Experts Everywhere!

[Action_Can_Do]

Has anyone ever noticed that if you ask someone on any firearms forum about gun magazines, they'll tell you not to believe anything the "so called experts" say? Has anyone noticed that gun magazine writers love to talk about "internet warriors" and their so called expertism? If I've learned anything it's that anyone who is an ex-marine must know what they are talking about. For instance, did anyone here know that the marines are going to be switching to a 20 round 38 special revolver? You can't get priceless info like that in a gun rag. So....in a hobby that has a lot of people with a lot of opinions, where are the experts? The real experts. Who do you trust? I read both forums and gun rags and I talk to anyone who claims to have any expertism on the subject. I have also recieved bad info from all three sources. So....I repeat my initial question. Where are the real experts? Do they really exist? Every field must have some experts right? Right?

 

[Satch]

Experts

Same thing happens when anything important, or if the Media people deem it important happens. They shove an expert or two in front of us on the tube to explain what, and why,and that they had written a book about this very thing years ago and you can get it at your local book store. Sound familiar?

 

[AndyC]

Expert - hmmm.

An "ex" is a has-been
A "spurt" is a drip under pressure

You may now happily rag on anyone who claims to be an "expert"

 

[Jorg Nysgerrig]

So....in a hobby that has a lot of people with a lot of opinions, where are the experts?

Online, for the most part, the latter have outlasted the patience of the former.

You see it on almost every messageboard out there. Some question gets asked. Person A, who has been doing said thing for 10 years and is damn good at it, repsonds with some personal insight. Person B, with little to no experience outside of seeing it on TV, refutes what the Person A said. Person C, seeing the same TV show, but having never actually done it, agrees with B and they pile on their collective knowledge about the exercise that has never been done. After this happens a few times, Person A doesn't bother to answer questions anymore.

A good chunk of really experienced folks have given up on sharing their knowledge the 'net due to the number keyboard commandos. This isn't unique to gun boards, either. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of knowledgable folks around. Just, as said below, it takes some knowledge to know who they are.


As far as magazine experts, well, whenever money is involved, perceptions become more flexible.

 

[FPrice]

So....I repeat my initial question. Where are the real experts? Do they really exist? Every field must have some experts right? Right?

Unfortunately you have to develop some level of expertise in order to figure out who the "real" experts are. I know that some people whom I consider to be experts are not considered as such by others. So be it.

But in general, someone who generally has a calm demeanor and does not insist that their way is the only way and all others are wrong and can also discuss different ways and analyze their strong/weak points are the ones who may qualify most as experts. But that is only a very general guide and not always accurate.

Sit, listen, question, learn.

 

[robert garner]

and then they went

and put Gunkid in prison,again!

 

[thexrayboy]

What constitutes an expert?

An expert is someone who has asked a specific question, formulated an experiment to test the question and recorded the outcome of that experiment to see if it proves or disproves what the question asked.

All others are merely offering an opinion.

 

[Don't Tread On Me]

In my opinion, most gun experts who write reviews in gun magazines have been discredited due to their blatant and obvious bias.


Remember, these magazines make money off of ads. Many of these ads are paid for by companies being reviewed. A firearm manufacturer isn't going to advertise in a magazine that just called their rifle inaccurate or their pistol a jam-o-matic.


I've probably bought less than 20 gun magazines in my life. That's a drop in the bucket compared to most gun owners. It only took me about that many to realize that the reviews and stories are pretty much cookie-cutter stories. Same format, same writing style, same "tests"...all fabrication and positive opinions.


Like anything in life, finding truth is difficult. You have to sort through the BS. Gun magazines are useful as gun porn, that's about it. The internet is the best thing going now. However, it can be as bad or WORSE than gun magazines due to people who hate certain brands, liars, exaggerators, or people with totally different point of views. Like one man's good accuracy is anothers poor accuracy. At least on the internet, there's usually not a profit-motive for a review.


I tend to take the advice of posts or articles on the internet from people who exhibit ideas and thoughts on things that I agree with in general. Although, I'm always open-minded.


For example - I'm not a gear-ho or tactical ninja wannabe, so I value the opinions of people who rave on about rails and gadets and whatnot much less. Likewise, If I'm looking for a decent rifle with decent accuracy (my opinion), I won't listen to the condemnations of what is an otherwise good rifle by folks who are of benchrest mentality that demand .3" groups. If I want reviews of a RUGGED and tough scope, I'm not going to listen to AR guys, I'll get advice from big-bore shooters who actually subject the scopes to recoil.

Here's an example. If you go to some AK forum and ask about optics, they'll find most sub $200 scopes to be perfectly fine. If you go to an AR forum, Aimpoints, EOtechs, Leupolds, ACOGs are all mid range. If you go to a "sniper" forum, if you're not spending $1,300 or more on optics of specific custom miltiary-grade - it's pure junk that isn't suitable for anything.


Most people have good information, but it helps to know WHERE THEY'RE COMING FROM.

 

[ezypikns]

For Shotguns.........

Ask Dave McCracken in the 'Shotgun' forum on 'The High Road'. Dave may not be infallible, but he's the closest thing to it. Also entertaining to boot.

 

[Justin]

Like anything in life, finding truth is difficult.

Truth is found on the range.

 

[SiG Lady]

Gleaning truth...

I now subscribe to just one gun publication (used to be three back in the days when I was a raw newbie--now I'm just a half-baked newbie), and my opinion is: Read between the lines. There are brief moments in some reviews when the writer may insert a remark that they had a little 'hiccup' with this or that on some handgun they were testing, and if the hiccup was CONSISTENT, then there may lie your kernel of truth, buried diplomatically in a paragraph about some OTHER set of qualities or performances. Or sometimes just a phrase here 'n there will set off alarm bells about what might be a less-than-desirable quality in a gun... maybe. No review is perfect. But look for consistencies and COMPARE remarks and reviews in both print and online sources. You'll find something solid sooner or later to base your OWN opinion on. But ultimately it IS your OWN opinion you're attempting to form from a series of focused research efforts on your part.

 

[SigfanUSAF]

I agree with SiGLady, It's easy to write an article favoring a product when the mfg is giving you huge discounts, or simply giving it to you to begin with.
Of all the firearms my dad reviewed for his books (yes, he gives the good, the bad, and the ugly), the only importer/manufacturer that would't send him guns were those Chinese 1887 and 1897 shotguns. Interesting

 

[redneck2]

I suppose everyone thinks their own ideas are always right. Of course they're wrong, except for me..

Anytime I see the "X is always better than Y" or "X is total junk", I pretty much tune out.

If a product is total "junk", it won't last in the marketplace. Also, what's adequate or acceptable for one person may be inferior or unacceptable to another.

Very few people have enough experience with any one product to make blanket statements. I have an AR that shoots beyond my wildest expectations. Others here have commented about some problems with this brand. Since it's the only one I've ever owned, my experience is 100%, but with only one in the sample mix, it's a shortsighted evaluation

I think the specialty publications tend to be more accurate than mainstream ones. Magazines like G&A, Field & Stream, etc. have to appeal to a wider base that I suspect is less knowledgable and sophisticated. For example, I doubt that many benchrest shooters refer to G&A.

When I subscribe to specialty publications, I expect something that mirrors my real world experience or plenty of research that proves otherwise.

 

[tubeshooter]

I haven't bought a magazine in a long time, but I will say that the one time a year they print a full list of all models commercially available with a few basic specs was useful when I was in the market for buying. I think it was G&A, I don't know if others do the same thing....


In the interest of not being a "keyboard commando" I try to stick to what I know if I try to answer a question online. There are plenty more experienced individuals around if it's over my head or I have never dealt with it. It's unfortunate when the truly knowledgeable stop posting, that really hurts a board whatever kind it is. So I try to do my part & no more.

 

[Hawk]

Doing research on the Web is like using a library assembled piecemeal by pack rats and vandalized nightly.
- Roger Ebert

Good question. Seems I'm reading more but believing it less, to paraphrase an old tobacco commercial.

I try to bear in mind that few things are binary. i.e. If expert "A" says they've never seen an issue with vendor XYZ's MIM parts and expert "B" says they're holding a boxfull of shattered XYZ produced MIM, they could both be right, and probably are.

 

[taliv]

Truth is found on the range.

that's pretty much the sum of it.

if you're not shooting, well, "de asini umbra desceptare"

 

[dakotasin]

i don't do latin, but i do know i believe everything i tell myself.

 

[taliv]

"arguing about the shadow of an ass"

 

[Brass Fetcher]

Experts are people with enough experience doing -one thing- that they are able to make the right decisions when faced with a -similar- thing, based upon their proficiency with the -one thing-. IE, a person used to shooting long distances across, say, a 1000 yard range, will not also be an expert at Arctic-area shooting, but would not be entirely out of place if they found themselves shooting those long distances in a new environment.

IE, I would weigh a persons opinion based upon the relevancy of their experience - not whether they get paid to do the tasks in question.

 

[Josh M.]

The problem with looking for an expert...

...is that only fools think that they know everything.

Wise people admit that they don't know everything.

So while the wise man answers your questions, he usually admits to not being an expert. And when fools answer your questions (out of modesty), they may, or may not claim to be experts.

He is a wise man who can tell the difference...especially when he himself is the man who is talking.

Keep the change - JM.

 

[akodo]

my biggest beef with most magazine writers is that while the may or may not be experts, the have chosen to NOT give expert advice in favor of giving flattering advice.

If a movie reviewer constantly gives 4-5 stars on a scale of 1-5, including real stinkers, it becomes obvious he is really just a promoter, not a reviewer. Hence even when he gives an oustanding movie a deserved 5 star rating, his ratings and position as a reviewer have been compromised.

American Rifleman Dopebag is one of the few 'gun reviews' that would really call crap crap, and I haven't seen them do that for a while.

I've noted that when most regular rags get ahold of crap, they point out the crappy bits taht won't really matter to most (the checkering looks like it was done by a gorilla!) and then gloss over the true problems, using the first crap exposure as a way to make it look like they are truely honest.

 

[XavierBreath]

An expert is one who many believe has a grasp on the truth on a subject. In reality, most experts are people who learn more and more about less and less. I don't want to be an expert.

There is no monopoly on truth by "experts". The internet is a threat to many of the self styled experts in the firearms world. The experiences of fifty gun owners on a Megablaster XP96 outweigh one gun writer's experience with the same Megablaster sent to him by a factory representative. Gun writers don't like that. Gunsmiths don't like that. Gun makers don't like it either. I blogged on this phenomena about a year ago.

Anyone can voice an opinion online. It is not the single opinion that rings truth. It is the combined similar experiences of customer after customer that provides an undeniable glimpse at the truth of a matter.

It is truth that I have always been interested in, not where it comes from, or who signs his name to it.

 

[Baba Louie]

Whereas I take everything I read on the internet as "gospel truth" , I find certain people worthy of reading, i.e. Stephen A. Camp, Dave McCracken, Mas Ayoob, Mike Venturino, John Taffin, Lawdog, Bart Skelton, Clint Smith, Pax, Tamara, Marko, XavierBreath, NightCrawler, Corriea, Rich Lucibella, Tom Gresham, etc.

Just as I enjoy certain photographers efforts, i.e., Ichiro, DHart & Oleg Volk come to mind immediately.

Some get paid for their services, others do it out of their love of the subject matter. Each is probably an expert in their own field, in their own way.

They're all probably better at what they do than I would be. I'm glad they're all available to speak their mind and let me judge what I feel to be relevant and/or worthy of intake.

One negative concerning gun magazines (printed variety) is the lead time and relevancy of timely material vis a vis political gun control issues... the one really big advantage the Gun Forums have over printed word.

My dear old Dad used ta say, "Believe half of what ya read, nothing ya hear and try to figure out what you actually saw really means".

 

[M.E.Eldridge]

I believe that firearms differ to much between makes and models for anyone to be a true firearms expert. Someone may have spent the last twenty years using and researching Glock pistols as a full time job and that may very well make him a Glock "expert", but that doesn't mean he knows anything about 1911s or SMLEs. So, he isn't a firearms expert he is a Glock expert.

When I read any gun related info, I do so for entertainment mostly and if the info has practical use as well then its just an added bonus.Obviouslythere are times when, if I really need to know something that might affect my future purchases, I ask questions regarding a certain firearm and am looking for serious practical info. If this is the case, I generally go to the source most in line with the info I want/need.

As an example if I want to know how much to pay for an SMLE made at Lithgow in 1941, I'm not going to go to a forum where people place value on rifles that are capable of .2MOA accuracy and look at a traditional battle rifle as cheap junk since it isn't capable of such feats. I'm going to go to a forum where the members have experience with and an appreciation for that SMLE.

Just my .02.....

 

[CornCod]

Experts

I like the gun magazines, but I read them with caution. I like some of the gun experts, even when sometimes I think they are extremely rigid. Jeff Cooper is a man whose editorial opinion I value, but I think the old gent would probably overlook new innovations in guns and ammunition because of his innate conservatism. To somebody like him the last weapons that had any utility were invented in 1903 and 1911! Still, he makes some good points and he is a thoughtful writer with a good command of the English language.

I guess the best policy is to read a broad range of reasonable opinions and make the best determination one can in the light of personal experience.