You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Elmer Keith's 600yd shot
- Thread starter Guv
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
ligonierbill
New member
You guys are costing me money. After reading this thread, I had to order a copy of "Hell, I Was There" on Amazon. Must be in demand, judging from the prices.
WHAT SURPRISES ME THE MOST---THE MOST !!!--- is how few men understand how easy it is to shoot a bigbore sixgun at long range. We routinely shoot at popcans at 250 yards. DO we hit 'em all....HELL NO, but we scare the crap out of 'em every shot.
ANYONE ANYONE, who knows how to shoot a sixgun can do this. Just because you can't put two bullets close together at 21' on the shooting range does not mean there are not a lot who can do it. Think we are kidding? Go out there at the 250 yard backstop, stop there,turn around, put your feet about 3' apart and we'll put a 44-250KEITH SWC right between your knees.
And so it goes....
ANYONE ANYONE, who knows how to shoot a sixgun can do this. Just because you can't put two bullets close together at 21' on the shooting range does not mean there are not a lot who can do it. Think we are kidding? Go out there at the 250 yard backstop, stop there,turn around, put your feet about 3' apart and we'll put a 44-250KEITH SWC right between your knees.
And so it goes....
Some things are hard to imagine if you can't put them in the context of experience.
If a handgunner has access to wide open space rangeland and practices he can say to his buddy "Side of that hill over there,the pink rock to the right of that lone sage"
Buddy says"What? There is no way!!You can't shoot a handgun that far!"
Kentucky up all of the front sight,maybe even the ramp.
Boom
Occasionally it is "Boom....whack,and dust comes off the rock.Quietly holster the gun like you expected it.
More often,you'll be a foot right,two feet low,etc,but almost always close enough to be dangerous.
Now,a sneaky trick.Once you take an intuitive Kentucky sight picture,shift your eye a bit and find some other ref point on up the mountain you can use a straight sight pic on .It might be another rock 40 feet up the hill .
Boom.Three feet low,two feet left.Now you aren't vaguely correcting some Kentucky hold.Aim three feet higher and two feet right of your ref aiming point.
Doubters,I suggest perhaps you just have no experience with cross the canyon handgun shooting,so it seems unbelievable.
Sure,luck is involved.Handgun silouhette shooters aren't just lucky,though.
You will never make the shot if you don't take the shot.I think a wounded animal justifies trying.
I was visiting someone in Salmon,and mentioned Elmer's name.My host was a long time family friend of Elmer's.She called him,and I was invited for coffee.
I had a cup with Elmer in his trophy room.We talked of many things.I left with a copy of "Hell,I was There"
Elmer had been enough places,done enough things,he did not need to make up some story .
The story is believable if you have done enough long range handgun shooting.
If not,well,you aren't there!
If a handgunner has access to wide open space rangeland and practices he can say to his buddy "Side of that hill over there,the pink rock to the right of that lone sage"
Buddy says"What? There is no way!!You can't shoot a handgun that far!"
Kentucky up all of the front sight,maybe even the ramp.
Boom
Occasionally it is "Boom....whack,and dust comes off the rock.Quietly holster the gun like you expected it.
More often,you'll be a foot right,two feet low,etc,but almost always close enough to be dangerous.
Now,a sneaky trick.Once you take an intuitive Kentucky sight picture,shift your eye a bit and find some other ref point on up the mountain you can use a straight sight pic on .It might be another rock 40 feet up the hill .
Boom.Three feet low,two feet left.Now you aren't vaguely correcting some Kentucky hold.Aim three feet higher and two feet right of your ref aiming point.
Doubters,I suggest perhaps you just have no experience with cross the canyon handgun shooting,so it seems unbelievable.
Sure,luck is involved.Handgun silouhette shooters aren't just lucky,though.
You will never make the shot if you don't take the shot.I think a wounded animal justifies trying.
I was visiting someone in Salmon,and mentioned Elmer's name.My host was a long time family friend of Elmer's.She called him,and I was invited for coffee.
I had a cup with Elmer in his trophy room.We talked of many things.I left with a copy of "Hell,I was There"
Elmer had been enough places,done enough things,he did not need to make up some story .
The story is believable if you have done enough long range handgun shooting.
If not,well,you aren't there!
I have been shooting handguns for nearly 30yrs. Not long by some's standards but I ain't wet behind the ear neither. I can attest tot he fact that revolvers are FAR more accurate than 99% of folks feel they are. With enough trigger time behind you things are far easier than most think they should be.
I have tested loads out to 300yds with my 41, 44, and even my 357 just for giggles. Like mentioned above, you simply learn to hold proper and hits come with regularity. I can't say they are bench rest type groups, but still, they are plenty accurate enough to hit a wounded animal if for no other reason to slow it down or stop it. The sad part is I have shot over more coyotes, and hogs out to around 150 - 200yds thinking the same way as the naysayers here, than I care to admit. Nowadays I simply don't hold off hair.
My best friend once challenged me to hit a paper plate with my 10mm he had stapled up to a fence post at 500yds. First shot hit the middle of the road about 75yds from it, second shot hit the plate about 2" low of center at about 4 o'clock. Probably couldn't do it again in 10 shots, but sometimes it's better to be lucky than good.
Also a 200gr bullet which is what I shot for years out of my 41, will still put a REAL whop on a hog at 100yds, just like a 200gr 45 ACP will do up close. The heavier ones retain a bit more momentum as well so penetration at long rages CAN be more than you think.
I have tested loads out to 300yds with my 41, 44, and even my 357 just for giggles. Like mentioned above, you simply learn to hold proper and hits come with regularity. I can't say they are bench rest type groups, but still, they are plenty accurate enough to hit a wounded animal if for no other reason to slow it down or stop it. The sad part is I have shot over more coyotes, and hogs out to around 150 - 200yds thinking the same way as the naysayers here, than I care to admit. Nowadays I simply don't hold off hair.
My best friend once challenged me to hit a paper plate with my 10mm he had stapled up to a fence post at 500yds. First shot hit the middle of the road about 75yds from it, second shot hit the plate about 2" low of center at about 4 o'clock. Probably couldn't do it again in 10 shots, but sometimes it's better to be lucky than good.
Also a 200gr bullet which is what I shot for years out of my 41, will still put a REAL whop on a hog at 100yds, just like a 200gr 45 ACP will do up close. The heavier ones retain a bit more momentum as well so penetration at long rages CAN be more than you think.
In both books he specifically mentions that the "part jacket" from a Remington .44 bullet was found in the deer by his son, Ted, confirming that one of the hits was from his gun since the other shooter was using a .300 Magnum rifle.I don't think Elmer Keith would use a jacketed .44 bullet, if they even existed back then.
He would, indeed. However, Keith wasn't arguing that his pistol was effective as a long range deer hunting firearm, only recounting an incident where he helped put down a wounded animal at long range.Lets say an experienced hunter and shooter in the rifle section with a open sighted 444Marlin asked everyone about it's effectiveness as a long range mule deer rifle, up to 500yds. He would politely or not so much be scolded for his inquiry.
And that's a critical difference between claiming that a particular gun is an effective choice versus claiming that it could happen. Keith never claimed that he aimed for the vitals and scored a hit where he aimed. The story clearly indicates that he was aiming for the deer, not some specific point on the deer, and wasn't even that sure he hit the deer until the jacket fragment was found in the carcass.Also, it needs to hit the vital area, not just anywhere on the whole wounded 200lb adrenaline soaked Mule deer.
By the way, for what it's worth, the story indicates that at some point before Keith fired his last shot, Kriley ran out of ammo.
Keith mentions in his autobiography that he had done some shooting (witnessed by Judge Don Martin) at about 500 yards (distance paced out) "just before hunting season" with the particular revolver in question and was able to put 5 out of 6 shots on a rock that was "about three feet long by about 18 inches high in the middle, tapered a little bit at each end".I didn't say Keith lied, or that the feat is impossible, just that there is no way you could do it without "luck", or random chance.
I do believe that there was a significant component of luck in the shots at the deer, but it's important to understand that Keith was no stranger to long distance shooting with a revolver and had used this specific revolver at long ranges not long before the shots were made.
Remember that Keith claimed that Kriley spotted at least one shot for him, telling him that he saw the bullet strike in the snow through his scope. That would go a long way toward explaining how Keith compensated for wind and drop.What about wind drift, how much would that factor in? Could be monumental. I think much more than a rainbow like trajectory. How much bullet drop would we be talking about?
It's also important to remember/understand that Keith used a method for long range shooting using open sights that virtually negates the issue of drop if used properly. He explains it in his book. As long as the gun and shooter are capable of the accuracy required, the process can theoretically be used to score a second round hit at virtually any range if the shooter is adept at the process and the location of the first hit is known/spotted.
I have not had the opportunity to shoot a handgun past 300 yards, but the technique worked well out to that distance, subject to my limitations and those of the pistol in question.
It can be a real eye-opener to realize how much a heavy, slow-moving bullet will penetrate, especially if there's little to no expansion involved.There is no way a 44 magnum would penetrate the body of a full grown Mule deer buck at 600 yds. 600-700 fps is not going to do it.
Also, you may be overestimating the size of the deer. According to Craig Boddington in his book "The Perfect Shot North America", the average mule deer buck taken in the U.S. is about 150lbs. A broadside shot wouldn't need to penetrate very far to shoot through a 150lb deer and the 16" to 18" of penetration I would expect from a 600-700fps .44 bullet, moving too slowly to expand, would likely do the trick if a heavy bone didn't get in the way.
Keith didn't make any quantitative claims about the buck's size or weight in either source I have for the story.
So I guess you think .45 acp is useless. since the standard load is a 230 grain bullet at 830fps. By 100 yards, it's down to roughly 700fps.There is no way a 44 magnum would penetrate the body of a full grown Mule deer buck at 600 yds. 600-700 fps is not going to do it.
.45 acp 230 grain Sectional density = .162 Energy at 100yards ~261ft-lbs
.44 mag 250 grain SD = .194 Energy at 700fps 272ft-lbs
.44mag has more energy at ~600 yards, than .45acp at 100 yards, and the .44 has a significantly higher sectional density, which means it should penetrate further.
As I recall (and I could be mistaken) Keith used a 4" M29 S&W. The deer was wounded by the hunter he was guiding otherwise he said he wouldn't have tried it. He shot from the "Creedmore" position where you lay down with one knee raised and brace the wrist of the shooting hand against the vertical lower leg. He fired SA and missed the first 5 times. But he said he could see the bullets kick up dirt and corrected for the next shot until the 6th one connected.
I'd say it was a lot of skill and a little luck. I agree with the sentiment that Keith didn't need to make up stuff. He had enough true stories to amaze most folks.
PS: With a 6.5" M29-2 I knocked down 3 of 5 rams at 200 meters the first time out. A very experienced shooter like Keith could probably make a 600 yard shot as described.
I'd say it was a lot of skill and a little luck. I agree with the sentiment that Keith didn't need to make up stuff. He had enough true stories to amaze most folks.
PS: With a 6.5" M29-2 I knocked down 3 of 5 rams at 200 meters the first time out. A very experienced shooter like Keith could probably make a 600 yard shot as described.
According to Keith's autobiography, the handgun in question was the first .44 Magnum he received from S&W. He received it in February of 1954 and it had a 6.5 inch barrel.
Also according to his autobiography, he fired only 4 times and believed he missed the first two times. The second shot "hit in the mud and snow right below" the buck according to Paul Kriley who observed the shot through the scope of his rifle. Keith used that spotting information to correct his aim and hit the next two shots.
Some more information about the ammunition used. According to Keith's autobiography, he used Remington .44 Magnum ammunition. "It had a part jacket over the base band and under the grease groove." He said that the velocity was "around 1400 feet per second." The velocity was almost certainly what Remington claimed, not a value Keith measured.
Also according to his autobiography, he fired only 4 times and believed he missed the first two times. The second shot "hit in the mud and snow right below" the buck according to Paul Kriley who observed the shot through the scope of his rifle. Keith used that spotting information to correct his aim and hit the next two shots.
Some more information about the ammunition used. According to Keith's autobiography, he used Remington .44 Magnum ammunition. "It had a part jacket over the base band and under the grease groove." He said that the velocity was "around 1400 feet per second." The velocity was almost certainly what Remington claimed, not a value Keith measured.
Hmm... to everyone here I would say the following.
I've made a shot that I honestly didn't expect to make. It was on a fox at a full run with a .22 rifle at 200 yards. Honestly shouldn't have even attempted the shot, but I did (I was younger and less responsible). I heard the "slap" of the bullet and the fox rolled. It was a liver shot and the fox ran another 30 or 40 yards before laying down. It was hard finding him though, as there was no blood trail from that little .22 caliber hole. As for Elmer, the deer was already wounded so there really isn't any harm in attempting the shot.
I'm a little skeptical myself, but I also know that numerous human beings have made 2000+ meter kills with a rifle in recent history. That's in the same realm as a 600 yard pistol shot. I haven't practice beyond 50 yards with a revolver, but when I practice at 50 frequently I can hit the 9 ring of a b-mod target nearly every other shot with my 6" Ruger .357 Security Six. Very few drop out of the 8 ring, and this is off-hand standing (in SA, of course). I can honestly believe a 600 yard shot is possible with a truly skilled individual shooting from a stable position, although I will say that there is a little luck thrown in with the skill. With that, though, most men make their own luck. Luck can win the day some of the time, but a lot of skill with a little luck mixed in will win the day most of the time. I want to be skeptical, but on the other hand I *know* that some skilled human beings are capable of great feats. If this guy has that much of a following, then he likely had witnesses for many of his shots. If he has enough witnesses attesting to his overall ability, to the point where S&W was giving him guns, then I'm going to take what he writes at face value.
I've made a shot that I honestly didn't expect to make. It was on a fox at a full run with a .22 rifle at 200 yards. Honestly shouldn't have even attempted the shot, but I did (I was younger and less responsible). I heard the "slap" of the bullet and the fox rolled. It was a liver shot and the fox ran another 30 or 40 yards before laying down. It was hard finding him though, as there was no blood trail from that little .22 caliber hole. As for Elmer, the deer was already wounded so there really isn't any harm in attempting the shot.
I'm a little skeptical myself, but I also know that numerous human beings have made 2000+ meter kills with a rifle in recent history. That's in the same realm as a 600 yard pistol shot. I haven't practice beyond 50 yards with a revolver, but when I practice at 50 frequently I can hit the 9 ring of a b-mod target nearly every other shot with my 6" Ruger .357 Security Six. Very few drop out of the 8 ring, and this is off-hand standing (in SA, of course). I can honestly believe a 600 yard shot is possible with a truly skilled individual shooting from a stable position, although I will say that there is a little luck thrown in with the skill. With that, though, most men make their own luck. Luck can win the day some of the time, but a lot of skill with a little luck mixed in will win the day most of the time. I want to be skeptical, but on the other hand I *know* that some skilled human beings are capable of great feats. If this guy has that much of a following, then he likely had witnesses for many of his shots. If he has enough witnesses attesting to his overall ability, to the point where S&W was giving him guns, then I'm going to take what he writes at face value.
Jim Watson
New member
The guy with the .300 did not fire that many shots.
The chance against a Keith bullet is 100%, since Elmer said that son Ted found a fragment of the Remington part jacket-deep gas check in the carcass when he butchered it for dinner.
The chance against a Keith bullet is 100%, since Elmer said that son Ted found a fragment of the Remington part jacket-deep gas check in the carcass when he butchered it for dinner.
I remember back in 1968 after buying a super Blackhawk, the ammunition I bought was a swaged copper washed gas checked bullet. I can't remember if it was a Remington or Winchester, but the recoil was fierce, so Keith could have been using a factory round for his shots. Does anyone know when this happened? Does he discuss the load used on these shots?
One of the longest sniper kills was in 1874 with a .50-90 sharps 1538 yards.
Roughly a 500 grain .512 cal bullet at 1500fps
Drop @ 1000yards is roughly 137 FEET with roughly 17.25 feet of wind drift. ~730 FPS and it still had another 538 yards to go before hitting and killing someone.
If that was possible with that cartridge then, it's plausible to hit and kill a deer at 600 with a .44 IMO.
Roughly a 500 grain .512 cal bullet at 1500fps
Drop @ 1000yards is roughly 137 FEET with roughly 17.25 feet of wind drift. ~730 FPS and it still had another 538 yards to go before hitting and killing someone.
If that was possible with that cartridge then, it's plausible to hit and kill a deer at 600 with a .44 IMO.
Now that someone mentioned it, I think it was a 6.5" revolver because the 44 Magnum was brand new at the time and the 4" didn't come out until later. I think he sent that gun back later and had a 4" barrel installed.
I think he was using factory ammo because the gun and caliber were so new he wasn't loading for it, yet. Whatever the details, I think he did it.
I think he was using factory ammo because the gun and caliber were so new he wasn't loading for it, yet. Whatever the details, I think he did it.
A shooting bud, with whom I have lost contact, at one time he was State Bullseye Champ. He owns a farm, has the place ranged, because he has targets at distance. He claimed he shot a deer, starting at or about 400 yards, with a 44 Magnum Redhawk. He hit it more times out to or past 600 yards before it died. His loads were always over max, (I picked up 45 ACP he shot and they looked like belted magnums!) but even so, Bud said the deer hardly reacted to the hits until the deer dropped. In his opinion, this was too far for a 44 Magnum and he would not recommend shooting a deer at extended range as it was not humane.
People who shoot a lot, get to know their firearms, they will occasionally make hits at ranges that are beyond belief. One of the most remarkable hits with a pistol was during the Civil War, the distance is such that I have read a number of history books, Shelby Foote’s Civil War series for example, that reduce the distance from 440 yards, to 40 yards, as the longer distance is just so fantastical. But, I believe it happened.
The 5th Regiment had charged through and driven the enemy out of the first line of woods near “Yellow Tavern” and had reached an open space, when the command was given to cease firing: just at that instant a rebel officer, who afterwards proved to be General J. E. B Stuart, rode up with his staff to within eighty rods (440 yards) of our line, when a shot was fired by a man of the 5th. John A Huff, of Company E, remarked to him “Tom you shot too low and to the left”. Huff turned to Col Russell A. Alger and said “Colonel I can fetch that man.”. Alger Responded, “Try him.” He then took deliberate aim across a fence and fired: Stuart fell, mortally wounded. Huff proudly proclaimed to Alger, “There’s a spread-eagle for you”. Huff himself was killed in action at the battle of Haw’s Shop, on May 28.
Copywrite expired, Michigan in the War, 1882, Google Books
http://books.google.com/books?id=nI...n the War, Huff "spread eagle" Stuart&f=false
Sgt John Huff served with the 2nd US Sharpshooter before enlisting in the 5th Michigan. He had won first prize for sharpshooting and was well known as a crack shot.
Elmer Keith was very experienced with firearms, he shot at Camp Perry, he shot while a Cowboy, he shot as a guide, and I believe that he hit a running deer at the distance he claims. I don't think he would recommend shooting at a deer at that range unless it was wounded, and you had nothing else to stop it.
People who shoot a lot, get to know their firearms, they will occasionally make hits at ranges that are beyond belief. One of the most remarkable hits with a pistol was during the Civil War, the distance is such that I have read a number of history books, Shelby Foote’s Civil War series for example, that reduce the distance from 440 yards, to 40 yards, as the longer distance is just so fantastical. But, I believe it happened.
The 5th Regiment had charged through and driven the enemy out of the first line of woods near “Yellow Tavern” and had reached an open space, when the command was given to cease firing: just at that instant a rebel officer, who afterwards proved to be General J. E. B Stuart, rode up with his staff to within eighty rods (440 yards) of our line, when a shot was fired by a man of the 5th. John A Huff, of Company E, remarked to him “Tom you shot too low and to the left”. Huff turned to Col Russell A. Alger and said “Colonel I can fetch that man.”. Alger Responded, “Try him.” He then took deliberate aim across a fence and fired: Stuart fell, mortally wounded. Huff proudly proclaimed to Alger, “There’s a spread-eagle for you”. Huff himself was killed in action at the battle of Haw’s Shop, on May 28.
Copywrite expired, Michigan in the War, 1882, Google Books
http://books.google.com/books?id=nI...n the War, Huff "spread eagle" Stuart&f=false
Sgt John Huff served with the 2nd US Sharpshooter before enlisting in the 5th Michigan. He had won first prize for sharpshooting and was well known as a crack shot.
Elmer Keith was very experienced with firearms, he shot at Camp Perry, he shot while a Cowboy, he shot as a guide, and I believe that he hit a running deer at the distance he claims. I don't think he would recommend shooting at a deer at that range unless it was wounded, and you had nothing else to stop it.
I'd say 100%. He stated that he was using a jacketed round and the comment he makes about the "part jacket of a Remington bullet" being found in the wound means he was using the Remington .44 ammo he described.What are the chances Kieth was not using a Keith bullet?
He doesn't give a date, but the context indicates it was the hunting season that followed February of 1954. He describes the incident in a timeline starting with his receipt of the pistol, doing a lot of shooting with it over the winter and then doing some practice at 500 yards "just before hunting season". In the same timeline, he mentions the Remington .44Mag factory ammo with "a part jacket" and called it "very accurate". Then he mentions a jacket from that ammo being found in the buck.Does anyone know when this happened? Does he discuss the load used on these shots?
It doesn't really matter because he wasn't shooting a rifle. What matters is that he indicates he had been doing shooting with that particular revolver at roughly the same range he shot the buck "just before hunting season". He would have had an idea of the holdover required to make hits at that general distance. That information and the information provided by Kriley from the second miss would have been enough to allow him to make reasonably accurate corrections for elevation and any wind.How much do you elevate a rifle to compensate for a 140+ foot drop.
While Keith stated that he led the buck a little on the fourth shot, he didn't claim that it was running when he actually touched off the shots. The implication from the narrative makes it sound more like the deer was moving slowly up the ridge rather than that it was running....I believe that he hit a running deer at the distance he claims.
It's hard to be dogmatic about that. Keith's narrative isn't clear on how many times Kriley fired, but it seems that Kriley fired at least 5 times.I think the wounds were probably from the 300mag.
"Paul took off, went across the swale...crawled up to the top. He shot. (1) The lower of the two bucks...dropped and rolled down the mountain. ... Just before I climbed up the ridge to where he (Kriley) was lying, he started shooting again. (2)
...
...At any rate, Paul shot and missed. (3) ...<Keith fires a shot and misses but no one sees the bullet strike. Keith fires a second shot.>... Paul said. "I saw it through my scope. It hit in the mud and snow right below him." ...
...
...Paul shot again and missed (4) ... The next time I (Keith) held all of the front sight up and a bit of the ramp, and just perched the deer on top. After the shot, the gun came down out of recoil before the bullet had landed. The buck made a high buck jump, swapped ends and came back towards us shaking his head. ... <Keith thinks he hit an antler with the shot.> ...
...
...<The deer comes back towards the two and at about 500 yards, Kriley says he thinks he can hit him now.> He (Kriley) shot (5) and missed again. ... <Kriley is out of ammunition and has to reload.> ...
...
...<The deer is moving up the ridge so Keith leads the deer a little and shoots again. The deer goes over the ridge. Keith thinks he has missed.>"
...
...At any rate, Paul shot and missed. (3) ...<Keith fires a shot and misses but no one sees the bullet strike. Keith fires a second shot.>... Paul said. "I saw it through my scope. It hit in the mud and snow right below him." ...
...
...Paul shot again and missed (4) ... The next time I (Keith) held all of the front sight up and a bit of the ramp, and just perched the deer on top. After the shot, the gun came down out of recoil before the bullet had landed. The buck made a high buck jump, swapped ends and came back towards us shaking his head. ... <Keith thinks he hit an antler with the shot.> ...
...
...<The deer comes back towards the two and at about 500 yards, Kriley says he thinks he can hit him now.> He (Kriley) shot (5) and missed again. ... <Kriley is out of ammunition and has to reload.> ...
...
...<The deer is moving up the ridge so Keith leads the deer a little and shoots again. The deer goes over the ridge. Keith thinks he has missed.>"
In examining the deer, they find an entry wound attributed to the rifle cartridge that is consistent with the initial wound from Kriley's first shot, the only shot that they thought Kriley connected with. Keith finds a bullet hole in the right jaw, not in the antlers, which is consistent in entry and exit with the third shot Keith took where the buck reacted by jumping and changing direction.
They find a broadside hit through the lungs. Kriley says: "Who shot him through the lungs broadside? I didn't, I never had that kind of shot at all."
Keith's son Ted finds the "part jacket of a Remington bullet" near the "exit hole on the left side of that buck's ribs" when butchering the buck.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.