After all of the activity here about the Stutzens, got mine out and shot it a bit and it was as sweet and accurate as I had remembered it. It happened to be next to the 460 .177 so I ran a few pellets through it too, sweet, accurate, and powerful. While I was cleaning them both up to go back to the safe I looked at them side by side and wondered why a 460 couldn't be redone into the Stutzen format. The Stutzens are just a re-do of the 46's, shorten the barrel and change the stock to that georgeous Manlicher style. Why can't this be done with the 460? Same style of rifle, nearly the same dimensions, just need to shorten the barrel and cocking lever, change the stock, and, ta da!, high powered Stutzen. I realize that it'd be harder to cock, but my 460 isn't too bad now for what it delivers. All of you who own a 46, a 46 Stutzen, and a 460, hold them up side by side and I think you will see what I mean. The 460 is a bit longer, but all of the major components of both guns seem to be in nearly the same positions, wouldn't make a 460 version much larger than the 46 version. But, WOW, the difference it would make in the abilities of the gun. I'd think that the extra mass of the 460 action and longer stock would offset the shortening the barrel. Might change it from a gentlemans birding gun to a gentlemans hunting rifle. Any thoughts out there?
to pull it off. the bugaboo is the attachment of the forend to the cocking lever/sight base. the way the 46 stutzen is engeneered (if you can call it that) creates a week point. i am trying to deal with that right now.
I did a post of how John of PA could buy a .177 Stutzen and mod his 46 to become a .22 Stutzen. Then make the leftover parts into a .177 carbine. I see no reason why the 460 couldn't be made into either - except the stock is more complex due to the cutout for the sliding breech release vs the flip up breech. You can't just cut away a 46 Stutzen stock - e.g. I've cut this wire 5 times and its still too short!
I'm rooting for Larry to come up with a clever solution to fix the Stutzen cocking lever latch issue. I think the kick of a 460 would cause the stock lever to dislodge every time instead of occasionally like a 46 does. A carbine, however, has those problems solved.....
If you wanted to shorten the 460's barrel (which can be done without any loss of performance), then you would have to shorten the lever and that would increase the cocking effort, and then everyone that bought that rifle would complain about the "inordinately", HUGE, cocking effort.
And if we took GAMO route and add an "extension" to the lever, everyone would complain about the ugliness and "ungainliness" of the piece. Airgunners are difficult people, so factories prefer to err on the conservative side.
I have a 460 "Beste Macht Ferlach Stutzen" on special order from M&G, but it's gonna take a year more to build (it was commissioned "only" 6 months ago), I'm in no hurry, and I will not even mention the cost. Will it be worth it? to me, yes. Will it loose value the moment I get it? yes, but not to me. To me it's a dream come true, the result of hard work and careful planning, cajoling and hard saving.
Custom guns are just that: what the customer wants.- "Custom guns"; and they defy all rationalization.
The rest of the world can order their own custom piece.
The 460 is relatively easy to cock with the current lever; shorter would certainly increase it to noticably different, but it would give you a good workout and look great!
Hector, don't be bashful, tell us more about what you've got on order. How are they dealing with the cocking lever/Stutzen issues, custom mfg parts???
platform for field target. you would want to de tune it but it has some good features. i keep hearing about sealing issues though. is that a by product of
its magnum specs?
The 460 has a spring loaded closure for the last bit of travel for the closing of the compression tube (so does a 300r). If the spring is weak, it won't close as tight. The factory drawings show a shim under the seal and a number of people have great results as a result of using one. I didn't see any change from putting one in, so I left it out. I'm thinking there might be a manufacturing tolerances thing going on....
I fell in love with the shooting characteristics of my 460.22.cal. Very smooth, short firing cycle, very accurate. But the damn gun was a bear to cock. It would wear you out after 15 rounds.I took the rifle to my friend MZ and we discussed what I wanted in a great FT.rifle. I wanted to keep all the smoothness and maybe enhance it, plus make it more user friendly. I was willing to compromise on the yardage I received with this powerful gun, for a smoother gun at 25 to 35 yards.MZ did his thing and the gun is a masterpiece. He did have a problem with the trigger, and he sent the gun to be repaired under warranty, but Umarex refused to honor the warranty, because it was altered by the detuning.Later, However, their gunsmiths made a call and stated that they were so impressed by the tune and the way the gun now shot that they waived the warranty fee. Was this gun really made for perfection, or was he designed to be a great field target gun. I think RWS was originally designing a gun, to be perfect but later caved in to the high velolocity crowd. Just my OP. Hy the way, I believe this is why JM no longer makes a spring kit for this gun. I think he was tired of the high velocity crowd that just wanted more POWER! Just my Opinion.
Hector, I'd love to see the details of the custom you're having built. Dave is on the path for what I was thinking about, detune it a bit, and have a sweet 18-20 FPE Stutzen. Wasn't looking for any increase in power, just a great handling gun with a bit more style than the current offerings.
Precisely one of the things to be unveiled at IWA.
January 21 2009, 11:58 AM
An FT 460.
It will be 12 ft-lbs, 0.177"; and one of the issues is that the way they are going to make the gun comply witj power limits will be by using a weaker spring, we have discussed that already.
The other is that they are set on a Thumbhole stock, again, we have discussed that issue already too.
The sealing issues you hear about, IMHO are more due to dirt and grime, than any other thing. Yes there is room to improve the sealing spring (a more forceful one), and we do have to admit that the system gets rid of the cocking lever linkage adjustment issue that plagues the 48-52-54 family, source of some grief and unhappiness. But it opened a new can of worms. AaMOF it is borrowed from the 300's system.
As long as you keep your breech/cylinder area clean and as long as you lubricate the piston/cylinder as prescribed by the maintenance instructions, I doubt you would even notice.
The sealing issue is not a byproduct of its Magnum specs, but rather, with the sealing issue and the Mangum specs, the breeh seals can die in no time if not properly cared for.
just cautious. If the girlfriend ever finds this place, I'm in BIG trouble! ROFLMAO!
There are TWO types of full stocked guns in the traditional Teutonic arsenal:
One is a Stutzen (of which we have been talking about), which is usually a shorter version/carbine barrelled variant of a given gun. The name is the short of "Berg-Stutzen" And it implies hunting in the top of the mountains.
The other is simply the Mannlicher stocked full-sized gun. Mannlicher was a "Ritter" (sort of a "Count") and he liked not only the appearance, but the performance a full stock afforded because it dampened vibrations transmitted to his face. It SEEMS Herr Ferdinand Ritter von Mannlicher has suffered quite a few blows to his face/head and was rather sensitive in this area. So he LIKED the full stocked versions of rifles. When the Schönnauer (also spelleed Schoennauer) action came into being, the first company that took the action forward was SteyrWerke, for the Austrian army. The 7 mm's Mannclicher-Schönnauer was born, not only as a battle rifle, but also as a Scout-sniper rifle (what the Teutonic Armies called Jägers in those days). It was not until 1914 that the term ScharfSchutze (Sharpshooter-Sniper) was actually born and put into effect, under the terrible conditions of the Trench Wars of the Great War. But coming back to the issue, full stocked rifles have always been "Mannlicher".
For a while Mannlicher was viewed as reactionary, as the MODERN (in those days), rifle was the half stock. Before the 1880's ALL rifles were full stocked with the exception of some American and British "contraptions", such as the Sharps and the Whitworth.
So, given that historical background, the 460 I commissioned is a FULL LENGTH 460. Not a carbine. It is full stocked, with Ferlach side panels, fish-scale "checkering", Wundhammer swell for right handed shooters, endcaps in the pistol grip and forend tip, and Continental shadow line cheekpiece to the top of the straight comb.
The action is a pure 460.
Is it possible to shorten the barrel? Sure! and you would not loose performance, but as someone has already stated, cocking the 460 with a shorter rod would be difficult to do more than a few dozen times for some persons. An extension rod could be fit into it, so that you could increase the leverage by about 60% of the normal ratio, but it would have to be a properly made piece in order not to rattle at some point.
Surely this is a project that can be tackled, it is just that when you are talking custom guns, you HAVE to talk in the US$1,000 to US$5,000 range. And I sincerely doubt there are many customers for those prices, especially nowadays.
how much is it worth to you for me not to tell your girlfriend
January 21 2009, 2:19 PM
about this new gun? lol.
you thouched on something when you talked about vibration damping. the shutzen stock may have some potential for tuning barrel harmonics. when i put that
aluminum spacer in there i created a better attachment point (can't take credit for it, sylvan actually "created" it). by building the insert so that it protrudes just enough to keep the wood fron contacting the frontis piece it gives some screw tooneing flexibility on those front screws. my groups improved as soon as i did it.(they have improved even more since i got that 52 spring out) i am also wondering if the use of some type of vibration absorbing shim between the stock and the frontis piece would be useful.
Thanks for the interesting history level. Your high level points were what had understood when I ordered the 46 Stutzen (that I was actually getting a Stutzen (carbine) with a Mannlicher (full length) stock).
So wouldn't that make what you are getting not a Stutzen since it is full length???
Also, my old question still stands, only expanded: What did you do about the issue with the cocking lever being hidden by the stock? If you went for the 46 Stutzen front sight, you need a custom cocking lever to go with it (and you have the issues with that sight that the rest of us have). If you went with the 460 front sight, how are you gaining access to the cocking lever?
Thanks,
JC
PS - I won't tell your girlfriend, although I did see a post where a fellow was worried that after he was gone, his wife would sell his collection for what he told her he paid for it - you probably need to come clean about the value of that baby!
You see, JC, at times I am not the brightest candle in the chandelier, LOL!
A 46 Stutzen is indeed a Carbine, what I have on order is a Mannlicher stocked 460. Quite correct.
The stock will be full and will use the same 460 nosepiece, but if you look at the nosepiece, you can see that it holds a screw with a spring and a plunger. By changeing the normal screw to a pull-knob headed one, you can free the lever easily and elegantly in the head.
Let me tell you another secret, this time YOU are the one that is gonna scream: "Sacrilege" and "Heretic" !
The first thing I did when I first had my Stutzen was to change the front screws from metal to Nylon.
.
.
.
.
I can hear you all the way to White Plains, my friend! LOL!
Yup, more plastic!
But in this particular instance, it did allow me to do the same "tuning" you are doing now.
Because in México no one sells Nylon screws I had to turn them myself from Nylalloy. Peculiar experience that one. But yes, that is another story.
To cut this one short, Diana should use Nylon screws in that piece and get rid of most of the problems encountered when the steel screws are mated to the plastic nosepiece.
I envision this nosepiece to be a permanent fixture in the Stutzen architecture, whereas the breech block is/should not.
when it comes to airgun ideas. call me a "tabula raza" if you will. nylon eh. hmm. gonna have to go on a quest again. the Ace hardware folks may be getting suspicious. hope i don't get a visit from homeland security.
that changing the tension on those front stock screws has an effect on point of impact. moving it from side to side. i wonder if having the lowest possible tension would be a good idea. using nylon screws would allow you
to have very light tension withour having the screws turn in use.
this is a solution to the cocking lever being difficult to pull down. i see.
i was talking about using the screws that hold the forestock to the nose piece as a tuning vehicle to vary side tension on the barrell which would have an
effect on barrel harmonics but also point of impact.
while the stutzen stock is pretty it presents a problem not present in 48/52
and standard 46s. that is the influence of the tension in the wood as it acts upon the barrel. this is thin wood and subject to warping in all directions and there fore changing the point of impact with changes in climate, moisture.
i think the next time i have the stock off i am going to have to seal the grain inside the stock.
Let me 'splain what I see a 46 Stutzen solution. Right now, the Stutzen has a number of issues related to that front sight assembly - you have been playing with most of them. Mine is working now because of just the right amount of screw tension on all 4 side screws. If I back off on the rear set, it affects the tension holding the cocking lever - that's not right!
One can put a regualr 46 front sight assembly on a Stutzen. You would need to either shorten the Stutzen cocking lever (not great as with this approach, we don't need those sideways balls that hold it up now), or get a 46 cocking lever and shorten it (get a 46 compact lever is the part you want, but I bet not available in the US). Anyhow, the cocking lever would stay up with this approach, but you wouldn't be able to unlatch it without some tool due to the longer stock (that's why they created that Stutzen front sight assemble in the first place). Enter Hector with the magic pull knob headed screw - pull it and release the end pressure that holds up the cocking lever and it falls down. Voila! problem solved (of course, we still need you to keep perfecting the inserts for the holes we will have to drill in the new 46 front sight to mount our "old" Stutzen stock (which we know from Hectors history is really a Mannlicher Stock that just happened to be attached to a Stutzen!)
JC
PS - Thanks for the Darwinian analysis of the Chicken and the Egg - that is probably moving us down the road towards forum rules violation as there is a religion based "Chicken" answer that your argument tends to invoke - and the next thing will be politics......Forum Moderators, it was really a rhetorical question, honest!
"Before the 1880's ALL rifles were full stocked with the exception of some American and British "contraptions", such as the Sharps and the Whitworth. "
Actually, full stocked rifles began to fall out of fashion in the US well before 1880. As rifles moved West and became shorter of barrel but larger in caliber, the full stock evolved into the half stock. Full stocks were still produced, but mainly back East and in calibers better suited to small game as "squirrel rifles". The full stock did continue to be the norm for military arms like rifled muskets and trapdoor Springfields.
My understanding of the Mannlicher-style stock is that it affords extra protection for the barrel when hunting in rough conditions. It's my favorite style of stock.
A full stocked 460 sounds nice. For a sleek muzzle duplicating the cocking lever button and latch of the older Diana 50 would be one approach. While my 50 is not a full length, it does have a schnabel that would be right at home on a Mannlicher stock.
Anyone wishing to try their hand at a full stock or Mannlicher airgun could find a suitable black powder rifle blank. Might make an interesting customizing.
and it will be one of those parts that will bear most of the cost. made by hand . . . .
Have not agreed on the final design, yet.
If you want something approaching what we agreed with M&G; go to the Reid Supply and look at knob DK-99. That should get you pretty close to where it should be.
but of course i am puting them into an aluminum piece. a side benefit of this
will be that i won't strip out the soft aluminum. the nylon holds well. i don't see a difference in accuracy but the gun is pretty good. it is almost as accurate with iron as my scoped HW50s which is now amazingly accurate.