|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,360
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,360 |
djs; Sports Afield arms editor was Pete Brown.
Deus Juvat
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,360
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,360 |
R.E. Jack shooting off his toe incident from the book "Jack O'Connor" by Robert Anderson. ..."in the summer of 1938. Eleanor was pregnant with the O'Connors' third child. She and Jack had driven into the desert outside of Tuscon for an afternoon of jack rabbit hunting. O'Connor did much of his running jack rabbit shooting with deer-rifle calibers. On this day, in the process of coaling up his favorite 270, the rifle discharged accidentally, striking him in the left foot and neatly blowing off the second largest toe. Jack went down like a poleaxed steer, screaming in pain. By the time he could get his boot off, blood was everywhere. Eleanor, although early in her pregnancy, was not feeling all that well, and the panic, blood, and withering Arizona heat didn't help matters. When Jack pulled his bloody foot out of the boot, the toe remained in there. At this sight, O'Connor, not surprisingly, passed out. As some of us have found out to our chagrin, even a small man, when unconscious, weighs in the neiborhood of five thousand pounds. It must have been a herculean task for the trim Eleanor, in her somewhat delicate condition, to load the dead weight, bloody Jack into the car for the harried drive back into Tuscon".
Deus Juvat
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,225
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,225 |
I had the honor of meeting Elmer just once. No, we were not close friends, but in that one meeting I got the impression that here was a "real" man that shot straight and pulled no punches. Didn't have the chance, but I believe I would have truely enjoyed spending an evening talking, shooting and sharing a campfire with the man.
Never met O'Connor but from his writing and what others have said......I believe I would have enjoyed a visit with Jack MUCH less. He always seemed full of himself and had a superior air that would have rubbed the wrong way.
There is no doubt that Jack was a fine writer. Much better, technically, than Elmer and possibly one of the best wordsmiths who ever wrote on guns and shooting.
From what I understand, Elmer's writing was a "challenge" to any editor who had to prepare it for publication. As some have said, he wrote like he talked.......and that wasn't always so "pretty". However, the content in that writing was impressive to say the least.
As far as the famous fight over big-vs-small bore.....I think it had a lot to do with the way each of them learned to hunt.
Elmer grew up in tough times and often talked about "getting my winter's meat". He was not exagerating as he hunted in a time and place where "waiting" for a better shot might result in an empty freezer that year. His shots weren't always "perfect" as mirrored in his talk about bullet performance on "raking" shots that had to pass through muscle, bone and paunch. Elmer also hunted, primarilly, much larger game that O'Conner. Although both men took a variety of game, Elmer was first and formost an elk hunter while O'Connor was more of a deer-sheep guy.The size of the game definitely influenced what each thought of as a "proper" rifle.
Most of Elmer's hunting (particularly in the early years) was alone on public land and wilderness. He was often the guide who was responsible for making things right when a client screwed up. When not guiding he was basically "sustinence" hunting for his meat. All had an influence on what rifle he chose. Perfect broadside shots were not always presented, but the option to "pass up" a shot and wait had consiquences that might include going hungry that winter.
O'Connor was more of a "gentleman hunter" who was most often the one being guided and many times was on a private game reserve (particularly after he had the Outdoor Life silver spoon in his mouth and mostly went on paid vacations to hunt). If Jack "passed up" a shot to wait for a perfect opportunity, the worst he faced was wondering what kind of wine the prince would serve that night at dinner. When the only shot you will take is a broadside lung shot (which Jack often wrote was the "proper" way to take game.....and rightly so when possible) of course you can get by with less rifle.
A big part of why each advocated different rifles was the effect of recoil. Jack made no secret of the fact he DID NOT like to be kicked. Not that he COULDN't handle bigger guns.....but he certainly didn't enjoy it. If one reads Jacks writing without trying to prove a point you will find that he admitted that bigger guns were better overall than his beloved .270.....but he felt that if the bullet "was properly placed" his .270 was all that was needed (sort of a silly argument in my mind as a .22 LR if "properly placed" will also work, but it's not what I'd want to hunt Brown Bear with). The real reason Jack championed whe .270 was that he seldom took anything but "perfect" shots and got kicked less.
Elmer, on the other hand, was one of those rare individuals who was almost immune to recoil. He chose rifles based on the fact that he could make a kill from ANY angle presented and do it on the largest of game he might encounter......not on how hard it kicked. He did use all types of rifles in his life and admitted that the lighter guns (7x57, .270, ect.) were deadly if placed right......he just didn't want to be limited if things weren't "perfect". He did "hate" the small bores or think they would "bounce off" big game.....he just chose a better weapon for general use (and he DID hate inexperienced hunters who chose small bore rifles without the experience and judgement to use them properly).
Who was right.....probably both were. Small bores WILL work IF PROPERLY PLACED and big bores will kill better and more reliably particularly if the shot isn't "perfect".
It is a shame that there was a personal clash between the men.
Elmer seemed to resent the better educated, more privaleged, "pretty boy" who was catered to because of his position at Outdoor Life.
O'Connor, with his typical arrogance and superior airs, seemed to resent Elmer's ability and experience and seemed to feel he was an ignorant cowboy who shouldn't be allowed to rub shoulders with "real" writers who were educated and sophisticated.
I hate change, it's never for the better.... Grumpy Old Men
The more I learn, the more I realize how little I know
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,337
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,337 |
If I had to choose which of the two would spend a week at camp with me, Elmer would win hands down. However, he'd have to pitch his tent on the other side of the camp. I bet he snored as much as I do. He'd have to bring his own whiskey, too.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 29,348
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 29,348 |
Not that it matters, but I don't think that O'Connor ever suffered hardships and pain comparable to Elmer's � burned almost to death, broken hand, nose, and back, etc � not to mention hard work and meager income. He certainly enjoyed a lot more privilege and income than ever flowed Elmer's way.
"Good enough" isn't.
Always take your responsibilities seriously but never yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900 |
I had the honor of meeting Elmer just once. No, we were not close friends, but in that one meeting I got the impression that here was a "real" man that shot straight and pulled no punches. Didn't have the chance, but I believe I would have truely enjoyed spending an evening talking, shooting and sharing a campfire with the man.
Never met O'Connor but from his writing and what others have said......I believe I would have enjoyed a visit with Jack MUCH less. He always seemed full of himself and had a superior air that would have rubbed the wrong way.
There is no doubt that Jack was a fine writer. Much better, technically, than Elmer and possibly one of the best wordsmiths who ever wrote on guns and shooting.
From what I understand, Elmer's writing was a "challenge" to any editor who had to prepare it for publication. As some have said, he wrote like he talked.......and that wasn't always so "pretty". However, the content in that writing was impressive to say the least.
As far as the famous fight over big-vs-small bore.....I think it had a lot to do with the way each of them learned to hunt.
Elmer grew up in tough times and often talked about "getting my winter's meat". He was not exagerating as he hunted in a time and place where "waiting" for a better shot might result in an empty freezer that year. His shots weren't always "perfect" as mirrored in his talk about bullet performance on "raking" shots that had to pass through muscle, bone and paunch. Elmer also hunted, primarilly, much larger game that O'Conner. Although both men took a variety of game, Elmer was first and formost an elk hunter while O'Connor was more of a deer-sheep guy.The size of the game definitely influenced what each thought of as a "proper" rifle.
Most of Elmer's hunting (particularly in the early years) was alone on public land and wilderness. He was often the guide who was responsible for making things right when a client screwed up. When not guiding he was basically "sustinence" hunting for his meat. All had an influence on what rifle he chose. Perfect broadside shots were not always presented, but the option to "pass up" a shot and wait had consiquences that might include going hungry that winter.
O'Connor was more of a "gentleman hunter" who was most often the one being guided and many times was on a private game reserve (particularly after he had the Outdoor Life silver spoon in his mouth and mostly went on paid vacations to hunt). If Jack "passed up" a shot to wait for a perfect opportunity, the worst he faced was wondering what kind of wine the prince would serve that night at dinner. When the only shot you will take is a broadside lung shot (which Jack often wrote was the "proper" way to take game.....and rightly so when possible) of course you can get by with less rifle.
A big part of why each advocated different rifles was the effect of recoil. Jack made no secret of the fact he DID NOT like to be kicked. Not that he COULDN't handle bigger guns.....but he certainly didn't enjoy it. If one reads Jacks writing without trying to prove a point you will find that he admitted that bigger guns were better overall than his beloved .270.....but he felt that if the bullet "was properly placed" his .270 was all that was needed (sort of a silly argument in my mind as a .22 LR if "properly placed" will also work, but it's not what I'd want to hunt Brown Bear with). The real reason Jack championed whe .270 was that he seldom took anything but "perfect" shots and got kicked less.
Elmer, on the other hand, was one of those rare individuals who was almost immune to recoil. He chose rifles based on the fact that he could make a kill from ANY angle presented and do it on the largest of game he might encounter......not on how hard it kicked. He did use all types of rifles in his life and admitted that the lighter guns (7x57, .270, ect.) were deadly if placed right......he just didn't want to be limited if things weren't "perfect". He did "hate" the small bores or think they would "bounce off" big game.....he just chose a better weapon for general use (and he DID hate inexperienced hunters who chose small bore rifles without the experience and judgement to use them properly).
Who was right.....probably both were. Small bores WILL work IF PROPERLY PLACED and big bores will kill better and more reliably particularly if the shot isn't "perfect".
It is a shame that there was a personal clash between the men.
Elmer seemed to resent the better educated, more privaleged, "pretty boy" who was catered to because of his position at Outdoor Life.
O'Connor, with his typical arrogance and superior airs, seemed to resent Elmer's ability and experience and seemed to feel he was an ignorant cowboy who shouldn't be allowed to rub shoulders with "real" writers who were educated and sophisticated. I've read about everything both wrote and I guess we all pull different things out of this. Speculating on which one we would "enjoy" most is engaging in day dreaming I think.That Elmer seemed to have lived a hard, pioneer type existence may have been true enough....but in photos of him as a young man we see some pretty fine firearms made by Hoffman, DuBiel, and other custom makers.....he certainly looks content enough to me  I'm sure those rifles did not come cheaply.....assuming of course that he paid for them. That each spent a considerable amount of their younger years sort of "broke" is apparent in their writings, and I can't hold it against JOC that he went and got himself an education,became a college professor, etc.But the notion that he had lace panties because he did so is, I think,mostly "bull". Also "bull" is the notion that JOC hunted game preserves and got his experience there, etc.He spent a large amount of time hunting desert sheep and deer in Mexico and the Southwest, on his own;elk in Arizona the same way.That he did an enormous amount of hunting is pretty apparent from his writings, as he not only wrote stories of his own hunts,but did excellent articles and books describing the country he hunted, the game habits, etc. Elmer did very much the same things and this demonstrates that both had a boatload of experience in the country,and with the game they with which they were both familiar. As to the country and game being responsible for their prefered choice of rifles and cartridges,well.....I dunno. Both used high velocity small bores including a variety of wildcat 7mm's,30 caliber magnums, medium bores from the 35 Whelen up through things like the 40's and 458's and 470' etc. They were certainly both aware of the differences between these cartridges,and Elmer was a big fan of the 7mm Dubiel,and 285 OKH for much deer and antelope hunting;and JOC used the 338 here and in Africa,along with the 450 Watts,and 416 Rigby.And JOC hunted elk in Idaho many times with 270's and 7 mags. I think their readers made more of the differences in their caliber choices than any real difference in the thought processes of the respective men themselves.If you read everything they wrote,we see that Elmer had good things to say about the 270 until we got to elk sized stuff;and O'Connor wrote more than once that 270 or 30/06 bullets were frequently stopped by elk shoulders but that 375 bullets frequently sailed right on through.In any even, I see a lot of overlap if you read objectively instead of picking and choosing through their writings. I really can't look at the argument about bullet placement being at all "silly",as anyone who has done much hunting knows that sloppy placement,even with big bullets, does a lousy job of killing game.I know this because I have seen elk, black bear and deer hit poorly from 300's and 338 caliber bullets that were most certainly NOT "killed better" because they were hit with poorly with a big bore.This is urban myth that somehow lives on today; it is BS.I also note, if we read "safari", that Elmer spent a lot of time chasing wounded African game that was sloppily hit on the run with 333 caliber bullets...and JOC had a spot of trouble because IIRC he or Eleanor hit a kudu a bit far back with a 7x57.Proper placement is the essence of killing ability in BG hunting;we should know this today. In the end there was a lot to learn from both and they set the tone for gun writing and BG hunting for over half a Century; but I suspect their fans were more talented in creating this vast gulf of differences between them than actually existed when it came to certain topics we deem important. I never met either one,but I'm certain that I would have enjoyed meeting both of them.
The 280 Remington is overbore.
The 7 Rem Mag is over bore.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 5,042
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 5,042 |
Personnaly I think the two probably liked one another, what fun is taking a stand on an issue if noboby opposes you? Same as we do daily on this very forum the two of them made a pastime ( and a living in their case) out of telling others why the way they think is correct.
The view one sees is his own
Practitioner of the ancient art of skank fu
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 28,385 Likes: 1
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 28,385 Likes: 1 |
There is an O�Connor article in an old Gun Digest, probably from the 70�s, titled something like �it�s where you hit�em, not what you hit�em with�.
The veracity of that statement is seen daily here in reports by countless people who take deer with .223�s, elk with .243�s and so on. My signature indicates a certain agreement with that statement as well.
Gunnery, gunnery, gunnery.
Hit the target, all else is twaddle!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 29,348
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 29,348 |
If you're hunting more for meat than for trophy, you don't want your game full of adrenalin. The worst game meat that I ever tried to eat had finally succumbed to a couple of my friends' inadequate rifles. Good placement resulted in death that wasn't sudden enough.
Heads on the wall don't suffer from an excess of adrenalin in the meat. "Dead in a few minutes" is as good as "dead now" when the skillet isn't a foremost consideration.
I've eaten old critters that were easy to chew and gentle on the taste buds because they never felt what had hit 'em.
Like Elmer, I'd like for my game to be dead before my bullet comes out the other side � an effect that isn't likely to occur but still worth trying for. I've always liked my friend Jack McPhee's description of a caribou that "dropped like an arm load of wet fish nets." I killed a goat that went down like that � NOT with a .22 Long Rifle or .25-20!
Then there's the humaneness of an instantaneous kill. I don't owe it to any critter to kill it, but I owe it to any critter that I kill to kill it as nearly painlessly as I can.
"Good enough" isn't.
Always take your responsibilities seriously but never yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 549
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 549 |
WOW the timing on this thread is perfect as I just last night finished reading my first O'Connor works (Lost Classics). I've really enjoyed reading this thread and getting insight from some of you who knew these guys. O'Connor was good at telling a story and I enjoyed reading the book, it was really an insight into bygone days. I realize that Jack was a very prolific writer and this book was a very limited example but a few thoughts came to mind after reading his works;
- cats, buffalo, elephant, plains game and more in Africa, North American Sheep, bear, elk, deer, cats, caribou, tigers in India, sheep in Iran, etc....what a life!! You can argue that he was privileged or not all I know is I would love to experience any of these hunts!!
- he seemed very interested in being in the record books, inches of horn and placement of animals in the all time records seemed very important to him
- With all the discussion of him preaching perfect shot placement he wasn't shy about recounting bad shots (leg hits, hind qtrs, gut shots), not sure if it was due to him seemingly having a willingness to shoot at running animals (at short and LONG range) or not but have to give him credit for relaying the story as it happened, seems today all I read about and see on TV are one shot perfect hits at ever increasing distances.
- I enjoyed how he included detailed equipment, load and bullet info into his stories
Few Questions:
-Did Jack ever develop any liking for the 257? He was very down on it when mentioned in this collection?
-What became of all the pictures and movies he took? His guns and mounts?
Elmer Keith was also just a little before my time, and I've never read him, can someone recommend a good place to start?
I once visited a place where BBQ was a verb, Canadian whiskey was the norm and no sweet tea on the menu. Hell on earth for a Southern boy!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 3,918
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 3,918 |
If you're hunting more for meat than for trophy, you don't want your game full of adrenalin. The worst game meat that I ever tried to eat had finally succumbed to a couple of my friends' inadequate rifles. Good placement resulted in death that wasn't sudden enough.
Heads on the wall don't suffer from an excess of adrenalin in the meat. "Dead in a few minutes" is as good as "dead now" when the skillet isn't a foremost consideration.
I've eaten old critters that were easy to chew and gentle on the taste buds because they never felt what had hit 'em.
Like Elmer, I'd like for my game to be dead before my bullet comes out the other side � an effect that isn't likely to occur but still worth trying for. I've always liked my friend Jack McPhee's description of a caribou that "dropped like an arm load of wet fish nets." I killed a goat that went down like that � NOT with a .22 Long Rifle or .25-20!
Then there's the humaneness of an instantaneous kill. I don't owe it to any critter to kill it, but I owe it to any critter that I kill to kill it as nearly painlessly as I can. Couldn't agree more. Heck, I let lobsters in cheap chablis before I throw them in. No flapping tails in boiling water any more.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,055
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,055 |
-What became of all the pictures and movies he [O'Connor] took? His guns and mounts?
Elmer Keith was also just a little before my time, and I've never read him, can someone recommend a good place to start?
Most of the O'Connor public legacy AFAIK was divided between the University of Idaho - Moscow and Washington State University - Pullman - I think because his children went there. University of Idaho had some full body skeletons museum mount and such on a top floor as I recall while WSU got the library and literary estate and some heads I think. But I could be completely wrong. Some of the otherwise fungible (except for the associaton) guns, again as I recall O'Connor had a collection for show of, presumably gifts when new variations came out with a #7 serial but it may have been something else and I could be wrong made the auction and gun show circuit shortly after his death - maybe bought out as a lot and broken up? Don't know. Duplicates of a well documented sheep rifle have been offered on the instant collectible market as I recall. Bradford has stayed active in the shooting community - last I knew was quite a few years ago now at a big double gun shoot in Eastern Oregon that was IIRC correctly written up in the Wolfe publications - and is I think more universally liked than his father. Jack was reputed to have a sharp abrasive and interesting vocabulary for a given time and place tongue for such things as local school board style activity in Lewiston. Both Jack O'Connor and Elmer Keith can be proud of their repective sons and that too says something I think. As for where to start with Elmer Keith I'd say start with the Winchester Press edition of his autobiography - Keith. I think it benefitted from editing. A friend of mine who had the greatest respect for Keith - and although a generation or maybe two younger knew people who lived and sometimes worked with Elmer in Salmon - read Hell I was There over a bad weekend in the hospital and found the book ultimately a downer. As noted Elmer lived a very hard life. No question in my mind that Elmer Keith always and forever told the truth precisely as he saw it including all the things some folks don't believe - I'm quite sure that had there been a camera and recorder on the scene the movie would be very close to what Keith reported. I've sometimes thought the conclusions reached included finding major differences when a lab test after n tries would have found no significant differences. My point is not to knock a man for reporting differences he really did see but rather to say that Elmer never fudged what some people might call dry labbed an observation to meet expectations. It has been reported that Elmer once in a while had an opinion in excess of his expertise as frex on the place of glass bedding and synthetics when stocking rifles - maybe so maybe not - but in taking lessons from the writings it pays to remember the time and place written and how times and hardware and land access and game management have changed. After that the books can I think be divided into hunting stories and hardware stories and read whatever strikes your fancy - start with whatever is on hand at your local library or easy to get. Petersen printed and reprinted a lot in full letter size format and there is a good deal of mix and match with some obscurity about when a paragraph was first written so again draw conclusions with that in mind. Remember it's another age and the difference between Major Askins and Colonel Askins and all the rest. A great new discovery awaits.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900 |
duxndogs:Which "257"?...  .....He was a very big fan of the 257 Roberts,which was used extensively by his wife and sons(and himself) for varmints,deer, antelope, etc. Somewhere here, I have a letter signed by him when he was with Outdoor Life and I wrote to him asking for loads for the Roberts. His recommendation was 39 gr 4064 with the 100 gr bullet... I suspect he preferred the Roberts to the Weatherby 257....
The 280 Remington is overbore.
The 7 Rem Mag is over bore.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 12,353 Likes: 1
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 12,353 Likes: 1 |
"As for where to start with Elmer Keith I'd say start with the Winchester Press edition of his autobiography - Keith. I think it benefitted from editing. A friend of mine who had the greatest respect for Keith - and although a generation or maybe two younger knew people who lived and sometimes worked with Elmer in Salmon - read Hell I was There over a bad weekend in the hospital and found the book ultimately a downer. As noted Elmer lived a very hard life."
Very true. I have both the books mentioned and while the Winchester Press version is good reading, from what I understand Elmer hated it. It seems Elmer had a somewhat distinctive manner of talking and the Winchester Press version removed that distinction.
In Hell, I Was There, his manner of speech was left intact and gives a much better picture of the man. Either book is a good read but my preference is for Hell, I Was There.
There use to be a hunting and fishing channel on Comcast and on one of the commercials, they showed a group rafting down some river., then people camping I suppose for the night anf here is this short stocky little fellow chopping wood like mad. Yup, it was Elmer, big old hat and sixgun doin' the chores. What a thrill that would be to find a copy of that old silent movie on a DVD somewhere. If anyone knows of it, let me know cuz I'd sure as hell buy a copy.
Paul B.
Our forefathers did not politely protest the British.They did not vote them out of office, nor did they impeach the king,march on the capitol or ask permission for their rights. ----------------They just shot them.
MOLON LABE
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 29,348
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 29,348 |
When I first knew Elmer, he was known as "the dean of American hunting guides" (and was so identified in one of the earliest Gun Digest articles).
He was also well known for taking rafting groups down the Salmon River (the "River of No Return").
"Good enough" isn't.
Always take your responsibilities seriously but never yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,509
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,509 |
I was lucky enough to spend time in both of their homes.
In 1971 I was 21. I met Mr O'Connor by calling directory assistance, getting his number, and driving about 5 hours. He said he would give me an hour. When I arrived in Lewison he met me at the front door and took me out back to his study. He was tall, gruff, and polite but not too eager. He had a deep booming voice. After we visited about 30 minutes, he knew I had read everything he had written and had committed it to memory. I addition I asked questions rather than argued. We ended up visiting for nearly four hours. He took me thru his home and took me upstairs. He had a desk there where he did most of his writing. He also had one very old dictation machine. He seemed to enjoy the visit nearly as much as I did. He did tell me that he never knew what was going to show up at his front door and that he really disliked those who felt it necessary to debate (argue) with him. We corresponded until his death.
I met Mr Keith because I had a summer job that took me in and out of Salmon. Everyone in town knew where he lived. I think I called first. He asked that I stop by right after dinner. We sat on the front porch and his wife brought out two very big bowls of vanilla ice cream. I saw him at least two more times and the pattern was always the same. His wife was a school teacher whereas Mr Keith had little formal education. She rewrote all of his articles for Guns & Ammo. He always had his 4" 44 Smith on his hip. There was a hole in his favorite leather chair where the handgun had rubbed.
Both were very kind and generous. O'Connor had a very quick wit. Our conversation covered a wide range of things. He was much more technically aware than I thought. He told me that he wrote to educate the novice rather than discuss fine points. He mentioned that his writing covered a four year cycle of topics. Keith was very concrete. Talking with him was just like reading his writings. He said the same things.
I did handle O'Connor's 6mm Rem, both 270's, a mauser 30/06, a 375 and a Rigby. I didn't ask to look at Keith's sidearm. It was more like an extension of him...too personal for such a request.
Last edited by RinB; 06/27/10. Reason: grammar
“Perfection is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away”.
Antoine de Saint-Exupery. Posted by Brad.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 24,239
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 24,239 |
It never once entered my mind,that Elmer fabricated yarns. He struck me as a most honest gent,who simply laid the cards on the table. That he penned material,which he certainly HAD to know,many would meet with disfavor,only added to the feeling that the exploits were genuine.
<br>
<br>I miss his meat and taters delivery and the confidence in himself and his experiences,to relate things how the were. That is sadly missing today,in my opinion.
<br>
<br>His,was a great loss.................. The middle paragraph of this post gives some insight into Larry's "goals" as for as writing is concerned . Had he stuck to guns and hunting topics things would not have gotten so upside down . In fact , it was his disdain for JO - which surfaced in another thread - that got him crossways with some on here .
Never holler whoa or look back in a tight place
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 20,896 Likes: 1
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 20,896 Likes: 1 |
.....But if you can get that small caliber to disintegrate inside the animal it will kill anything on the face of the earth"' (Roy Weatherby) Exactly the tenet Berger Bullets adheres to now.
"I never thought I'd live to see the day that a U.S. president would raise an army to invade his own country."
Robert E. Lee
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,434
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,434 |
This is not a knock on either man. Both of them made their living by writing. Controversy sells magazines and pays salaries. Therefore, I take with a grain of salt both their positions on "large versus fast". Ditto on Mr. Weatherby; he was in the business of selling rifles. For me, when I disregard the extreme positions of each I find a better understanding and respect for them all.
One other thing. Most of the controversy of that era can be summed up in one word: bullets. We have much better bullets today and that makes both arguments mostly moot.
With that said, I don't hunt deer with a .243Win or elk with a .270Win. There is a much larger selection of rifles and cartridges today (and money to buy them) that allows me to better match the cartridge to the game. A quick and sure death for the game animal is much more important to me than bragging rights.
JMHO.
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 9,472
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 9,472 |
.....But if you can get that small caliber to disintegrate inside the animal it will kill anything on the face of the earth"' (Roy Weatherby) Exactly the tenet Berger Bullets adheres to now. That is not exactly accurate as a Berger VLD penetrates several inches before is explodes VS a normal explosive bullet that starts expanding immediately. In other words, on a chest shot the Berger's penetrate the chest cavity, then explode. Which of course knocks the crap out of animals.
|
|
|
|
|
484 members (12344mag, 10gaugeman, 160user, 1Longbow, 17CalFan, 10ring1, 38 invisible),
2,148
guests, and
1,146
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,192,125
Posts18,483,808
Members73,966
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
