What nonsense have you seen in gun magazines?

Question

Many people blindly believe whatever they read or hear in the media. I have seen ridiculous stuff in this category, and people get it from mags, it seems. In an old mag, a man tested a Colt Walker replica and said he loaded it with the original charge of 60 grains of powder, conical bullet and felt patch. I owned this gun and know 50 grains was its charge. With some conical bullets, I must reduce it. I see no use for a patch. I put grease around each bullet. An almanac I have has an article that says a "double-action only" is best for novices and experts, but Bill Wilson says in the same mag that he has no use for such guns. I agree with Bill. Is it good to present such opposite views or does it confuse people? I say that the first one is silly and has no place in the mag. Bill agrees! When I was a boy, I bought a mag that listed nonsense in other mags. Some mags said the LES Rojak was a good pistol, but it proved to be junk. It was a poor copy of an imperfected Steyr GB. Any to add?

Sir Bobby, the problem with the Walker is that conical bullets occupy much more space than a spherical ball, so there is less room for powder. The point is that no one can put 60 grains of powder in the revolver with a conical bullet and felt patch. Indeed, if one puts in that much powder, he might load it with pennies. the point is that the writer, Elmer Keith, was writing sheer nonsense, and I asked if anyone else has seen such obvious crap. i had both balls and conical bullets that worked well and shot quite accurately. They were .451 or .452. 185 grain pure lead wadcutters for my .45 ACP were great in it.

Elferro seems confused. The original Colt Walker held 50 grains of powder and debuted in 1847. That was a big charge making it as powerful as some muskets. The next Colt revolver and several varaitions of Dragoon held 40 grains of powder. The reduction was from 50 to 40, not 60 to 50, sir! Some think it was due to the 50 grain charge blowing guns apart if used much. I owned a Walker replica that was the same size as the original, and it held 50 measured grains of powder with a round ball. Several books and magazines confirm this charge too. I do not know where this nonsense about 60 grains began. Perhaps Elmer Keith did it. He wrote other nonsense. No one can show me a revolver by Colt that holds 60 grains of powder with any bullet used in the 1800's. Gun magazines have really confused people. That is what I am saying here, and some men prove my point by blindly believing the mags, like holy books. I check things for myself. I suggest that someone do the same.

Curtism says he is a Democrat, and dislikes David Petzal criticizing them. Unfotunately, Democrats have been gunowners worst enemies for some time now. Dad was a die-hard Democrat, but I told him I would never vote for Clinton who was the gunowners' worst nightmare. You had best heed David Petzal. You must decide between owning guns and backing Democratic gun grabbers. I choose to keep my guns and vote against Billary Clinton, John Kerry or Al Gore.

Answer 1

Gun magazines are advertising vehicles for gun and accessory manufacturers. That is their primary business.

It is a mistake for the reader to confuse the words written in a gun mag with objective journalism or unbiased opinions.

The Gun magazines rely heavily for their operating income on the advertisements they sell. The price you pay at the newsstand covers printing and distribution and retail overhead....if that.

The writers, editors, photographers, tech people and accounting staff are covered by the advertisement sales. So, do you think they are really going tell you something that may make one of their advertisers unhappy? Don't think so....

The also rely on the gun manufacturers to provide their new model guns for testing and "long term" evaluation, an industry euphemism for 'free guns'.

Are you going to write something bad about a XYZ pistol when the rep from XYZ gives you a few free guns every year, and pays for your luxury suite at the Bellagio during conventions, complete with ah...the live entertainment that happens in suites in Vegas during conventions?
Don't think so...

BTW, don't believe a word in Car magazines either.

Answer 2

A 12 or 20 ga shotgun. I don't know what it is with everyone always suggesting a 12 ga all the time. A 20 ga can do the EXACT same things a 12 ga can. Proper choke and load and both a 12 and 20 will preform perfectly.... ok.. now off my lil soap box... A rifle bullet can travel over a mile and the bullet will have no problems passing thru multiple walls. So, out of safety for anyone within a mile (and sometimes over a mile) of you, choose a shotgun or even a handgun (and yes, you can hunt some with a handgun). No matter what gun you decide to get- no one gun is more accurate than another. It's the person behind the gun.

Answer 3

If indeed it was an exact replica, that would be possible. The originals held 60 gr. FFg. Two types of bullets were used, round ball and conical. When Colt started making them, the cylinder was made shorter to accommodate only 50 grains because a lot of the originals suffered from ruptured cylinders attributed to poor metallurgy, but speculation has it it was caused by loading the conical bullets in backwards.

Answer 4

A lot of gun writers (not all of them) just parrot what they heard when they were young. And that is 50% truth and 50% myth. I have exploded many myths in my internet site called "Gunowner" (You are welcome to join) (MSN groups)
The "don't clean rifles or any guns from the muzzle end" is one of my favorite myths. And all the companies that sell cleaning rods love to tell you that you will wear out your barrel (ie destroy the riflings) if you do not use their cleaning rods or their 'clean from the chamber' tools. Occationaly I write letters to the editor debunking these claims but they never get printed. Don't want their writers to look like fools I guess. I also have been in some very heated arguments with other gun owners that claim if it is written in a gun magazine it is the honest to God truth. OK if you think so. LOL

Answer 5

Re the BP Colt : I shoot a Remmie repro in BP and have a choice of lead balls to use...from .451 through .457 or so.
Just perhaps the conical round is undersized for the Walker.
Insofar as the differing viewpoints are concerned: It's good to see two sides to a story, or to hear pro and con on a topic.


Opinions are like belly buttons - everybody has one.

Answer 6

What really bothers me is the politics played in magazines. Like many hunters, I am a democrat. I don't appreciate blatent hatefilled unnecissary bashing. For those reasons I avoid certain publications. But here lately Field and Stream and Outdoor Life have been doing it as well. Especially Pezal (sp), I ignore every article that he writes now.

Answer 7

In line with your opinion I have something to ad in general. We live in the information age and there is an endless supply of same; trouble is that about 97% of it is garbage, we just have to filter all of it to get the few nuggets of gold that are worth something. In addition to all the information bombarding us we are surrounded by talking heads and experts of all kinds, no to mention idiots and computers. Thank god I am on my second cup of coffee this morning or I would really go into orbit.