .22 also a very accurate gun with 14 grain shooting 780 fps.

If you try to shoot mid to light pellets yes too much gun not enough pellet. With 8.6 H&N FFT or H&N Barracudas 10.6 tight groups are easy.

Some pics for ya!

Dustin

Jaymo · « **Reply #13 on:** February 23, 2011, 08:15:21 PM »

All I can say is that Herr Krautenhammer (my 48 .177) is a great gun, a great shooter, and an all out friggin hammer. Accurate and flat shooting.
.177 CPHP and Cros Mags knock the snot out of squirrels when I shoot them at 830 fps +/- from
Frau Blitzenkraut (my .177 HW95). And she needs a tune, due to twangyness and worn seals.

I'm a huge fan of .22 pellet guns. My first experiences with RWS sidelevers were with my friend's 48 and my BAM B30-1, both in .22.
I like them both, but the higher velocity of the .177 version gives tree rats less time to start at the shot before the pellet hits them. I tend to hit closer to where I aim with the .177.

200 fps +/- additional velocity means that the pellet hits the nutter closer to when the sound of the shot gets to them, giving them less time to jump/twitch out of the way.
When I hit them with a .177, I hit them right where I aim. When I hit them with the .22, I hit them about 1/4" or so away from where I aim. 1/4" on a squirrel can be the difference between it dropping where it's hit and it running off to die.

I am a HUGE fan of .22 airguns, but I can't argue with nutters that are DRT.

BTW, my pet names for my German air rifles are terms of endearment. I'm 1/4 German.

bart the fart · « **Reply #14 on:** February 23, 2011, 10:03:55 PM »

well i have yet to shoot a .22 in this model, but i own a RWS 52 in .177 and love it! its not picky at all as far as pellets go, and she's a beauty to look at. she can be a handful as far as the right scope-mount-anti droop goes. it took me awhile to get a handle on the glass. currently the stock is at Rocker1's wood works getting herself prettied up

. and YOU KNOW what gate i'll post the pics in!

....cheers Bart

Mark 611 · « **Reply #15 on:** February 23, 2011, 11:09:02 PM »

Bart my 48 shoots 850fps in 22cal w/14.3cphp's

bart the fart · « **Reply #16 on:** February 23, 2011, 11:19:51 PM »

Quote from: Mark 611 on February 23, 2011, 11:09:02 PM

Bart my 48 shoots 850fps in 22cal w/14.3cphp's

whoa! thats some real pop in .22! i got my rws 52 from AOA they chrony'd it for me at 1014 in .177....bart

Mark 611 · « **Reply #17 on:** February 23, 2011, 11:49:41 PM »

thats scootin!

darryl · « **Reply #18 on:** February 24, 2011, 09:43:53 AM »

Phew!!!

I know I love this new gate now!! Thanks for all the additional replies. I especially appreciate the replies from the owners of the power plant in the .177 version (Gary, Bart, Jaymo, clip, amb5500c, kymike, s10gto, et al). I only hope I haven't dawdled too long. Did I mention it was a refurb I've been contemplating? That $271.00 shipped is very attractive, especially given my experience with the refurbished 54/.22 I own (yeah, Gary's spending my money for me again!). BTW, I had been long pouring over straightshooter's take on the 52 already, but thanks for posting the link, kymike. It's great info.

Also, I've read in several different places that the power plant is too much for the .177 caliber, but always there seems to be the same advice I've read in this thread already: use heavier pellets. So I appreciate the input from that perspective too. If I get the 52 (it's no longer being imported new) I'll have a rifle that will be a rarity going forward. I know it's just a fancy 48. Gary's 48 moved me off the BAM clone because it was more rifle, imo. And I really enjoyed shooting that B30. But regardless of caliber, I'll be glad to add this rifle to my little collection. Just to say it, the 54 is a great, sophisticated rifle. But sometimes it's good to have a rife that challenges me to shoot it well, and a bit of recoil doesn't hurt in that regard; one more variable (the 54 doesn't have) to manage. Spring-powered pistols offer that too.

thanks again Guys. I'll keep you posted.
darryl

PS, being a true-to-form knucklehead, if I get this rifle, I may put a Williams peep on it. I blame Gary for that thought too! I think the peep can be effective out to 30 yards with the 0.125 aperture. Then, I also have the Center Point 4x16x40 scope already mounted on the correct droop-compensating mount. I took it off the 54.

darryl · « **Reply #19 on:** February 24, 2011, 04:21:34 PM »

Well now I've done it. Someone told me just a few days ago that it's better to ask forgiveness than to ask permission. The refurbished 52 is on the way. I hope Gary has a spare room; I'll need a place to hide out for a few months!

If this rifle comes in the same condition as my 54 did, I'll be in great shape.

Now to check my supply of .177 pellets, but I think the heaviest ones I have are JSB Exacts at 8.44grn. I'll have to order some heavier ones.
darryl
Hey! when Gary gets tired of feeding me, maybe I can stay with some of you guys! When my little Death_Blossom finds out what I've done I won't be long for this neck of the woods!

Thank you to our advertisers!

.177 side lever worthwhile?

Author Topic: .177 side lever worthwhile? (Read 33994 times))

Jaymo