Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns ELMER KEITH AND BIG GAME

Wonder how many head of big game Mr. Keith killed in his career?
How do you think his knowledge of ballistics compares to todays top writers?

You have to remember the place and era he was in back then if you didn't raise it or hunt or fish your family went hungry. So I think like a lot of our older generations his experience and taken game numbers is beyond what anyone today will ever get even remotely close to. My opnion on his knowledge compared to today's writers there's differences obviously with the technology and bullet and powder changes that have occurred since his era so that's really the modern writers only plus. Elmer Keith,warren Page,Jack O'connor,Charles
Askins, Townsend Whelen,Les Bowman,Al Goerg,Lee jurras,Pete Brown,John Wootters,Bob Milek,Roy Weatherby, Corey Ford,Gary Sitton,Skeeter Skelton,and a few others in my opnion were the real deal they really went out and hunted and shot (saw first hand and knew what worked and what didn't)and were good story tellers that made you want to read there stuff. Jim Carmichael,John Taffin,Jon Sundra,Ross Seyfried,Lane Simpson, Mike venturinio,Dave Scovill,Mark Hampton and John Barsness are really the only modern writers that I would put in this category. Sorry no offense to some of the modern writers but I prefer real hunting and shooting with a good tale told.

LET ME CLARIFY MY FIRST POST. I AM TALKING ABOUT HIS TAKING BIG GAME WITH A HANDGUN. NOT A RIFLE. THIS IS THE HANDGUN SECTION. I SHOULD NOT HAVE ASSUMED PEOPLE WOULD UNDERSTAND THAT WITHOUT STATING THAT

Thank you for your understanding.

I know you ment handguns I think he said once he used a rifle when he was serious about hunting and i think if you were to count rifle and shotgun game # i think you'd probably go cross eyed at the numbers.But I was meaning with his revolvers just read Hell I was there he carried a pistol since he was a teen all the time. Stands to reason targets of opportunity he probably took more than we'll ever know people back then didn't brag it was just daily life in his book he tells about shooting a big old mt. goat with a 45 saa like it was just old hat (how many modern hunters have done that).Have to remember he guided too that was where he took the wounded mule deer at long range with a 29. Once said he got so much flack on that one he didn't mention the wounded elk at 500 yds. So like I've been saying I think more than most will ever get close too for numbers. Like I said before he knew what worked from experience not computers and books or test labs he went and killed game and saw first hand. But just my opinion.

Keith wasn't really a handgun hunter. He inspired a lot of handgun hunting but for him, he hunted with rifles. Handguns were a weapon of opportunity. Not to say that he didn't have the opportunity and kill quite a few critters.

I can't find the exact quote but Seyfried once said that in terms of "gunology", most people were still in short britches while Keith was at the doctorate level. I think he was being modest because Seyfried hands down has the most depth of knowledge and experience of any writer I know of.

By 1950 Keith said he had shot 19 head of big game with a handgun not counting animals he finished off that were already hit. I imagine he added to those numbers.

The old time writers knew how to write interesting stories. Most of today's are boring. All they care about are the technical details. I like the ones who write a 3 page article on a new gun and then at the end say "the weather was bad and I had a deadline and I was low on that caliber ammo so I only put one box through it on the 10 yard line".

That one guy that used to write in GA all the time, he hunted with pistols a lot. I can’t recall his name now,? Bob?....

Bob Milek.

Ah thanks.

Life is a blur these days. We are working 0600-2200 give or take. What’s sleep?

GD, toward the end of his life, Keith had slain about 60 head of game with pistols.. After the advent of his .44 mag.. He did hunt deer with his handguns.. At one point he said he had killed a buck with his 4 " 44 mag. for the last seven years.. If you really want information it is all there in his books.. This does not count the animals he shot that others crippled.. He always said he had killed 50 elk for his own use.. His elk kills were about three times that number.. In his time you hunted until the party had filled all the tags.. He killed lots of elk for other folks.. A great gunman.. I think the greatest America has ever known... He was a leader, a wildcatter, JOC made his living writing about the .257 Roberts, the .270, and the .30-06.. Most of his hunts were guided.. Elmer was a guide for many years.. But this is more information than you ask for.. Sorry, buy some books and read..

You're welcome Viking.

Keith obviously filled a few freezers with his trusty six shooters. But his more impressive feats remain the killing of air borne birds of prey with those same revolvers.

As mentioned Elmer wasn't really a handgun hunter, when he hunted he had to put food on the table just like everyone else & for that he mostly used a rifle. Most of his handgun work was experimenting & he was far ahead of his time. Of course he made some mistakes but he was leading the way for everyone else but he did a lot of amazing things & was a truly great shot. I always remember Ross Seyfried saying the greatest SHOOTER he ever knew was Elmer Keith. That was rifle, handgun & shotgun & this came from a handgun world champion.
Elmer had amazing eyesight, in the several times I visited him I never once saw him wearing glasses, that always impressed me for someone his age & that's what it takes to shoot iron sights. He did take quite a few animals with a six gun but putting food on the table was always the #1 priority for people back in those days when most people lived on ranches.
Another very fine shooter with a six gun that hasn't been mentioned was Elmer Keith's neighbor, Bob Hagel. He doesn't get mentioned much with handguns but he killed a lot of game, mostly mountain lions & bobcats with six guns for many years although his real love was the long gun.

Dick

I'd say kind of depends on what ballistics means in context.

On the one hand I doubt he internalized numbers for ballistic coefficient and drop at standard atmospheric pressures and temperatures on the other hand I suspect he could eye ball pretty good.

Times have changed and Mr. Keith's observations about flash tube ignition and what worked with powders available to him were no doubt honest but irrelevant today. For handgun internal ballistics balloon head cases are long gone. Powders that gave the .338-.378 KT about as large a powder capacity as could be used have long been supplemented so that the .338-.378 without reduction is useful have not invalidated Mr. Keith's opinions but again obsoleted them.

I am quite sure he was completely honest and frank in all his writing. Almost all Mr. Keith's opinions were based on observation. Then again in at least one case I do believe Mr. Keith expressed an elitist opinion not adequately based on personal experience. Arguably relying on observation by others Mr. Keith trusted, maybe because it agreed with his own prejudices in forming his beliefs.

Further I am equally sure that Mr. Keith saw differences in external ballistics and lethal effect in his own experience and reported those differences as real when the differences are not real with modern statistical testing.

Then again I don't think Mr. Keith much cared for any hypothetical advertiser's concerns in forming his opinions and reaching his conclusions.

hallelujah