Why I don't read gun magazines

[ratcatcher55]

http://pistol-training.com/archives/2600

from an email sent by my good friend Baxter)

Instruction From The Editor To The Journalist: Frangible Arms just bought a four page color ad in our next issue. They sent us their latest offering, the CQB MK-V Tactical Destroyer. I told Fred to take it out to the range to test. He’ll have the data for you tomorrow.

Feedback From Technician Fred:

The pistol is a crude copy of the World War II Japanese Nambu type 14 pistol, except it’s made from unfinished zinc castings. The grips are pressed cardboard. The barrel is unrifled pipe. There are file marks all over the gun, inside and out.

Only 10 rounds of 8mm ammunition were supplied. Based on previous experience with a genuine Nambu, I set up a target two feet down range. I managed to cram four rounds in the magazine and one in the chamber. I taped the magazine in place, bolted the pistol into a machine rest, got behind a barricade, and pulled the trigger with 20 feet of 550 cord. I was unable to measure the trigger pull because my fish scale tops out at 32 pounds. On the third try, the pistol fired. From outline of the holes, I think the barrel, frame, magazine, trigger and recoil spring blew through the target. The remaining parts scattered over the landscape.

I sent the machine rest back to the factory to see if they can fix it, and we need to replace the shooting bench for the nice people who own the range. I’ll be off for the rest of the day. My ears are still ringing. I need a drink.

Article Produced By The Journalist:

The CQB MK-V Tactical Destroyer is arguably the deadliest pistol in the world. Based on a combat proven military design, but constructed almost entirely of space age alloy, it features a remarkable barrel design engineered to produce a cone of fire, a feature much valued by Special Forces world wide. The Destroyer shows clear evidence of extensive hand fitting. The weapon disassembles rapidly without tools. At a reasonable combat distance, I put five holes in the target faster than I would have thought possible. This is the pistol to have if you want to end a gunfight at all costs. The gun is a keeper, and I find myself unable to send it back.

[r_boyette]

Ha Sounds about right. I still buy the gun mags hoping there will be something new and interesting. With the exception of Barsness, Venturino, John Taffin, and maybe a couple more, I have lost any hope of someone writing about something original. Sometimes i stop halfway through the first paragraph, and try to decide if ive already read the artivle before. Just plug-in a different manufacturer, Model #, and caliber, and presto! Brand new, hot off the presses, revolutionary magazine article! This seems especially true with any magazine who's title contains the word "Tactical."

Read one article this week that i had hopes might be good. It was about "Precision LE Rifles on a Budget." The author bought a used M700 BDL 30-06 for $400. Then swapped the wood stock for an El Cheapo $110 synthetic rig. Stated that he decided to fore-go freeloating or glass bedding it b/c the process was "messy," then mounted a set of 2-piece steel bases and rings. Suggests adding a "decent, inexpensive tactical scope" such as a Leupold or Burris combined with an anti-cant device. In the end he touts that the test rifle added up to only a hair over $1200, "compared to the whopping $2500-$5,000 tarriff of a factory or custom-built precision rig. And that boys and girls is a deal in any language!"

I had to ask myself what the point of this article was??? The guy basically just advised LEO sharpshooters to go buy a used deer rifle, slap a cheap synthetic stock on it, screw on cheap mounts, a "tacti-cool scope" and they would have something to compare with a GAP(or any other custom precision rifle). Hell, i found 2 rifles just like what he described in the local gunshop for $450, and they already had synthetic stocks, basis, rings, and a 3-9x scope(albeit, not a tacti-cool model). Im sure they were fine deer rifles but precision LE rifles, eh?   

[ratcatcher55]

r_boyette,

I'm with you on that.

Hunting ragazines are just as bad.  Safari was an outstanding thing to read many years ago but now half the articles are about some comped trip paid for by US Blaster. The writer just explains how it's impossible to kill a pronghorn as dead as you can with the US Blaster 700 rifle in new .215 Ultra Blaster Midget round. 

Ive heard SWAT magazine did a fairly brutal review of the M-4 Shotgun that PO'd Benelli. That would be a rare thing to see these days.

[r_boyette]

r_boyette,

I'm with you on that.

Hunting ragazines are just as bad.  Safari was an outstanding thing to read many years ago but now half the articles are about some comped trip paid for by US Blaster. The writer just explains how it's impossible to kill a pronghorn as dead as you can with the US Blaster 700 rifle in new .215 Ultra Blaster Midget round. 

Ive heard SWAT magazine did a fairly brutal review of the M-4 Shotgun that PO'd Benelli. That would be a rare thing to see these days.

No doubt. I canceled all my hunting rag subscriptions a long time ago. Im glad someone is willing to ruffle a few feathers. I bought 4 gun magazines the other day and not one has so much as a "if i could change one thing about this gun it  would be____" paragraph. I know better than that. Ive never met a person yet that couldnt find at least one thing they would change about every gun they picked up. 99% of all reviews ive looked at in the last 5 years read more like a 3 page ad for the manufacturer

[twyacht]

American Rifleman comes with my NRA membership, it's fine. I also like to keep up with American Handgunner, and Combat Handguns.

Annual subscription is $9.99. Good to read, when in my office with the porcelain seat...

[Sponsor]

[philw]

same thing happens here 


it is all about the sponsors $$$

and it is not just firearms

[r_boyette]

American Rifleman comes with my NRA membership, it's fine. I also like to keep up with American Handgunner, and Combat Handguns.

Annual subscription is $9.99. Good to read, when in my office with the porcelain seat...

American Rifleman & American Handgunner are 2 of my favorites. Also like GUNS, Guns & Ammo, parts of Gun World and Guns of the Old West. At least i think thats the name of it. My memory ceases to function this late in the evening.

Does anyone know if the "Gun Tests" magazine is still being put out? It was a black & white paper cover magazine that would put similar make guns from different manufacturers in a head to head test. They didnt advertise for any manufacturer and gave some strong opinions. They tested reloading equipment too. I had a subscription to it in the mid-90's

[garand4life]

I went back through all my magazines looking at the first reviews of the M&P now that I've pretty much owned at least one of each of the major models reviewed (.45/.40/9 full size and 9 compact). And the only review I could stomach was by Massad Ayoob when he pointed out that there was mixed reviews from the pros in his circle because of certain design elements that were quickly replaced after launch due to end user complaints. Every other article I read was almost line for line the same as reviews of the Taurus 24/7 and Ruger SR9 (how's that for running the gamete?). All were "revolutionary", super accurate never failed in bench testing and so on. You know I've heard more people in gun shops be honest than these guys. Especially with the SR9c. Why can't a gun the same size as a Glock 27 and M&Pc get the same standard capacity? But in the magazines the hammer the, WOW you can hold 10 rounds of 9mm selling point. Not saying that it's a bad thing or that the SR9 is in any way subpar. But, when I hear at least a dozen people pose the same question and the reviewers all read the script handed to them by the manufacturer I get a little annoyed.
What about people who read these things to actually get buying advise. They would buy a piece of Ukrainian crap if these guys reviewed it like they do every gun that comes through their magazine. Sorry, I've been in the car for almost 10 hours today and after reading through the latest Guns & Ammo, Combat Handgunner, American Rifleman, and Handguns I am in the boat of never wanting to read one again. I think it's all a giant case of plagiarism that nobody is catching.

[kilopaparomeo]

I've gotten nearly all the magazines at one time or another.  I've only kept a few.

I get American Rifleman and Shooting Illustrated with my NRA membership.

I like Guns and American Handgunner.  They are irreverent, have excellent writers and will tell you if a gun is not great.

I like Small Arms Review...lots of FA stuff, obscure and historical articles.

Shotgun News still comes.  I have a love/hate relationship with it.

[TAB]

the car rags are the same thing.

Boat mags are even worse.(atleast they have ideas for improvments)