Jack O'Connor Opinion

[JD 500]

Just now reading "Complete book of Rifles and Shotguns" by Jack O Connor ironically.
While I'm relatively young, I find it interesting that a lot of bullets I assumed were new, have been around since O' Connor's time. I have found it to be a very interesting read. Looking forward to your follow up post Skip. You've got me curious...

 

[Noah Zark]

I grew up reading Jack O'Connor articles and books and although I can't say I was heavily influenced by his writing, I still very much respected his experience and opinion.

IMO, his writings about the 7x57 and .270 are timeless, and equally appropriate today as they were in 1959. "Sheep and Sheep Hunting" remains the definitive work on the subject, IMO.

O'Connor wasn't a "magnum" fan, and also IMO if he were still around he'd probably consider the "short magnums" as being solutions to non-existant problems.

O'Connor was quoted as saying that he only ever wrote a dozen articles during his career, and just kept changing the first and last paragraphs. I appreciate self-deprecation in a person.

As for Keith, he had a lot of experience upon which he drew his writings. I do recall the words of Thomas G Samworth of the Small Arms Technical Publishing Co, who published Keith's first books in the mid 30s, "big Game Rifles and Cartridges" and "Sixgun Cartridges and Loads." Samworth was not too kind when speaking about Elmer's writing, and said that the book manuscripts needed so much editing that "Keith was the author in name only." Be that opinion as it may, Keith was experienced and influential and his legacy lives on in high-power large caliber handguns and their use to this day.

Noah

 

[Skip Sackett]

Looking forward to your follow up post Skip. You've got me curious...

Well, something else I aimed at and hit!

That was the purpose of the post, to spark interest.

While some quote Elmer as the only valid oracle from the "gun world" it is nice to find out that he had other contemporaries with equally valid reputations.

Remembering that these folks, while endued with special attributes, are only that, folks. All of them, Elmer included, was just a person, fallible as the rest of us. Did he have good things to share with us? Absolutely! Was he instrumental in the development of some classic cartridges? Definitely. Was he perfect? Not hardly! Just like me and you. As we study Jack we will find the same thing about him. He wasn't perfect by any stretch of the imagination, so don't look for that, I'm not.

I am astonished at the folks that know him by name here. That's great.

I am just reading one small portion of his writings that has been enlightening and encouraging to say the least.

I'll give you a hint about the following topic/thread. It has nothing to do with his love for rifles per se. More to do with reloading/hand-loading. I don't want to give too much away at this point.

I want to wait a day or so to allow everyone that has a comment about Jack to post it here. Thanks for the input to this point. Keep it coming!

 

[bmcgilvray]

Jack O'Connor is my favorite gun writer because he was very knowledgeable about both guns and writing. His refined style still makes the most pleasant reading.

 

[38-44HD45]

For reasons about which I am not completely clear, I did not spend much time with O'Connor's writings as a young, budding, full-time gun nut. Like most, I've always viewed him as a well-respected writer and a gentleman, and staunch advocate for the .270. My development (deterioration?

) as a shooter, hunter and reloader was much more heavily influenced by the writings of Skeeter Skelton, George Nonte, Charles Askins, Bill Jordan and Elmer Keith.

BTW, I've seen copies of a couple of Elmer Keith's "first draft" manuscripts. He was almost illiterate; he couldn't spell or punctuate to save his life. Editor's nightmare, but his experiences were priceless. I've been given to understand that O'Connor's writing needed little editing, but I have not seen proof of that.

 

[2152hq]

I grew up reading O'connor too, though I didn't follow his writings as much as some of the others mentioned here. I wasn't that much of a hunter and I used to go to the details in his storys more focused on the rifles he used, the gunsmiths who built them, etc.

I do remember they had a few of his books in the library in High School (mid 60's). Wonder if they'd dare do that now.

 

[FrankD45]

As a young man I read just about everything that Jack O'Connor wrote in Outdoor Life. Of all the things he wrote, one story stuck in my head, probably because he applied humor to a serious issue. He was writing about hunting "accidents" and related a story about a young woman who was sitting on a rock smoking a cigarette when a "mountain lion hunter" shot her. He wrote "obviously he thought she was a mountain lion sitting on a rock smoking a cigarette". He had a very easy style of writing that held my interest.

If you are interested, his papers are housed at Washington State University and are listed in this link.

http://www.wsulibs.wsu.edu/hol...sc/finders/cg457.htm

Frank

 

[Jellybean]

I have read a couple of books by him, one was a gift and the other I bought used from a library, My shooting interests are quite a bit different from his writings. Anyway, I'd heard a long time ago he wasn't what he was supposed to be. Where ever it was and from who ever said it, they claimed he had other people do most of the work on his projects and he just wrote about it and liked to get in front of the camera all he could. I don't think this came from Elmer Keith either becuase I've only read a couple of his books too, and this was way before that.

I guess this isn't really an opinion of him, I've never formed one of my own.

 

[Paul5388]

Frank,

They have a listing of his writings, but they aren't accessible without some other process.

I'm sorta like 38-44, with thoughts of O'Connor being pretty much noted for being a one trick pony. He is best remembered for his strong advocacy of the .270, normally in a M70 Winchester.

I usually found Outdoor Life to be a waste of time, so I didn't read it or Field & Stream with any regularity. I liked Guns & Ammo, which is what I subscribed to after I got out of the Navy in 1965. That's were Elmer was writing, not O'Connor.

As far as Elmer being illiterate, here's a personal letter he wrote, which is entirely understandable, even with the common typos that are generated on a manual typewriter.

 

[38-44HD45]

Cool, Paul! That is indeed more easily decipherable than the couple of missives I've seen.

 

[OKFC05]

What sticks in my mind about O'Connor and Page is their objectivity, modesty, and accuracy of observation.

Many other writers of their time were of such advanced ego and dedication to special interests that their writing was more like a Ned Buntline dime novel. Chas Askins sticks in my mind since he published article after article about his pet "wildcat rifle" projects, each of which was "so vastly superior to ordinary cartridges as to render them all instantly obsolete." (YAWN)

 

[FrankD45]

Originally posted by Paul5388:
Frank,

They have a listing of his writings, but they aren't accessible without some other process.

Paul, there is a link on the top of the page where you can contact the university about availability and cost of reproduction of his papers and photos. I'm not sure I am interested enough to spend cash for it now.

 

[Paul5388]

I'm not sure I am interested enough to spend cash for it now.

I think you're right Frank, I didn't read him much while he was alive, so I don't see any reason to change now.

 

[Homie]

Like a lot of you, I grew up reading Cactus Jack and Elmer, and learned a lot from them.

Fifty years later it seems that Elmer's writings were more pertinent than Jack's.

For those of you who haven't read them, I recommend JACK O'CONNOR by Robert Anderson and JACK O'CONNOR Catalogue of Letters.

For Elmer, read ELMER KEITH, The Other side of a Western Legend by Gene Brown, and LETTERS FROM ELMER KEITH by Timothy Mullin.

I'll not prejudice anyone's opinion, but they're very enlightening.

Still have my .338s, 270s and a bunch of .44s!

Good shooting.

 

[Skip Sackett]

Fifty years later it seems that Elmer's writings were more pertinent than Jack's.

I'm a technical guy. It's what I do for a living. If you compare the two (three if you include Skeeter) which ones seem to be more specific technically?

 

[Paul5388]

For the most part, Elmer and Skeeter are going to give you more in depth information on handgun loads. I don't know that I've ever seen anything from O'Connor on handguns. OTOH, O'Connor will possibly give you more on rifles, especially if he was pushing that particular variety of .270.

In more modern times, John Taffin has pretty well taken up the mantle on handguns.

 

[Homie]

Skip,
I think that technically Elmer was way ahead of Cactus Jack- .44 Special development,.38/44 work, High Power competitor, arsenal work in WWII,etc.

Simply stated, Keith was a shooter, Jack was a hunter. That's probably the way Outdoor Life wanted it. Jack seems to have had better "sponsors".

With all due respect to Charles A. Skelton, and I love his work, he wasn't in the same league as the other two. He was a great story teller, but, by his own admission, was not an experimenter. Let's call him a great Pistolero.

John Taffin does has done great work for the past 30 years, mostly handguns, and Brian Pearce is excellent also. Got to admire anyone who's built two copies of #5!!! Of course, both are admitted Keith and Skelton fanatics.

Good shooting.

 

[FrankD45]

I agree with Paul that O'Connor probably never mentioned handguns in his articles. While he was a proponent of the 270, I don't think he was totally committed to the high velocity school of thought like Roy Weatherby. He wrote that the 270 was the best for its intended purpose but he did use heavier cartridges when appropriate. I also remember he did some development work on wildcat cartridges based on the 7x57 Mauser and I remember him doing some practical experiments on heavy brush performance of various calibers. If anyone is interested, I ran across a re-print of some of his favorite 270 loads.

Frank

 

[Paul5388]

If anyone is interested, I ran across a re-print of some of his favorite 270 loads.

I'd be interested. I did a Google search for just that information and didn't turn anything up. It seems that I remember 60+ gr (maybe 63?) of H4831 being in that list.

[email protected]

 

[K.38]

I don't remember where I read it but I believe Mr. O'Connor liked the K22. I seem to remember he carried or at least had it close at hand most of the time.