Newest issue of Handloader

[detox]

Mike uses parafin as flux.............................................. ....................just kidding..............................i think?

Maybe he does?

[kenyerian]

Who was it that said "Don't believe everything you hear and only half of what you see" or "Trust but verify". i enjoy reading Mikes articles. They are always well written and full of useful information. Plus he signs his work with his name and stands behind it. However I question and double check everything I read about reloading because a mistake could be fatal. I grew up reading Outdoor Life, Sports a field, Field and Stream Guns and Ammo, Fur Fish and game back in the late 50's and 60's so I've read a lot of the old time writers and Mike does as good as job as any of them.

[10x]

I have read the article carefully, twice.
Mr. Venturino has written an article about what he does with cast bullets that works for him. He expresses his experiences, and he tells us what he does that seems to work acceptably (to him but maybe not for others who have different goals and criteria).
He makes no "carved in stone" claims - just tells us his experience and how he copes with having more rifles than he has time to develop loads for. He likes 5744 with cast bullets, I like Unique. Mostly because until recently I have never had access to 5744. Will I try it, maybe in a gun that I want to try to wring more accuracy out of.
It is an excellent article - well written, and mentions that these methods may not be "the best" for the best accuracy with a specific gun, and that in some guns, they may not work at all. He mentions that some guns do not like the loads.

And Mike, if you ever read this far in the thread. Keep up the good work! I enjoy reading about your experiences, and appreciate your wisdom and skill.
The world would be a dull place if we we all used the same cast bullet caliber, load, and rifle....

[Bullshop]

How dare he! He knows full well that we all do everything exactly the same way here. How dare he be different.

[fcvan]

I used to enjoy reading Mike's articles in various magazines but I haven't subscribed in a long time. His articles taught me a great deal and I believe as a previous poster said that his articles are aimed at the person who might try cast in their rifles. I know it inspired me to try rifles having mostly cast for handguns. I really liked his articles on old Sharps rifles and BP Cartridge shooting. If a few people get inspired to try cast in rifles because of Mike's writing they will undoubtedly want to learn more and hopefully end up looking here.

Side note: Back in the 80s, I had a buddy in Bakersfield who loved BP and was getting sick of CA. He talked often of moving to Montana to enjoy God's country. John finally left CA in the late 80s. How cool to read an article where Mike was hunting Bighorn Sheep with a Sharps rifle, using black powder, and a picture of my buddy holding up the ram's head so we could see the dandy Mike had bagged. Makes a guy want to bust out of a rut and try something new like launching lead with old rifles using BP.

[Bent Ramrod]

I think you've put your finger on an important point, fcvan. Part of the allure of the writers of old was that there was a lot of interest in all of the aspects of the shooting sports, but not much information beyond what the individual could figure out for himself. Any writer who could do a good job of experimentation and could carefully document what they were doing had at least a shot at being a reasonably saleable gun writer, especially at the fees the poor guy would get from what few magazines were around. If they could do it with style, or at least come across to the reader in their own voice, they had a good chance of gaining a devoted following. The development of guns, ammunition components and accuracy and terminal ballistics was going in leaps and bounds and there were plenty of new developments to write about. If, in addition, the writer could generate interest in what he was writing about among people who were not previously interested in the topic, he would become universally regarded as a great writer.

Now, the situation is a lot different. The industry is what they call "mature," at least in the areas that the average reader would be interested in. Most "advances" in gunology these days are marketing developments rather than real technological advances. Too much concentration on or enthusiasm for for any of these developments opens the writer up to charges of being a shill for the industry, whether it is true or not. There is enough information out there, collected over decades, so anybody who is interested can glean at least a superficial idea of what is available and what it does. The upshot is that it is very much harder to be a truly noteworthy and original voice now, and very easy to sound like one is just regurgitating (and perhaps mangling) already published and easily available information.

So the "greatness" of a gun writer nowadays devolves essentially to one thing, the ability to make some aspect of gun stuff interesting to somebody who was not previously interested in it. This talent is complicated by its extreme subjectivity; it obviously doesn't work with everyone, but some percentage of people need to be affected by it. I'm not a deer hunter, and haven't fired a shot at a bird in decades, but Francis Sell's writings make me interested in both endeavors, whereas the writings of many other people about the same subjects make me wonder why anybody would get up that early to do anything that boring.

The modern writer who, to me, had the interest stimulation talent in spades was Ross Seyfried. He could make anything he wrote about, no matter how routine or arcane, interesting. I used to go over and over his stuff to try to figure out how he could do that just by stringing words together, but in vain. He had something of the storytelling abilities of Elmer Keith, and he was very good with detail and could put the reader into the picture, so maybe that was part of it.

Mike Venturino started out writing about stuff that all gun writers write about: hunting rifles, their calibers, wondernines, etc. He was competent, but not particularly compelling back then. He started getting interesting to me when he started writing about stuff that I'm interested in, like single action revolvers and single shot rifles, boolit casting and reloading. He must have learned some things while he was doing this because he has now become a good hand at interesting me in whatever he writes about. I am of the generation whose fathers had all the war and weaponry they ever wanted before I was born, and never talked much about either, except in terms of privation and misery. The "milsurp" rifles at the surplus stores when I was a kid had the single virtue of being cheap; otherwise, they had as yet no historical glamour and were funky,ugly things, coated with grease, dirt and rust, sticking out of fiberboard drums. I still have some of that mindset, and yet I read Mike's articles about his new enthusiasm for WWII and its artifacts and find myself interested as well. So if he isn't a great gun writer in the modern sense, he is at least well on his way to being one.

As pointed out, he has to write for a mass audience. Suppose his article was about how to cast, season, harden, size/lube, finagle and otherwise prestidigitate so he could shoot cast boolits in his milsurp rifles at 2900 ft/second with 1-1/2 MOA accuracy. Suppose further that he had the time available to do so and the magazine space to write the complete description in. Almost nobody would buy the magazine for the article. Only one in fifty magazine buyers would read the article, only a minority of them would try doing it themselves and only a tiny few would succeed. (If you don't think this is true, consider what happened to the concept of Fire Lapping.) The article would thus result in little reader interest, many angry letters to the editor by those who couldn't do it, and the minority who got it working would be on Line telling everybody that Mike either got it wrong or that he stole their chops and used them to line his own pockets. He couldn't win; why should he bother?

[Boyscout]

I thought about a subscription to Handloader but too many issues don't cover anything I shoot so I usually only buy the ones with cast bullet and casting articles. I look through them and buy the idividual issues that suit my needs. I subscribe to Guns and Ammo and Outdoor Life and get weary of both sometimes. I get tired of reading gear review for rifles and shotguns I will never be able to afford. I do enjoy reading most of Mike's articles. As for Linotype, I now have a source for awhile but I will probably use some of it to make Alloy #2 and water drop the ones I want to use for target only. Recently I have been air cooling and water dropping in the same casting session and then loading cartridges identically to see which shoots better in a given gun.

[Rocky Raab]

I am amazed, astounded and deeply impressed that at least one guy "gets it" about the realities of magazine writing. Kudos to Bent Ramrod.

I wrote about what interested me, to answer a question that bugged me, or just to explore some small aspect of reloading. I had something like a hundred articles published. That's no great shakes compared to a full-time writer like Venturino or Barsness or Seyfried - but it's not a bad score for a part-time freelancer.

I recently decided to stop writing, however. The reasons are many, but included are the facts that magazines are shrinking in all aspects: size, content, and frequency. Where once I could explore a topic with 3,000 words, the upper limit now is half that. Where once I could expect to have an article accepted and see print in six months or so, submissions now sit unprinted for two years or more - if indeed they ever see print. Then there's the payment; where I could once expect to recoup the costs of the necessary components and make a few dollars, the checks recently don't even allow me to break even - and there are NO checks until after the article sees print.

My hat is off to anybody who can remain employed as a staff writer these days - but I suspect that the days are numbered.

[Shiloh]

I've enjoyed John Wayne's movies for decades.
As to the name, "Duke", Mr Wayne held no copyright, and I have personally met a number of men called "Duke" in my lifetime .....as well as a HERD of dogs with that handle.

I used to ride a horse named Duke as a youth, and another named Luke. I currently know three people with a dog named Duke.

Shiloh

[wills]

If I buy a magazine and everything in it exactly matches my own understanding, have I not wasted my time and money?

[MtGun44]

+1 on Recluse's post #24. I like Handloader, Rifle and have taken them for years. I think
Mr. Venturino is a skilled 'gunriter' (as he says) and a real asset to the community. Do I agree
with everything he says? No. But so what? Still like his stuff, and would love to have dinner
with him and chat some day.

Bill

[Kull]

If I buy a magazine and everything in it exactly matches my own understanding, have I not wasted my time and money?

No not really.

[waksupi]

If we all agreed on everything we read, we would have some darn short topics on this board.

[Gohon]

Hmmmm..... interesting. My "over-reaction", as you call it, was due to a post from 'gandydancer', I believe, and IT HAS NOW VANISHED.

Then you must realize that with the post you are referring to now gone from the thread, a reader will easily confuse what you stated as pointing back at the OP. The OP only disagreed with the article and made no personal attacks on anyone but your #9 post as it now stands with the deleted reference post will always point a new reader straight back to the OP. Maybe the correct thing to do would be to edit your post and point that minor detail out.

[NVScouter]

1) That article made me regret selling my 303 to a member here, I may be looking for another.
2) It was a fairly weak issue, maybe the worst in a few years.
3) I'd like to see more HUNTING with cast and recovered boolits instead of what gong to ring.

4) Drop the "filler" handgun review articles for HANDLOADING stuff.....this is the only thing that really irritates me. There are dozens of review type magazines and hundred of articles like this in them. Go buy HANDGUNS or RIFLE magazine that these guys put out and leave the handloading in HANDLOADER.

[NVScouter]

Some excellently written stuff here. Thank you.

Just add books too.

I am amazed, astounded and deeply impressed that at least one guy "gets it" about the realities of magazine writing. Kudos to Bent Ramrod.

I wrote about what interested me, to answer a question that bugged me, or just to explore some small aspect of reloading. I had something like a hundred articles published. That's no great shakes compared to a full-time writer like Venturino or Barsness or Seyfried - but it's not a bad score for a part-time freelancer.

I recently decided to stop writing, however. The reasons are many, but included are the facts that magazines are shrinking in all aspects: size, content, and frequency. Where once I could explore a topic with 3,000 words, the upper limit now is half that. Where once I could expect to have an article accepted and see print in six months or so, submissions now sit unprinted for two years or more - if indeed they ever see print. Then there's the payment; where I could once expect to recoup the costs of the necessary components and make a few dollars, the checks recently don't even allow me to break even - and there are NO checks until after the article sees print.

My hat is off to anybody who can remain employed as a staff writer these days - but I suspect that the days are numbered.

[lotech]

Bellyaching on an Internet forum about a gunwriter's deficiencies may provide solace, but does absolutely nothing to improve the quality of articles we read. How many have made the HANDLOADER editor aware of specific shortcomings in the articles? I know that I have not. Granted, HANDLOADER, and RIFLE as well, are not the publications they were a few years ago. I single out no particular writer because any long-time gun journalist with some semblance of a following can become complacent and "slip a few under the wire" as long as there are no (or just a few) intelligent critical comments about his work, or lack of it. Perhaps our efforts should be directed where they will do some good, and they will if enough folks take the time to handle the matter in a courteous, professional manner.

[alamogunr]

HANDLOADER, and RIFLE as well, are not the publications they were a few years ago.

Most of us are not the persons we were a few years ago.

[44man]

So much truth and even more from Rocky and Bent. That is how it is. It is not the writer and he is allowed little to entertain and also offer facts at the same time.
I tried writing and was rejected all the time and then seen stuff printed that was 100% wrong.
Many of us here could write but would get nowhere.
I was once told that if I had a record book animal, I could write all kinds of junk proving how good I was even though the animal was 100% luck.

[gunfan]

I, for one, have disagreed with Mr. Venturino on a number of occasions. He's a paid gun writer. I don't hold him in any special esteem. Frankly, I don't care much for a number of the recent breed of "gun writers." Venturino may seem "special" to some, but I beg to differ.

Scott