Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Writer and hunter: Jack Lott?

I remember reading that he had a really hot wife. I tend to remember the important stuff.

This story always puzzled me. In Jack's account stated in American Rifleman, January 1972, there are several comments I find interesting.

He praised the Model 70 as fully the equal of the Nitro expresses of the day then later states that he shot a buffalo twice and wounded it with the first shot, a soft, going into the ribs and back in to the paunch and a second round, a solid, breaking the shoulder and then being deflected, though he does not state how he knew this as the rest of the story covers Wally Johnson pumping .375's into the buffalo then using Jacks .458 to fire the last two rounds, for a total of 11 shots being fired, with the final round from the .458 opening the brainbox.

I never understood why the .458 got the blame for his shot placement as a .458 LOTT would have been worse with the increased velocity and the bullets of that vintage.

If a writer of 2011 wrote that, I think some reader mail would be generated.

JW

According to Jacque, the last round that he fired was the problem. It barely left the barrel of the rifle, dropping to the ground about twenty feet in front of him. And that's when the Buffalo hit Jacque, and damn near killed him.

I have no intention of casting aspersions on the old writers who gave us so much inspiration and learning, enough to start down our own roads of logic, but the knowledge the average handloader / consumer has today, could deflate the greatness we have created in our recollective minds eye, towards writers of previous generations.

Fame is not a licence to create fact for example on P33 of that same AR article, Jack says he broke the right shoulder of that buff and it circled around and took him from the rear, left. There is no mention of any bullets hitting the ground between him and the buff.

Because several here have cited this story published in other journals, a comparison between them would likely determine variance in the report. Again, My attention is drawn to the detail in the report, not the character of the man.

Let me quote, "A friend's .416 when loaded substantially above the factory velocity of 2371fps lacked penetration".

Now we all know that a .416 Weatherby and modern handloads in a .416 Rigby are incredibly powerful cartridges capable of complete penetration on any animal from most angles.

As much as I loved to read Elmer Keith, he, and Jack Lott, I believe, had their own professional agenda's and that is fine, but the negative "facts" they provided 40 years and more, ago, would prevent a writing career today simply because you are a better educated readerships with considerable experience, particularly with handloading, for these accounts to record any level of authority in today's market.

There are facts of long ago that will never be emulated today such as Bell with 175gn Solids on elephant and Corbett with 175gn Kynock softs in their respective .275 Rigby's illustrating that some information from the past is both interesting and provides equivalent comparisons for today.

If a 1920's tiger(s) can be contemplated with a .275, then elk or mule deer taken in 2011 offer viability for the .275 with the best bullets in the history of rifle ballistics being so common that contemporary emphasis seems to lean towards the brass hull, barrel length, twist and the right powder because again, of what we have today.

I am currently reading a hunting book first published in 1953. It is wonderful reading because I know the context in which it was written. There will be learning for me and dissagreement from me, but I paid for the book.

JW

If Jack gotten a Congo Cross awarded to him by Moise Tshombe, chances are he walked out of the Belgian Congo with a couple of duffel bags full of money. Lot of the mercenaries of that time made out very very well. Of course the looted the place blind. The First Congo War was in 1960 or 1960. Tshombe was over thrown by Col.Joseph-D�sir� Mobutu. It was a very interesting bit of history on what when on in the Congo from 1959 to 1969.

Well, I'm not going to argue with you over what Jacque said happened on that day, as opposed to what appeared in print, after the fact. I do know that as part of the settlement of the litigation between Winchester & Mr. Lott, Jacque was specifically enjoined from "disparaging their products in print", something that I was well aware of when editing Jacque's copy at G&A. I presume this would include not mentioning malfunctioning ammunition as a cause of Jacque's injury, sustained by the attack of a wounded Cape Buffalo, in the article that ran in "The American Rifleman". Wanting to keep a major advertiser "on board" may very well have been another reason that the reference was edited out of the copy.

And as we old timers say...

--30--

Did you ever hear the story of how Elgin Gates (and others) used to come back to the 'States with the barrels of worn out guns filled with gold? In 1976, when the price of gold went from $35 an ounce to (at one point) over $800 an ounce, several gentlemen probably made out quite nicely.

I have heard numerous rumors about the original .458 loadings such as the powder was so compressed that the bullets were glued in as well as crimped, early bullets were unreliable too. It took dropping down in velocity and doing away with the heavily compressed loads and modern bullets for the.458 to regain it's deserved reputation. So the Lott definitely made sense in that era.

Lott was the real deal. I like the accounts where he considered the .378 and .416 Weatherbys as just the ticket for gun shy Baboons.

Don't misunderstand my line on this. I am not attempting to discredit any of the old writers. I am however, drawing the readers attention to the common trend of that era and prior, to denigrate a "cartridge" when a "bullet" was placed "incorrectly" or failed to perform. The poor old .30/06 copped that nonsence for more than a half of its existence.

This is one of the reasons I like Big Stick's between the eyes comments from time to time, such as "Boolits matter far more than headstamps pard..". He is beyond criticsm for this line of thought, though his presentation I would agree, could do with a little polishing on occasion, but then, it wouldn't be "Big Stick".

What a shame a bullet company didn't think of that one?

John

Gents:
I'd like to point out that 22 years before Lott's round, James Watts blew out the .375 H&H for his .450 Watts Magnum. That was 1949. Over two decades later Lott used Watts' round and called it his .458 Lott. Being a well known PH and writer he got the credit but 22 years prior James Watts was the true originator. My book on Jim has sold out of its 1200 copies but I will be pleased to forward a photocopy of the chapter on cartridge development to one of you gents to post it here.
Cal

Hi Gentelman

any news about old Jack?

Please:
Many have postet here, that they have some old articles bout hiom him.
Can you post them here?

Thank you.
TH

Something that is VERY DIFFICULT for even well educated people to do, is to put historical events into a historical context. Most people, even some historians, immediately juxtapose historical information to modern day standards and knowledge bases and that is NEVER going to be an accurate comparison and the historical event is ALWAYS going to appear less significant than it really was.

In those days, people who hunted dangerous African game had a very compelling reason for shooting large calibers and heavy bullets and that reason was because the bullets of the day were unreliable and often failed to penetrate or kill. So hunters of the era tried to make up for the bullet short comings by shooting large chunks of lead hoping mass would prevail. If Keith and Lott had access to todays wonderfully consistent and high performing bullets, one may well question if they would have been advocates for the large guns and bullets they maintained should be used.

Given the state of the bullet technology when Keith and Lott were writing, it is unfair and inaccurate to portray the firearms and bullets they had available to them AT THE TIME as being personal agendas because it seems to me that their agenda was to simply stay alive. Buffalo's are known to have no sense of humor and a VERY BAD ATTITUDE towards anyone or anything attempting to kill them and no one should expect any less from a dangerous game animal. That is highly likely the very reason it is called dangerous game.

What we ought to expect a REASONABLE and PRUDENT person to do is to, as Ruarak said, use enough gun and by extension, use enough cartridge and bullet weight to insure that you don't commit suicide while hunting in Africa. The only way they had to accomplish that IN THEIR DAY given what was available to them THEN, was large bores and big, heavy, bullets.

Today, an African hunter may well hunt safely with a smaller bore than would have been advisable back then, or even legal in the old days, and smaller, albeit a more consistent, high performance bullet. Too many people have killed too much dangerous game with the modern bullets and medium bore rifles for that to not be true. Many African game departments however, have not kept up with modern developments in bullet technology and set minimum calibers, and cartridges for hunting. They may also have the bad publicity of having a hunter killed in their minds when they require those larger calibers and that is something they ought to consider given how cavalier some people approach African hunting today. It AIN'T Disneyland. The native beast over there will kill you if you cause them any irritation and it doesn't take much to irritate a buffalo. They are born irritated and their attitude gets worse as they get older.

Keith and Lott knew that and simply went prepared. When Lott thought he had been injured and almost killed by what he considered to be sub-standard performance from Winchester, he said so. He was on firm ground to say so and because of his experience, he was on much firmer ground than the guys at Winchester who sat in their office and wrote advertising copy for Winchester products. But big business then is the same as big business now and it didn't pay to cross them. Lott did and Winchester tried to ruin him for it. Remember those were the same guys who brought you the "New post 64 Winchester model 70" that was so much better than the old, tried and true model 70. They were the same guys who made such huge blunders that Olin Matheson sold the Winchester Brand name and quit making them. If I had to take sides in that dust up, I would stand with Keith and Lott. They had more credibility than the brass at Winchester and history has proved that to be true. What they didn't have was advertising dollars to spend in all the outdoor magazines, so the advantage went to Winchester. At least, until the company was sold because it was not making any money because American sportsmen judged their products to be sub standard which is what Jack Lott also said about them.

I think history has vindicated Lott and Keith and the sorry story of the total ruination of one of Americas oldest and best known firearm brands stands as a monument to the arrogance and stupidity of the Winchester brass of that era.

That's my 2 cents worth anyway.

AMEN BROTHER

Does anyone know the particulars of Lott's run in with the buffalo? powdr

powdr-
Jack Lott wrote about the encounter several times. Near at hand is his tale in the Petersen softcover publication Big Bore Rifles, from 1983, ISBN 0822723352, with most chapters written by Lott. Chapter 11, "The 458 Winchester Magnum", includes a description of the event.

The publication is hard to find. Used copies for sale on the internet are $150 and up.
.

(image linked from Amazon.com)
.
A slightly longer and more detailed account is in the 1992 Wolfe publication Hunting Horizons, volume 1 number 1, pp. 50-57. Lott's story is in a chapter titled "458 Winchester Magnum".

Lott published others, but I haven't time to look further. These will give you a start. I'll be interested in what others might reply.
--Bob

I might have that one in the picture.

I still have his Big Bore Rifles book/magazine and drag it out every now and then to read over again.

If I remember correctly, Jack found out he had cancer and walked out to the woods and put an end to it if you know what I mean.

That article in Hunting Horizons has been repeated adnausium by a few high profile writers and has gained credencee through constant repetition but it is a complete turnaround from his original story he wrote shortly after the occurrence !

If you look at Jacks writing when he both Wrote, and Edited, the 1983 Guns & Ammo Big Bore Rifles issue he wrote how the 458 was not at fault but it was all due to his poor shooting and he admits to having gut shot the buffalo. " the fault was mine, not Wally's nor the .458 or the .375 Holland's. If my first shot had been delivered as intended and I hadn't waited so long, and probably, if I had used a solid, the remaining 10 shots would have been un-needed ones."

He went on to say that the 458 in the hands of Wally Johnson had saved his life and that " This and other experiences have made the Winchester 458 rifle and cartridge an inseparable part of my life, not only for it having saved my life in Wally Johnson's hands, but as my main heavy rifle in Mozambique, Rodesia's Zambezi Valley, the plains of Mattes, the Gazuma Forest, Nuanetsi's low veld and Nyasaland's Rift Valley"

Later on in life, after he had developed the 458 that bears his name, he claimed that all he wanted was a 500 gr bullet at 2150fp as that was all that was needed.

When the piece in Hunting Horizons came out I talked with editor Dave Scovill about it and he said he had specifically asked Jack to write about the 458. When I showed him what Jack had originally written shortly after the incident he was flabbergasted at the 180% turnabout.

Jack, it seemed, like to portray himself as a conundrum.

If he were alive today he might make another fine addition to our Pool of Presidential contestants.

Phil... that sheds an interesting light on the entire controversy, doesn't it? Thanks for sharing that with us. It certainly makes the entire controversy about .458 Win vs .458 Lott take on a new perspective!