Author Topic: Holding an air rifle versus a conventional rifle?  (Read 1918 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline His lordship.

  • Trade Count: (12)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1018
Holding an air rifle versus a conventional rifle?
« on: June 20, 2010, 08:48:08 AM »
I had read somewhere that the method of holding an air rifle is different than a conventional firearm, if this is true, what stance or method is to be used?  Offhand versus a bench?

Offline bobtodrick

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8
Re: Holding an air rifle versus a conventional rifle?
« Reply #1 on: June 21, 2010, 06:26:43 AM »
The different hold you've heard about primarily pertains to hi-powerd springers.  In a springer some of the vibration occurs during the firing cycle (whilst the pellet is still travelling down the barrel.  If held tightly you are in essence fighting the natural tendencies of the gun and accuracy will suffer.
The preferred method for holding a springer is called the artillery hold (perfected by Robert Beeman, airgun expert).  Basically you just rest the forearm of the rifle in your palm.  As well you don't push the airgun into your shoulder.  What you are trying to do is just allow your body to be a free floating rest for the gun so that all its natual harmonics can disipate naturally, which is repeatable.
If you're holding it tightly there is no way you can replicate the tightness of your hold everytime...hence the pellets will land all over the place.
If you google 'artillery hold' you get lots of how to info.

Offline jamaldog87

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1465
  • Gender: Male
Re: Holding an air rifle versus a conventional rifle?
« Reply #2 on: June 21, 2010, 06:29:31 AM »
I shot it like any other conventional firearm. I sometimes used a Olympic shooting hold for off hand shots.
Most Interesting Man in the World: I Don’t Always Watch Shows for Little Girls, but when I Do, I prefer My Little pony . stay magic my friends

Offline dave

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 281
Re: Holding an air rifle versus a conventional rifle?
« Reply #3 on: June 21, 2010, 01:43:31 PM »
Quote
The preferred method for holding a springer is called the artillery hold (perfected by Robert Beeman, airgun expert). 






Thats too funny. Airgun expert? Really? Beeman had nothing to do with developing the artillery hold, in fact his advice was just the opposite. Tom Gaylord was the guy who gave it a name. Its been used for over a hundred years though.



Offline bobtodrick

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8
Re: Holding an air rifle versus a conventional rifle?
« Reply #4 on: June 22, 2010, 07:03:09 AM »
Dave, in regards to you insinuating that Beeman is not an airgun expert, I quote  from a Pyramid air report by Tom Gaylord (June 24/06) in which  he states that "when Robert Beeman headed the company (Beeman) he carefully built a reputation of quality and performance that American shooters had never dreamed possible".
Sounds like Gaylord considered him an 'expert'.
He also states that Beeman recommended a very light hold with the original Beeman R1 (which did a lot to start the magnum airgun ball rolling)...maybe he didn't 'invent' the artillery hold...but he sure suggested it.
Dave...if you don't appreciate someone trying to help a newbie to the game...just let me know.
I can easily go elsewhere that isn't populated by pompous twits!!

Offline North Pack

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Holding an air rifle versus a conventional rifle?
« Reply #5 on: June 22, 2010, 11:06:10 AM »
Both of your replies are excellent Bob, - it's certainly not you that should "go elsewhere". Please keep posting here, ...

Offline dave

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 281
Re: Holding an air rifle versus a conventional rifle?
« Reply #6 on: June 22, 2010, 04:08:58 PM »
First of all, if you are going to try to help someone out,  maybe you should be sure your information is correct and the source reliable. Your quoted source doesn't really fall into that category, neither does your information.
 Pyramidair sells Beeman products and that blog is pretty much recognized as a shill for Pyramidair. Beeman is an airgun expert only as much as he sold tons of them and wrote a some self serving books on them. His Bluebook of Airguns was a prime example. A self described leading collector writing a price guide that inflated the value of the pieces in his collection and devalued those that aren't. Other than that he was a pitchman, nothing more, who recognized what sort of airguns American consumers wanted and sold them by the thousands.
Beeman only recommended that kind of hold after the rest of the airgun world had already discovered it. The artillery hold applies to all spring powered guns, not just high powered models. They all work the same, some are just more powerful than others. Power levels don't change how a spring gun shoots, they all have the same recoil movements. Some respond differently than others, thats called hold sensitivity- in other words, some require the shooter to be very consistant with hold to be accurate, some don't.

All of the vibration occurs during the firing cycle. The spring powers the gun, and it has everything to do with the firing cycle. It vibrates when it is released, moreso if the guides are poorly fitted. However, that vibration is more annoying then detrimental. What needs to be controlled is the recoil. Spring guns have a unique double recoil, both rearward and forward as the spring drives the piston to the end of the compression chamber then rebounds at the end if its travel. This action is why it takes practice to shoot any spring gun with consistant accuracy, and high power guns are more difficult to shoot accurately. 

The R1 hardly started the magnum airgun rolling, rather it came about some  years after the power race began. Beeman saw that the high powered guns such as those made by FWB and BSF were selling well,  so he went to Weihrauch and had the HW35 modified with a longer compression tube and named it the R1, HW80 in HW terms. It was the most powerful airgun of its time, but hardly the first high power air rifle.

As for the rest of your response, if you feel that this place is full of pompous twits,  why do you visit here?