"...Elmer Keith and..." Elmer Keith argued with everybody. I have the article in an old Gun Digest Treasury. The original article is from 1951. It's kind of humourous reading Keith espousing big, slow bullets when he invented the concept of big, fast bullets in handguns a few years later.
Elmer vs Roy
- Thread starter Win/64
- Start date
Heavy bullets traveling at "Slower" velocities kill very well, plus they lose speed at a slower rate than a faster velocity bullet.
A lighter bullet traveling at high speeds also kill very well, plus are easier to make hits at farther distance, due to flatter tradgectories. Either way, you put a bullet where it needs to be, the job will get done. In truth, most shots are well within range of even the slowest, most arched bullet paths. If your out of range, get closer. That's why it's called hunting.
I think for the average hunter, a flatter shooting cartridge reduces error potential and will make for a more succesful experiance, with less chance of a wounded animal.
A lighter bullet traveling at high speeds also kill very well, plus are easier to make hits at farther distance, due to flatter tradgectories. Either way, you put a bullet where it needs to be, the job will get done. In truth, most shots are well within range of even the slowest, most arched bullet paths. If your out of range, get closer. That's why it's called hunting.
I think for the average hunter, a flatter shooting cartridge reduces error potential and will make for a more succesful experiance, with less chance of a wounded animal.
john-brennan
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Vancouver Island B.C.
bullets
Yes larger cal. will benifit from the better bullets also but what that would mean is you can use lighter bullets for large cal. eg. 225gr .35cal TSX and have the penetration of a 275gr .35 cal hornaday spire point, with flatter trajectory. I own a .257 weatherby and so do you, a 100gr barnes TSX would penetrate as well as a 120gr speer hot core if not better, with better trajectory and shocking power. That was the point I was trying to make.
Win/64 said:
Yes larger cal. will benifit from the better bullets also but what that would mean is you can use lighter bullets for large cal. eg. 225gr .35cal TSX and have the penetration of a 275gr .35 cal hornaday spire point, with flatter trajectory. I own a .257 weatherby and so do you, a 100gr barnes TSX would penetrate as well as a 120gr speer hot core if not better, with better trajectory and shocking power. That was the point I was trying to make.
Jack O'Connor
Extremely well put. About the 375 H&H he also stated he didn't want it in any rifle under 10 or 10½ pounds, kind of heavy for the mountains. I have one of his articles on the 7mm, where he states he has shot, or seen shot, many hundreds of game animals with the 7 x 57, as well as a great many shot with the 7mm Rem. Mag. He says he can honestly state that he could notice no difference in which cartridge they were shot with! He said a good hit always killed the animal cleanly while a poor hit with either cartridge resulted in a wounded animal. Now, don't anyone chastise me for saying this, I am stating what Jack O'Connor wrote.
Where Jack O'Connor was really outstanding was the fact that he would always personally answer any question sent to him about shooting or hunting.
In his latter days, when he was with Petersons magazine, I was given the chore of selling my deceased brothers Model 21 Win shotgun. All jack's followers will know a 21 Win was his baby! I had no idea what to ask for my brothers 21, so I wrote to Jack O'Connor, described it and asked his opinion of what it may be worth. I got a letter from him, written in his own handwriting! If anyone wants to know what his writing looked like, let me know and I will send a picture of the envelope.
Bishopus said:
Extremely well put. About the 375 H&H he also stated he didn't want it in any rifle under 10 or 10½ pounds, kind of heavy for the mountains. I have one of his articles on the 7mm, where he states he has shot, or seen shot, many hundreds of game animals with the 7 x 57, as well as a great many shot with the 7mm Rem. Mag. He says he can honestly state that he could notice no difference in which cartridge they were shot with! He said a good hit always killed the animal cleanly while a poor hit with either cartridge resulted in a wounded animal. Now, don't anyone chastise me for saying this, I am stating what Jack O'Connor wrote.
Where Jack O'Connor was really outstanding was the fact that he would always personally answer any question sent to him about shooting or hunting.
In his latter days, when he was with Petersons magazine, I was given the chore of selling my deceased brothers Model 21 Win shotgun. All jack's followers will know a 21 Win was his baby! I had no idea what to ask for my brothers 21, so I wrote to Jack O'Connor, described it and asked his opinion of what it may be worth. I got a letter from him, written in his own handwriting! If anyone wants to know what his writing looked like, let me know and I will send a picture of the envelope.
- Location
- AB foothills
H4831 said:
So would Elmer.
Answer to Johnn Peterson
I have chronographed various powders in a Ruger Blackhawk 44, with 7½ inch barrel. I always think accuracy is pretty much a case of what load will give the least deviation between high and low in a string of five. I am looking at my notes with 2400 and bullets from the Lyman 429421 mold, weighing 252 grains.
22 grains (2400) averaged 1415, with extreme spread of 68. 20 grains gave 1312 and es of 41. Even 17.5 grains gave 1120 and es of 45.
H110 is supposed to be the same as Win 296. With H110, 24.5 grains av. 1323 with a spread of 103. 24.5 of Winchester 296 gave one 5 shot string of 1358 and a spread of 96. The same load, 24.5 of 296 with the Lyman 429244, a gascheck, gave 1385 and a spread of 80.
Best, as far as difference between high and low is concerned, was 8.2 grains of Winchester 231, which gave a velocity of 1018 and a difference of only 17 between high and low!
I have chronographed various powders in a Ruger Blackhawk 44, with 7½ inch barrel. I always think accuracy is pretty much a case of what load will give the least deviation between high and low in a string of five. I am looking at my notes with 2400 and bullets from the Lyman 429421 mold, weighing 252 grains.
22 grains (2400) averaged 1415, with extreme spread of 68. 20 grains gave 1312 and es of 41. Even 17.5 grains gave 1120 and es of 45.
H110 is supposed to be the same as Win 296. With H110, 24.5 grains av. 1323 with a spread of 103. 24.5 of Winchester 296 gave one 5 shot string of 1358 and a spread of 96. The same load, 24.5 of 296 with the Lyman 429244, a gascheck, gave 1385 and a spread of 80.
Best, as far as difference between high and low is concerned, was 8.2 grains of Winchester 231, which gave a velocity of 1018 and a difference of only 17 between high and low!
there is something about heavy for caliber and moderate speeds that is just plain dependable.
that being said, if you choose a well constructed bullet and launch it at high velocity, it is very dependable too. Also makes hitting stuff past a couple hundred yards easier too.
either way, shot placement is the key
that being said, if you choose a well constructed bullet and launch it at high velocity, it is very dependable too. Also makes hitting stuff past a couple hundred yards easier too.
either way, shot placement is the key
Johnn Peterson
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Chemainus B.C.
H4831
I was drawing attention to what powders Lyman, in a couple of their recent manuals, had labeled or high lighted as being the accuracy powder & load in their tests with a few of the heavier cast bullets. As their testing procedures are usually fairly extensive and thorough, I have little reason to doubt their results. The accuracy results I've obtained, with that load of powder and bullet are some of the best I've got with that calibre, and that particular handgun.
With the accuracy results I've had, I haven't chrono'd or had reason to questioned the degree of 'possible' deviation in loads and/or velocity. With other loads and powders, that a friend chrono'd for me and, where there was a 'significant' variation in accuracy a check indicated that was also a variation in velocity. Weighing each powder charge usually resulted in minimizing those variations and, for me, the powder measure, how I had it set and how it threw charges of the powder in question 'seemed' to be the root cause for the variations or deviations I experienced.
A chrono is on my list of things to get for my equipment upgrades.
I was drawing attention to what powders Lyman, in a couple of their recent manuals, had labeled or high lighted as being the accuracy powder & load in their tests with a few of the heavier cast bullets. As their testing procedures are usually fairly extensive and thorough, I have little reason to doubt their results. The accuracy results I've obtained, with that load of powder and bullet are some of the best I've got with that calibre, and that particular handgun.
With the accuracy results I've had, I haven't chrono'd or had reason to questioned the degree of 'possible' deviation in loads and/or velocity. With other loads and powders, that a friend chrono'd for me and, where there was a 'significant' variation in accuracy a check indicated that was also a variation in velocity. Weighing each powder charge usually resulted in minimizing those variations and, for me, the powder measure, how I had it set and how it threw charges of the powder in question 'seemed' to be the root cause for the variations or deviations I experienced.
A chrono is on my list of things to get for my equipment upgrades.
However a lot have been killed, leaglly, with rounds like the 6.5x54 MS, 7x57 or 275 Rigby, 303 British, and others which would hve been considered 'High Velocity' by Elmer Keith.303carbine said:How many elephants have been killed with a 22-250............that's what I thought.
- Location
- The Conservative part of Ontario
Elmer
"Woolly Mammoth" Why are we talking about my mother inlaw?Calum said:Bingo!
Besides which I don't think the Deer Cares, and Elephants haven't been part of the indigenous Canadian wildlife scene since the ice age... in the form of Woolly Mammoths.
Gibbs505 said:
And don't forget the lil' .256 Mannlicher. I just read an excellent article in the May/June 2003 issue of successful Hunter, wher they talked about the great days gone by. The article is called Little Bitty Rifles-Great Big Game. Those would have been the days to be a hunter.
prosper said:go for the best of both - large heavy bullets at hyper velocitied
Agreed.
Bishopus said:
Yeah, someday I want to hunt T-Rex. And to do the job I'm going to use a 20x102mm double rifle!
- Dave.
