And when I get done think WTF did I just read.

No, and its getting more and more that way it seems.

I thought it was just me. Lately the articles seem to ramble blindly in three or four directions.

Hmmm. Thought it was just me, too...

He has always sucked IMOP.

Lefty C

When I read his articles I find that if eggs are over cooked to the point of the egg being hard that burnt sienna is my favorite crayon.

another scovill fan. NOT!!

Ed

When reading something by the author of interest, vice other writers, there are certain things that wear on me.

Always read them. No problem with sundry subjects.

Yeah, he does seem to tracking rabbit trails (all over the place), but then, he's got the job, we don't.

I don't think I have ever read one complete article he has written. They just can't hold my interest

Same here. They just seem to wander with no real purpose...more like he is just waxing eloquent about how much he accomplished decades ago.

Well then I guess it isnt just me. I used to enjoy them he was opinionated but the stories where ok. Now its like what the hell we were talking about .45 acp and suddenly we are in Africa with a 416 rigby.

I have some old copies of Rifle and Handloader containing his articles. Articles then were longer and more detailed which if not about something you're into, could be pretty tedious. When he became the editor, his piece at the front of the magazines became more of a column that covered this and that, rather than a pointed article.

Scovill knows his stuff, and has the background and technical ability to go into more detail than many, including me sometimes want, but when he says something, I believe him because he bases his statements on actual experience. He has a lot of accomplishments, and he really likes to point them out, over and over and over to the point it gets pretty annoying sometimes. If I read about how he designed the RCBS 270 grain bullet for the .45 Colt one more time, I think I'll explode. He seems to be largely dismissive of lesser mortals in general and pretty full of himself. In short, his writing leads me to believe he's probably someone I wouldn't care to know personally. That could be a false impression, but it's how he comes across.

Well said, Pappy348. I can usually slog through his column, but it is hardly ever something of major interest and he is all over the board in his train of thought, stream of consciousness, or however he writes.

I lost most of what little respect I had for him when he went off about Jack O'Connor and how he didn't have to read O'Connor to know anything. A thick headed guy that thinks he can't learn something from those who have gone before him isn't too bright.

I think John Wooters said, "Thems that can write, write! Thems that can't write, edit!"

Scovill was just one of the reasons I quit subscribing and then buying Wolfe.

That O'Connor stuff hit me the wrong way too. Scovill apparently grew up around lumber camps, worked his way through school and had a couple of good careers including a stint in the Navy. I give him full credit for his accomplishments and success. His comments about O'Connor seemed like he was taking shots at him, which seemed silly and petty, especially given that he admitted that he hadn't read his stuff and therefore couldn't know much about him or his background. I think O'Connor's accomplishments, even before he became famous, surpass anything Scovill has ever done, and his beginnings were just as challenging. The whole business just smelled like a jealous rant. Everybody makes a jackass out of themselves eventually and I guess it was his turn.

That was the article that got me also. After reading it, I cancelled. Scovill is way too arrogant for my tastes.

I wouldn't cancel over the editor having a hissy fit a time or two. Those magazines are too enjoyable and valuable to me. In case no one's noticed, a fair number of gun writers, especially old ones, have attitude issues at times. Old Jack, though it didn't show up in most of his writing, apparently could be difficult himself.

Not everyone can be as sweet-natured, patient, and helpful as our buddy, JB. 🙄

I too am glad that I'm not the only one that does not "get" Scovill and that O'Connor article came off (to me) as, others have said here, a petty rant saying that he should have been as famous as O'Connor because of all the experience that HE had. He may very well have the experience but I'll never know cause as soon as I see his name on an article I skip it......probably petty on my part but I can't stand narcissists!

PennDog

I greatly enjoy Scovill. Sorry to see him retire and I also like Sefried.
I have learned a lot from both. O'Connor not so much. But what
do I know, uneducated and old, all was another time frame.

Respectfully
Rob

Has he retired??

Scovill's articles, or anyway, some of the opinions expressed therein, have been getting on my nerves in the last year or so.
I have to agree with pappy348, though, Scovill does know his stuff.

Having said that, Scovill's O'Connor article didn't bother me. I've felt for some time that O'Connor's reputation was a bit over-inflated, and I'd say the same about the reputation of at least a couple other gone-but-not-forgotten gunwriters. I'm kinda tired of seeing their(often out of context)in-print opinions frequently quoted (as near-Gospel)to support arguments in present day controversies. Yeah, O'Connor and his contemporaries knew their stuff(mostly)and there's something we can learn from their writings years later. But come on, they haven't pulled a trigger in how many years? Time to start doing our own homework rather than recycling O'Connor quotes in support of our unfounded opinions on some theoretical(to us) point.

Newest magazines list Lee J. Hoots as Editor in Chief and Dave Scovill as Editor Emeritus.

Scovill is still writing his columns.

Well, O'Connor has been gone for quite some time now, so Ploughman's right that he hasn't pulled a trigger in many years. That being said, as a writer, Scovill couldn't carry O'Connor's jock strap! I can read JOC's stuff even today and be completely entertained as well as learn a thing or two. I could never say that about Scovill's writing. I'm sure Scovill is a smart man and he may be a hell of an inventer and know a ton about guns, but how he ever became a writer or an editor is beyond me.

I always read his articles-- then wonder what the hell I just read--

test1328,

Dave Scovill became a gun writer because when casting bullets wasnn't very popular he did a considerable amount of work investigating the techniques and science of casting. That was his original specialty, and the reason he became a staff writer for Wolfe, back when it was a small specialty magazine. He had a science background, thanks to his Navy career, which involved not just being a cargo pilot during the Vietnam era but taking classes at Annapolis in computer science.

He was chosen as editor when Al Miller retired, because Scovill had studied the technical aspects of handloading far more than than anybody else available. And at that time the two Wolfe magazines were far more technical than most gun magazines.

But he also was one of the major reasons Rifle and Handloader became mainstream gun magazines. When he became editor the circulation of both wasn't much over 10,000 per issue. He and the new owner decided to start running color photos, and pay enough to attract more professional writers. (Before then a lot of the articles were written by readers. Some were good and some not.)

This was around 1990, as I recall, and I was one of the first professionals who got involved. I was in the early stages of "gun writing" back then, having previously made my living writing hunting and fishing articles for magazines as diverse as Gray's Sporting Journal, Sports Illustrated, Fly Fisherman and what were then called the Big Three, Field & Stream, Outdoor Life and Sports Afield, among others.

But even then it was becoming apparent that Sports Illustrated wasn't going to be running "blood sport" articles much longer, and the general hunting/fishing/camping/boating magazines were shrinking, due to competition from specialty magazines, such as Rifle and Handloader. So I contacted Wolfe and proposed a couple of articles.

Scovill replied, rather testily, saying he doubted some of the stuff I said. I came back with facts and he assigned me a couple of articles. We didn't always see eye to eye, but he was a good editor, because he knew his technical stuff and recognized which of the staff writers would be best for certain assignments. And he recognized good writing, even if he wasn't as good a writer as Jack O'Connor. He was also flexible enough to let me write an article titled "I Did Read Jack O'Connor" after his column appeared.

Yeah, he wanders a lot, something he often does in conversations as well. But that's not because he doesn't know his stuff, and his years as editor of Rifle and Handloader are one of the major reasons they became major gun magazines.

Everything I've read of Scovill's sounded like he doubted everything anybody did; he was about 20 years behind everyone else with the 45 Colt and revolvers that had been around for 45 years, about ten years behind Barsness on loading concentric ammo and it seemed every writer he was an editor for had loaded and shot a wider variety of cartridges than he had.

The only thing worse could be LJ Hoots or Jack O'Connor....

There is no way I could come up with a steady stream of well researched, well written articles which held the interest of anyone but my mom. Truth is, I am pushing the edge of my literary talent in writing a personal check and, given the level of literacy put on display on this site, I am not alone in this.

Kind of sad to see how many folks here are quick to condemn anyone who dares put pen to paper. I seriously doubt most of those whiners could do a better job.

I suspect he writes about stuff he's interested in, lever guns, regular sixguns, cast bullets, etc., and as the editor, he could do what he wanted and assigned the other stuff to the regular staff writers. I think he appreciates the traditional roles of cartridges like the .45 Colt and .44 and .38 WCFs and isn't much into trying to supersize them into something more. Things like black rifles, hi-cap auto pistols, and tactical-anything just don't float his boat apparently and those things got limited coverage in the magazines and none in his column. I hope the new guy stays the course and doesn't go changing a bunch of stuff trying to make his mark.

Not condemning just stating fact that when I get done with one of his articles Im not sure what I just read. I am sure he is a class guy and knows a lot but he wanders a lot in his writings.

+1 on that....I do not like his style and I do not have to enjoy reading something that someone writes just because they write it. I appreciate the information that JB brought forth and for that I am greatful for Scovill because there are NO better magazines for the rifleman and handloader and Scovill does have to get credit for retaining the services of the likes of Brian Pearce, John Barness, Mike Venterino, John Haviland, and others for their expertise. I will read the articles of Handloader and Rifle for as long as they are published and I am able to - with the exception of Scovill's (but hey that is just me!!).

PennDog

p.s. Jack O'Connor was not THE RIFLE GOD but as close to it as a kid in the late sixties and seventies had who was a rifle nut in the making and really only had access to Outdoorlife

Maybe you're no writer, but you did a good job of writing that.

Yeah, Hoots is a real hoot, NOT.


I'll echo Dave's comment, I never read Jack O'Lantern either. Yes a did read a little of his stuff back in the day, just enough to know I didn't like JOC. I don't care what JOC shot, what is favorite rifle was or if he took it in the backside from Mexican guides.

I started reading and subscribing to Rifle and Handloader back in the day, not long after they first came out. They were really just gun nut magazines...highly technical, no gloss... When Scovill took the helm and the character of the magazines began to change, as JB mentioned, I took him to task with a letter of complaint. (This was still the pre-email days.) I was surprised to get a quick and reasoned explanation, almost by return mail. We corresponded a little after that, infrequently. I usually liked his editor's column ramblings, generally found them interesting, not always. Today it's a moot point. I seldom read paper magazines any more...I find it more rewarding to have open ended discussions here...you find out in short order who know's a bit about this stuff, who thinks they know a bit about this stuff, and....well, you get the picture.

I think the last I read was the one where he was describing his 375 Scovill cartridge. It sounded like something I'd have liked. It was a good article, in my opinion.

I enjoy Dave Scovill’s writing. Dave writes about things I am interested in. In a box somewhere I still have the first Scovill article I read. It is in a 1970’s vintage obscure magazine and is on the difference between neck sizing and full length resizing of cartridge cases. The article is well written and at the time I thought, I would like to read more from this guy.

I have worked with many “Old Cranks” and I have learned a lot from them. Open minded Skeptics are rare, we do not have to agree with them, but the skeptics make us think.

We all see things from a different perspective. I never thought of JOC as “The Rifle God” but rather as a hunting writer. JOC’s writing always left me wanting more detail on loads, bullets, sights etc. For me there was never enough detail in O’Connor’s articles. In late 1950’s gun writing Townsend Whelen was still the Rifleman’s writer but a new generation was rising.

MD, I appreciate you taking the time to provide some perspective on why Scovill got to where he is. I figured he must be a good editor or he would not have held the job for as long as he did. I have no personal animosity toward the guy, he's just not a writer I prefer, even though I do read his column every time since I try to keep an open mind and may learn something in the process. I also don't think JOC is a god, either, but as an outdoor/hunting/gun writer, I can certainly recognize his talent over others. By the way, I do remember reading your story "I Did Read JOC" and I smirked when I read the title since I knew you were doing it because of Scovill. You're right. The guy does deserve credit for allowing it.

This really funny.

I remember an article in RIFLE about the 375/338 Magnum wildcat cartridge. Impressed me enough that I had one made up and the comments and data were correct. However, the drawing of the cartridge was for the .375 Epstein, not the cartridge in the article. I wrote in questioning this because my .338 brass necked up to .375 was noticeably shorter than the drawing. Mr. Scovill answer was a bit terse saying something on the order that there was no difference in the cartridges. Oh really? I'd have to dig up the two magazines to figure out the difference but I thought it was significant. A case that much longer would never fit in my rifle. It gave me the feeling he didn't like people catching what they felt were errors.
Paul B.

I have enjoyed the Handloader magazine under Mr. Scovill's editor time. He is interested (on the handguns side of things) in revolvers and loading for them, which is what I like too. Other shooting magazines seem to have largely become devoted to autoloading handguns; I can only enjoy a very limited amount of reading about these. I hope that Mr. Pearce and Mr. Venturino continue providing articles to Handloader under the new editor.

375 Epstein in based on the 300 Win Mag case (2.6" long) while the .338 is 2.5" long. I see why most think Scovill is an azzhat . . .
when you're a know-it-all, there's just no way in heck you can be wrong.



While mislabeled 375 Epson in the photo below, I believe it a an Esptein case formed from a 300 WM. Shoulder is forward of a 338 case.

Hmmm, I've never been bothered by his work and feel I've learned from his writings. I'm glad he still has a column.

I have Handloader and Rifle magazines going back to when Al Miller was editor. Through to years I feel that after Scovill took over quality has diminished considerable. I actually dropped them for a while but re upped as there really isn't another magazine with the quality of writers such as Venturino, Pearce, and Barsness although some of these writers also write for other magazines. Maybe you should start your own magazine John Hint Hint
Scovill makes a big deal about growing up poor. Him and I are about the same age and grew up in the same area about 40 miles apart. Most people were logger/mill workers or Farmers/ranchers or all of the above such as my grandfather but if you were to ask them they didn't consider themselves poor as they all had jobs, food on the table and a roof over their heads. This was another time back in the 50's and 60's where opening day of deer season was a family event and more important than any ball game is today.
As a gun writer I rate Scovill just below Clay Harvey and there is also the BS factor. There has been a couple of time where he has told the story of where he outran a black bear in the woods . As for his RCBS 45 bullet it is nothing but a Keith design with a little extra weight. if you have a fixed sighted 45 colt it will probably shoot high with this bullet.
I can't understand this retirement thing. Looks like his wife Roberta was just put in his place. Maybe she was doing the work all along as she has also been with the magazines for a long time even before they married.
I just got a notice the other day that it was time to re up my subscription. I probably will and just put Scovill on ignore.

I do not know how old Mr. Scovill is ,but I read an article today he had wrote as a .44 special review. The article reminded of discussions I have with my father ( 80 years old with ever increasing dementia) anymore. It seemed to go off track from the beginning and wander a bit about this and that, then repeat it's self. Then I drew to some sort of a conclusion that was not nearly what was anticipated. The article left me no more or less informed and generally was more of a remembrance of him and a couple of guns he may or may not have owned.
One part I do think was interesting is his quote " The real test for those loads was ,of course, at 100 yards, where they managed nice round 4-to -5 inch five shot groups and at least three of the five shots were inside 3 inches.

Who here judges the accuracy of a .44 special revolver or any iron sighted handgun on the basis of 100 yard groups, especially with cast bullets at 950 fps?????

DocFoster,

I did start my own magazine. Actually Eileen did, seven years ago, the notorious on-line quarterly RIFLE LOONY NEWS, but she assigns me a few essays in each issue:-)

Actually, several writers have used long-range shooting to test the stability of bullet designs and accuracy; Brian Pearce is one that comes immediately to mind, along with Seyfried. Pearce tests at much greater distances. Scovill is (was?) apparently blessed with really excellent vision, one reason he gets such good results with iron sights.

I've played with handguns at 100 yards, but never had the skill to actually try it in the field. Red dots and scopes help a good bit with the aiming part, but holding and squeezing are pretty tough.

Not a reply to anyone, just a general observation.

My dad, who was involved back in the 50/60's when super markets chains were innovating stuff we now take for granted, always told me "retail was for gentiles". I was involved with him in a wholesale biz at the time he was mumbling that mantra, and so the wisdom of it took a few years or more to sink in.

My hat is off to anyone who is serious about research in their career, while exposing themselves to the retail public--particularly with the internet exponentially increasing "feedback". Expressing an opinion outside the beltway can result in hellfire raining down. It has to be thick skin, as I doubt that he is getting fabulously wealthy off the job.

There is good reason for the lion's share of the shooting industry's retail reading being fluff.

I just signed up.

Thanks!

Dunno if you already noticed, but new subscribers also get access to all the back issues.

Here's my take on Dave Scoville:

Yes, he has started to wander in his columns, particularly in the last few years. As Mule Deer has reminded us more than once, when gunwriters move beyond their peak years, they tend to write more about themselves than they do guns. It appears that Dave can't decide what story he wants to tell, starting off in one direction and meandering into several others, leaving us wondering what point he was trying to make. One recent column appeared to be dedicated to the memory of his step-father Lester, but actually drifted off course and never seemed to come back.

The truth is, there have been many times where Dave's writing has made me yell, even out loud. One time in the space of three or four columns he appeared to contradict himself several times and I wanted to pull my hair out.

Other times, he has offered up some stuff that's hard to swallow, with an apparent straight face. A few years ago, when defending a John Haviland article about handguns for bear defense, Dave made the incredible claim that he could he draw his .44 Magnum and hit targets of various sizes out to 20 yards in some fraction of a second, "or a shade under." Perhaps he really can, but I find that hard to believe.

Even at his best, Dave tends to write in paragraph-length sentences, and overuses such phrases as "select powders" and "calibers of interest" or "accurate enough to hit a jackrabbit at 80 yards, or whatever." His accuracy tests for handguns and lever-action rifles appear to occur at arbitrary distances ranging from 30, 40, 60 or 70 yards or some other unusual distance, rather than the standard 25, 50 or 100. All that's okay, of course, I just find it rather odd. He certainly has a peculiar writing style.

Still, after years of being a staunch critic, I could not actually bring myself to stop reading his columns. Eventually, I came to peace with his occasional misfires and realized that, when it comes right down to it, ol' Dave is just as much of a handloading looney as any of the rest of us, and most importantly he's on our side.

I've decided that in some areas, Dave has a savant level of understanding about guns and handloading and his information can be taken to the bank. In others, I believe he is a little out of his element and I take him with a grain of salt. Fortunately for us readers, if you read him very much it isn't hard to tell which is which.

Scovill's columns always reminded me of an old adage: only the editor doesn't get edited.

I don't subscribe anymore, but I keep a few old issues around to dip into. It's kinda like buttermilk, a quart every few months goes a long way.

The recent piece he wrote about his stepfather and the family guns may be the best thing he's done. Very enjoyable.

Funny to see this topic here about Daves' "ramblings".
Midway has/had the newest Nosler manual on sale for $16 so thought I'd get a copy as I was ordering some other stuff anyway.
I enjoy reading the "forward" before each cartridge as I always look up some of my favorites to see what others have to say about them....then there it was....I looked up the 300 H&H and the prelude is by Mr Scoville.
The 300 H&H is mentioned twice on the page in 2 different sentences. Daves story is about how John Nosler invented the partition and about growing up in Oregon, and Dave still having a few original bullets in an original box..gee Dave thanks.

I will say he stayed on track pretty well in his latest Rifle article.

I'm a fan of his column and other writing, especially his 30W.C.F. in Rifle .30s Special Edition (2010). Some of his columns get to technical for me since I don't handload but I like reading about lever actions, iron sights and stuff generally older than me. Rifle is the only magazine I buy every issue because it has a diverse range of subjects. I'm in my mid thirties and have no interest in WSM's,AR/MSR, Extreme long range shooting/fancy specialized scopes, etc.... Obviously others do, that's why I like Rifle, there's something in it for everybody each issue. As a side note, I enjoy JOC BUT enjoy the likes of Hagel, Ormond, Koller, Larry Benoit,Van Zwoll, Scovill, Barsness, Pearce and Wieland a little better. To each their own!

Dave knows his stuff and in person, he's a heck of a good guy.

Al Miller was my editor at Wolfe for several years and he was a total pleasure to work with. Al knew more about militaria and obscure European rifles/cartridges than about anyone ... his article on the 6.5 Mannlicher is a classic. I was really saddened when my friend Al Miller retired.

I found Dave to be more of the same, except that he had more technical handloading knowledge.

Dave is married to Ruby Montgomery, who is a darling, and she does most of the proofing.

One thing about Dave, if you start a phone conversation with him, you'd better be ready for a full-hour or more.

Something most folks don't know is that Dave owned a jewelry store in Klamath Falls, OR for quite a while. In fact, he bought an antique diamond scale from me. When I delivered it, we found that we had more in common than fine karat jewelry and gemstones ... we both killed stuff, lots of stuff.

I've hunted with Dave several times. He is a superb rifleman ... simply a dead shot ... and a great guy to have in camp and by your side in the field.

The highest compliment I can EVER give a man (or lady) is, "He's a person I would trust and enjoy when we had a bad elk in the bottom of a awful canyon." In my guiding years, I had some horrible elk situations and having a trustworthy companion, one you can count on, simply makes all the difference ... Dave is just such a person.

Johnny B is another, as is his wife, Eileen.

As Johnny Buffalo mentioned, Dave kinda wanders when he's talking ... hey, we're old farts; we ALL wander some. Besides, there's other cool stuff than what we're actually talking about. Sh1t, y'all might learn something that was unscheduled

Anyway, Dave is one of the good guys and I'm proud to call him my friend.

Blessings,

Steve

I recall an article that discussed crimping and bullet fit in handgun cartridges. Scovil did comparison tests evaluating tightness of bullet fit, versus crimping, and the effects on accuracy and velocity variation. His results showed that a tight bullet fit, combined with a firm crimp gave the best accuracy and least velocity variation in the .45 Colt, and a firm crimp alone did not provide the same benefit.

That was probably one of the top 5 handloading articles I've ever read, anywhere. I used the same approach going forward for my loads, and I benefited a lot.

IIRC Scovil also worked with Turnbull on the development of the .475 & .470 Turnbull cartridges. I eventually wound up with a .475 Turnbull #1, and it is my rarest and most accurate big bore Ruger

I have always enjoyed reading Scovill. The O'Conner sidetrack seemed a bit odd, and I rarely enjoy anyone's writing about cast bullets or black powder, but enjoyed reading him first all the same.