358156 hp
At large, whereabouts unknown.
The Fouling Shot. Official publication of the Cast Bullet Assn. Wild, wild experiments often grace their pages, along with information you never knew you needed until you actually do need it.
358429 front band small
- Thread starter bruce381
- Start date
fiver
Well-Known Member
and some of his that's the only way to do it dammit,,, just ain't so.
those big lube grooves ain't needed any more, especially with the more modern lubes.
the shape of the cylinder throats have changed.
the tolerances between the cylinders and barrel have changed.
etc.
RicinYakima
High Steppes of Eastern Washington
But you have to respect a guy, 100 years ago, who spend so much time and effort to make revolvers really useful past 50 feet.
CZ93X62
Official forum enigma
That had to stink something awful.
RicinYakima
High Steppes of Eastern Washington
Not as risky as spilling it on Eleanor's nickel plated wood cooking stove!
Bret4207
At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
Amen! St Elmer gets the shaft from a lot of modern day "experty experts", but they never did any of what he did. He didn't produce perfection, he just made stuff work. Not a darn thing wrong with that, or the fact he was a lousy typist and wasn't a mastr of the finer points of English grammar. Yet, he's been taken to task recently by people apparently jealous of his fame who never had more than a few articles published in the gun rags.
Petrol & Powder
Well-Known Member
I respect the work Elmer did. He was a trailblazer.
But minor differences in current grease grooves and driving bands aren't going to induce sleep loss for me.
But minor differences in current grease grooves and driving bands aren't going to induce sleep loss for me.
An education will only take you so far, there are some things that can’t be taught. There are things I know how to do that a college education didn’t give me. If it weren’t for men like Keith and Thompson, who knows what we would be casting and shooting today. Still, almost 100 years later we are still casting and shooting their designs, I love a Keith bullet, as many others do. It has nothing to do with the man necessarily, but he designed a really nice bullet. It looks good and shoots good, it’s a win win for me.
Petrol & Powder
Well-Known Member
The reality is, we would still get to where we are now, but it may have taken a little longer and the end result might look a little different but not much different. Experimentations and discoveries are key to advancements, but those advancements are heavily influenced by the people conducting that process. Light bulbs in the U.S.A. have a screw type base that is standard and known as an “Edison” base. I’ll give you three guesses way it’s called an Edison base
.What we now call a “Keith” bullet or a “Keith type” bullet is a result of the work that Elmer Keith did. He deserves that credit and recognition. However, because it does work so well, the odds are really high we would have ended up with something very similar had Keith not come along. It may have taken a bit longer to get there but we would still get there.
Keith had a lifetime interest in firearms, lots of opportunity to shoot, was keen to observe and the intelligence to do something useful with his observations. He possessed the opportunity and skill needed AND the drive to do something useful with that knowledge. He deserves the credit for his efforts. HOWEVER, people took Keith’s designs and built upon that knowledge. That always happens and it is not always bad.
Last edited:
telebasher
Member
Just got to wondering, how many pounds of lead did Elmer send down range in his lifetime ? It might make good food for thought !
StrawHat
Well-Known Member
This is true! Among many other things.