I owe the "Gamo Yeller Forumers" an apology!

I owe the "Gamo Yeller Forumers" an apology!

Joined: July 24th, 2010, 1:44 am

January 1st, 2011, 11:14 pm #1

The opinions I've given here are my opinons based solely on my negative Gamo experiences, not some form of snobbery, but I have to be completely honest and admit that I've had so little experience with Gamo/Gamo clones that I shouldn't be implying that they are ALL poor shooters! One thing I noticed after I bought my Gamo440 was that the metal work, fit and finish (especially the rifle bore) was MUCH better than the Chinese clone. LOL.....pushing a new pellet through the Quest barrel felt like running the pellet over a rasp, but pushing a new pellet through the Gamo bore indicated a nicely finished bore.

Anyway, I do offer my apologies for lumping all Gamos into the same basket!
Reply
Share

Joined: December 15th, 2009, 2:25 pm

January 2nd, 2011, 2:08 am #2

i take back the stuff i said about you under my breath last night.....jk
Reply
Share

Joined: July 24th, 2010, 1:44 am

January 2nd, 2011, 2:21 am #3

LOL.....Peace my friend! After all, they're only "toys". nt
Reply
Share

Joined: October 11th, 2006, 11:23 pm

January 2nd, 2011, 2:33 am #4

The opinions I've given here are my opinons based solely on my negative Gamo experiences, not some form of snobbery, but I have to be completely honest and admit that I've had so little experience with Gamo/Gamo clones that I shouldn't be implying that they are ALL poor shooters! One thing I noticed after I bought my Gamo440 was that the metal work, fit and finish (especially the rifle bore) was MUCH better than the Chinese clone. LOL.....pushing a new pellet through the Quest barrel felt like running the pellet over a rasp, but pushing a new pellet through the Gamo bore indicated a nicely finished bore.

Anyway, I do offer my apologies for lumping all Gamos into the same basket!
it makes for great conversation lol!
Reply
Share

Joined: October 19th, 2006, 1:37 pm

January 2nd, 2011, 7:17 am #5

The opinions I've given here are my opinons based solely on my negative Gamo experiences, not some form of snobbery, but I have to be completely honest and admit that I've had so little experience with Gamo/Gamo clones that I shouldn't be implying that they are ALL poor shooters! One thing I noticed after I bought my Gamo440 was that the metal work, fit and finish (especially the rifle bore) was MUCH better than the Chinese clone. LOL.....pushing a new pellet through the Quest barrel felt like running the pellet over a rasp, but pushing a new pellet through the Gamo bore indicated a nicely finished bore.

Anyway, I do offer my apologies for lumping all Gamos into the same basket!
not often,these days,come across folks who'll display your kind of honest self-reflection. You can come out to Gamble Bay and shoot with me ANYTIME! Your above post blew me away,and in so doing instilled in me a great deal of respect for you...not just as an airgunner,but as a true mensch worthy of anyone's admiration. I hope, when the time comes, I can be as morally brave as you. your friend, Bryan

But they PROMISED me there'd be no math!
Reply
Share

Joined: October 10th, 2003, 5:24 am

January 4th, 2011, 3:25 am #6

The opinions I've given here are my opinons based solely on my negative Gamo experiences, not some form of snobbery, but I have to be completely honest and admit that I've had so little experience with Gamo/Gamo clones that I shouldn't be implying that they are ALL poor shooters! One thing I noticed after I bought my Gamo440 was that the metal work, fit and finish (especially the rifle bore) was MUCH better than the Chinese clone. LOL.....pushing a new pellet through the Quest barrel felt like running the pellet over a rasp, but pushing a new pellet through the Gamo bore indicated a nicely finished bore.

Anyway, I do offer my apologies for lumping all Gamos into the same basket!
Take a line like Gamo's basic springers (Shadow, 220/440/880). No, they aren't finsihed up to the standards of, say, a Diana 34, but they really are not that bad, either. Now take one and clone it, the idea being let's make it cheaper to undercut the original. Corners must be cut and quality suffers (if quality was ever a high priority in the first place). So the original becomes tainted by any shortcomings in the clones. FWIW, I've found the basic Gamo's, especially the older guns, to be rather good values. Some came with decent barrels and triggers and the later, steel triggered guns, can accept a very nice aftermarket sporting trigger to get even more out of them. A lot of folks seem to dismiss Gamo out of hand without any personal experience. Too bad because, in a gun like the CFX, for instance, they really don't know what they might be missing.
Reply
Share

Joined: July 24th, 2010, 1:44 am

January 4th, 2011, 3:41 pm #7

was that while my Gamo440 had a pretty good fit and finish, it wasn't accurate enough (compared to my R9s) to actually be used for more than can rolling. I first bought a Crosman Quest (Gamo220 clone) and as you've mentioned the finish was pretty good but the fit was rather poor giving 1 1/2" ctc 30 yard accuracy. After a LOT of rework I was able to improve the 30 yard accuracy to 1" ctc which was equal to the Gamo440 with a trigger insert, even though the Quest had a crappy corncob bore. I always assumed that most Gamo/Clones were this bad, however I had to rethink my position when a father/son team showed up at a couple DIFTA field target matches last year with their Gamo break barrels (don't know which ones) and did really well (especially their offhand shots!). I'm beginning to think that whatever springer is best for the individual shooter and his wallet is best, not necessarely what I think is best (but I do have my bias !)

CFX? Well....I shot one of those at a ft match (it was borrowed) when they first came out and it shot OK with an aftermarket trigger and tune, however I didn't like the swing out loading tap that I called the "fumble loader" because it seemed that the pellet would fall into the tap backward more often than not. I do have to say though that the CFX owner shot some pretty good scores the CFX, however after a few months I noticed that the CFX was replaced with a TX200.



These are my personal OBSERVATIONS, not re-broadcasting negative reviews that I've read.
Reply
Share

Joined: October 19th, 2006, 1:37 pm

January 4th, 2011, 7:56 pm #8

bought it,and like you,thought it would never be good for anything but "can rolling" (permission to steal your cool phrase?), so that's what I did for at least 1500 shots or so. It was a real surprise and a thrill when I idly gave it a try at a paper target and was rewarded with great groupings...then, and thereafter. Perhaps three tins worth of effort broke the gun and trigger in,but it's equally possible that I just adjusted to it's firing characteristics. Either way,my custom now is to reserve judgment on any springer until I've shot it for quite a bit. Your friend, Bryan

But they PROMISED me there'd be no math!
Last edited by 71moggy on January 4th, 2011, 7:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reply
Share

Joined: October 10th, 2003, 5:24 am

January 5th, 2011, 11:25 pm #9

The opinions I've given here are my opinons based solely on my negative Gamo experiences, not some form of snobbery, but I have to be completely honest and admit that I've had so little experience with Gamo/Gamo clones that I shouldn't be implying that they are ALL poor shooters! One thing I noticed after I bought my Gamo440 was that the metal work, fit and finish (especially the rifle bore) was MUCH better than the Chinese clone. LOL.....pushing a new pellet through the Quest barrel felt like running the pellet over a rasp, but pushing a new pellet through the Gamo bore indicated a nicely finished bore.

Anyway, I do offer my apologies for lumping all Gamos into the same basket!
Ed, you've been around a long time, so this isn't directed at you, just newcomers. Sometimes a gun that's just not grouping well will do a complete turnaround with a different brand of pellet and how she's held. Just takes a lot of bench time (although springers don't like to be, literally, benchrested) to find the combination which shoots the best. Also, a lot of fellows do custom tunes on these Gamo's to wring more accuracy out of them. New seal, top hats, etc. Just don't expect target gun accuracy from them.

Regarding the CFX's rolling tap, yes, I've had much easier guns to load. Haven't had one in .177 because it's just a bit too frustrating working with a pellet that small. I prefer the older style tap loaders, as well. Flip - drop - flip.
Reply
Share

Joined: July 24th, 2010, 1:44 am

January 7th, 2011, 3:48 pm #10

due to the very long power robbing transfer port and the inability to actually FEEL the pellet fit in the tap (so you can blow off the "illfitting pellets), the CFX style tap does keep your loading fingers out of the "bear trap". While I've never had a "mis fire" with my HW77 I always firmly hold the cocking lever when loading a pellet in the tap so I don't get a finger chopped off if it does "let go".

Reply
Share