Wolfy
Member
I started receiving mail from these guys and wanted to know what you guys think of this publication.
Gun Test Magazine
- Thread starter Wolfy
- Start date
- Status
RON in PA
Member
Save your money. A bunch of guys using subscribers' money to buy guns that they shoot and report on. Not always objective, tests don't always make sense and they don't fire more than 200 rounds, not very many to make a judgement .
coldshot03/04
member
Save your money. You can get all of the info needed on just about any gun right here from real owners and real shooters. When they knocked the Makarov that did it for me I quit their sorry arses.
300lbGorilla
Member
I got two free issues. The second one kept referring to the Wilson KZ-45 Compact's 10-round magazine. I'm not sure if it was for the purpose of the test or if the writer can neither read nor count, but I sent them back their bill with the word "CANCEL" written on it.
WhoKnowsWho
Member
I remember a small blurb about a review of "cheap" guns. They had a Makarov that had a safety that fell out, so automatically, all were bad and should be stayed away from...
I get much more information from here, so no thanks for that.
I get much more information from here, so no thanks for that.
Rob96
Member
Bunch of yahoo's. Save your money and buy a new gun.
Fly320s
Member
(voice of dissent)
I like the magazine and I think they try to do a fair, unbiased report on the guns they review.
Instead of asking a gun company to send a sample gun to a well known gun magazine, these guys buy one off the rack. So, in theory, there shouldn't be a way for a gun company to get them to test a show piece. The idea is that the magazine is getting the same gun you or I would get from a local shop.
And sometimes the writers get a lemon. When that happens to a gun with a long history, such as the Makarov, the quality should be suspect. By now all the bugs should be out of the gun.
You will not find a truly unbiased report from anyone, anywhere. We are human and we let our emotions get in the way. But I think Gun Tests does a good a job as anyone else out there, this forum included,
I like the magazine and I think they try to do a fair, unbiased report on the guns they review.
Instead of asking a gun company to send a sample gun to a well known gun magazine, these guys buy one off the rack. So, in theory, there shouldn't be a way for a gun company to get them to test a show piece. The idea is that the magazine is getting the same gun you or I would get from a local shop.
And sometimes the writers get a lemon. When that happens to a gun with a long history, such as the Makarov, the quality should be suspect. By now all the bugs should be out of the gun.
You will not find a truly unbiased report from anyone, anywhere. We are human and we let our emotions get in the way. But I think Gun Tests does a good a job as anyone else out there, this forum included,
Dial911inVegas
Member
- Joined
- May 27, 2003
- Messages
- 10
I agree with Fly. I've taken their publication for almost 3 years now, and found it to be very helpful. But, "every rat to his own hug of cheese." You'll have to decide for yourself.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2002
- Messages
- 22,482
I think better info may be had from our members here. I subscribed once but allowed it to lapse. They're not a "consumer reports" with standardized testing and writers are all freelancers who submit articles. Nothing against freelancers but I do not believe you can get anything from them that you won't get from our members or our files.
Keith
Member
I agree with most of the complaints above, but... it's still about ten times better than any other magazine out there.
Look at a magazine like Guns & Ammo - they've never shot a gun that wasn't absolutely perfect, 100% reliable, accurate, etc, etc...
If you want to subscribe to a gun magazine, this is the one to get.
Keith
Look at a magazine like Guns & Ammo - they've never shot a gun that wasn't absolutely perfect, 100% reliable, accurate, etc, etc...
If you want to subscribe to a gun magazine, this is the one to get.
Keith
I have been a Gun Tests subscriber for a while....on and off, sometimes lapsing for a year or two.
I would say that many of the criticisms made in this thread are valid.
However, I keep subscribing, and here's why.
They will tell you the ugly truth about any gun while the glossy gun mags, which make all their money off advertising dollars, not subscriptions or news stand sales, won't.
C'mon....if Ruger's or Glock's or FN's newest product failed during testing by one of those glossy magazines, you'd never, ever hear about it in any truthful detail. If you read about it at all in one of the glossy gun mags, it would be heavily spun to minimize the ugly truth. Telling the ugly truth about a major manufacturer's product would jeopardize future advertising accounts with that company.
To Gun Test's credit, when they do a review which slams one gun, like the slam on Bulgarian Makarovs, they do print reader responses containing the opposing view.
All gun magazines are flawed. But I like my chances better with Gun Tests than most of the others.
hillbilly
I would say that many of the criticisms made in this thread are valid.
However, I keep subscribing, and here's why.
They will tell you the ugly truth about any gun while the glossy gun mags, which make all their money off advertising dollars, not subscriptions or news stand sales, won't.
C'mon....if Ruger's or Glock's or FN's newest product failed during testing by one of those glossy magazines, you'd never, ever hear about it in any truthful detail. If you read about it at all in one of the glossy gun mags, it would be heavily spun to minimize the ugly truth. Telling the ugly truth about a major manufacturer's product would jeopardize future advertising accounts with that company.
To Gun Test's credit, when they do a review which slams one gun, like the slam on Bulgarian Makarovs, they do print reader responses containing the opposing view.
All gun magazines are flawed. But I like my chances better with Gun Tests than most of the others.
hillbilly
Zip06
Member
I have been a subscriber for about six years. Its a good magazine; surely much better that the supermarket rags. That said, I am letting my subscription lapse. The reason is two-fold. First, the price of a subscription is getting way out of hand and second, the internet evaluations of guns on this and similar boards are much better.
Topgun
member
And....POOF....go some more jobs to the Internet..
as predicted. But.....that's another story for telling to our grandchildren who, clad in rags, sit at our knees and wonder how stupid we were.
BUT..............
Is this the same "Gun Tests" that was out in the late 70's and early 80's?
They didn't have subscriptions, but the format sounds familiar. They served a valid purpose testing ...off the shelf....guns and I pretty much found myself agreeing with their conclusions.
I still have those yellowed copies in my gun library. Interesting and fun. They had recipes for cooking looters in riots. Think that got em in some trouble.
I thought they finally died out.
as predicted. But.....that's another story for telling to our grandchildren who, clad in rags, sit at our knees and wonder how stupid we were.
BUT..............
Is this the same "Gun Tests" that was out in the late 70's and early 80's?
They didn't have subscriptions, but the format sounds familiar. They served a valid purpose testing ...off the shelf....guns and I pretty much found myself agreeing with their conclusions.
I still have those yellowed copies in my gun library. Interesting and fun. They had recipes for cooking looters in riots. Think that got em in some trouble.
I thought they finally died out.
Solinvictus70
Member
I agree about the major gun mags. I used to have a subscription, can't rememeber which, Guns and Ammo I think, and it was like the song "Home on the Range":never was heard a discouraging word.
Rangerover
Member
I subscribed to Gun Tests at one time as well, and, like others, allowed my subscription to expire because there really wasn't any information in it that I couldn't acquire online. That said, I must agree that they don't pull any punches when reviewing a particular firearm, and I found that refreshing.
They usually don't print typical gunrag nonsense like, "The Smith and Wesson Jamomatic was a little quirky out of the box, but after the standard 5,000 round break-in period, it worked flawlessly with two of the eighteen brands of ammunition used. Accuracy was more than adequate for a combat handgun, with our expert placing five of eight shots in a six inch circle at four yards. Ornate and expensive, the Jamomatic is solidly recommended."
No, they'll slam anything, regardless of manufacturer, so I got the impression they were at least attempting to report honestly, which is more than I can say for the slicker and more well-known publications. Of course one can't take what any publication prints as gospel, but I never got the impression they played favorites.
They usually don't print typical gunrag nonsense like, "The Smith and Wesson Jamomatic was a little quirky out of the box, but after the standard 5,000 round break-in period, it worked flawlessly with two of the eighteen brands of ammunition used. Accuracy was more than adequate for a combat handgun, with our expert placing five of eight shots in a six inch circle at four yards. Ornate and expensive, the Jamomatic is solidly recommended."
No, they'll slam anything, regardless of manufacturer, so I got the impression they were at least attempting to report honestly, which is more than I can say for the slicker and more well-known publications. Of course one can't take what any publication prints as gospel, but I never got the impression they played favorites.
Wouldn't it be cool if there were a live, national radio talk show about guns, where you could call in and voice your opinion -- good or bad -- about a particular gun or load?
Oh wait! <grin>
Kind of an "interactive gun magazine" where you can "write" your own "article."
Calls, kudos and complaints are welcome.
www.guntalk.com
Oh wait! <grin>
Kind of an "interactive gun magazine" where you can "write" your own "article."
Calls, kudos and complaints are welcome.
www.guntalk.com
El Tejon
Member
Shhhh, it's a big secret!
BUT..............
Is this the same "Gun Tests" that was out in the late 70's and early 80's?'
Topgun: That was Phil Engledrum's GunTests. Different outfit altogether. Phat Phill from Philladelphia was publishing some car mags when he saved up his bucks for a Smith 59. It jammed, It jammed on S&W (fiocci) ammunition. This made him very mad because it had been praised to high heaven in all the regular gun magazines. Phill decided to get even and started publishing his own magazine based on reviews of over the counter guns.
He may very well be the single biggest factor in the turn around in quality control that took place shortly there-after.
I don't remember frying looters but he did come in for a little bit of criticism when he massacreed a bunch of hogs trying to find a handgun/load with stopping power. It was graphic.
Is this the same "Gun Tests" that was out in the late 70's and early 80's?'
Topgun: That was Phil Engledrum's GunTests. Different outfit altogether. Phat Phill from Philladelphia was publishing some car mags when he saved up his bucks for a Smith 59. It jammed, It jammed on S&W (fiocci) ammunition. This made him very mad because it had been praised to high heaven in all the regular gun magazines. Phill decided to get even and started publishing his own magazine based on reviews of over the counter guns.
He may very well be the single biggest factor in the turn around in quality control that took place shortly there-after.
I don't remember frying looters but he did come in for a little bit of criticism when he massacreed a bunch of hogs trying to find a handgun/load with stopping power. It was graphic.
I subscribe. I think it is a decent magazine. I don't always agree with everything they say, but then I disagree with a lot of the stuff I read on here. That doesn't make it bad. But, I too am going to let my subscription lapse. I don't base any of my buying decisions on what they print. I have been around guns long enough to know what I want and it usually isn't the kind of stuff they cover. I don't really want to buy any new revolvers, I like the old ones. I have no interest at all in the latest autoloading pistols. The milsurps are already a very well known, tried and tested commoditity. I have all the hunting rifles I could ever use in eight lifetimes. So....... I don't get anything out of it that is useful to me.
Okiecruffler
Member
I stopped subscribing to Gun Test after they reviewed the Talon 9mm. The first pistol locked up on them, the second one lost it's load indicator. They declared it to be a fine weapon. You trying to tell me that someone wasn't getting some kind of kick back for that?
armabill
Member
I'm letting my subscription lapse due mainly to the cost. Also, they test guns lately that don't interest me at all. I'd rather that they test the latest/newest ones that come out.
Wolfy
Member
Hey thanks for the help still undecided but the main factor is that most people are saying this forum is just as useful.
Cosmoline
Member
I'd actually buy "Gun Tests" long before I bought ANY slick mainstream "combat handgun" or "weapons for law enforcement" or even "guns & ammo." The slick mags are complete garbage, and any reviews are bought and paid for by the industry. I do like "rifle" and "handloader," but more for their technical information than any reviews.
You simply cannot trust mainstream gun rags. Their goal in life is to SELL SELL SELL. Treat them as you would treat a car salesmen.
Could "Gun Tests" be better? Yes, of course. But the idea behind it is excellent.
You simply cannot trust mainstream gun rags. Their goal in life is to SELL SELL SELL. Treat them as you would treat a car salesmen.
Could "Gun Tests" be better? Yes, of course. But the idea behind it is excellent.
There are a lot of smart experienced folks on this board.....
Why don't some of us JUST START OUR OWN gun testing magazine, and address the problems many of us see with Gun Tests?
That way, we'd get paid to shoot guns and then write about shooting those guns.
Anyone else interested?
hillbilly
Why don't some of us JUST START OUR OWN gun testing magazine, and address the problems many of us see with Gun Tests?
That way, we'd get paid to shoot guns and then write about shooting those guns.
Anyone else interested?
hillbilly
seeker_two
Member
...and here's the first issue...
- Status
