Comparing the Steyr with the FWB

[Antoni Sccott]

Has anyone had the opportunity to shoot a Steyr AND an FWB back to back ? I have an FWB P34 and am considering a Steyr (LP2 or LP 10) ? Any suggestions and/or recommendations ?

Antoni Scott

[CROB]

I have a FWB P40. Before I bought it I fired about a tin of pellets through each of: the FWB P40, Steyr LP10 and Morini (electronic - latest model).

IMHO (no flame please) I liked the P40 and Steyr most. I don't like the lack of feel in Morini electronic triggers (that's just me) and dont get me started on Morini grips. The Steyr and the FWB both shot well. Both have the same level of adjustments.

I chose the FWB because I prefer the way it loads (I find it easier to drop a pellet in the grove and close a bolt than to push a pellet into the barrel). I also prefer having the cylinder with a gauge, as I've seen too many people with Steyr's loose half their air screwing a gauge into the cylinder to check. In other words, non performance reasons.

The weight rods are a gimic (I don't use them). Buy it with a KN Nill grip as factory FWB grips are awful.

I'm positive all three pistols can shoot perfect scores, pick the one you like and have confidence in your choice - they are all good.

[Guest]

FWB up to and maybe including the P30 were top notch pistols but I think that they dropped the ball with the P34 (and P40). I think that the hand/trigger position is all wrong. And they seen to sit very high in the hand but thats probably just the impression they give rather than actually.

Steyr (my first chioce) and Morini are dominant.

You get used to loading the Steyr and they have a better feel upon firing than the Morini which has a small amount of muzzle flip. Batteries or circut board can't fail in the Steyr either and you have better grip adjustment possibities.

[pilkguns]

I also prefer having the cylinder with a gauge, as I've seen too many people with Steyr's loose half their air screwing a gauge into the cylinder to check. .

Steyr has a had a dial gauge on their cylinder for the last 5 or 6 years. Actually of the last 11 years of CA production, Steyr has had a guage on their cylinders more than 9 of those years. There was only 18 months or so that they had the screw in gauge, which is the only reliable, and accurate way to to check pressure, but Steyr bowed to customer demands who wanted the conveneince not accuracy available from the dial gauge like every one else was using. If you use the screw in gauge and loose more than just a blip of air doing so, you are doing something wrong, or a seal is broke and you have other problems.

[Richard H]

I have a FWB P40. Before I bought it I fired about a tin of pellets through each of: the FWB P40, Steyr LP10 and Morini (electronic - latest model).

IMHO (no flame please) I liked the P40 and Steyr most. I don't like the lack of feel in Morini electronic triggers (that's just me) and dont get me started on Morini grips. The Steyr and the FWB both shot well. Both have the same level of adjustments.

I chose the FWB because I prefer the way it loads (I find it easier to drop a pellet in the grove and close a bolt than to push a pellet into the barrel). I also prefer having the cylinder with a gauge, as I've seen too many people with Steyr's loose half their air screwing a gauge into the cylinder to check. In other words, non performance reasons.

The weight rods are a gimic (I don't use them). Buy it with a KN Nill grip as factory FWB grips are awful.

I'm positive all three pistols can shoot perfect scores, pick the one you like and have confidence in your choice - they are all good.

If the Steyr didn't have a gauge than it is a 2000 vintage model because they all have had gauges since the end of 2000 or early 2001. (I'm basing this off the fact that my LP5 has cylinders stamped 2000 and my LP10 are stamped 2001)

As for the loading pushing a pellet in is not that difficult and I v'e seen more than a few people load two pellets into Morini's (which basically is the same loading system as the FWB) and fire two shoots at once. That is almost inpossible to do without knowing it on an LP10.

Personally I think you're better off with a Morini or Steyr (I have 2 Steyrs). The build construction is just far better than the fwb IMHO. That said buy which ever fits you better.

[Nicole Hamilton]

Steyr has had a guage on their cylinders more than 9 of those years. There was only 18 months or so that they had the screw in gauge, which is the only reliable, and accurate way to to check pressure, but Steyr bowed to customer demands who wanted the conveneince not accuracy available from the dial gauge like every one else was using.

I bought my LP10P 6 years ago, so it was one that came without gauges on the cylinders. My experience agrees with Scott's: Using the screw-in gauge, you lose maybe the amount of air used for one shot. I've since bought a cylinder that includes a gauge on the end, but I've never gotten around to using it. (I always refill my cylinders every 100 shots, that being the number in a shaker box, and before walking out the door to go to a match.)

But your comment, Scott, prompts a question: Why are screw gauges "the only reliable, and accurate way to check pressure?" It seems like the cylinder gauges could be made to the same standards; are you saying they aren't? Or is it something else?

[Richard H]

Steyr has had a guage on their cylinders more than 9 of those years. There was only 18 months or so that they had the screw in gauge, which is the only reliable, and accurate way to to check pressure, but Steyr bowed to customer demands who wanted the conveneince not accuracy available from the dial gauge like every one else was using.

I bought my LP10P 6 years ago, so it was one that came without gauges on the cylinders. My experience agrees with Scott's: Using the screw-in gauge, you lose maybe the amount of air used for one shot. I've since bought a cylinder that includes a gauge on the end, but I've never gotten around to using it. (I always refill my cylinders every 100 shots, that being the number in a shaker box, and before walking out the door to go to a match.)

But your comment, Scott, prompts a question: Why are screw gauges "the only reliable, and accurate way to check pressure?" It seems like the cylinder gauges could be made to the same standards; are you saying they aren't? Or is it something else?

To put a gauge as accurate on the cylinders would add lots of expense to each cylinder as opposed to just using one accurate screw on gauge.

That being said the Steyr cylinder gauges seem to be more accurate than the Morini guages.

[Fred Mannis]

To put a gauge as accurate on the cylinders would add lots of expense to each cylinder as opposed to just using one accurate screw on gauge.

The small, coarse scale on the cylinder gauge makes it moot whether it is as precise, or as accurate, as a larger, screw-in gauge.

That said, my Steyr cylinder gauges agree very closely with the gauge that is mounted on my Hill pump

[Nicole Hamilton]

To put a gauge as accurate on the cylinders would add lots of expense to each cylinder as opposed to just using one accurate screw on gauge.

The screw-in gauges are only $40 on the Pilkguns price list, and that's retail. So how much manufacturing cost can they possibly save by putting a poor quality guage on there instead of a good one? And how many cylinders does anyone need? I now have three, having bought a third just so I could get one with a gauge, but that was silly, I've never used it. In fact, in 6 years, I don't think I've ever used even the second cylinder; I just keep refilling the first one. Finally, when you're talking about an elite, $1000+ airgun, what manufacturer and what shooter would choose to save a couple bucks on a cheap gauge? It would be like arguing about what brand of pellets is cheapest. "In for a penny, in for a pound."

I'm more inclined to agree with Fred's remark, that it's harder to read a small gauge as precisely, but then again, no one (that I know) is trying to read these things to fractional pounds. You're just trying to decide if you should refill or not: Is it near the top or the bottom of the green?

[CraigE]

Pardini has opted to simply have the kind of analog "read-out" to which Nicole refers. That is 3 contrasting lines on the end of the cylinder. When the cap on the end of the cylinder closes to reveal only one line, it's time to refill as there are only 30 shots left. There is no glass to break, no gauge to malfunction, no guesswork about the time to refill. Seems to work quite reliably for me. I only have the need for 2 cylinders because I pump to fill the cylinders and practicing/shooting immediately after the aerobic part of AP is counter-productive. IMHO CraigE

[Richard H]

Pardini has opted to simply have the kind of analog "read-out" to which Nicole refers. That is 3 contrasting lines on the end of the cylinder. When the cap on the end of the cylinder closes to reveal only one line, it's time to refill as there are only 30 shots left. There is no glass to break, no gauge to malfunction, no guesswork about the time to refill. Seems to work quite reliably for me. I only have the need for 2 cylinders because I pump to fill the cylinders and practicing/shooting immediately after the aerobic part of AP is counter-productive. IMHO CraigE

Steyr had that as well early on and I beleive there were problems with it.

[Richard H]

To put a gauge as accurate on the cylinders would add lots of expense to each cylinder as opposed to just using one accurate screw on gauge.

The screw-in gauges are only $40 on the Pilkguns price list, and that's retail. So how much manufacturing cost can they possibly save by putting a poor quality gauge on there instead of a good one? And how many cylinders does anyone need? I now have three, having bought a third just so I could get one with a gauge, but that was silly, I've never used it. In fact, in 6 years, I don't think I've ever used even the second cylinder; I just keep refilling the first one. Finally, when you're talking about an elite, $1000+ airgun, what manufacturer and what shooter would choose to save a couple bucks on a cheap gauge? It would be like arguing about what brand of pellets is cheapest. "In for a penny, in for a pound."

I'm more inclined to agree with Fred's remark, that it's harder to read a small gauge as precisely, but then again, no one (that I know) is trying to read these things to fractional pounds. You're just trying to decide if you should refill or not: Is it near the top or the bottom of the green?

Well Nicole I don't know if you have ever been involved in manufacturing (but from your comment it doesn't seem like it). If they can sell a product with the gauge they have on it and make say $100 (profit) why would they want to put a better gauge on it and do one of two things eat the cost difference or pass it along. I doubt any really good shooter, really cares if there air pistol has a more accruate gauge on it (these are things worried about by the lesser shooters just like what are the cheapest best practice pellets). It will be hard to pass along because I really don't think it will make great ad copy and attract people to the pistol " The New Steyr with the most accurate gauge on the Market " then in small print " We thought you'd like this more than an electronic trigger". I can see the headlines "Nuestrev won Olympic gold because his pistol was properly filled using the most accurate guage on the line". I for one wouldn't want to pay $5, $10, or $20 extra for a cylinder with a better gauge. Personaly I wish they would take the guages off because it only means that there is one more area for the cylinder to fail at. As for your only $40 dollar comment that's approximatley 33% of the cost of a cylinder. As for how many cylinder someone needs who knows and who cares, you bought a third so I guess you thought you need three at some point in time, but I guess you were mistaken. Both my pistols came with two and I use both for each pistol. I suggest one would at least need two, unless they don't mind not being able to shoot because one of their cylinders sprung a leak (which is not a that uncommon).

[Richard H]

To put a gauge as accurate on the cylinders would add lots of expense to each cylinder as opposed to just using one accurate screw on gauge.

The small, coarse scale on the cylinder gauge makes it moot whether it is as precise, or as accurate, as a larger, screw-in gauge.

That said, my Steyr cylinder gauges agree very closely with the gauge that is mounted on my Hill pump

Not quite sure why you quoted me but I agree when my screw in gauge says its full so does the cylinder gauge and really thats all I care. Before a match or practice I fill my cylinder so I don't worry about running out.

[Nicole Hamilton]

Well Nicole I don't know if you have ever been involved in manufacturing (but from your comment it doesn't seem like it). If they can sell a product with the gauge they have on it and make say $100 (profit) why would they want to put a better gauge on it and do one of two things eat the cost difference or pass it along. I doubt any really good shooter, really cares if there air pistol has a more accruate gauge on it (these are things worried about by the lesser shooters just like what are the cheapest best practice pellets). It will be hard to pass along because I really don't think it will make great ad copy and attract people to the pistol.

My first job out of college was 8 years at IBM in the division that made Selectric typewriters. They were pretty fixated on getting every penny out of manufacturing cost. I got more of the same at Prime Computer and still more when I did my MBA. None of this makes me an expert, but I do understand the argument that every $1 in manufacturing cost could easily mean another $10 in consumer price. But the markup is much higher on individual parts sold separately than if they're part of an assembled product. If the screw-in gauge is $40 sold separately, it might have an allocated price of only half or even less when shipped with the gun.

So consider: Previously, they were committed to shipping a gauge, and to putting machined aluminum endcaps on the cylinders. Now they're dropping the big gauge and its fittings, simplifying final kitting (one less extra thing to place into the final product package), and replacing the endcaps with smaller gauges. They do need two gauge mechanisms, but they're smaller, they don't need any fittings and no matter what they spend on the mechanism, they still need the housing and the plastic window, etc. So I get back to the question, how much more expensive is this and how much can they save and at what possible risk to their reputation and to increased service and repair costs on their flagship product?

If there really were any cheaper gauges that would meet their standards, why wouldn't they already have been using them when they were building the screw-in type? My guess is that the most they might save by choosing a lower quality (less reliable / less accurate) gauge mechanism is less than a dollar in manufacturing cost and what they would have to accept would be a quality level they'd previously rejected when they were shipping big gauges. This doesn't sound likely to me.

And when it comes to selling spare cylinders, any small additional costs probably can be passed on to the consumer. This is, after all, a great example of a captive market. If you buy a Steyr AP, where else are you going to buy a cylinder for your gun? And how many people consider how much additional cylinders might cost when making their choice of a gun? There can't be that many people who ever buy additional cylinders and fewer still that buy them at the same time they buy the gun. So unless they charged so much that it began to look like gouging, Steyr can charge pretty much whatever they want and they'll simply get some kind of mostly inelastic response.

[Richard H]

Well Nicole I don't know if you have ever been involved in manufacturing (but from your comment it doesn't seem like it). If they can sell a product with the gauge they have on it and make say $100 (profit) why would they want to put a better gauge on it and do one of two things eat the cost difference or pass it along. I doubt any really good shooter, really cares if there air pistol has a more accruate gauge on it (these are things worried about by the lesser shooters just like what are the cheapest best practice pellets). It will be hard to pass along because I really don't think it will make great ad copy and attract people to the pistol.

My first job out of college was 8 years at IBM in the division that made Selectric typewriters. They were pretty fixated on getting every penny out of manufacturing cost. I got more of the same at Prime Computer and still more when I did my MBA. None of this makes me an expert, but I do understand the argument that every $1 in manufacturing cost could easily mean another $10 in consumer price. But the markup is much higher on individual parts sold separately than if they're part of an assembled product. If the screw-in gauge is $40 sold separately, it might have an allocated price of only half or even less when shipped with the gun.

So consider: Previously, they were committed to shipping a gauge, and to putting machined aluminum endcaps on the cylinders. Now they're dropping the big gauge and its fittings, simplifying final kitting (one less extra thing to place into the final product package), and replacing the endcaps with smaller gauges. They do need two gauge mechanisms, but they're smaller, they don't need any fittings and no matter what they spend on the mechanism, they still need the housing and the plastic window, etc. So I get back to the question, how much more expensive is this and how much can they save and at what possible risk to their reputation and to increased service and repair costs on their flagship product?

If there really were any cheaper gauges that would meet their standards, why wouldn't they already have been using them when they were building the screw-in type? My guess is that the most they might save by choosing a lower quality (less reliable / less accurate) gauge mechanism is less than a dollar in manufacturing cost and what they would have to accept would be a quality level they'd previously rejected when they were shipping big gauges. This doesn't sound likely to me.

And when it comes to selling spare cylinders, any small additional costs probably can be passed on to the consumer. This is, after all, a great example of a captive market. If you buy a Steyr AP, where else are you going to buy a cylinder for your gun? And how many people consider how much additional cylinders might cost when making their choice of a gun? There can't be that many people who ever buy additional cylinders and fewer still that buy them at the same time they buy the gun. So unless they charged so much that it began to look like gouging, Steyr can charge pretty much whatever they want and they'll simply get some kind of mostly inelastic response.

Except if your spare parts become excessively expensive people may choose to buy another product (with similar characteristics) with lower cost consumable type parts (it actually becomes a selling point for the competition). Cylinders really are consumable because eventually you need to replace them. Personally I'm amazed now it looks like the costs have already shot up about 75% in the last coule of years.

I see what you're saying and that was the IBM model they built wonderful bullet proof machines, industry was willing to pay for it, but eventually the consumer market wouldn't support their philosophy, and it basically ran them into the ground.

The other thing to remember is that the market for top end target air pistols world wide is small relatively speaking, so manufacturing and engineering changes have to be passed along on a relatively small level of units (aka the USAF's $100 ashtray and $500 coffee makers).

The original cylinders without a guage didn't have an endcap where the gauge is today (the knurled section is actually one piece with the cylinder). So adding a gauge in the first place was a big thing as it required more assembly time (which is allways a high value added activity, especially if you do it where they actually pay decent wages). It also required more parts, more parts means more suppliers, more inventory.

I spent 15 years as a quality and reliability engineer and quality manager in the automotive industry for an extremely large automotive part supplier, doing both machining and assembly. I'll tell you any day that machining a cylinder with one open end with a valve assembly and a solid end on the other is far cheaper and more reliable than machining a cylinder with 2 open ends and fitting a gauge assembly on one end and the valve on the other end. So you're not just looking at the cost of the gauge which would be vastly more expensive, but the machining (which includes tooling. consumables, overhead, and labour) and assembly (which also include, labour, overhead, inventory and may include tooling as well).

[VR]

I have shot the Steyr LP10, the FWB P40, and the Morini 162 EI. All are great pistols and I ultimately chose to buy myself a Steyr. The FWB feels larger in the hand than the other two and the bare pistol (without weights) was noticeably heavier than the others (I prefer a lighter pistol). As I recall, it the sight picture seemed to sit "higher up" in the hand. The FWB and the Steyr have a compensator system. Both worked very well to eliminate muzzle flip. I agree with "guest" above that the Morini gives a tiny muzzle flip. While barely perceptible, I prefer shooting a compensated pistol. The triggers of all three guns each feel a little different, but to my mind all are superb in their own way. The Steyr grip is highly adjustable. I prefer to have positive control over loading a pellet into the barrel, and the Steyr lets me do so. Given these factors, I chose the Steyr, but it really came down to personal factors and my own shooting technique. I would have happily taken any one of them. Good luck in choosing.