I am looking to getting back into shooting AP and was solely interested in compressed air guns. After a little searching I find that CO2 is a little more readily available. Is there a reason for this? Mind you, I was only in the 550-560's when I was shooting, so I was no accuracy ninja by any means. I just find it easier to deal with scuba tanks than CO2.
Thanks in advance,
Jesse
School me: CO2 vs. compressed air
Moderators: pilkguns, m1963, David Levene, Spencer, Richard H
Forum rules
If you wish to make a donation to this forum's operation , it would be greatly appreciated.
https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/targettalk?yours=true
If you wish to make a donation to this forum's operation , it would be greatly appreciated.
https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/targettalk?yours=true
-
David Levene
- Posts: 5617
- Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 12:49 pm
- Location: Ruislip, UK
Re: School me: CO2 vs. compressed air
How about dealing with neither?orion_134 wrote:...I just find it easier to deal with scuba tanks than CO2....
http://tinyurl.com/3dfjlo7
This is a topic that has been beaten to death here.
My take on it is that you can find a used top of the line CO2 AP for a lot less money than CA. Performance will be equal and CO2 is very easy to obtain (and cheap).
viewtopic.php?t=27938&start=0
My take on it is that you can find a used top of the line CO2 AP for a lot less money than CA. Performance will be equal and CO2 is very easy to obtain (and cheap).
viewtopic.php?t=27938&start=0
Re: School me: CO2 vs. compressed air
Out of the question with me. I don't want the cocking of the pistol in my shot process.slofyr wrote:How about dealing with neither?orion_134 wrote:...I just find it easier to deal with scuba tanks than CO2....
http://tinyurl.com/3dfjlo7
-
David Levene
- Posts: 5617
- Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 12:49 pm
- Location: Ruislip, UK
Re: School me: CO2 vs. compressed air
I don't blame you.orion_134 wrote:Out of the question with me. I don't want the cocking of the pistol in my shot process.
The less effort needed on the firing line to prepare the gun for a shot, the better.
> ...my only experience is with (I think) a FWB 65 and it will wear you out.
> ...The less effort needed on the firing line to prepare the gun for a shot, the better
It's human nature to seek the easy path, but this is getting silly. Feinwerkbau sold 145,000 of the 65's to shooters over a period of 33 years. The pistol scored highly and won matches. I owned a couple back then and the cocking effort was not a problem, but spring pistols in general were a heavy handful.
The FAS 604 is about as strenuous to operate as popping the top on a beer. Even now as an older shooter in average physical condition, charging the FAS 604 is a non-issue. I just don't see where the fear of effort comes from. The 604 is a gem. For the moderate investment you get excellent build quality, consistency, and accuracy. Ergonomically, it holds and balances beautifully. The design is simply brilliant, and it will put a pellet downrange into the 10-ring without all the support paraphernalia that is required by the gas pistols just to make them functional. K.I.S.S.
> ...The less effort needed on the firing line to prepare the gun for a shot, the better
It's human nature to seek the easy path, but this is getting silly. Feinwerkbau sold 145,000 of the 65's to shooters over a period of 33 years. The pistol scored highly and won matches. I owned a couple back then and the cocking effort was not a problem, but spring pistols in general were a heavy handful.
The FAS 604 is about as strenuous to operate as popping the top on a beer. Even now as an older shooter in average physical condition, charging the FAS 604 is a non-issue. I just don't see where the fear of effort comes from. The 604 is a gem. For the moderate investment you get excellent build quality, consistency, and accuracy. Ergonomically, it holds and balances beautifully. The design is simply brilliant, and it will put a pellet downrange into the 10-ring without all the support paraphernalia that is required by the gas pistols just to make them functional. K.I.S.S.
OK, maybe I should have added my disclaimer before people took offense to it: the 65 I was using was tossed into a drawer in the armory for over 20 years by the time I picked it up. The gun book proved no one has touched it since then. That may have been why it was a little "stiffer" than others. Like I said, it's my only experience.
Just having a little fun with you.
Seriously, if you can find a K58 you'll find it easy to operate, light, ergonomic, accurate, and with a great trigger. It would also be MUCH cheaper than a decent CA + accessories.
I DO find the FWB 65 a bit clunky. I'm sure the FAS would work well, too, but it's a bit underpowered for my taste.
Seriously, if you can find a K58 you'll find it easy to operate, light, ergonomic, accurate, and with a great trigger. It would also be MUCH cheaper than a decent CA + accessories.
I DO find the FWB 65 a bit clunky. I'm sure the FAS would work well, too, but it's a bit underpowered for my taste.
-
C. Perkins
- Posts: 480
- Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2009 9:31 pm
- Location: Was a Bullseye Master
Rover, you crack me up LOL
On the serious side...
I shoot an IZH46m (Izzy).
Good pistol, accurate as heck if you are on, cocking it is effertless.
My only gripe is using my big mitts picking up those tiny pellets and inserting it into the chamber.(kind of like a monkey and a football...)
Nothing wrong with an accurate SSP for a learning air pistol.
Clarence
I shoot an IZH46m (Izzy).
Good pistol, accurate as heck if you are on, cocking it is effertless.
My only gripe is using my big mitts picking up those tiny pellets and inserting it into the chamber.(kind of like a monkey and a football...)
Nothing wrong with an accurate SSP for a learning air pistol.
Clarence