I've read MM forever and enjoyed 99+% of it.

I'd summarize his reply to the critic of his shot string article as: "I know all the research, but won't bother with factual details that would bog down my fine writing." Without providing supporting data he claimed some studies cited by the critic were bogus. His cavalier response suggested disdain for the critic. I was unpleasantly surprised.

Then I remembered ... included in my MM 1% is a circa 1985 article in SSM about "ugly machinery" guns, which was very like the opinion Jim Zumbo was tarred and feathered for expressing.

In one of his books he describes making gun fit adjustments to comb height based on shots fired at a pattern plate. On a SxS, to compensate for barrel downflip, he recommends adjusting fit to deliver patterns higher on the pattern plate than the desired POI.

I've enjoyed pretty much everthing else I've read of MM. Why does this negative stuff stick so in memory?

Jay