"Only accurate rifles are interesting"

[bearhunter]

The thing is, Whelen was a consummate rifleman. A rifle that could just keep its shots on a pie plate at a hundred yards would have bored the #### out of him, as it would me and probably you. If I'm being honest I would sell a rifle that was only that accurate so fast that it would leave a dust trail.

Some people are just perfectly satisfied with the pie plate rifle. They probably even kill a deer or two with it every year. But they're just consumers looking to put meat in the freezer, which is a great thing. But I'm not just trying to put meat in the freezer. I want to test a rifle, to see what it is capable of. What powder does it prefer? What bullet? Brand and type of primer? Brand of case? Neck size of FL? That's the real fun part for me, and that's the difference between a rifleman and a hunter. One person will buy whatever brand of ammo they have at the local Co-Op or Canadian Tire and be happy so long as it goes bang and kills a deer. A rifleman won't. Neither one is more right or wrong than the other...it just depends what game you're playing at.

So, from Whelen's perspective, I agree 100%...only accurate rifles are interesting.

I pretty much agree with everything you've written in your reply, but you left out something very important.

Whelen was first shooting black powder type firearms and got used to the incredible accuracy that can be achieved with consistent powder, percussion caps, and lead quality, along with proper patch size and load density. Then he was very involved with the transition period from black powder to smokeless powder and had some considerable influence on which components and firearms the US military would use.

I believe he was first more interested in hunting accuracy, as a very young man, then later in putting together components that would be consistently accurate within the specifications of the US military.

I've often felt that his oft quoted comment "Only accurate rifles are interesting," was misconstrued by many people reading the quote over the years.

There was a time when Mr Whelan felt the 30-30 Winchester was the best hunting cartridge going. He used a Model 94 Winchester on several big game hunts all over the US and in even in British Columbia and Alberta.

He made that comment when an accurate rifle was one that would consistantly shoot into 3 inches or slightly less at 100 yds.

Of course, he would have loved more accuracy, but I did see a letter he had written to Elmer Kieth about the accuracy of jacketed bullets and commercial loadings, when comparing them to military loadings and those to black powder charges with cast and even jacketed bullets.

He wrote a brief sentence about BP loads for 45-70 chambered rifles often exceeding accuracy requirements, while modern smokeless loads always struggled, other than the very odd lot.

 

[ivobb]

A very accurate rifle in the hands of someone that can not shoot worth a damn is useless

 

[Meroh]

I think the attitude of the Whelan expression is actively damaging. I have seen many discussions on this and other forums where people are making decisions based solely on perceptions of accuracy. I have read guys who have just received their PAL, have never owned a gun, coming here and discussing their first acquisition. I have read things like, "I don't know what I'm going to do with it, I don't know where I'm going to shoot it, but I want 0.5 MOA". They then go out and buy $8k worth of stuff they have no idea how to use, in a calibre that is entirely impractical for them. I see threads like that and think, there goes a guy who will never get into shooting.

More often than not. I have seen on more than one ocassion, a gung-ho newbie trying to sight in his rifle at 50 or 100 yards, going through two boxes, getting nowhere, blaming the rifle and the guy that sold it to him, then me finding the scope is lose, the mounts or rail are lose, or the 30 or 40 MOA rail that he thinks he needs to shoot 100 yards is installed backwards.

Last year, i took a guy with a lose scope on a brand new Tika 243 up to 50 yards after tightening it. I set it up on bags, sighted through the barrel, adjusted the scope, fired one shot. I then dialed the scope to align an inch below point of impact, told him to take a shot at the bulls eye, it was about an inch low. He asked why so low? I told him that it may even still shoot a bit high at 100 (I explained line of sight, trajectory, and MOA). He did not shoot it any more that day, as he had used up his time allocation from the wife, but he did get out, and is now pleased with his rifle. BTW, I liked it too.

Why don't new people get a nice .22 and put a few thousand rounds through it, and learn how to shoot.

Most rifles are more accurate than the shooters ever will be; which is the way it should be.

 

[homslice]

3" at 50 yards? Man, I would sell that rifle so fast you'd get whiplash watching me drive to the post office to get rid of it!

All of my rimfire do better then 3" if I can't blast a pop can at 50 yards and hit with every shot I do sell it. That's the reason I no longer own any chiappa guns (I've had 4) up to 8" groups.
I've shot multiple Ruger 10/22 that would not give me a 3" 5 shot groups. (Which is why I don't own one)
That's my minimum with Winchester bulk box 5 shot groups (read the cheapest ammo I can find.)

 

[elKrusto]

I am definitely in the accuracy group. I zero my rifles at 200 meters, and if I can't get under 2 inches I am not happy. (30-30 excluded of course).
Realistically, under hunting conditions these groups could double or even triple once adrenaline, heart beat or improvised shooting position is necessary. I couldn't imagine starting out with a rifle that only groups 3 inches at 100 meters.
Things are different out WEST. Admittedly, most shots are under 200 meters, but sometimes the only shot we get is a long one. Same thing goes for all the remington 740-760 fans I see on here. In my 40 plus years of hunting, I have only known ONE guy that used one.

 

[savagefan]

^^^ Agreed 100%

 

[Licensed to kill]

I am in the “ only vintage guns are interesting” camp.

 

[boxhitch]

I've often felt that his oft quoted comment "Only accurate rifles are interesting," was misconstrued by many people reading the quote over the years.

There was a time when Mr Whelan felt the 30-30 Winchester was the best hunting cartridge going. He used a Model 94 Winchester on several big game hunts all over the US and in even in British Columbia and Alberta.

He made that comment when an accurate rifle was one that would consistantly shoot into 3 inches or slightly less at 100 yds.

almost sounds like someone 150 yag that was glad to see rifling in a barrel instead of the older smooth-bore muskets lol
not, i know, but close... )

 

[Rman]

I am in the “ only vintage guns are interesting” camp.

Only interesting rilfes/guns are interesting?

R.

 

[Rman]

almost sounds like someone 150 yag that was glad to see rifling in a barrel instead of the older smooth-bore muskets lol
not, i know, but close... )

It's actually very close to that.
That quote has been tossed around like an old rag for all sorts of reasons with zero context about its original meaning and absolutely no way to quantify it.
Now it seems it's mostly used in an attempt to elevate one's status over others, much like many other long ago dead writers quotes.

R.

 

[JIMMY 808]

It's actually very close to that.
That quote has been tossed around like an old rag for all sorts of reasons with zero context about its original meaning and absolutely no way to quantify it.
Now it seems it's mostly used in an attempt to elevate one's status over others, much like many other long ago dead writers quotes.

R.

Venerable.

 

[Rman]

Venerable.

The most overused and nauseating word in any gun writing, ever.

R.

 

[DGY]

More often than not. I have seen on more than one ocassion, a gung-ho newbie trying to sight in his rifle at 50 or 100 yards, going through two boxes, getting nowhere, blaming the rifle and the guy that sold it to him, then me finding the scope is lose, the mounts or rail are lose, or the 30 or 40 MOA rail that he thinks he needs to shoot 100 yards is installed backwards.

Last year, i took a guy with a lose scope on a brand new Tika 243 up to 50 yards after tightening it. I set it up on bags, sighted through the barrel, adjusted the scope, fired one shot. I then dialed the scope to align an inch below point of impact, told him to take a shot at the bulls eye, it was about an inch low. He asked why so low? I told him that it may even still shoot a bit high at 100 (I explained line of sight, trajectory, and MOA). He did not shoot it any more that day, as he had used up his time allocation from the wife, but he did get out, and is now pleased with his rifle. BTW, I liked it too.

Why don't new people get a nice .22 and put a few thousand rounds through it, and learn how to shoot.

Most rifles are more accurate than the shooters ever will be; which is the way it should be.

The reason people are not buying a 22 and shooting thousands of rounds is simple, people are not in for the process of learning something new, just like in trades, people want to be good and playing with the big boys right alway. If every body had to go through a few bricks of 22’s before they could go up to a big caliber/cartridge/chambering they would understand rifles better, shooting better and how to adjust sights and optics better, if people would be more interested they would do research on the matter, studying different aspect of the sport. Same goes for the hunting aspect, lots of new hunters up here every years and not many of them start by hunting small games, to then move up to medium game to finally go after large games… no they go straight after moose and bison because that is what’s cool. Or they decide they are sheep hunters cause they are fit! For FvCk sake!

 

[savagefan]

If you live in gopher country, .22s are the ####. Of course for longer distance where permitted it's hard to beat .223s etc, but from 0 to 75yds and all distances in between rimfire is king. The little buggers give you great practice at various distances which keeps you sharp. I almost prefer it to big game hunting as you get to shoot way more.

 

[Suther]

"Only accurate rifles are interesting" is a famous quote by Col Townsend Whelen, published in The American Rifleman in 1957. However, when it comes to hunting rifles, I fundamentally disagree. There are more important considerations. Some hunting rifles feel almost alive, are perfectly balanced in the hand, and are easy to shoot quickly, while others definitely are not. Some "accurate" rifles can be real unbalanced logs to lug around in the bush. I will take a happy, lively and "accurate enough" (1.5 - 2 in. groups?) rifle any day over a log that shoots tiny groups at the bench. "Only lively rifles are interesting."

I suspect your "accurate enough" would be plenty to qualify as simply "accurate" in 1957.

 

[Meroh]

If you live in gopher country, .22s are the ####. Of course for longer distance where permitted it's hard to beat .223s etc, but from 0 to 75yds and all distances in between rimfire is king. The little buggers give you great practice at various distances which keeps you sharp. I almost prefer it to big game hunting as you get to shoot way more.

Train with a .22, just like the militarys of the world do.

 

[ScottB]

"Only accurate rifles are interesting" is a famous quote by Col Townsend Whelen,

All guns are interesting....I have a little 25acp with a 25mm barrel that is as inaccurate as he!!, but it's interesting. Same with a Colt #1 that I have. Interesting gun. Accurate? Not sure...actually haven't fired it.

 

[270AB]

I'd opine that any cf rifle that can't shoot 3/4" and under at 100 yds isn't interesting at all.

 

[EJG]

I have no time for rifles that are not accurate. My biggest interest in setting up light weight rifles that are accurate as well as easy to shoot. We are looking at physics of a rifle upon firing and all that is needed to help accuracy. One thing shooting small groups at 100m but it is more important to be able to hit a small target at say 500yds year round. Our advantage is that we don't have your extreme cold weather which helps. I just don't want a rifle that you need to square up behind or do fancy things to get it to shoot, often not an option when hunting.
edi

 

[savagefan]

Venerable.

Now there's a word that commands respect.