It has been my pratice to throw the gun rags in the back of my hunting truck to use as paper for "you know what".....since they have gone the slick paper they are not even much good for that!
This month's Guns & Ammo came in and Cissey laid it on my desk. Thumbing through it, Boddington's article on Keith, "A Tough Act To Follow" caught my eye. I scanned through it and Whamo! He Said That? Under the sub title "Substance Over Style", Boddington states "The truth is, if Keith had started writing today, he wouldn't be able to sell his first manuscript"
Now......I'm surprise they let that one through!
If that was not enough, he goes on to say " The truth is, over the course of my career, our system has increasingly favor form over substance" I am dismayed that a syndicated rag writer would allow himself to state these!
However, what he says is the absolute truth! Under today's mindset.....Elmer Keith and the rest would not last a week on the forums! I knew them well! Think about it!
There are many retired men from the industry still out here. They have years in "Hands On", but when I have asked them to look over the forums, their answer was "No way I will pin on a target for incoming flak!" Many would be happy to just answer questions and let it go at that.....but to get into debates...no way.
Knowledge learned over many, many years.....if not passed on.....is lost! And Friends All, that's excactly what's happening ever day. Remember the statement, "Homer Who?" Best Regards, James

Tell them to stop in over here .... and educate the masses! If we can't learn anything from the magazines then we need their input more than ever!

Interesting, I read once that Boddington edited some of Keith's work when he first got started. I'll bet that was fun!
What amazes me is not what the writers wrote about but what they didnt write about. I would like to know more about Boddington and some other current writers, experiances with the .348 Improved and other wildcats based on the .348. I wish Dave Scoville would write more about the .25-35 and his close-in, fast action coyote hunting. I wish Francis Sell had written more!
One of the problems is how few shooters there are. How few of them reload. The market for semi-technical magazines such as Precision Shooting and Rifle and Handloader is small. If I were an editor I would probably put my magazine out of buisness printing articles on .307's, .218 Bee's and .32 Magnums! I guess what we need is another rageing debate between the big bore and small bore clans to generate interest!

I belong to several forums that I believe would welcome the presence of those that have been there and done that. I understand what you say about wanting to avoid debates. I tend to stick my nose into any thread reguarding cylinder drag rings and lawyer inspired safty gadgets. But there is much I would love to learn from the men you mention.

Tell them check out this forum, Handloads.com, and Sixgunner.com These are three of the best as far as I am concerned.

J

James I'm not sure that I understand precisely what you mean, but I feel there is the seeds of something important in what you are saying. One thing I got out of your post was the view that there is a superficiality to much that is published today and I basically agree with this. One does get tired of reading which rifle is the best for hunting deer, for example. Still, I can think of several writers in the glossy magazines who have contributed knowledge as well as spurred my interest, and they have done this responsibly and well within this venue. The other thing that really struck me about your description of Boddington's remarks is more complex, harder to talk about and, I think, far more important. It is the view that adherence to form has become more important than innovativeness or creativity..."quality" if you wish. I can see it in the systems I deal with outside the shooting sports, and it doesn't make it easier that these are systems that influence lives daily. At times I wonder if the perception is due to my getting older, and somewhat more frustrated and depressed, as it becomes increasingly difficult to see my way to a clear resolution of problems. When you have logged forty or more years working with problems you can bring many experiences to bear on them, and things don't necessarily get simpler except, perhaps, for the very best of us. On the other hand, Boddington's perception that there is a strong reliance on form in the system he is dealing with is probably just true too. Indeed, I believe it has always been there and that the reliance illustrates an important survival tactic. It is only the best of us that can deviate from the generally accepted and come through safely and often the tried and true works. Remember Galileo's visit from the Inquisition, for example. There were thousands of smaller stature, and some like him, that didn't live through it. The fear of deviating is real and based on significant facts. Taking the path of deviating only succeeds about one time in a thousand. When I used to get on this theme of people following the herd or the prescribed route, one old friend and mentor of mine, sadly passed away now, used to say to me: "Look whose alive after the army passes through Fred!!!" He meant a number of things when pointing this out, of course. Bless him! He was right! On the other hand, the redemption for me comes from the individual who can often be truly great and surpass himself in spite of all this. Even if I am made of more common clay than he or she and can't do what they do, they uplift my life and show me what is possible in the very best of us. Sometimes that has to be enough, especially if you want to play basketball and are only five foot eight. If this statement is true of me (or you), then I (you) have to serve in other ways. I think Elmer Keith would be an excited man today, but he wouldn't be saying the same things or necessarily doing things in the same way. Indeed, I wonder what he would be doing! Sorry for the long post. I hope you will forgive it because what you said is important to me. I better post this before I get carried away...:-) Fred

I would welcome the participation of any of the gun writers here on the board - either old or young! :D

The normal questions showing up in the gun rags today is: "I'm going elk (deer)(moose)(antelope)(caribou)(etc) hunting and want to know if my .30 whizbanger is adequate, and what load should I use?" These used to set my teeth on edge until it dawned on me that many years ago when first starting to hunt, this would have been a burning question for me, too. Now, with all those years gone by I can answer the questions just as well as the writers and think everyone else should know the answers, too! The young have to re-invent the wheel, guys. Let them learn. We should be patient and help all we can with good, solid answers.

I miss the scribblings of Keith, O'Conner, Page, Raurk, and all the other old timers.

It is true that articles are necessary for beginners. In fact I enjoy a well-written article even if the subject matter is quite basic, like how to get started handloading, or shot placement for deer hunting, etc.

But.... there is an awful lot of drivel, and advertising-driven "product reviews" for junk. It isn't just the gun magazines, either.... check out the car magazines, for example, same problem.

As far as I can tell, most of the mainstream gun magazines have 1 or 2 good writers at most, then a bunch of hacks..... too bad.

We are fortunate to have industry insiders like Mr. James Gates (who is also a published author), and Mr. Ed Harris who pops in from time to time.

In addition there is quite a body of information here in the form of posts, stories, and tech notes from enthusiastic members of this forum.

I believe that one of the key benefits of the Internet is the spread of information that is not controlled by corporate media and (for the most part) advertising dollars.

Now......we seem the be headed in the direction with this post that I am trying to get it to go. All one needs to do today is attend one "Outdoor Writer's Seminar".......follow this syndicated writers as the move from on company to another....to see which will give the most "goodies" for the articles. That, an "orders from above" for them to push the products of the publisher's largest advertising customer!
So where does the reader turn for facts?
This is all "modern merchandising"! Few have any idea what is involved in marketing, sales, discounts, and distribution that causes a product to go or fall by the wayside! No matter how good a product is, if distribution can't get it into the customer's hands.....no one ever knows.
When comparing the past writers like Elmer Keith, Bob Hutton, Donnie Zutzs and all the rest.....what difference do we see today. Simple.....these old heads were dealing with concept that led to the development of products and new methods.
The American customer leans toward the idea today that if it costs tons of money, it must be better......Remember, "Quality is as the Customer Perceives". This combined with the "head game" that causes some's ego to pay great prices for high cost items that really are just for selling.
To close......we should all take a hard look at what we read and consider the motive behind it all. This is the only way you can keep them from playing with your puppet strings!
Best Regards To All, James

James, sometimes the old truths are the best truths, I agree. I remember my grandfather and the other men in the neighbourhood gathering to read the newspapers together on Sunday morning. One of my oldest memories is them telling each other, and me the little kid sitting there saying nothing, to "...read between the lines...". I agree too that there is an emphasis on consumerism today which manipulates perception and it is easy to get sucked in by it. To me one of the best examples of this is, so called, designer labels, where you stick a label on the same piece of clothing or footwear, advertise like h... and it is transported into the $100 plus category. On the other hand, there have been advances in footwear, as my feet tell me each day. In fact, all things considered, I believe new is usually better whether it comes to autos or cloths. (I don't apply this thinking to women though. But this is only the exception that proves the general rule.) It is also true that when one idealizes the past, and men who lived in it, many things are missed or distorted. I don't believe these old guys were superior to the men we have today, for example. Indeed, they were pushed by many of the same motives we are today and there was lots of cheap stuff built and touted that didn't work then too. Another thing about prices is that it cuts both ways. Almost always the more expensive the tool I buy the better it is. Every time I buy a cheap tool I pay twice with some extra gas thrown in! I still have a penchant for buying cheap box end wrenches that let me down when the going gets tough. For me the bottom line is what you implied at the end there, inform yourself or "watch out". I'm not sure that emphasizing the motive behind something is the key to getting by though. I think many people driven almost completely by the profit motive have developed good things. Indeed, people driven by the motive of killing people more efficiently have developed many of our best guns, for example. One of my old mentors used to argue that whether a person was a psychopath while doing surgery wasn't relevent. It was whether the guy was doing good surgery that mattered! Strictly speaking he was correct, of course, but he still used to drive me crazy with the argument!!! Where does one turn for facts? Well, in some cases, I turn to the men who are doing the stuff and are really interested in what they are doing, like on this website. In others, one hires a professional and/or journeyman and pays him. In still others, you read the professional literature. When doing all of these things, however, I keep the responsibility for making the final decision with myself. Naturally one makes mistakes and screws up from time to time. But this approach seems to be the only one that keeps a guy half honest or in control of my (his) own life...so far... Fred

This has been, as is, a very interesting run......however I believe that some of the old heads were motivated by some thing more than dollars (as many did broke like Parker Ackley) and advertising. As for the cost of something relating to its quality....I go along to a point. Let's take the Remington Express as an example. By not having the finish hand polished and blued, using synthetic stocks popped out by high speed injection molding machine, since the mass merchandiser buys them at distributor cost, plus early money discounts, etc........they hit the market very cheap. Now on another forum I work on there are some dealers and they raved and ranted that the Express was an inferior firearm, seconds, and repaired guns from the factory put back on the shelf! Well....it's just not so! The same parts that go into the Wingmaster go into the Express! Remington has only one Mod 870 parts list! It's nothing different except cosmetics! Now, what would the young shooter without mega-bucks think read if they read this dealer's comments that the gun was junkand there was not a rebuttal?
Another example...In this months Guns & Ammo there is a big blurb on a Marlin 1994 madeup in .475 Linebaugh. The price is $1750 and the customer furnishs the rifle.....unless I am mistaked that adds up to over $2000. And one can tell me that's not a BS "Head Game"......not Today (I can already here the flak coming!)! My question is this...if the more money cost does mean more quality....were is the $1800 difference in quality over a NEF in .44 Mag? That is exactly what I am speaking of. The $1800 is a what a customer perceives to be more quality! Again, cosmetics! "Quality is as the Customer Perceives! Does anyone really expect one of today's writers say what I have just said?
Best Regards, James

Hi James. I had no intention of implying that some of the old guys weren't altruistic or that they weren't talented. Indeed, I believe some of them were both. I only meant to say that they operated with the same motives as us, and that there are men today who are also altruistic and every bit as creative and knowledgeable as the older fellows. In fact, from time to time, I believe I meet them on sites like this. I didn't mean to imply that there aren't rip offs today or problems with perception either. I only meant to say that there were snake oil salesmen back then too, as well as people who through ignorance or desperation bought their product. Maybe there is more of a problem with bogus information today because there has been such an explosion in communication technology. At one time there was evidence from consumer research which suggested that consumers made their best decisions with a modicum of information available. When too much information was provided the effectiveness of decisions began to break down. As for price correlating with quality, I agree that it isn't a perfect correlation by any means. The correlation just seems a little stronger when I buy tools. :-) Fred

Fred and All......I understand where you are coming from. I also don't think the old heads were any smarter than today's crop......but I question today's crops motivation vs some of the old heads.
The other factor is just what real experience do the present writers have. How much meat have they really made? I once asked the members of this forum to tell me how and what they killed with handguns for a database.....I got one reply. Let me give you a couple of examples from the past on the forums. I will be 69 this week and have hunted with handguns since 1956. During that time I have killed well over 50 head of deer, wild hogs, and River Pest ( Lazard Grande). During that period I used a few 2nd generation Colt SA in 45, A S&W and Ruger in .41 Mag, S&W in .357 Mag (which I hunt with now), and Rugers in .44 Mag......Now I have said that any 250/265 gr .44 bullet with a large meplat @ 1200 '/" from a handgun was all one needed. I received a lot of flak on that. I have also said time and time again that control was more important than power.....and that a .357 Mag with a proper bullet in the 175/185 gr class was a great game killer. More Flak! There is a great deal of difference in setting at a benchrest shooting and in a stressful game situation where the roles of who is the hunter and who is the hunted can change over quite fast! I have a friend in South Florida that kills as many as 100 deer a year on crop damage control. If anyone knows what works well, he should. I don't dare say what he and the rest of the crop damage control boys use! I don't think many listened when Marshall said he used a .357 Mag carbine for crop damage control either. Remember what Col. Whelen said about not being able to kill something more than 100%.
The point I am trying to make is....I think we owe the young shooters coming aboard more than the BS that rag writers publish! There is nowhere for them to turn now except forums like this one and only then, when we tell them facts from expereince, rather than some of the BS that floats around. If I am wrong, I'll hide out here in Old Towm Hammock and do my thing. Best Regards, James

No - I don't think you're wrong Mr. Gates.

As with most here on the board, I believe most writer's loyalty today lies with the product manufacturer and the edicts of his editor.

It would be very hard for one to knock a product that takes out full page adds monthly in their journal, or provides the hunting seminars they attend and take game. Probably wouldn't be in the gun writing trade too long if they didn't.

The classic in yesteryear was when Winchester changed the classic Model 70 in '64. Story goes that O'Connor was on a fall hunt after introduction and the Winchester host pulled out one of the new rifles for Jack to use and write up. O'Connor snorted that it was a piece of trash and refused to use it or write it up in glowing terms. What do you suppose the present day writers would do in similar circumstance? Bet they would go pop a cap at some obliging animal and wax poetic on the virtues of the new wonder weapon!

Bob Melik was a prettey good sage, that is - until he decided to bad mouth my pet 7mm Rem Mag as no better than a .280 Rem. Never forgave him for that little article!

Craig Bottington seems to be the closest to un-prostituted by today's manufacturers. He is a big bore, ultra high velocity fan and, as such, trumpets the wonders of the Lazzaroni and some of the others falling into this niche, but he can be forgiven as he also writes about the older shoulder busters and even sneaks in articles on such as the venerable old 30-06 every now and then.

Dave Scovill and John Barsness are now my favorite authors, along with all the others on the Wolfe Publishing board. Rifle, Handloader, Successful Hunter, The American Rifleman and North American Hunter are the only publications I receive anymore - all the others were cancelled long ago.

Well, Friends.....I've got to pull out of here. We "Swamp Crawlers" are putting stands in the swamp tomorrow. Acorns are falling, the moon getting right, the pigs are fat, and the deer are moving in to feed. It's Red Meat Time! Bill McConnell, Mike Coles, Joey Sanders, and John Anderson will be checking in before long and I have to get everything set up right for that crowd. There will be wood smoke from the campfires soon in Old Town Hammock ......wish you all were here to eat Smoked Pig, Mustard Fried Venison, Red Beans and Rice, Cuban Coffee, and Suwannee River Channel Cats.......oh yes, Bill....Cissey's sweet cornbread! Maybe even a little bit of "Lazard Grande"
Until Then, Friends.....My Best Regards To All, James

Best of luck on your hunt James!!! I wonder which gun you'll be packing...lol...Fred

I've been reading gun mags since the 1960's and grew up reading Elmer Keith, Jack O'Conner, Jeff Cooper and others. I wrote Jack O'Conner a fan letter and he responded. Wish I could find that letter, but it was misplaced somewhere along the last 40 years of trials and tribulations.

The modern gun magazines are increasingly vacuous and lacking in substance, although very professionally produced. They are very strongly product and advertiser driven. Every time I read one, I feel as though I'm reading an advertising circular for the firearms industry. I do not bedrudge the firearms industry because a healthy firearms industry is essential to the existence of a shooting culture, or rather what little is left of the shooting culture that used to exist.

In the last few years, I have discovered a fantastic source of shooting information in the internet shooting forums (fora?) such as this one. Frequently I find that regular lay people on these boards actually have more experience and knowhow than the "groomed" professional writers who make careers our of promoting the industry's latest products.

James,
I know you're out hunting, but this is interesting, so I think I'll jump in!
I agree that many of the magazines today seem to be mainly about selling stuff. Maybe they always were, I don't know. These days I like Barsness and Scovill pretty well - they seem pretty knowledgeable and don't push products too hard. When they do take somebody's new whiz-banger on a hunt they are pretty straightforward about it.

Why do they do what they do? It seems to me writing is one of the few ways a fellow could finance a lot of gear and hunting trips iffin he weren't wealthy. I know I don't get to do half the experimentation and so forth I'd like to because I can't afford to, either in time or $.

It is interesting to me, James, that only one person responded to your request for handgun hunting data. I would have thought more would reply. Myself, I've never shot anything but a target with a handgun, and while I know a lot of guys who carry handguns into the woods, I do not personally know anyone who hunts specifically with one in my area. To me, they are just too loud to use w/out hearing protection except in an emergency. I already don't hear that well!

As far as personal experience I'd be happy to share that! I've shot perhaps 25-30 big game animals, in Delaware, Tennessee, Montana, and Idaho, and I can vouch that the 243 Win, 7mm Rem Mag, 308 Win, 30-06, a 50 cal muzzleloader and 12 gauge w/ a Brenneke slug all work okay. The 243 demands a premium bullet, and the 7 mag bloodshot a lot of meat. Other than that, there isn't much difference.

OKAY, so that's not as exciting as an O'Connor story, but that's all I've got!