View Single Post
Old 12th January 2012, 02:27 AM
CameronWilson CameronWilson is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Member of: JGARC
Location: Midlothian
Posts: 448

Yeah, that's what I thought.

From the article:

"And as for charge, what sort of shot-count does a shorty like the HW101 manage per 200BAR fill? Obviously, it's not going to be a lot because this isn't a regulated rifle, and my test gun was supplied in the less-efficient .177 calibre. However, as you can see from the chart (below), it's a bit of a performer. I got over 40, full-power shots between fill-ups, and as for the power curve well, what curve? All 40-plus were usable, with a 'sweet spot' lasting from start to finish, as on a regged rifle. As an added bonus, there was no gradual slow-down of power at the end of the cycle, either once it had had enough, the rifle's velocity dropped like a stone within a few shots. It certainly made it obvious to tell when a top-up was needed while I was punching paper.

For the record, the test gun needed replenishing bang on 90BAR, the point suggested by the colour-coded manometer on the front of the steel air cylinder."

Surely whether the rifle is regulated or not, is a fairly fundamental thing to get right in review of this nature? It's made all the worse by the reviewer (Nigel Allen) highlighting all the tell-tale signs the flat power curve, which drops away sharply at the HW100's traditional regulator pressure of 90BAR.

"Anyway, at least I got the first HW101 test sample in the country which has meant I've now had plenty of time to get to grips with it."

I've personally made buying decisions based on reviews that I've read in these magazines it makes you wonder just how accurate and informative they are? Surely, you would have thought that given that the rifle on the test purported to be a "test sample" it must have come from Weihrauch directly or Hull Cartridge, at that the reviewer would have confirmed the basics with either of those parties? And likewise that the reviewer submitted the review to them for fact-checking before going to press?
Reply With Quote