132 



RECREATION. 



There is no question of the superiority 

 of home-loaded shells, loaded by the Win- 

 chester '94 tool and with the right kind of 

 stuff. 



H. R. Pettit, Fort Atkinson, Wis. 



EXTREME RANGE OF THE RIFLE. 



Being a lover of the .22 calibre rifle I 

 was much interested in what W. S. C, of 

 Brooklyn, had to say on "The Danger 

 Limit of the .22 Calibre" in a recent Rec- 

 reation. Some 15 years ago J. M. God- 

 inez and I constructed a 200-yard rifle 

 range and with our friends spent many 

 pleasant hours there. We began with a 

 Ballard, .38-50, equipped with peep and 

 globe sights, and a Sharps .45-70. With 

 both some good scores were made. Short- 

 ly after we bought a Stevens gallery rifle, 

 .22 short, open sights, 24-inch barrel, S 1 /^ 

 pounds weight. With this gun we scored 

 15 shots straight on an 8-inch circle, at 100 

 yards. Finding that too easy, we moved 

 back to the 200-yard firing point. At that 

 range the lack of elevating sights both- 

 ered us until we hit on the idea of aiming 

 at spots on a flagstaff behind the target. 

 In that way we commonly made 20 out of 

 25 on the regulation 200-yard Creedmoor 

 target. Greatly surprised at this work by 

 the .22 short, we fitted the Stevens with 

 sliding peep sight and globe front sight, 

 and tried it on the military rifle range. 

 Beginning at 200 yards and using the reg- 

 ular 500-yard target we paced back 50 

 yards and fired a few shots until we had 

 the range. In that way we moved back 

 until, at 450 yards, the peep sight could 

 not be raised any higher, and we were 

 obliged to aim over the top of the sight 

 to get the proper elevation. At 450 yards, 

 shooting in that manner, we were hitting 

 the 6x6 foot target 3 times out of 5. One 

 shot, which struck a sound hemlock tim- 

 ber under the target, penetrated nearly an 

 inch. Remembering this work by the .22 

 short I am sure that W. S. C.'s estimate of 

 800 yards as the extreme range of the .22 

 long rifle, a much more powerful cart- 

 ridge, is not too great. 

 Albert C. Gallup, Poughkeepsie, N. Y. 



HE DID NOT MEAN SHOTGUN SMOKELESS. 



I have read the article published in your 

 December number signed "John H. Ver- 

 non, Sioux City, la.," and wish to call 

 your attention to these points: 



W. A. powder is no longer made by the 

 Laflin & Rand Powder Company. The 

 powder they now make is known and des- 

 ignated as Laflin & Rand shot gun smoke- 

 less. This is a dense nitro powder and 

 cannot be used in charges such as are re- 

 ferred to by Mr. Vernon. He speaks of 

 having loaded 63 grains in a 12-gauge gun. 

 The regular charge for that gun is 35 to 42 



grains, the latter being the maximum 

 charge recommended by the company. 



Again he says he loaded in a Blue Ri- 

 val shell. That shell does not give satis- 

 factory results with Laflin & Rand powder 

 and has never been recommended for the 

 powder. Afterward, Mr. Vernon cut down 

 his charge to 54 grains, which is still 12 

 grains higher than maximum load recom- 

 mended. He says that proved an effective 

 load, but in the new few lines adds, "The 

 experiment convinced me the powder was ' 

 not uniform in pressure. If so, it could 

 not be reliable and might prove too weak 

 or too strong at some critical time, result- 

 ing in lost birds if weak or in a burst gun 

 if too strong, neither of which is particular- 

 ly enchanting to a common trap shooter." 



What the experiment was which caused 

 Mr. Vernon to form this opinion does not 

 appear, and certainly his loading the pow- 

 der in extreme charges and in an improper 

 shell can hardly be taken as a test of the 

 powder on which to base an opinion, much 

 less to publish one derogatory of the prod- 

 uct which he alleges he tested. 



Laflin & Rand's present product is all 

 right. Thousands of experts, both at the 

 trap and in the field, are using it, and 

 many of them have testified through Rec- 

 reation to its good qualities. 



E. J. Baldwin, New York City. 



HIS CHOICE IS .38-55. 



Like most other shooters, I am a gun 

 crank. One trouble with us all is we esti- 

 mate too highly the experience of others. 

 One man buys a .30-30 and has good luck 

 with it. Another man reads about it, and 

 decides to take the same kind of a gun to 

 Maine with him in the fall. He thinks it 

 will kill everything he points it at. He 

 uses it, does not place his ball right, and 

 the game gets away. His verdict is that 

 the gun is not good for anything. He is 

 mistaken. All the guns that shoot well are 

 good. It is largely the man behind the 

 gun who does the business. I have used 

 a shot gun and a rifle 20 years, and 

 found out long ago that if the gun was 

 held right there was not much trouble in 

 getting the game. I went to Maine with 

 a small party the first of last November. 

 One had a .45-70, 3 had .38-55's, one had a 

 .32-40, and one a .32-20. The .45-70 killed 

 2 deer, the .38-55's killed 3, and the .32-40 

 2. The .38-55's killed their game cleaner 

 and surer than the others; but it was 

 largely because the game was hit better. 

 For any game up to and including moose 

 the .38-55 is an effective cartridge. 



If you want a wicked shooting rifle use 

 the .38-55 express bullet. One of our 

 party dropped 2 deer in their tracks with 

 a bullet of that size. All the other deer 

 ran 10 to 25 rods before they fell. 



