Over the last few years I've really become a fan of underlevers. When the Diana 46 came along I saw the beautiful rifle, its interesting loading port and decided I would need to get one eventually. It went into a slot in the mental rolodex and when the time was right I finally got my 46.

I've found the rifle to be extremely accurate. Consistant too. In other words I've become a real fan of the Diana 46. Think of it as you would a Harley owner. One whose had his bike for better than ten years. He knows his bike's good and he's okay with some of its shortcomings. No motorcycle is perfect, but each one has its own character. Its own soul, so to speak. So the biker can appreciate it for what it is. Same with us airgunners. Individually speaking you or I may love a certain Diana but that particular rifle is closer in line with what we appreciate, while a third person may lean toward another model.

In other words, the Diana 46 is not perfect from the factory. Its port, for instance, may develop sealing problems. Or it may not. But what it has in spades is accuracy. Crazy stupid accuracy. Being a fixed barrel rifle its totally consistant where the pellet will end up. That only leaves seals to contend with. Simple enough. Its hard to beat, really. The loading port is the safest of recent design in any spring piston air rifle.

So, whose into the 46 rifles besides me? I know one lurker here is. And you be the one who started me on this great adventure with my 46. lol

Let's hear from you. If you own one or if you've tuned one... I would like to know whose into these accurate machines?

Harv

I owned a 46 about three years ago but sold it on a whim. This morning I actually became a owner of one again! I bought off a Yellow forum member last week and it showed up today. This stock is even nicier than my first one and the accuracy is unchanged. Simply awsome!

I have one in .177, Ive had it just around two-three months now and from my little experience with it I can say that it is a better shooter than I am. I can only shoot it when the wife is not at home.It was used when I got it and it has been lubed but I do not know how well,so one of these days I want to get a tune kit and a seal from Maccari and also send the trigger group to John in PA for his magic touch, I just hope he works on the T01 like he did to my T05 man did he make it sweet.But for now no kit or trigger work I'm just going to shoot the hell out of it ,so far it likes JSB exacts the best. I have a center point 4-16x40 on it with accushot mount.

I have a 46e in .177, a 46e in .22, a 46 in .22 and a 300r in .177. The 46's all have T01 triggers and the 300r has a T05 trigger. I'm running a little test now to see if I can differentiate between them. The 46e in .177 has a Maccari spring kit and an Apex seal. The 46e in .22 has a Maccari spring kit and an RWS seal. The other two have all stock parts. They all have Maccari heavy tar on the spring and Moly paste behind the piston seals. All of them are insanely accurate, with little vibration/recoil. The .177's have enough velocity that they give you a semi flat trajectory. The .22's are total lob monsters, but very consistent with a scope level. I shoot CP lites in the .177's and RWS Superpoints in the .22's (something about the thin skirt makes them the pellet of choice).

Wow! Thanks guys, great stories about your 46's. And the many you have! lol

A while back I tuned my 46. Now the funny thing about it was I had the cell phone on speaker and plugged into the nearest outlet. Meanwhile, I was talking with another airgunner from this forum. We were tuning our rifles together while on the phone if you can believe it.

That was the first time I was into the rifle. I opened her up a few (a few?) more times since. Nothing had changed internally that I could tell without detailed measurements so I decided to just shoot her. And on occasion she made her way through the rotation. Lately I've been picking her up more often. Spending more time learning the best hold and letting that tune work itself into what its supposed to be.

I'm beginning to group inside the six ring on the offical ten meter air rifle targets at the official distance of, uh, ten meters. Offhand standing position. Getting used to those factory open sights. I believe they may be the shortcoming of this rifle as its inherant accuracy even with open sights can be much greater. They really just aren't fine enough. I truly believe the finer the sights the better the rifle tends to be shot. And I'm not even using the best pellets the 46 digests. My goal is to wipe out this box of Crosman Premier Lites and hope not to find another stashed away somewhere.

As far as the shot cycle? The tune is working its way in. Where there was a bit of a longer snap sound, not even the twang one might think of, that sound is beginning to abbreviate the more the rifle is used. I place my left thumb under the trigger guard as a support and two fingers forward under the stock forming a kind of inverted hand tripod. The rifle is pretty well anchored into my shoulder and I place my index finger as perpendicular as possible to the trigger blade so as to apply even pressure straight back. My right pinky finger touches the grip more as a sense of location of hand position than to anchor my right hand anywhere on the grip. I try to rest my thumb behind the safety without pressure as much as possible. But still, I know my thumb and pinky still exert something to the stock. I guess what I'm trying to say is that my goal is to keep my shooting hand as limp as I can so that the only pressure is even and coming straight back from my trigger/index finger.

While the majority of my shots (notice I said "majority") will stay inside the six ring, I'm beginning to see three and four shot single ragged holes. These are some of the reasons I think this 46 has more potential than I've realized with it thus far. My intention was to keep it open sighted. To run the aperture sight I had on it for a while. Now? I'm thinkin' its scope time. This thing has it in it.

Harv

The Diana rear sights on the 46 are quality, with micro adjustable windage and elevation. Then they put a wiiiiiiddddddeeeeee plastic front sight on that spoils it all (kinda like Crosman, but then they give you a junk rear sight also!). My air rifles are all scoped, usually with Leapers 3-9x40 AO or 3-12x44 AO. I have a range set up with backstops at 30, 40, and 55 yards. I also put up FT targets with varying size KZ's from 20 to 55 yards. You can't really experience the accuracy of a 46 at 10 meters with open sights.

I think both the front and rear sights leave something to be desired. The reason is the width of any of the four leaves of the rear sight are waaaaay to wide. Consequently, they're so wide that the gap you see either right or left when you line up the front sight can be too great a variance. Just shifting your head a slight bit can cause you to see an image which is gapped too much either way.

Naturally the front sight is honking huge. A damn brick on the end of the barrel. Now imagine if you trimmed either side of that brick down to slim the thing into a more proper post. You just end up with even larger gaps left and right of the the leaves of the rear sight and its worse than before.

I believe the classic HW globe and rear sight is a much better sporter design. I've been toying with finding a proper way of encorporating that combination onto my 46. I already have enough scoped rifles and my intent was to have an amazingly accurate open sighted underlever. Truth be told, having an HW77 with a modified latch mechanism to accept their own globe sights would be simpler. Well, except for the price of an HW77 lol.

Harv

This is my new baby that I picked up last week. I remember the stock on my first one being pretty but, it was'nt this nice. I,ve had it to the range four times since I got it last Saturday. I beleive this will be the rifle I use for the competition this year. Its a little longer than the B40 I used last year but the balance is great. I went with the Bushnell Trophy scope on this one because theres no need for milidots in a 50ft competition. John.







If I could just get a Stutzen with this kind of grain I,d have a nice pair.

That sure is a sweet looking 46,mines almost as nice


The first two pics are from the guy I bought it from and the next is next to my 350,s.
Just yesterday I opened it up for the first time ant the previous owner had done some work in there,lube every were and had crosshatched the cylinder. After I had it all cleaned up saw there was a chunk out of the seal and the spring was bent at both ends. So up stairs I went to get a seal and spring that I had got from umerex for a 48 for another project gun that I sold before I got it in. The seal measured the same but the spring was a little longer (unset) and to OD was a little larger, but it fit the guide well and still went in the piston. So I put it all together with a lot less lube ,new seal and new spring. First shot over the chrony was with JSB exacts, 700 then with-in 10 more had claimed to 730,If I can remember correctly I was getting 800, what do you think should I take it apart and try to size the seal of just keep shooting it? So I went back upstairs ,went to my favorite window and put another 20-30 threw it. And its still spot on
And one more thing John, Can you do to a TO1 what you can do to a TO5,I hope so.

with all kinds of grain running through them. How come most of my RWS rifles have such plain looking wood?
Phil, I take it your 46 is a .177 cal becuse you said it was at 800 fps before you opened it up. If you used a Maccari Large Apex piston seal its going to take some time for it to wear down.You have the option of tearing your rifle down and reducing the outer diameter of the seal, or you can just keep shooting it and check the fps after 100 pellets. If you just dressed up the chamber where it was crosshatched that will take some fps off until if gets worn in also. As for what I can do with a T01 trigger,Yes! Even better than the T05.

My 46 next to the TX. Similar colors.
Anyone who has did a search on the 46 has probably read this article. I wouldn't want to read the accuracy comparison part in a room full of TX200 guys though. lol.
http://www.pyramydair.com/blog/2005/10/diana-rws-46-german-underlever.html

[IMG][/IMG]

Ran across this link on the SS Forum and thought some of you might find it informative.

http://web.archive.org/web/20050308141703/www.straightshooters.com/chat/

Click on the "Products & Features" link in the fine print at the top of the page.

Then go to the "Our Tests - Our Results - Our Take" link and click on the "RWS 46"
link for a product review. From this page there is also link to the
"Velocity Test Results" page.

"How loud are airguns. Compare different guns and their decibel levels" is another link
from the "Product & Features" page. Looks like a 46 is not much louder than an R7.

Question... Is the 46E the same as the 46 except for the Plain Jane stock?

Thanks.

takes me to an error message.

n/t

to the hw 50s in 177. both guns brush 11 fpe. you could shoot field target
but it would be marginal and might fail to knock down some targets. the
stutzen is heavier than the 50s and it is a fixed barrel. i wonder how the two
platforms compare in the shootabilty department (meaning accuracy and smooth firing cycle.) HW barrels are very fine barrels but it is a break barrel.

i am so tempted to pick one of these up. i am not in love with those front sights and it would be difficult to convert to a globe (the rear is no problem i am sure the beeman would be fine). with a rear peep and a finer front post it would be nice. of course if you used it for FT it should be scoped.

my HW is now getting very smooth especially with the cut down JM GRT spring. now that i have figured out how to shoot it, it so accurate. i was splitting pencils stuck in the ground at 10 meters today offhand. not every shot but enough. next i will try playing card edges.

had built a brass front piece for the 46 that was dovetailed for a globe. how is that coming? (if you read this).

Greetings Larry,

Here are some pics of the sights. I like the bronze and will let it patina naturally. The Beemans/Williams rear peep sight is taking some getting used to.

[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]

This shot through the peep is under my shop fluorescents. Gives an idea how the F.O. globe performs.

Martin

Yup, that and the metal being marked '46E'.

n/t

http://www.diana-airguns.de/index.php?id=156&L=1&width=1024&height=768

Happy Canuck

n/t

Jeez, those are some nice 46's. Hat's off to you guys!

Somwhere back on the SS forum was a post on how to get the triggers really sweet. If I recall it was Kevin Gilbride who first mentioned it.

Anyone know how to use a wayback machine? lol

I would love to find that info

Harv

the procedure would be the same. trigger pull weight is adjusted by changing the sear spring for a lighter one. this is trial and error. the trigger return srping can also have a coil cut. before doing that you would carefully stone and polish the surface of the part that the triggert adjusting screw contacts so the pull is not so gritty. there are other things as well. the latch plates need to be surface polished to remove burs. i also polis hte edges of those where they slide in the slot in the houseing. a small amount of molly rubbed onto those plates as well. and that surface whre the trigger screw contacts that rocker thing gets a small amount of molly.

one of those 52 shutzens from pyramid air?

the barrel on the stutzen is 14". the rifle is 5" shorter than the standard
46. is it all in the barrel? what do your standard 46 barrels measure?

of course barrel length will not effect accuracy but the stutzen should handle well. it is also about 1/3lb lighter than the standard 46.

The stutzen barrel is 13 3/4" long, the regular 46 barrel is 17 1/2" long. I usually prefer carbines, but in the case of the 46, I prefer the full length versions. The stutzens may be shorter, but they don't FEEL any shorter, they aren't any more "fast handling", they're harder to cock, and will not accept a barrel band sling swiver set.

Jeff

I just received one of the PA Stutzen closeouts. Don't know whether to be happy or disappointed - It has a T01 trigger, made in 00. I was expecting a T05 trigger and a gun made in 07~08. The happy/disappointed thing is my expectations vs I kinda like the T01 trigger, they have more metal and a slicker release mechanism. I'll give PA a call and see what the story was, but I was thinking this was their "new" stock from the 2008 UMAREX import.

and did not get my order filled. i called and they said out of stock. then, yesterday i checked the site and they are now in stock. i orderd abnd it was filled. it will be interesting to see if i get the T01 or T05. i understand the T01 rifle is much harder to disassemble but the trigger is more adjustable.

trying to get rws to bring out a 12fpe filed target version of the 4//52/54 platform.

isn't the 46 just that except its an underleve?

JC, don't worry about the earlier triggers. I think those were as good or better than these later models. I'd prefer a TO1 to a TO 5 but that's me. But for the most part, its six of one, half a dozen of the other. Stoning or even just lubing the triggers makes them perform a lot better.

Larry, no the 46 is not like the 48 series. Its more like the 34 series but with the unique loading hood design. An unalerterable fixed barrel 34. More or less, what you get is a .177 34 in an underlever version where the hood, if not properly latching, can rob a little energy through poor sealing prior to the compressed air reaching the pellet. The advantage is the fixed barrel. If the rifle is sealing well, you end up with a great really tight shooting modern Diana. A wise bird recently told me the pellets we would consider in the heavy range for .177 could make the hoods pop open during the firing cycle. The heaviest pellet my 46 digests is the RWS Supermag when I can get ahold of them. Mine hasn't popped open so far. Maybe the Kodiaks are a worse culprit?


Harv

Harv,

Thanks for the encouragement, I feel the T01 is a better trigger, just takes more work to get it "right".

Harv said, "A wise bird recently told me the pellets we would consider in the heavy range for .177 could make the hoods pop open during the firing cycle."

I have not had the same experience as that wise bird. I find the hoods tend to pop open because of seal sizing issues/user process in closing. I have a .22 that popped open frequently (say every couple of hundred shots). The second time it flipped its seal, I couldn't find it. I replaced the seal and it hasn't happened again in a couple of thousand shots.

Hector - back around 2002 you posted that the Stutzen has metal on metal cocking lever closing (i.e. ball and ball detent - both metal). It looks like mine has the detents just drilled into the plastic of the front sight piece; am I missing something, or is there an earlier version that is just metal?

Thanks,

JC

Well, if you consider that the average .22 pellet is fairly close to the weight of a Kodiak or similar heavier pellet in .177, it might be the same malady. Since the tube diameter ie swept volume, is the same. Just the barrel diameter/caliber is different.

You know how people who've owned or shot both calibers of the Diana sidelever series tend to say that .22 is the better caliber for that particular model due to its design? It might be the same for the 46 but in reverse. That too much pellet weight combined with poor sealing causes the hoods on the 46's to blow open due to too much pressure.

It sounds plausible, doesn't it? (shrug)

Harv

Harv said: It sounds plausible, doesn't it? (shrug)

I might buy into it if I didn't have two .22's and a .177. I have cycled all kinds of different weights of pellets through all of them and only have experienced the hood opening thing with the one .22. I have no doubt that heavier pellets cause more back pressure, but what actually opens the port is poor closure of the latch (brought on by mismatch of seal(s)?).

JC

what mounts are some of you using? i will not likely scope mine since the the front sight is difficult to modify for a globe. this rifle is probably not a scope eater which certainly is nice.

If you mean me I'm using a Williams aperture. Might find an HW globe and really modify (butcher) that front brick to fit it correctly lol.

Harv

Yes, Not a scope eater. I have been using the Leapers one piece mounts and haven't had a problem (even with a 460, but I did go to the new mount when it became available).

I also have two Talons with two piece leapers mounts. When I put 30 mm scopes instead of 1" on a couple of 46's, I also got single piece leapers mounts and swapped the mounts with stop pins from the Talons. i.e. I now have 46's with leapers two piece mounts where both of the mounts have stop pins in the respective RWS stop pin hole. Overengineering for the 46, but being an engineer, I relate that term to Marketing (and it didn't cost me anymore anyhow).