I subscribe to Gun Tests, have for a couple of years now; and look forward every month to the next issue arriving. I predict you will as well.
What I love about it is its approach, the same approach used by Consumer Reports. The magazine accepts no advertising; it is supported solely by subscription. Because of this, they can tell the unvarnished truth about the weapons they are testing in each issue. If a weapon by a famous maker is a dog, they'll say so, and give you the reasons why they think so. If a piece by a comparatively unknown maker that costs much less but performs much better than its much more costly contemporaries beats them in a head to head test, they'll tell you that. Becasue they don't owe anything to anybody, they can afford to tell the truth; and that honesty is priceless.
Even when the weapons under test are not something I'm interested in - for instance, three .45 ACPs outside my range of affordability this month, I will always learn something. For example, in the case of the Para Ordnance PX1445s-GR, I learned that the rear sight is rounded, and that makes target acquisition take longer than it should; the Kimber SIS Custom/RL has a very attractive logo inlaid in the slide that isn't worth a damn as serrations to help you cock the piece, which makes the raised forward end of the rear sight a necessity to work the slide quickly; and the Springfield Armory Full Size MC Operator needs better grips because the stock wraparound rubber grips make handling, particularly reloading, difficult.
Gun Tests gives it test weapons letter grades, from A+ to F. And as I said, they will tell you why each firearm gets the grade it does, and what needs to be done to it to improve it. And from what I can tell, the manufacturers pay close attention to what Gun Tests has to say about their products. Whatever they say about their test weapons, you can take it to the bank.
Mind you, there are months when I sit there reading it and wonder, "Couldn't they have tested something I give a hoot about?" But then again, there are months when I will sit and read about a firearm I like a great deal and almost memorize the review. And not all their reviews are about state of the art guns. One favorite of mine last year was a piece on buying milsurp Mausers, what to expect, what you should be on guard about (they received one rifle that had a warped barrel that looked okay on the outside but was almost a parenthesis mark laid on its side when you put a bore light up it; I wrote and told them they had a piece of history there, that Resistance members in the arms factories would do things like that to Nazi weapons when they could get away with blaming it on faulty machine tools), how to clean them, and what kind of accuracy you could expect for your money.
It's printed very simply by modern standards, on regular paper, not clay coated stock; and in black and white, not color. But if you are looking for a gun magazine that's 100% meat and 0% fluff and advertising, this is it.
I used to subscribe a few years back but it got to where all I was reading about were tests on guns the average Joe like me wasn't interested in or were out of my price range.
__________________
"It confuses me how some people can vigorously go against the 2nd. Amendment and still call themselves patriotic"-me
I used to subscribe a few years back but it got to where all I was reading about were tests on guns the average Joe like me wasn't interested in or were out of my price range.
Thus the reason I haven't before and didn't when I got another offer in the mail the other day. As you mentioned, doesn't do me any good unless it's on one I own or wish to someday own.
Besides, with our economy heading into the dumper, I'm cutting back on little things like subscriptions and the like. For now anyhow.
G-Meister
__________________ "My next door neighbors two dogs have created more shovel ready jobs then Obama has." - Gary Johnson
i tried it before, and found it to be a waste of my money. every article i read left me feeling that the guy who wrote it did not know anything about which he was writing. for one that knows little or nothing about guns, it might be okay for a year or two. the internet is a better source of info. you just have to sort out the bickering here.
I joined a couple of months ago and so far, I like it. As a somewhat less than expert, I use them as a research tool. I found on their web site that being a member gives me access to their archives for all their issues which gives me a tool to research pistols/rifles that are no longer sold. I also like their policy of no advertizing. I will coninue for now to subscribe.
i tried it before, and found it to be a waste of my money. every article i read left me feeling that the guy who wrote it did not know anything about which he was writing. for one that knows little or nothing about guns, it might be okay for a year or two. the internet is a better source of info. you just have to sort out the bickering here.
I agree with Lefty.
I really like the idea of unbiased reviews from a publication that doesn't take add money, but I was not impressed with the people doing the reviews/articles. They threw in their own opinion and biases too much. Not a very professional group. Good concept - poor execution.
__________________
"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything."
- Alexander Hamilton
