Bulgarian Makarov & Gun Tests Magazine review

[Akurat]

Wow..

My thoughts here are that they are basically kissing a$$ to the major manufacturers as always...in an indirect way. You see, a reliable, accurate compact pistol like the Makarov, selling for $125 is a hell of a steal...and that has to erk the hell out of the higher-price ranged gun mfg.

I've got a Circle 10 Bulgarian that has been flawless in every regard.

 

[Akurat]

I will never trust ANY of Gun Tests reviews. Besides flunking the Makarov, they also flunked the Saiga-12, the fine Russian Semi-Auto shotgun based on the Kalashnikov action. They said the reciever cover came off while firing. I thought that was off since anyone who is familiar with Kalashnikovs knows that the reciever cover isn't going anywhere unless you take it off yourself. I was curious and looked into it further, and even in their own picture on their own website you can tell the reciever cover isn't put on there properly. Looks like they never put the recoil spring assembly into it's "notch" in the reciever.

Heh, yup, thats pretty bad for supposed experts!!! Unbelieveable. :banghead:

 

[aircarver]

I found I often disagreed with their opinions of guns I knew about. And figured this reflected poorly on the quality of their opinions about guns I didn't know about.

The knocking of the Mak twice, and their crowing about it in their advertising literature was too much. I let my subscription lapse and never looked back at Gun Tests.

My experience is my three Maks have burned 2000 rounds between them without ever missing a beat, let alone having the problems they cite.

Your chance of being happy with a Mak is very high

 

[Shaughn Leayme]

I use to be a subscriber (a gift) and they were so far off and biased, I was wondering if they were in the employ of the North American Arms industry.

Frankly, they seem like a waste of time.

 

[denfoote]

Here's something to think about. They say that they accept no advertising, but SOMEBODY has to be forking out the bucks for the guns they test!!

 

[Jeff Timm]

Let me get this straight.

The reviewer at Gun Tests thinks a Walther PP series pistol is NOT a blowback action?

Jeff Timm
Who has fired several and owned one. None had a locking system, they were blow backs.

 

[David4516]

My Circle 10 bulgie Makarov has been 100% reliable. I'd guess I've put about 3000 rounds thur it, possibly more (I don't keep track of such things), and have NEVER had a jam or misfire of any kind. As far as dependablity goes, on a scale of 1 to 10, the Mak gets an 11...

To the best of my knowlage, my Dad's Russian Mak in .380 also has a perfect record.

It seems pretty clear to me that people who talk trash about the Mak don't know much about guns

 

[denfoote]

One more thing. In a later issue, they flunked my carry pistol: Kahr MK9!!!! They also did not appreciate my carry revolver: Taurus M605!!

Burn in , Gun Tests!!!

 

[Shweboner]

I got my Bulgarian Mak for $110 2 years ago, I have since put over 1000 rounds through it wtih absolutely no problems. All kinds of ammo even my reloads were great.

My one and only experience with the PA63 wasn't much to write home about, it felt like crap in my hand and it jammed, I didn't get through the magazine before I gave it back.

~Brian

 

[Curare]

"Here's something to think about. They say that they accept no advertising, but SOMEBODY has to be forking out the bucks for the guns they test!!" --denfoote

Ahh...probably the subscribers?

 

[Correia]

Love my Bulgie. It is now my Wife's CCW. She really likes it, and shoots it well.

How the heck can you get a Saiga receiver cover to fall off?

 

[BowStreetRunner]

i back up all the endorsements of Bulgy Maks...i just got one and it feels well put together, functioned 100% at the first range trip (where my inferior skills did not achieve much accuracy) and it was a great deal for 130 bucks plus transfer fee for my local FFL dealer
BSR

 

[matsaleh]

I own a Bulgarian Mak. Put 1000+ rounds through it of all makes, jhp and fmj. Only had 2 failures to feed on the first box, because the gun had never been fired and the feed ramp was a bit rough. No other problems, and after break in, it has been a fine gun. I am betting my life on it because it is my carry piece.

You could do a lot worse and pay 4x as much at the same time.

 

[denfoote]

Ahh...probably the subscribers?

Ok, let's look at this logically.
Every month, GT magazine goes out and buys at least several thousand dollars worth of guns "off the shelf". Substantially more, if they just happen to be reviewing the latest whizz-bang, got's-all-the-bells-and-whistles, what not, 1911 that one of the legion of custom gunsmiths or shops has put out.
In order for the subscribers, who put out, I believe, $50, there abouts, per year for this garbage to finance this monthly gun buying spree, they have to have a base the size of the known universe, expanding monthly, at least, at a geometric, if not exponential rate!!!!

No, somebody with a LOT of bucks is greasing this operation!!!!

 

[Walt Sherrill]

They used to sell the guns back to the shops where they bought them, and probably still do -- but also make them available, at a good price to subscribers. (You contact them and get your name put on the sale mailing list...)

I subscribed for years but have slowly become disenchanted with some of their opinions and their seeming lack of common sense. But that said, I've never doubted their integrity or intent.

 

[Bainx]

Here is yet another testimony for a Bulgarian.
When I can't manage to pack my Glock Model 30, its the Bulgarian that rides on my side.

Having owned one for 3 years now, I am still amazed at the quality of the gun you get for about $150!

You can buy a cheaper gun and you can buy a better gun but, you can not buy a cheaper, better handgun than the Mak!

 

[22luvr]

As a former subscriber to GUN TESTS mag......

They don't cut any gun any slack. Based on what they're given to test by the gun manufacturers, the recommendation to "BUY" or "DON'T BUY" or "CONDITIONAL BUY" are based on the performance of the normally single specimen they have in their possession.

Although I've never owned a MAK, I would tend to believe the folks who own them, rather than the arbitrary opinions regarding single test example by a gun magazine.

Wouldn't you?

 

[TooTaxed]

Gun Test Mag must have had damaged or mis-assembled guns (...twice????). Several of my friends have Maks, shoot them extensively with no problems. Actually, this is the first account I've heard of with MAK problems, except for one damaged magazine.

My first MAK years ago was a brand new Russian in 9-mm MAK, 10-round magazines, adjustable sights...after one trip to the range I was ready to trade it...unacceptable accuracy. Fortunately, a prominent gunsmith advised me to run several hundred rounds of cheap ammo through it to break it in before ditching it...and he was right! The gun settled down and became extremely accurate...2" groups at 25 yds even with those minimal sights...and is one of my favorate guns. I have about 1,500 rounds through it I've purchased a Bulgarian MAK for carry, and it too has been exceptionably reliable. The MAKs are simply a bargain for the money, and are getting scarce. Imported ammo is cheap if you attend gun shows, and I also hand load boxer-primed hulls such as S&B. Power is adequate, expecially with Gold Dot bullets.

Have also ordered a CZ-83 in 9-mm MAK for its large capacity. Though a larger gun, it should be a fine shooter.