How things have changed.

[H4831]

I was a very ardent shooter in the era I refer to as the glory days of shooting, from a couple of years after WW2, and fading out in the 1960s. There were at least six, glossy US monthly magazines with montrous size circulations, all with a shooting and/or hunting editor. I can't remember them all, but the prominent writers were shooters and experimenters such as Townsend Whelen, Elmer Keith, Pete Kuhloff, Warren Page, Jack O'Connor, Bob Hutton, etal.
There were books written by others, such as Brigadier J. A. Barlow, C.B.E., who wrote, "The Elements of Rifle Shooting." There were many others, but you get the point.
I regularily read all those writers works and still have many magazine articles and books from them, and here is my point.
In all those volumes I don't remember ever reading one word of "What my/your rifle likes." If your rifle didn't shoot well, it was most likely because the rifle wasn't properly bedded. The gist of all those writers on reloading was to load your rifle up to a high, but safe load. I don't think I ever read one word about reducing the load to make it shoot more accurate. Of course, there were all kinds of light loads given, for special shooting, or a special class of shooting, but normal hunting and shooting loads meant full power loads.
Warren Page may have been the most famous of all bench rest shooters and experimenters. Here is a page from his book, "The Accurate Rifle," written in 1973, talking about his favourite subject!
I posted the second part to show what kind of groups they made at 1000 yards.
I am not going to get into a hassle about loading, or shooting, or which is best, or anything else.
I have merely related some history.

 

[ben hunchak]

H-4831..that's a good read, but makes me think also of some of Ackley's loads for promoting his wildcats. The loads are downright scary(they were even then), and the velocities were off the map, don't know what kinda chronographs they were using but I want one of them!!!...Ben

 

[Ganderite]

Times change. The 1000 yard magnum groups he says were winners are now ordinary groups for a 308 Palma rifle shooting 155 gr bullets.

 

[stubblejumper]

In all those volumes I don't remember ever reading one word of "What my/your rifle likes."

Anyone that truly believes that all rifles will shoot all loads equally well,has a lot to learn about rifles and loads.A rifle may shoot several loads accurately,but in my experiences,all rifles have loads that they like better than other loads.

 

[OEM]

Interesting read, thanks for sharing.

 

[rnbra-shooter]

I posted the second part to show what kind of groups they made at 1000 yards.

Thanks. Interesting to read that 1000 yards ... regularly permits 1/2-minute-of-angle spreads, a "normal" winning group out there going some 11 inches, the record at just over 7 inches.

Seems funny how they were regularly getting 1/2-MOA spreads, and yet a normal winning group was 11 inches (1.1 MOA), and the record was 7 inches (0.7 MOA).

Perhaps by "spreads" he meant the height (elevation) of the group?

As Ganderite says, this is what a topnotch good Palma rifle does today (.308 Win, handloads, 30" barrel, 155 match bullet at about 3000fps)

It is interesting to see what changes and what doesn't. For a few years I shot 1000 yard blackpowder cartridge rifle, and reliably getting hits at 1000 yards (6' high by 10' wide target board) could often be a real challenge, though some days it seemed like your rifle shot about as well as modern military ball ammo might, which is to say that you could pretty much count on hitting the 4' diameter aiming black and about half or even a few more than half of your shots would go into the 30" diameter (at that time) 5-ring.

I have a book by W.W. Greener that was published in the the 1870s or 1880s. He includes a few plot sheets of target rifle shooting done at Wimbledon (predecessor to Bisley). This would have been done with blackpowder target rifles, I can't recall if they were cartridge guns or muzzleloaders. The amazing thing is that even by modern standards, the groups achieved were pretty decent and respectable.

 

[H4831]

Thanks. Interesting to read that 1000 yards ... regularly permits 1/2-minute-of-angle spreads, a "normal" winning group out there going some 11 inches, the record at just over 7 inches.

Seems funny how they were regularly getting 1/2-MOA spreads, and yet a normal winning group was 11 inches (1.1 MOA), and the record was 7 inches (0.7 MOA).

Perhaps by "spreads" he meant the height (elevation) of the group?

As Ganderite says, this is what a topnotch good Palma rifle does today (.308 Win, handloads, 30" barrel, 155 match bullet at about 3000fps)

It is interesting to see what changes and what doesn't. For a few years I shot 1000 yard blackpowder cartridge rifle, and reliably getting hits at 1000 yards (6' high by 10' wide target board) could often be a real challenge, though some days it seemed like your rifle shot about as well as modern military ball ammo might, which is to say that you could pretty much count on hitting the 4' diameter aiming black and about half or even a few more than half of your shots would go into the 30" diameter (at that time) 5-ring.

I have a book by W.W. Greener that was published in the the 1870s or 1880s. He includes a few plot sheets of target rifle shooting done at Wimbledon (predecessor to Bisley). This would have been done with blackpowder target rifles, I can't recall if they were cartridge guns or muzzleloaders. The amazing thing is that even by modern standards, the groups achieved were pretty decent and respectable.

I used to read a book on shooting from the late 1800s. I remember reading about 1000 yard shooting with 45-70 rifles. Probably at the time the 45-70 Trapdoor Springfield was the US official military gun.
They said they had to reduce the ten ring from 36 to 30 inches, because they were getting too many possibles! In other words, all ten shots in the 36 inch ten ring.