Gun Rags; Useful or Useless?

Gun Magazines waddya think?

  • Yes I find them entertaining and informitive

    Votes: 81 58.7%

  • At least they make good bullet trap stuffin

    Votes: 57 41.3%
  • Total voters
    138
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

R.W.Dale

Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2005
Messages
11,648
Location
Northwest Arkansas
Hello I'd like to know what people thing about gun magazines in general. Do you read through em carefully or just toss em after finding out an issue is full of the same recycled 1911 stories.
 
I like them like I like car magazines, they are entertaining and its fun to read about stuff I can never afford. I take the "stats" witha grain of salt though.
 
More entertainment than information

I read them because it gives me something to read at work during lunch, but have to confess that I'd often sooner read something else. Firearms are a way of life and a hobby, but it's rather like going to a mechanic for an oil change and he tells you about the newest model rather than changing your oil.
 
I think when one first gets into shooting, for a year or two, they can provide very useful background information and reference material. After that, you start to notice that the "new" articles about "new" guns sound suspiciously like the older articles in your back issues, and it doesn't take long to figure out that their main raison d'être is to sell you guns you don't need to replace or augment your already-perfectly-good existing arsenal. Around about that time, you stop buying them...

Of course, Internet resources like THR have radically changed the picture in the past decade or so. Prior to that, you didn't have a universal forum like this to ask questions, search for previous threads, etc. Now, with this depth of information available, I find the printed magazines to be largely redundant.

I'm getting more and more to the curmudgeonly stage where I realize that I can take all the deer I want with a good ol' .30-30, helped out at longer ranges by a good ol' .308. I don't need anything more than that for 90%+ of my rifle work. All the new Magnums and SSM's and whiz-bangs in the world won't make my hunting any more efficient or more fun than it is right now, despite all the magazine writers say about them. Works for me! :D
 
Keep in mind most shooters/hunters/whatever needs can be ment with a handful of cartiages and guns.

With the right bullet and good aim you can hunt any game in the world with 7x57 mauser.

With HP a 9x19 or .38 SPL will be fine for SD against two legged preditors.

.22 LR does well for plinking and taking small game.

Majorty of people needs would be meet with only three or four guns.

-Bill
 
i remember going one year to an inuit village in alaska. they had all sorts of pelts in their houses and stores. since I knew i would never be able to legally hunt such animals (indian priviledges), i wanted to know all about how it was done.

the woman shrugged and laughed when I asked what caliber, what kind, what distance...

"all the animals that we hunted in this room were shot with a .22 caliber rifle," she said sweetly. "and i don't know i've ever really had to use a scope... it's just important to make sure that the bullet hits the head."

bear in mind that in that room were foxes, seals, otters, birds, etc...

previously, small game to me meant "squirrels".
 
whm1974 said:
Keep in mind most shooters/hunters/whatever needs can be ment with a handful of cartiages and guns.
Click to expand...

Funny how that works out. Seems like you have to go through a few rifles and a few handguns though, before it becomes clear.

Lately I've been eyeing a .243 or 6mm BR to fill the void between .223 and .264...

:)

Mike
 
I like "Rifle" and "Handloader" and I also like "Shotgun News." But I've found the big press mags and most of the "Tactical" mags to be less than useful. I have issues of "Handloader" marked up and tagged in my reloading box, which is as high a praise as I know of.

I also pick up vintage collections of old gun mag articles from back in the days of Keith and O'Conner. In those days they weren't afraid to trash an advertiser's product if it was garbage. Now it's all about selling advertising space and keeping the real customers happy. We're just marks for the fleecing.

Of course, even the best mags are really just the work of a very small number of gun writers who can't know everything there is to know. The good gun forums simply have a greater wealth of information than any magazine can ever have.
 
Every chance that I get, I'm reading them. And I work in a bookstore......so whenever there is no customers in there I'm reading them then.
 
Some good, some bad, some just ok.

I skip the articles that don't interest me and if that ends up being too much of the magazine I cancel my subscription. I don't take as many as I used to...
 
I like Shotgun News. They seem to focus on surplus stuff and more "affordable" guns in general. Plus you get all the new ads for the surplus dealers. Guns and Ammo shows more of the high end stuff IMHO. But it is goot to keep up on all the newest toys. Special Weapons For Military and Police is another one that I enjoy.
 
The purpose of of gun magazines, like the purpose for T.V. or radio, is not to entertain. The purpose is to sell advertisements. That is the primary "purpose" for the magazines to exist.

That being said, most gun manufacturers do not want the consumer to understand a few facts.

1) Virtually all that needs to be done with a gun, CAN be done with a few calibers (within each class of firearm, i.e., shotgun, centerfire rifle, pistol and revolver, rimfire). New calibers, new guns, with VERY FEW EXCEPTIONS fill a nonexistent void.

2) Since the average gun, with good maintainance, will last as long as its owner, reasons need to be created for the purchase of another gun. I know, I know, we all like to own as many as we can support...like women or cars...but the many "new developments" are superfluous, with few exceptions. I find the tendency to try and replace knowledge and skill with some sort of technology amusing. It is a common theme. It runs throughout the culture in many areas and could be the subject of a future thread.

3) Many "gun experts" are nothing of the kind. I used to watch the way they hold a gun, or use (or not use) a sling. That tells me a lot. There are exceptions.

I recently purchased a rather large quantity of old (1960-1980) gun magazines from a used bookstore that purchased them from an estate. The writing was superior in the past, especially from the readership, as in "letters to the editor" and the like. Fewer blanket assertions were made and a higher degree of knowledge of the readership was inferred by the subject matter and nature of the writing. But that is to be expected, as today we are living in the Age of Mediocrity.

The previous posts about being useful for the first year or so was a good point. Generally about that time you garner enough information to understand the nature of the magazine's game.

And by the way, most articles have already been written before, though perhaps by someone else, in some other time.
 
handloader and rifle used to be wonderful, now only mildly useful.

Varmint hunter is written for the most part by the readers, it is pretty cool.

precision shooting and accurate rifle were good too!

sometimes AHG is ok but too many Tactical articles. tactical cleaning kits, tactical knives that are impossible to use afford or sharpen.
nice gun porn

guns and ammo, shooting times, gun world, anything with layne simpson in it worthless
 
Lots of useful entertainmant value, and occasional helpful ideas or thoughts. The tests seem to be a bit more bla-bla.
 
All are good for gun porn to one degree or another.

I find SWAT informative tho not authoritative, and Shotgun News and Gun List useful for the classifieds.

Spot on to those who point out that unlike books or the Internet, all magazines exist to sell ad space. Some few manage to transcend this, but that is their base purpose none the less.
 
I buy the mag's to look at the pictures; gun porn is fun. I believe it was the last issue of American Handgunner that had some very alluring pic's of Ed Brown's wares. The tests are also fun to look at so long as we keep in mind that they are only testing one example and our mileage not only may vary, it most likely will vary. Last Saturday, at a Kimber dealer, I dry fired 2 new Gold Matches. Even though their serial numbers were only 14 numbers apart, the later numbered one had the newest extractor and an excellent trigger, while the lower numbered example had an older MIM extractor and a fairly creepy trigger. If a magazine writer had tested only the higher numbered one, I believe the numbers would have been better than the other way around. Bottom line for me is that I rely on my own observations and the recommendations of folks whose opinions I trust when it comes to actually spending my money. All that being said, I still enjoy reading about our favorite subject and will continue to line my bird cage with it.
Steve
 
Pretty pictures but they always talk about how great guns or ammo are because they get how much money from these companies? They give rave reviews for almost everything that gets in there magazine.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top