What the h... are .357 Magnum jokes?

[ElmerKeith]

After reading this article

DOES ANYBODY KNOW THE STORY ON THE EARLY 629'S

and the linked excerpt of HL 241 with the article by Biran Pearce about handloading the M 29 I was very amused about Mr. Pearce stating:

There was even a group known as the ".44 Associates" who shared load data, hunting stories and .357 Magnum jokes,...

Who were these 44 Associates and does anyone know on or more of these mentioned jokes?

[blujax01]

A .38 Special, a 9 mm and a .380 walk into a bar -

The .357 splinters it!

[Maximumbob54]

A .38 special looks at a .357 magnum and says, "Why the long case?"

[Twogunnes]

Originally Posted by ElmerKeith

After reading this article

DOES ANYBODY KNOW THE STORY ON THE EARLY 629'S

and the linked excerpt of HL 241 with the article by Biran Pearce about handloading the M 29 I was very amused about Mr. Pearce stating:



Who were these 44 Associates and does anyone know on or more of these mentioned jokes?

Yes, I know of the 44 Associates. Have read quite a lot about them. Really interesting.

I suggest you acquire the book(s), and read about them yourself.

[6GUNSONLY]

In reference to the .44 associates, .357 jokes were about the (in their view) superiority of the heavily loaded .44 special to the .357.

[Penmon]

Twogunnes, what books are you referring to?
Generally its better to give a short answer to a polite question as opposed to a smug one.

[bettis1]

You use the handle "ElmerKeith" and you never heard of the ".44 Associates"???

[Twogunnes]

Originally Posted by Penmon

Twogunnes, what books are you referring to?
Generally its better to give a short answer to a polite question as opposed to a smug one.

I agree with Bettis, you use the name Elmer Keith and....

Start reading the books he co-wrote. But, I will suggest you take it with a grain of salt.

Then read of Jack O'Conner's books. For more salt.

[David LaPell]

I always wondered why some thought so little of the .357 Magnum, yet Elmer even though he was more into the .44 did like the .357 Magnum, just not as much as the hot .44 Specials and the .44 Magnum. In his early reviews of the .357 Magnum in a 1935 edition of the American Rifleman he killed over 100 jackrabbits and wrote some glowing reviews. The .44 Associates were quite an interesting group from what I have read, but from what I have seen I have never anything where they wrote bad ink on the .357. Anyway, the .357 is certainly no slouch when properly motivated with the right bullets.

[358156hp]

The .357 seemed to be Elmers "rabbit" caliber. If you read his books, you'll find that he was a big bore man at heart, first with the 45 Colt, then the 44 Spl, followed of course by the 44 magnum. Kind of interesting, considering his first "new" gun was a 32-20 Colt SAA. FWIW, Elmer did play a part in the development of the 357 magnum too, although he seemed to think more highly of the 38-44 over the .357. Probably because his 173 grain 358429 bullet was designed for the 38 Spl, and was too long for the early 357 mags. Phil Sharpe shortened the 358429 for use in the 357 magnum. The end result weighed 158 grains IIRC, which has been a standard bullet weight since the beginning. BTW, there is a lot of information on the 44 Associates, I'd suggest you use your browser to track it down, it's worthwhile reading. You'll see a lot of famous names on their membership rolls.

[mikld]

Try googling ".44 Special Loads" by Lawrence I. Newton...

[RussellD]

Elmer taunted a few people with the big bore stuff. Talked about using a 220 grain 30.06 as a varmint round..said he teach even the smallest framed women to shoot a 4" .44 mag. Sold a lot of print with the all the hype...

[snubbyfan]

Not really a joke but a funny moment anyway. I use 2 spring clamps to hold targets to my target holder. My wife was blasting .357 magnums through her 4" 66-3 and accidently (she says) shot one of the spring clamps and it went flying. Don't know why but it just seemed hilarious. Of course I took it as a challenge and shot the other one with my 442. When we retrieved the clamps, the one she shot had a hole all the way through and mine was just dented. After a little time with a hammer and an anvil I got the clamps working again.

[BUFF]

Writers often "recycle" (a kinder phrase than "copy" or "plagarize") other writer's writings. Methinks I recognize other's work sometimes in print:

"Through this whole mess, my appetites were honed by a dedicated group of individualists who called themselves "The .44 Associates." At the time, I thought these afficianados of the .44 Special rather smug. They already had their guns and interchanged loading information and jokes about .357 shooters in a regular newsletter."

This was written by Skeeter Skelton and published in August, 1966, in an article he wrote titled "The .44 Special: A Reappraisal".

Brian Pearce wasn't born yet, I bet.

Writing about guns and wearing a cowboy hat sure don't make you into Skeeter Skelton, that's for sure.

[shawn mccarver]

Originally Posted by Twogunnes

I agree with Bettis, you use the name Elmer Keith and....

Start reading the books he co-wrote. But, I will suggest you take it with a grain of salt.

Then read of Jack O'Conner's books. For more salt.

Jack O'Connor pushed the .270 and will be remembered for that. Beyond that, his name should not be mentioned along with that of Elmer Keith.

Aside from Mr. O'Connor's odd personality as compared to Keith's jovial and friendly manner, Keith had a broad base of experience and knowledge across the disciplines of shotgunning, rifles and hunting and, of course, handguns and handgun hunting. Keith's experience was far more broad than O'Connor. Keith certainly had a less polished writing style, but what he lacked in form was easily made up in substance. Thus, while O'Connor should have his due for his conservation efforts and his promotion of the .270 rifle cartridge, there is just no doubt that he and Keith did not play in the same ball park.

About the most they had in common was that they both wrote articles for gun magazines. Keith was an experimenter who came up with new ideas for ammo and guns, and he got companies to bring his ideas to the general public.

Thus, while O'Connor is remembered as Mr. Outdoor Life and for his conservation efforts and his sheep hunting and promotion of the .270, Keith is remembered for his involvement with the .357 Magnum, the .44 Magnum and the .41 Magnum revolvers and cartridges and for a host of other things related to hunting, shooting, safaris and the like. Keith pushed rifle calibers in the .338 range and could never really understand why the .270 should be used instead of a .30-06.

It really doesn't make good sense, does it? They are both long actions, but the "ought-six" takes a wider range of bullet weights and can do more, all in a rifle of equal weight and identical features. Thus, why would you really want a less versatile rifle?

Oh well, it doesn't really matter. The evidence is right in front of us. O'Connor barely gets mentioned in articles these days, while there is still a "larger than life" fascination with Elmer.

[semperfi71]

In O'Connor's last book, titled I think "The Last Book", he (I am speaking from memory) said that Elmer contacted him and begged for an opportunity to be introduced into the "top" gun writing world. Jack O'Connor said he did indeed "open some doors" for Keith. Then O'Connor reported that Keith snubbed him forever after.

O'Connor also took a swipe at the style of "dress" that many of his gun writing "associates" took upon themselves "back in the day". He mentioned one who wore "big cowboy hats", and a few others. Then he commented on how when he arrived at gala events with these "dressed up" gun writers he (O'Connor) was dressed like an out of work trombone player.

O'Connor was as experienced a big game hunter as Keith but the was definitely not an experimenter and wildcatter like Keith. He used the .270 because he said it would kill as well as a .30-06 and if anything heavier than the .270 was needed he went to a .375 H&H. He also stated he didn't necessarily "push" the .270 caliber as a "signature" cartridge as many later game writers would do (Charles Askins and the 8MM's he pushed, or Elmer and his .338's) instead he shot it because he liked it and he stayed with it because for him it was effective.

I always suspected that Jack O'Connor was not reticent to speak his mind in a probably sometimes visceral manner, at least privately. He was probably a direct and blunt man and not many people like thorns with their roses.

Indeed Jack O'Connor does not have the recognition as does Elmer Keith. Both of them are probably happy though as they have their wives beside them wherever they are now. Not many folks today have wives like Jack and Elmer had.

[BUFF]

One article I remember O'Conner writing was about handguns. He said he had little experience with them, but he said he liked a 6-1/2 inch .44 Special 1950 Target a great deal.

Small world.

[Pisgah]

Originally Posted by Penmon

Twogunnes, what books are you referring to?
Generally its better to give a short answer to a polite question as opposed to a smug one.

I just Googled ".44 Associates" -- 229,000 hits in .24 seconds.

I love teaching, and I think many of the other forum members do, too. But the student needs to put just a bit of effort into the process in order to learn anything worthwhile, and there's not a thing out of line in a teacher saying "Here's a clue. Go look it up yourself and report what you find." Unfortunately, many people these days seem to have never been taught how to learn.

[murphydog]

In defense of the OP, if he is to do his own research on his Forum namesake, he may have to find German translations of the material in question or must be more fluent in English than my German will ever be .

[ElmerKeith]

Originally Posted by Twogunnes

I agree with Bettis, you use the name Elmer Keith and....

Start reading the books he co-wrote. But, I will suggest you take it with a grain of salt.

Then read of Jack O'Conner's books. For more salt.

Living in Germany the availability to me of books written by Elmer Keith as a co-writer is not as good as it is in his homecountry.
I have and read Sixguns and "Hell I was there" and also Phil Sharpe's book about reloading. As well as Taffin's book of the .44.

But the exact expression "44 Associates" was absolutely new to me. The reason may be the fact that although beeing quite familiar with the English language I wasn't raised with the inventors of the 44. Will say that sometimes it is quite difficult to follow and understand the conversation even if written.

O.K. I could have used google to try to find out but as far as I know this forum isn't the "Anna-Amalia-Library" as it is not the "NYC-Library" and so it will live from answers and questions even if the questions are asked by someone being so in-polite using as a nickname the name of the Pope of the 44.

I chose this name because I was especially impressed about this little big man managing his life which was not alway easy to him - sometimes it was very cruel to him. I didn't chose his name just for his invention of some ammo while letting a Colt 45 going kaboom.

[semperfi71]

ElmerKeith,

You came to the right place with a legitimate question.

I too am more impressed with Elmer Keith's life rather than his cartridge achievements. He was one tough boy-grown to man.

My favorite Elmer Keith picture is the one whereby he is about 20, standing in deep snow, with a horse named "Satan". Its so cold both Elmer and Satan are breathing frost. Elmer is dressed to ride which I'm sure in his day a man sometimes had to ride in dead winter.

I own horses and know that a name of "Satan" instantly evokes a rough bronc. Elmer said as much. The horse was a ornery mustang which he finally broke and he said it was one of the best horses he ever had. Sadly he reports it was later stolen and he searched high and low and never found it. Even today I can feel his anger and passion. If someone stole my good horse, If I found him, no one else would.

[tappedandtagged]

In regards to Elmer vs Jack... Unless ya'll knew them, all we can domis speculate and draw from what others have said. The fact that they are written about and "touted" in the firearms world should (in my opinion) show that they were knowledgable men. As far as who is better than who, well, we can't know as none of us were there to shake either of their hands.

Take my $0.02 and spend it as you wish.

[David LaPell]

I can tell you having read most of Elmer's books on handguns and cartridges, and even the one where the whole thing is full of his letters on many subjects, you get the idea that he was set in his ways and that was that. I know he did not quite understand why the .44 Magnum was not pushed more for a law enforcement round, and I think he was ticked off that the .41 Magnum never really succeeded. As a writer myself on these subjects having written some articles, it is hard not to repeat what others have done. It's like a remake of a good movie, why mess with the original product, but if you dig in deep enough you can find more about the subject. Most who know me know that I have a deep affection for the .357 Magnum and the .38-44 rounds. This was more by accident than design, after I got hurt I simply could not shoot the big bores one handed accurately like I can the .357. I had a .41 Magnum that I tried and it could not be done, and I even played around with a couple of .45 Colts, although I may try another some day.
I have tried to stay out of the caliber wars as they are called because what I can shoot comfortably all day long others may find intolerable. Before I got hurt I could shoot fifty rounds at a time of .44 Magnum from my Model 29. I find though that shooting my Model 27 one handed is just as enjoyable now. I don't live anywhere where I have to worry about the really big bears, and even if I did, a 160 grain cast SWC travelling at 1,400 fps from that .357 is nothing to sneeze at.
I think you need to look at the older writers with a grain of salt because its like anything else. I look at Elmer and Skeeter for a lot of inspiration, Elmer certainly did more woods time than most other people can ever dream of. He killed lots of game, so didn't Skeeter but the settings were different. Skeeter found a lot of use for the .357 Magnum but loved the .44 Special. Elmer, once he got to the .44 Magnum every other handgun to him was out of the question. I would say if Elmer was into cars he would be what you would call a speed freak, he got those velocities up as high as he could in his guns. Skeeter liked his .357's hot but he knew what he could do with them. Many gun writers now don't experiment like the older guys used to. What I have noticed is that few of them except for a small handful even really seem to play around with a variety of loads. John Taffin, Brian Pearce and Mike Venturino do some of that but most seem to take the gun and take the ammo and go out and shoot it and that's it. Few writers now seem to have a caliber they like and stick with. It's more about reviews I think than anything I feel and that's a darn shame. It's almost as if they don't want to offend anyone by saying that they are for one caliber more than another. To me, pick the caliber, if you like it and it works and you are good with it, and then defend your choice as long as you can back it up. To heck with what others think, if you like the .44, shoot it, the same with the other calibers. Damn the torpedoes and full speed ahead.

[semperfi71]

In handguns I like all the calibers and have no favorite.

If I remember correctly Elmer thought the .44 and .41 would make an excellent handgun for LEO's and once he stated (again from my memory) ...."all you have to do the handle the recoil is let the weapon roll up..." or something to that affect.

Most law officers then, and now could not handle the recoil of the .41 and .44 Magnums. Not a slam to LEO's because a lot of people couldn't and still can't.

Also, I have never been in a gunfight...but I have heard that in a real one excess recoil is not good because the shooter wants to be back on target quickly. This is true as well in Cowboy Action Shooting, the top shooters do not shoot .45 Colts with 250 grain bullets at 900 fps, it cuts down on their "time" to win.

There's not much reason today to "discover" new calibers or find new ways to load the old ones, all of the work is done.

About the only avenue left is to experiment with the plethora of gun powders we have that Elmer, Skeeter, and O'Connor did not have. Which is what I am currently doing.

All of the older gun writers had different "takes' on different subjects but they all had interesting tales to tell to a young lad (me) who's only outdoors adventures at that time was running trotlines for catfish.

[dickttx]

Don't know if any of you read Steven Hunter, but he has an entertaining book titled Pale Horse Coming in which the main character enlists the aid of Elmer, Jack, Audie, Charlie, and Bill, I believe.
An enjoyable read.

[M29since14]

Originally Posted by semperfi71

...There's not much reason today to "discover" new calibers or find new ways to load the old ones, all of the work is done.

Certainly a lot of truth in that. Getting back to the OP's question, I have read some ".44 Associates" material. It's been years now but I don't recall seeing ".357 Magnum jokes" per se. I believe that was just the author's way of remarking that the .357 was not held in any sort of awe by the .44 Associates. They tended to berate it as being over-rated in terms of killing power and penetration.