First Post in quite some time. Opinion Needed

[thehobbygunsmith]

Hi everyone,

I hope you're all doing well! It's been a while since I've posted, and I want to extend a sincere thank you for your patience and support. Life threw a few unexpected curveballs, but I'm back with exciting news!

I've just released my latest YouTube video on my channel The Hobby Gunsmith, and it's a special one – my First Product Review Video featuring the GuardTech Pro Universal Firearms Cleaning Kit.

In this video, I've given my honest point of view on their kit, sharing insights from a Gunsmith's perspective. I believe in providing unbiased opinions, and I'm curious to know if this is something you all would like to see more of! Should I continue putting out reviews on various products and equipment?

I know I've been away for a bit, but I'm back and committed to sharing new video content on my channel at least once a week. Your feedback means a lot to me, so please check out the video here and share your thoughts.

Thanks for your support!

https://youtu.be/Bv8UZV7Qhcw?si=BeXAr0nTLt1u4J6V

 

[LiveLife]

I believe in providing unbiased opinions, and I'm curious to know if this is something you all would like to see more of! Should I continue putting out reviews on various products and equipment?

Your feedback means a lot to me

< 50 posts and most are advertising Youtube channel >

Here's a feedback. How about doing unbiased product/equipment reviews on THR?

If I like the reviews, maybe I will check out your channel.

 

[LiveLife]

FYI - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...erly-polish-a-feed-ramp.830056/#post-10710337

Just so everyone is aware:

The OP posts on TFL under the name GorillaGunworks and started this thread over there with the same video. It drew a number of critical comments from a number of knowledgeable members on that board. Anyone interested in the subject might want to have a look at the thread on TFL.

From TFL mod Unclenick - https://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6546831&postcount=58

"The way to resolve the disagreement is to grab another barrel and do before and after chamber casts and measure them and see what you get. Measurements trump opinions about what does or does not appear to be happening. Such measurements would also make a dandy summary addition to a video."​

​

And from HiBC - https://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6546849&postcount=60

"Your ramp/chamber advice may well be destructive ... You are just flat wrong about the chamber. As Unclenick and I both said, unless you measure, your "It does not cut" is based on illusion."​

I honestly do not know where you are getting the misconception that doing this will ruin a barrel ... its ridiculous the rumors that go around from a simple task ... i am going to have to post a video with facts just to make a point on the subject.

i am going to take it upon myself to post a new video taking chamber casting measurements before and after on a new barrel just to prove a point.

An excellent idea. We'll look forward to your return here when you can post a link to that video.

Hobbygunsmith, has your process changed since you first posted a video about this back in December 2017? I can't see the old video anymore, but it was in this thread: https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/how-to-properly-polish-a-feed-ramp.830056/

Same Method Odd Job.

@Odd Job, here's the link to the video.

 

[LiveLife]

Also, you should test your own advice about oil deactivating primers sometime.

I will definitely put that on my list of videos to make for the future. "Will oil deactivate a primer" hahaha I assure you it will any sort of moisture in the primer renders it useless.

Ummm ... Actually not really - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/how-to-make-dummy-rounds.841778/#post-10930563

Primers are designed with moisture barrier/cups to seal out/resist humidity for years/decades. Color seen under the anvil is not the color of priming compound rather color of moisture barrier/cup to protect the priming compound. Think about harsh storage conditions of humid tropics to 100% humidity coastal climate where primers are designed to endure not just for civilian use but for military. Because of barriers used, it is very hard to deactivate primers.

 

[Varminterror]

What gunsmith did you hire to do the review?

 

[thehobbygunsmith]

< 50 posts and most are advertising Youtube channel >

Here's a feedback. How about doing unbiased product/equipment reviews on THR?

If I like the reviews, maybe I will check out your channel.

I have no problem with that my friend.

 

[thehobbygunsmith]

FYI - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...erly-polish-a-feed-ramp.830056/#post-10710337

From TFL mod Unclenick - https://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6546831&postcount=58

"The way to resolve the disagreement is to grab another barrel and do before and after chamber casts and measure them and see what you get. Measurements trump opinions about what does or does not appear to be happening. Such measurements would also make a dandy summary addition to a video."​

​

And from HiBC - https://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6546849&postcount=60

"Your ramp/chamber advice may well be destructive ... You are just flat wrong about the chamber. As Unclenick and I both said, unless you measure, your "It does not cut" is based on illusion."​

@Odd Job, here's the link to the video.

I remember that video, and I do plan on doing a follow up to the video for sure. I stopped making videos for a while because YT had given me strikes for my videos because they said some did not meet their community guiguidelines because It demonstrates how to modify etc. but I love doing the videos and I thought I’d start again.

 

[thehobbygunsmith]

What gunsmith did you hire to do the review?

I’m trying to figure out if it’s sarcasm or a real questio

 

[Varminterror]

I’m trying to figure out if it’s sarcasm or a real questio

I’ll clear it up for you - it was derisive.

 

[LiveLife]

I remember that video, and I do plan on doing a follow up to the video for sure.

What I got from the polishing of feed ramp/chamber threads is when other members challenged your claims, you promised to back up your claims with a follow up video with factual measurements but that did not happen.

Actually, TFL members were quite civil and polite compared to THR peanut gallery. I experienced similar with THR members challenging my testing methods with too many variables and not large enough sample size. They were correct and I was wrong. So I changed my methodology and started conducting "myth busting/confirming" threads focusing on single variable with measurable and repeatable data while increasing sample size.

So we ended up myth busting what factors effect digital scale zero drift to resolve Varget down to single kernel (And found depending on kernel length and angle of cut, weight of kernel can vary between .02 gr to .03 gr) and Promo down to single granule (And found depending on size of granule, weight can vary also by .01 gr) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ctric-scales-that-drift.924836/#post-12756145

And sample size was increased to "beyond reasonable doubt" levels to include extreme spread data points - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/seating-depth.925253/page-3#post-12767513

As beta/product tester for Lee Precision, when I notice something "wrong" with test samples, I immediately point it out to Calvin (my contact for Lee Precision) so problems/issues identified can be verified and resolved. So when I noticed improper machining of drop tube of their new Deluxe PPM to bridge powder granules with temporary tape fix for testing, I pointed it out and replacement drop tube was sent. Instead of 10 drops I used to do in years past, sample size was increased to 50 and after modifying the drop tube twice, 50 more drops were repeated subsequently - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ct-powder-measure.922834/page-3#post-12751870

There are circumstances when testing variables cannot be reduced down to one and I conduct "real world" testing threads like 22LR comparison at 50/100 yards. Once again, issue of sample size was considered and in full transparency, after shooting 30,000 rounds, I proceeded to capture every 5/10 shot groups during 10,000 round testing to current 47 brands/weights/lots of 22LR ammunition (While using reference Aguila groups at the start/during/end of group testing to show consistency of reference groups verify larger groups are due to ammunition and not rifle/scope) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...nition-comparison.908102/page-2#post-12733155

So yes, I was wrong about my testing methodology and sample size before but took the "pointing out/criticism" of THR members as valuable learning points and improved my testing methodology and increased sample size to beyond sufficient to their satisfaction and agreement.

In your case, your claim of polishing feed ramp and chamber was "OK" when it was not. And when TFL and THR members challenged your claim, you responded that you would do a follow up video with measurements before and after the "polishing" and Unclenick suggested chamber casting. But proofing your work by chamber casting and doing a follow up video that showed before and after measurements did not happen when THR moderator @Odd Job asked if your method had changed and you replied, "Same Method".

We are all human and it's OK to make mistakes (Heck, my wife of 29 years point that out all the time and yes, I do listen so I don't make them anymore ). Your credibility would be much improved if you indeed did the chamber casting with follow up video showing, "Hey now, chamber did increase in size and TFL/THR members were correct in pointing that out".

Peace.

 

[Varminterror]

I was wrong about my testing methodology and sample size before but took the "pointing out/criticism" of THR members as valuable learning points and improved my testing methodology and increased sample size to beyond sufficient to their satisfaction and agreement.

In the research industry, this is called “the scrutiny of peer review.”

When a hypothesis is tested, results observed, and conclusions proposed, all four of the hypothesis, the test methodology, the result, and the conclusions must be validated by peer review. Valid test methods can produce measurable and repeatable results, even if the results don’t support the original hypothesis or even without meaningful conclusions.

But what has happened in all of the OP’s threads around the web which I have seen have been “I did this, and it’s great, watch my videos so I get paid for how great it is,” then when experts challenged that the processes were bad, the results not properly measured to support the conclusion, and that the conclusion is NOT great, with these peers referencing known and proven science and proposing test methodologies which are proven to produce meaningful measures for the hypothesis being presented, the OP simply responds with, “I went to school so I know what I’m doing,” and he ignored all of the evidence and ignored known and proven science…

So in a thread including “opinions needed,” it’s my opinion that this dude is just as bad as a flat earther, he just hides it better in a different subject matter…

 

[Varminterror]

Another opinion: you offered an implied expert review of a product you have never used, and the conclusion you drew was that it is just like other kits and priced the same (which is a null hypothesis). In other words, 13:24 of meaningless cloud space wasted.