I was thinking this weekend about the origins of what I like.  Particularly given my tastes often run with the minority rather than the majority.  Examples include my penchant for .32 specials, preference of shotgun butt over crescent butt, magazines that are shorter than full length and round barrels vs. octagon barrels (half-octagon is fine). 

My interest in this hobby started as a small child.  During my early childhood, middle childhood, teenage years and young adult years, the family deer hunt was something I looked forward to more than Christmas, birthdays, etc.  The rifles were a huge component.  I think back to the dozens of different family members and family friends I hunted with.  I can remember most of the rifles they used.  I started my cartridge collection as a small boy.  Each hunter gave me a cartridge from the rifle they used. 

With all of the dozens of hunters, I don’t recall anyone hunting with an octagon barreled rifle.  Not that older rifles weren’t used.  I recall a great uncle who used a M1876 in .40-60.  It had a round barrel that was cut down to about 22 inches.  Even though from a collector perspective this was very unfortunate (the rifle had a lot of original case color) I doubt he would have taken it in the woods if it had a full length barrel.  My grandfather used a M1886 in .45-90.  I recall it had a round barrel with half magazine.  My Dad used a M1886 in .33 (half mag., shotgun butt). I recall many 1894’s and 94’s (all were carbines).  The majority were .32 Specials (that’s were that bias came from).  Savage 1899’s were used but never 26 inch barreled versions.  Any Marlins used were carbines.  I was the only one who ever carried a M1892 in the woods.  That was a .44-40 and it did have an octagon barrel.  I don’t mind a 24 inch octagon barrel on a ’92 as the ’92 is such a slender piece (but I wouldn’t go longer than a 24 inch barrel).  Other than my carrying that .44-40, I don’t think anyone would have considered carrying a long octagon barrel rifle.  Just too heavy, bulky, unwieldy for the kind of deep-woods hunting we did where a lighter, fast-handling piece was much more preferable.  

A friend commented about the line of thinking I just outlined – he said, “yes, but you only need one shooter!”  He added, “why apply this northern woods hunting test to what you collect?” He makes a very logical point.  It just plain doesn’t come down to logic for me.  If I were to focus on what the majority likes (which would be a better financial move) I would be buying rifles for someone else and not for me. I think it comes down to you pursue and collect what you have a passion for.  Unless you are a speculator, which I am far from being.  

Below is a photo from my childhood.  I am about four years old and have a pair of kid’s binoculars.  I am watching my Dad drag a deer in from the woods.  It’s amazing to think that he is about ten years younger than my youngest children.  By the way, that was the first year that he had moved on from his .33.  He loaned that to his younger brother to use and he used his new Remington M740 in the then, brand new .280 chambering.  And even though it was a brand new rifle, it was quite the jammer .  He should have never quit using his .33 .