Was Whelen Wrong????

[JohnH]

"....The only interesting rifles are accurate rifles...." Townsend Whelen (Please forgive if I don't have the quote exactly)

If this is true then why is most of my thinking about my rifles about how to make them shoot more accurately, or perhaps more precisely, about why they are not shooting accurately enough?

[mike in co]

no ...you are just looking at the rifle early and side ways......now its just a rifle..it will be an interesting rifle when it is accurate........ he never said how long it took to make a rifle interesting....or was it the other way around....lol

[9.3X62AL]

Interesting......yeah. My Rem 788 x 243 is VERY interesting, while the recalcitrance of the Marlin 25-20 makes for interesting copulatory and coprological references.

Interesting, indeed.

[NVcurmudgeon]

I am a great admirer of the late, great Col. Whelen. I even taught myself to load ammunition from his book, "Why Not Load Your Own?" (This was the only publication that actually described how to load a cartridge back in the late fifties.) Whelen's comment about accurate rifles is good as far as it goes, but leaves out an important consideration. There are many rifles that may fall outside the good Colonel's definition of interesting, yet are perfect for their intended purpose. Cowboy action shooting rifles, where speed and slickness of operation are vital, and the US Cal. 30 M1 Carbine which furnished an accurate enough weapon to servicemen who were not primarily riflemen, are two of many examples. Portability, speed of operation, reliable function under adverse conditions, ergonomics, etc. can be more important than absolute accuracy depending upon the venue. Col. Whelen, IIRC, used his famous quote in connection with an early benchrest publication, which he edited.

[fecmech]

It's a quote that has always stuck with me but more in regards to handguns as I'm not much of a rifle shooter. I do not enjoy shooting most service grade auto's due to their poor grouping ability. I know they are not "Bullseye" accurate and that they are accurate enough for the intended purpose. I just don't like "calling" a 10 and getting a 2 O'clock 8 or vice versa!

Deputy Al--Had a 788 .243 many moons ago that loved Sierra 60 grainers no matter what powder or velocity. Full case of H380, 3700fps and less than 1/2"@100--12 grs of red dot about 1800fps and well under 1". Real tough on woodchucks! Nick

[9.3X62AL]

Nick--

If I could get any of the 243s I've messed with (4 so far) to do anything positive with lighter varmint bullets, I wouldn't have a 22-250. Zero zilch nada good luck with anything under 85 grains in 4 different rifles to date. That old Rem-gun sure likes the RCBS 95 grain castings, though--and Sierra 100 grain BTSP's, too.

[Bass Ackward]

"....The only interesting rifles are accurate rifles...." Townsend Whelen (Please forgive if I don't have the quote exactly)

If this is true then why is most of my thinking about my rifles about how to make them shoot more accurately, or perhaps more precisely, about why they are not shooting accurately enough?

John,

Depends what you are looking for. Accuracy is a term that has no definition. Good enough is good enough.

I have some rifles that are boringly accurate. Believe it or not, they spend more time sitting. Or I am out trying to make them do the impossible. It's the cantankerous types that just aren't going to beat me. :grin:

[45 2.1]

I have some rifles that are boringly accurate. Believe it or not, they spend more time sitting. Or I am out trying to make them do the impossible. It's the cantankerous types that just aren't going to beat me. :grin:

John-
Thats the spirit! Now you have to figure out what doesn't fit right or what isn't burning right to get where you want to go. Methodology is worth more here than blind trials. You are not rtying to make them do the impossible, only a very few rifles don't respond.

[Bass Ackward]

John-
Thats the spirit! Now you have to figure out what doesn't fit right or what isn't burning right to get where you want to go. Methodology is worth more here than blind trials. You are not rtying to make them do the impossible, only a very few rifles don't respond.

Ah Bob, it's frustrating.

I feel like a submarine that either is on the surface or the bottom. I can do well if I stay below 1300 fps or above 2000. But in the dead zone between those two ranges, I just can't crack 1/2". Today's best was .592 for 5 shots at 1883 fps with 37.5 grains of RL10X.

Three group average was .917. That was 36, 37, and 37.5 grains of RL10X. 38 grains goes totally wild with this mix at 2". It was 90-92 degrees during firing. So maybe with cooler weather. The shot buffer may have helped, but generally, I can't make fillers work to save my derriere. Pardon my French and my frustration.

I am going to settle on the 37.5 grains and play with compression and see what happens.

[JohnH]

Nice to know that I am not the only stubborn one here....

[drinks]

Al;
My 1968 788, .243, which cost $78.95 new, is the most amazing rifle I have ever owned, I just shot 90gr cast in 3/8" at 50 yds , at 2400fps, 80gr Speer spitzers at 3250fps in a group of about 1/4" at 50yds and 55gr Nosler BTs at 3800fps in 3/8" at 50 yds.
I just cannot seem to find a bullet and load it does not like.
I also have some that 2" at 25 yds is good, but that is a commie milsurp with a barrel big enough for the bullet to turn around in.
Win some , loose some.
Don

[MTWeatherman]

"....The only interesting rifles are accurate rifles...." Townsend Whelen (Please forgive if I don't have the quote exactly)

If this is true then why is most of my thinking about my rifles about how to make them shoot more accurately, or perhaps more precisely, about why they are not shooting accurately enough?


Not to detract from Colonel Whelen, who was a pioneer in reloading and cartidge development, but the statement is wrong because the statement as given would apply to everyone. As you've already noted...not so. If he had said "To me, The only interesting rifles are accurate rifles...." then it could be true, but would imply that he is only interested in benchrest shooting. In differing circumstances, the bench rest rifle loses its appeal. In hunting in heavy cover, speed not super accuracy can be desirable. I suspect that if he was being charged by an enraged grizzly bear, he might find a.45-70 Guidegun more interesting than his benchrest rifle...super accuracy be damned.

It's all relative. How does he define an accurate rifle.? One would have to know what he means by that to know whether or not to agree with him.

Myself, I find many things interesting...a challenge being one of them. I like to make a rifle shoot better and using cast bullets adds an even bigger handicap. So, a rifle which might not meet his definition of accuracy would pose a challenge to me so becomes interesting. If I knew what his definition of accuracy was I would know if I ever made any of them "interesting" but suspect his criteria is pretty restrictive.

What you just said, John H, is that you are interested in making your rifle shoot more accurately...which means you are interested in your rifle. Now Col. Whelen may not have been interested in it but you're just as entitled to your opinion as he is...and that's what it is, an opinion that applies to him, not a fact which applies to you.

[JohnH]

MTWeatherman, Far be it from me to take the Good Col. to task, I just find the statement something of a conundrum, and I was wondering if others, like myself, found their lessor accurate, or perhaps I should say finikier rifles jsut as if not more interesting. I think the actual quote is more like "Only accurate rifles are interesting" I'm sure that in the midst of a bear charging, accuracy would be the lest of my concerns.

Perhaps it is not accuracy that we persue, but exellence.

[Bent Ramrod]

The Colonel was of the opinion that both the Krag and the Trapdoor Springfield were accurate, and, therefore, interesting, and the run of mine specimens of these would shoot into 2-1/2"-4" at 100 yards with the average issue ammunition of the time. On the other hand, I don't think that the more accurate the rifle is, the more interesting it is. I have a bete noire (several, actually) that I keep struggling with, that maintain my interest with their challenges. I even have a couple that I've finally beaten into submission, and these I prize more and shoot more than the ones that were accurate to begin with. The latter rifles are those that I keep telling myself I should practice more with, to improve my shooting techniques, and then I don't, electing instead to spend the time trying to get some fractious clunker performing.

I'm more interested in mechanism and aesthetics in rifles than I am in pure accuracy. I get more fun out of a Stevens or Winchester single shot that puts all its lead bullets on a soda can at 100 yards than I would out of a Shilen DGA PPC that leaves me no alibis whatever for not being able to put them all in one bullet-sized hole at that range.

[Buckshot]

............I have a MkII** 3 band .577 Snider that you cannot hit the 100 meter berm with, deliberately[smilie=l: However it is such a gas to shoot that that becomes a very minor point. Oh to be sure, if you were serious minded about trying to accomplish something with it, then it would be different.

With that thing it's the pure fun of the size of the cartridge, the mechanics of loading, the bellow and the smoke. I guess about like playing with firecrackers, which at 52 years old I still haven't outgrown.

It IS a pleasure to put something together and have it shoot a clannish little group, and you can say, "there's one for the books". I have several rifles that are easy to please and have proven exceedingly accurate. On the other hand I also have several that to date haven't really done well with anything I've put through them.

They get set back for awile and I go on ot something else for a bit. Yet I may get a new mould or have a brainstorm and they get dragged back out again. It's all fun. The immediate successes along with the long hard roads, and guess which is the sweeter?

...............Buckshot