peacemaker45
Member
Howdy folks. Being interested in both reading and rifles, I recently decided to do some reading about rifles. Although I did grow up with guns, and reading about guns, I did so too late to read any of Jack O'Connor's magazine pieces, as he, alas, left the scene four years before I was born. I also hadn't read any of his books until now, though I've certainly heard and read a lot about him.
Anyhow, along with several other "before my time," classics, I was able to find a copy of his 1970 book The Hunting Rifle. It's not my intent to write a full blown review, merely to make a few observations and ask a few questions.
First, the elephant in the room. Knowing of him by reputation, I was surprised to see how little he was pushing the .270 Winchester. That may be the thing for which he is most remembered, and yet he always recommended, at least in this book, an appropriate caliber that you can shoot well. Far from pushing the .270 for everything, he talked about varmint rifles, deer rifles, Magnum 30s, medium bores and big bores, all as tools fitted for certain jobs.
Second, the enmity with Elmer Keith. He did at one point mention that one ought to ask for more qualification in an expert than merely that he wear a big hat, and another time, in discussing formulas for so-called stopping power, he mentioned Keith by name. Otherwise, there was small sign of acrimony.
Third, is his prose style. He certainly presented his information clearly and well, but to tell the truth, I didn't find his style particularly engaging. Keith may be scatterbrained and badly organized, but you'd never call him dull. Cooper may have been excessively formalistic, but he was funny, too.
Next, the questions. Mostly these are things he mentioned, but which I'd never thought of, or never thought of in that way before.
One such is the way he describes some bullet failures. Sometimes bullets fail to penetrate, instead blowing up on impact. I'd always just thought of them as fragmenting, but he describes such bullets as "a gilding metal bottle, filled with molten lead," which shatters and spews liquid lead everywhere on impact. He says this is caused by too soft an alloy for the core, and too much heat from the friction of the barrel. Any truth to the description? Any way even to know?
Another is the effect of a bullet's rotational speed on wounding. It hadn't ever occurred to me, but an expanded hollow point, with petals sticking out in all directions and spinning at 200,000 RPM is a fearsome little buzz saw. But does it continue to spin in tissue? Is it a factor at all?
Anyhow, along with several other "before my time," classics, I was able to find a copy of his 1970 book The Hunting Rifle. It's not my intent to write a full blown review, merely to make a few observations and ask a few questions.
First, the elephant in the room. Knowing of him by reputation, I was surprised to see how little he was pushing the .270 Winchester. That may be the thing for which he is most remembered, and yet he always recommended, at least in this book, an appropriate caliber that you can shoot well. Far from pushing the .270 for everything, he talked about varmint rifles, deer rifles, Magnum 30s, medium bores and big bores, all as tools fitted for certain jobs.
Second, the enmity with Elmer Keith. He did at one point mention that one ought to ask for more qualification in an expert than merely that he wear a big hat, and another time, in discussing formulas for so-called stopping power, he mentioned Keith by name. Otherwise, there was small sign of acrimony.
Third, is his prose style. He certainly presented his information clearly and well, but to tell the truth, I didn't find his style particularly engaging. Keith may be scatterbrained and badly organized, but you'd never call him dull. Cooper may have been excessively formalistic, but he was funny, too.
Next, the questions. Mostly these are things he mentioned, but which I'd never thought of, or never thought of in that way before.
One such is the way he describes some bullet failures. Sometimes bullets fail to penetrate, instead blowing up on impact. I'd always just thought of them as fragmenting, but he describes such bullets as "a gilding metal bottle, filled with molten lead," which shatters and spews liquid lead everywhere on impact. He says this is caused by too soft an alloy for the core, and too much heat from the friction of the barrel. Any truth to the description? Any way even to know?
Another is the effect of a bullet's rotational speed on wounding. It hadn't ever occurred to me, but an expanded hollow point, with petals sticking out in all directions and spinning at 200,000 RPM is a fearsome little buzz saw. But does it continue to spin in tissue? Is it a factor at all?
