It's amazing how many guys love to quote Jack O'Connor...including a few guys who apparently didn't know all about Jack's thoughts.

Fifty-five years ago Jack authored an article in which he declared one cartridge & rifle as America's best all-purpose hunting cartridge and rifle.

Question:
What was Jack's pick as America's best hunting rifle cartridge?

Hint: The article was in a gun magazine which is still published.

Choices:
..300 H&H
.30-06 Springfield
.308 Winchester
.30-30 Winchester
.280 Remington
.270 Winchester
.257 Remington Roberts
.256 Newton
.243 Winchester
.222 Remington

 

I had to guess, I know he loved the 270.

Curly

I voted 30-06, its my answer to almost everything anymore.

That would have been in 1955. I would have been seven, when he published that one, so I may have read it. I don't remember that article, but I do remember many articles noting that he though the 30/06 was one of the most pratical and useful cartridges for most Americans.
When were the 280 and 243 put out in the market place? Were they there yet?
Bfly

Hmmm,I've read but 3 of his 15 or more books,

and even though he prized his .270's by Hank Kauman and Al Biesen ,

and he thought it was about the most rifle most could comfortably shoot,

the most logical choice would be the 30-06,

and he liked the caliber,

and the best all-purpose rifle, the M-70,

and Outdoor Life would be the logical

periodical,---

let's see,

1955 was the 1st year of the .243,

the .222 was about 5 years old,

the .257 which I love had been a factory cartridge for about 20 years,

the .256 Newton, one of my all time favorites was all but dead,

the .308 was about 3 years old,

the H&H was not American.

the .280 came out in 1957,



so I have to guess--

in 1955 the best all-purpose American rifle and cartridge

was probably the 30-30 and the Model 94.

I've read a lot of O'Connor. He loved his 270 but he has stated the 06 was the best all around for North America. I do enjoy O'Connor but I really love reading Russell Annabel. Ol Rusty is my absolute favorite american outdoor writer. His tales of Alaska are amazing and extremely entertaining. If you haven't read any of his works, you really should.

I agree, it's the 30-06 Springfield. I've read just about all of Jack O's books and believe he was the best gun writer although Elmer K was the best story teller. Love 'em both.

It was definately the 30-06

Back in the 70's I was an Air Force recruiter in Twin Falls,Id and Jack O'Connor lived up in Northern Idaho in Lewiston. One night I called him. We talked about an hour. When he found out I was military, thats what we talked about and many of the questions I wanted to ask never got asked.

Tomorrow afternoon I'll post the answer, for those of you who have (and haven't) got it right.

By then, with any luck, we'll have a pretty good number of answers in our poll.

We already have quite a few responses. Looks like the O'Connor name still hasn't lost its magic....

AC

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
Back in the 70's I was an Air Force recruiter in Twin Falls,Id and Jack O'Connor lived up in Northern Idaho in Lewiston. One night I called him. We talked about an hour. When he found out I was military, thats what we talked about and many of the questions I wanted to ask never got asked.

Yes, he used to hang around Lolo Sporting Goods in Lewiston a fair bit. I had the pleasure of seeing him there several times. That and the fact that Lolo used to sell Speer "seconds" (bullets) by the pound made Lewiston and Lolo a "must stop" site every time I went through there. (Speers were and are made in Lewiston, just across the Clearwater River, IIRC, from downtown itself.)

He was a bit "short" with those he didn't cotton to, but I couldn't blame him. He was sort-of a "rock star" of hunting and shooting, and tons of folk including I used to constantly assault him with questions there.

He also had a reputation of being pretty sharp sometimes with his wife Elanor (SP?), but I never witnessed that. He was always a gentleman when I saw him.

Jack could write.

And his opinions were always based on experience and sound reasoning.

Unlike much else that one reads from time to time.

BTW, I voted, and will reveal my answer as soon as it has been confirmed by AB.

If based on my own experience, I would have voted for the Newton, once called "the thinking man's .270",

with a close second place going to the Bob ,

once called "the most useful rifle cartridge ever developed",

although , I can no longer recall the author of either ( approximated ) quotation.

Both might have been attributable to Jack but my memory ain't what it wus.

I think his answer would have been the 30-06 for all around. I know his attitude on the .270. My only wish is that he could have shot my either of my .270 WSM's with a 130 grain North Fork at 3450 fps and pin point acccuracy. His opinion would have been interesting. Good shooting.

I voted with fond memories of how he carried on for the .270.

When Jack graduated college and began his journalism/writing career everyone was writing about the few old stanbys of the day 45-70, 30-30,30-06. He wanted fresh ground and picked the .270 which was a wildcat not yet adopted by Winchester. He had the field all to himself and the .270 did make him rich and famous---but he was pro 30-06.

The answer to this poll question is found in a fairly lengthy article starting on Page 20 of the November, 1955 edition of Guns magazine, authored by Mr. Jack O'Connor himself.

Before telling you what Jack's choice was, I must also tell you that one member of AR who anwered the poll CHEATS! He has either extensively read Mr.O'Connor's work, or has used both logic and his own experience to arrive at the correct answer. In today's internet world, both of those approaches must be considered outright cheating.

I mean why should he get to use logic and/or knowledge when so many internet gurus aren't impeded or assisted by either? (Not referring to AR members, of course, just trying to build suspense and insert a little humour at the same time...) I am quite impressed that anyone got the right answer. I probably wouldn't have.

Anyway, CONGRATULATIONS to one AR member.

The answer was NOT the .270 Winchester. NOR was it the .30-06 Springfield. Wasn't the .300 H&H either. As was pointed out earlier, though it COULD have been the 7mm/06 it couldn't have been the .280 Remington...that wasn't yet on the market.

So congratulations to DuggaBoye who got the right answer both as to rifle and cartridge, which was summed up in the title of the article:......

"America's Best Hunting Rifle: The 30-30".

BTW, it is a good read and brings back a lot of memories.

I obviously did not read everything Mr. O'Connor ever wrote, but I can not remember him ever writing anything about the 30-30. Perhaps I missed a lot more of his writing than I imagined.

Fooled me. I thought I remembered him heaping high praise on the old 30-06. Maybe it was someone else.

.308, cause it is the best! (But he probably chose the 06)

Hot Core-

Like all gun writers (and all shooters who have shot for very long), I suspect Jack's opinions changed some over the years....maybe several times. Part of that may have been from experience, and part from pressure by readers and editors. One or two of his "favourites" may have even been just from theorizing.

I know he said that he had more luck with grizzlies with the '06, but not because of it being the very best grizz cartridge. Somehow he seemed to SEE a lot more grizz when he was packin' the '06.

It would be fun to have readers here find & post specific dates and publications where Jack said any specific cartridge was the "best" for any specific game animal species.

That way we could develop a factual time-line of how his view(s) may have developed. It might also show us WHY his mind changed on the subject...something all of us might benefit from.

I know at various times he liked the .257 Roberts, the 7x57, the .270, the 7 mm Mag(s), the .30-30, the .30-06, and probably others, for specific uses.

To all here, I say, don't get too upset if Jack's stated "Best Hunting rifle" doesn't match what you thought he said or believed. He had been writing for maybe 20 years then (though maybe had not been published that long), and he wrote for about a quarter-century after that article. He was nothing if not a practical thinker, so he had the right to change his mind over time.

Canuck,

Boy, that was an article that I am totally unfamiliar with. I didn't realize that O'Connor had ever written a piece for GUNS. By the way, GUNS first appeared on the newsstand in 1955. The owner of GUNS, George Von Rosen, and the owner of Guns & Ammo, Bob Petersen, had a continuing debate over which was the first gun magazine. Both G&A and GUNS hit the stands in 1955, and to this day, I don't know for sure which was first.

Anyway, I'm pretty familiar with O'Connor's writings, and if he ever used a 30-30 for anything, I'm unaware of it. What I suspect he meant by the article, is that the 30-30 is the best hunting caliber for the vast majority of hunters, not that it was best for him to use.

Tom

quote:

Originally posted by Alberta Canuck:
The answer to this poll question is found in a fairly lengthy article starting on Page 20 of the November, 1955 edition of Guns magazine, authored by Mr. Jack O'Connor himself.

Before telling you what Jack's choice was, I must also tell you that one member of AR who anwered the poll CHEATS! He has either extensively read Mr.O'Connor's work, or has used both logic and his own experience to arrive at the correct answer. In today's internet world, both of those approaches must be considered outright cheating.

I mean why should he get to use logic and/or knowledge when so many internet gurus aren't impeded or assisted by either? (Not referring to AR members, of course, just trying to build suspense and insert a little humour at the same time...) I am quite impressed that anyone got the right answer. I probably wouldn't have.

Anyway, CONGRATULATIONS to one AR member.

The answer was NOT the .270 Winchester. NOR was it the .30-06 Springfield. Wasn't the .300 H&H either. As was pointed out earlier, though it COULD have been the 7mm/06 it couldn't have been the .280 Remington...that wasn't yet on the market.

So congratulations to DuggaBoye who got the right answer both as to rifle and cartridge, which was summed up in the title of the article:......

"America's Best Hunting Rifle: The 30-30".

BTW, it is a good read and brings back a lot of memories.

If I had any feelings left I'd be hurt

Thank you.

I truly did use logic and assumption( SWAG-scientific wild ass guess)

Actually I was waiting to be berated for choosing an "obsolete combination" - after the '06 was revealed to be the correct answer.

(But, as I said, I remembered something about him saying that most could not shoot the '06 as well as the lesser calibres.)

I have read Jack's work , I also had the honor of meeting him, (and several other well known writers).

I would never have guessed GUNS magazine though-- because I thought he had an exclusive contract with O. L. before 1955.

As to the 30-30,most people could afford one,

ammunition was at most grocery stores and gas stations in 1955,

it was handy and compact, most could shoot it well,

most people killed their game at less than 100 yds, and most would never face a grizz or hunt moose/elk

AND the lever is/was considered as distinctly American and Winchester was America's gun.


I still in my heart believe the .256 Newton to be the best, particularly now with modern projectiles and powders---

so much for logic when sentiment gets involved.

If you send me your mailing address by PM DuggaBoye, I'll try to make you a copy of the article. I think you'd find it interesting. Jack specifically mentions a number of elk and moose killed with the M '94 in .30-30...how it didn't drop very much at all at 200-250 yards...was even used by a few shooters with some success in early benchrest rifles, was very unlikely to be harmed on saddle-hunts, and a lot of other positive things.

Affordability and availability of both rifle and ammo was also a plus.

Anyway, congratulations again. Ya done good Bubba!! (and that particular "Bubba" is NOT an insult!)

BTW, if that "DSC" after your name means what I think it does, you have my admiration. They don't give those things out like popcorn.

AC

quote:

Originally posted by Tsquare2:
Canuck,

Boy, that was an article that I am totally unfamiliar with. I didn't realize that O'Connor had ever written a piece for GUNS. By the way, GUNS first appeared on the newsstand in 1955. The owner of GUNS, George Von Rosen, and the owner of Guns & Ammo, Bob Petersen, had a continuing debate over which was the first gun magazine. Both G&A and GUNS hit the stands in 1955, and to this day, I don't know for sure which was first.

Anyway, I'm pretty familiar with O'Connor's writings, and if he ever used a 30-30 for anything, I'm unaware of it. What I suspect he meant by the article, is that the 30-30 is the best hunting caliber for the vast majority of hunters, not that it was best for him to use.

Tom

Tom - GUNS magazine's first issue on the newstands was January, 1955. I used to have every copy up through 2,005, but gave all but the first year to a local VA hospital. The first 12 issues I have hard-cover bound and keep in this computer room along with many years of hard-bound American Rifleman volumes.

I used to have every issue of American Rifleman as well. Lost most of them in 1966 in a domestic situation.

Was an original subscriber of Guns & Ammo, and Shooting Times too. Do you recall when Shooting Times appeared very much as the "Gun Digest" magazine does now? Mostly ads then, but some really, really good articles. The articles were so good, as a matter of fact, that it wan't long before they dropped the classified ads and just went with the articles.

Still have every issue of a few others...PRECISION SHOOTING, HANDLOADER, RIFLE, to name three. Also have 30 years or so of the Brit weekly, "Shooting times & Country Magazine".

Have pretty much dropped all subscriptions now though, except Rifle, Handloader, and a couple of others. Can't really drop American Rifleman even if I wanted to...have been a life Member for 49 years now. Most of the modern writing seems unpaid ads, for which I have absolutely no respect or need.

One thing for sure in life...everything we really like and rely on is going to change and/or disappear before we do.

Pax Vobiscum, y'all.

quote:

Originally posted by Alberta Canuck:
If you send me your mailing address by PM DuggaBoye, I'll try to make you a copy of the article. I think you'd find it interesting. Jack specifically mentions a number of elk and moose killed with the M '94 in .30-30...how it didn't drop very much at all at 200-250 yards...was even used by a few shooters with some success in early benchrest rifles, was very unlikely to be harmed on saddle-hunts, and a lot of other positive things.

Affordability and availability of both rifle and ammo was also a plus.

Anyway, congratulations again. Ya done good Bubba!! (and that particular "Bubba" is NOT an insult!)

BTW, if that "DSC" after your name means what I think it does, you have my admiration. They don't give those things out like popcorn.

AC

No sir, it is not the hallowed designation.

Just -Dallas Safari Club.

Thank you for your most gracious offer , PM will be enroute.

quote:

Originally posted by Alberta Canuck:
Hot Core-

Like all gun writers (and all shooters who have shot for very long), I suspect Jack's opinions changed some over the years....maybe several times. Part of that may have been from experience, and part from pressure by readers and editors. One or two of his "favourites" may have even been just from theorizing. ...

No doubt the 30-30 would make a fine choice for 95% of the Hunters I know. Those old Flat and Round Nose Standard Grade Bullets always seemed to perform well for the Game I've seen them used on.

It sure was interesting growing up reading Mr. O'Connor and Mr. Keith. Both made excellent points in their on-going debates. I do not remember ever catching them "fabricating" stories. Sure they had strong opinions, but that is how most of us were able to actually learn from them back then.

I remember Mrs.O'Connor being a fan of the 7x57.

Great Pop Quiz!

Fair to middlin' choice, although Jack was potboilin' just a wee bit on that one.

And I'm not saying that just because I got it wrong.

quote:

Fifty-five years ago Jack authored an article in which he declared one cartridge & rifle as America's best all-purpose hunting cartridge and rifle.

I accept the accuracy of the article you quote but Jack, as with many other writers, "changed" his opinion from time to time. I read much of his writing in real time, including several of his books.

At different times he said the .30-06, .270 and 7x57 were the "best all around" cartridges. But several times he said he had more -06s in his rack than any other. He greatly influenced my original choice of the Springfield round and I still agree with him.

Like most writers, I'm quite certain Jack had different opinions of what was best for him and what was best for others. For one thing, he knew most hunters work in deep woods where long range guns would be a handicap. In the woods, nothing does better than the 30-30 or .35 Rem. so he was right in the Guns '55 issue too.

As a side issue about writers, I remember Chas. Askins wrote a lot for different magazines in the 60s. It was common for him to have articles in different issues at the same time, one loudly proclaiming the 06 as obsolete and in the other the 06 was still the best available for the widest range of game. Ditto handguns, one article would extol semis and a different magazine would have him carefully testing and finding revolvers were still tops. Got to remember some writers then just wrote for money and not what they really believed, if some of them even knew what that was. Askins was NOT one of my favorites.

Elmer Keith was a man of honesty and integrity. If he said it, we could know he believed it and he would still write it that way years later. That man was a gunner for sure but, more to the point, he was a hunter! He now has a (false) reputation today of loving big, heavy, slow bullets; that's a lie. Elmer loved big, heavy FAST bullets and worked hard to accomplish that. He IS the reason we finally got the .44 Rem Mag cartridge when most "experts" said "people couldn't handle it, it kicked too hard to ever become popular!" (My wife disagrees.)

I still miss Elmer, a lot, he would LOVE the .500 S&W. Kinda miss Jack too.

Don't forget about the best NA woods cartridge....the 338 O'Connor (338x57)

I suggest folks could learn a little more about Jack O'Connor's thinking if they actually dug up the text of his November, 1955 GUNS magazine article and read it. It would be an especially good move to make BEFORE "interpreting" it to others.

He mentions the use of the M 94 .30-30 in the deep woods. He also specifically mentions how common and useful they were in the open ranges of the far West, where they were very common.

They weren't the oater movies' "cowboy rifles" for nothing. For a rancher, traveler, or hunter in the West, they were plenty powerful, adequately flat-shooting, easy to feed, and carried just great either on a horse, in a train, a car, a pickup, or wagon, or on foot.

Fact is, they were plenty adequate for western American hunting back when hunting the West inherently included a lot of moving around by the local hunters over open range (unfenced range) or deserts, and very little of sitting on one's butt in towers and other sniping posts. They were also, of course, quite adequate in dense woods or swamp hunting in the East or West too, especially where the hunting involved deer-drives and hunters sited at "stands".

Certainly there were other rifles and cartridges which were better for certain circumstances, but Jack was speaking of "America's" best rifle...the one rifle and cartridge which came closest to being adequate EVERYWHERE for every hunter in the U.S.A.

Anyone could/can prefer something else. Jack wouldn't have cared. He was simply saying what HE thought was the best continent-wide tool if a person had to pick ONE, in those days.

30-06

Hooray for Russell Annabel. Now there was a fellow that had been there and done that.

Just for the sake of being able to sleep with a clear conscience, I will admit that I voted 270, and of course thought model 70 Win. After reading a post or two I then remembered him saying the 270 was his favorite, but that the 30-06 was actually better. I never dreamed it would be an M94 in 30-30!

The article in the November 1955 GUNS magazine was written by Jack Connor, not Jack O'Connor. Similar name, different person.

I believe it was Mark Twain who said the difference between the right word and almost the right word is the difference between lightning and lightning bug.

Anyone familiar with Jack O'Connor's writing could easily see this article was not written by him. The writing style is different, and the author refers to hunting deer in locations O'Connor never referred to in any other of his works.

All those who expressed disbelief O'Connor would have written such an article can rest easy. He didn't.

Well, for that I most profoundly apologize.

I was amazed by it too, which is why I posted the poll. I still don't know how I missed that.

My upper left quandrant peripheral vision in both eyes has been ruined by a stroke a couple of years ago, but I didn't think it was that bad.

As to the writing style, I just figured it was not yet fully evolved when he was that youngish.

Anyway, I apologize again for the screw-up, and thank you for the correction. Am just thankful it wasn't anything dangerous which might have caused someone some harm.

Crap....what a "downer".

No apologies necessary Alberta Canuck, certainly it isn't hard to confuse two very similar names. In any event you started a fun thread which got lots of response.

It's interesting how influential O'Connor and Keith were and still are, both have been gone for more than 25 years yet we still quote and discuss them. I've seen good friends practically come to blows arguing over which of the two was better!

I'm sorry if I wrecked your poll. Perhaps by way of apology I could change direction. What gunwriter wrote of the .270 Winchester, "When they (elk) are struck broadside through the heart or lungs it (the .270 Win.) killed like dynamite.."

Mr O'Connor really liked all calibers.The 375 H-H was a favorite.The hype on caliber and Elmer Keith made a bit of $$

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Anderson:
No apologies necessary Alberta Canuck, certainly it isn't hard to confuse two very similar names. In any event you started a fun thread which got lots of response.

Well, I thought it was fun. I was absolutely delighted to find the story, because it was at that time of year where we really can't hunt (or even shoot, someplaces) very much. I thought everyone might really enjoy it. But I really hate doing something so damned dumb.

It's interesting how influential O'Connor and Keith were and still are, both have been gone for more than 25 years yet we still quote and discuss them. I've seen good friends practically come to blows arguing over which of the two was better!

They sure are influential. And to me it doesn't matter which really said what, or how absolutely right one or the other might be. What matters to me is that they get us thinking about what works, and why, for effective humane hunting.

I'm sorry if I wrecked your poll. Perhaps by way of apology I could change direction.

YOU didn't wreck my poll. YOU did exactly the right thing...went to the cited source and checked it out!! Hair on ya' for your effort. You most certainly owe no one, especially me, an apology for straightening things out.

What gunwriter wrote of the .270 Winchester, "When they (elk) are struck broadside through the heart or lungs it (the .270 Win.) killed like dynamite.."

Well, I don't know the answer, but my first guess would be Elmer Keith. Of course if it was him, he would have probably followed up with something like, "But in the field you can't count on getting that shot"....and then go on to recommend something heavier.

My second guess would be Warren Page, who dearly loved the 7 m/m Mashburn Magnum. I think he would have really liked the .270 as much as the magnum IF the .270 had had room for both a 150 grain bullet and enough slow burning powder to push that heavier slug as fast as the 130 grain one.

Why don't you pick out 5 or 6 writers as choices and post a poll on your question? Let everyone have a whack at it, and explain the reasoning behind their choices...

Best wishes, and thanks for your most courteous correction.

Alberta Canuck,

No need to run a poll as you have already nailed it. It was indeed Elmer Keith, from his book "Big Game Rifles and Cartridges". You're also correct that the next word after "dynamite" is "but".

Here's the full quote: "Have also seen this cartridge [.270 Win.] used on elk with very poor results. When they are struck broadside through the heart or lungs it killed like dynamite but struck too far back they regained their feet and two out of three got away."

Actually I doubt even O'Connor would find much to disagree with in that statement. Keith also had some nice things to say about the .270 in his later book "Keith's Rifles for Large Game" (1946).

I think as years went by and their rivalry intensified both O'Connor and Keith dug in their heels and became a bit more pro (and anti) .270 than they initially intended. Also both were pretty smart men, I suspect they figured out a bit of controversy didn't hurt either of them.

As patrick murphy noted above, O'Connor liked lots of cartridges and over broad ranges didn't think cartridge choice made much difference. He did write that he considered the .375 H&H as the world's most useful cartridge (in "The Hunting Rifle").

I was glad to see you mention Warren Page, who maybe isn't remembered as he should be. His writing style doesn't appeal to me quite as much; I get more enjoyment reading an O'Connor or Keith story. But for shooting ability and technical knowledge of ballistics and rifle accuracy I believe Page was the best of his era.

Well, like you I've been reading these (and a lot of other) gun authors for going on fifty years. Maybe we should just let these good men rest in peace - but they've given us a lot of information and reading pleasure, and I think we honor them by remembering them.

Well, I picked the 30-06 as jack's choice based on the interview he gave Jim Carmichel shortly after he retired from Outdoor Life. Carmichel asked Jack what rifle and cartridge would he choose to hunt all of North America if he could only have one? Jack immediately said, "The 30-06." IIRC, it was in a 1970 issued of OL.
Paul B.