Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Handloader magazine does it again

Yes, you are correct I did state that. What was not made clear was that my intent was not to say that the "lie" was meant to relate to the first part of my post. From your initial response, my interpretation was that you thought I was stating the writer in the Savage story lied when in fact he was just wrong at least in my read of what was posted. In the second part of the post I was just referring to shall we say in a somewhat tongue in cheek manner that most of the rag writers whore themselves out to a certain degree because of advertiser pressures. I also should know better than to post during Friday happy hour as well.

I just recently discovered Wolfe's publications and have subscribed to all three for 2 years now. I have canceled Successful Hunter though--just didn't do anything for me.

I have seen more than a few editing issues within articles, but I let them pass. EVERY magazine or book I have ever read has some spelling errors in them--not a big deal. I don't like one sentence paragraphs though.

The Bullet book anthology had too many errors. The editor should have done a much better job of seeing and correcting misspellings in the text, chapter headings, and missing page numbers. I hope JB's upcoming rifle book is better edited than the Bullet Book appears to have been.

I'm not going to "throw the baby out with the bath water" though. Wolfe's mags are still the best reading on the market from my perspective. Are there any errors in my post?

Apparently Savage cares enough -- they're offering some models with a selection of different twist rates available for the buyer to choose what they want. http://www.savagearms.com/2007_pressrelease.htm



Dan

Varmint hunter doesn't come out enough (4 times a year?).

I like handloader above everything I've read.


On the break in - I just wonder if the cleaning between shots makes sure that your not laying down powder residue between the layers of copper your imbedding in the freshly cut steel? Just a thought - I don't think the cleaning really impacts removing copper, maybe a bit of residue but not truely embedded stuff.

Spot

I was glad to see an article by Charles Petty in the Handloader.

Great rag, very low fluff content. Editing is a lot easier to improve upon than content...

The Speer 405, huh? I wonder how many of them actually make that weight? That would require a 1.25% plus or minus variance which would be an error on Speer's part. Oh my! (It is fun to nit-pick, isn't it?)

Dude, water is wet, the sky is blue, women tell lies, who gives a [bleep].......

I don't make the weights.Usually don't weigh them either but they are advertised and marked on the box as Speer 405. Go into a shop and ask for 400 gr and you won't find a box marked that. Ever wonder where they get those 67 gr .223 , and other bullet weights.

Does Wolfe use a national bank or a local one.The reason I ask is if we send a cheque from Canada will their bank process it.Here in Canada, we have big effiecent banks with international reach,it's no big deal to write cheques in US funds,they just charge us the buy/sell rate.I never got a subscrition to Wooden Boat because their bank wasn't set up for more than a mom and pop store.

You mean like this:



Seriously though, I'm just teasing. Who cares if it says 400 or 405 grains. I have greater issues with detail errors in books. Magazines I regard as "reader beware" kinds of things, even when they aren't the "Fun with Dick and Jane" versions of gun rags like Guns and Ammo, etc. I would never take details important to me in buying something by basing it on a single magazine article - or even a book.

I do like Handloader and Rifle magazines more than the rest. (You know a magazine isn't half bad when even the ads are interesting, informative, and useful!)

'Predator Xtreme' magazine is also worth a look. It's an interesting mix of accurate rifles, handloading and hunting.

What, nobody noticed the cover lead-in for JB's article on the ".6.5x55 Swedish Mauser"? Now, that, my friends, is a small bore. A bit overbore in my opinion, though.

Who cares about such little errors? It's still a good value for a magazine. After all, without such screw-ups how would those that need it get their regular superiority fix???

scott

I am glad to see that Americans are a tolerant bunch.

Somehow a lot of customers don't seem to fall into that category. Sure wish we could get them to spend some time with ya'll.

Really would reduce most people's stress, anxiety, and workload while keeping the checks coming.

I actually enjoyed that piece, but if memory serves it was penned by Brian Pierce.

You're right it wasn't JB, but John Havilland. I should've typed "JH".

I caught that too, just a few minutes ago. BP did the .22-250 piece in the same issue. Was wondering if anyone would catch my goof.

I have been a reader of the Wolfe publications since 1972,subscribing for most of that time. They have been through different editors and formats through the years and quality has varied. But, over the years they have, by far, been the most interesting and informative of the various shooting publications. Some specialized magazines may cover specific areas of the shooting sports better, but for general information about ammunition, handloading and especially hunting rifles; Wolfe is the best. The people in Prescott are friendly and helpful; I'll bet that a quick phone call would solve the subscription problem mentioned above.

My Handloader #247 arrived, and I got the chance to check the cover.

I think the cover has wild decimal points -- the one that moved up to appear in the NEW LOADS! list as the .6.5X55 must have drifted up from down below where it is missing from the ALL-AMERICAN 25s!

I emailed Wolfe for a job in the Department of Consistency, but they were not interested.

I edit and publish a newsletter for a non-profit group, and it makes my teeth hurt when mistakes make it into the distribution version. I imagine there is a lot of dental pain over in Prescott.

jim

Don't read the 375 Ruger article new American Rifleman! There are a couple of number errors too.

A. "The 23" long barrel tapers from 2.93" at the receiver to 1.69" at the muzzle."
B. "There is a white .92" diameter bead sight..."

I think they're a bit off cuz that is one big barrel and sight!

RH

Jim & Hammer:
Both points well taken........

HOWEVER, the older I get, the more I realize that

Excellence does not demand perfection.


As always, your mileage may very.

Bob