David Scott
New member
I've noticed a disturbing trend in product reviews in gun publications. The writers are reluctant to give a bad review to anything. I've read glowing reviews of weapons that are agreed in TFL commentary to be second-rank or lower. The height of absurdity was a review of four holsters. The author liked the first three, and said who makes them. The last one was a Kydex number that wouldn't let go of his 1911; he had to cut the gun out of it. He properly lambasted their quality but did NOT say who the maker is.
This is not doing the readers much service. The reason for product reviews is to help the consumer make choices. That's one reason why I buy a magazine. If they want me to keep buying them, they're gonna have to get up the nerve to say stuff like:
"The new .45ACP polymer-framed Scheisse-Spritzer pistol is an unmitigated piece of crap. The trigger pull feels like broken glass is part of the linkage. The grip feels like holding a live lobster. The sights are pitiful, but it doesn't matter because even in a machine rest we couldn't do better than a 5-shot group of 9 inches at 15 feet -- that is, when we could get it to run 5 rounds without a stovepipe. Wonder if the 1/4 in play between the slide and frame has something to do with it? We tried to check, but cut our hands so badly on the machining burrs that we gave up. The slide only locks open on an empty magazine one time out of three, but it makes up for it by locking open on a full mag once in a while. The finish started rusting when we turned on a Miami Dolphins game. Operating the safety is like breaking a pencil. In summary, for self-defense you're better off throwing rocks."
Car magazine writers used to have problems with managers who would not let them slam the products of major advertisers. The writers and editors stood their ground, and now the people who create the content are free to speak plainly about products, and they DO zap it to cars that aren't up to snuff. The advertising sales are handled by a separate part of the business.
Where, oh, where, are the writers who will call a spade a spade and a piece of junk a piece of junk? Where are the editors that will put them in print?
This is not doing the readers much service. The reason for product reviews is to help the consumer make choices. That's one reason why I buy a magazine. If they want me to keep buying them, they're gonna have to get up the nerve to say stuff like:
"The new .45ACP polymer-framed Scheisse-Spritzer pistol is an unmitigated piece of crap. The trigger pull feels like broken glass is part of the linkage. The grip feels like holding a live lobster. The sights are pitiful, but it doesn't matter because even in a machine rest we couldn't do better than a 5-shot group of 9 inches at 15 feet -- that is, when we could get it to run 5 rounds without a stovepipe. Wonder if the 1/4 in play between the slide and frame has something to do with it? We tried to check, but cut our hands so badly on the machining burrs that we gave up. The slide only locks open on an empty magazine one time out of three, but it makes up for it by locking open on a full mag once in a while. The finish started rusting when we turned on a Miami Dolphins game. Operating the safety is like breaking a pencil. In summary, for self-defense you're better off throwing rocks."
Car magazine writers used to have problems with managers who would not let them slam the products of major advertisers. The writers and editors stood their ground, and now the people who create the content are free to speak plainly about products, and they DO zap it to cars that aren't up to snuff. The advertising sales are handled by a separate part of the business.
Where, oh, where, are the writers who will call a spade a spade and a piece of junk a piece of junk? Where are the editors that will put them in print?
