Elmer vs Roy
- Thread starter Win/64
- Start date
I have an old Gun Digest and in it there is an article "High Velocity vs. Heavy Bullets".
The authors are Roy Weatherby and Elmer Keith.
Keith writes about the killing power of the 45-70, 405 etc. and Weatherby about killing cape buffalo with the 257 weatherby.
Both make convincing arguments. No doubt part of it was Weatherby promoting his rifles and cartridges.
The older and "more wiser" I got, the more I learnt to lean towards the slower and heavier bullets when I want to bring'm down now.
Back 20 years ago, we had cartridges that were too fast for the bullets available, causing lots of blow-ups on the hide. As Barnes, etc. developed bullets to handle the speeds of the day, the designers just kept pushing the velocities higher. Now you have items like the TSX, and there are still cartridges that are too fast for the bullets. A bullet has a "functional velocity" that it's designed for, and on either side of that velocity range it's not going to work perfectly, so the ideal reloader/hunter with a ".30 Super....." would carry maybe three loads in his pocket while hunting, one load for up to 100 yards, another for 100 to 250, and the last for the long ranges when the bullet would be losing serious velocity.
So, was Jack or Elmer right?
Jack hunted open areas in the southwest, typically Arizona, where you had to make 300 yard shots. one had lots of open area for 2nd and 3rd shots.
Elmer preferred the heavy timber, with an average of 75 yards, and if the game wasn't anchored, it could be lost.
I hate chasing wounded game, so prefer to get in close and "sledgehammer" it.
For Dangerous game, the rule has always been " 400 grains at 2100 fps will stop anything", and it still applies. Look how many have rediscovered the 45-70 and the wallop it delivers to game and the bloodtrail it leaves behind.
.....Tells you something!
~Arctic~
Back 20 years ago, we had cartridges that were too fast for the bullets available, causing lots of blow-ups on the hide. As Barnes, etc. developed bullets to handle the speeds of the day, the designers just kept pushing the velocities higher. Now you have items like the TSX, and there are still cartridges that are too fast for the bullets. A bullet has a "functional velocity" that it's designed for, and on either side of that velocity range it's not going to work perfectly, so the ideal reloader/hunter with a ".30 Super....." would carry maybe three loads in his pocket while hunting, one load for up to 100 yards, another for 100 to 250, and the last for the long ranges when the bullet would be losing serious velocity.
So, was Jack or Elmer right?
Jack hunted open areas in the southwest, typically Arizona, where you had to make 300 yard shots. one had lots of open area for 2nd and 3rd shots.
Elmer preferred the heavy timber, with an average of 75 yards, and if the game wasn't anchored, it could be lost.
I hate chasing wounded game, so prefer to get in close and "sledgehammer" it.
For Dangerous game, the rule has always been " 400 grains at 2100 fps will stop anything", and it still applies. Look how many have rediscovered the 45-70 and the wallop it delivers to game and the bloodtrail it leaves behind.
.....Tells you something!
~Arctic~
death-junky
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Moose Jaw SK
X2 for sure!prosper said:go for the best of both - large heavy bullets at hyper velocitied
Johnn Peterson
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Chemainus B.C.
Right you are, and I have a 4" Smith that loves that, for a heavy 'diet' and especially when I still had some of the Lyman bullets of his design, #429421.H4831 said:
Also 5grs of Bullseye or 8.5grs of Unique for something on the lighter side. When I got my .500 S&W, one of the powders of choice for the heavier loads is H110. It's also supposed to do well in the heavy .44 Mag loads, but I haven't brought myself to that transition yet, and probably never will.
A quick check of the Lyman 48th Edition Reloading Handbook & the Lyman 3rd Edition Pistol & Revolver Handbook I see they list 2400 as the powder used in their accuracy loads for cast bullets in the 245gr, 255gr & 300gr weight range.
I guess 'The Man' knew his stuff so here's no sence in me 'reinventing the wheel'.
- Location
- South Cariboo, BC
444shooter said:
Words of wisdom.
I have Elmer Keith's Gun Notes Vols I & II and it's definitely Elmer and Jack that had the differences. The truth is that Elmer Keith despised Jack O'Connor for constantly writing about the use of small calibers for big game. Elmer only trusted large caliber, high sectional density bullets for big game.
From reading some of the stuff in those books it was pretty one sided really. Jack just wanted to write his stuff and sell articles and it was Elmer Keith that constantly attacked and criticized O'Connor, which I suppose annoyed but maybe also amused Jack O'Connor.
Keith wrote many letters to O'Connor that were quite viscious and he also would then relate these thoughts to others, in letters to them. He was extremely critical of O'Connor, I think partly because he resented O'Connor as an intellectual type. This is how I interpret the letters I have read.
For my own hunting I prefer to use large heavy bullets at moderate velocity. I do not like hyper velocity or small calibers. I would feel seriously under-gunned hunting moose with a .270Win.
From reading some of the stuff in those books it was pretty one sided really. Jack just wanted to write his stuff and sell articles and it was Elmer Keith that constantly attacked and criticized O'Connor, which I suppose annoyed but maybe also amused Jack O'Connor.
Keith wrote many letters to O'Connor that were quite viscious and he also would then relate these thoughts to others, in letters to them. He was extremely critical of O'Connor, I think partly because he resented O'Connor as an intellectual type. This is how I interpret the letters I have read.
For my own hunting I prefer to use large heavy bullets at moderate velocity. I do not like hyper velocity or small calibers. I would feel seriously under-gunned hunting moose with a .270Win.
Last edited:
Do what I did I have a .270 and a .35 Whelen.... That way I can have the best of both worlds and keep it all covered! Most of my buddies are speed and smaller calibers for sure though. The 270WSM is really popular among my peers at the moment. For elk,moose,bear I for sure prefer a 250 grain bullet out of my 35 Whelen but if all I had was my .270 I wouldn't be worried about.
Guess I have to sit on the fence on this one.
Guess I have to sit on the fence on this one.
I like big bullets at moderate to fast speeds. I read about following up/tracking already hit game. Yes this can and does happen but when you use enough gun there's very little tracking involved. Before the little premium bullet arguement starts, a big premium bullet works better period.
beretta boy
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Orillia, Ontario
Many African Game Departments have very wisely considered Mr. Keith's
side in their enactment of prohibiting anything less than the .375 H&H
for Cape Buffalo. Otherwise BIGREDD would be over there trying to slay-em
with his new .204 !
side in their enactment of prohibiting anything less than the .375 H&H
for Cape Buffalo. Otherwise BIGREDD would be over there trying to slay-em
with his new .204 !
Bullet construction is even more important than bullet diameter,weight,or velocity.A bullet that expands properly and retains most of it's weight in a given application,is of far more use than a heavier bullet that fragments or does not expand enough.
- Location
- Ft. Mac. Alberta
My father knew both gentleman, and told me the argument was actually spawned by
the gun totin' public wanting to read stuff.
The biggest denominator is the fact that if thee critter is hit properly, it will die.
I have seen animals shot with .375's that ran away because they were gut shot.
Interesting thing that has been discussed here before about Mr. O'Connor.
He actually liked the '06 better than the 270, but couldn't shake his reputation of being "Mr. 270" because he had promoted it heavily in the beginning.
Open country can still be hunted with rifles shooting relatively heavy bullets at lower velocities.
Guys hunting with the older (30/30, 45/70, etc) calibers prove it every year ,not to mention our archers and the traditional BP crowd.
Cat
the gun totin' public wanting to read stuff.
The biggest denominator is the fact that if thee critter is hit properly, it will die.
I have seen animals shot with .375's that ran away because they were gut shot.
Interesting thing that has been discussed here before about Mr. O'Connor.
He actually liked the '06 better than the 270, but couldn't shake his reputation of being "Mr. 270" because he had promoted it heavily in the beginning.
Open country can still be hunted with rifles shooting relatively heavy bullets at lower velocities.
Guys hunting with the older (30/30, 45/70, etc) calibers prove it every year ,not to mention our archers and the traditional BP crowd.
Cat
Last edited:
Just as close cover can be hunted with rifles shooting lighter bullets at higher velocity.Place a properly constructed bullet in the right place,and regardless of the bullet weight or velocity,you will be taking meat home.
beretta boy
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Orillia, Ontario
Keith & O'Connor were basically "gun writers", Weatherby a "gun salesman".
Why would you necessarily want to believe anything either one of them said,
whether in person or in print. ....
Why would you necessarily want to believe anything either one of them said,
whether in person or in print. ....
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
I have an interesting book called "Last Man in Paradise" that deals with this subject in an honest light. The author bought Weatherby chambered rifles for his African plains rifle and for hunting in Alaska (a .300 and a .340), and later a 7mm Weatherby for his son. He went on to explain how he discovered that the bullets loaded in the Weatherby ammunition at the time were poor, and wished he had Noslers - and sent several letters to Roy Weatherby in that regard. It appears that he did not handload.
Had he been armed instead with a .30/06 and a .333 OKH, the problems he encountered due to bullet failure may of never occured. His heavy rifle was a .470 double, so there was no issue with it's performance.
Weatherby apparently gave little thought to bullet construction, believing that given enough velocity, the structure of the bullet was unimportant. I believe we know better now.
As for myself, I have seen bullets fail on game, but in all fairness it was because I chose the wrong bullet for the job, then pushed it too fast. While I prefer premium bullets like the Rhino, the Barnes TSX, and others, my .375 won't blow up Hornady Interlocks at the velocity I drive them. Personally, I tend to believe the African pros who maintain that 2400 fps is the optimal velocity for an expanding bullet.
Had he been armed instead with a .30/06 and a .333 OKH, the problems he encountered due to bullet failure may of never occured. His heavy rifle was a .470 double, so there was no issue with it's performance.
Weatherby apparently gave little thought to bullet construction, believing that given enough velocity, the structure of the bullet was unimportant. I believe we know better now.
As for myself, I have seen bullets fail on game, but in all fairness it was because I chose the wrong bullet for the job, then pushed it too fast. While I prefer premium bullets like the Rhino, the Barnes TSX, and others, my .375 won't blow up Hornady Interlocks at the velocity I drive them. Personally, I tend to believe the African pros who maintain that 2400 fps is the optimal velocity for an expanding bullet.
- Location
- Vancouver Island BC
How many elephants have been killed with a 22-250............that's what I thought.
O'Connor praised many different cartridges, including the 7mm mauser, the .270, the .30-06, the .30-30, and the .358 Winchester. From everything I've read he reserved his most unconditional praise for the .375 H&H, NOT the .270, which he considered merely part of a 'class' of cartridges that were very useful (to include the .280 Rem and .284 Win).
He talked a great deal about the value of a relatively heavy bullet moving at moderate speed. He preferred a big round-nose bullet for shooting deer at short to medium range, especially in the woods, though he also kept the legend alive that these bullets 'buck brush' better, which yeah isn't true.
O'Connor was absolutely not a 'velocity nut'; he spends many pages making fun of the Weatherby boys, and the nuttier wildcat nuts, and the rest of the cult of speed. He spends equal time making fun of the grognards who think the 'killing power' of a rifle is equal to the size of its bore--which was true in the black powder days, but no longer true with smokeless powder and high-intensity cartridges.
The 'argument' between himself and Elmer was one sided. O'Connor hunted and shot and wrote about many different cartridges--including 'slow' ones--and Keith #####ed about everything he wrote because he didn't follow the big bullet orthodoxy. Elmer was an entertaining writer and a true 'character', but nobody ever accused him of being reasonable, logical, or very bright.
He talked a great deal about the value of a relatively heavy bullet moving at moderate speed. He preferred a big round-nose bullet for shooting deer at short to medium range, especially in the woods, though he also kept the legend alive that these bullets 'buck brush' better, which yeah isn't true.
O'Connor was absolutely not a 'velocity nut'; he spends many pages making fun of the Weatherby boys, and the nuttier wildcat nuts, and the rest of the cult of speed. He spends equal time making fun of the grognards who think the 'killing power' of a rifle is equal to the size of its bore--which was true in the black powder days, but no longer true with smokeless powder and high-intensity cartridges.
The 'argument' between himself and Elmer was one sided. O'Connor hunted and shot and wrote about many different cartridges--including 'slow' ones--and Keith #####ed about everything he wrote because he didn't follow the big bullet orthodoxy. Elmer was an entertaining writer and a true 'character', but nobody ever accused him of being reasonable, logical, or very bright.
