HuntingNet.com Forums

HuntingNet.com Forums (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/)

- Guns (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/guns-10/)

- - Gun Tests. (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/guns/39154-gun-tests.html)

Chances are you' ll never get the truth from any gun mags.They sugar coat all the guns tested.What it boils down to" They' re not going to bite the hand that feeds them" . I agree talk to people who have what you' re intrested in. Ask questions then make your decision from that.The worst ones to believe are the actual gun mfgs.For an example. Look how Remington praised their Model 710 and still do their 597. The 710 was the gun of the future others to be compared to. Well we see the quality of it.Believe only half of what you see and nothing you read(or hear)......
Ruger Redhawk

If you think gun reviews and hype is bad, try buying a bow! [:o][X(]

One has to turn their BS Detector up to full power before reading anything regarding archery or archery products, and still risk being duped by the plethora of ad BS and biased reviewing.

Guns, with a few exceptions, aren' t as bad, but bad enough.

I think I got something in the mail from this magazine trying to sell me a subscription. I think they said that the magazine accepts no manufacturer advertising revenue. If that were the case then I' d have a little more faith that the reviews weren' t " Ad biased." That' s not to say that there wouldn' t be personal bias. Take for instance the side-by-side comparison of the various 1911 clones out there mentioned above. The Kimber received a better review than other, more accurate, pistols. Well, my question would be, was the reason personal bias? Or maybe the other merits of the Kimber outweighed the deficiency in accuracy? Were they referring to practical or intrinsic accuracy. Some guns may fire great groups from a rest but may not point and shoot so well from a normal shooting position for a particular person. I for one can shoot my Glock 21 a lot better than any target grade Kimber, just because the Glock fits my hands near perfectly and points like an extension of my arm.

I guess the point is that, for each individual the only unbiased review possible is the one you do yourself.

Mike

I use to subscribe as well, but let my subscription lapse. For the money, get a yearly subsciption to " Shooting Times" magazine instead.;)

Quote:

Take for instance the side-by-side comparison of the various 1911 clones out there mentioned above. The Kimber received a better review than other, more accurate, pistols. Well, my question would be, was the reason personal bias? Or maybe the other merits of the Kimber outweighed the deficiency in accuracy? Were they referring to practical or intrinsic accuracy. Some guns may fire great groups from a rest but may not point and shoot so well from a normal shooting position for a particular person. I for one can shoot my Glock 21 a lot better than any target grade Kimber, just because the Glock fits my hands near perfectly and points like an extension of my arm.

I guess the point is that, for each individual the only unbiased review possible is the one you do yourself.

Very well said. I' ve owned a number of handguns. Both revolvers and pistols. S&W, Glock, H&K, Sig, EAA Witness, Ruger, Colt, and Kimber. In my hands, the Kimber is the most accurate firearm I' ve ever shot. I' m talking one ragged hole from 15 yards, and never a malfunction. So it all depends on that particular weapon, that particular shooter, and the stars being in perfect alignment.