Gun Tests Magazine

[johnny blaze]

I recently received a letter about Gun Tests magazine. The letter looked good, and the information supplied said that they are non biased when it comes to testing the various guns. It gave examples of several different guns that were tested, and compared them.
I was wondering if anyone out there knows anything about this magazine, or is actually subscribed to this magazine.
I am looking for feedback either negative or positive.
Thanks

 

[vynx]

Do a search, lots of posts on gun test magazine.

They take no advertising. I have subscribed twice in my lifetime and may subscribe again.

I don't always agree with their comparisons - like comparing a kel-tec 9mm to a Beretta 92 and a HK ? Not really similar types for all 3.

If you have the money its worth reading.

 

[repsychler]

People seem to love them or hate them. There are many threads already on the subject.
I have subscribed in the past and may subscribe again one day. I have some issues with their methodology, but on the whole I like it.

 

[go_bang]

I was subscribed to this magazine some years back. I liked it a lot. While they do appear to be as unbiased as possible, they are a bit limited in the extent of the reviews that they do. Because they actually buy the guns they test, their test sample is pretty small. If they buy a gun that ends up having problems, but the problems are not a representation of the overall reputation of the gun, it can end up working against their recommendation.

Outside of that I couldn't complain.

 

[Hawk]

I've been getting it for years and intend to continue.

There's no advertising which is good. They're not terribly consistent which drives some people wild.

However, although ratings can sometimes seem arbitrary they do a good job of explaining why something was rated the way it was. What's important to them may not be important to you or vice-versa.

 

[Shann]

I'm new here, but I've been an off and on subscriber to Gun Tests for years and years. They call it like they see it and don't say that every gun is great, like most of the magazines. They aren't perfect of course. They could use better editing and they offer a fairly limited number of reviews.

Probably my favorite gun magazine by a large margin. I like reading about guns, if I want to read about hunting in New Mexico, I'll read hunting magazine.

 

[Oohrah]

I have taken this mag about four times over the years. Overpriced
with too few tests. Only on occasion do they test weapons that I
would consider. I do think they tell it the way it is with no glossing.
Didn't throw any away and on occasion go back articles tested when
asked by friends how items are rated. It's been a few years now since
I have been a subscriber.

 

[Bobhwry]

I like their stated independece from gun manufacturers, but too many of their tests are comparing apples to oranges.

 

[Stevie-Ray]

Is this a Peterson publication? I used to read a Handgun Tests a great many moons ago. It also used no ads and seemed to be pretty unbiased. Though I remember them preaching the superiority of the 9mm over the .45 ACP when the military canned the 1911 and adopted the M9. Of course I thought they were a bit thick about that, but overall they were pretty broad articles about all our favorite handguns.

I probably still have the back issues upstairs.

 

[Dysfunctional Individual]

The reviews are detailed and useful, but the testers seem to purchase only one sample and extrapolate. If something happens to be wrong with their particular gun, they give it a bad grade, even though it might be just that one.

 

[johnny blaze]

Thanks for all the replys. Sounds like mentioned above, you either like it or not.
I think that I wll subscribe to it for one year, just to test it out. I have gotten pretty tired of some of the worthless articles in alot of the other magazines, and the ratings on alot of the manufacturers that may or may not be true.
As mentioned above, they do not take advertising.

 

[greg531mi]

If they knew firearms, I would buy their mag. The trouble is the writers don't know much about guns.....Too bad, the mag could have been a great one for the industry.....They missed their chance when they hire writers and testers that don't know much about what they are testing........

 

[MechAg94]

Gun Tests thread seem to come around every month or two.

I get the mag. I like it. I see reviews on a lot of gun I wouldn't otherwise know anything about. Lately they haven't tested anything I am interested in, but I have past issues that have.

The ratings are biased to their personal tastes and prejudices. The good thing is that either in the rating or in the body of the article, you can see what or why they rated a gun good or bad and make your own decision.

 

[TimboKhan]

I have my issues with gun tests, although I am a subscriber. The pro side is that they aren't afraid to say something sucks if it does. The con side is that I have never quite got a bead on thier grading system. In my view, they can be a little harsh in regards to minor issues. For example, in the last issue they gave the Taurus 1911 a D, because the front sight was off center and the mags were squirrely. Both are irritatating to be sure, but neither is a rare problem with any manufacturer, and both are easily cured. If it were me grading the guns, and it obviously isn't, that would be a C, or even a B with an asterisk or something.

 

[MikeFF]

I subscribe, they do a good job and tell it like THEY see it.They try to cover a broad range of firearms.But still as always I try to make my purchases on as much research as I can find.

 

[mattw]

I have been a subscriber for about a year. I like the fact that they review new guns all the time and never seem to reprint material. I like the fact that they give detailed dimensions and prices on each weapon they review. I do not like the fact that they seem to let their emotions determine wether or not they give a gun a good grade.

Read the magazine and ignore the grade or rating they give, form your own opinions from the review article.

 

[Barr]

I am a subscriber to their magazine and like it pretty well. Generally, they are on the money with most issues and do raise some questions that sometimes I do not think about to ask or consider. There have been a few times when I have scratched my head and said "Huh?" but the independent view with no industry input is a refreshing change. I usually only find 2-3 of their articles interesting every month but they do cover a wide array of topics. I keep the last few years of issues (I got some from a buddy at work) in a notebook and refer back to them from time to time when I am considering a new gun purchase. Most decisions like buying a rifle from Ruger, Winchester, Savage, or Remington vs. some other import can be pretty easy to decide etc.

 

[michiganfan]

I enjoy reading the mag. Worth the money

 

[coltchris]

I have subscribed for several years, but recently let it expire. Not a bad magazine, but too expensive (probably due to no advertising) for the few reviews of guns I'm interested in.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Sadly, you can do just about as well via soliciting opinions from gun forums and get the same sort of inconsistencies in reporting, similar tester bias, and similar tester qualifications and as a result, have information that is of the same quality as you get in GT.

Aside from the inconsistencies are the numbers of blatant mistakes made by the supposed experts of GT in their explanations and reporting on various firearms and features.

 

[Redneck with a 40]

I've been a subscriber for 2 years now and I like the magazine. To me, they are un-biased and to the point. If a gun sucks, they will flat out say it. I like their no holds barred writing style, tell it like it is.

 

[Nicolai]

I currently subscribe but am undecided on renewing and leaning towards not renewing.
Last issue went to a letter grading system (A to F) instead of their previous "Best Buy," "Our Pick," etc. The letter grading system makes more sense to me, except when they award plusses and minuses ("let's see, an A- gun is how much better than a B+ gun?").
Gun Tests is not afraid to give an "F" when earned (Alfa Steel's .357 Magnum 3541 "earned" an F in the Mar 2007 issue for malfunctions and failure to fire double action).
Mar 2007 issue had a test of three basic 1911 semiautos--I'd like to have seen a much wider sample and most (maybe all) of the issue devoted to the comparison.

 

[strambo]

I used to subscribe...I liked it. The fact that they only buy one gun doesn't bother me...how many would constitute a good enough sample? 10? 20? It would be cost prohibitive. Besides, they buy a gun off the rack...the gun rags get a sample sent to them from the manufacturer. Big difference there.

Yeah, their methodologies aren't always the best, but as others said, the explain exactly why they give each rating so you can decide for yourself.

 

[camacho]

They sent me a trial issue, ask them for one and find for yourself before subscribing. I did not care much for it and did not subscribe, however some folks like it.

 

[beaucoup ammo]

I like the concept. The reason I'm allowing my 2 year subscription to lapse is this: As a subscriber to the magazine I firmly believe you should have total access to past articles on their web site. A subscriber is charged $7.50 to see a past article! Non - subscribers $10.

Sorry, that's where they lost me.