gun tests magazine

Status
Not open for further replies.
I took the magazine for three years, in the mid-90s.
I thought it was fairly interesting the way they compared
similar guns, "head to head". I didn't always agree, but I enjoyed
the read.
Since then, I have read that some of the "reviews" were
somewhat 'slanted'. I don't know about that, but I stopped
taking the magazine because I thought it was too expensive.

Walter
 
I subscribed in the past, stopped because the reports were about 80% handguns and I am a longarm type.
I have decided to get a ccw permit, so I have subscribed again , looking for a good, reliable ,sl at the least cost, not the cheapest sl available.
I believe they are honest and actually purchase the pieces they test, rather than the kiss a-- , send me something for free and I shall give it a great review, slick paper pi-- rags.
 
A friend loaned me all his issues dating back from 2001, and I enjoyed them. I am not primarily a handgun shooter so their style of reviewing almost all handguns made it something I didn't have to have.
 
I'm a subscriber, but I won't renew. Their reviews are too subjective. F'rinstance, they recently rated a Marlin 1894 .44 Mag a "Don't Buy" because it was (oh, the horror!) more expensive than the Winchester Model 94 Trapper. The firearm functioned perfectly, but they rated it a "don't buy."

A little further back, they rated a Glock a "Buy It" even though it had a defective trigger safety which rendered the gun dangerous! Their rationale for not rating it "Don't Buy" was because they could fix the problem with a knife and little sandpaper.

Give me a break! :rolleyes:
 
Was a subscriber in the 90"s.
They don't know what they are doing. It's a lot better to get The High Roader opinion on guns. They know what they are talking about.
With their own writing, Gun Test reconmended guns that jammed! How can you do that???
Then, a gun with a gritty finger pull, works every time, they don't?????
Or, they don't like the finish, or it's less polished than the jamaholic....they don't make sense.
Don't trust their opinion, get ours on here.
 
No ads, but they must make a ton of money because the magazine is pretty small and all reviews are done by two or three staffers.

I used to subscribe, but it was a rare occasion when they reviewed a gun which interested me. I agree with the previous poster who said there is more accurate information available here and elsewhere on the net.
 
I cannot remember any fancy colored paper gun rag which had a negative review -of anything: guns, ammo, anything. Is it a coincidence that a paid advertisement for the same product is on the page next to the review? That being said, I value Gun Tests as a source of less biased information. Do I always agree with their recomandations? Not always, but they tell me why they choose that particular rating, and it's up to me to make a decision. I believe they do a good job of covering all types of guns (hand, long, for children, shot, etc), and cover stuff like ammo and binoculars.
 
I've been an off and on subscriber for a few years. Right now, Off. The thing that puts me off with them is some of the nitpicky things they mention and "Don't Buy" recomendation of guns I know to be better than their tests indicate. Many times I just flat disagree with their opinions. Sure, any manufacturer's gun can have problems but often the small problems can be solved with a little common sense by the owner.
 
I've been a subscriber for a few years and plan on continuing. It's probably not the best choice if you get emotionally involved with your guns. I've noticed a lack of consistency with allowing "second chances".

As a previous poster noted, the Glock got a "bye" with a defective trigger safety but a Blaser R93 and Korth semi-auto got panned - one for a defective ejector, the other for function issues. Apparently because guns over 3,000.00 shouldn't have to fiddled with or returned under warrantee when brand new. I can't say I'm totally unsympathetic to the notion.

When they dump on something that has a cult following, it's fun to sit back and watch the food fight. When they had a Mak they liked not much happened; when they had a dog Makarov, and said so, the anguished cries from all over started. I think the total number of emails and letters crying foul exceeded actual circulation numbers but this is just conjecture. :D
 
I subscribed for several years. All stated above I agree with. I believe though they do their best to give you an honest opinion though subjective toward their method of thought. Think about it though, how good of a rating is there when you only review one mass produced item, be it a firearm or a car? For each their own I quit subscribing a couple years ago do to running out of subject matter and frankly disagreeing with there thought process.
Jim
 
Been a subscriber for about 2 yrs. You have to take it for what its worth. Its the opinion of a couple of guys that test guns according to their own standards. Its interesting and informative but certainly not something to make a decision on alone.
 
I've subscribed to it for years.........

I too don't always agree with their reviews, but do know how to take them with a grain of salt. Besides the reviews they give you a lot of factual comparative data that you don't always see elsewhere. I keep all my old copies, and when I get the itch to buy a handgun, I can generally go to my back copies and find related info. They do review much more than handguns, but they do dominate.

Gun-Tests do give more comprehensive data than most mfgers. They measure all dimensions, weights, trigger pull lengths and weights, etc.
 
Walter said:
I took the magazine for three years, in the mid-90s.
I thought it was fairly interesting the way they compared
similar guns, "head to head". I didn't always agree, but I enjoyed
the read.
Since then, I have read that some of the "reviews" were
somewhat 'slanted'. I don't know about that, but I stopped
taking the magazine because I thought it was too expensive.

Walter
Click to expand...

I tend to distrust any magazine like that if it has ads in it, because:

1. They depend on ad revenue from placed ads as primary profit.
2. A gunmaker is NOT going to place any more ads if a review says, even if true, that a gun they make is a piece of garbage.

So...there's no way that a magazine like that can ever be truly impartial.
 
rust collector said:
No ads, but they must make a ton of money because the magazine is pretty small and all reviews are done by two or three staffers.
Click to expand...

That, and it's printed in only black ink on cheap paper and it's an EXPENSIVE subscription.

I've always thought Combat Handguns was the most trustworthy and content rich.

.
 
I cancelled my subscription after the editor got snide with some of us that were supporting the S&W boycott. By the way, we were right and he was wrong. Because of the boycott we now have an AMERICAN owned S&W.
 
^--- aruguments with the editor is part of charm of the thing. They tend to actually answer.

One man's negative is another man's positive.
 
larry starling said:
I subscribe, In my opinion the magazine is usefull even though I dont allways agree with there reviews.....:D
Click to expand...
Dittos and it can help you decide if you are on the edge of yes/no on a particular purchase. They give no quarter on any gun tested this rag can be a very usefull tool. Just don't plan on it being a G&A or Shooting times type of mag.:D
 
Yes its subjective but I don't think its particularly biased. I find it a whole lot more informative and accurate than the regular gun rags.
 
They pride themselves on not being biased and yes more of a pamphlet than a magazine. Also an online component to it as well now.

Having said that, I've subscribed and dropped it a few times over the years - seems to me if you are not interested in one of the guns they are reviewing, the magazine becomes academic.

Another problem is they do the consumer reports approach which is subjectivly based on the stated criteria which may not be yours . . .

Long story short - worth the money? give it a shot for a year. Useful? . . . . . more entertaining than useful for my purposes.
 
IMHO you'll get much better info on THR and other sites. I enjoy Gun Tests, but mainly because I like all things GUN. I think the tests are usually way too subjective. It's a costy little rag too.
Regards,
SKIP
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top