If Cal doesn't, PM me with an email address, and I'll send them as soon as I notice the PM.

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Don't know if it's true, but if he stiffed Jamieson's widow, that was not cool. Seems likely he was a homosexual, who cares, but while I think his knock out factor is total bullshit, his book is worth reading.

I don't agree about his knock out factor. It was a reasonable attempt for the time to quantify what is required for a kill/stopping shot on verious animals, based on observation and experience.

Is it exact or the answer to the question, No. We, today are still not really any closer to a complete answer. I think if we take it as a guide only then it is useful, but then so are kenetic energy figure. Remembering energy does not kill but is an indication of how far a bullet will penetrate all things being equal.

Just my 2 bobs worth.

Gentlemen, I don't have any doubt that Taylor embellished some of the things in his books. However I don't believe that most other well known authors were squeaky clean in that respect either.

We must remember that these books were not written for people like most of the members here who are very knowledgeable where modern ballistics are concerned. His books were written to entertain the Casper Milk toasts back in England, who had zero idea which end a bullet came out of a rifle.

I'm sure Taylor had a laugh thinking about the puzzled looks it would bring on some of his readers faces when he was writing some of those things.

As someone above said, most things concerning ballistics, in those days, were guestimations at best, and we all have experienced things in the field that if written about here would look like total lies, and unbelievable.

It is my belief that we, today, tend to be so critical that it ruins the enjoyment of reading anything written. I simply read a book and consider it a mix of truth and fiction, and just enjoy good writing as entertainment, nothing more.

It is amazing to me why people like Hemmingway, and or Ruark are taken as gospel when what they wrote about things that were not witnessed by anyone, yet others are taken as fiction in total.

In my opinion much of this is simply akin to old women's gossip over the back fence!

Noting Taylor wrote was verified by scientific tests, and were simply his opinion on the reasons for some things that happened in the field.

As far as numbers of any game taken over several years I have doubt anyone here of any age who can state, with any degree of accuracy, how many whitetail deer or jackrabbits they have taken over years in the hunting fields.

Taylor's opinion, and our opinions are just that OPINION, and one is no more worthy than the next!
.....................................................................

quote:

Originally posted by Rule 303:

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Don't know if it's true, but if he stiffed Jamieson's widow, that was not cool. Seems likely he was a homosexual, who cares, but while I think his knock out factor is total bullshit, his book is worth reading.

I don't agree about his knock out factor. It was a reasonable attempt for the time to quantify what is required for a kill/stopping shot on verious animals, based on observation and experience.

Is it exact or the answer to the question, No. We, today are still not really any closer to a complete answer. I think if we take it as a guide only then it is useful, but then so are kenetic energy figure. Remembering energy does not kill but is an indication of how far a bullet will penetrate all things being equal.

Just my 2 bobs worth.

I somehow wonder how anyone can discredit Taylor's knockout factor or any other factor when they don't come up with one of their own to calculate or estimate the killing or knockdown potential for cartridges. In the world we live in today, no one is shooting as much African game as Taylor, Bell, Selby, etc did, so they can not possibly come up with anything like a valid killing factor.

Elmer Keith promoted lbsft (instead of kinetic energy ftlbs) as a better means of measuring the effect of bullets on big game. Of course this is just momentum which Taylor took and added in a factor for the diameter of the bullet. Momentum favours heavy bullets (Keith always went the heavy bullet route) and Taylor's experience showed that larger diameter bullets hit with more authority, something that many on this forum promote.

No one killing factor works for all things, but some such as Taylor's knock out factor give a pretty good guide, enhanced by development in bullets.

Taylors 'TKO' factor model, was based on the less than ideal brain-shot placement scenario.
giving way to this theory that a heavier calibre will give more 'stun' time on an animal.
_
Yet we have another highly experience DG hunter like Bell,who found rounds like 7x57 quite adequate
for the brain-shot (in the appropriately skills hands)....career average of 1.5 shots per/ Bull elephant taken.
No doubt Bell was at times stunning his bulls also, and then quite effectively finishing them off.
Mind you he also did all this and chose his calibres knowing he's out there without backup!
and knowing full well the whole success of his lucrative but long & expensive cost ivory Safaris stemed
from him being alive and in full capacity.

Q./how many rounds does it typically take to burn a .416 barrel out?