New Low in Gun Reviews

[Radjxf]

Guess I'll have to check out SWAT. Not terribly interested in tactico** stuff, but anything has to be better than the others out there. G&A and Handguns are truly horrid. Sweeney spends more time talking about "power factor" than anything pertinent about the gun. Writers shooting lousy groups at 10-15 yds and proclaiming a gun to have "good combat accuracy"! Half the mags are Springfield and Kimber ads
Chuck Norris and Superman couldn't fix these gun rags.
I like Stephen Camp's articles, everything else I'll have to pass on.

 

[sholling]

1) Install trigger $51.25
2) Tune trigger $98.00
3) Straight 8 night sights $122.80
4) Install sights $57.00
5) Install Ed Brown Ambi thumb safety $153.25
6) Magwell/grips/installation $309.00
Total custom work: $791.30
Total for completed pistol: $1723.30

Admittedly I'm coming into this discussion late but this has to be one of the silliest posts/discussions I've seen in a while. First the idea that gun rags can be counted on for a serious review was debunked long ago. This discussion adds nothing to it. Gun magazines are fine entertainment and as long as you take the reviews with a grain of salt. Some of the better ones actually have some very useful information. Siting with box of salt in hand I still enjoy reading the better ones. Especially American Handgunner.

Now that we have gotten that out of the way the OP's quibbles about the writer's decision to customize a fine pistol are petty at best. First off $900 for a 1911 if this quality is a fair street price. The S&W isn't a RIA or a Charles Daly it's one of the better 1911s right out of the box. The author's choice to 'have it his way' is his choice. That's one of the joys of having a 1911. The stock trigger is one of the best I've felt on box stock 1911. If the author has a preference for a different trigger and that custom trigger needs to be tuned it just reflects his tastes. It's the same with the sights. Personally I detest Heinie sights but if that's what the author likes, well it's his money. I hate ambi safeties, but I'm right handed. Is the OP griping about the author being a lefty? Is there something wrong with adding a mag well for competition? That's what they are used for. Is the OP angry that all SW1911s don't come with a mag well or is the OP angry that the author likes extended mag wells? Or is the OP offended that the author shares his pride in his custom build-up? Or is the OP angry because the author bought a 1911 over a Glock/Taurus/Sig or whatever his pet choice is?

The bottom line is that some people are happy driving a box stock Toyota. Something sensible. Well good for them. Others like buying a perfectly fun Corvette and sending it off to Lingenfelter for a little custom work.

 

[Hokkmike]

That is the problem with most magazines. Runners' World shows you Olympic runners' training schedules. Guitar Magazine shows you licks from the superstars, and in a gun magazine some pro acts like it is no big deal to pop $900 into a pistol then add tons of money to modify it! They are not REAL WORLD!

 

[LeibstandarteAdH]

shotgun news and small arms review are about it

 

[obxned]

The author spent almost as much to 'fix' his pistol as a darn fine, accurate, reliable pistol would cost brand-new.

 

[George Hill]

Thanks for the Concealed Carry Magaizne plug... considering I write gun reviews for them.
If you think I shill for the manufactures, read my article on the HK P2000, CZ-100, and the upcoming Charter Arms reviews. (Charter Arms is going to FREAK!) Then tell me I pander for advertising dollars.
And SWAT Magazine? Those guys know their craft and they know who reads their rag... they are not going to pander and risk the lives of their subscribers.
Suggestions that they do, or I do, is flat out insulting. I refuse to be a shill... Tim knows that, and my readers do to.

 

[innerpiece]

geez, yall are taking magazines too seriously imo....

shoot the friggin gun for yerself, and share YOUR opinion... not too many smart folks shop or review the gunmags with any wieght anyway...

really what do reviews matter... that person is NOT you, NOT the pistol yer holding, NOT of the same skill level, likely NOT testing in the conditions you would..
not to mention, many writers are just that.... writers... Not many of them have fired a weapon in combat, or even defence of them selves.... but they certainly have have their comments on weapons suitable for SD and combat huh.....

then, recently born, are the writers that will insult anything that isnt "perfect" in their eyes.... because they are afraid too much compliment of anything in question, will render them a mere "shill"..... better to be a hardass, than a softass eh...

I havent bought a gun mag since Issue#31 of conceald carry 2006... while it was actually topic oriented (cant say that for most mags) the reviews were weak, I was dissapointed... I was hoping to see information not yet published.... couple things were great... but it was still just a gun mag, as they all are imo....

magazines are for advertisement and making a profit off of advertisement.... just so folks know. nothing new, nothing changed.


best way to judge something is to experience it.
atleaset, thats what makes sence to me anyway...

ip.

 

[George Hill]

"not too many smart folks shop or review the gunmags with any wieght anyway..."

You would be suprised. Don't dis magazines so easily. They can be a credible source of news and opinion if you read them with the understanding that you are reading more of an editorial piece than journalism.

But my heavens most of them bore me to tears. Few articles keep me all the way through. If I read another Charles Petty Ammo Report Review when I want to know about the gun - I'm cancelling subscriptions. That man needs to step away from the machine rest.

 

[Mad Magyar]

If I read another Charles Petty Ammo Report Review when I want to know about the gun - I'm cancelling subscriptions.

+1 Thank you....He's a fine example of the "Peter Principle"...

 

[2ndamd]

I have seen certain writers write the actual review before.

Dennis Prisbey reported the Speer Golddot ammo problem with the CZ P01.....CZ fixed it. And I do not think he liked the Judge that well.

There is a guy from Kansas that writes and has other people shoot the gun and he reports their initial impressions too. So it is not just him. He wrote about a Ruger P95 having the safety fall off during shooting. He did note that Rugers are usually very reliable though. (sorry to forget his name at the moment. He is not too good of a shot though )

So I have seen some writers report the woes and the highlights. But I feel the phrase "must have" in this example is an exaggeration. And I think that is many posters point. I am sure we all agree we have read an article and seen the writer exaggerate just a tad. Right?

 

[Cosmoline]

geez, yall are taking magazines too seriously imo....

I'd be more inclined to agree with you if my copy of Elmer's old gun notes wasn't among my most frequently thumbed books. Everything from load information to suggestions for iron sight styles. And there was nothing "slick" about any of it. That's what gun writing should be. That's what it used to be.

 

[Landlocked Pirate]

Actually, Duane Thomas is one of my favorite writers. His article in GUN WORLD a couple of years ago about choosing the Glock 34 for concealed carry was very informative and useful, to me at least, and it helped pursuade me to finally buy a Glock, which I'm glad I did (Glock 17). Another memorable article by Duane was titled "Why Your 1911 Won't Work" (http://outlands.tripod.com/armory/1911.htm) which I thought was extremely useful and the kind of article you don't often see. Thanks, Duane.

 

[romma]

i hate gun mags b/c they never seem to tell the gritty parts about pistols, just as long as they get one w/ their name engraved on it they say it's great. i did like one of the back pages of american handgunner though which said basically the same thing

I buy them because I like to look at the pictures... LOL

 

[romma]

That is the problem with most magazines. Runners' World shows you Olympic runners' training schedules

Runners World will have 50 or so different training schedules that conflict each other in every edition...

Every article or schedule seems to explain why their model is the best. Pretty funny stuff.

 

[innerpiece]

george, yer right, I was a bit "in general" with my comment.

Csomoline. I understand. I too have a book I refrence for factual info. however, it is not one of the more common mag's I was referring to, nor is yers.

Peace, ip.

 

[Tecolote]

Quote:
This breaks the record for the oldest thread resurrected, not once but twice.
um, three times (so far).
__________________

The necromancy continues.