[James Gates]

The accepted definitions are as follows:
(1) Fact: something having real demonstrable existance or something that has been odjectively verified.
(2) Theory: an assumption or guess based on limited information or knowledge.
(3) Opinion: a belief or conclusion held with confidence, but not substantiated by positive knowledge or proof.
Well now.......! The question arises, what are the people visiting this Forum, looking for? Facts, of course! They can get their fill of "Opinions" and "Theory" any where else they look. Our responsibility is sort sort out, in our mind, just what "Fact" and present it as such. An example: I know as a "fact" that the BTB 250 gr LFN GC will kill deer and big hogs quick and efficient at velocities of 1200'/"+- having seen 8 Kills. After testing its penetration in hard oak and cement blocks...It is my "opinion" that it would crush a bears head. It is a "theory" based on the formula E=MxVxV that a BTB 250 gr LFNGC at a 1200'/"velocity x 1200'/"velocity would deposit( or whatever you want it call it)more Energy than a heavy slow bullet. It has been more or less proven that a Permanent Would Channel is the product of Velocity and Meplat! My "observations" cause my "opinion" to be formed that that is correct! So...what is all this about? Simple...Let's for a moment unscrew the top of our heads, take out our brains, and wash out all the BS that has been published...and seek "Facts"! Another example: "Fact"..Elmer Keith designed the #429421 250 gr plain base bullet at least 70 years ago. "Fact"..during that time, game has been taken, of all size, by leading hunters all over the world. Are we to say he or they lied? Not me! "Fact"...He used 18.5 grs of #2400 in the .44 Special @ 1200'/" until the .44 Mag came out. Then he says use 22 grs #2400 for 1400'/" in the Magnum. I'll buy that in his 5.5" or up to 7.5" barrels! "Fact"...after the .44 mag came out, his favorite firearm was a S&W mod 29 with a 4" barrel! It's my "opinion" that with that 4" barrel, he was right back at 1200'/". Is it my "opinion" the the 250 gr bullet is best in the .44 Mag? No! In "theory" the 260/265 gr's velocity (still high) would be an better overall choice. After I test in for penetration, etc., I will form an "Opinion", but the "Fact" will not be established until I see many more than one Kill! When Marshall had to kill out many deer on the orchards, it became a "Fact" that the .357 Mag. with the proper bullets "was" a real killer! When Big Bob drove one through the skull of a large reptile, smashing heavy bone, it is my "opinion" that what he did was "fact"! I state it in this form as I haven't done it myself! This same set of rules can apply to any and all bullets and calibers!
So where is all this leading? To the point that we, on the Forum, should dwell on more "Fact" than "Theory". We can state an "Opinion", but should label it as such. What we need is more "Facts"! With all that said, I will go feed the bulldogs!
Best Regards, James

 

[MT Callahan]

Bravo James,

I like to think that if I offer a personal opinion, I make certain I advertise it as such. I wish I could claim to have all the facts, but it just isn't so. I continue to search for fact in every facet of my life and in doing that I've certainly formed some opinions. As long as I can keep the two separate, I'll  be doing OK.

As far as truth is concerned too many folks are content having "truth" handed to them. If they only knew the fun they were missing or the education gained by going out and finding the truth they were looking for we would have a lot less problems in the world.

This post certainly can be applied to load development and other firearms experimentation, but I think it carries a little further than that. Sorry if its too "heavy".

 

[James Gates]

Friend MT...I don't think your post is too heavy.I think your statements ring true. The greatest problem in the search for Truth is dealing with the Untruths we turn up!
Some day, this Forum will become known as a place all shooters can come and find honest answers. Whats we need is people testing everything from the litlle pop guns all the way up through the Magnuns, Max-Magnums, to the Mega Max Magnums....telling how they have performed on paper and game! The man who likes to pot small game with a .32 S&W Long or the man who has killed a Griz with whatever, can contribute. Down in this neck of the woods, handguns are tools of the trade, just like a hammer or saw. No one is intimidated by seeing someone packing iron. Evetone liked to talk about Taylor, but few realize he was the greatest irovy poacher of his day! His experiences of taken heavy game spawn some of the finest cartridges in the world. The waterfowl market hunters did more to develop our shotgun, and their loads, than any present day "Rag Writer". Men who have used a handgun in war or the game fields all their life
have forgotten more about "Kill Factors" than a person, who might have killed one or two animals! It's only their pride or some mental need they have that keeps people for "hearing"!
Whenever I think I have reached the top, I go back and read..Sixguns, Gun Writers of Yesterday, and Frank Forrester's book, written in 1848..to realize how little I really know! Oh well......time to feed the bulldogs!
Best Regards, James

 

[Big Buck]

I remember as a Kid reading Jack O' Conner and Elmer Keith go at it about BIG AND HEAVY Vs. Light and fast. I ate it up. Mix Roy Weatherby in the fray and you had a Shoot out . I still have back issues of Petersons Hunting and Outdoor Life when Jack was the Hunting editor. I want to get the Book ' #### I was There" by Elmer Keith.  I am looking over the Eighth Edition of Handloader Digest and see an article by Jack titled Handloading  for the 270. Jack loved the 270 and used it to take all kinds of game with the 130 gr bullet! It was a mighty slayer of game.  Elmer on the other hand thought of it as a pop gun.  His 333 OHK was the way to go. Roy Weatherby took the light and fast theory and took Game all over the world with his 300 Mag.  They all had different  ways to get to the same objective. Which one was right ?  I am still thinking .

 

[James Gates]

Quite So, Big Bore.....That feud had much more serious ramifications than many of today's shooters realize! What it did was split the group into two factors with total polarization that lasts until today! Jack O'Conner considered himself as somewhat Aristocratic and a member of the Elite, thinking Elmer Keith was a somewhat crude cowboy, who had been out in the sun too long! On the otherhand, Elmer Keith being a practiacl man, down to earth, thought Jack O'Conner was a pompous arse. There was really bad blood there! The sad part of the entire war was that both were correct, within their scope! The .270 Wichester "is" a great cartridge, under it's limitations of well place lung/shoulder shots. I don't think anyone would claim it great for a butt shot in heavy cover. Within its limitations it killed like lightning! On the flip side of the coin, Elmer Keith, used to taking game in rough conditions and at all angles, favored a large bullet weight capable of smashing its way through what Elmer called a "quartering shot". Within its conditions it killed like Thor's Hammer! So...things became very polarized, as they are today! However, I subscribe to to camps, with this exception. I refer you to a Tech Note I wrote, comparing the light weight/high velocity vs heavy weight/ low velocity equation. I said that I felt the break point from one to the other was in the range of .35 Caliber. Below that size, I prefer the light weight/high velocity for tree stand and open range shooting. When I am in the swamps and palmettos facing something that can hurt you bad, I subscribe to the heavy weight/ low velocity. HOWEVER, the weight can be carried to the extreme at the cost of velocity and, above all, the ability to control the firearm under stress situations!! The same happens on the opposite end of the equation....too much velocity.
It is the responsibiliy of the experienced shooters of this Forum to keep all this in focus when giving advice to new shooters!
Best Regards, James

 

[Big Buck]

Well said James. Well said.

 

[5150]

Friend MT...I don't think your post is too heavy.I think your statements ring true. The greatest problem in the search for Truth is dealing with the Untruths we turn up!

Some day, this Forum will become known as a place all shooters can come and find honest answers. Whats we need is people testing everything from the litlle pop guns all the way up through the Magnuns, Max-Magnums, to the Mega Max Magnums....telling how they have performed on paper and game! The man who likes to pot small game with a .32 S&W Long or the man who has killed a Griz with whatever, can contribute. Down in this neck of the woods, handguns are tools of the trade, just like a hammer or saw. No one is intimidated by seeing someone packing iron. Evetone liked to talk about Taylor, but few realize he was the greatest irovy poacher of his day! His experiences of taken heavy game spawn some of the finest cartridges in the world. The waterfowl market hunters did more to develop our shotgun, and their loads, than any present day "Rag Writer". Men who have used a handgun in war or the game fields all their life
have forgotten more about "Kill Factors" than a person, who might have killed one or two animals! It's only their pride or some mental need they have that keeps people for "hearing"!
Whenever I think I have reached the top, I go back and read..Sixguns, Gun Writers of Yesterday, and Frank Forrester's book, written in 1848..to realize how little I really know! Oh well......time to feed the bulldogs!
Best Regards, James

I think you already have a good amount of this however when it comes down to it your still left with the same problem as with any Internet forum.
You either believe it or not.
And if I may add. When it comes to shooting no two bullets or situations are exactly repeatable so this leads to different interpretations of the same event.

 

[fivedog]

most posts are basically opinions
based on observations
oh and you forgot elgin gates who liked to get the heaviest going as fast as possible.

 

[5150]

Just because you have established the fact “which I agree with” that a large heavy bullet will do “X” amount of damage or “killing efficiency” One can produce another factual scenario based on a small higher velocity round.
That’s the beauty of terminal ballistics study. One fact is another’s theory and or opinion.
Facts are always arguable if they weren’t we would not need lawyers and judges.
if we pigeonhole ourselves into one belief is to possible miss all the facts. As we can agree no two shooting events produce the same results.
If you can’t demonstrate the same results then the facts remain somewhat obscured and then we are left with theory and opinion.
Regardless of the facts the Internet will always remain the domain of armchair Einstein’s and we are all subject to the limitations of reason

The numbers of loads and bullets and vast abundance of configurations is proof enough to show that theirs more than one way to get the job done and to argue which does it better is and always will be a futile exercise.

 

[fivedog]

amen to that
and if it has worked for me so far im gonna keep doin it till it don't

 

[kdub]

Boy!

You guys can really dig up bones!

 

[5150]

Now thats a fact.
But will digging with a left handed shovel produce a larger hole or would a right handed be better?
I think a bigger frontal area would have less affect on the dirt than a tapered point.
How would you figure the TKO figures on that
Worm carnage,

 

[11B3V]

I was under the "opinion" that my wifes choice in shotgun shell for deer/feral-hog hunting should be a near prefect load.

It was on the "theory" that "bigger pellets penetrate better"(00 vs #1/#1 vs #4).

The "fact" was at under 40yards she dumped a doe with one charge that left three exit wounds on the off-side chest!
Hogs dropped similarly as the load of three .600 diameter balls is in my opinion to be thee best Buckshot load available!

Based on the theory that bigger is pellets should penetrate better(exits mean better drainage{blood-trails}),my wife decided to try this new product.
My wifes read up on the product and was confident in the theoretical application by the manufacture of the product.
The successful hunts on six times that she used the product in the field(six-shots/six-one shot kills)is fact enough for us!

George

 

[Flat Top]

James; A great post...thanks! Back in the early 60's I used to read Outdoor Life Magazine, and there was an article around that time about two fella's that had the reputation of killing big grizzly and brown bears with a 22LR pistol. If My memory serves me (and, I do have "senior moments" from time to time) an article about these two guys was published in that magazine....photos and all......it was a fact, backed up by proof, that the big bears could be killed with a 22LR pistol....consistantly. Recently I read of an Alaskan housewife that had killed a big brown bear, I believe it was, with a single shot from a 22LR pistol..........the "legend" continues! In "theory" compared to more viable catridges, the 22LR would be a last choice for this task. "Fact" is that it can be done! My opinion is that I would not suggest anyone trying it!!!! A local hunting buddy of mine had a relative that had killed over 70 whitetail deer with a 22LR in the course of his life...he had proof, photos of every deer he had ever killed...some so old that the photos were in sepia.....and, in each photo was the same single shot 22 rifle (the only rifle) he owned since he was a boy! I had the priveledge of seeing those photos!. He was at our deer camp that year, with that same rifle, and took a deer on the second day! I thought he said that was number 73! Fact is the 22LR can take whitetail deer. Theory is that it would be on the far side of "light" for that purpose. My opinion is that it can be done. but I would choose something a little larger to do the job!................Most (not all) modern day gun magazine pundits are nothing more than salesman for the shooting industry (in my opinion). I rely on those who's "real" experience over the course of their lifetimes set forth some undeniable "facts" about catridge performance and gun handling techniques. P.O. Ackley, Ed McGivern. and Elmer Kieth, come to mind straight away. They all had "theories"....based on thier own "opinions", but took the extra step to back them up with tried and proven "facts". Most forums (on most topics) are filled with theory and opinion. Its up to the reader to wade through the mess, and make what he feels is the best choice for his own personal endeavors. In closing...I have my heart set on taking a big bear with the 444 Marlin. I have recieved many opinions on that subject from folks on this and other forums. I have researched this issue from the ballistic standpoint, recieved info from those that are knowledgable on the capabilities of the cartridge, and, I have talked to those that have taken large game with this caliber about its performance potential in the field. I have yet to find any one individual that has actually taken a big brown or grizzly with the 444 Marlin. In theory it can be done. My opinion is (along with many others), that it can be done. The only thing remaining is the "fact" that it has been done. One thing for sure...if I try the big bears with this cartridge, I will want someone backing me up with a 22LR pistol!!!! LOL!!!!!

 

[unclenick]

Man, this is an old thread. Holdover from when the forum was new; hence, James Gates' hopes for what it would develop into.

There seems to be some confusion about what a fact is. The father of a friend of mine likes to say: "There's no point in arguing about a fact; you just look it up." In other words, if it isn't possible to list, or make a record of, or prove a thing, then it isn't a known fact. Even lawyers don't actually argue about facts, but rather argue about whether something can be shown to be a fact, and when it can be, what that fact implies about what occurred in a particular case.

• Fact: The detectives found water on the floor of the victim's vestibule.
• Prosecutor's inference: It came from the defendant's rain coat.
• Defense attorney's inference: It came from the victim's umbrella.

You can arguing the implications of a fact, but not the fact itself, or it isn't a fact. In other words, once something is established as fact, by defiinition, it is no longer arguable.

In terminal ballistics you can state a fact, as George did, that a particular animal was killed by a particular load. Can you infer from this that a future shot at some other animal will have the same result? We can infer a good probability that it will, if the circumstances are substantially similar, especially as to range. But the future kill still won't be a fact until after it has actually happened.

The same thing applies to self-defense loads or any other discussions of stopping power. Any legitimate evaluation of stopping power is going to be a probable effectiveness, without 100% confidence. Based on past experience with failed theories, this is going to have to be supported by factual experience to be valid, and not just by theoretical or laboratory test considerations alone. Even then, no matter how high the probability of a stop gets, it never reaches 100%. The ends of the bell curve never actually touch the horizontal axis before that axis reaches infinity. In any particular real situation, a round won't be known for certain to produce a stop or a kill until after the event has concluded.

 

[11B3V]

Unclenick,
She went 4-does and two hogs with six shells of Tri-Ball!
Theoretically proving her Opinion of the larger pellet idea into Fact.
At least to our hunting party that is and that to us is gospel enough.

George

 

[5150]

Unclenick truley gets it. +++++1 sir.

 

[leverite]

All I know is that my Savage 99 in 308 is a better levergun than a Winchester 88.

Demonstrable Fact...since I do not have a Winchester 88.

QED

;>}

 

[unclenick]

Unclenick,
She went 4-does and two hogs with six shells of Tri-Ball!
Theoretically proving her Opinion of the larger pellet idea into Fact. . .

Since I am a believer in big bullets, I expect that theory to be true. However, from the standpoint of proof, you'd have to do side by sides with a control group shot with the other pellet sizes under the exact same circumstances to show there was a difference in performance, and a statistician would want to see at least 30 shots taken with each load to get a distribution with meaningful confidence. Like most real world ballistic experiments, it is almost impossible to arrange that. In your shoes, I wouldn't bother with proof to a scientific standard, but would be very happy that your wife demonstrated the load was doing so well at meeting her objectives thus far, and keep her using them unless you see a problem crop up? To a scientist, six in a row merely makes the load "promising", but it sounds like a darn good bet to me. And its all in the probabilities. Congratulations to your wife!


Leverite,

So we've established the fact you don't have an '88?

 

[slim 60]

the problem with many stated fact as to effectiveness of rds ,,is if you except it for a fact
somewhere in your own experiences you may find it not to have been total truth..
so best thing is do the test your self.. if it carries that much interest for you..
for me the only thing that i exstensively test is personal protection rd..
i know my deer rd 180 grn 30 06 will knock a deer down pretty quick if i do my part..
but i can t test my protection rd like that so i do the best i can..right now i carry a 147grn rd that is devastating.. but thats out of my gun with 4 inch barrel.. a good example of not ever assuming
results ,,is i tried the 135 grn rd of that same protection rd,, yesterday.. the rd was only half as effective..so the truth[fact] is the rd i use is twice as effective from my gun as the supposed same rd with 12 grn les wt..BUT how do i know that the hydro shok rd has not been changed
between the manufacturing of these two boxes of ammo.if they have changed it ..it was because the old hydroshoks were too devasting to defend in a court room.. this of course being just my opinion..this rd out of my gun would i believe take a mans shoulder ,or most of it off..
it would ,,i believe be terminal with a hit any where in the torso that was solid enough for
full impact and total expansion..i believe that and have confidense in it.. thats what counts..
but i believe each person carrying an gun should do there on test..then you will believe in yours as i do mine..heaven help you if you believe what you read..you just might get the worst surprize a person can get..jmo