Opinion wanted on gun magazine

[Muddflap]

I have tried using the Search function, but I'm not having much luck. I have read several threads discussing the value, or lack of value, of many of the gun magazines out there. Seems they are pretty much at the mercy of their advertisers, and don't want to irritate them. Therefore the articles might not be as accurate as they should be.
I got an ad for GUN TESTS in the mail yesterday. They claim to be honest in their evaluations. They do not accept test guns from manufactureres, they go to the store and buy one. They say they are not run by their advertisers.
Does anyone have any experience with them? I would really appreciate a good gun magazine, but would like one I could trust.

Thanks

 

[tipoc]

You can go to Gun Tests's website and judge for yourself. They have several articles there that are available to read.

tipoc

 

[esq_stu]

I have subscribed to Gun Test for 7-8 years.

What I appreciate is that the mag does not pull any punches. If it finds the test gun to be lousy, it will say it is lousy and why. It is not fluff to keep advertisers happy and free test samples coming.

Some findings are subjective. Others are very objective - number of failures, group sizes times in rapid fire, etc.

They take into account price. If a gun is very good but more expensive than others of similar ratings, they say so, and have down-rated guns for priciness. I respect that.

I have found some articles completely consistent with my own experience and others completely inconsistent. Often several guns get compared and in one article a certain gun comes out on top and in another, the same one is mediocre. If the gun is not reliable out of the box, the reader finds that out up front. If it's sometimes a simple fix, they fix it and continue with the test, and they tell you about it.

None of that bothers me, because I know each review or comparison is not a puff piece. I want to hear the bad as well as the good.

 

[ADKWOODSMAN]

I have suscribed off and on a few times.

I like the fact that they purchase and then do an eval.

However, with other gun mags. the write ups will contain handloads and factory load info. which I enjoy.

 

[DPris]

They do not always buy their test samples.
They do not always evaluate realistically.
They do not always understand the guns they review or how they're used.
Denis

 

[DENALI]

Good question, when reading those gunrags pay careful attention to there claims of ballistics, accuarcy, reliability workmanship ect... Gun tests at the least buy's there gun's or at least they claim too and if true thats a big deal as they pulling the sample from general circulation, just like you're gonna do if and when you buy! As to the ballistics and such, I've found that virtually every gunrag or there writer's are full of BS. They cater to the high end 1911 maker's and gunsmith's because IMO there'e a lot of money in that, I mean what can the high end gunsmith really do to a Glock except try and make it look and feel more like another 1911! I believe claims like 12,000 rounds between cleaning's without failure to be absolute BS. You know what I like about the gunrags? The photography...................

 

[Hawk]

I like Gun-Tests but they are certainly not for those with confirmation bias issues.

Also, I believe one is well served to read the body of an article rather than the (new) letter grade. What they dinged or liked a piece for may not have any relation to your priorities.

SWAT's reviews seem credible as well.

For reasons which escape my grasp a small minority of individuals seem to have their self-esteem tied to their choice of firearms or their notions of what's important in a firearm. Gun-Tests would be very poor choice for such.

 

[jwr_747]

I use to get that magazine,but as stated in an above post,they don't always understand the gun they are testing.once did a test on an AK type weapon that had the recoil spring cover not installed correctly,wouldn't test the gun,said it was defective from the maker.it takes 15 seconds to fix the cover problem.told me they didn't have a clue on the workings of that weapon.I got the impression they hand Bubba a gun and ammo and ask him what he thinks.also noticed that at different times,the same gun may get a good rating and later on get a bad rating. jwr

 

[Golddog]

The only gun magazine I'd get, if I could get just one. Honest, critical, tests a broad array of guns. They've been doing it a long time, so they know what they're doing.

 

[strat81]

If you do subscribe, save your issues. Subscribers get charged to read back articles on the website.

 

[possum]

i take everything that i read anywhere with a grain of salt. i like to try things for myself. if i do take the advise of someone, it is a very reputab;e and good source. if i read the opinions and evals of some then i would take what they would say and run with it. but there are few out there who's opinions i respect to that level.

 

[Joe Gunns]

I like the GUN TESTS, if they dont like a piece they say why. I don't always agree with their reasons for low-rating a piece, but they give you the info behind their choices and you can choose what is important based on your own experience.

I currently subscribe to RIFLE SHOOTER, HANDLOADER and UNDER WILD SKIES. The handgun mags are, by and large, too much into plastical for my taste.

 

[RPBrown]

I tried to subscribe to Gun Test. But, They charged my CC, never sent a magazine. After 3 months, no return calls or emails, I had the CC company reverse the charges. Then GT turned it over to a collection agency. I am not in the habit of paying for something I don't recieve.

A fluke? Maybe. But a return call or email would have been nice.

Therfore I cannot recommend Gun Test.

 

[Jim K]

I like Gun Tests and find that their results are generally in line with my experience. To me the argument that "they only test one gun" has no validity. I buy only one gun. If theirs is no good, how do I know mine will be better? I think a gun should WORK out of the box. Sure, I can probably fix it if it doesn't, but that is beside the point. If a maker can't produce guns that work without the attention of a gunsmith, that maker is no good. Period.

But testing guns is not the only thing in gun magazines. In any given magazine, I may find only one article I have real interest in, but others will have other choices. African safari stories turn me off, but I like stuff on old military firearms. Someone else may like gun tests or deer hunting articles.

Even stories that are obvious BS are worth reading if only to recognize crap when you see it. Still, I like to subscribe if only to show support for gun publications.

The American Rifleman, the oldest gun magazine, is much improved over what it was several years ago, but the quality of information is not what it used to be when they had really knowledgeable writers.

For collectors, the NRA Gun Collector (formerly Arms and the Man) and the Gun Report are good, the former being the better.

Jim

 

[SAWBONES]

I've subscribed to Gun Tests on and off over the years.
I've always let my subscription lapse after seeing how many guns they evaluate which are of no interest to me, and the relatively high cost of subscription, together with their apparent biases and their tendency to damn the many for sake of the one. (If they find fault with a test sample, their review often implies that all guns of that one type are deficient.)
I'd suggest subscribing for a year and forming your own conclusions.

 

[buzz_knox]

They do not accept test guns from manufactureres, they go to the store and buy one.

Take that with a grain of salt. Rohrbaugh outed them by publicly disclosing that Gun Tests received an R9 as a test gun. The same pistol was used in other articles for other magazines. The Gun Tests article didn't disclose this fact, so you have to wonder how many times they've concealed using test guns.

I also had a problem with their subcription service. I tried the free issue offer, and told them to cancel it. They threatened to send a collections service after me if I didn't pay for the subcription I'd refused.

The information isn't really any better than you get over the internet, and is just as subjective as most advice offered over a gun store counter.

 

[Rexster]

Some Gun Tests articles I have read seem amateurish, with irrelevant evaluation standards. Other articles have been really good. One thing to keep in mind with any gun magazine article evaluating a firearm, is that they are usually only writing up one test sample from each manufacturer. I give more weight to an article in which the information deals with large numbers of handguns over time, in an environment such as a shooting school, either a fixed location, or a traveling instructor, where many pistols have gone through the school, and gotten hot and dirty. Tom Givens, Mas Ayoob, and John Farnam are three such sources of information, but pay attention to the subject matter, and make sure the subject is multiple examples over time, not one test sample. Ultimately, the end line user must test his weapon with hundreds of round to verify reliability, anyway. Yesterday, a fellow officer's SIG P229 broke its extractor during his annual qual. I spoke to a range officer at the academy, where hundreds of cadets are trained in a year, and several thousand officers return to qual and train yearly, and he says no brand of pistol is immune to problems. He did indicate it is rare for a SIG to break a part like that. (We carry .40 S&W in SIGs, Glocks, various S&W autos, Berettas, XDs, plus a variety of "grandfathered" duty pistols chambered for .38 and 9mm up tp .45.)

 

[Rexster]

I did not mean to imply in my above post that the three writers mentioned write for Gun Tests. Maybe they do; maybe they don't; I have not seen a recent issue. The only handgun mag I still read regularly is American Handgunner. John Farnam has a website, and Tom Givens' school, Rangemaster, in Memphis, has a website.

 

[Muddflap]

Gun foruns are a great place to learn. You can ask about a specific model and type, and usually get lots of replies from some very knowledgeable people. I am learning to separate legitimate opinions from the BS. I don't pay much attention to the "Buy a *****", or the "I had one that was a peice of junk" replies. Folks that are interested, and willing to help usually have sound reasoning, they justify their opinions, and they are very willing to share.

Chances are, I'll skip the magazine, and just hang around gun forums.

Thanks for all the replies.