"Gun Tests" magazine - worth a subscription?

C

Cliff

New member
I received an ad for this rag in the mail. It looks interesting, and they claim to accept no advertisements and are thus unbiased.

"Consumer Reports" doesn't accept ad's and claims to be unbiased, too. Experience has taught me not to entirely trust "Consumer Reports."

What say ye TFL'ers?

FWIW, the only non advertisement carrying periodical I have ever enjoyed is "Mad" magazine. :)

TIA....

Cliff
 
I have had a subscription for a while now. I found it helped me with various guns with which I had no experience. You will see some people attack it for only testing one sample of each gun, but are YOU going to go out and buy ten guns and hope one works?
Also they do give guns more chances down the road and have updated reviews of guns.
I think it is a valuable asset if you plan to buy many guns.
 
The pictures aren't as pretty like the other gun rags but the info ir less biased. IMO, it's worth the subscription.
 
I'll chime in here are well. Don't be fooled into thinking that it's CONSUMER REPORTS because it isn't but it is the CLOSEST gun publication that there is to a Consumer Reports. Definitely worth subscribing to -- I've been a regular reader for close to a decade.
FUD
fudflag.gif
Share what you know & learn what you don't
 
Here is one way to look at it. Do you subscribe to any other gun rags? If so, have you ever actually seen a gun review in any of them where they say NOT to buy a product? I haven't. Most of the guns these other rags review are regarded well and any problems noted are usually played down. This is because the gun companies put advertising into those rags.

Gun Tests does two types of reviews in one. First are their observations about various guns or other products and the tests (speed, accuracy, etc.). They also include subjective evaluation information regarding things they did or did not like. For example, in a test between Les Baer, Wilson, and Clark .45s, the Les Baer shot the best, but Gun Tests picked the Wilson over the Les Baer because the Wilson was dehorned and because the Les Baer was so tight that the slide could not be racked without popping one's palm against the muzzle.

The thing about gun tests is that you get a professional evaluation on products by people who are not trying to sell the products to you as in the case with other gun rags.
 
I'd say it's worth it. I like their response to folks who write in to say, "You gave the Krunchenthunderboomer 9cP a bad review, and I've never had any trouble with mine and neither have any of my friends!" They just say, "Well, the one we bought at a local gun store nosedived every other round, and every third round stovepiped, and oh by the way it wouldn't hit the broad side of a barn from a Ransom Rest - so we should say that other than that, it seemed fine?" Also, if they do a follow up review on the same or similar model, they're always quick to point out any improvements found in a previously unfavorable review. I do think the subscription price is a bit high, but accepting no advertising has its costs...

------------------
"...and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one."
Luke 22:36
"An armed society is a polite society."
Robert Heinlein
"Power corrupts. Absolute power - is kinda cool!"
Fred Reed
 
I buy all of my magazines, gun and otherwise, at the newsstand because I do not want my subscription data used by marketers. Luckily we have a good local independent bookstore that has about 10 feet of shelf space devoted to shooting publications. I have not seen Gun Tests on the newsstand; do they sell subscription only, or is it something my local store might stock if I asked?

Do they have a web site?

I'd like to look this over because IMHO the reviews in the mainstream gun mags are not critical enough. They never seem to meet a gun they don't like. The worst criticism of a gun I've read recently is "the checkering was too sharp".

Case in point is the Steyr M Series. The mags all loved it and piqued my interest, then I see multiple TFL threads about its questionable reliability. Is this really a dud gun or are the reports on TFL a minority of axe-grinders?
 
I've been a Gun Tests subscriber for years, since the early days of publication. I have decided not to renew after all these years.

While the Gun Tests reviews are more objective than most gunzine reviews, the quality of the reviews has deteriorated so far I can barely stand to read them. I see so many inane comments, inconsistencies, faulty reasoning, and wrong information that I question the value of anything they publish. Their testing methods are inconsistent and sometimes questionable.

They also play games with their subscription renewal pricing, and simply charge too much for what you get in return.

In short, while I still find some limited value in the publication, I cannot justify paying a high price for what little content I find useful. There is little (if anything) you can get from Gun Tests that you can't get better -- and cheaper -- from a critical reading of rec.guns postings.
 
Now I ask you - how could you improve on TFL for getting all the unbiased, objective information you could ever use on guns?

Seriously, I've also gotten the same "junk mail" subscription stuff from them, but I frankly believe that the information here on TFL is legitimately as useful as anything they could offer. The nice part about TFL is you can ask for the specific information you need and not just hope they evaluate just the make or caliber gun you're looking at.

Not so?? How 'bout you, FUD, after a decade? :)

------------------
If "the people" in the 1st, 4th, 9th & 10th amendments, means "the people", why do some folks think "the people" in the 2nd amendment means "the state"?
 
A few year back I received a card in the mail asking if I wanted ONE free sample copy of their magazine. The ad stated that I was under no obligation to subscribe, that with the sample issue would be another card that I just needed to sign and main in to start my subscription. I read the free issue but decided not to subscribe and threw the card in the trash. The next month I received another issue and just thought that they may have goofed up and sent it by accident. Then the next month another copy was delivered and also a letter from some bogus sounding collection agency threatening me with death and dismemberment if I did not pay my subscription. Tried calling this agency but only got one of those voice systems that wouldn't let you talk to a human being. I then wrote a nasty letter telling them to stuff it where the sun doesn't shine. I had not sent in the card to start the subscription or telephoned no one to start it. I don't do business with a company who obviously has no honor or integrity.
 
"I see so many inane comments, inconsistencies, faulty reasoning, and wrong information"

I had a subscription the it for about two years. I got a little irritated with an increasing "elitist" style. Then they started slamming cheaper guns and putting them on a "Don't Buy" list. As well they made some cracks about using certain guns for self defense as if it was below them.

Wouldn't you know it, Handgun Control Incorporated began using the GunTests "Don't Buy" list as justification for banning guns. We wrote many letters to GunTests to get them to tone it down a bit but they pointly refused.

I cancelled my subscription, never to return.

Rick
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by The Plainsman:
Now I ask you - how could you improve on TFL for getting all the unbiased, objective information you could ever use on guns?

Seriously, I've also gotten the same "junk mail" subscription stuff from them, but I frankly believe that the information here on TFL is legitimately as useful as anything they could offer. The nice part about TFL is you can ask for the specific information you need and not just hope they evaluate just the make or caliber gun you're looking at.

Not so?? How 'bout you, FUD, after a decade? :)[/quote]Please see http://www.thefiringline.com:8080/forums/showthread.php?threadid=30904
 
I think Gun Tests is worth the $24 per year that I pay because I like the comparison tests. You don't see comparison tests much, if at all, in other magazines.

But Gun Tests is not without its prejudices or its inconsistencies. The last time it tested a USP9, it complained about the texture of its grip in hot weather. This was never mentioned in earlier tests. Is that because the USP9 was not tested in hot weather, or is it because one reviewer had a peculiar reaction to the USP's grip? I have a USP9. I shoot it in hot weather, and the texture has never bothered me.
 
Ahhhh..... God, I love this place. :D

Thanks for the replies, folks!

I think I'll toss the ad in the trash. However, enough TFL'ers had good things to say that I'll see if I can find a copy elsewhere, evaluate and then take it from there.

The Plainsman wrote: Now I ask you - how could you improve on TFL for getting all the unbiased, objective information you could ever use on guns?

I thought of that. The ongoing Kimber / Springfield Armory 1911 discussions are what finally convinced to: A) Buy a 1911 style pistol ... and ... B) Buy the Springfield "loaded" stainless.

I know now that both guns are excellent. Both can have problems. Both have their own quirks and personality. The SA seemed right for me, and I'm quite happy.

That is the kind of info that no gun rag has ever given me.

Cliff - Nobody else has read MAD magazine? :confused:


[This message has been edited by Cliff (edited September 14, 2000).]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top