[Chuck Perry]

Anyone read Metcalf's SW1911 review in the latest issue of Handguns? The suggested retail is $932.00. Metcalf ends the article by proclaiming the pistol a must have. He liked the factory gun so much that he sent it to Heinie and 1) changed the trigger, plus a 2.5# trigger job 2) changed the sights 3) changed the thumb safety 4) added a magwell and new grips. But other than these minor points he really liked the gun and highly reccomends it. Lessee, $932 for base pistol. Checking Heinie's website we find these prices:
1) Install trigger $51.25
2) Tune trigger $98.00
3) Straight 8 night sights $122.80
4) Install sights $57.00
5) Install Ed Brown Ambi thumb safety $153.25
6) Magwell/grips/installation $309.00
Total custom work: $791.30
Total for completed pistol: $1723.30
Oops, almost forgot $20.00 for crack cocaine. I've no doubt the SW1911 is a quality weapon, but c'mon. What kind of review is this?

[3 gun]

Sounds like a few of those items are just personal preference. Still $900+ for a S&W 1911, they have to be kidding.

[10-Ring]

1st off, I thought the new S&W 1911 was going to be in the $700 range...$900? No thanks!
Now, if this guy really liked the gun, why change out sights, trigger & trigger work etal? Isn't it now a different feeling gun compared to the one he reviewed?

[rebbryan]

it's a 1911. that's it, it's the same as the rest. everyone's acting like it's gold plated, never malfunctions, and gets 1" groups at 100 yards. i hate gun mags b/c they never seem to tell the gritty parts about pistols, just as long as they get one w/ their name engraved on it they say it's great. i did like one of the back pages of american handgunner though which said basically the same thing

[MK11]

Send that exact same note as a letter to the editor. Handguns is unreadable these days.

[Sean Smith]

The street price is usually a good bit less than the MSRP, so the price might not be out of line in real life. I dunno about those mods, though... a 2.5lb trigger?!? Maybe he's going to shoot it in USPSA Limited-10 or something, otherwise that's the part that makes me think he's smoking dope.

[bountyhunter]

Please, this isn't even in the top ten for worst gun reviews. I saw one in Handguns on a Kimber Whatever model which awas basically a standard 1911 with some fancy scroll work selling for about $1200. The pig couldn't hold a 4" group and had a lousy trigger and the author proclaimed it was a perfect platform to build a 1911 on. For $1200, I'll go to STI and buy a 1911 that doesn't need to be rebuilt.

And HG is so in Para's pocket that 90% of their covers have a giant picture of a Para pistol... and the "Gun of the Year" award is actually the "Which Para Haven't We Given the Award to Yet" award.

[9x19]

What kind of review is this?

Typcial... all too typical for most printed gun magazines these days. :barf:

[rblack]

The street price for this gun is around $700

[Schuey2002]

I'll pass, on the both the gun and the review/reviewer..:barf: ;)

[Blackhawk]

An example of one of the reasons I don't subscribe to, buy, or even pick up Handguns at the newstand.

[BevrFevr]

There are few mags with value but most blow. I stopped reading Handguns when I was a teenager.

American Rifleman is ok. But they rarely say anything bad.

Gun Tests is ok. But sometimes these guys drop the one brain they are sharing. They seem to get stumped by things my niece could get passed.

Shotgun News is fairly good.

What do you all read that has merit?
not to hijack the thread but curious.

-bevr

[The Mighty Beagle]

I don't even buy 'em any more, I just read them while standing at the magazine rack at Wal-Mart.

Anybody else wonder why reviewers don’t benchrest a pistol at 25 yds. any more? I’m starting to see groups fired at 10 yds. now, which is a pathetic standard.

Or worse yet, I plunked my money down for some “Guns Annual” catalog-type publication to find out how this .38 Spec. SAA clone and .38 Spec. lever rifle shot. THE AUTHOR DIDN’T EVEN BOTHER TO SHOOT THEM FOR GROUPS. Instead, he just messed around with some cowboy action silhouettes at 15 feet or something ... what a joke.

My favorite is when they get a super-custom-high-dollar 1911 that can't even make it through a clip of ball, and the conclusion labels it a "near perfect gun for self-defense". Yeah, sure.

[M58]

Hardly a magazine worth buying anymore!:banghead:

[Soap]

Buy S.W.A.T.!!!

[bad_dad_brad]

I stick with Small Arms Review and Soldier of Fortune. The current SOF reviewed the S&W 1911 and if you read between the lines, the review was mixed. Shotgun News is often good as well.

Gun mags, car mags, they are pretty much the same. All about editorial preference bribed by money or products. What do you expect?

Forums like this often provide more honest input. Many of my firearm purchases have been decided upon by searching or posting on the TFL/THR web sites.

[ojibweindian]

I stopped buying any gun mags after joining TFL. I let all my subscriptions run out.

Some of the best reviews, advice, etc one can find is on TFL and THL.

[Tecolote]

I find Mr Camp's reviews a lot more informative and unbiased than anything in the rags.

[J Scott]

I agree. Stephen Camp's reviews are the best ones going.

J Scott

[seeker_two]

SHOOTING TIMES is honest on their reviews (have yet to see them give a good review--or ANY review-- to a junk gun). AMERICAN HANDGUNNER & GUNS are good too.

The rest I can just skip...:scrutiny:

[2xTap]

I'll put a third in here, Mr. Camp's reviews/range reports are leeps and bounds ahead of any gunrag. And with Stephen, you can be sure he won't pull his punches................you'll get an honest review of whatever piece he's shooting.

2xTap

[EJ]

I read ALL the gun rags at Border's in the cofffee shop--

SWEET--:D

[BevrFevr]

for sure. I thought I would throw in in case he's reading.

It would be cool if he could put a code word in his reviews that would make them easy to do search on so that we could retrieve only the reviews. maybe Hassenfeffer...

I would subscribe to his reviews but like them better free. :)

-bevr

[care-less]

Don't expect honesty from the gun whores. They always add some drivel about "having to be tweaked here or there". thats gun expert ( whore) language for ... they haven't got it right yet. If they print the truth, they will not get any more free guns to review; I mean sell.:cuss:

[mattk]

Twerent nothing wrong with mine. Trigger was 4.5 out of the box. Plus trigger jobs go for about 40 bucks here as long as new parts arent need and trust me there is nothing wrong with the parts Smith put into this gun.

[yesterdaysyouth]

dave spaulding reviews the sw1911 in the may combat handguns... the last section was titled problems....

first the mainspring housing pin was working it's way out of the frame, but he claims that was easily fixed... but the next part was funny...

he was actually delighted when the white dots fell off the rear sight...???!!! :confused:

he's only beef with the gun was the sights, saying he'd add a tritum front and serrate the rear...

either way i think one will find it's way into my stable before long.... :p

[gk1]

Worst recent review? Last September or so, there was a review in G&A or ST for the Auto Ordnance WW2-style 1911. They said it was a good buy for the price (~$450-$500) despite:

The front sight fell off.
The locking lugs on the slide were rounded, causing the lugs on the barrel to flake off, locking the gun up tight.

It had to be sent back to the factory TWICE for things that, according to the review, the factory rep said were common production problems that they'd fixed; he was scratching his head over how this one had "slipped by" the new steps in manufacturing... He didn't discuss how they failed to notice that the slide should never have been used in the first place when they were putting new sights on it during the first trip to the factory for repair.

So, if the SW1911 didn't outright blow up, or otherwise fail to be a firearm any longer, this isn't a new low, it's just typical of advertising-driven reviews in the same old rags.:barf: :barf: :barf:

George

[smooth operator]

The guy probably didn't pay anything for the gun-That's why it's a "must have"
Jerry

[Jim K]

If the reviewers told the truth, there wouldn't be any more reviews. Editors and publishers make far more money from advertising than from magazine sales, and aren't going to print anything that offends the advertisers.

I like Gun Tests for that reason, but sometimes think they may know testing (they can measure a group) but don't know beans about guns. For proof, read their silly story that confuses the modern BAR sporting rifle with the military light machinegun and says they are the same thing. What silly ignorance!

Jim

[gk1]

Browning sure made some major changes to that model over the years, eh? Shaved 10 pounds, ~15 rounds, every part, and got it to fire from a closed bolt, too.... That is some pretty impressive ignorance.

George

[Oleg Volk]

Try www.swatmagazine.com -- they pan anything that deserves it. Read their reviews of the newest Benelli SG or some Taurus autoloaders and tell me if they let advertising get in the way of the truth as they see it. I suppose having freelance writers helps.

[Derek Zeanah]

I suppose having freelance writers helps.Yeah, but I think having Rich at the head means more.

[RON in PA]

Interesting that Metcalf reviews the S&W 1911 in the current issues of both Shooting Times and Handguns. I need to compare and see if he uses the same words. It should PO the editors.

My only question about the Smith version is if the external extracter is an improvement.

[Zip06]

I believe the best reviews are on the internet. Gun writers are a mixed lot. Picking the worst is really difficult as the competition is so darned stiff. Nevertheless I would nominate Duane Thomas.

[TheFrontRange]

Nevertheless I would nominate Duane Thomas.

I actually like Duane Thomas' articles quite a bit myself. He wrote some pieces in "Handguns" (in the days of Jan Libourel) and "The Blue Press" I thoroughly enjoyed. The only gun mag I've consistently stuck with over time has been "American Handgunner" and I've been wondering what happened to Mr. Thomas.

I will give in to temptation and just ask here, Zip06...are you, in fact, Duane? :)

Edited by TheFrontRange to add: it occurs to me that it's pretty impolite of me to call you (or anyone else) out like that in a public forum like this. Please forgive any offense on this, and PM me if you'd otherwise like to.

[Zip06]

TheFrontRange - a pox upon you. No, I am not Duane. I was born on this planet. Libourel seemed to be his sponsor in writing. I used to buy a lot of gun rags and he wrote quite a bit, hawking a new "best" pistol in each issue; timing himself on drills; denouncing the .40 caliber as an inferior round; and then, after apparently reading the National Inquirer, taking a job as a security guard to do research on the "best" equipment.

[TheFrontRange]

You know, I do seem to remember the security guard thing now that you mention it...I recall an article in "The Blue Press" where he was hunting for a duty weapon.

I suppose I likened your style of writing to his, saw your "Pacific Northwest" location and tied that to his being in Washington state (I think?)...that's what I get for jumping to conclusions! :)

[Duane Thomas]

Nevertheless I would nominate Duane Thomas.

Why?

[Duane Thomas]

I actually like Duane Thomas' articles quite a bit myself. He wrote some pieces in "Handguns" (in the days of Jan Libourel) and "The Blue Press" I thoroughly enjoyed.
Thanks!

The only gun mag I've consistently stuck with over time has been "American Handgunner" and I've been wondering what happened to Mr. Thomas.
I'm currently selling to Handguns, Blue Press, Gun World, The Book of the 1911, The Book of the AR-15, Tactical Guns & Gear, Combat Arms, and the occasional issue of SWAT and Front Sight.

I will give in to temptation and just ask here, Zip06...are you, in fact, Duane?
He is not, in fact, Duane.

[real_name]

This is quite an old thread, check the date.
You might want to PM the posters to see if they are still around, or check their User CPs and see when they last visited.

[Duane Thomas]

No, I am not Duane. I was born on this planet.
So was I. I also know how to be polite.

Libourel seemed to be his sponsor in writing.
I would say that's true. Jan is certainly the editor to whom I made my first sales.

I used to buy a lot of gun rags and he wrote quite a bit, hawking a new "best" pistol in each issue;
Really? When did I ever do that?

timing himself on drills;
Yes, I like testing out techniques with an electronic timer, not just with myself doing the shooting but other skilled shooters, as well. That's actually one of the best things about being a gunwriter. Often, in the pursuit of info to relate to readers, I wind up learning something myself.

denouncing the .40 caliber as an inferior round;
It's true enough I'm not a .40 S&W fan, and I can make a case for why. If anyone else disagrees with me, they're certainly entitled to their opinion.

and then, after apparently reading the National Inquirer, taking a job as a security guard to do research on the "best" equipment.
Not quite sure I get the National Enquirer comment. Yes, for a blessedly brief period of time, years ago, I was an armed security guard. Yes, I wrote a couple of articles on choosing a duty gun. I did not, actually, take that job as a means of researching equipment. I took that job because I needed the money.

[Duane Thomas]

This is quite an old thread, check the date.
You might want to PM the posters to see if they are still around, or check their User CPs and see when they last visited.
Naaaah.

[mec]

In the form of the Kraemer/Thomas "Perfectionist" rig. About three years ago, Mark Pixler put me on to this and it has been a perfect rig for my Smith Mountain Gun. Some people can wear an IWB and some cant but I predict that anybody who can tollerate an IWB at all will find the Perfectionist to his liking.
The American Handgunner 2008 Tactical Annual is about to come out and my review of it will be on page 82.

A couple of months ago, I had a piece on the Paterson Revolvers in GUNs Magazine. When I approached the editor about it, I told him that I could do it but not without discussing a number of quality shortfalls in my copy of the version with the loading lever. He said "cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war" or something to that effect. He encourages factual reporting about such things.

I also did the security guard thing and for the same reason as Duane. Money. It didn't pay much, the risks were measurable and there were no beneifits but when you have a wife who thinks money grows on trees and all belongs to her, any little bit helps.

[Phil DeGraves]

They can't even get basic facts right. In September 1998, Shooting Times, in a glowing review of the SIG abortion known as the 2340, Layne Simpson states that "SIG stuck by steel in the frames of all of its models except the 239." WRONG! They used alloy frames in all of their models until recently when they started offering stainless frames.

Bruce Gray writes in the Spring 2004 issue of HIGH VELOCITY, talking about the new SIG GSR 1911 pattern pistol, that "Fortunately, SIGARMS respect for JMB's design didn't extend to his funky torsion bar extractor..." You mean those internal ones like the ones they put in the SIG 220, back then? Those funky ones? What a hypocrite! The reason for external extractors has nothing to do with functionality and everything to do with ease of manufacturing and the subsequent cost savings thereby raising the profit margin.

And I think it was Dick Metcalf who wrote the review of the Beretta 8000, praising it's "revolutionary rotating barrel design". Yeah, it was revolutionary back in the 1960s when MAB put in their MAB P15 auto pistol, but there was nothing new about it in the 1990s. What a bunch of idiots!

[OldBillThundercheif]

This thread is great. I agree with a lot of the opinions stated here.

1. Gun magazines are terrible. Except Small Arms Review, of course, and they really don't review many modern firearms.

2. Auto-Ordinance (Kahr) makes awful products that do not work. Ask me about my Thompson... go ahead... ask me.

3. The 40 S&W is overrated, inaccurate, and a bad substitute for a .45 or a 9mm

[Confederate]

The 1911 design is one that certainly has remained popular, though I haven't seen any out-of-the-box 1911s that I feel are 100 percent reliable. Guns used to be affordable, but even revolvers are creeping up towards the $1000 mark now. Thankfully, used revolvers and automatics are probably the best buys. (I'm in Maryland and everything is expensive because of the state's determination to drive gun dealers out of business, so good deals are few and far between.)

I recall, too, when, as a dealer, I would pay about $200 for a Beretta 92. Then immediately after the military adopted it, the price jumped hundreds of dollars. Shortly after that, they started failing and parts would hit shooters in the face after a few thousand rounds.

[Gewehr98]

Auto-Ordinance (Kahr) makes awful products that do not work. Ask me about my Thompson... go ahead... ask me.

Kahr Arms inherited the miserable quality control of Auto Ordnance by virtue of their purchasing that company, so they've got their work cut out for them. A blanket generalization of all things Kahr would not do justice to the fine K9 and K40 line of slim little pocket autoloaders, one of which has amazed me in quality, function, and accuracy for 6 years or so, and I bought it used. :scrutiny:

[OldBillThundercheif]

Kahr makes overpriced, unreliable junk. I'm glad you got one of their rare non-factory defect afflicted pistols.

[rockstar.esq]

I agree that American Handgunner is the only worthwhile magazine I've found. I wrote G&A a heated letter in response to their cover story on the Tikka T3 Tactical. The article went on to admit that they didn't have a T3 Tactical for review but that they'd shot other Tikkas and after checking Tikka's literature they were sure about the following...

For crying out loud they didn't have an actual rifle to review for their COVER STORY!

In an older issue they were carrying on about the amazing SA M25 "White Feather" and all the magic they do to make it better. The article took a BONE STOCK wally world special Remington 7400 with it's Bushnell scope and shot it against the M25 with Honking Zeiss optics. The truth of the matter was that the 7400 out shot the M25 at every range with plain hunting ammo! The group sizes were only mentioned in the photo captions and the writing glazed over the absolutely crushing the M25 took at the hands of an UNPOPULAR DEER RIFLE!

[swingset]

Kahr makes overpriced, unreliable junk. I'm glad you got one of their rare non-factory defect afflicted pistols.

Your opinion is based on what? Your 1 auto-ordinance that doesn't work?

I have 3 Kahr pistols, in my club I know of at least 4 more guys that own them and I know a few other guys that I've shot with that have Kahrs too. Only 1 of those guys EVER had a problem of any signifigance, and it was remedied by Kahr pronto.

You talk authoritatively about the company, how much do you actually know?

[GoRon]

Welcome to THR Duane!!

The gun rags are good entertainment to read during lunch. Some nice photographs and lists of standard options, msrp, etc...

When it comes time to buy something I go off word of mouth among people I shoot with, searches here and some other sites. Seems to be a good plan on my part, I have yet to buy something I was dissapointed in.

[mec]

Those who want to read reviews with comments on the negative factors should flip through the American Handgunnner 2007 Tactical Annual and check out the review of inexpensive pistols by Alex Hamilton.

[cbsbyte]

IMHO, There is not one firearm magazine worth reading for gun reviews. If one want to find reviews on firearms this site and many others have some decent info on them. Of course you will have to wade through some BS but overtime you can spot the accurate real world reviews. It is also true that the gun manufactures are basically buying favoritable gun reviews. With the supplied test firearm and advertising they are paying off the writer to give them a good review. This is the same with all product reviews in trade magaizines. Not the pinnacle of journalism by any strech of the imagination.

[tegemu]

IMHO the best magazine is "Concealed Carry Magazine." I read it cover to cover, word for word. I like most of the articles but now and then one I don't like sneaks in. However, like an article or not, I have never perceived any B.S. in the magazine.

[Manedwolf]

I saw one in Handguns on a Kimber Whatever model which awas basically a standard 1911 with some fancy scroll work selling for about $1200. The pig couldn't hold a 4" group and had a lousy trigger and the author proclaimed it was a perfect platform to build a 1911 on.

That's why I tend to regard those like Jaguar cars. Sure, there's a good chance you'll get one where the electrics will go out continually and there will be mystery puddles in your driveway, but hey, it has the name, and it's expensive, so it must be good!

For the price those go for, I'd expect a single-ragged-hole shooter out of the box. Not a "starting point". It should be already DONE.

As for SWAT magazine, it's just a bit too...um...mall-ninja tacticool for my tastes.

[Correia]

Well, I've written for SWAT. I'm not sure what you mean by Mall-Ninja. When I think of Mall-Ninjas I certainly think of Denny Hansen, Rob Pincus, Pat Rogers, and Louis Awerbuck. :scrutiny:

Every single review I've written, I've included everything negative that I could find. I noted every malfunction and every nit pick I could find. Pick up the last issue. That was my cover article on the XCR. It was totally honest. I talked about malfunctions, problems with taking the gun apart, and complained about the trigger.

Pick up the current issue where someone else is reviewing the FS2000. He notes all of the guns foibles, and its malfunctions.

Denny has never edited anything negative that I've written. Ever. In fact, the only thing he's ever pulled out were some of my lame attempts at humor. :)

[Correia]

And on a related note. I despise the word "tacticool". Mandewolf, I've got all sorts of crap hanging off of my guns. Want to put some money down and shoot a 3gun match and see which one of us does better? :rolleyes:

[CombatArmsUSAF]

I read American Handgunner. Unfortunately, I won't be doing anything more than reading for almost two years. I have orders to report to Incirlik AB, Turkey. I am going to thoroughly miss shooting.

[Duane Thomas]

Duane Thomas did me a favor

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the form of the Kraemer/Thomas "Perfectionist" rig. About three years ago, Mark Pixler put me on to this and it has been a perfect rig for my Smith Mountain Gun. Some people can wear an IWB and some cant but I predict that anybody who can tollerate an IWB at all will find the Perfectionist to his liking.
The American Handgunner 2008 Tactical Annual is about to come out and my review of it will be on page 82.

A couple of months ago, I had a piece on the Paterson Revolvers in GUNs Magazine. When I approached the editor about it, I told him that I could do it but not without discussing a number of quality shortfalls in my copy of the version with the loading lever. He said "cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war" or something to that effect. He encourages factual reporting about such things.

I also did the security guard thing and for the same reason as Duane. Money. It didn't pay much, the risks were measurable and there were no beneifits but when you have a wife who thinks money grows on trees and all belongs to her, any little bit helps.

mec,

Thanks for your comments.

Duane

[Duane Thomas]

Welcome to THR Duane!!

Thanks, GoRon.

Duane

[hankdatank1362]

So Duane, are you the guy I'm thinking of that wrote the article about "Where do you fall in the Hierarchy of Tactical Shooters?" in HANDGUNNER? I really enjoyed that article.

And was that you in that picture, in the flanel shirt, puffy vest, and yellow shooting glasses? Man, you people in the pacific Northwest dress funny! :evil:

[Tecolote]

This breaks the record for the oldest thread resurrected, not once but twice.:what:

[Cosmoline]

Given the way the slick rags operate these days, is there ANY chance they'd give a thumbs down to a flagship model of a major customer? The slicks have declined a long, long way from the days when Skeeter or Elmer would openly criticize design flaws in the magazine and send the whole thing back to the factory.

[CPshooter]

I think handgun magazines are a waste of time in general...they suck. The articles suck, the gun reviews suck, and there's nothing interesting to read about. I only flip through them to check out the cool advertisements so i know what to spend my money on next:)

[Caimlas]

Man, you're right - that's nonsense. What a shill. The only difference between various 1911s in the aesthetics and feel department, as far as I'm concerned, are the things he's changed: grips, sights, safety. Ok, so there's still the backstrap safety, beavertail, length of the barrel and slide serration style/presence, but all of those things can be found in a variety of configurations at the $550-600 mark, easily.

This is a pretty good example for why I don't trust firearm magazines whatsoever anymore. The only reason I'll pick one up is for the pictures, and the various self-defense stories or even the ads (that is, the ones which specifically display themselves as such, not the editorial ads). And when I can't find anything else to put me in a mildly vegetative state on an airplane or while using the head.

[crebralfix]

Hmmm...I just read the gun rags for the advertisements. I like to know what's new that not an actual firearm.

[Duane Thomas]

So Duane, are you the guy I'm thinking of that wrote the article about "Where do you fall in the Hierarchy of Tactical Shooters?" in HANDGUNNER? I really enjoyed that article.
Thank you. I actually wrote that piece years ago, wasn't able to sell it. "Too esoteric," or somesuch. But I really liked that piece, held onto it, and eventually was able to sell it. I think it was published in Hanguns, actually.

And was that you in that picture, in the flanel shirt, puffy vest, and yellow shooting glasses?
Um....no? I don't think so. I don't wear yellow shooting glasses, though I have been known to wear the odd flannel shirt or puffy vest over the years.

[joe4702]

Is there a big full-color 2-page S&W ad on the pages following the review?

[LittleLebowski]

Maybe we need a thread on the most blatant product advertisements disguised as gun reviews? Scott Mayer took the cake when he "reviewed" realistic rifle and accuracy it was nothing but a blatant shill for Sako complete with only Sako rifles, pictures of him with [i]2[//i] different Sako hats, and him mentioning being on a hunt with Sako factory representatives. Matter of fact, I am going to start a thread on that.

[ironvic]

So--what the heck do we need YET ANOTHER 1911 REVIEW FOR??!! looking at all the gun mag covers, you'd think the 1911 was the only gun worth reviewing or using for the cover shot. Does anyone even shoot revolvers anymore? (I mean like, .357s, .38s, 44s and not just some custom shop display-case gun in some weird buffalo caliber).

Custom 1911s are nice to look at, sometimes, but flipping pages upon pages of nothing but bling encrusted shooters gets run-of-the-mill after a while. I sold my Colt Enhanced 1911 and bought a SIG P-226 (which is a whole lot more interesting) and paid for a quarter's worth of tuition as well with the proceeds. I figure, since everybody's making the 1911 (even SIG-jeez!) I can pick up another any old time.

If the gun mags don't get their acts together and add some honesty and interest to the mix, the internet will kill them fer sure.

ironvic

[sdj]

The real reviews happen here on the THR. :-) I tend to read the magazines for the advertisements and the book reviews and the holster reviews.

[LittleLebowski]

Check this out (http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=310686)

[ironvic]

BTW-Welcome Duane!

I've always liked your stories and reviews in the gun mags and it's good to see a fellow Northwesterner's by-line. Some of the stuff you wrote about SIGs still rings true today.

It seemed like a long time since I read any of your stuff in the mags and I was beginning to wonder what happened to you--just keep 'em coming, man!

ironvic

[ironvic]

Oh, as long as we're ragging on the gun rags, here's one that REALLY chaps my pants: does anyone ever proofread gun magazine articles before they go to press? The magazines are getting very expensive and I always think twice before deciding not to buy. For the money, I cannot believe there are so many typos, dropped words, poor syntax and articles that end in mid-sentence.

This isn't just a complaint from an ex-magazine editor and publisher--these common gun mag mistakes make us all look like ignorant bubbas to any reader outside the orbit of the gun world.

ironvic

[Wayne G.]

This breaks the record for the oldest thread resurrected, not once but twice.

um, three times (so far).

[Radjxf]

Guess I'll have to check out SWAT. Not terribly interested in tactico** stuff, but anything has to be better than the others out there. G&A and Handguns are truly horrid. Sweeney spends more time talking about "power factor" than anything pertinent about the gun. Writers shooting lousy groups at 10-15 yds and proclaiming a gun to have "good combat accuracy"! Half the mags are Springfield and Kimber ads :barf:
Chuck Norris and Superman couldn't fix these gun rags.
I like Stephen Camp's articles, everything else I'll have to pass on.

[sholling]

1) Install trigger $51.25
2) Tune trigger $98.00
3) Straight 8 night sights $122.80
4) Install sights $57.00
5) Install Ed Brown Ambi thumb safety $153.25
6) Magwell/grips/installation $309.00
Total custom work: $791.30
Total for completed pistol: $1723.30 Admittedly I'm coming into this discussion late but this has to be one of the silliest posts/discussions I've seen in a while. First the idea that gun rags can be counted on for a serious review was debunked long ago. This discussion adds nothing to it. Gun magazines are fine entertainment and as long as you take the reviews with a grain of salt. Some of the better ones actually have some very useful information. Siting with box of salt in hand I still enjoy reading the better ones. Especially American Handgunner.

Now that we have gotten that out of the way the OP's quibbles about the writer's decision to customize a fine pistol are petty at best. First off $900 for a 1911 if this quality is a fair street price. The S&W isn't a RIA or a Charles Daly it's one of the better 1911s right out of the box. The author's choice to 'have it his way' is his choice. That's one of the joys of having a 1911. The stock trigger is one of the best I've felt on box stock 1911. If the author has a preference for a different trigger and that custom trigger needs to be tuned it just reflects his tastes. It's the same with the sights. Personally I detest Heinie sights but if that's what the author likes, well it's his money. I hate ambi safeties, but I'm right handed. Is the OP griping about the author being a lefty? Is there something wrong with adding a mag well for competition? That's what they are used for. Is the OP angry that all SW1911s don't come with a mag well or is the OP angry that the author likes extended mag wells? Or is the OP offended that the author shares his pride in his custom build-up? Or is the OP angry because the author bought a 1911 over a Glock/Taurus/Sig or whatever his pet choice is?

The bottom line is that some people are happy driving a box stock Toyota. Something sensible. Well good for them. Others like buying a perfectly fun Corvette and sending it off to Lingenfelter for a little custom work. ;)

[Hokkmike]

That is the problem with most magazines. Runners' World shows you Olympic runners' training schedules. Guitar Magazine shows you licks from the superstars, and in a gun magazine some pro acts like it is no big deal to pop $900 into a pistol then add tons of money to modify it! They are not REAL WORLD!

[LeibstandarteAdH]

shotgun news and small arms review are about it

[obxned]

The author spent almost as much to 'fix' his pistol as a darn fine, accurate, reliable pistol would cost brand-new.

[George Hill]

Thanks for the Concealed Carry Magaizne plug... considering I write gun reviews for them.
If you think I shill for the manufactures, read my article on the HK P2000, CZ-100, and the upcoming Charter Arms reviews. (Charter Arms is going to FREAK!) Then tell me I pander for advertising dollars.
And SWAT Magazine? Those guys know their craft and they know who reads their rag... they are not going to pander and risk the lives of their subscribers.
Suggestions that they do, or I do, is flat out insulting. I refuse to be a shill... Tim knows that, and my readers do to.

[innerpiece]

geez, yall are taking magazines too seriously imo....

shoot the friggin gun for yerself, and share YOUR opinion... not too many smart folks shop or review the gunmags with any wieght anyway...

really what do reviews matter... that person is NOT you, NOT the pistol yer holding, NOT of the same skill level, likely NOT testing in the conditions you would..
not to mention, many writers are just that.... writers... Not many of them have fired a weapon in combat, or even defence of them selves.... but they certainly have have their comments on weapons suitable for SD and combat huh.....

then, recently born, are the writers that will insult anything that isnt "perfect" in their eyes.... because they are afraid too much compliment of anything in question, will render them a mere "shill"..... better to be a hardass, than a softass eh...

I havent bought a gun mag since Issue#31 of conceald carry 2006... while it was actually topic oriented (cant say that for most mags) the reviews were weak, I was dissapointed... I was hoping to see information not yet published.... couple things were great... but it was still just a gun mag, as they all are imo....

magazines are for advertisement and making a profit off of advertisement.... just so folks know. nothing new, nothing changed.


best way to judge something is to experience it.
atleaset, thats what makes sence to me anyway...

ip.

[George Hill]

"not too many smart folks shop or review the gunmags with any wieght anyway..."

You would be suprised. Don't dis magazines so easily. They can be a credible source of news and opinion if you read them with the understanding that you are reading more of an editorial piece than journalism.

But my heavens most of them bore me to tears. Few articles keep me all the way through. If I read another Charles Petty Ammo Report Review when I want to know about the gun - I'm cancelling subscriptions. That man needs to step away from the machine rest.

[Mad Magyar]

If I read another Charles Petty Ammo Report Review when I want to know about the gun - I'm cancelling subscriptions.

+1 Thank you....He's a fine example of the "Peter Principle"...:)

[2ndamd]

I have seen certain writers write the actual review before.

Dennis Prisbey reported the Speer Golddot ammo problem with the CZ P01.....CZ fixed it. And I do not think he liked the Judge that well.

There is a guy from Kansas that writes and has other people shoot the gun and he reports their initial impressions too. So it is not just him. He wrote about a Ruger P95 having the safety fall off during shooting. He did note that Rugers are usually very reliable though. (sorry to forget his name at the moment. He is not too good of a shot though :) )

So I have seen some writers report the woes and the highlights. But I feel the phrase "must have" in this example is an exaggeration. And I think that is many posters point. I am sure we all agree we have read an article and seen the writer exaggerate just a tad. Right?

[Cosmoline]

geez, yall are taking magazines too seriously imo....

I'd be more inclined to agree with you if my copy of Elmer's old gun notes wasn't among my most frequently thumbed books. Everything from load information to suggestions for iron sight styles. And there was nothing "slick" about any of it. That's what gun writing should be. That's what it used to be.

[Landlocked Pirate]

Actually, Duane Thomas is one of my favorite writers. His article in GUN WORLD a couple of years ago about choosing the Glock 34 for concealed carry was very informative and useful, to me at least, and it helped pursuade me to finally buy a Glock, which I'm glad I did (Glock 17). Another memorable article by Duane was titled "Why Your 1911 Won't Work" (http://outlands.tripod.com/armory/1911.htm) which I thought was extremely useful and the kind of article you don't often see. Thanks, Duane.

[romma]

i hate gun mags b/c they never seem to tell the gritty parts about pistols, just as long as they get one w/ their name engraved on it they say it's great. i did like one of the back pages of american handgunner though which said basically the same thing

I buy them because I like to look at the pictures... LOL

[romma]

That is the problem with most magazines. Runners' World shows you Olympic runners' training schedules

Runners World will have 50 or so different training schedules that conflict each other in every edition...

Every article or schedule seems to explain why their model is the best. Pretty funny stuff.

[innerpiece]

george, yer right, I was a bit "in general" with my comment.

Csomoline. I understand. I too have a book I refrence for factual info. however, it is not one of the more common mag's I was referring to, nor is yers.

Peace, ip.

[Tecolote]

Quote:
This breaks the record for the oldest thread resurrected, not once but twice.
um, three times (so far).
__________________

The necromancy continues.