Long-range Handgun Shooting: Elmer Keith

I noticed in a picture Handejector posted on Elmer Keith's 38/44 Outdoorsman, there was an accompanying letter from Mr. Keith discussing the provenance and history on it.

One thing that caught my attention was that he stated--to paraphrase--that he repeatedly hit a target at 400 yards that was 18".

In thinking about this, it somewhat baffles the mind. Is this for real? I'm sure it is, but boy, it seems unreal.

I've done long-distance practice at the target range at 100 and 150 yards relatively frequently. Ok. I can understand the theory behind it...but 400 yards repeatedly?!

How much practice would it take at those distances (all variables considered, including shooter's techniques) would it take to get to his level?

Please share your thoughts on the general topic. I just felt compelled to share my amazement.

Smith & Wesson Forum - handejector's Album: Ray's Silver Medals - Picture

(Handejector's Photo to cite the source)

Lets say you have a model 29. You also have a ransom rest. Your gun and ammo are perfectly mated. Would this simple formula be true?
25 yards you can keep them in one inch.
50 yards = 2"s.
100 yards = 4"s
200 yards = 8"s
400 yards = 16"s.
I wouldnt want ray charles shooting at me at 400 yards much less elmer.
However I wouldnt mind betting on the outcome, from behind elmer.

I know it's sacrilegious, but I think Elmer Keith was full of BS on a lot of things, with his claimed extreme long range revolver shooting chief among them.

JMHO

Duke426 said:

I know it's sacrilegious, but I think Elmer Keith was full of BS on a lot of things, with his claimed extreme long range revolver shooting chief among them.

JMHO

Click to expand...

I'm inclined to agree. A 1 inch group at 25 yards is pretty much the limit of accuracy for a 38 caliber revolver that features a one piece cantelever mounted barrel. In addition it takes a good deal of experimentation and load devlopment to hit that mark.

With a 44 caliber revolver you are facing a reduction in barrel section relative to muzzle energy. Basically, the barrel will "whip" more than the smaller and less powerful 38 caliber and that whip will degrade accuracy. I suspect that a real world result of shooting at 400 yards would be at least one miss and most likely 2 misses out of 5 attempts. Add in the difficulty in play at trying to hit a target that you're probably aiming 4 or 5 feet above and the likelyhood for missing goes way up.

Well, it also depends on the direction of the wind and it's speed...

But how abt. a test? Who has a 400yd range available?

I have a 5" 29-2, a ransom rest and a unlimited distance range. I havent been a active shooter in ages 71 years old and have the shakes. Maybe I will make it a project when I get some ambition.
I hadnt used my ransom rest in 30 years but got it overhauled a couple years ago. I finaly took it out a couple months ago but had trouble with my mounting system. Its been rideing in the back of my truck the last three months. I gotta get with the program. Think my 30 year old handloads are up to it?

Elmer grew up with sixguns. He carried them all the time and called them a weapon of opportunity! He had a lot more opportunity to use them than any members of this forum, myself included. He was also an excellent rifleman too, being involved in the introduction of the updated Winchester model 54-the model 70. An expert on reloading for the big Sharps cartridges which I can attest too. Not to mention his bullet designs which are IMHO still cutting edge today.

I'm not really sure what to make of it, candidly.

An 18" target at 400 yards has to be really small to the naked eye. No rest or support, no scope. Even when trying to take a couple shots to judge where your hitting; it would still prove very difficult to judge/see where the shots go.

Elmer Keith is a legend and has made extraordinary, lasting contributions to the sport. No question. I am not taking a position either way.

I'm just thinking, if this is true, it is quite possibly the most remarkable handgun shooting i've read.

Hicock 45 on Youtube:

Glock 23 At 230 Yards - YouTube

This is a full size gong maybe close to 3 ft, at 230 yards.

Alot of Elmer's shooting was called fake even at the time, so he started doing his shooting in front of witnesses. Elmer wasn't the only one that shot long range with a handgun in those days, Ed McGivern, Doug Wesson, Phil Sharpe all shot long range with their handguns back in those days, alot were .38-44's and .357's since the .44 Magnum was yet to be invented. I know a couple guys who used to shoot silhouette open sight and for them 200 yards and up was no big deal, and they didn't shoot anywhere near as much as Elmer did. I know with my limited skill shooting long range with a handgun (hard to get distance here in the mountains) my .38-44 in good hands could certainly do the job of at least 100-150 yards and maybe more if sighted in properly.

Elmer Kieth hitting an eighteen inch target at 400 yards with a handgun? I find it believable. He was witnessed performing many great shots.

I remember reading that Ed McGivern, in 1936, showed (this was witnessed) that with the then new .357 magnum revolver he could consistently hit (six out of six) a man sized silhouette at 600 yards from a prone position. After his demonstration he coached some of the witnesses and they were able to hit the same target for five out of six.

I believe the right person with the right skill and the right handgun can do it.

Supposedly he'd rest against a tree while sitting and brace his hold between his knees; then he'd fire for effect to see where the shots landed. Remember he always used the same load in the same Model 29s. The load was 2400 powder backed off from max by about four grains, topped by a 240 grain Keith style semi wad cutter and using standard, not magnum, primers.

At gun meets, he regularly took out one-gallon jugs at 100 yards after firing two for effect and then getting the hit...

His style epitomized the maxim of "beware of the one-gun man."

Or, as Wyatt Earp said, the handgun was basically a 15-yard affair but using the 7.5 inch .45 Colt a good man could always worry an opponent at 600 yards---maybe not hit him but worry him.

I think revolver men, big bore revolver men, were extremely assiduous in the use of their irons.

I have trouble hitting an 8" target with my .22lr pistols at fifty
yards. With ten shots, might get 5 on the target. Have tried for laughs shooting a Ruger MKIII at 100 yards. Target was a standard B-27. Shooting in a chair, with a sand bag on the bench. After about 100 rounds I started hitting it most times.
This really suprised me.
So I think a pistol can hit targets at ranges that suprise you. Who knows! Great shooter with the right ammo, and gun, might really suprise!

400 yards with open sights with a .44mag Revolver? Hmmmmmw? Don't know. Would love to see some great shooter's try it. Might be a new TV show!!!

Or maybe get Myth Busters on the case.

Gun22

Duke426 said:

I know it's sacrilegious, but I think Elmer Keith was full of BS on a lot of things, with his claimed extreme long range revolver shooting chief among them.

JMHO

Click to expand...

Wish I had a time machine. I would PAY to watch You TELL Elmer face to face that he was full of BS. LOL.

And yes. I agree it is a sacrilige to post such opinions. Keith was the real deal. If he said he did it, I'd bet he did.

We need to define "regularly". One hit out of a cylinder full? Three out of six?


Any idea what was the shape of his 400 yd target anyone??

Or ammo used? What barrel length?

I can see a test on the horizon.

FN in MT

An 18" target at 400 yds. w/ a open sighted .44 Magnum? Depends... on whose doing the shooting, the prevailing conditions and the revolver/load. Keith w/ a .44 revolver at 400 yds... I'd bet on him.

Frank, Brucey, his load is known and I gave it a few posts above yours. By all accounts, he didn't vary it over decades. Originally he used a heavier maximum .44 load with 2400 powder but he did back off as he got older, realizing he was getting to borderline dangerous where the brass was really bulging and sticking in the cylinders.

Take a look at Ed McGivern's book. He has a chapter on long range shooting with the 38/44 and the then-new .357 mag. If I recall correctly, he did some testing out to 600 yds and was able to put a significant percentage of rounds on a silhouette target even that far out.

I've never tried shooting paper at 400-600 yds. but we do lots of rock shooting that far out in this open country. I certainly don't claim to be especially good at it, but I've done enough long distance shooting to believe that someone who really shoots a lot could be extremely lethal at those ranges. Elmer was one of those guys, and I don't believe I would have cared to try him out at any distance at which he could see me!

redlevel said:

I BELIEVE!!!

Click to expand...

ME TOO!! Larry

I personally saw Elmer fire at 200 yards from a bench when he was 78, and there were numerous other witnesses, including a TV newsman.

You would not have cared to be his target. The gun was a Mikkenger Arms .44 Magnum, resembling a Ruger Super Blackhawk, but with tighter tolerances and a higher price. He had just been presented the gun while making a speech and meeting fans in a Dallas hotel the night before.

I talked with him then and on several other occasions, and had breakfast with him at a Winchester press function at the 1979 NRA Convention n San Antonio.

I think I am a fairly good detector of BS, and Elmer Keith, although rather vain, did not seem to me to have that aura.

This does not mean that I think he necessarily killed that infamous wounded deer at 600 yards with a .44 Magnum. But I think he believed that he did. The animal may have just collapsed from prior wounds as he fired. Or, he may have administered the final blow. We'll never know for sure.

One thing he told me that made a lot of sense and explained why he didn't shoot some guns loose was that he didn't always fire those heavy "Keith loads" on a routine basis. He used them when he thought they were likely to be needed and for some practice, but not daily.

I certainly did believe his story that he shot a buck across a river while fishing. Without checking, I think he wrote that the range was about 200-250 yards, and he used a Model 29 wih four-inch barrel. I don't think many of us should try that, but he probably achieved it. Whether it was a sportsmanlike shot is another matter.

Elmer also shot several caribou with four-inch bbl. M-57's and they did not die easily or quickly. Unless one was desperate for meat and had no rifle at hand, that wouldn't be somethng that I'd risk.

I think we need to keep in mind that Elmer was often shooting for meat that his family needed. But that caribou hunt was a sporting endeavor. I didn't tell him so, but it kinda stuck in my craw. I hoped that the "public" didn't see his reporting on that. PETA, etc. would have had a fine time citing that as an example of what hunters are like and how much suffering they cause.

But it says a lot about Elmer's honesty that he told the story as it happened, and didn't try to sweep it under the rug. He was pretty disappointed in the performance of the .41 Magnum, which he otherwise liked a great deal, if not as much as the .44. Extreme cold weather may have affected the velocity of the bullets on that occasion.