350 Vs 460 Power Could someone answer a technical question please
April 6 2009 at 9:31 AM
Barry.g (no login) from IP address 126.96.36.199
First I think that 22ft/lbs is about right for a spring gun but it seems that most people think that the 460 is between the 48/54 and the 350 and when people tune and tweak for high power like Chris and I have no doubt about his 28ft/lbs, I have not heard of anyone using a 460 to experiment with.
What I cant understand is on paper the 460 should be more powerful. The 52 has a 28mm bore 100mm stroke with a short transfer port, the 350 has a 28mm bore 115mm stroke and a longer transfer port and a 460 has a 28mm bore and I think 115mm stroke ? with a short transfer port so once the breach lock up and seal on the 460 have been sorted out WHY is the 460 not more powerful?
Now I know that I might have it all completely wrong but that is my question.
The 460 is a very powerful magnum. Most of the velocity test I have seen the 460 does beat the 350 out. The cocking effort on the 460 was hard enough at velocities of 20 to 22lbs. I saw one report that the true cocking effort was around 40lbs. I had mine detuned to enjoy the gun more. I also have an additional JM modified spring to get the gun more like a TX 200. I personally would not have any need or desire for a gun shooting 28lbs.
Warren thanks for your reply but a tx200 has a smaller sweep volume than a 34 but can go to 17-18ft/lbs.
You also say that the stroke on the 350 is longer could you tell me by how much? but the 460 still has a more efficient transfer port.
I suspect that tuners just haven't tried yet with a 460.
Barry, I think the reason that most think that the 350 is more powerful, because the 350 came out first and that was all the chatter. When the gun first came out, you heard about so much power, the gun had a enormous kick, and ate scopes like m&m's, all of which related to power and velocity. I think that most of the "magnumitis" crowd that wanted this magnum rifle, are not the type that would be interested in a underlever like the TX200 because it is not a magnum gun, which in my opinion the 460 closely resembles. It is my belief that Jim Maccarri made the "Modified" spring because it brought the 460 down to the level of the TX, which the gun is much better suited for. It appears that the modified spring was NOT what the Magumitis guy's wanted so he then made the more powerful "Artic" spring.I believe that the new spring still did not deliver what the magnum guys wanted so he became frustrated and stopped making the springs for the 460 gun altogether. These are my opinions only and not the words of the great spring maker JM.
Interesting answer Dave but I am still a bit surprised of the general lack of interest and knowledge about this nice gun I think that it has it all, I dont even know what the official length of the stroke is, perhaps someone can tell me.
i think the 460 was incorrectly slotted in the lineup and should
April 6 2009, 2:05 PM
have been more tx like in power. they had the 46 in the lineup at that time and
that was the 11-12 fpe gun. probably folks were asking for more power in the 46 and of course the platform can't support it due to the breach design and seals that would never hold big power. diana decided that a underlever magnum fit their marketing plans and now we have the 460 which has its own issues.
i still wonder what the accuracy potential of the 460 is in detuned state. if it was the equal of a tx i would be interested in one for FT use at 12 FPE.
the seals would probably be a lot happier at that reduced output as well. i wonder if a 46 piston would de-stroke a 460? the diameter is the same i think.
and it has the cocking slot in the right place. anyone know what the 46 stroke is? is the piston stem longer or shorter? hmmmm? a short stroke 460 with a little weaker spring would be smooth i think.
Larry I am sorry but I have to disagree with you I have a TX and it is a completely different animal to a 460 and what do you mean there is issues with the 460 only two small things put right easy.
But no one is answering the power question that I am asking in a satisfing way with facts just opinions, I would like to see some technical answers why the 350 is more powerful than the 460 as I cant see any to debate.
never said is was equal to a tx. i do think the 460 SHOULD have been made more like a tx. or even a 97. 460 might have been a good platform if it has the accuracy of a tx. so far no one has said what kind of accuracy it has. issues? i hear about them all the time. or maybe just one issue and that is sealing the breach seems to be a problem but a solveable one.
RedFeather (Login RedFeather) Owner Moderator 188.8.131.52
Warren, why can't you bob these guns?
April 6 2009, 2:46 PM
Granted, they would be a pita to cock with the shorter lever, but you ought to be able to cut/re-choke one. The main obstacle would be the lever latch. What would be neat is some kind of telescoping extension so that you could still have some mechanical advantage akin to a full sized gun. I wish I could handle the recoil on either a 350 or 460 so that I could try one of these, myself. The 350, in particular, is a fine looking air gun.
The 46 piston is slotted, but the slot is not in the right place for the 460 as the 460 piston does not have a slot. The cocking lever moves the sliding cylinder, which in turn moves the piston - more like the piston in the 300r....
The 46 spring in the 460 is a smoother shooter at 16fpe, but still not 46 (or TX200 smooth). I think a JM GRT kit might be the ticket.
Speaking of JM, I think that he quit making springs for the 460 as they had a tendency to break things (like lockup spring, cocking issues, etc) and he got complaints back in his direction - not worth the agrevation. These are my opinions only and not the words of the great spring maker JM. And its probably just a concidence that these words showed up next to the XLR2 kit recently: Not for use in Diana 350 or 460.
PS - I think I fixed my 460's problem of breaking guides by replacing the piston...
Are you sure you can't chop and rechoke a 460 barrel by taking off the plastic front site, cutting and machining, rechoke, then shorten the cocking lever accordingly?
I can confirm the ~115mm stroke for the 460, so I tend to believe the latter; although I tend to disbelieve the post that says the transfer port of the 460 is shorter/more efficient than the 350's; I think they are virtually the same.
RedFeather (Login RedFeather) Owner Moderator 184.108.40.206
Here's one reason you don't see too many 460 mods
April 6 2009, 3:25 PM
Going by PA's website, they are about $150 more expensive than the 350. Not saying that a increase in price deters modding but it doesn't lend the gun to tinkering with like, say, a B28. That, combined with what appears to be initially disappointing fps numbers might also be limiting the number of 460's floating around.
There's been some contention on a couple of the other forums lately and I would hate to see that here. I'm sure we are all gentlemen (or genteel women, as the case may be.)
No, you can own a world of air guns without ever laying hands on a 34. But, Warren, I will concede your devotion and, should you ever find yourself in the same situation as Son of Kong, I am sure it will be the 34 that you raise high as the waves close over your head. (Seen that old movie?)
The 460 seems to have been a flash in the pan. If they weren't so few and expensive it would be neat to see if converting to a .25 might make them shoot a bit better. Actually, maybe a failure for Diana in the "super magnum" race is not such a bad thing. They can concentrate on guns which both shoot well and hard but not try to be a .22 short.
You don't need to take out a slide rule to see that the 460 is a great gun. I disagree with Warren that it is not to be compared with the TX. I do not own a TX but have shot the 460 extensively, and it is a lot nicer shooter than my 34. which by the way was tuned to perfection.I think the 460. is more of a FT gun than a "magnititis" rifle. It sure as hell shot a lot better from the factory, than my 34. I mean a hell of a lot BETTER! Shorter firing cycle,no twang etc and very powerful. The detune made it even a nicer gun. I do not own a slide rule, nor do I care about mathematical equations that look pretty on paper, or meant to prove a point. All I care about is how the gun shoots. As Mark Twaine is quoted"
Figures often beguile me, particularly when I have the arranging of them myself; in which case the remark attributed to Disraeli would often apply with justice and force: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
- Autobiography of Mark Twain
Slight problems here. Swept volume will be given by pi*r*r*l rather than d*l, so:
1/2" x 10" = 1.96 cu-in = .0011 cubic feet
3/4" x 12" = 5.3 cu-in = .0031 cubic feet
1-1/2" x 12" = 21.2 cu-in = .0123 cubic feet.
I never said the sweep volume was the same in the 34 compared to the TX
and transfer port means nothing when you talk about volume sweep but it does have to go thru the transfer port
volume in 1/2" is less than 1", add lenght in 1" with a volume of 1 1/2" and you have POWER, now for the formula about air volume and diameter sweep
1/2" diameter X 10" = 5 which = .0347222 cubic feet
3/4" diameter x 12" = 9 which = .0625 cubic feet
1 1/2" diameter air chamber X 12" 18 / 144 = .125
what does the capacity of .125 compare to .034722 or to .0625
add the barrel lenght, transfer port and pellet weight and you have a HEADACK.
Larry sorry if I misunderstood you, JC so the 460 is a 115mm stroke thank you, but is the 350 a 115 or s 125mm stroke?
The way I work out sweep volume is say a 52, Pi 3.1416 x radius 1.4cm x 1.4cm x stroke 10cm = 61.575
I said that there was only two things to fix on a 460 the breach spring and a heavy duty seal, I was not thinking about the guide and the trigger because I always fit a steel guide to my guns from new when I re-lube them and I was aware that the TO5 on the 52 and the 460 might need a deburr but all gun have quirks that need to be put right if you want them at there best.
The transfer port is shorter on a sliding breach than a break barrel, so the question still stands about the power unless the 350 has a 125mm stroke.
"Speaking of JM, I think that he quit making springs for the 460 as they had a tendency to break things (like lockup spring, cocking issues, etc) and he got complaints back in his direction - not worth the agrevation. These are my opinions only and not the words of the great spring maker JM. And its probably just a concidence that these words showed up next to the XLR2 kit recently: Not for use in Diana 350 or 460."
was very interesting, and I think maybe you are right.
A mainspring didn't break or weaken a lock up spring, but someone who might have put in a new JM kit when the lock up spring was about to go might have complained to JM when it went that the gun is now shooting poorly and JM might have not needed a lot of agrevation he was getting when his product worked perfectly well. Just me saying.....
PS Barry. Tell me why you think the 460 has a shorter transfer port than the 350. I think they both have a transfer port the thickness of the metal at the end of the piston's travel (essentially the same) and the hubub about the 460 is that it is efficient compared to a gun like the 46, CFX, Hammerli Nova, etc that has a loong, flip type transfer port???
I understand now what you mean about the lock up spring now thanks for making that clear.
I have seen a cutaway of a 52 tube and you can see how short the transfer port is so less lost volume but I dont have a 350 to look at but I have a 34 and I assume that would be the same but I dont know for sure,also when I look at the 460 tube it looks short compared with my 34 and the 460 is a straight and direct but the 34 is at a angle called a gas-flowed transfer port giving more lost volume.
This is why I would of thought the 460 would have the edge on the 350,as I said I am not sure about this but it looks that way, but of course we are only talking a few fps.
There is also that the 460 can take a bigger spring like a HW80 spring but wont fit if the 350 has a piston sleeve but will fit a 34 without a sleeve with the right guide.
Do we both have the same understanding of what the transfer port is? I'm thinking it is the hole at the end of the cylinder that the piston travels in. That hole is lined up with the barrel so the air is transferred from the big sweep volume through the much smaller diameter hole to power the pellet out the barrel. Air Arms has advertised that the fact that they center their transfer port on the cylinder by offsetting the barrel equally all around makes it more efficient than others whose transfer port is offset from the center of cylinder (top of the barrel aligned with the top of the cylinder). Still doesn't impact the length of the transfer port which is in the order of 1/8" for breakbarrels as it is the thickness of the metal at the end of the cylinder.
Re the bigger spring thing, The 460 (and 48/52/54) have a bigger outer cylinder as they have a sliding inner cylinder. The diameter of the spring they can take is the same.
Hay Anonomous - Are you saying that Marketers lie? I'm with ya!
Re: 350 Vs 460 Power Could someone answer a technical question please
April 7 2009, 1:40 PM
Just one thing that, perhaps, nobody has noticed (or care) in the past:
When the Diana 460 was launched, I felt surprised by the advertising on Pyramid Air's site saying - "the most powerful RWS rifle, 1350fps"! And, I know, the same advertising came stamped on gun's carton boxes.
And this is hilarious because when this gun was launched, on M&G's web-site the rifle's performance was/is JUST 1150fps! The germans ALWAYS statued the 350 was/is their most powerful produt!
I guess, and I'm led to conclude, this was just an advertising executive manuever by RWS company...eh,eh!
Re: 350 Vs 460 Power Could someone answer a technical question please
April 7 2009, 2:55 PM
I do not own a 460 but do own a few guns. The strait port on them is OK but what size is the port. ? The big equation when making power in a strait port IMHO. The angled port in a 350 and a 34 is important that both pieces of the chamber are lined up directly up and sized right. For a .22 the port can be tweaked a tad. The when tweaking ports its more important to find a pellet that fits the breech and use only that pellet. Many breech leaks are never seen. Its not always the seal either. RWS are know to leak at the pellet seal as they use a chamfered breech. That is a bad idea. Its easier to get the pellet in but its a area of power loss. Do you want the air blast hitting directly behind the pellet or all over it ?
I have at least 800 rounds on my 460 and it shoots very good with plenty of power to spare,the only problem is the breech seal so i'm using a 109 buna o-ring from motion industries store we have here in south texas and have to change it at 400 rounds or less,i can shoot sparrows out past 30 yrds. with this gun and that impresses me then again i never shot a 350 in 22 which i have in 177.I do here how fantastic the 350 in 22 is and i wish i would of bought one in 22 cause i'm a 22 caliber guy now.I know my 460 is smooth as silk when cocking and not bad on recoil either.
The big mistake that Diana made with the 460 was they released it with the lock up spring and seal problem and rightly people like Warren was disappointed.
But when I bought my 460 I knew about these problems so I found them easy to put right right before I started, also when I dismantled it completely I found the build quality one of the best that I have seen, a bit like a HW they need a few things doing to get them at there best.
Now most people know that the 48/54,460,350 will all do 22ft/lbs and that is about right for a spring gun, but out of the box the 460 is disadvantaged because of the lockup /seal problem.
It looks like the 460 could go the way of the AA Pro elite and that was only because a small fault and now people say they are the best.
I hope we are all friends hear sharing info on Diana's,
MPAC The best seal I have found so far is a heavy duty 52 seal from T.R. ROBB might be worth sending off for?
IMHO Don't shoot all the Dogs just because one of them has fleas!
April 8 2009, 3:47 AM
Warren quotes "
"I knew this issue was going to bring some strong disagreements and emotional but the bootom line is that IMHO the 460 is NOT what it was meant to be there other better air guns"
Well Warren, I do not know if you had a bad 460. (don't shoot all the dogs just because one of them has fleas") but the 460 I have was a great shooter right out of the box. (22.Cal). I really do not know what you would want in a gun. It was as powerful as the 350 or more so. It is extremely smooth, no twang at all, and has a very crisp and short firing cycle. Here is a gun that could keep up with the 350 all day long in power, and yet not break a scope. I have had the original scope on the gun to this day. The short firing cycle made the recoil very manageable or for me hardly noticeable.
Now on the other hand some might question your judgment when you compare this fine gun to a Chinese made rifle, and laud how good that gun is and how much better a rifle made in China is over this Diana.But you are correct about one thing Warren, and that is, it is YOUR OPINION. Thank you for your post and good luck with your BAM.
The reason that I started this thread was for Diana enthusiasts interest only, If cranked right up was the 460 the most powerful Diana?
Of course 22ft/lbs would be the all round right power so please dont take it to serious.
I didn't think that the 460 was being given a fair chance to claim the title from the 350 as its dimensions on paper said it should and there was a need for some real experiments to prove it.
I am bias in favor of the 460 because I have got one but I really dont mind if the 350 wins, I like the 460 and I did not rush into buying it and I am not disappointed with it.
So who is the power champ?
Warren, what the heck is the deal with the all caps and the "I know who you are! stuff? (I hope you don't know where I live) I never said anything about a holy grail. I never shot a 48 and maybe it is more accurate than the 460,maybe it isn't. I really don't give a crap. Besides, aren't you the one always quoting "70% shooter, 30% gun??"
Lighten up Warren, It's just pellet guns we are talking about and not your dog.
Damn,you scare me sometimes.
Warren why are you getting your knickers in a twist
April 9 2009, 2:23 AM
It is obvious that you had a 460 with a breach spring an seal problem, everyone who knows anything knows that a 460 will do at least 22ft/lbs if the breach spring is OK and I can only say that my 460 is accurate.
I hope we are all friends here who have interesting discussions and share tips.
Re: Warren why are you getting your knickers in a twist
April 9 2009, 3:21 AM
This I can tell you . I do not have a 460 but bet I could get it to shoot better and more powerful. I did it to a 350 and everyone says above 900 is a accurate gun. I 100% disagree as I have proof. The 460 has even more potential accuracy I would think as its a fixed barrel
That was with the TO1 and that gave me a shorter stroke but I was just making a point that a 460 will shoot at that power nicely if you want to, a bit of useless info realty,
Now dont laugh or take this to serious but I am the UK expert on the 460 that is because as far as I know I am one of two owners in the UK, and I have a fair bit of knowledge only through dismantling it a lot of times plus liking the gun more than my HWs and AAs.
I now have my 460 at a very consistent and smooth 11ft/lbs and I am pleased with that, but I could apply for a FAC?
Also there is a lot of interest from FAC holders and I would like to give them accurate info also opinions.
I'm going to try this weekend and see what my groups are ,yesterday with 20 mile an hr. wind at 18 yrds. i got nickel size off hand mine is scoped.mine is a virgin never opened up.Using centerpoint 3-9x32 with r/g.mildot.It was a 5 shot group.
Larry I am a very average shot but I can get in a inch at about 30 yards, about the same as my TX the 460 is heavy with my 3x9x40 Nikko Stirling cheapy but the weight adds to the accuracy.
I like open sights so I have shaped the front post.
Yes, Warren I am just a child at heart. Best of all, I do enjoy life. Already have a dog, a little PeekaPoo. I guess I was comparing the RWS Diana to a Chinese Bam. And most of all I agree with ya Warren, they are nothing but children's guns and I love being a child again! Sure beats being a "grumpy old Man". Bam,Bam Bam! ha ha. Sure hope none of us kids get caught playing on your grass today, Bam Bam! Hope ya feel better tomorrow.
Franklin P. Jones:
You can learn many things from children. How much patience you have, for instance.
We can be bias if we have a favorite gun and there is nothing wrong with that, but the facts look like this, the 48/54 has been a time proven powerful gun for a long time with only a few small faults but has a 15mm shorter stroke than the 350/460 so I think that out of the box straight shooters have it about right if the 460 has a OK lock up spring, they are about the same power.
But I think that the 460 has not been around long enough for tuners and people like Chris to experiment with to find out if it is the most powerful Diana as it has a diffrent spring capacity and transfer port to the 350, but this is for fun only as as 90% of shooters will find all three guns about the same power just diffrent to shoot.
But how many conventional under leavers can match the 48/54/350?