This "gunwriter" bashing as of late has got me thinking about the magazines and hunting/shooting related books that I read. I enjoy most of them and prefer some authors over others, and have my preferences for subject matter etc.

As gunwriters go however I must admit to having a strong favorite in the writings of Jim Carmichel. My families household has recieved, every month without fail ever since I can remember, a copy of Outdoorlife in the mail. I used to pour over them with great interest, at first just enjoying the stories, leaving the more technical stuff behind, but then comming to enjoy the more technical stuff as well. Jim always produced my favorite articles.

Now I don't particularily care for Outdoorlife anymore. I do however purchase it from the news stand every month for the Carmichel content and really think I'm blessed when two of his articles appear in one single issue. I even read his stuff when the subject matter is of little interest to me.

So why don't we hear much about him? At last it seems that way to me. He is rarely discussed on these forums (in light of recent gunwriter disdain, probably a positive thing), and doesn't seem to get the attention that Boddington, Barsness, Seyfried, etc. recieve (I personally enjoy these gentlemans writings as well). Is it just me or do others see the same things and do others enjoy his writing.

Another thing I have thought about as of late is the fact the Jim must be considsering some kind of retirement. Try as I might, I really can't think of anyone who could possibly replace him.

Chuck

Jim could never be replaced by anyone else.

He's a championship-caliber rifle and shotgun master shooter (if you saw his shooting-trophy collection, you wouldn't believe it); a dedicated varminter; a conservative (yet progessive) intellectual; a world-class big game hunter with scores of superb trophy animals to his credit; an accomplished collector and expert on all aspects of rifle and shotgun history, art, and science, including fine contemporary custom firearms, etc.

A highly educated man and a superb writer with an astounding resume behind him, Jim is one-of-a-kind, and better-qualified for his job in most ways than his predecessor Jack O'Connor.

The learning process never stops with Jim, and I have a hunch if he lives to be a hundred and is still physically able, he'll keep right on going just as he always has.

Just for fun, I assembled all of Jim's fantastic "Outdoor Life" hunting stories (spanning over thirty years) in one file in my office. If those stories were published in book form, they would collectively constitute one of the greatest and best-written big game hunting anthologies by a single author ever put together.

His masterwork, "Book of The Rifle" should be on ever rifleman's bookshelf.

AD

I agree. I like Carmichel. I look n him as a kind of transitional writer. You know, a bridge between the old timers like Keith, Page, Jordan etc. and the modern writers. This is maybe not a fair charatarization because he is more than that. There are a lot of things which impressed me about Jim Carmichel. Among them the fact that he actually worked with Hacker Martin in Tennesee. He is a respectable gunsmith and decent stockmaker in his own right. He can probably outshoot me in any kind of contest I care to try. He can write humor. He can write technical. He can write adventure. I freely admit that any criticism of his writings from me probably stem from envy! Regards, Bill.

I've had the good fortune to visit with Mr. Charmichel on several ocassions, at benchrest matches. He has always been a true pleasure. I also agee that his writing is superb and most often, great fun to read.

Pat Byrne

Concur,
His rifle book is a masterpiece and should be in all bookcases.

regards,
Graycg

Yes, JC is all that and then some.

But JO'C was the gunwriter who made me miss the school bus.

you guys must have missed the article where he called all of us on the forums a bunch of dorks, then blamed us for the failure of the ridiculous etronix system, which was a white elephant from the beginning.

maybe we are dorks, but i certainly don't intend to pay 4 or 5 bucks to have him tell me that! i enjoyed an article of his several years ago, when he described the origins of the .260 remington cartridge, and still give him high marks for that, but i do so realizing that he is just another whore for the mag rags.

for my money, jack o'connor was the best, as a couple have already said. jim carmichel will NEVER have the balls to fill o'connor's shoes, mostly because his balls are deep in the pocket of some OL/F&S executive's pocket.

[ 09-08-2003, 09:50: Message edited by: tasunkawitko ]

I've read some of that "advice" and seen some of those formulas for reloading which are more like instructions for construction of WMD. Lot's of silly screen names, too. At least mine is my actual nickname and I don't hide behind it. You can actually write me and tell me I'm an idiot to my "face".

No, I'm not thrilled with any thing like Etronix that requires batteries (what DO I have against batteries anyway? ) and I'm not an idiot (again, that's MY opinion ), but he's not that far off in his description.

Maybe he's never made it as far as here, this is one of the better places to go... but still.

You know, Jim is a friend of mine, but even so, my comments about the Remington Etronix have been less-than-positive on these forums in the past, and if we had another Etronix discussion today, I'd still have about the same perspective concerning it's practicality and usefulness.

Disagreement is OK! There are quite of few people I don't see eye-to-eye with on various issues who I still respect greatly, and some of them turn out to be right after all.

Etronix or not, Jim's an incredible individual and worthy of the highest respect. He'll always have mine.

AD

That's a fairly disturbing article, coming from someone who I've respected so much. At this point, I'm not sure he's playing with a full deck, anymore. When someone of his expertise describes today's rifle ignition systems as "a complicated series of levers and sears�all prone to breakage and disorder;" well, all I can say is "Wow!"

Come on, Jim: "prone to breakage and disorder"??? Maybe he has a different definition of "prone" than I do. I would describe 99% of my guns as "reliable."

And as for these forums and others like them, if Jim, et al, wants to feel needed and see people again consulting the oracles of old, like Outdoor Life and its ilk, then maybe he should make some effort to see that they stop publishing the milquetoast drivel that they are mostly comprised of today.

Carmichel seems very knowledgeable, but I have never warmed up to his writing because I always felt he seemed to have a certain amount of disdain for his readers, wanting to stay aloof from them. To this day, I don't know what he does to make a living. Obviously he is fairly wealthy, and that kind of wealth does not come from being a gun scribe. O'conner, for all his arrogance, at least let us have a glimpse into his personal life so we had a little appreciation of his viewpoint.
One gun writer that I cannot tolerate any longer is David Petzal from Field and Stream. His belligerance towards his readers, his cowardly attacks on people that disagree with him, and his total disregard for journalistic standards are more than I can stomach.
Petzal recently did a review of a book by Bryce Towsley about the Benoit family, the famous deer hunters from Vermont. In his review Petzal stated something to the effect that the Benoits were sucessful hunters without using any modern technology like scopes or GPS units. If Petzal had bothered to read the book, he would have seen that there was an entire chapter in the book about the Benoits using GPS.
In another of his recreant retorts in the letters to the editor column, he made some comment about there being a "few" Democrats that didn't deserve to be hung. Well, I have lots of Democratic friends and relatives that are a lot more patriotic Americans than he is,and to imply that fellow Americans deserve to be hung because of differing viewpoints is something Hitler would have said.

I haven't read one thing by JC in the last 15yrs that I thought was worth printing or my time to read. I don't know if his editors dictate what he should write about or if he is truly that uninspired these days. He was good when he first took over for JOC but these days I'll take Seyfried.

Jim has been one gun-writer who I have respected in the past, but on the article posted above, I feel he is full of crap.
First, I read these forum's because I can get an honest opinion. Yes some of them are bogus, but it doesn't take long to recognize the BS from the gems. Gun rag writers can't do that because they can't offend their advertisers. Anymore, I feel gun-rag writers are nothing more than used car salesmen.
Second, I hope he re-reads his article to see what has been preached on this forum the last couple of years. In this article, he states that once he installed a Shilen barrel on it, the gun shot like a dream, and that Remington made a mistake by installing their production barrels on the rifle. Geez, where have I heard that off-the-shelve Remingtons are not as accurate as they used to be? He has confirmed to me what I feel has been the reason why.
Now I will never claim to know even a fraction about the Rifle that Carmichel knows. But where he and the gun makers are making a huge mistake is not following these forums, because this is the pulse of the gun-market. We are the "Air-Headed" people who buy the guns and make suggestions to other gun-buyers. If I don't trust his opinion, he can either blow me off or do something to earn my trust. I feel gun makers don't want to know what their customers think of their products or are too scared to listen to complaints and problems. If they gave a rats ass about our opinions, they would be here defending their product or at least lets us know what they are doing to correct the problem.
But they blow me off, which is why I blow them off when I spend my money.

I have been critical of those bashing the gunwriters on this forum and am no less so of the reverse. Carmichel obviously has a certain positive bias in favor of a rifle he seems to know a good deal about. He is also right about the crazy nature of the internet. You have to bring your brain to the internet but most of us already know that and I am sure he does too. I get a lot of useful information here and also hear some really silly or dangerous stuff. It is the nature of the medium but that doesn't excuse Carmichel. His article had a feelings hurt spiteful tone that was just unnecessary. I hold him and others like him to a higher standard than those who might be on this or any other forum. He is SUPPOSED to be one of the leaders in the field. He and others like him have a responsibility to try and educate those who may not know as much. Granted it may often be like trying to heard cats but that is just tough. Did his literary tantrum convince anyone that the rifle in question is if fact a good one? I doubt it.

I really like Carmichel. He, along with Seyfried, in my opinion, are THE two best writers in the business today. Carmichel's Book of the Rifle is a must have. Personally I think it is a much better look at the subject than any of O'Connor's book of the same. Carmichel seems to have embodied the tactical and benchrest techniques and their continuation that Warren Page was known for. He has written at length of both internal and external ballistics, carrying the torch from Col. Whelen. He's not just a gun crank either. He uses those rifles to hunt everything from whistle pigs to elephants. The story of his crocodile while hunting Jack Atcheson is one of the most entertaining I've ever read. Like Seyfried, Boddington, O'Connor, Keith, Whelen, Hagel, etc... he has tons of real hunting and tournament experience from Tennessee to Alaska to Africa. A whole more than most.

Sure he's opinionated. Sometimes can be gruff. What do you think Elmer Keith or Jack O'Connor would have said about some of Axel's posts? To all the flame wars or marginal cartridge for game or mile distance hunting we see here and on other sites?

I do agree that he missed the boat on the Etronix, but he's been preaching electronic ignition since before "The Book of the Rifle".

I'd had much rather read Carmichel, Seyfried and Boddington, guys that have been around and really know what they are writing rather than a 3 or 4 page advertisment or supposition that is so popular with gun scribes these days.

I must admit his comments on the "prone to breakage" when it comes to "old fashioned" guns pretty well turned me off to the article. I thought the whole "Etronix" thing was ridiculous As far as Petzal and the democrats, he was partially right. He should have used "ALL." jorge

I think one could say Jim Carmichel is an institution. I have been reading & enjoying his stories for years and hope he continues to turn them out.

He had some big shoes to fill when he took over from Jack but, from all accounts he did it right.

I do however, wish Jim would write some new books. I'd love to see texts on Jim's African and North American hunting exploits as well as an updated "Book of the Rifle"

Regards,
Dave

Of all the gun scribes alive today, I'd most like to share a hunting camp with Carmichel. We'd argue about the Etronix but agree on most else.

I pretty much stopped reading Outdoor Life after Jack O'Conner left. I have read some of Jim's work , it never held my interest . Just different tastes. I was taught a long long time ago if you didn't have anything nice to say, don't say anything. As for the Internet, gee's any child will tell you that there is a good bit of bs and just plain horseing around on these sights. There is a lot of good stuff here and then there is the 2000 yard shots at game. Most of it is pretty good information while some is like trying to have a real conversation with Mel Brooks. Sorry Mel I can't look at you with out busting a gut. As for the Electric Rifle, If remington really thought it was the way to go, then why didn't they make a hunting rifle that an Eastern White Tail hunter would buy and hunt with? Some of us know what lock time is, my problem with is pretty simple, the same reason my watch has a sweep second hand and I have to wind it. Rather than a battery. I had a battery die on me once when I really needed to know the time, flying instrument approaches are like that. So I wear an old low tech time piece. I think that most hunters just want a good rifle that will always work, regardless of the weather. Maybe remington would have been better served by taking all of that R&D money and just make the 700 a better rifle. I guess this caveman is just stupid.

Well, I dopn't hide under any screen name, it's my own and I'm damned proud of it. My thing is I like to hunt with single shot rifles and do right well at it. Mr. "smartass" Carmicheal made some snide comments about hunting with "oneshooters" in his book, the modern rifle. He felt facing dangerous game in a charge would be "mighty sporty." I dropped my subscription to OL shortly after that. At least, even if he was doing a lot od rehashing of his old hunts, I found Jack O'Coonor entertaining. I find JC a total frigging bore.
Paul B.

I would have to agree with David C and Forrest B. on all points. I also think the electronic rifle was not for me, but I certainly would not call the man names because he happened to like it. I would bet some of these writer bashers are real sweeties themselves, at least they have a way of telling everybody else at AR. Good shooting.

[ 09-11-2003, 00:49: Message edited by: phurley ]

Jim's article,Enough Rifle,has stuck with me.That is mark of effective peice of writing.BTW,there was no answer to that.