Out of the Box: Passionate Persuasion?

[Mad Magyar]

Since I’ve implied in other posts that many threads & responses are purposely placed to promote or denigrate a pistol by agents of the gun industry, which includes the popular gun magazines benefiting from large chunks of advertising money, I’ve omitted this model so I not be accused. Many of you will recognize the pistol right away. I found this particular review of a popular compact pistol quite disturbing, but interesting.
Entitled, “Out of the Box” it describes the reliability this way. “……..recommends you fire 200 rds of ammo before trusting your life to the gun. Take that advice, I’ve owned four …...over the years and every one needed the break-in period. After 200 rds their reliability became absolute.” BTW, it stated that the pistol experienced one stovepipe jam, & two failures to feed during the 1st 200.:banghead: Would you be content & patient going through four boxes of ammo waiting for the last sliver/shaving, mating, or whatever before CCW? If you are carrying, would you be confident with portions of the fifth box that is in your pistol? Not me!:uhoh:
Why do I keep bringing up the topic of “break-in” period & performance results? I find it alarming that some of the big-names in the gun genre, like Massad Ayoob, have moved from writing interesting, sound tactical gun articles (e.g. Ayoob Files) to just an ordinary gun reviewer with the all too-familiar slant. I realize a person needs to make a living, but what a disappointment. Pistoleros, these reviews are paid advertising and are always written in a way to cover-up any deficiencies in design, workmanship, and performance. “Break-in” has become the “magic elixir” to cure all our pistol ills…..Oh yes, the last sentence of this review gave me the biggest grin: : “If this was Consumer Reports, I’d rate the ……a “Best Buy.”

[MCgunner]

Don't like the counter top Zines? Get a subscription to "Gun Tests". If "Gun Tests" thinks it's good, it is good. They put down about everything that throws lead in one way or another. :D

['Card]

Are you saying that agents of the gun industry are posting incognito on web forums?

Do they get paid for this?

Ummmm... is there an application process?

[ArmedBear]

Nothing is sacred to the Gun Test guys. Theirs is the only rag worth the subscription price, except for a few sport-specific publications like Shotgun Sports.

E.g., they love Rugers, because Rugers have been excellent guns in their collective experience. This doesn't stop them from unabashedly rating a Ruger "Don't Buy" if they have any trouble with it. But they'll also let you know in a subsequent issue if a company resolved warranty issues, how the gun works now, how the customer service is, etc., and if they changed their minds.

They buy test guns from shops, even Wal-Mart, so they get the same thing as we get. I don't think manufacturers know who's calling them if there's a warranty problem. And they live off subscription money, not ads.

I've bought a few guns based on their recommendations, since I got my subscription, and they've been dead-on every time. They test milsurp guns as they come on the market, too, not just the newest and greatest, and they test low-end stuff, like cheap package hunting rifles, at least as much as mid-to-high-end.

That's how I've acquired a few real gems for under $300, but avoided blowing money on junk.

I can't overstate how WORTH the $24/year, Gun Tests is, even if you only buy a gun once every year or two.

[Kamicosmos]

Are you saying that agents of the gun industry are posting incognito on web forums?

Do they get paid for this?

Actually, there has been a big 'discovery' in the video game world that at many many forums, lots of posters turn out to be game company employees. They create online personas and get 'known' in the community. Then, when they give opinons on this new upcoming game, or slam a competitor's game, everyone else thinks it's all good stuff from a fellow gamer. This is different than coming right out and saying I'm a Dev for Such&Such. They pose as Joe Blow Consumer.

It wouldn't surprise me at all to find company employees posing as normal forum users in many industries: cars, firearms, books, movies, etc etc.

What's the latin phrase? Caveat Emptor?

[ugaarguy]

For those who think Gun Test is absolute take a look at their review of the Rohrbaugh R9. They called the carbon fiber grips high tech plastic, complained about one magazine, and omitted that it only had one mag because it was a T&E gun sent to them by Rohrbaugh not a new over the counter purchase that would have had two mags. They dont buy everything new. They also trashed the accuracy of the Rohrbaugh ignoring that it was plenty accurate for a gun that size in that substantial a caliber. There was a post on here a while back that adressed this. I'll try to find a link to the Rohrbaugh forum post where were one of the Rohrbaugh execs posted his open letter in response the Gun Test review.

[Mad Magyar]

Interesting comments....I believe I''ve run across a copy or two of Gun Tests, especially if it's the one that comes with the 3-ring punch holes..
Kamicosmos, I can believe it about the video game industry...Actually, it does make a lot of good business sense, as it is extremely cheap advertising.
All of us can scan these forums in minutes selecting one's that fit our agenda, and say: "Worst POS I've ever owned", or "One great trigger, very nice fit & finish". Those one-liners really hit home with little or no explanation and unfortunately or fortunately are very effective.
It really is no different than many posters/responders not actually owning or firing any of the pistols talked about...:uhoh:

[JohnBT]

"Would you be content & patient going through four boxes of ammo waiting for the last sliver/shaving, mating, or whatever before CCW?"

Certainly. That's only one or two trips to the range. And it's going to take me at least that long to get really comfortable with a new gun before I decide if it needs any tweeks or maybe even major modifications.

What's the big deal about shooting a new gun? I like shooting guns.

Do you follow the manufacturer's break-in recommendations when you buy a new car? You know, the ones that say don't drive at sustained high speeds, but to vary you speed slightly. The ones that say to change the oil and check the air pressure in the tires. Am I the only person here who checks the lug nuts after the first 75 or 100 miles? :) Knew a guy in college who had a rear wheel fall off a new Corvette.

John

[Selfdfenz]

As my command of the English language will soon show, I'm not a gun rag writer and I don't play one on TV but I will admit I buy the occassional mag if it has a reloading arti of interest. I'm also not an engineer, or firearms designer FYI.

Observation begins:
I've owned several new cars and trucks over the years and in every case the owner's manual had some pretty specific text regarding breaking in the motor/brakes etc. I bought more than a few pieces of gasoline engine powered equip over the same period of time and ditto on break-in info. I have no scientific proof that the excellent job I did following those directions gave me extra years of service but one thing I understood upfront was that a break-in period was required before I bought. No sleep lost.
For a few of the firearms I have purchased a break-in period was specified.
I followed the directions, the directions worked and in one notable case I still have the unit 20 years later and it works fine. Additional sleep not lost.
Observations ends.

Is the original post about break-in periods, possible industry influence among the authors of gun-rag artis or both?

In my estimation the issue with run rags was worse in the 60s than it is now based on some of the old F&S and Sports Afield articules from that time.

While I had a subscription to GTR for a long time and I like the mag I stopped the renewals. I decided they tended to be unscientifically judgemental based on the one unit they purchased and tested.

If they bought 3-5 identical units of some product they plan to test from a number of different sources and then did their evaluation, their publication, and we, the consumer, would both benefit. A test sample group of 3-5 units is not statistically adequate but it's much more informative than one test sample. As it is now I can get information equal in value to what they publish for free if I can locate some Bubba in the hood that happens to own the product in question.
And yes I understand that increases their costs but it's still the way to go.

No flames intended

Best

S-

[Kevinch]

No matter what publication you read, the article was written by a human & humans are biased.

Long ago, I realized that gun mags are nothing but entertainment as far as gun evaluations go. That includes Gun Tests. True, they don't take advertising $$ but I still don't believe all that I read. I currently don't subscribe to any gun rags, except the the American Rifleman that comes with my NRA membership. I'll pick up an issue here or there off the newstand if I see something that might interest me. Too many of the gun scribes seem, IMHO, to have an inflated opinion on how they themselves are steering the industry because they know an employee or 2 at the manufacturing companies. These guys have big egos.

[461]

I pretty much like anything to do with guns and have been known to grab a gun magazine just to pass the time. I take nothing as gospel from any source and choose to make my own decisions based on my own experiences.

Every thing written by anybody else whether in a gun magazine or online forum should be taken with a grain of salt and sometimes the whole darn shaker. A whole bunch of folks out there need to puff their own egos by trashing something or jumping on a band wagon and agreeing with the stupidest ideas simply because the originator has a reputation of some sort.

[Bullet Bob]

I wouldn't willingly carry any gun I hadn't put a few hundred rounds through.

[CajunBass]

What's the difference between "breaking in a gun", and "going to the range to shoot?" :confused:

Maybe I've been really lucky, but I've never had a bad gun. The very worst one was a Ruger 22/45 that jammed a few times in the first couple hundred rounds. I guess it was "breaking in."

As for gun magazines? I read a lot of them. I like to read.

[Mad Magyar]

Excellent points, but remember this concerning the "break-in" comparison with a new vehicle. While you are breaking in your new Escapade, you are running it and expect it to run & run & run....With the pistol, when you experience a problem: the operation STOPS! Not a good analogy with an internal combustion engine....
As far as planted, distorted, or monitored threads, I wish I could remember the forum where the poster was having problems with his pistol, IIRC, it was a Sig or Taurus but not a 100%sure, and couldn't get the assistance from the service dept. He was on the verge of calling it a POS, not what gun makers want their customers to hear or read.:eek: It wasn't but minutes later that a VP of this mfgr. was posting on the forum stating how they would take care of the problem immediately. The members' moniker was typical of what you see on forums...Look at this way, yes, there is word of mouth; but normally speaking much of our knowledge for new firearms are coming from two sources: Gun rags & Gun Forums....I love him both but am extremely skeptical of each...:scrutiny:

[Standing Wolf]

Lots of cars develop major mechanical problems during the first 3,000 miles.

My rule of thumb with a carry gun is that it needs to fire about 250 rounds without a single problem before I'll stake my life on it.

[Smurfslayer]

If "Gun Tests" thinks it's good, it is good :scrutiny:


Not for nothin', but I've bought 2 or 3 of their "recommended" suggestions and 2 of them were dogs. As has been sufficiently addressed above, the statistical sample used by GT isn't necessarily reflective of reality...

That said, I did not base my purchase decision solely "because Gun Tests" said it was good, but I will admit I was swayed by their articles in those decisions.

If they were able to fire 900 rounds out of a lorcin .25 without a malfunction and were to have a problem with a SA/Beretta/Sig/HK/S&W/etc. would you immediately declare the Lorcin .25 the new "it" gun?

On the subject of 'break in' I'm sure there are still guns out there so tightly fitted as to require some period of time(rounds) to establish a reliable gun, but I wouldn't expect this in a duty gun. Of course, American consumers are finicky and periodically step outside the norm. Some of us have been known to carry guns which are impractical, a-tactical, or even competition guns :neener:

Guns are a very personal decision. What's right for Mas Ayoob isn't necessarily right for you...or me. That is not in any way to say we should discount everything else he says, simply that ultimately you have to make the individual choices for you, not him...

Now, can we move on to less controversial topics... like limp wristing? :neener:

[Dravur]

Ok, I admit it. I am a gun poster, working for a gun maker/magazine. Yep, I randomly post information on guns and really work to promote the guns that advertisers send me.

If you are a gun manufacturer, please send me guns to try and I will be happy to write good things about them on Thehighroad. Lorcin and Jennings don't count.

So, if you want good press, send me guns. Simple as that.
:evil:

[depicts]

I like reading gun magazines. I learn a lot about things I didn't know, especially historical stuff. How a gun developed from its concept to what it is 50 years later.

Right here on our forum we have guys like Mas Ayoob and Bart Skelton, and others that I don't know as well like PAX and Oleg and many others that write or work in the gun trade. I even did it myself for a few years.

Do I believe everything they say? Well, I believe they believe what they say. As for me, I don't buy a gun and carry it to protect my life because some writer gave it good reviews.

I carry my S&W Centenial because the Smith J frame has proven itself for many many years. From the first Chief's Special my uncle let me fire, to my latest 640. I also carry a Browning Hi Power. I got my first one when I ws 13, and my latest makes me very confident.

What I'm saying is you have to prove some of this stuff to yourself. The writers and magazines can describe, berate, praise or stretch the truth, but it's you carrying the gun. I'd want to know for myself. It's like reloading information, don't you cross check it with a few other loading manuals?

Especially now with the internet, it's easier than ever to research gun information, but I find it darn hard to use my mouse when I'm sitting on the "throne", like I can when I read Colonel Cooper!!! :) Thre's a time and place for everything.

[meef]

Especially now with the internet, it's easier than ever to research gun information, but I find it darn hard to use my mouse when I'm sitting on the "throne", like I can when I read Colonel Cooper!!! Thre's a time and place for everything.
Ummmm..... I'm not sure you should be talking about what you're doing with your mouse when you're sitting on the throne.

Good grief, man - that's too much information!

:uhoh:

[gudel]

“Out of the Box” it describes the reliability this way. “……..recommends you fire 200 rds of ammo before trusting your life to the gun. Take that advice, I’ve owned four …...over the years and every one needed the break-in period. After 200 rds their reliability became absolute

That brings out the 'comfort' feeling doesn't it?
I don't recall reading break in period in my HK/GLOCK/Beretta manuals.
The only bad guns I had was a ruger MKII that would jam every mag, a NIB out of the box Sig that wont lock mag, and a NIB 1911 that need factory service after 400 rounds.
So far all my HK/GLOCK/Beretta have been reliable.

[silicon wolverine]

IMHO its simple common sense ANY mechaincal device needs a break-in period when it is new. This applies to guns, cars, generators, or dishwashers if you want to go that far. Ive bought around 30 new guns in my life and all of them need a break in before they smoothed out. Modern manufacturing creates small burrs, sratches, casting flash etc. etc. etc. that need to wear in. Usually it takes around 100 rounds to break in an automatic weapon. (the only one that didnt was my colt gold cup. one mag and she was rockin')
Less for bolt guns, lever guns etc. Just my .02

SW

[HSMITH]

Common sense tells you that ALL of the reviews, even Gun Test, have a sample size of ONE GUN!!!!! That isn't much of a test no matter who ran it or how critical it is or isn't, and information gathered from that test is anecdotal at best.

It really is that simple.

[MCgunner]

I've bought a few guns based on their recommendations, since I got my subscription, and they've been dead-on every time.

I bought a Weaver rifle scope for that reason, rave reviews of it in Gun Tests, beat out scopes from Leupold, Burris, scopes costing twice the price. you know what? They were right! This scope has been awesome, clear, bright optics, repeatable adjustments with quarter minute clicks, sturdy and bump resistant. a heck of a rifle scope for a lot less money than the over-rated Leupolds. I want another for another rifle. This one has been awesome.:D I'm a Weaver convert.

However, they do get carried away over ONE firearm they obtain. You have to read between the lines on stuff and use your head. Rossi usually gets cut down on fit/finish and this and that, might not be as accurate in a comparison test to a 686 or something, and they'll give it a poor or adequate or some lower rating. Now, it's a perfectly reliable, servicable gun, but they're comparing it to a 686 or some other high end revolver. Of course it's not going to be finished quite so well. :rolleyes: But, if you read this, instead of taking their opinion literally, read between the lines and realize the Rossi they're testing is a good, servicable gun for the money, but is not a show piece. They'll always give a rounds fired, accuracy, any malfunctions report on the gun. You can tell how it worked for them. And, yeah, they have ONE gun they're testing, but it's still quite informative. I've seen 'em trash a high end gun because something broke on it. Might only happen in one out of a hundred and they got tha one. They do follow it up, as was said, with a "how the manufacturer handled the return" which is quite informative as any weapon might have to go back and I like knowing what sort of service to expect.

Of all the magazine tests, Gun Tests is the only one I'll actually be able to form an opinion of a gun on based on their results of the test. With other gun rags, you KNOW they don't wanna PO the manufacturer and will only bad mouth something if it ain't gonna cost 'em anything to do. Even then, they'll gloss over deficiencies. I read a test of the Phoenix Arms HP22 in one of the rags and they talked about the great accuracy for an inexpensive gun. Well, I bought one because it was cheap and I figured I couldn't get burned too bad at that price. Well, it is accurate, very accurate, and I like that. But, they never mentioned the slide that broke on me and needed a redesign. They never mentioned the fact that the gun chews up those limp recoil springs at a rate of about one spring per brick of ammo. :rolleyes: Yeah, for a cracker jacks gift pot metal gun, the thing is pretty amazing. It's quite reliable so long as the recoil spring is fresh and it's accurate, but TELL ME THE DEFICIENCIES. I wasn't mad about the gun because I expected it to be more a POS than it was, frankly, being cheap and pot metal. And, it fills a niche in my collection, pocketable outdoor plinker. But, that magazine sure sugar coated it. LOL! The thing is certainly no defensive weapon and don't even consider it for that if you buy one. They should print stuff like that, too, but Phoenix Arms was buying a lot of gun rag ads at the time, so guess what.......:rolleyes: I will say this, that Phoenix HP22 is a much better gun that the little single action Beretta .22 short I had that wouldn't feed a round cleanly if you begged it to. It was beautifully made of solid steel, for all the good it did. That pot metal Phoenix will at LEAST feed and fire reliably and is danged accurate to boot. But, I sold that POS Beretta at a gun show for a $20 profit, probably couldn't GIVE that HP22 away, LOL!

[ball3006]

is a subtle safety thing. 200 rounds would get you fairly familiar with the pistol........chris3

[Soybomb]

I can't imagine carrying a gun without a test period/break-in time. The one new revolver I've bought had out of the box problems. Sorry, I'm not trusting functionality until I see it for myself.

[JohnBT]

Back to the new vehicle analogy for a second. Would anyone seriously consider entering a race, or taking cross country trip with the family, without putting at least a couple of hundred miles on a new vehicle first?

That reminds me of the new Olds Cutlass my dad bought years ago. The second day he owned it he found the coil hanging down under the engine. Then there was the new '72 Corvette 454 that lost a rear wheel exiting the interstate. I'm glad it didn't happen to me - the owner lived upstairs and would let me drive it for an hour if I dropped him off at class and then picked him up.

John