Seems to me that exchanging negative emails with one of the oldest firearms companies is not a good thing to do.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/critical_look_T3.htm

I don't care what people think, everyone has their preferences, re: bolt vs. semi-auto archery vs. blackpowder. People like Chuck like to force their opinions on others as gospel truth, according to articles like this.

Also, people like CH should know that there are many factors that can affect a gun's accuracy, temp, wind, humidity, not to mention standard factory loads aren't as good as factory match loads or even handloads. Bedding vs. free-floating, to each their own.

But to critisize detachable magazines and not having a fully notched ejection port is like telling the designer/engineer that they don't know what they're doing. Maybe someone wanting a few extra loaded magazines like me is smart.Cartridges are better contained and ready to load at the range instead of them rolling around if you accidently knock the box over, you know how Murphy likes to screw with you while shooting at your local range, not to mention while out in the field.

It all boils down to this, we all have our opinions about what is best, but that is because we voice our opinion with what works for us, and human nature dictates that we dismiss the voice of others. I see it all the time.

So in my opinion, and you have the right to disagree with me, CH is not credible because he refuses to look at the facts and figures, as well as dump on well established periodicals and writers.

In speech class in high school, and on the debate team, we gave poor scoresto those who could not give real good cause on their opinions and just argued for argument's sake. Sooner or later, those individuals were dropped from the team because they made us all look bad. Looks like to me no real respected periodical will take CH because he'd make them look bad, and that's why he's got his own site, even tho not many have heard of him outsite of the internet.