Gunwriters and gun magazines and their drivel

[Joe Boleo]

Are you good folks taken aback when a gunwriter praises a $3,000.00 rifle or $4,000.00 shotgun as being "reasonably priced" or within the budget of most hunters and shooters? I certainly could not and would not pay that amount for any rifle or shotgun.

I have reduced the number of gun magazines I buy for the same reason. When a publication names a "Gun of The Year" that costs as much as my used SUV, we part company. Once in a blue moon, a gun magazine may run a half-baked article on buying used guns. They focus on new guns.

I shop the used gun racks on a regular basis. When I find domething I like, I haggle with the gun shop. Usually, it is possible to get discounts if you are a frequent customer. Just the idle thoughts of an idle fellow. Take care...
Joe

[skeet]

I'm kinda with you Joe. I just may be a more idle fellow than you. I have some expensive guns but don't usually buy them new. I buy guns mostly used although i have just bought a Rem 700 Synthetic 243 for my wife. But new it was only 325 and has a 30 buck rebate. I also like the older guns because the quality I have always looked for seems to be in the older guns. Some of the new stuff in my usual price range is kinda junkie. Just my opinion.
As to the magazines they are printed to sell advertising, you know, so they have to promote the advertisers products. The way of the world. I kinda like Fur Fish and Game mag cause it is slanted towards us normal guys...or abby normal whichever way ya look at it!

[fabsroman]

This is why I refuse to buy any magazines and tend to go to chat boards instead for my hunting, fishing, and cycling information and questions.

Magazines get a lot of their money from advertisers and not from readers. They make more in advertising dollars than they do from magazine sales. So, when one of their adverisers wants them to do a review of one of their products, do you think the magazine is going to trash that product if it sucks? Nope, because they don't want to lose those advertisers.

Magazines are just a waste of money now that we have the Internet and the worldwide web. You can do tons of your own research without having to depend on biased authors. You can also look at products at the manufacturer's website instead of in the magazines.

[Adam Helmer]

Joe,

I agree with you that the majority of gun rags are a waste of time as the other posters lament.

Let us review the magazine scenario: First, a gun maker sends a "test" gun to a scribe who, in most cases, gets to keep it for his time and write up. Second, the gun maker has advertising copy in the magazine and is a "good client."

Third, It ALWAYS slays me when a scribe describes the "test" gun by saying, "The fit and finish were perfect." Walla, what does the scribe expect? Does he think the gun maker will just take "any old gun off the production line" for a test? NO!

If, and when, the gun tester goes to a gun shop and buys a manufacturer's product like we all do, then I will give some credibility to his gun test. But, the "HAND PICKED" specimen is not a real reflection of the product!

Adam

[fabsroman]

Good point Adam. Most of these writers for any magazine receive the test product straight from the manufacturer, and you can bet that the manufacturer goes over the test product with a fine tooth comb before sending it to the test writer.

[Brithunter]

Hmmm it seems that our gun magazines can be a little different here in the UK. One writer I can think of did an article on the .30-06 an handloads for it. The rifle was a BSA export model with roll over comb for teh US market not a new rifle but one he brought for the testing. I can vouch for that fact as I knew wher eit came from as I had looked it over myself but brought a BSA CF2 in 7x57 as it was like new and seemed unfired but for proof.

I took issue with some of the writers comments and so e-mailed the magazine and got a reply from him and an offer that I could buy the rifle off him for what he paid for it. I didn't follow up on that as I didn't need a 30-06 at that time. So at least some writers here do buy the test rifles however editors still will not allow bad press on test products. A writer I knew had his first artcle kicked back as it was too factual so that too happens .

[popplecop]

Alot of the writers receive their test firearms on a loan basis, with the option to purchase at a greatly reduced price. The firearm goes through a dealer so that the federal and state laws are met. This is what I have been told by 2 writers. Anyway I agree with you I'd rather see what actual users think of a firearm.

[multibeard]

Originally posted by skeet As to the magazines they are printed to sell advertising, you know, so they have to promote the advertisers products. The way of the world. I kinda like Fur Fish and Game mag cause it is slanted towards us normal guys...or abby normal whichever way ya look at it! [/B]

The only magaizine I buy any more is FFG. It has been my #1 go to magazine for over 50 years. The rest of them are put out for the rich/elete hunters not the ordinary joe. Fact is I have almost all of the FFG magazines I have ever bought. Great resource material.

I never have paid more than $300 for any firearm I own. I buy my guns to use not to look good on the wall or to brag about how much it cost me. My $100 used Model 100 Winchester has served me well for almost 50 years. It looks like it has been around the world, which it might nave been for all the miles it rode on the sling on my shoulder.

I came out of the woods the other day from pat hunting. There were a couple guys sitting in a truck next to my trooper. The driver said " Don't see many old guns like that around any more."

He was talking about my Fox BST double 16. I thought what does he mean OLD. Then I realized I had gotten it for Christmas when I turned 14. That will be 50 years this Christmas. I guess it isn't just the gun that is geting old.

[skeet]

As I used to work(guiding) at Remington Farms occassionally I got to meet some of the writers of old. I also know quite a few of the Remington Reps...or did. Almost all the reps had firearm licenses so they could receive and transport guns to and from the factory. They would sell the guns to the writers for about 50% of cost if I remember right. Some of the writers just used the guns and gave 'em back. They were somewhat elitist in some ways. I doubt Ol Elmer Keith ever bought a gun from Remington as he liked the older guns. He really wasn't a bad shot on waterfowl. I even bought a few guns from a Remington Rep or two. Bought a really nice 1100 410 Skeet from a VP of Remington. Sight unseen too. Got the darn thing and opened the box and it had drop dead gorgeous D grade wood on it. He hadn't even opened the box. He tried to back out on the deal when he saw it...but it was too late!! Very seldom do the factories give a gun away. But the prices are giveaway prices. Shot at the World Skeet Shoot with a Remington Rep..We were both shooting 1100's. His died and I let him use mine. He ended up running a 100(I shot 98) using my gun. Gave me 3 cases of shells. He was somewhat embarrassed that his gun broke. But it happens to all kinds when ya shoot alot.

[denton]

There are many cases where your skepticism is well justified, and where I openly share your point of view.

I can point to one case where the reverse is true.

Varmint Hunter does publish articles that contradict their advertisers. I know, because I did one. I pointed out the issue to the editor, and he didn't flinch in the slightest. He ran the article as written. I guess he figures that his credibility with his readers is his most important asset.

[fabsroman]

Yeah, I'm sure there are exceptions, but the majority of magazines and editors probably fit into the mold we have described. Terrible to generalize like this, but this is why I stopped buying magazines. Same goes for cycling magazines. They rarely do good reviews of products.

What I like to see are comparison articles, because that forces them to choose one above the others. Read something like that in a cycling magazine where they were comparing 5 frames against one another. They described all the good things and bad things about each one and gave each of them a final ranking. Car magazines do this a lot too. Kind of like the best bang for the buck reviews for cars.

[Catfish]

If you want the scoop on new guns Gun Test is the rag to buy. They buy all the guns they compair and tell it like it is. The only problem is that most of the guns they test I`m not really interested in, but I did enjoy that magazine more than any other gun rag I ever got.
I bought my first center fire rifle in 1965 and have loaded my own ever since. So far this year I`ve loaded 3 to 4,000 rounds of rifle ammo and 1 to 2,000 rounds of handgun ammo. I love to play with wildcats and have rifles for .17 cal to .411 cal. so I do have alittle experance with guns. The reason I quit buying the gun rags was that they were 95% advertisements and the gun writers they had did not have a clue in most cases. Some of the thing they were claiming was if not imposible, is very unlikely.

[Rocky Raab]

As a gun writer myself, it always rankles me to read these not-so-vague insinuations about these reviews.

I have only done one gun review, so I know a bit about the process without being suspect - I hope. Here's the scoop.

Staff writers get writing assignments. They may not have any say in what topics or guns they are assigned. Often, they have the review gun for as little as a week before it has to go to another writer (or magazine). Much of the time, there is no possibility of buying it for that reason. I can't say whether such guns are cherry-picked, but writers find enough things to nitpick that I doubt it.

Freelance writers have to request review guns, often being put on a waiting list to get one - if ever. They also may have to quickly return a gun to the maker or forward it to somebody else. Shipping is at the writer's expense, as are FFL transfer fees and legal checks. If the gun can be purchased, it is typically about 20% off the MSRP - and the same gun in a retail store might be LESS than the writer's "discount."

Finally, 99% of all the writers I know are the most honest and straight-up people you'd care to meet. Yes, there have been exceptions, but darn few and they don't last long in the business. Hedging the truth does not pay off in the long term - especially when you put your words in print for all to see - and essentially forever. Think about that.

[fabsroman]

Rocky,

Now you know how I feel when people bash attorneys. My apologies for my post above, but that is my perception of the magazine industry. I had a client of mine working for a yacht magazine and her perception of the magazine was as described above.

[Rocky Raab]

Amen, Fabs. The people who drag writers or lawyers through the mud would have a fit if anybody said similar things about THEIR profession.

Or their union...