Loking at energy figures for light vs. heavy weight pellets and collecting data. The ENERGY numbers for the light weight pellets have been pretty close tot he heavy weights, with occasional exceptions...mostly low readings...from cheap pellets that just don't fit the bore well.
For a number of years now, the .177/.20/22 Benjamin/Sheridan's have all been built with the same power plant..no internal differences, just a different sized hole running though the barrrel. That certainly isn't true of the older guns, and while they fall pretty much in line with the modern gun's figures, are excluded to keep it as close to apples-to-apples as possible.
Tossing out the old guns leaves 7 rifles (3 22's, 2 20's, and 2 177's). The energy of the lighter weight .177 (7.4fs.) and the heavier weight (10.5gr.) is within 4/10ths. Call it 9.6 to 10fpe+
Get 11.5 to 12.2fpe+ from a .20cal, the weight variation runs from a light pellet of 10.3gr. and the standard 14.3gr. pellet.
The .22 pellets ran from 21.4gr. and 13.4gr., but produced only a 1/10ths differnce in energy (13.4 and 13.5fpe+).
Springers don't seem to work this way; more complicated ballistics and pressure generation. Have found some springers that make much better use of their system in .177's (the FWB 124) than they do .22's (the FWB 127) and belive that the modern rifles offered in the +1000fps range would be worth a hard look in .22...IF YOU COULD GET THEM! (disturbs me to see so few .22's as an option).
But given a fixed volume of high pressure air, multi-stoke pneumatic or pre-charged, the larger caliber justs get more out of the contained energy than the smaller calibers.
----
Yep..can get them rebuild and magnumized....belive that the larger caliber will continue to out perform the smaller calibers if the same work is done to each. Given a fixed volume of high pressure air, the larger bore just seem to make better use of it .
