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.

__________________
Rather be outdoors

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

(Handejector's Photo to cite the source)

__________________
Rather be outdoors

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

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?

__________________
Jorge

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.

__________________
Rather be outdoors

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.

__________________
Vaya con Dios

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

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!

I BELIEVE!!!

__________________
Georgia On My Mind

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.

Well lets see. A current day 38 special +P 158 grain bullet drops almost 15 inches at 100 yards. So you do the math and elevation trajectory. Just saying.

Speer Ammo - Ballistics Tables

__________________
Still Running Against the Wind

I'm reading this and my minds eye is standing on the covered firing point of my Fish & Game club. our range is only 300 yrds, Damn thats a looooong way to loob a chunk of lead.

__________________
UNDER THE CONE OF SILENCE

I never met Elmer Keith, so I never saw him shoot. I had two friends who did visit him in the '70s. He seemed to be very generous to shooters with his invitations to stop by.

Both of those friends told me that Elmer was a VERY fine shot, and coming from these gentlemen, it meant quite a lot to me since I knew they themselves both were very fine shots. Their story was that they thought him beyond their capabilities, and they were probably 20-years his junior. Both of these men were not the fan-boy types. I knew they both had been shooting hundreds if not thousands of rounds through their S&W magnum revolvers in a time when that level of shooting activity was uncommon. Neither would be the type to have said Elmer was a terrific shot unless they had seen that with their own eyes.

I was fortunate to correspond with Elmer a few times, both in writing and once, I was able to join a phone call placed by one of my friends. I never received anything but good information and encouragement from him. I always thought a great deal of him and kind of laughed to myself when people became critical without really knowing too much about him. I would not doubt the story one bit.

I had similar feelings about this. In later years, a friend who had lived both in the midwest and then spent most of his adult life in the west explained to me that westerners do take what might seem like a more cavalier approach to big-game animals than we are used to doing here in the midwest. He thought this type of thing was, in that era, more a matter of "a way of life" than it was a blatant disregard for or lack of respect for the animal, and that I was judging what I knew of the story from a vastly different - and maybe inappropriate - perspective. Probably true.

Though he lived through the middle part of the 20th century, I don't think most of those who knew Elmer really thought of him as a 20th-century man. Looking back on him, we need to keep that in mind.

How many here have met shooters that never want to shoot @ any range other than 7 yards because their groups open up? The longer that you shoot distances you can get better with trigger control and muzzle control. Reading the impact is a learned skill. Practice does not make one better, perfect practice and learning while doing so creates inprovement.

__________________
Front sight and squeeze

I seem to remember a story from somewhere that while in the process of trying to convince Remington and Smith and Wesson to produce the 44 "magnum", Keith demonstrated his suggested load by firing at a rock at a later measured 600 or so yards with reps fof both companies as witnesses. The rock split when hit and and the rest is history...

Keith, McGiven, Topperwein....ageless leaders in our disipline

I have no doubt that Elmer was a excellent shot with any and all handguns. Consistently hitting something at 400 yards with a 38 special seems to be more of a well practiced "trick" shot than anything else. I doubt he or anyone else could just pick up a gun and make such a shot in the first 6 shots.

If the trajectory is linear than one would need to aim at a angle 4 feet high

Kinda like the tangent sights on some Browning High Powers, A bit optimistic.

__________________
Still Running Against the Wind

Any of you gys ever see Impossible Shots on the Outdoor Channel? Bob Munden does this kind of stuff all the time, in fact in one epsiode he's talking about Elmer, the legend of his long shots, and demonstrates at once that it can be done, using a 8-3/8" model 29.

Years ago, Keith designed a paper target used to extract every possible bit of accuracy out of a handgun. It consisted of an inverted capital letter "U" on a white background. This allowed maximum accuracy in horizontal and vertical alignment with black sights against the white background. I haven't found a commercial source for those, but this is pretty close, and works well:

I DO recall that from maybe "Sixguns". Thanks.

Thinking I may try some 168 gr Keith slugs in a .38 case at 950 fps.

I've got a 6" N frame for the revolver, assuming his .38/.44 was probably 6 or 6 1/2 inces??

I found a sheet of 20x22 inch sheet steel. I'll get it cut to 18" square, paint it white and see what I can do.

We shoot routinely at 100, 150 and 200 yds on steel plates here but due to the Mtn in my back yard the angles turn steep quickly past 250 yds. Need to run out to another property I have access to for this experiment. I can easily do 400 yds on the FLAT there.

FN in MT

Two men here seem unclear on the issue: Keith was not shooting modern Plus P .38 ammo!

That formally clocks at just 890 FPS from a four-inch vented pressure barrel. In some cases, it willl actually deliver that, from longer barrels. The RCMP used to have ammo loaded to maybe 950 FPS from the five-inch bbls. of their M-10's. That was loaded by CIL, before they went to US ammo, I think.

Elmer used his own handloads, with his Lyman 358156 bullet (lead) and a hefty charge of 2400 powder, which I won't cite, due to possible changes in burning rates over the years. Check your manuals. You're looking for a charge that will launch the bullet at some 1200 FPS!

His .44 Magnum load went out at about 1400 FPS! And did not give excessive pressures, he thought, because cases ejected normally, unlike with many lots of factory ammo.

His .38-44 load was intended ONLY for .38-44 S&W guns and for Colt SAA, New Service, and Shooting Master models. It was NOT for M&P's, Official Polices, etc.

He especially recommended it for the S&W Combat Magnum, too, which he callled " a very fine little combat gun" with that load. With .357 factory ammo of that day (1960 or so), he got sticky extraction with many lots of ammo.

But he also said that the M-19 had very little barrel left to bell or crack in the forcing cone, which is untrue. He may not have actually seen or shot that model much,and was going by photos and what others told hm, or what he knew of pressures for that load.

Skeeter Skelton did use it a lot in his M-19's, though, and confirmed what Keith said. This is not a misprint; I know that Skeeter also liked the five-inch barelled M-27 a lot. But he often carried an M-19, too, especially at work in his LE jobs. (He also favored a fancy Colt Govt. 45 auto.)

Elmer Keith, practiced shots at long range, by shooting at rock boulders on hillsides, out in open country. His sight alignment...was to raise the front sight post in the rear leaf irons, till he started making hits. So far as I've read about Elmer Keith in shooting magazines --- no holdover was necessary in his long range pistol shooting.

Frank-

Please keep us posted. But note that your load is WELL under the power level of what Keith shot! His handloads were low-end .357 power, which is why he insisted that they not be used in any but heavy-framed .38's "listed" for use with factory .38-44 ammo! That was shown as giving 1150 FPS, not the 890 FPS of modern Plus P 158 grain ammo! Keith's loads actually clocked about 1200 FPS!
Even the lighter 125 grain Plus P ammo usually shows at no better than about 950 FPS and does not hold velocity as well at longer ranges as will heavier bullets. Keith's cast bullets ran about 146 grains. But he did do some shooting with those 168 grainers that you mention.
Of course, he adjusted powder charges for the heavier bullet in such cases.

Elmer's Outdoorsman has a 6.5-inch bbl. I think he said so many times, and there is a photo of him with a brace of grouse and the gun in his other hand. It is def. a 6.5-inch model.

I think some men deny what is possible with a handgun because THEY can't shoot well. I am constantly baffled by people at the range who brag that they hit the kill zone on a target at a mere 15 yards! Good Lord, Applegate and Fairbairn taught hundreds of OSS agents and Commandos to do that with POINT shooting!

Why these men who presumably cannot drive a race car as well as the pros do don't doubt that exceptional men with remarkable reflexes and talent can drive as they do is beyond me. Maybe they see it enough on TV that they accept it. But there are videos of Jerry Michulek (sp?) and Bob Munden doing equally remarkable things on film, with guns. I met Munden a couple of times, and also never got any "BS quotient" from him. What he could do with his tuned Ruger SA's defied belief until seen. He was also an exceptional long range shot. I understand that he amazed many by showing what he could do with a .38 Chief's Special at 100 yards. With bigger guns, longer range was logically well within his capabilities.

Elmer Keith lived most of his life in a wilderness area where he could shoot daily, wih no one within many miles. He could/did develop skills that most cannot envision. Publishers like the late Bob Petersen did not admire him and get him to write for them without knowng what he could do.

Those of you who have original letters from Keith can imagine the efforts that it took to edit his "copy" to professional standards. Publishers wouldn't have bothered to hire him unless he had a following and they knew that he was telling the truth about his shooting.

Shooting in wide open country and walk em in, he shot and shot and shot at distance. He KNEW his Stuff!!!!! Practice loads and loads and maybe you could hit some long range.

Elmer was a FRONT-RUNNER, he didn't have computers and forums to BS on, he put lead in the air, tested HI-POWER LOADS, and he also BLEW UP his share of revolvers during his long learning and shooting career.

__________________
NRA Pistol/Rifle Inst. RSO

Hell, I don't know I wasn't there.

If using a EK super duty magic load, lets compare it to a 357 Mag in a 38 special The drop rate of a present day 357 Mag 158 gr is around 7.5 inches at 100 yards.

I think it's a good subject for those Myth Buster guys on TV unless Frank237 can duplicate it. We will await a range report!

__________________
Still Running Against the Wind

I grew up reading Elmer in G&A and other mags. I too read with apprehension his long range exploits and naturally had to try them. I had lots of woods behind the folks house and we had a big revine/abandoned landfill. My former brother-in-law and I hung the top of a 55gal drum (painted bright orange) and from a guesstimated 350yds , we would shoot at it with his 8 3/8 S&W 629 and my 7 1/2bbl Ruger Redhawk. Well , we soon discovered it could be hit. Heard them too! Not too consistantly at first, but after I learned about holdover and windage and found my aiming point, I could get 2-3 hits from a cylinderful.

The desire to shoot long range sixgunning never left and I enjoyed several years of metallic silhouette shooting till most gunclubs that did it went away.

My eyes can't even see those 200yd rams anymore though.

Last fall I busted a 7 inch balloon at 200 yd.with my 17 on the first shot, 50 shots later I broke another

Once you figure out the holdover, You can hit some at long ranges.

The son of a friend of mine drew the outline of a deer on a large piece of cardboard so we could see where we hit. The target was placed 300 yds from where we had our table set up. I lined up the bottom of the front sight with the top of the rear sight. I aimed my .44mag 10.5" Super Blackhawk at the top of the deer's back and shot 6 shots from a rest. The 8" group hit about 6" below the deer which would have been 12-16" below point of aim. I aimed about a foot above the back and hit the deer target with 6 more shots.

I load 125gr .357 to what the manual says is 1300 fps. At the Sherriff's range here there is a 2 square foot steel plate at 225 yds. I lined up the bottom of the front sight on my 8 3/8" 27-2 with the top of the rear sight and could hit the plate every time by putting the top of the front sight on the plate.

__________________
Corripe Cervisiam

I don't doubt Elmer's ability to make that shot.

I live and work in an area of NW New Mexico that is a lot of BLM land, and I enjoy the sport of long distance rock shooting as some of my fellow Westerners have mentioned above.

I'm no Elmer Keith, but even with my fixed sight P220 .45 I can bust rocks pretty far out there. The method, of course, is to hold up front sight, not hold over with a conventional sight picture. With my slow moving .45 ACPs I have to hold up all of the sight and a chunk of the slide sometimes, but once I find the spot I can lob them out there pretty well.

__________________
Rule of law, not a man.

In the November, 1935 American Rifleman Elmer did a write up on the .357 Magnum. He killed 125 jack rabbits with twenty five of them from 100-180 yards. He used both factory loads and .38-44 handloads out to the 500 and 600 yards. One of the things Elmer wrote in the article was this:
"For the benefit of those who think a sixgun is only a short-range weapon and not capable of accuracy beyond 50 yards, let me say that all the above shooting with the Magnum .357 Smith & Wesson was done offhand with both hands, and all before witnesses, and I was accompanied at all times by one or more of the following men: Cale Dickey, J.G. Maelzer, Jess Taylor, and John Warnock."

Elmer knew that his work would be called BS so he was smart enough to do it in front of other people as much as possible.

__________________
Vaya con Dios

That's funny, and true! I think I may still have one or two of his letters somewhere. They were always one paragraph (sometimes a rather long paragraph) and it took about 20-30 minutes just to read them!

I do wish Elmer was still around to keep things lively. What a character!

I will explain how to calculate where to put the rear sight on the front sight to cause you to aim high enough to offset the bullet drop at a distance.

Normally, you align the top of the front sight on the top of the rear sight to shoot to where you have to gun sighted in.

The ratio of the distance from the rear sight to the front of the front sight is the same as the ratio of the drop of the bullet is to the distance of the target.

Example using my Super Blackhawk with a 10.5" barrel.

The distance from the rear sight to the front of the front sight is 12".

I use the calculator here: JBM - Calculations - Trajectory (Simplified)

At 300 yds, a 240 gr XTP with a muzzle velocity of 1300 fps drops 112".

300 yds is 10800" Divide 112 by 10800 to get the ratio of drop to distance which is 0.01037037

Multiply that ratio times the sight distance to get the distance to drop the rear sight on the front sight to cause you to hold over 112"

For my gun that is 12 times 0.01037037 = .12444 which is about 1/8".

So if I line the top of the rear sight to 1/8" below the top of the front sight, I should compensate for the drop at 300 yds.

I then put the top of the front sight where I want the bullet to hit.

Of course this does not take into consideration bad eyesight and the inability to hold the gun steady.

__________________
Corripe Cervisiam

As my friend, Wyo, eluded to in his above post, re: Ed McGivern,



I have been a student of long range handgunin' for the last four decades...


I almost accidently hit a antelope at 2500 yards plus, one time before witnesses. (With a bigbore rifle....)


I will also shoot for money and put on a right fair sideshow.



Su Amigo,
Dave

__________________
"IN GOD WE TRUST"

I have been tinkering around with long range handgunning for a while now, especially ever since I got hurt and alot of my hunting work is going to be done with a handgun for the foreseeable future. I have been working on my shooting sticks that I am going to use and I plan on signing back up at my local range which stretches out to a couple hundred yards (alot here in the mountains) just to see what I can do with my own .38-44.

__________________
Vaya con Dios

It's true! I saw it myself. We had no idea that Goat was even in the country, he was way out past 2000 yds. in a little gully, but you shoulda seem him go when that bullet snapped right over the top of 'im.! Ol' Dave nearly got himself the world record Accidental Antelope Kill With Bigbore Rifle trophy.

Here is a video of Bob Munden busting a balloon at 200 yards with a 2 inch .38.

Bob Munden -- Impossible 200 Yard Shot - YouTube

I have read everything I could find on Elmer Keith, never found anyone who actually knew him that had any doubts about his abilities with a gun.

While Bob is an amazing shot, I believe there is a bit of trickery in the 200 yd balloon shot. I suspect a hit anywhere on that steel tombstone target would cause splatter to break the balloon! Still and amazing shot though!

__________________
Old paratrooper in NC

I found my old copy of SIXGUNS and read through the chapters on handloading and LR Shooting. He mentions that his .38/.44 HD load is 13.5 of 2400 over "his" cast bullet. So I'm thinking the #358429 170 gr SWC. I do have that mold and some cast/sized slugs available.

The #358156 Thompson GC design is not mentioned at all.

Today or tomorrow I'll set up the Dillon 550 for .38 spcl and with 2400 and .38 Spcl cases see what I can come up with. I see the Keith slug in a .357 mag case is MAX'd at around 1250+ fps in the current Lyman Cast bullet manual. The .38 Spcl data has been lowered over the years and shows even few +P loads. Much less EK's old loads!

If I can get 1100-1150 fps in a .38 +P case I'll go with that.

Or...if the velocity isn't open for debate and EK did in fact get 1200 fps with his 170 gr cast bullet...I can simply and easily use .357 mag cases and safely get 1200 fps.

I took my 6 1/2" 27-2 out of the safe and cleaned it up as well as my old pre 27 8 3/8" gun with the tall Patridge frt sight. THAT one may be the gun for me to actually make a few HITS.

I've got a few 18" sq targets cut...they are NOT very large! LOL.

I think this is going to be INTERESTING.

With any luck I may be able to make a fool of myself by Saturday or Sunday.

FN in MT

Elmer may not have mentioned the Lyman-Thompson bullets in Sixguns, but he did write about them now and then in his column in one of the popular periodicals. He would usually remark about their deficiencies as far as design of the "nose" of the bullet and driving band, and then finish up with his classic comments that, "a sixgun bullet needs a gas-check like a hound dog needs two tails." As I said earlier, what a character!

IIRC ...MMC, Bowman, or perhaps another custom shop of the day offered a partridge sight w/ horizonal lines of gold wire inlaid into it at different heights for suggested hold over for long range handgun shooting. Maybe to 300yds. or beyond, can't recall....the manufactureer did refer to it as a "Keith long range pistol sight"...