Have a chance to pick up a 48 in .177. The owner says it shoots 7.9 CP's around 910 fps. Is this kind of low and, if so, indicative of what? Isn't asking a lot for it, but would rather not have to do any repairs, just shoot it.

What, me worry???

its getting down to $175. For that price even I might buy it, and I don't even want it. 910 with cp's is just about right for good accuracy. You can always put in a tune kit from Maccari.

Don't know much about them. How's the recoil on these? I have an untuned Gamo Shadow for comparison purposes. Not too bad but there.

What, me worry???

RF my 48 is in .22 cal and the recoil is about the same as my 34

maybe because of the added weight of the 48 with it's more roboust wood stock and that I added a bipod, scope, Vortex muzzel it handles recoil very well

cocking the sidelevel is fairly easy. loading a pellet takes its skill, the breech diameter does not like some pellets, they have to be exact not undersized or over. to small and they insert themselves into the breech, too big and you have to push the pellet in

my take on the 48 others might have other things to say, mine is a solid gun

warren

and remember "it's 30% the gun and 70% the shooter"

Guess the fps range is about normal. I've been searching and a few posts say these have a fairly harsh recoil and are hard on scopes/stops. I have a stock Gamo Shadow for comparison purposes and a BAM 20 which I just picked up (about the same handling characteristics). Those I can tolerate. I'm not concerned with the rearward shock but what would be transferred to the face. Looking for something that is not so bad.

I don't think the 48 will recoil any worse than the guns you already have. If its recoil is terribly harsh, there's probably damage to the main seal, or the pellets are too light (like a Raptor, for instance).

I think you'd be happy with that gun if it's in good condition.

J

RedFeather , The shot cycle ,to me, isn't something to worry about . The harsh shock ,many experience/write about, is normally a bad seal .  Even before I lube tuned/GRT'd my 48 I thought it was remarkably tame . If you can handle the Gamo and B20 I'd say give the 48 a try , it's a great gun with a great history. Anything that isn't quite right can be cured easily.

at the same time !

Dear Sir, a small investment of a new spring and ( blue ) seal and you will have an air rifle of > 300 m/sec. Super reliable air rifle and absolutely nice results on 100 meter ! I would advise a 4.5 mm. because they have ( from ballistic viewpoint ) a very flat traject. I have done thousands of shots with mine in 4.5 mm and it's a long time ago that I shot my 48 in 5.5 mm simply because the 4.5 is more "the marksman's" rifle. Enjoy shooting, kind regards from Johannis. ( the Netherlands )

Jan im glad you cam around i think im the only one here that shoots only .177 or as you state 4.5 they are excelent rifles and over here the pellets are half as expensive as the .22 ALL my guns are .177 .Marvin

Dear Sir, the .177 shooting is for the "connaisseur" or in air rifle world for the marksman. A very, very flat traject and 33% faster ( average value ) than the .22 when measured by the Chrony ! I mentioned the opinion that how bigger the caliber is how more shooter you are but the long distance shooters are 99% of the time .177 shooters. Enjoy your 48, when you have the chance to own a 54 Airking in .177 you will never buy another air rifle anymore, maybe this rifle is your next step !! Best regards from Johannis.

Yes most expert target shooters use the .177 but we tend to over look that hear . Mine is the 46e and ever time i look at the sv i wish i could have gone for it but i was already over the limit but it is the best rifle i have had . I have heard that the 48 is very acutate as well. Of course all the above are will under the speed of sound which helps that little piece of lead to stay in a stright path .I realy think if i was going to hunt more than small animal like squirrels and pigeons and the like i would look at a 45 or 50 caliber then coyoties pigs or the like could be delt with up to that point were most hunt at 30 - 40 yards the 4.5 is good enought . Marvin

When you get to forty-five or fifty calibers I really think you need either a very expensive, high pressure PCP or something like a black powder muzzle loader. The .45 roundball (.445 or .439) is about 130 grains, while the .50 (.495 or .490) comes in near 180. Typical black powder velocities are in the 1800 fps range down to target/plinking loads of maybe 800 fps. The higher loads are more than adequate in that caliber for medium sized thin skinned game like deer. An airgun in .32 (.310) caliber would be better for small game as those run about 45 grains. But, to put it into perspective, the .22lr in 40 grains, so the .32 is certainly no power house.

Redfeather you are right im talking about the pcps for sure but i would still go with a .45 like the Sam Yang big bore 909s or the Shin Sung caaeer dragon slayer .50 .you can get 170 - 225 slugs for these very easy and heaverif you want . Cost about $ 500 - $ 600 not that much more than some of the magnum springer prices that are around . I have seen some used for about $ 400 . Marvin

Just that I hear one or two members of the airgun community talk about taking every kind of game with the Quakenbush-type guns as if they are air cannons. Shooting black powder, I know how hard it is to take down some of those animals. Those airguns are in the mid-power muzzle loader range, at most.

One thing's for sure. A pure lead conical, even from an airgun, has a lot of whack at the terminal end.

The range depending on the grain is 730- 570 . Good brush or tree stand rifle. Some states even let you legaly deer hunt with them . Marvin

Getting back to an earlier part of the discussion, I have to say I disagree with .177 for feathers and .22 for fur.

I can tell you from experience that .177 will take a woodchuck with a single correctly placed shot. I've taken gophers with my R11 at a little over forty yards. That air rifle only comes in .177.

While its true that a less well placed shot will cause a chase to ensue, it doesn't take the larger calibers to kill with a single shot. Its been said and documented that during the depression .22 caliber rimfires brought down deer for the table when other rounds and rifles were too expensive. I think its more about being within range for terminal velocity and most importantly, knowing where to hit the animal and then consistantly hitting it there.

Harv

you make toooooo much sense

the debate about .177 and .22

velocity and impact power, which one

can't we have both, velcity of .177 and impact power of .22?

your turn and PLEASE don't burn me

warren

and remember "it's 30% the gun and 70% the shooter"

Rebarrel to a .20. The lowly Sheridan has taken more than its share of this type of game.

.20 cal

makes sense

warren

and remember "it's 30% the gun and 70% the shooter"

Warren wrote:
<can't we have both, velcity of .177 and impact power of .22?>

Sure you can Warren! All you need is two guns. One in .177 and another in .22. Unless you can figure out how to make a .177 pellet somehow acquire the frontal area of a .22 between muzzle and quarry.
It's the most basic of physics people! More frontal area transmits more energy. As Jan pointed out above a pellet from the same powerplant in .177 will be almost a third faster than .22. The flip side of that is that the .22 will produce almost a third more energy. Can you say 'trade-off'? As in: "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch" as immortalized as TANSTAAFL by author Robert A. Heinlein.
When all of the rhetoric and BS is exhausted there's simply no avoiding the fact that the projectile that produces the biggest wound channel does the most damage and kills quickest despite all of the wishful thinking to the contrary.
And therein lies the fallacy of the worship of velocity insofar as hunting with .177 is concerned. The small frontal area and high velocity of a .177 caliber pellet from the leaders in the 'velocity wars' are a virtual prescription for producing the phenomena referred to as 'hypodermic wound channel' which implies that it passed thru the quarry too quickly and with too little energy 'parked' in the game to produce the massive wound channel with accompanying tissue and organ damage needed to produce a humane kill. Since I can't figure out how to use italics I'll just have to emphasize the following with caps: VELOCITY AND ENERGY REMAINING AFTER A PELLET PASSES THROUGH THE ANIMAL IS WASTED!
Useless. Not a factor. Superflous. In such instances the chance of the game 'going to ground' in its' den rather than being harvested is multiplied manyfold.
There is no escaping the simple phyics that the greater the frontal area a projectile has the more energy it can transmit AT PELLETGUN FEASABLE VELOCITIES.
As Harv sez: <-- .177 will take a woodchuck with a single correctly placed shot> Note that he DOES know how to make italics work and has used them to emphasize the most salient point in his statement: 'correctly'. He further states: <I think its more about being within range for terminal velocity and most importantly, knowing where to hit the animal and then consistantly hitting it there.> With that statement he eliminates the VAST majority of airgunners. Sitting here at the keyboard I can visualize at least half of you reading the foregoing sentence and recoiling in anger that I might be imputing your shooting ability. If YOU did that then I suggest that you take a moment to review your expertise in game animal anatomy and honestly evaluate your ability to place a shot into the brain pan or heart from any angle at any distance. Because that it what is required to harvest the larger game such as the exemplar groundhog where the high velocity .177 does have a place in the hands of a very few unusually competent marksmen. In such cases the penetration that merely passes through smaller game without leaving enough energy behind to anchor it is needed to place the pellet with surgical acuracy exactly where it is required on the thicker animal. And even then the vagaries of wind, tissue density and the position of Jupiter in relation to Venus can alter the final results. The number of airgunners capable of even making those shots dependably is so minute that they would barely register in an intense survey.
The average bozo with a Gamo has absolutely no business even considering taking such shots.
Mike Pearson (our leading expert in pellet terminal ballistics as Harve will attest) and I have been in an e-mail debate on exactly this subject over the past three days and while Mike and I can and do butt heads over relatively minor points his opinions are substantially similar to my own as advanced above.
TANSTAAFL, Tom @ Buzzard Bluff

Tom Anderson

WoW! You don’t want to debate with guys who quote Robert A. Heinlein.
They’re usually kick A## people. I feel sorry for that fella who’s arguing with you-what was his name?

You could print that post out with a nice border, a RW&B banner, and a “ghosted” picture of a wild turkey in the background.

The heading could be:
“Air gunning 101: .177 vs. .22 - The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth”

Make it State/Federal required reading for all air gun enthusiasts prior to purchasing any type of air gun. Lest they be needlessly and cruelly wounding critters all over our cities, towns and counties.

Wow!

Ctruth

would you like to be hit by a golf ball at 100 MPH or a baseball at the same speed or

slapped by a 4 ft tall woman than a 6-6 tall one and then

hit over the head with a 2 x 4 or a 4 x 4

inconsequential? Nope

the stoping power of the .45 cal automatic is not the same as the M-16 in 5.56 mm. back when my Dad was in the military he talked about the Philippines and the insurgency over there the .45 was and is a man stopper, the Springfield and Garand are the same but not the M-16 even in automatic

Channel wound is a factor but so are exit wounds' the difference is the efect of the projectile traveling through flesh. With the higher cal. you produce more tear of tissue and flesh also bone fragmentation with lower cal. you get deflection inside your target there is no straight line between initial entry and exit wounds

bottom line FOR me is that the .177 has the speed but not the knock down power of the .20 and the .22, kinetic energy is not the same

if you want to plink or shoot birds, small game then use the .177 but for possum and medium game then the .22, it will stop him even with a neck shot

warren

PS: just my opinion, like my Daddy said .177 for feathers and .22 for hide

and remember "it's 30% the gun and 70% the shooter"

this:

http://www.velocitypress.com/BeemanKodiak.shtml

Not about the rifle, but the concept of hunting with larger caliber pellets. Sure you can take any small game with a .177 that a .22 or .25 can, but having shot 4 10-15lb goundhogs this past summer with my 350, I would not use anything smaller than .22. It's not just about the hole diameter or penetration, it's the shock/trauma a larger caliber and heavier pellets delivers to the internal organs. Besides for such large fur bearing small game such as woodchucks/groundhogs, I prefer 2 holes over 1 or a 20FPE gun. A woodchuck's skull is 3X larger than a squirrel's. It's harder to find the brain with a .177 than with a .22 or .25.

Guess which one is the Groundhog skull. Squirrel skull on the left of it..


Diana 350 Mag .22
Hammerli 850 .22
A few Crosman CO2 & Pump .177

Went ahead and put a claim in on a 48 over on Brad's. Hope it's not too hot to shoot indoors.

you will need to make a "silent" trap made out of electrical duct seal (putty) in a metal box. This not only quiets down indoor shooting but also prevents lead contamination, as you don't have lead fragments and dust bouncing off metal targets onto your floor, rug, air, etc.

Saw it on Brad's classifieds again, late last night and slept on it. Sent an email this morning but it was sold. Just as well because this one had a Williams basic peep which was drilled and tapped to the scope rail. Not the kind of set up I wanted and likely why it was priced very low. For a good bit more there was a 48 in .20 that went quickly. I think I might rather have one like that or in .22, anyhow. Well, I know of another Diana (not 48) that I might be interested in. And now I won't have to sell something else to finance someting. Things always work out for the best.

Harry S.

Impressive, nice pic!

Say, you don’t happen to have any brethren out here in Cali do you?
Have a problem with disappearing critters here in my area.

ctruth

Redfeather there is a 48 in a .22 on the yellow page form classifieds. Marvin

That one in .177 was a pretty good deal except for the screwed on peep sight. Have another gun on the way and can't buy everything I see. Also into muzzle loaders, so split between two mistresses.

While I hibernate, let me ask, again, what's going on with the collective? Seems like a whole lot of newer posters since I last frequented it. Some of the posts are borderline silly and you have to wade through a lot of side conversations.

What gets me is all the negitive comments that get thrown around when things dont go right for people.I do not see it on other forms they seem to control it better. Marvin

Don't see as many of the older posters chiming in, either.

Well i hope you enjoy the new powder burner you got instead of the 48 . I stay with the air its so quite that way and much cheaper . I know a lot of the members at the sportsman club i belong to are really talking about the cost of lead in all calibers wheather it be black powder or center fire . More of them are looking at what im doing and thinking about air as well.Marvin

Hey Mr. Redfeather,,Tim here. Im new here. Yeah there has been some silly stuff here. All in good fun. But the base union of Diana Werks still holds onto quite a few advanced members. All of whom exchange info freely. A partial list of my new friends would be,,,, ZVP, Harry, Harvey, Herb, Dave@Vb., Warren!,KRick,Missysdad,M.Z.,Marvin,Ctruth,Justin,H,Johanis,& Mr Tom Anderson,,,,Im shure I left out a few. Sorry. My point? Regardless of age or how much exp. you have,,GREAT place to be!! Great to have you back Red Feather! Maybee at 47& 3/4 yrs. old Im still young???? Ha Ha!! I love to gain all info on airguns I can. Hang out my friend! Tim.

Forgot many Im shure,Add Russ. Man Ill be pikin his brain!! Tim.

Daisy 853

I guess not if its a daisy . Sorry i assumed when you said you were into muzzel loaders thats what you got . Assume never works for me i should give up on it . So sence you just wrote daisy and never really stated thats what it was i have done it again . And i must ask what did you buy .Marvin

Little entry-level pneumatic target rifle in .177. Not a great trigger but a very sedate gun for indoor practice and maybe one for the kids can start out with, as well. (Not little kids - teens. When I say kids, I get a lot of advice for children's guns.) Also something to fill the gap while I figure what to do with my sightless 75.

What, me worry???

<Little entry-level pneumatic target rifle in .177. Not a great trigger>
I've had one for years. Friendly little gun. Don't shoot it as much as I should. Maybe because it's so boringly accurate tha it doesn't present enough challenge. Be sure to do the trigger mod on the Pilkguns site to bring out the best in it. I think you'll like it then. Dunno if they stil have them but I picked up the fancy target stock in Walnut from Gun Parts a few years ago for $20 IIRC. Still have't gotten it fitted up and mounted.

<Also something to fill the gap while I figure what to do with my sightless 75.>

Haven't been following your front sight predicament so I dug out the mentions of it. Have you tried asking for help in locating one on the American Vintage site? If not try it. They're a helpful bunch there and the site attracts more of the sort who are deeply involved with vintage target guns than here as well. Jim Edmondson, who imports a lot of vintage iron, 'hangs out' there as does 'Frakor' who I think is in Holland and seems to be able to get just about anything. Tom