So much for those gun magazines...

Status
Not open for further replies.

doublebarrel

Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2003
Messages
160
Location
Lafayette, IN
Here's an article published by Handguns magazine, back in Sept. 2000. It's about the HS2000 pistol, a name for the Springfield XD when they were cheaper. Here's a quote from it on the XD's finish:

The Bruniral coating is a special black oxide type of finish that is more durable and corrosion resistant than ordinary blueing.

Wow, they got that right, didn't they? Wonder just how bad the "ordinary blueing" can be? Say, instant oxidation as soon as exposed to air?... :neener:
 
This just goes to show you that there is no true evaluation of these guns in gun rags. They are paid advertisements, nothing more. We need a "Consumer Reports" for the gun industry.

Greg
 
Even if they were true evaluations, gun rags usually ask the manufacturer to send them a gun to review, instead of actually getting one off a store shelf. You know the manufacturer will send the pick of the litter.
 
"Even if they were true evaluations, gun rags usually ask the manufacturer to send them a gun to review, instead of actually getting one off a store shelf. You know the manufacturer will send the pick of the litter."
__________________
I only wish! I'm not going to entertain a discussion of who we gun writers are -fill in the blanks here. but based on what I've received over twenty plus years, if they are cherry picked, I don't want to see the pits!(I also agree that I can't speak for all gun makers and how they interact with other writers.)

The mags do ask for guns to attempt to be first with the review. This sells magazines. Sort of like reporters who want to be first with breaking stories, Car magazines and Camera magazines etc.

By the way, where can we all find out the source of this information - that we get cherry picked guns?
 
By the way, where can we all find out the source of this information - that we get cherry picked guns?

Good grief Walt, didnt you ever read "Gun Tests" and "Pistolero" magazines? Phil Engeldrum knew all about that stuff, even had cute little cartoons showing the manufactuer'rs stalling on shipping a review gun while their "Master" gunsmith went over a gun before shipping it.:D :D
 
A voice from the past!(Not so past, he now has me on his E mail list. I've learned about "ignore").
 
I think Gun Tests fills that need, I just wish they knew a bit more about guns. Sometimes their ignorance is appalling.

Jim
 
This just goes to show you that there is no true evaluation of these guns in gun rags.

Gun Tests does do true evaluations of store bought guns, and they are very harsh in their analisis. Though some belive their critera for warrantys is flawed, if you know that going in it's not an issue.

http://www.gun-tests.com/

As an example, A company like T/C who do not provide a written lifetime warranty will get a lower rating than thoses who do have the written warranty in that particular category. Even though T/C does have an unwritten lifetime gaurantee, and provide top notch customer service.
 
Gun Tests magazine couldn't figure out how to properly put a dust cover back onto a Sagia 12. Sorry, but 3rd world goat herders, that still worship the sun, can put an AK back together. They pronounced the Saiga 12 crap. Funny, I've got 6K through mine with 2 malfunctions.

Gun Tests may be honest, as far as they see it, but their expertise is sorely lacking.

I've done a couple of reviews for gun magazines now. Every time it has been a gun that I purchased myself from a store, or a regular production item.
 
Gun Tests does do true evaluations of store bought guns, and they are very harsh in their analisis. Though some belive their critera for warrantys is flawed, if you know that going in it's not an issue.
Kind of like with opinions that you read on an internet gun forum.:cool:
 
Sorry, but I can't take Gun Tests too literally. Then again, I think the same about Consumer Reports. Useful, to a degree, but hardly anything to use as your sole point of an argument.

I've read the free-availability stuff on a couple of things Gun Tests did. One was an evaluation of DCM AR-15s. I just about dropped out of my seat in shock and laughter. They really didn't know how a match AR is setup.

The second was one comparing a Marlin 1894 to a Ruger 96/44. Having had both, my opinion may be biased. But my gun safe did NOT choose their winner. And why did they bother do an accuracy test of a .44 Carbine for 5 shots at 100 yards, consecutive groups.

There, got that off of my chest.

As for the XD finish, is it really all that worse than a Sig? I'll stick with my Glock, thankie. ;)
 
I don't put much stock in most of the magazines. All the recent ones seem to be all like "OMG NEW (ugly as sin) KIMBER! IS BEST GUN EVAR!"...(now pay us please), while at the same time ignoring new and actually useful and excellent-ergonomics guns like the 24/7's.

And yes, the XD is nice, thank you, move on, there are OTHER 2006 guns worth talking about.

They really just need to come out with a couple of new gun magazine specific market titles. Like "BBQ GUNS", and "MALL NINJA".
 
Gun Tests may be honest, as far as they see it, but their expertise is sorely lacking.

Exactly what I feel about them. I used to subscribe 15 years ago or more. The ran an article comparing a Lee Progressive with a Dillon 550B. The pronounced the Lee superior! :eek:

I respect Lee products... especially from a 'most bang for buck' POV... but to say that the Lee is BETTER than the Dillon? Absurd.

I cancelled my subscription then and there.

StrikeEagle
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top