Gun Test Publication

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Bruno2

Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2009
Messages
886
Location
Tulsa , Oklahoma
I don't know how many of you guys are familiar with Gun Test. Gun Test is the publication to get if you are looking for info on a gun you want to buy. Unlike any other magazine that does tests on the newer models . Gun Test goes to the store and buys their firearms right off the shelf like a consumer does. Almost all of the other magazines performing tests on new firearms will call the factory and tell them what they are doing and try to get a sample for free. So the factory (I am sure) will hand pick the gun and probably send it back down to the fit and finish dept to deburr and slick them up before shipping them to the aftermarket test facility. So the Gun Test method is the most accurate test if you want the low down on an unbiased opinion about a firearm and how it performs right out of the box.
 
It's a pretty good magazine, I subscribe to it. Many of their comments are subjective and tailored by personal preferences rather than objective perspectives that allow the reader to decide. I don't necessarily agree with all of the grades they give on various guns they test (I have expereinced different results myself on many occasions) but it really is the best resource for unbiased functional testing.

Dan
 
Perpetual topic of discussion, complete with errors.

GT does not always get their guns off the shelf, their writers frequently have incomprehensible reasons for rating "winners", their evaluation criteria may give the nod to one gun simply because the other had a cosmetic issue (or some similar minor reason such as price), and writers of other publications do not routinely get hand-picked samples from makers supplying them.

After trying two GT subscriptions over the years, I gave up.
Their findings and conclusions were not matching my own.

Buy if you want, just understand they're far from the final word, and I'd say the "Gun Test method" is absolutely not "the most accurate test". I noticed they didn't understand the purpose & use of several of the guns they were testing, and their observations reflected that. :)
Denis
 
the main thing is they do not take advertisements from gunmakers and no one else so they are not prostitutes like all gun writers
 
I gave 'em two honest tries, I freely admit don't know it all and like to keep up on things, but eventually decided it wasn't worth the money.

NEVER buy any gun based entirely on what ANY publication says about it.
In this case, you can easily end up unhappy with a GT "winner".

Denis
 
I have issues with the methodology used by Gun Tests as well as the alleged "expertise" of the staff. Some of my concerns are documented here: http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs4.htm

In addition, although I understand their rationale, simply testing one sample of a gun does not provide valid results from which to draw generalized conclusions. Each gun is an individual. Multiple samples provide more data about general fit, finish, performance and reliability.
 
Years ago, I got a trial copy of Gun Test in the mail. When I read their report on the Ruger Mk II which said the best group it would shoot at 25 yards, over a sandbag, was 3 inches, I decided it was nothing I wanted to subscribe to. My Mark II, with the right ammo, will shoot a 25-yard group you can cover with a quarter.
 
I'd much rather see a gun test overly critical of the product than they typical "review"
which is usually just another glowing review of a product sent to them for free from a company that pays them money to advertise in their publication/venture.
There are a few "review" sites that I have lost all respect for because of their statements like "totally reliable once you find its favorite ammo" and "once you fix a few issues its the perfect carry gun" and "after a break in period it ran great"
Those people want more free guns and more advertising dollars, not to give honest, truthful reviews.
 
I have issues with the methodology used by Gun Tests as well as the alleged "expertise" of the staff. Some of my concerns are documented here: http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs4.htm
Click to expand...

I have never read any of the articles regarding ammo. They may very well be out of their field of expertise there. However, they may be trying to hone the edge on that topic as well and just haven't gotten there yet.
 
In addition, although I understand their rationale, simply testing one sample of a gun does not provide valid results from which to draw generalized conclusions.
Click to expand...

I will have to disagree with you there Shawn. Just buying one to test is what a consumer does when they purchase. Most LGS's don't send you home with 5 and tell you to return the 4 that perform the worst. As far as the write up on the MKII went. Maybe that's all the gun they bought would shoot was a 3" group over a sandbag. That tells me that Ruger better tighten up their QC. Especially of yours shoot quite a bit better. My MKII gov target wont shoot a group like you are claiming. I bought a SS 10/22 that had the font sight pushed into the dovetail crooked. I couldn't figure out for about a yr why it wouldn't sight in. So IMO they do need to work on their QC.
 
In addition, although I understand their rationale, simply testing one sample of a gun does not provide valid results from which to draw generalized conclusions.
Click to expand...

I keep looking for the reviewers that test 100 units or more, each from different lots, but they never seem to do this. I don't know why.

On a more serious note, I don't know any reviewers (except the government) that test multiple units and report on their findings. As such, pretty much all reviews are therefore bogus.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Don't buy GT, or if you do, don't consider the validity of the reviews to be any better than the overly gracious slick gun mag reviews.
 
I subscribed in the past when I was more active buying and I liked the publication. It is the only honest one I found that was not just saying the same old re-canned story or talking it up because the advertisers just did a 1/2 million ad run.

As with any review, there is no guarantee that your gun will not be out of spec or lemon, but overall there review is not to tell you about the gun you may buy, but to tell about they gun they have. I was never disappointed in their honesty and accuracy.

When on line, you also get access to past reviews.
 
It's a good resource among others, being one of many. I feel that it is more objective than your usual firearm publication. The "letter" section is always interesting. My three current pubs are Gun tests, Shotgun news and American Handgunner. It covers the field of what I'm currently interested in.
 
Perpetual topic of discussion, complete with errors.

GT does not always get their guns off the shelf, their writers frequently have incomprehensible reasons for rating "winners", their evaluation criteria may give the nod to one gun simply because the other had a cosmetic issue (or some similar minor reason such as price), and writers of other publications do not routinely get hand-picked samples from makers supplying them.

After trying two GT subscriptions over the years, I gave up.
Their findings and conclusions were not matching my own.

Buy if you want, just understand they're far from the final word, and I'd say the "Gun Test method" is absolutely not "the most accurate test". I noticed they didn't understand the purpose & use of several of the guns they were testing, and their observations reflected that.
Denis
Click to expand...

I agree 100%!
 
and writers of other publications do not routinely get hand-picked samples from makers supplying them.
Click to expand...

Denis, I am interested in what other publications practice this. I feel like its a very important aspect of rating guns and would like to have other sources to gather opinions from.
 
It's not bad. However, they are often very subjective and biased in their views. Not a scientific analysis which I may be interested in paying for these days.

In the end, for me, I would rather go onto a forum like this and hear X number of people who have a firearm and have written their opinion. Much better sample size and means more to me than a testing of 1.

The net pretty much killed them for me.
 
Ohen, that's a good response! I do that too. You will run into people like for example die hard Glock people that just wont allow someone to point out their flaws. However, its like anything else I suppose, a person has to sift through the bias to get to the meaningful info.
 
Gun Test magazine is no different than any other gun magazine. The articles are the product of the author's preferences and 'pet peeves' and knowledge (or lack thereof) about the gun being evaluated.

Overall, I find Gun Test magazine to be a bit on the expensive side for the fact that it isn't all that much different from the other magazines that I can get for a lower yearly rate.
 
I will have to disagree with you there Shawn. Just buying one to test is what a consumer does when they purchase. Most LGS's don't send you home with 5 and tell you to return the 4 that perform the worst.
Click to expand...

This is a magazine that bills itself as the consumer reports for firearms. Generalized conclusions based on a single sample are invalid. Period. It's no different than performing an ordnance gelatin test of just a single cartridge and claiming the results represent generalized terminal performance for an entire lot of ammo. Better yet it's like firing a one shot "group" to measure accuracy.

As a consumer you purchase an individual firearm, with all it's individual quirks, defects, and whatnot. Some purchasers of the same gun will get a shooter, others will get average, and yet others will get a clunker. Which ONE did Gun Tests get and report about?

I believe the collective opinion of individual consumers who report their experiences on discussion boards like The High Road are of higher value and validity than Gun Tests magazine.
 
Generalized conclusions based on a single sample are invalid.
Click to expand...

When I purchase a gun I only buy one of a certain make and model. So why cant I expect the same performance from the same make and model? How does a bad one get out the door of they have good QC?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top