Just read the book by the Grisham"s:

"Weatherby: The Man, The Gun..."

After reading his log hunting in Africa, lost some respect for his hunting ethics.

Although he never admitted it in the notes, he no doubt purposely shot many animals in non-vital areas to test his velocity theory. He writes of a few animals "running and not stopping" Never writes about recovery of these.

off

Well "ar" you aren't the first to reach that conclusion either. Totally removed from that I've little respect either for a company that will sell a product that is Made in Japan at a time when your own domestic gun industry needs every help it can. But back to the "hunting ethics" debate:

"The Speed of Light - How Bullets Don’t Kill" By Terry Wieland’s On Shooting

Searching through some old Gun Digests a while back, I came across an article written in 1950 by Roy Weatherby, the 20th century’s high priest of high velocity. Having just returned from a safari in Africa where he and his companions killed more than 150 animals with his then-new high-velocity cartridges, Weatherby appeared in print to preach the gospel of speed.

His words, 55 years later, read like those of a snake-oil salesman in a travelling wagon.

“Velocity plays the most important role in killing power – and tomorrow’s rifle is going to be one with high velocity,” Weatherby wrote. He then went on to talk about 87-grain bullets at more than 4,000 feet per second from his .257, and how he made phenomenal one-shot kills with it on everything up to and including Cape buffalo.

He insisted that a light bullet at hyper-velocity “blew up” inside the animal – literally fragmented like a hand grenade – and that animals would drop on the spot as if hit by lightning, even if the bullet did not hit the vitals.

“It doesn’t matter whether you shoot him in the paunch, the ribs, the ham, or the shoulder,” he wrote. “You do not have to hit the heart, the lungs, or the spine, in order to kill when using a bullet that disintegrates inside his body.”

The piece appeared in the 1951 Gun Digest, just as Weatherby, Inc., was starting to get rolling in South Gate, California, complete with movie stars, outlandish ivory inlays in their California-style stocks, and always – always! – the gospel of high velocity....

....Weatherby’s insistence – criminal, in my opinion – that one could kill with a hit anywhere on the body, that it was not necessary to aim for the vitals, may have influenced hunters not to bother to hold steady and squeeze the trigger, but just to get the crosshair anywhere on the body and blaze away....

....In his article, Weatherby showed a zebra stallion that he said had been pole-axed with one shot in the paunch from his .257 at 175 yards. Whether it was gut-shot deliberately, he did not say. And then hunters wonder why they have a bad reputation with the public at large....

And this:

"The Killing Power of Centerfire Hunting Rifles By Chuck Hawks

Roy Weatherby, on an African safari, intentionally gut shot dozens of plains animals with a .257 Wby. Mag. rifle in an attempt to demonstrate this theory. Most (perhaps all) were one shot kills. I understand that he even killed a Cape buffalo with his .257 Magnum."

........simple as that. Ahead of the time.

Sounds like he had some serious ethical problems. Wby rifles never did much for me, maybe it's karma.

He was a man of his time. Nothing more nor nothing les. One of the few Giants in our industry.

I've always liked his 300 & 340, but never cared much for his rifles. I don't think the old Powell Miller Venturi Freebore did much for accuracy either. On the other hand his efforts brought us better bullets and a flatter trajectory.

Yes, Mr. Weatherby's ideas revoloutised our idustry. Progress it is called. I'm sure Ted Thorn is turning in his grave.

I'm not dead yet.

quote:

Originally posted by enfieldspares:
Well "ar" you aren't the first to reach that conclusion either. Totally removed from that I've little respect either for a company that will sell a product that is Made in Japan at a time when your own domestic gun industry needs every help it can. But back to the "hunting ethics" debate:

"The Speed of Light - How Bullets Don’t Kill" By Terry Wieland’s On Shooting

Searching through some old Gun Digests a while back, I came across an article written in 1950 by Roy Weatherby, the 20th century’s high priest of high velocity. Having just returned from a safari in Africa where he and his companions killed more than 150 animals with his then-new high-velocity cartridges, Weatherby appeared in print to preach the gospel of speed.

His words, 55 years later, read like those of a snake-oil salesman in a travelling wagon.

“Velocity plays the most important role in killing power – and tomorrow’s rifle is going to be one with high velocity,” Weatherby wrote. He then went on to talk about 87-grain bullets at more than 4,000 feet per second from his .257, and how he made phenomenal one-shot kills with it on everything up to and including Cape buffalo.

He insisted that a light bullet at hyper-velocity “blew up” inside the animal – literally fragmented like a hand grenade – and that animals would drop on the spot as if hit by lightning, even if the bullet did not hit the vitals.

“It doesn’t matter whether you shoot him in the paunch, the ribs, the ham, or the shoulder,” he wrote. “You do not have to hit the heart, the lungs, or the spine, in order to kill when using a bullet that disintegrates inside his body.”

The piece appeared in the 1951 Gun Digest, just as Weatherby, Inc., was starting to get rolling in South Gate, California, complete with movie stars, outlandish ivory inlays in their California-style stocks, and always – always! – the gospel of high velocity....

....Weatherby’s insistence – criminal, in my opinion – that one could kill with a hit anywhere on the body, that it was not necessary to aim for the vitals, may have influenced hunters not to bother to hold steady and squeeze the trigger, but just to get the crosshair anywhere on the body and blaze away....

....In his article, Weatherby showed a zebra stallion that he said had been pole-axed with one shot in the paunch from his .257 at 175 yards. Whether it was gut-shot deliberately, he did not say. And then hunters wonder why they have a bad reputation with the public at large....

And this:

"The Killing Power of Centerfire Hunting Rifles By Chuck Hawks

Roy Weatherby, on an African safari, intentionally gut shot dozens of plains animals with a .257 Wby. Mag. rifle in an attempt to demonstrate this theory. Most (perhaps all) were one shot kills. I understand that he even killed a Cape buffalo with his .257 Magnum."

Thanks Enfield,

Very interesting historical post.

If Roy was deliberately gut shooting or deliberately taking questionable shots on animals in some morbid experiment, he deserves a special place at hells dining room table.

There is only ONE WAY TO KILL an animal, and that is to cease brain activity.

Basically, besides destroying the brain, cutting off oxygen or blood are the two main ways to "kill" the brain.

Massive hydrostatic shock may cause an animal to "go right down", however death of the brain is the final killer.

Before we collectively condem Roy Weatherby, I would have to see more evidence of his intentionally placing shots in what many consider "non vital" areas.

I have shot a lot of game with Weatherby calibres. They have always killed well.

However, I must say I have had as many drop to the shot kills with the 9.3x74R and the 450/400 3 1/4" as I have had with the Weatherbys.

I have shot a fair amount of deer, antelope and elk with a 300 WBY Mag, no complaints, it is a great killer, but I found the 257 WBY Mag to be no better than the 243 Win.
To be fair to the 257 WBY I never shot anything with it over 250 yards, where its high velocity at a distance, over the 243, did not come into play.

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
There is only ONE WAY TO KILL an animal, and that is to cease brain activity.

Basically, besides destroying the brain, cutting off oxygen or blood are the two main ways to "kill" the brain.

Massive hydrostatic shock may cause an animal to "go right down", however death of the brain is the final killer.

Before we collectively condem Roy Weatherby, I would have to see more evidence of his intentionally placing shots in what many consider "non vital" areas.

I have shot a lot of game with Weatherby calibres. They have always killed well.

However, I must say I have had as many drop to the shot kills with the 9.3x74R and the 450/400 3 1/4" as I have had with the Weatherbys.

I have shot a fair amount of deer, antelope and elk with a 300 WBY Mag, no complaints, it is a great killer, but I found the 257 WBY Mag to be no better than the 243 Win.
To be fair to the 257 WBY I never shot anything with it over 250 yards, where its high velocity at a distance, over the 243, did not come into play.

Notice that I started my post with “IF”. I don’t know anything for sure. I may not want to know anything either.

quote:

Sometimes I wonder if all the hullabaloo about super fat magnums packed to the brim with powder and pegging the pressure gauge isn't just the latest mania.

I tend to think that it probably is. And I,for one, would sooner not gain 200fps more velocity at the cost of one less round in the magazine.

We too had this extreme velocity nonsense in Great Britain with the notorious 244 Holland & Holland.

Personally? A 270 Winchester and a good Zeiss 'scope and a 140 or 155 grain bullet at 150 yards maximum will do for for me. 2,900fps to 2,700fps and a bullet of 120 grains or more is plenty fast enough to get the job done in the medium bores.

But back to RW. Another search found this too:

ROY WEATHERBY -- The Man Behind The Name. Guns Magazine Dave Anderson

"The premise on which Weatherby based his cartridges and his business is that bullet velocity is the most important factor in producing fast, humane kills on game. Some of his claims seem rather extravagant. In the beginning at least he seemed to have been convinced that if velocity was high enough, where the animal was hit didn't matter.

The diary of his first African trip includes comments such as this one about a hyena: "I shot him with my .257 Magnum, hitting in the front leg only, high toward the shoulder ... nothing can withstand the shock of high velocity bullets, even when not hit in a vital spot."

When a Cape buffalo escaped after being hit once with a .375 Weatherby, twice with a .300, and once more with a .470, Weatherby wrote, "You must hit them right unless the bullet has sufficient velocity to disintegrate. Now, I am going to try the 87 gr. .25 caliber on them -- this may have the shock we are after."

The diary of his 1948 hunt printed in his biography makes fascinating reading. After seeing poorly hit animals run off, Weatherby noted, "This shooting business is really something. I'm disproving all my own theories and everyone's else's ... the bullet must be travelling at a certain velocity when it hits the animal in order to kill by shock, no matter where it hits."

The ultimate, though, was when Weatherby claimed that if velocity was high enough, you did not have to hit the animal at all in order to kill it. A near miss was enough. "Government experiments with projectiles travelling 10,000 fps show the devastating results that can someday be expected ... they shot over the backs of animals with these guns, missing by only a fraction of an inch. The animals jumped several times their normal ability to jump and fell dead. Autopsy revealed every blood vessel was ruptured in the area over which the bullet passed. It worked with shock waves in the air..."

It's interesting to take a couple steps back and look at not only Weatherby but ballistic theory in the 20th century.

Remember the velocity craze which followed the introduction of cordite---many of the claims for velocity sounded like Roy. Also remember George Grey emptying the magazine of his .280 Ross unsuccessfully into a charging lion. The lion apparently wasn't impressed.

Remember also the long "war" between Jack O'Connor and Elmer Keith about speed vs. bullet weight.

The latest hurrah of the velociphiles was in the 80's/90's with rounds such as Lazzeroni and some of the A-square rounds.

The first rifle I bought as an "adult" was a .378 Wby in the early 70's. I still have two other Wby rifles in the safe. I haven't shot the .378 in over 20 years and probably never will again! At some point I need to get rid of them.

Interesting to compare Weatherby's safari notes with John Taylor's "African Rifles and Cartridges", also published in 1948. 95% of this book still rings true, some 60+ years later. The truth was available for people, even back then. Weatherby was nothing, if not a salesman. He goes on one safari and is able to pass himself off as more credible than Taylor, who spent 30 years in the bush after dangerous game.

all of the above statements prove one thing---that you are not going to get out of this world alive, no matter what you do or are.

Some may not like Roys HV approach, but when the 17rem craze was on over 2 decades ago, I witnessed that round drop goat size game instantaneous time after time with well placed shots,like someone had just turned
out the lights.(using the harder 25gn Hornady.)
Would you say that Roys HV hype of"shoot them anywhere" has about as much credence as the claim that bigger calibres kill better due to greater hydrostatic shock?
Frankly I dont care where Roy had his guns made, if your a man of the world, the world is yours to utilize,
What next, a man should also not hunt in another country cause he should be spending all his money in America?

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:

Before we collectively condem Roy Weatherby, I would have to see more evidence of his intentionally placing shots in what many consider "non vital" areas.

The best evidence is probably this book. It has many, many pages of his African safari where he used a recorder and dictated his stories each night to save. The stories are many and took me a long time to get through them. Many are non vital hits :

http://www.amazon.com/Weatherb...resham/dp/0944438024

Mr. Weatherby may not be up to the standard of some by shoting game in what may not be ethical areas, but considering on what is happening in this country with the so called ethics of cloning, dna manipulation and who knows what else, i would say Mr. Weatherby is very ethical. Also if i am not mistaken all vangards are made in Maine.

derf, sort of a stretch don't you think? I suppose we can also make Manson a choir boy if we only compare him to Hitler. It is what is and stands alone for what it is. From there we can all make out own personal judgements.

Roy Weatherby was an innovator and a business man. Like many of us, he hunted when he could.

derf9.3

try to stay on task please. I think I practiced genocide on (according to the latest Crest toothpaste commercial) between nineteen and twenty billion germs when I brushed my teeth this afternoon. Species not identified. That is as germane to old Roy as your post.
Don't forget to throw in some gratituitistic remarks about Idi Amin and the true slaughter in Africa.

regards,

Rich
Buff Killer

Speed kills...And so do all my Weatherby calibers. jorge

Roy Weatherby was simply wrong.

High velocity (to the extent achievable in a hunting rifle) is no substitute for correct bullet placement.

Again, Roy Weatherby was wrong - not unethical or much less, criminal - but simply wrong.

Now, on the other hand, high velocity with correct bullet placement is devastating. That much is incontrovertibly true.

This has to be one of the silliest threads I've read in a long time...

I agree he was a business man and his business was pushing his cartridges. It is hard to argue however that if in the course of business he was purposely taking non lethal hits to promote his rounds he was acting in a way most hunters consider unethical. It seems pretty clear cut and to your average hunter in no way "silly". Of course it's ancient history for the most part but still an interesting look into one of the so called pioneers of the industry. I must say I'm a bit surprised it causes a need for some to over look it all and make excuses for him. It doesn't change my thoughts at all. Like I said I've never been a fan of the rifles. I thought they were/are for the most part tacky in appearance and marketed to a niche group of shooters to which I don't belong. I like some of his cartridges and have had more than a couple rifles chambered for the 257 and 300 wby's, just not in a Wby rifle. I think he may have been a product of his generation in some ways and highly doubt he was alone and also doubt he'd carry on the same way if he was alive in todays market place.

He was simply a man who was experimenting with cartridges of high velocity. By that I mean designing them. As to his ethics, I wasn't there when he was hunting so I don't know for sure.

It is all about shot placement and using a bullet that matches the game and cartridge. Hit them in the vitals and they will die sooner then later. Kill the brain, by shooting or removing blood/oxygen flow, they will die.

As to where they make their rifles, the Mk V rifles were in fact made in Japan for a number of years. They were also made in Germany for a number of years. They are now made in the US. The Vanguards are made by Howa in Japan.

Ken....

It is always easiest to pass judgements on people who are long gone, who lived in times one really may know little about, and who cannot speak up to defend themselves.

Such judgements are often little more than arrogance on our part, as we are all products of our eras, and eras differ in values and knowledge.

In Roy's young adult times many people did more hunting than now and used a great many different chamberings to do so, A hit anywhere on an animal with any cartridge was commonly held out to be a "good shot".

In christian North America, animals were not yet publicly believed to be the moral equals or superiors of humans, and were in fact viewed by many as put here on this earth by God solely for the use of man, for which view they quoted the Bible to proove.

Subsistance farming as THE way of life in the U.S. was just starting to come to an end and, during such, the death of a "mere" animal was seen as no big deal, no matter how it occurred. One can find the same kind of currently deemed immoral (amoral?) behavior in the writings of Elmer Keith, for instance. Or in the writings of every hunter, according to PETA.

So anyway, rather than viewing Roy Weatherby as an unethical, evil, man, regardless how, where, and why he killed animals, one really should take a step back and view him as a product of the world as it then was in North
America and elsewhere.

Roy was both trying to sell his guns, but he was also trying to develop guns which would cut the loss of wounded animals by hunters. IF he had been able to do so, that alone would have been a great contribution to conservation.

He sincerely thought he had the answer, but that is a failure of many researchers in viewing their own works, even today.

Originally posted by Alberta Canuck:

quote:

It is always easiest to pass judgements on people who are long gone, who lived in times one really may know little about, and who cannot speak up to defend themselves.

Such judgements are often little more than arrogance on our part, as we are all products of our eras, and eras differ in values and knowledge.

Then call me arrogant. Been called much worse.

quote:

In Roy's young adult times many people did more hunting than now and used a great many different chamberings to do so, A hit anywhere on an animal with any cartridge was commonly held out to be a "good shot".

Times have changed. This post is relevant to 2009. I believe a common quote is, "If we forget the past, we are likely to repeat it."

If one person reads this post and decides to get another 100 yards closer next year to drop an animal, it was worth it.

If one drunk reads this post and refrains from gut shooting a deer next fall for a laugh, it was worth it. Not saying Roy was drunk and gut shooting deer drunk, but you get my point. Perhaps that drunk just might remember this post next fall and give his head a shake, perhaps...

quote:

In christian North America, animals were not yet publicly believed to be the moral equals or superiors of humans, and were in fact viewed by many as put here on this earth by God solely for the use of man, for which view they quoted the Bible to proove.

So are you saying animals don't feel pain?

quote:

One can find the same kind of currently deemed immoral (amoral?) behavior in the writings of Elmer Keith, for instance.

Then Elmer and Roy were both unethical hunters IMO.

quote:

Or in the writings of every hunter, according to PETA.

True. But that is irrelevant to this discussion because PETA are sickly, malnourished disturbed individuals and are against everything concerning animals.

There are many hunters on this forum like myself who probably agree with me on this issue yet disagree with PETA. If you believe I am some lefty, tree hugging, granola eating PETA pusher you are wrong.

Let me give you an example:

In Canada where I live it gets really cold. A few months ago I was late season Whitetail hunting and on my way back home I drove past a farm yard. It was about -35 C which is -31 F that day.

I saw some horses out in the pasture. It had just snowed, there was no bedding and no feed in the feeders. I thought this guy needs to take care of his horses better. Then I saw one laying flat out on the snow. Well, I couldn't take that and had to stop. Not some PETA agenda, just wanted to show this guy that his horses need some work.

Upon driving in I thought of only 1 thing. Perhaps this guy is too poor and has no straw or feed left. The farm looked very run-down and I saw nothing.

After driving in I saw a brand new Ford 4 X 4 truck worth about $50,000, and an Arctic Cat snow mobile worth probably $15,000. I walked into his shop and he was working on a snowmobile worth another $15,000, and another 10 or so machines waiting to be worked on. All brand new machines. This guy obviously fixed snow machines. He could afford to feed and bed his horses.

I simply told him how cold it is and it would be a good idea to bed and feed his horses. Then I left.


You see, Alberta Canuck, you are simply playing devil's advocate. Every thing you say is true concerning that era but we don't live in that era anymore. We now live in the "Information Age" via the Internet. People are no longer ignorant or stupid, or at least have the capacity to read both sides of the story.

If Roy were magically brought to life today he would no doubt say those things you say. Yes, times were different, but doesn't change the fact that animals feel pain or that money can blind people and cause them to do certain things. The post above about being compared to Hitler makes all of us look good but that doesn't make Goering or Goebbels saints.

Since you brought the bible and God into this without quoting scripture, here is a scripture that may be relevant to this:

"For the love of money is the root of all evil"

I Timothy 6:10

It doesn't say money is the root of all evil but the "love" of it.

Perhaps Weatherby, in his persistence to make his buisness lucrative allowed evil to take root, which allowed him to be indifferent to the suffering of an animal.

Is taking multiple, non-vital shots at animals evil? Not when a bear is charging you. Not when you are some nomad, starving and need to eat or feed your family. Clearly these are examples God meant in Genesis concerning "dominion"

Oh yeah, he made some ugly rifles alright. . . .

It's "different strokes" I would say. White line spaces and skipline checkering do absolutely nothing for me I'm afraid. Two rifles. Both in 240, one an "Apex" the other a "WM". Similar barrel length, etc., etc. So let's have a "poll" as to who likes which best:

So this does nothing for me:



But this pushes all my buttons:



Both 240s...but I'd take Holland's over Weatherby's any and every day.

I enjoyed looking through the Weatherby catalogue in my youth and dreaming I would own one.I remember the names,ORION,ATHENA,LAZERMARK...I never bought one,but admire the mans contribution to the shooting world.He would be someone I'd like to sit down and have a beer with.

Like is one thing, afford is another for some folk.
People can & do get plenty enjoyable & succesful hunting from a Weatherby...and they are quite content without having an emotional need for a H&H.
Me I like 240wm to be in light rifle, so I would prefer the MkV ULW(5.75lb) over the H&H anyday,
....,and just for the record, I also have heavier calibre mauser(s) that are built to a higher quality than what comes out of the H&H workshop.
Needless to say I accept both and can happily hunt with either,just depends what im doing and where im doing it.

This rifle is off the WBY site, it is everything I don't like all on one gun. There is no winner when debating what looks good and I won't belittle anothers poor taste Just kidding. Their rifles remind of a four door Chevelle with all the bells and whistles. Just give me real SS car with clean lines and paint, everything else is lipstick on a pig.

quote:

Originally posted by ar corey:
We now live in the "Information Age" via the Internet. People are no longer ignorant or stupid, or at least have the capacity to read both sides of the story.

Although we have a wealth of information at our finger tips, don't assume that people are no longer stupid or ignorant. If anything the information highway has reinforced ignorance and stupidity. There's alot of accurate and inaccurate information out there open to evryone's interpretation and opinion.

quote:

Originally posted by ar corey:

If Roy were magically brought to life today he would no doubt say those things you say. Yes, times were different, but doesn't change the fact that animals feel pain

so why didn't you offer to pay for the horses food?
in 2060 or so, that might be the only ethical thing to do.

quote:

If Roy were magically brought to life today he would no doubt say those things you say. Yes, times were different, but doesn't change the fact that animals feel pain or that money can blind people and cause them to do certain things. The post above about being compared to Hitler makes all of us look good but that doesn't make Goering or Goebbels saints.

How an animal feels or doesn't feel about being shot or killed was not an issue back in the day. I am amazed today that so many peoiple seem to b worried about them animals feelings, yet shoot them anyway. I eat Beef, Chickens, Turkey, Deer, Elk, and lots of other game, so I am worried more about how to harvest them than I am about thier feelings.

quote:

Originally posted by dempsey:
This rifle is off the WBY site, it is everything I don't like all on one gun. There is no winner when debating what looks good and I won't belittle anothers poor taste Just kidding. Their rifles remind of a four door Chevelle with all the bells and whistles. Just give me real SS car with clean lines and paint, everything else is lipstick on a pig.

I like everything except the inlays. The fancy checkering and engraveing make this pig kind purdy.

quote:

I enjoyed looking through the Weatherby catalogue in my youth and dreaming I would own one.I remember the names, ORION, ATHENA, LAZERMARK...I never bought one, but admire the mans contribution to the shooting world.

Yep, me too!! Invested a lot of time looking at those glossy pics and memorizing the ballistics tables.

quote:

Originally posted by Macifej:
This has to be one of the silliest threads I've read in a long time...

X2