d.winsor

What is brand Bashing

I Am CONFUSED!

On the internet it is like pulling teeth trying to find a bad review on a muzzleloader, any brand.
Knight has a post where they request the reviews of their “Satisfied” customers. It would seem to me that a bad review would be more important. As an honest review would show where improvement is needed, possibly in many areas. Bad reviews if acted upon by the manufacturer would create a more desirable product, which would probably lead to more sales.

On forums Brand Bashing is frowned upon.

If one cannot post of a bad experience with a product from a muzzleloader manufacturer, be it a gun, accessory, warranty, quality or customer service. How is anyone who is considering purchasing a brand of muzzleloader, going to get any real-time information, to make a decision on which one to purchase.
Granted, depending on the severity of treatment and dissatisfaction reviews can get “Colorful” in the heat of the moment. Good or Bad Reviews.

So, if a new shooter can only go by the reviews of the satisfied shooters and does not know personally people who take part in the sport of muzzleloading. How can the new shooter make an educated guess as to which Muzzleloader and/or Brand to buy?

Where can a new shooter get their information. Good or Bad.

Is there an acceptable way to post a bad experience with a muzzleloader. here is a little more information:
https://www.nbcnews.com/business/con...ngress-n693001

1874sharpsshooter

I think brand bashing would be if I said that CVA was a cheap , no good, inferior ,
Low quality piece of crap gun .













Which in my experience it is .

d.winsor

So if I read you right I can say "based on my experience of a purchase", a model of muzzleloader of the brand CVA is cheap, no good & inferior, low quality piece of crap gun. As long as I don't bash the entire line I am ok. Is that right.

1874sharpsshooter

No. You ask what brand bashing was ? The statement I made , even though it is based on my experience is still considered brand bashing by most , even though it is an honest personal experience. Just as your experience with Knight was bad . Honest reviews usually aren’t tolerated on forums is what I have found out. They usually lead to getting banned .
Seems that way anyway .

hunters_life

Posting a bad review of personal experience isn't considered brand bashing. Posting bad reviews on multiple threads with the intent of bashing a brand because of one bad experience, and with the explanation that to us seems to have been your own fault, is brand bashing. Your posts about Knight Rifles and your experience with one particular rifle led most all of us that know a little about muzzleloading rifles to the conclusion that your problem came from not knowing how to seat your breech plug properly because you were using the wrong tool for the job. You then furthered your bashing by advertising for a well known inferior quality product over Knight.
There are several on this forum that own and like CVA products and for the most part they are okay if you don't mind dealing with cheap un-inspected barrels and with a company that has been sued for patent infringement and injuries caused by poor barrel quality more times than my highly developed math skills can count. They seem to be producing a better quality rifle today but I'm not the type of person to deal with thieves or with a company that has absolutely no care for the safety of it's customers. If you want to shill for them, that's your choice. But to bash on a quality rifle company while advertising for a disreputable one is not a choice that most forums will allow.

falcon

i had more trouble with one well known USA manufactured muzzleloader than all the other muzzleloader guns owned in my lifetime combined.


The only CVA gun i currently own is a .50 caliber StagHorn bought in 2000. i have maintained, scoped and sighted in many dozens of inline muzzleloaders for other folks. With one exception all were good serviceable guns. That one was replaced by the manufacturer.


Riddle me this: If CVA guns are so bad why is it that they sell more muzzleloaders than all other makers combined?

d.winsor

CVA was never in contention with being a bad muzzleloader, The CVA inferences above were only for demonstration and clarification purposes. We could have used any brand. I own two CVA's both are excellent guns. The manufacturer has warranted one in its entirety. I am extremely glad to have that gun. In my opinion CVA recommendations are top notch in all aspects.

BarnesAddict

Could it be, that CVA absolutely floods the market with inexpensive lessor quality rifles, that the vast majority of "extended season" hunters are willing to purchase?

sabotloader

That's fairly easy to answer... PRICE. Since everything about them is using cheaper labor and parts they can offer them it a greatly reduced priced to control the market.

Gm54-120

And end of seasons sales in the "Bargain Bins" used to be overflowing with imports at half of what they were selling them at.

Pretty much the same way Japan got a foot hold in the USA after dumping millions if not billions of $$$$s worth of autos in the US market during the 1970s.

They both make a fairly good product today after many years of product dumping and copying ideas such as the Omega then selling the Kodiak for half the price or less.

Lets be honest though, if CVA made such a good ML then why does Traditions/Ardesa outsell them in virtually all of Europe including Spain. Show me a shop's website in Spain that even carries a CVA/Bergara ML. Ive looked countless times with no luck. Pedersoli and Traditions/Ardesa are easy to find.