Elmer Keith's 600 yard shot

[788Ham]

MikePGS,

I remember a show on the History Channel about snipers. They showed a mock-up of Hathcock and his spotter, then taking the shot. After that segment, there was another sniper, I believe he was retired, who tried and tried to re-do what Hathcock had done, he never did it! This other sniper shot I don't remember how many scopes, just wasted ammo and scopes trying to prove a point..... he never out did Carlos either, that's why they are legends!

 

[natman]

People always talk about effective ranges for handguns and the max distances are always, 7 yards, 50 yards, 200 yards etc...How come Elmer Keith killed a mule deer from across a canyon at 600 paces with a 44 magnum revolver with open sights???

There is a big difference between what's possible and what's effective. Sure a 44 mag can inflict a fatal wound at 600 yards - if you can hit with it that far away. Just because Elmer Keith mixed luck and skill and did it once doesn't make it a good idea.

Anyone else think that people who write all these articles have no practical experiences to show actual limitations?

I think the people who write all these articles based their limitations on practical experience. At least they understand the ethical difference between hunting and shooting at wounded game that's getting away and the difference between what's possible and what's practical.

So my question to you all....how far would you shoot, lets say a mule deer, with a 44 mag "Keith Load?"

About 100 yards with a 44 rifle. Considerably less with a pistol.

 

[Guillermo]

Colt, dear boy, a Colt

what do you have against Smiths?

 

[Old Fuff]

what do you have against Smiths?

Understand that I was being specific about J-frame models.

To shoot snubbies at longer ranges then (give or take) 50 yards you have to be able to raise the front sight in the rear notch to compensate for trajectory. The older Colt Detective Specials had round "pencil barrels," with a high front sight. The very first S&W Chief Special's (pre-model 36) were the same, but they quickly changed to a ribbed barrel with a low front sight - which is still used today. For normal snubbie distances they work, but not when shooting at longer ranges. Also the Colt's have a handle that's large enough to hold onto with all three lower fingers. The shorter one on J-frames is for most people only good for two. If these little revolvers are not firmly supported in the hand when fired they can shift, and at long ranges will throw shots where you don't want them to go.

In fairness to Smith & Wesson, I will admit that snubbie versions of the Military & Police model made before the war, and a short time thereafter, that had pencil barrels and high front sights; were equal to the Detective Special, but as a practical matter they are seldom seen. The same can be said about model 15's with two-inch barrels, but again you don't see many, and they are heavier and more bulky when it comes to concealed carry.

When it comes to longer range snubbie shooting in a size/weight package that's practical to carry, The Detective Special is the best way to go.

 

[NMGonzo]

Not me!! I rang a gong at 600 meters once, but it was an accident, and by no means - the first shot.

Now 200 yards... Maybe...

Clear day, no wind, 12 inch gong, sitting with a good support for my hand ... yes.

 

[Tequila Mockingbird]

Interesting thread...

I've read Sixguns by Keith, and I consider it an interesting read, but I've always withheld judgment on whether Keith really was able to make the shots he claims to have made. The main reason for this is that the only point of reference I have is myself, and I can't even come close to some of the shots he describes, although I consider myself reasonably proficient with a handgun. Off a rest, with open sights, I can generally place all my shots in the black on the standard SR-1 target, but I can't do it offhand with any consistency. At 25 yards offhand, I might occasionally get a one inch group, but usually I get one or two fliers that spoil the group.

It seems to me that getting consistently good groups is really tough, but almost everyone can recount their truly amazing one-time shot, when everything lined up just right and it all came together for some spectacular result.

That's one of the reasons I soured on gun magazines a long time ago. All the guys writing the articles were superb shots who never failed to get a great group or knock down an elk at 400 yards with rain pouring down and a howling cross wind blowing. It's just too easy to be a great shot when you're sitting in front of a computer screen. So I just take all that with a grain of salt...

 

[piece of meat]

just a question: when these guys are out there wandering in the field or just on the farm/ranch/land shooting rifles and magnum revolvers, do they use hearing protection? if not how do they not lose their hearing?

 

[CajunBass]

just a question: when these guys are out there wandering in the field or just on the farm/ranch/land shooting rifles and magnum revolvers, do they use hearing protection? if not how do they not lose their hearing?

Probably not. Back in the day, almost nobody used hearing protection. Earplugs? What are earplugs?

Did they lose their hearing? Well...Yes...they did. That's how we gradually learned to use earplugs.