Thought I would just ad another little comment on that article by John B. He also spoke something about barrel lengths in regard to "fast" and "slow" powder and basicly said all that was foolishness. He said that the large case will always give more velocity than a smaller case. And that the best load in the long barrel will also always be the best load (velocity wise) in the short barrel.

I believe that his all enclusive statements fall under the military designation of Bravo Sierra. I know that large cases will USUALLY produce more velocity that small cases, but such is not always so. The .378 necked down to .224 fired in a 26" barrel doesn't produce velocities that the .22 Cheetah and other such wildcat cases produce.

Likewise, what is said about fast and slow powders in long and short barrels may be true when your are talking about barrel differences like a 22" to 24" to 26". Yet, we who single shot pistol shooters know that when you are talking lots of powder in a 12 to 15 inch tube, that isn't the case.

The best loads for the .260 and 7-08 in a rifle are pretty slow powders. Yet top loads in my contender is w/ RL-15 and AA2520, much faster powders, because the expanding gases are more completely filled their presure curve potential of expanding gas velocity in the short barrel.

It seems like J.B. was trying to sell papers, too me. He bashed all the other writers by writing that which was contrary and making generality that may be so most of the time, but certainly, not all.

I think his comments regarded MAINSTREAM rifles not hand cannons with 12 or 14 inch barrels. John does a lot of testing and several of his findings DO seem to work out. I've discussed the Ackley Improved series of cartridges with him prior to haveing a pair of rifles rechambered to AI. He was 100% on the money with his findings compared to mine.
I have only met a few gunwriters in my life; Elmer Keith, Craig Boddington and John Barsness. John seems to be a very honest, well informed writer with a lot of common sense. I have a hell of a lot more faith in HIS findings and opinions than the vast majority of the other writers out there. He is surely opinionated , but aren't we ALL?

FN in MT

Frank - I haven't seen any opinionated members on this site. Please give me their names.

Actually you fellows might want to read the parallel thread to this here on this forum. It is entitled Agree or Disagree." We are hashing out the same topic and have had some good input thus far. Come join us.

I agree completely with Barsness on the max velocity in pistol length barrels . I shoot and have done extensive chrono-ing with a .243 Striker . The powders that get the best speeds are exactly the same slow ones that work well in a rifle .

I have been working up a load for the new 95 gr. SST . RL 19 does really well in the speed department .

Beartrack et al......in this case with respect to fast and slow powders and the same powder giving the highest velocity is true with the following caveat....it must be the same barrel. Start at 28" or whatever and test all the powders you want and then rank them for velocity and then start cutting that barrel....the ranking of the powders will stay the same.

Comparisons to different barrels of different lengths are not germaine as each barrel is different and the powder rankings may (or may not) differ.

[ 11-06-2002, 18:05: Message edited by: DB Bill ]

I think Barsness and Seyfried have had it and I personally really like the edge on their writing,LOVED it when they slammed gear geeks,road hunters,poor hunting ethic's and I like it when somebody gives there honest opinion from their experience. Rawhider

Barsness is one of the better-informed of the current crop of gun writers. He is sometimes misinterpreted by readers, but is usually accurate in what he writes.

In this case, I think that his general observation that the slower powders generally give the highest velocities even in shorter barrels is, again, accurate (within the limitations of legal rifle barrels -- ie. not less than 16"). This has been misinterpreted by some to mean that slower powders make for the BEST loads in short barrels, which may or may not be true. Slower powders will produce greater muzzle pressure, and while the velocities that they produce may be a tad higher, the accuracy may not.

Barsness' articles on optics are by far his best, however. He often debunks some common misconceptions about optics and provides a lot of useful information to shooters on this subject. I wish the editors of Handloader/Rifle would reinstate the optics column he used to author.

As compared to earlier writers like Elmer Keith, whose writing you may have enjoyed, but whose technical grasp of their subject was marginal and heavily colored by prejudice, Barsness makes for refreshing reading.

Does he prostitute himself for manufacturers? Impossible to say, since the ultimate control of what is printed in an article is with the editorial staff of a publication, and is subject to the influences of the "needs" of the business management of the publication, which is in turn sensitive to the "interests" of its paying customers, the advertisers.

I believe Barsness, Seyfried, and that older gent who unfortunately "has gone west" and I can't remember the name of(CRS strikes again!), are telling us some of the most practical, field-useable info. (as they see it), out there in a wildernes of hype straight from the desks of the various sales dept.s, and useless tripe.
Dave 32-20

Personally, I agree with Barness' conclusions....

AD

I agree with DB Bills post on this subject, and I am no Barsness fan, he has never impressed me, but he will baffle many with BS...but this has been a bad week for me, I'm confrontational this week...

I know and have a great deal of respect for Seyfried, as does anyone who knows him personally..He is by far the most intelligent and gun knowledgable person that I have ever known and I'm sure he makes some mistakes now and then.

Regarding Western hunting, after exploring all the avenues of big bullets driven fast, using astronomically capable telescopic sights and all of the other acoutrements of the modern hunter, Mr. Barsness once concluded (this is not an exact quote, but close enough),
"Just get yourself a plain vanilla .30-06 with a 4X scope and a case of 180 grain ammunition. Shoot all but one box of the ammo in practice, then take the remaining 20 rounds and go out and slay any game the American West has to offer."

That bit of common sense immediately propelled him right up to the uppermost reaches of my personal "List of Exalted Sages". Henceforth, one may quibble over the outer fringes of his statements on this or that but that one bit of advice has put him in my good graces forever more.

P.S. Post this over on 24hourcampfire. He posts there occasionally. And while Gen. Boddington was run off by the unruly mob after graciously trying to post on some forums, Mr. Barsness stands still to let folks snipe at him and then answers his detractors calmly and politely. Give him a try, you might start to like him.

I'm sure Seyfried knows that a 22 centerfire is not OPTIMAL for elk, but I would imagine he would do so using extremely good judgement.

Would I do it? No,but I bet he could do so sucessfully.

Mt.Htr,
your posts make little since to me, you seem not to understand anything you read, just spouting gibberish for some unknown reason...Misquoting Ross and flaming me is not particularly funny and without substance...but then I am confrotational this week....

Ray,
You use to give out pretty good advice on this forum, what's happened to you and a few others here at AR? If you're having a bad week and feeling confrontational, why not give the computor a rest? If you and others want to bash Barnsness, be prepared to back up your statements. He is respected by many as is Ross Seyfred and others. Its no wonder gunwriters don't post here much(at least under their own names). I like Seyfred too and they all slip once in awhile, give em a break for Pete's sake! MtnHtr

I like Joh B. myself. He was the reason I subscribed to Handloader Magazine. I think he has a PHD in common sense.

470 Mbogo

Mt.Htr.,
Ok, I won't smoke ole Barsness anymore, heck I thought the post-ta-near wanted an honest answer and that we could all give our opinnions on this forum...Agree or disagree with each other...Guess I missed the whole point..

Now, you suggest that we don't say anything confrontational on these gun scribes, that by their very existence, put themselves in the public eye, and they themselves except that as going with the territory, hell it made Keith popular. I am sorry to hear that they don't post on these sights because of that,it hurts me deeply. I know most all of them personally as I advertise in their magazines and book hunts for some of them, now they will never speak to me again, thanks for the warning.

Now does this apply to everyone or just me and do I have to agree with you on all issues or just this one...I just want to get the rules right, so I can apply them correctly!

I just need to know YOUR rules inasmuch as you have set yourself up as judge and jury...

I will do my best in the future, and I don't see myself taking a sabatical until the hunting season starts, sorry ole boy, get a friggin life. Are we having fun now?

Hey guys, if you want to yell at JB, he's over at 24Hr ("Mule Deer") Campfire. I'm sure he'll be glad to chat with you about any problems, real or perceived, you may have with him.

Personally, I find him the most refreshing change of pace since Clay Harvey (wonder where HE went). I've yet to find a JB article that seemed to show a buyout by any particular manufacturer, and, have picked up some really good tips from his stuff. I'm solidly in his corner.

R-WEST

[ 11-23-2002, 02:24: Message edited by: R-WEST ]

I had the pleasure of spending the weekend with John at the Sisk Rifles Shoot.

He was well informed on lots of things, and worked hard at the shoot.

I'd spend time in camp with him again anytime.

John is a very nice guy but why ressurect a 3.5 year old thread to tell us so?

I'm sure we can all pick each other or someone else to death on details and generalizations. To what point? There are plenty of opinionated people on this site that I love to read because they are interesting. However, when the arguement goes beyond "I disagree and here's why" and turns into "I disagree because your a fat head (or much worse)" I personally lose interest and occationally some respect for those involved. This obviously doesn't apply to jumping on trolls or statements that common sence would recognize as BS.

That said, I know John a bit and like his writing. There are far worse out there. If you think you'd do better in a magazine forum, by all means please save us from those you find so lacking.

I lurk here a lot but post very seldom. Saw this thread, read it and was AMAZED to see a post by ME. I thought I was getting senile. Had I just posted something and forgot it already??
Glad to see it was from 4 years ago.

FNin MT