Magazine Subscriptions and gun knowledge.

Status
Not open for further replies.
I learned a great deal about guns, back in the 80s, from magazines. I still have a handful of them from the era and they all are better than today's versions. Shooting Times in particular is a ghost of its former self, with G&A close on its heels.

I subscribed to American Handgunner until just a few years ago, and I still consider it one of the best shooting magazines available. I finally dropped it simply because it was so repetitive.

Rifle and Handloader were very good, but in my opinion that was almost entirely because of John Barsness and Ross Seyfried. As much as I enjoy Barsness, he isn't enough to make up for Scovill, so when Seyfried left I dropped both subscriptions. I actually consider Seyfried in the same class as Keith and Skeeter in that he is tremendously experienced and knowledgeable and can also be an entertaining writer. He is not for everyone, but is one of the few men who seems to write the truth as he sees it and has the experience to back it up. That may be why apparently no one will hire him to write about guns any more.
 
Last edited:
I am a regular subscriber to several publications but I wouldn’t consider them valuable information. They are purely for entertainment. When I was in gunsmithing school they referred to gun magazines as comic books. I now know why. It seems like magazines these days don’t run an article because its the best gun to feature. Rather its because they bought advertising. You have to take what they say with a grain of salt.
 
I do not subscribe to any gun magazines. I do not care about the ads. I do not care about shoot the bad guy stories. I do care about in-depth presentation of information written by experts on the article topic. Have rarely seen the latter in gun magazines. I do better with in depth Internet searches when I can find multiple experienced based opinions on a single topic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mec
I have two main beefs with gun rags: One is that they repeat old myths and pass them off as truth. "Well, everybody knows that....I've been reading that forever so it must be true..."

A classic example of this, and a more recent myth, is that 7.62X25 Tokarev ammo is loaded to higher pressures than the 7.62 Mauser and should never be fired in the latter. This myth has been repeated by many writers including Mike Venturino. Just the opposite is true. When the Russians copied the German round (they are good at that and claiming it was their idea in the first place) they loaded the 85 gr. bullet to just under 1400 FPS. The Germans loaded the same bullet in the Mauser to 1575 FPS. { source; Small Arms of the World by Smith and Smith } As I have said many times, show me a box of 7.62X25 ammo with a warning not to shoot it in a C-96. Another classic example of an old myth that has been around forever is that an Astro 400 can chamber and fire any 9mm round from .380 on up. The Largo and Styer rounds are somewhat interchangeable but the 9X19 and the .380 often will not feed or chamber in a 400.

And my second beef is this: A lot of newer writers know how to write slick, entertaining articles, which is exactly what the publisher wants.....but upon reading them it is obvious the author doesn't know manure from toothpaste about the gun itself.

Read an article once about the Browning Hi-Power...."Which was John Browning's greatest achievement!" Uhhhhhh.....not!!!

Read an article a few years back in one of the newer mags ( which has since folded ) about subguns. Not semi-auto civilian models but the real thing. He described the magazine capacities for each model, and added "Plus one in the chamber." Really would like to see him demonstrate that one as most submachineguns fire from the open bolt.

Oh, well..... Nobody is forced to subscribe or buy any of the gun mags and good old free market capitalism will decide which ones survive.
 
I get American Rifleman with my NRA membership. I may or may not read it. Muzzle Blasts (from the NMLRA) has improved dramatically in the last few years, it's worth reading.

Most of the magazines...well, they do the same review of the same guns over and over again. Big deal. I subscribed to American Handgunner for a while, realized that the articles consisted of "Gunsmith A's Custom 1911", "Knifemaker Y's Custom Tactical Folders", and once in a while an article of actual interest...and gave up.
 
whughett said:
Time has dulled the memory, was it Skeeter that often worked family into his conversational articles in a humorous way.
Click to expand...
No. Generally left them unmentioned except maybe Bart in the later years. He NEVER talked about his wife.
 
tark said:
I have two main beefs with gun rags: One is that they repeat old myths and pass them off as truth. "Well, everybody knows that....I've been reading that forever so it must be true..."

Another ignoro-myth found its way into handloading manuals half a century ago ( andis still there.) The notion that the 38 special was introduced in 1902 with the /smith and wesson M&P of that year. Actually it was introduced in 1899 in the Smith and Wesson first Model M&P of that year. This is verified by Roy Jinks in a provenance letter regarding an M&P that was shipped to the Bekart gun on December 20, 1900 (see):
lettersml.jpg

The major Elmer Keith -channeling SIXGUN Writer still insists on the 1902 date. Same thing with loading and shooting Percussion Revolvers- the Articles have to fit a certain template that has been around for fifty or more years and not ideal from any standpoint of reliable function.
Until fairly recently ( and Maybe still) any discussion of 45 acp DA revolvers dredge up the old " Poor Man's MAGNUM!!! loads lifted from 1950-60s pulp-zines where various cast bullets were loaded over heavy charges of Unique or 2400 until the polite " boom!" tuned into a super sonic "CRAACKKK!!!" signaling that the Model1917 Colt or Smith or the 1955 target had arrived at Magnuminity. These made it into the Speer Loading Manual #3 of 1959 and stayed there through Number 8 foundly remembered as the "Blow-Up" Manual. in a Shooting Times of 1973 " Me N' Joe" finally admitted that the cylinder of one colt he had treated to those load abruptly came apart in the hands of a new owner. Same writer inspired Smith and Wesson to Drop the J-frame 32 H&R Magnum when they saw the loads he was recommending.
More recently a modern gun writer Channeled Elmer Keith in a manner that may or may not have blown up a few .44 specials. He printed 10 Grains of Unique under the 250-gr SWC Keith Bullet instead of the Stout 7.5 grain load beloved of Keith and Skelton.
Caveat Lector
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I would consider a gun magazine subscription, but only if I had some way of selecting what I’ll receive. I don’t need yet more random magazines for guns I don’t own.

As for gun knowledge, periodicals are the last place I would look for that. A book that was published long enough ago to have received some critique and hopefully at least a 2nd edition is good, 1st hand experience is better, and if neither of those is possible I prefer sources that allow for public dialogue so the crazier opinions can get shouted down immediately rather than 7+months later in a letter to the editor that may never get printed.
 
Before the www. became ubiquitous, the magazines were the only way to keep track of anti-gun activity. It was easy enough to learn when the Democrats were humping a new law-massive press/media coverage and polls that predicted passage -usually by a 2/3 majority.. "Entertainment" programing- particularly on series about to be cancelled, trotted out episodes about " Saturday! Night! Specials!" and gun mayhem in general. Then.... on the rare occasion legislation passed one or both houses of Congress- a massive Victory Dance in the media the next day.

When a law Didn't pass- Dead Air-nothing. You could assume that the measure had failed but to be sure you had to wait past the two month lede time of the American Rifleman or one of the other magazines. Generally, the predicted margin. heald up. The measures failed by the same 2/3 majority the media had predicted. for passage.
 
I don't have any subscriptions.
I've found very good technical information on the forums. Other things like assembly and disassembly tips and guides are useful on YouTube.
I probably would subscribe if it would help my job, for example if I worked at a gun shop. To keep up with developments in the industry.
 
I used to get about a dozen gun mags but I'm now down to American Handgunner and Combat Handguns. These two were always the best of the bunch!
 
I get American Rifleman as part of my Life Membership.
Recently subscribed to Backwoodsman. Received their sister magazine - Self Reliance.
No gun article in this magazine.
 
I'm down to two subscriptions.

I get the American Rifleman and the Front Sight from USPSA.

I only get them because I'm a life member of each organization and rarely read much of either magazine.
 
In the 1960s and 1970s, I read about all of them. I like most of them: found out about guns I had never seen, technical articles about using firearms, loading ammunition, history of firearms, nifty pictures of really fancy arms and some humor. I appreciated the writers. Most already mentioned, Keith, Cooper, Skelton, Jordan, and others. Jon Sundra and Jan Libourel had some knowledge and talent as well. Most of them are dead.

I did slack off between the 1980s and 2000. Magazines altered into 'new gun' reviews, actually advertisements disguised as reviews and testing. Most about the newest iteration of the same old - even though made by different companies - pistol holding more shots - wild shots shot into the atmosphere rapidly - suited more for 'combat' competition that has little or nothing to do with actual self defense.

So now, I regularly buy and read "Rifle" and "Handloader" as they seem to have actual information. And a couple writers with some ability to think and talk about experiences and lessons learned. And humor, at times.

I get American Rifleman as well. Probably don't read much of it. I remember when AR had scholarly articles regarding theories of how ammunition worked on game animals.

I do have a decent library, including some works of Elmer Keith, "Jeff" Cooper, No Second Place Winner by Bill Jordan, Secrets of Double Action Shooting by Bob Nichols and some writings of large dangerous game hunters, old and current. Not to mention the annual updates of Cartridges of the World, several reloading manuals and works on collecting in general and specific. And a bunch of Gun Digests.

I used to read Shotgun News, but then the internet struck and most advertisers moved. Or died.

I'm old, it happens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mec
That is a very DECENT library. Much better that a few of the current slate of Gurus who alternate between endless , repetitive self= promoting autobiography and channeling Elmer Keith and " Skeeter."
 
I subscribe to Shooting Illustrated because it comes with my NRA membership. I like it because it has pics, features and specs on the new pistol offerings. If I see one that meets my fancy...I'll read upon it and put one in my hand when I visit my LGS the next time. It also offers the latest news from the Gun Grabber front and proposed legislation. It includes insightful articles on conceal carry drills and tactics that I find interesting....and a smattering of articles on guns of old and their history. I keep a stack in the john for my reading pleasure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mec
1942bull said:
I do not care about the ads.
Click to expand...
I've noticed a trend in ads in gun magazines. They tend to portray gun owners/users as what I would call "ruffians." Unshaven, unwashed, vaguely threatening. Maybe this is meant to underline a "macho" image that would appeal to the Walter Mitty type of fantasist gun buyer. But it sure looks bad to the mainstream viewer. This is not helping the broader cause of gun rights.
 
AlexanderA said:
I've noticed a trend in ads in gun magazines. They tend to portray gun owners/users as what I would call "ruffians." Unshaven, unwashed, vaguely threatening. Maybe this is meant to underline a "macho" image that would appeal to the Walter Mitty type of fantasist gun buyer. But it sure looks bad to the mainstream viewer. This is not helping the broader cause of gun rights.
Click to expand...

I think that is true and a good observation on your part. I consider myself an average gun owner who carries for SD. I am going out in an hour to buy a new car. I will be wearing trousers with an untucked polo shirt. My LCP 2 will be IWB and my extra mag will be in my pocket. That is a far cry from the depiction you cite
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Racinbob
  • Locked
Magazine subscription
Replies
5
Views
617
Robert
Robert
C
  • Locked
Good gun magazine
2
Replies
33
Views
1K
BENELLIMONTE
B
G
  • Locked
I know this has been asked before but....
Replies
12
Views
719
franconialocal
franconialocal
R
  • Locked
Which is the better subscription magazine?
Replies
9
Views
706
RaymondMillbrae
R
zaitcev
  • Locked
Glossy magazine for DIY guns
Replies
0
Views
414
zaitcev
zaitcev
Back
Top