UpperAtmosphere
Member
Let us not forget about Gun Tests giving the Remington R51 a glowing review and an A rating.
No more Sig ads in Guns & Ammo?
- Thread starter Redcoat3340
- Start date
- Status
I stopped reading gun and car mags years ago. With both you get inconstant reviews. With car mags you had unattainable 0-60 and 1/4 mile times in the mags that had HUGE advertisements right next to the review. Basically one mag would say a 1/4 mile in 10.9 and another saying we could barely hit the 12's. A second+ is a huge difference.
With gun mags you would get these glowing reviews of guns that the LGS hated. "We sold X-amount, more then half had to go back for warranty work and we have a bunch of ticked off customers". Being that everyone in my family is a member of the NRA, we get American Rifleman, American Hunter and America's First Freedom every month. Basically there is always something to read in the bathroom and it has crossed my mind that our mail person probably thinks "pyscho house" but my household hasn't had a piece of mail missing in years.
I personally like American Rifleman. One of the reasons why and recently was Novembers issue, it was a review of ammo and not even a gun. I had heard and read nothing but bad things about the HST .380 for micro pistols. The "technical" article at first looked like it was going say this .380 round could shoot down a Apache helicopter but after a rather long article for a specific round, it agreed with the common perception that it was a marketing ploy backed by expansion tests and actual chrono tests from a 2.75" barrel that didn't even come close to what Federal advertised. A truthful article to me based on what others had said and written.
I find that the best source for gun reviews is actually YouTube. You will get a vast variety of different people firing different guns and loads. A new gun is like a new car in a way, it might rely on the name brand and be a jam-o-matic. It might be a brand you personally cant stand and be a great gun for your needs. I find the gun reviews on YouTube to be surprising amusing and you get many points of view. Plus if everyone has problems with a certain gun and they have videos of it constantly jamming or it just being a POS then you know there is an issue. The R51 is a perfect example of that. Unless you have to be the first one to own a gun that just came to market, wait a few months and there will be at least 5 reviews on YouTube.
Welcome to the Digital Age.
With gun mags you would get these glowing reviews of guns that the LGS hated. "We sold X-amount, more then half had to go back for warranty work and we have a bunch of ticked off customers". Being that everyone in my family is a member of the NRA, we get American Rifleman, American Hunter and America's First Freedom every month. Basically there is always something to read in the bathroom and it has crossed my mind that our mail person probably thinks "pyscho house" but my household hasn't had a piece of mail missing in years.
I personally like American Rifleman. One of the reasons why and recently was Novembers issue, it was a review of ammo and not even a gun. I had heard and read nothing but bad things about the HST .380 for micro pistols. The "technical" article at first looked like it was going say this .380 round could shoot down a Apache helicopter but after a rather long article for a specific round, it agreed with the common perception that it was a marketing ploy backed by expansion tests and actual chrono tests from a 2.75" barrel that didn't even come close to what Federal advertised. A truthful article to me based on what others had said and written.
I find that the best source for gun reviews is actually YouTube. You will get a vast variety of different people firing different guns and loads. A new gun is like a new car in a way, it might rely on the name brand and be a jam-o-matic. It might be a brand you personally cant stand and be a great gun for your needs. I find the gun reviews on YouTube to be surprising amusing and you get many points of view. Plus if everyone has problems with a certain gun and they have videos of it constantly jamming or it just being a POS then you know there is an issue. The R51 is a perfect example of that. Unless you have to be the first one to own a gun that just came to market, wait a few months and there will be at least 5 reviews on YouTube.
Welcome to the Digital Age.
larryh1108
Member
It is really hard for anyone to evaluate a pistol line with a sample of one. All they can do is evaluate the one they are given and I've read on these forums of guys sending guns back because they had issues and they did not want to evaluate them.
The only method is by shooters like us actually buying them and using them in big numbers. 1 gun in a run of turds could be wonderful when a writer gets that good one and he'll look foolish when the line is called back (see Remington 51). Also, a wonderful line can be trashed if a writer gets a lemon and he publishes it even though time proves it is a great line. Anyone who takes a sample of 1 to heart is foolish, IMO. Forums like these are the best place to find out about a new gun on the market but it also means that we are the beta testers, not the R&D department. If a line is truly crap it will be exposed soon enough by the masses. A single review is worth the paper it's printed on.
The only method is by shooters like us actually buying them and using them in big numbers. 1 gun in a run of turds could be wonderful when a writer gets that good one and he'll look foolish when the line is called back (see Remington 51). Also, a wonderful line can be trashed if a writer gets a lemon and he publishes it even though time proves it is a great line. Anyone who takes a sample of 1 to heart is foolish, IMO. Forums like these are the best place to find out about a new gun on the market but it also means that we are the beta testers, not the R&D department. If a line is truly crap it will be exposed soon enough by the masses. A single review is worth the paper it's printed on.
Plan2Live
Member
Disclaimer: I have not driven down to Barnes & Noble and settled into a comfy chair and read the article in question.
But from what I have read in this thread, let me see if I understand the gist of it.
A writer I know nothing about writes an editorial comparing a used example an out of production pistol purchased at a deeply discounted price that the average person could not easily go out and duplicate if they had a mind to, to a brand new in the box example of a new offering from the same manufacturer that happens to wear a similar name badge. After shooting the two cousins from a similar lineage and analyzing their inards the writer concludes that the used example purchased at a deeply discounted, unlikely to be readily duplicated price is the better bargain and bemoans the fact that the internals from the new pistol that acknowledges a manufacturing change right in its proper name aren’t interchangeable with the vintage model. Am I in the ballpark? And he gets paid for this?
I am reminded of an old adage that “knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing not to put it in your fruit salad”.
It seems obvious to me that comparing a vintage P225 and a newly released P225-A1 is an apples and oranges comparison. As for the “value” judgment, I am reminded of another adage which says “if you have to ask the price” well you know the rest of that one.
But it does seem odd to me that a knowledgeable writer (knows tomatoes are fruit) in an era of $800 - $1,500 Compact 1911 carry guns with questionable reliability would dump on an $1,100 all metal carry gun from a family of thoroughbreds simply because of its price. I must go read this publication, if I can do so free of charge since value seems to be the word of the day.
Disclaimer #2: No I don't own a P225-A1.
But from what I have read in this thread, let me see if I understand the gist of it.
A writer I know nothing about writes an editorial comparing a used example an out of production pistol purchased at a deeply discounted price that the average person could not easily go out and duplicate if they had a mind to, to a brand new in the box example of a new offering from the same manufacturer that happens to wear a similar name badge. After shooting the two cousins from a similar lineage and analyzing their inards the writer concludes that the used example purchased at a deeply discounted, unlikely to be readily duplicated price is the better bargain and bemoans the fact that the internals from the new pistol that acknowledges a manufacturing change right in its proper name aren’t interchangeable with the vintage model. Am I in the ballpark? And he gets paid for this?
I am reminded of an old adage that “knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing not to put it in your fruit salad”.
It seems obvious to me that comparing a vintage P225 and a newly released P225-A1 is an apples and oranges comparison. As for the “value” judgment, I am reminded of another adage which says “if you have to ask the price” well you know the rest of that one.
But it does seem odd to me that a knowledgeable writer (knows tomatoes are fruit) in an era of $800 - $1,500 Compact 1911 carry guns with questionable reliability would dump on an $1,100 all metal carry gun from a family of thoroughbreds simply because of its price. I must go read this publication, if I can do so free of charge since value seems to be the word of the day.
Disclaimer #2: No I don't own a P225-A1.
jdmb03
Member
I'm not really seeing the $1,200 price tag on the Legion. It's a dressed up classic SIG.
- Status
