As promised in the review of the Crosman 3576W, I am going to compare that revolver with the Umarex Smith and Wesson 686. Both of these are similar in the high level specs - both are CO2 revolvers, both use 10 pellet clips, and both have a 6" barrel. There is an obvious difference in the materials used, but what else does one get for the significant price difference? To answer this question, I will use the same format that I used for airgun reviews, except now, each section will address the differences between these two airguns.
Operation
Both revolvers use CO2. The 686 requires removing a single grip side and the piercing is performed by the lever that masks as the grip bottom. The 3576W requires removing both grips and the piercing is performed by turning a screw that is revealed when opening the grips. In general, I prefer the approach taken by the S&W, but in this particular instance, I found it a bit more finicky than on the Beretta 92FS, which uses the same mechanism.
The clip loading is done using a swing out cylinder mechanism, while the Crosman uses a top break approach. The swing out approach is simpler and more robust.
Overall, there is no significant difference in operation. Users may prefer one approach over the other, but both revolvers are nice and easy to use.
Package and build
The S&W 686 impresses here, as it comes with a nice custom case and is built to look like the firearm it replicates. The 3576W is built very well, but this is an area where the price difference has an obvious justification.
Adjustable settings
Both revolvers have a nice adjustable rear sight. The S&W offers two additional options for customizing the front sight and those give it an edge.
Performance
Both revolvers do a great job of regulating the CO2 consumption. By this, I mean that the airguns maintain high enough power for longer, with the result that they also consume the CO2 powerlet after fewer shots. This is a good thing though, because fewer stronger shots are better than a lot of weak ones when it comes to target shooting. The S&W 686 seems to do a superb job here, as it cuts clean holes through paper for 50 shots, then loses power very quickly after that. The 3576W seems to lose power a bit faster, but after 60 shots, it still produces enough power for punching holes in paper targets and can go 20 more shots if you don't care about scoring - the sudden drop in power that I noticed with the 686 is not present here. The 686 seems to have a stricter consumption regulation, but the difference is pretty small anyway - both revolvers are great CO2 airguns.
Both revolvers also have great triggers. The 686 has a lighter trigger and the double action is exceptionally smooth. The 3576W double action is very good, but the 686 is just special here. Both triggers work great in single action - the 686 is still smoother here, but I actually prefer the resistance of the Crosman single action, so I'd call it a draw.
In terms of handling, the plastic build of the Crosman works in its favor, as it makes it easier to use for longer sessions. I also find the handle-trigger ergonomics to be slightly more comfortable than on the 686. The S&W 686 is a large and heavy revolver and its weight and size take their toll after a while - this is a plus if you want it for training to use a similar firearm, but a minus if you only care about target shooting.
The accuracy of both these revolvers is excellent and I cannot pick one over the other. Neither is designed for target shooting, but they can work in that role pretty well.
Conclusion
Both the Crosman 3576W and the Umarex S&W 686 are excellent CO2 revolvers. The 686 is a showpiece and in this aspect, it has no competition from the 3576W. But when it comes to actual use and results, the differences are smaller than one might expect. The 686 offers an adjustable front sight and an exceptional double action trigger, as well as an excellent use of the CO2 powerlet, but these differences aside, there is very little to separate these two airguns when it comes to accuracy - in fact, here, the plastic build of the Crosman make it a bit easier to use over longer periods of time.
If you are split between these options, I hope this comparison will help. And if you are still split, consider doing what I did - get both! They are worth it.
Saturday, March 9, 2013
Friday, March 8, 2013
Crosman 3576W
As I mentioned in the review of the Smith and Wesson 686, the other CO2 airgun that I wanted to try was the Crosman 3576W. These are CO2 revolvers with similar specs - both have 6" barrels and use 10 pellet clips. They both also have very good reviews and the Crosman costs about a fifth of the cost of the Umarex revolver, so I was curious to compare them, especially since I liked very much the Crosman 1377C, so I knew that Crosman can provide great quality for an affordable price.
The style of the Crosman 3576W revolver draws inspiration from the Colt Python, but it replaces the swing out cylinder mechanism of that revolver with a top break mechanism that I first saw in the S&W Schofield; also, the Python did not seem to have contoured grips, so those are probably inherited from some other revolver model. As such, the 3576W is not a firearm replica - it is just styled to look like a firearm.
Crosman has quite a history of producing CO2 revolvers. The 3576W comes from a series of 357* revolver models that goes back to 1983 - 30 years! I imagine that the "357" part of the name hints to revolvers using the .357 Magnum round and I know that the "6" stands for the 6" barrel, but I do not know what the W is meant to suggest - perhaps higher power compared to previous generation? As with the S&W 686 airgun, this Crosman revolver also used to come in versions having different barrel sizes, but now only the 6" version is available.
Operation
One other aspect where the 3576W shows that it is not a replica is the presence of a safety. This safety takes the form of a bolt that can be pushed in the path of the hammer - to engage it, you have to pull the hammer slightly, to allow the safety to slide in front of it; to take it off, simply push it out of the way of the hammer.
As usual, the CO2 powerlet can be loaded in the grip of the revolver. The grip mechanism is rather unique in that both sides come off. First pull the right side by holding it from the middle and pulling it away - it should detach with little effort and once it comes off, the left side will be easy to remove too. What remains is a grip skeleton that is shaped to receive the CO2 powerlet. The piercing mechanism is a simple screw - this needs to be unscrewed first to make place for the powerlet. After oiling the tip of the CO2 cylinder and placing it in the grip, you can turn back the screw to pierce it. Do that by turning the screw firmly once you feel stronger resistance. As I mentioned in the review of the Walther PPQ, which uses a similar piercing mechanism, I like to turn the screw a bit after it pierces the cylinder, but then I unscrew it just a tiny bit. Now it is time to replace the grips. I do that in the reverse order in which I removed them - I first fit back the left grip and then the right one - when they are fitted correctly, pressing them together will result in a snapping sound and they'll get secured. Removing and putting back the grips requires very little force - if you find it to be otherwise, you are doing something wrong. The grips are made of plastic, so you should never apply excessive force - it is not necessary and it can break the attachment clips.
As mentioned earlier, the clip loading mimics a top break mechanism. To break open the revolver, you need to push a lever on top - keep it pressed while pushing down the barrel and release it only once the barrel is clear of the lock. You can now mount a clip on the short protruding pivot at the back of the barrel. Once a clip is loaded, I press again the top lever while pushing the barrel back to its normal position. I always press the top lever during this operation, to avoid wearing the locking mechanism.
The revolver is now ready to fire either in single action, after cocking the hammer, or in double action with a longer trigger pull.
Package and build
As usual for airguns in its price range, the 3576W came in a plastic wrap that I cut with scissors. One clip was included besides the manual and warranty cards. As it seems to be usual with Crosman packaging, the manual was rolled so I had to roll it in the opposite direction to get it to sit flat. I recommend getting one set of extra clips - they are inexpensive and make recharging easier.
The Crosman revolver is built from metal and plastic. The grips are plastic and attach to a metal frame, the clips are made of plastic, and the barrel is shrouded in plastic. The safety bolt is also plastic, but the rest is metal - the trigger, the hammer, the grip frame, and the barrel. I liked that a metallic piece was also used in the top break locking mechanism to protect the plastic of the shroud. Basically, all essential parts that suffer wear and tear are made of metal or protected by a piece of metal. The only parts that may get worn out are the attachment clips of the grips, but so far I saw no issues with them. This is a very nicely built revolver.
I also like the plastic parts - they look and feel very nice. They also make the 3576W very light, especially when compared with an airgun that uses more metal such as the Smith and Wesson 686.
Adjustable settings
The front sight is fixed, but the rear sight adjusts for both elevation and windage via a couple of screws.
Performance
The 3576W does a very good job of regulating CO2 use and it provides pretty constant power over the use of one powerlet. I can get 80 shots per CO2 cylinder, but after the first 60 shots, the power starts dropping and the pellets no longer cut clean holes in the paper targets, so I stop after 6 clips. This revolver definitely maintains constant power better than the Beretta 92FS and the Walther PPQ.
The Crosman 3576W handles very nicely - I really like the shape of its grips and its light weight also makes it easy to handle it for extended periods. The sights are also very good.
The trigger is crisp and precise in single action mode. In double action mode, it requires a stronger pull, but it still works very predictably - I was quite impressed with the overall performance of the trigger.
Given all the above observations, it should not come as a surprise that the accuracy of the 3576W is excellent and that this revolver is very suitable for target shooting. Everything works great here.
Conclusion
Crosman has engineered another classic airgun in the 3576W. No wonder it is so popular. Even ignoring its very affordable price, this revolver offers pretty much everything that you could expect to find in a CO2 revolver.
I am impressed with Crosman - they offer excellent features in very affordable models.
In my next post, I will attempt to answer the unavoidable question - how does the Crosman 3576W compare to the Umarex Smith and Wesson 686?
The style of the Crosman 3576W revolver draws inspiration from the Colt Python, but it replaces the swing out cylinder mechanism of that revolver with a top break mechanism that I first saw in the S&W Schofield; also, the Python did not seem to have contoured grips, so those are probably inherited from some other revolver model. As such, the 3576W is not a firearm replica - it is just styled to look like a firearm.
Crosman has quite a history of producing CO2 revolvers. The 3576W comes from a series of 357* revolver models that goes back to 1983 - 30 years! I imagine that the "357" part of the name hints to revolvers using the .357 Magnum round and I know that the "6" stands for the 6" barrel, but I do not know what the W is meant to suggest - perhaps higher power compared to previous generation? As with the S&W 686 airgun, this Crosman revolver also used to come in versions having different barrel sizes, but now only the 6" version is available.
Operation
One other aspect where the 3576W shows that it is not a replica is the presence of a safety. This safety takes the form of a bolt that can be pushed in the path of the hammer - to engage it, you have to pull the hammer slightly, to allow the safety to slide in front of it; to take it off, simply push it out of the way of the hammer.
As usual, the CO2 powerlet can be loaded in the grip of the revolver. The grip mechanism is rather unique in that both sides come off. First pull the right side by holding it from the middle and pulling it away - it should detach with little effort and once it comes off, the left side will be easy to remove too. What remains is a grip skeleton that is shaped to receive the CO2 powerlet. The piercing mechanism is a simple screw - this needs to be unscrewed first to make place for the powerlet. After oiling the tip of the CO2 cylinder and placing it in the grip, you can turn back the screw to pierce it. Do that by turning the screw firmly once you feel stronger resistance. As I mentioned in the review of the Walther PPQ, which uses a similar piercing mechanism, I like to turn the screw a bit after it pierces the cylinder, but then I unscrew it just a tiny bit. Now it is time to replace the grips. I do that in the reverse order in which I removed them - I first fit back the left grip and then the right one - when they are fitted correctly, pressing them together will result in a snapping sound and they'll get secured. Removing and putting back the grips requires very little force - if you find it to be otherwise, you are doing something wrong. The grips are made of plastic, so you should never apply excessive force - it is not necessary and it can break the attachment clips.
As mentioned earlier, the clip loading mimics a top break mechanism. To break open the revolver, you need to push a lever on top - keep it pressed while pushing down the barrel and release it only once the barrel is clear of the lock. You can now mount a clip on the short protruding pivot at the back of the barrel. Once a clip is loaded, I press again the top lever while pushing the barrel back to its normal position. I always press the top lever during this operation, to avoid wearing the locking mechanism.
The revolver is now ready to fire either in single action, after cocking the hammer, or in double action with a longer trigger pull.
Package and build
As usual for airguns in its price range, the 3576W came in a plastic wrap that I cut with scissors. One clip was included besides the manual and warranty cards. As it seems to be usual with Crosman packaging, the manual was rolled so I had to roll it in the opposite direction to get it to sit flat. I recommend getting one set of extra clips - they are inexpensive and make recharging easier.
The Crosman revolver is built from metal and plastic. The grips are plastic and attach to a metal frame, the clips are made of plastic, and the barrel is shrouded in plastic. The safety bolt is also plastic, but the rest is metal - the trigger, the hammer, the grip frame, and the barrel. I liked that a metallic piece was also used in the top break locking mechanism to protect the plastic of the shroud. Basically, all essential parts that suffer wear and tear are made of metal or protected by a piece of metal. The only parts that may get worn out are the attachment clips of the grips, but so far I saw no issues with them. This is a very nicely built revolver.
I also like the plastic parts - they look and feel very nice. They also make the 3576W very light, especially when compared with an airgun that uses more metal such as the Smith and Wesson 686.
Adjustable settings
The front sight is fixed, but the rear sight adjusts for both elevation and windage via a couple of screws.
Performance
The 3576W does a very good job of regulating CO2 use and it provides pretty constant power over the use of one powerlet. I can get 80 shots per CO2 cylinder, but after the first 60 shots, the power starts dropping and the pellets no longer cut clean holes in the paper targets, so I stop after 6 clips. This revolver definitely maintains constant power better than the Beretta 92FS and the Walther PPQ.
The Crosman 3576W handles very nicely - I really like the shape of its grips and its light weight also makes it easy to handle it for extended periods. The sights are also very good.
The trigger is crisp and precise in single action mode. In double action mode, it requires a stronger pull, but it still works very predictably - I was quite impressed with the overall performance of the trigger.
Given all the above observations, it should not come as a surprise that the accuracy of the 3576W is excellent and that this revolver is very suitable for target shooting. Everything works great here.
Conclusion
Crosman has engineered another classic airgun in the 3576W. No wonder it is so popular. Even ignoring its very affordable price, this revolver offers pretty much everything that you could expect to find in a CO2 revolver.
I am impressed with Crosman - they offer excellent features in very affordable models.
In my next post, I will attempt to answer the unavoidable question - how does the Crosman 3576W compare to the Umarex Smith and Wesson 686?
Tuesday, March 5, 2013
Umarex Smith and Wesson 686
After the Beretta 92FS and the Walther PPQ, I decided to try two more CO2 airguns that had a great reputation for accuracy. The Umarex Smith and Wesson 586 and 686 revolvers were said to be as good as many target pistols, so they formed option #1.
The only difference between the 586 and the 686 models is that the latter has a nickel body. These revolvers used to come with several barrel sizes and you could even buy the barrels separately to exchange them, but these days only the 4" and 6" versions of the 586 can be found and the 686 only comes in a 6" version, with its 6" barrel also available separately (I wonder why). I picked the 686 because I liked how the nickel contrasted with the black grips and clip, but other than this aspect, I am not aware of any essential differences between these models, so this review will apply just as well to the 586 model.
The sights, with all the adjustments available, are among the best sights I used.
PS: Do you remember that at the beginning of the review I mentioned trying two CO2 airguns? Well, the other one is the Crosman 3576W, which I will review soon - I also plan to compare the two in a separate post.
The only difference between the 586 and the 686 models is that the latter has a nickel body. These revolvers used to come with several barrel sizes and you could even buy the barrels separately to exchange them, but these days only the 4" and 6" versions of the 586 can be found and the 686 only comes in a 6" version, with its 6" barrel also available separately (I wonder why). I picked the 686 because I liked how the nickel contrasted with the black grips and clip, but other than this aspect, I am not aware of any essential differences between these models, so this review will apply just as well to the 586 model.
Operation
The Umarex pistols are revolvers in disguise and thus their operation differs significantly from the firearms they copy. The Smith and Wesson revolvers do not have such problem. The only important difference is that instead of a full cylinder, these replicas use a rotating clip that masks as the front part of the cylinder (and doesn't mask too well on the 686, because the clips are black). The rear part of the cylinder is fixed and its only purpose is to mimic the look of the cylinder.
There is no safety on these revolvers, so it is better to perform the CO2 loading without a clip inserted. To reveal the CO2 compartment, open the lever at the bottom of the grip and then pull out the right grip. The CO2 mechanism is similar to that of the Beretta 92FS. There is a retainer screw that needs to be unscrewed before inserting the gas cylinder. Once that is done, oil the tip of a CO2 powerlet, insert it into the compartment, and tighten back the screw without exerting any force - you are just trying to secure the powerlet, not to pierce it. Once this is done, place back the right grip and then firmly push close the bottom lever - this will pierce the CO2 cylinder. This piercing part is trickier than on the Beretta - I found the grip lever to be harder to close quickly and I even managed to be slow enough in doing it that I once wasted two gas capsules. Just hold the grip tightly with one hand and then press the lever firmly with the other until it snaps shut.
With the CO2 loaded, the next step is to load a clip. Again, I remind you that there is no safety, so stay away from the trigger during this operation. The S&W 686 mimics a swing out cylinder loading mechanism - the clip needs to be loaded on an arm that is unlocked by pushing a lever behind the left side of the cylinder. Swing that arm out all the way, then slide the clip on it and close it back. The revolver is now ready to shoot.
The 686 works either in double action by directly pulling the trigger or in single action, by cocking the hammer and then pulling the trigger.
Package and build
The Smith and Wesson 686 came in a larger plastic case than that of the Beretta 92FS and this is not only because the 686 is a larger airgun, but because there is a lot of space inside. The case feels slightly sturdier than that of the Beretta, but is still not as solid as a Plano case. As usual with Umarex replica cases, the S&W logo is nicely etched on the front of this case. The foam inside is already cut to offer a lot of storage inserts - I am not even sure what they are all meant to hold, but it is better to have more storage options than less. Unlike with the Beretta case, the foam inside the S&W case is glued to it - I like to store the airgun papers under the foam, but I cannot do that here. A manual, a warranty card, safety rules, and a Umarex brochure come in the case. There are also a few accessories - two clips, two front sights of different widths, a barrel removal key, and a barrel cleaning brush.
As usual for the high end Umarex replicas, this airgun is mostly made of metal - the main exceptions are the plastic front sight and the rubber grips.
The plastic front sights are a nice idea. The gun comes with one sight mounted and two others of different widths are included as customization alternatives. I found the one that was mounted to be of the right width for me, but others may find one of the other two alternatives to work better for them.
I liked the intention of these sights but they also happen to generate my only trouble with this gun. One problem is that their base is wider than the metal slot where they were supposed to fit over the barrel, so they cannot be attached in a straight position and instead they end up sitting tilted to one side or the other. This is not what I expected from German manufacturing. I had to remove the sight piece and file the edges of its base, to get it to sit flush with the barrel. Another problem is that the sight is long, is not made of very rigid plastic, and is attached by a single screw - the result is that it moves slightly when touched - this contrasts unpleasantly with the otherwise very solid feel of this airgun. There is no operational impact, however, and this is a much shorter list of issues than I had with the Beretta 92FS.
Front sight aside, the 686 is very solidly built and looks very nice, even better than the Beretta. It is also a very large gun and thus it is quite heavy too.
The clips deserve a bit of commentary as well. They are very solid and heavy and their size permits housing 10 pellets. They only come in black, so there is no nickel version to match the 686, but I actually like the contrast they make with the body of the 686 - they act as a cylinder accent. On the Beretta/Walther style of clips, the ratchet teeth are extending from the clip body, but in these S&W clips, those teeth are recessed, which is very convenient because you can store more than a pair of clips in contact with each other without having any contact (and wear) between those teeth.
Also, many online reviews mentioned that the extra clips that Umarex sells are actually having larger pellet holes than the clips that came with the revolver. If that was an issue at some point, it appears that it has now been resolved - I have seen no difference between the original clips and the extra set I purchased - they are identical.
Adjustable settings
I have already mentioned that the front sights can be changed to adjust their width. In a nice change of pace from the Umarex pistols, the 686 rear sight can now be adjusted for elevation as well as for windage. The adjustments are done by turning a couple of screws, so they can be done with more precision than on many other airguns.
Performance
The 686 behaves very differently from the Beretta and Walther pistols when it comes to CO2 consumption. It seems to regulate the use of CO2 much better, so it keeps almost constant power for 50 shots (5 clips), after which the power will drop abruptly. The first time I used it, I fired 6 clips and about halfway through the 6th one I felt the power dropping severely, so now I stop after 5 clips.
The better CO2 use regulation leads to shots being more powerful than with the Beretta/Walther, so they cut cleaner holes in paper targets and they are louder as well. The 686 is distinctly louder than the other CO2 airguns and in fact it might be the loudest airgun I have.
The sights, with all the adjustments available, are among the best sights I used.
This revolver is indeed very accurate. It lives to the reputation of being as accurate as a target pistol. Only its size and weight prevent me from shooting it as accurately as a target pistol, but without doubt, this is one of the most accurate airguns I have.
Special praise needs to be given to the trigger action. I expected it to be smooth and crisp in single action, but I was very surprised about how nicely the double action worked - it is both light and crisp, so this may well be the best double action available in any airgun pistol or revolver.
Special praise needs to be given to the trigger action. I expected it to be smooth and crisp in single action, but I was very surprised about how nicely the double action worked - it is both light and crisp, so this may well be the best double action available in any airgun pistol or revolver.
Conclusion
The Smith and Wesson 686 sets the standard by which CO2 airguns should be judged. Front sight nitpicking aside, it offers a superb build and operation coupled with excellent accuracy. I would only caution about its size - it could be found to be too large and heavy to use comfortably, but if that is not an issue, I cannot see why anyone would be disappointed with this revolver.
PS: Do you remember that at the beginning of the review I mentioned trying two CO2 airguns? Well, the other one is the Crosman 3576W, which I will review soon - I also plan to compare the two in a separate post.
Monday, March 4, 2013
Umarex Walther PPQ
I wanted to try another CO2 pistol after the Beretta 92FS. The Walther PPQ drew my attention for several reasons:
The PPQ is based on a similar revolver mechanism as the Beretta 92FS and it shares the same clip with that pistol. The main differences are that the PPQ:
Loading the clip is the same as on the Beretta 92FS and once that is done, the gun is ready to fire. Disengage the safety by pushing it forward and up and then you can fire by pulling the trigger.
The PPQ can fire both pellets and steel BBs and comes with separate clips for each of these. The pellet clip is a metal clip, identical to those used in the Beretta 92FS. The BB clip looks the same but is made of plastic. I have not used BBs in this gun, so my evaluation is done using only pellets.
Package and build
The PPQ is wrapped in a plastic box that you need to cut with scissors to extract the pistol, the manual, and the two clips. This is typical for pistols in this price range.
I like the build of the PPQ very much. The plastic looks even better than in the pictures I had seen online and feels very nice to touch. The trigger and the slide mechanism are made of metal - only the exterior is made of plastic. I expect this pistol to last as much as the Beretta.
I also like the shape of the pistol very much - it is very comfortable to hold. Looking at pictures of the firearm, it is hard to tell the difference. This is a very well made replica.
Unlike the Beretta, which was manufactured in Germany, this Walther pistol is made in Taiwan. It is not clear to me whether Umarex owns manufacturing facilities in Taiwan or simply contracted one of the experienced Taiwanese airgun makers, but whatever may be the case, I found this PPQ to be very well built and without the many small issues that I discovered in the Beretta 92FS.
Adjustable settings
The rear sight can be adjusted for windage. While there is no adjustment for elevation, I did not miss one.
Performance
Let me get the bad out of the way. During the first couple of CO2 cartridges, I experienced many misfires where gas would be released, but the pellet would remain stuck in the clip. I am not sure what caused this, but the situation has improved with subsequent use. Now, I might still get a pellet stuck, but it happens once per CO2 cartridge, if at all. Because of this initial issue, I have also avoided pushing the use of one CO2 powerlet beyond 60 shots. If you have the same experience, be patient - it should improve after about 100 shots.
The trigger of the PPQ, being DA, requires a longer pull and more force, but I found it to be very predictable (a good thing). As a result, I get pretty consistent groups with the PPQ. On average, I get better groups with the PPQ than with the 92FS, but with the 92FS I got better all-time groups.
Like the Beretta, the PPQ seems able to use the CO2 powerlet for more shots by using less gas with each shot. This also makes the PPQ as silent as the 92FS - they are both louder than the Crosman 1377C, but still more silent than other CO2 pistols.
I initially thought that the sight markings would be more helpful, but after a while I started ignoring them. The sights are pretty good.
As I said earlier, I really like the shape of this pistol - it feels very, very comfortable to hold.
Conclusion
There is nothing to reproach to the PPQ once you accept it as what it is - a replica pistol, not a target pistol. It is inexpensive, it looks and handles very well, and it shoots great even with the challenge of DAO. If you are looking for a reliable and inexpensive pistol replica, you should definitely have a look at the Walther PPQ.
- it is also produced by Umarex and it shares the same clip with the Beretta, so I could reuse the clips in both pistols
- Umarex owns Walther and I heard that this pellet pistol was launched at the same time as the Walther PPQ firearm
- the Walther PPQ was relatively inexpensive and I was curious about the quality available at this price point
- the PPQ is one of the smallest pellet pistol replicas that Umarex makes these days
- I liked its look
The PPQ is based on a similar revolver mechanism as the Beretta 92FS and it shares the same clip with that pistol. The main differences are that the PPQ:
- is double action only (DAO) and has no hammer
- has a safety on the right side only (the safety of the 92FS has levers on both sides)
- has a plastic exterior
- has a rather unique CO2 loading mechanism
- has sights marked with paint
- is less expensive
Loading the clip is the same as on the Beretta 92FS and once that is done, the gun is ready to fire. Disengage the safety by pushing it forward and up and then you can fire by pulling the trigger.
The PPQ can fire both pellets and steel BBs and comes with separate clips for each of these. The pellet clip is a metal clip, identical to those used in the Beretta 92FS. The BB clip looks the same but is made of plastic. I have not used BBs in this gun, so my evaluation is done using only pellets.
Package and build
The PPQ is wrapped in a plastic box that you need to cut with scissors to extract the pistol, the manual, and the two clips. This is typical for pistols in this price range.
I like the build of the PPQ very much. The plastic looks even better than in the pictures I had seen online and feels very nice to touch. The trigger and the slide mechanism are made of metal - only the exterior is made of plastic. I expect this pistol to last as much as the Beretta.
I also like the shape of the pistol very much - it is very comfortable to hold. Looking at pictures of the firearm, it is hard to tell the difference. This is a very well made replica.
Unlike the Beretta, which was manufactured in Germany, this Walther pistol is made in Taiwan. It is not clear to me whether Umarex owns manufacturing facilities in Taiwan or simply contracted one of the experienced Taiwanese airgun makers, but whatever may be the case, I found this PPQ to be very well built and without the many small issues that I discovered in the Beretta 92FS.
Adjustable settings
The rear sight can be adjusted for windage. While there is no adjustment for elevation, I did not miss one.
Performance
Let me get the bad out of the way. During the first couple of CO2 cartridges, I experienced many misfires where gas would be released, but the pellet would remain stuck in the clip. I am not sure what caused this, but the situation has improved with subsequent use. Now, I might still get a pellet stuck, but it happens once per CO2 cartridge, if at all. Because of this initial issue, I have also avoided pushing the use of one CO2 powerlet beyond 60 shots. If you have the same experience, be patient - it should improve after about 100 shots.
The trigger of the PPQ, being DA, requires a longer pull and more force, but I found it to be very predictable (a good thing). As a result, I get pretty consistent groups with the PPQ. On average, I get better groups with the PPQ than with the 92FS, but with the 92FS I got better all-time groups.
Like the Beretta, the PPQ seems able to use the CO2 powerlet for more shots by using less gas with each shot. This also makes the PPQ as silent as the 92FS - they are both louder than the Crosman 1377C, but still more silent than other CO2 pistols.
I initially thought that the sight markings would be more helpful, but after a while I started ignoring them. The sights are pretty good.
As I said earlier, I really like the shape of this pistol - it feels very, very comfortable to hold.
Conclusion
There is nothing to reproach to the PPQ once you accept it as what it is - a replica pistol, not a target pistol. It is inexpensive, it looks and handles very well, and it shoots great even with the challenge of DAO. If you are looking for a reliable and inexpensive pistol replica, you should definitely have a look at the Walther PPQ.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)