Gun Test Magazine

[ImOverHere]

Don't the other gun mags also review based on one sample? Plus, it's an off the shelf sample rather than a sample supplied by the manufacturer for review.

Exactly right on both counts.

Like most things, it's a function of one's needs. For me, always looking to buy something new/used/interesting, it's just another source of info. - and certainly more helpful than the glossy gun mag. writers who apparently love every gun they ever review - just like the experiences of one's friends, Internet forums, etc.

[goober]

i like it but agree that their methods are a bit whacked at times.
in concept its great- no ads, no bias, no BS, just fair evaluation of firearms & straight talk.
in practice its isn't quite so-
their comparisons are not always fair; at times they compare a bone-stock model from one manufacturer to a totally tricked out top-o-the line model from another. and every now and then they seem to have a bias and be more forgiving for issues on some models than for others.
but overall, i like it, and if you can keep your BS-ometer at least on standby, there is good information to be had. just don't mindlessly swallow everything they (or anybody else) say(s).

[tankerman]

I got the mag for a couple of years, didn't care for it.

[gdr_11]

Well, the jury is in. Looks like the rag has pros and cons, but I have decided not to order and instead run my questions through this site if I am pondering a new purchase.

Who needs a subscription when you are connected in cyberspace to a grand bunch of crazy gun nuts like we have here!

[chickenfried]

One of the shooting magazines I like is Shooting Times. Nice combo of informative articles and eye candy.

[navraster]

I had a subscription a few years back, but let it lapse. I recently resubscribed, and was pleasantly surprised to find that they have a full, searchable archive of their past reviews. I use the site a lot, mainly because they publish one piece of information that is almost impossible to find anywhere else. That is the "trigger span" of handguns, which is critical to me because of my small hands.

They aren't perfect, but I find their service worth the $24 a year. I spend a lot more than that on things that aren't as valuable to me.

They will indeed send you about a billion pieces of junk mail if you don't sign up for the magazine after the trial issue. However, none of mine were threatening to send the account to collections. However, once you either decline or subscribe the mail stops. I also had a problem with not receiving issues, and the missing issues were sent to me within 2 days(!!) to me.

I would give it a shot for the $24, as their online database goes back 10 years or more, and has already paid for itself for me since December.

-Steve

[Knight]

I've subscribed to it for about three years. Pretty much everyone's comments in this topic seem about right-on.

I mostly read it like I would listen to a guy at a gun store or range that I just met telling me about his new gun he bought and what he thought of it - if you catch my drift.

[Ford8N]

I used to subscribe to GT and all the gun magazines. But now with the .net, why? I can get all kinds of opinions and reviews on just about any firearm. I realize opinions are like...well you know. And it is correct about the pretty magazines being shills. It was Mike Venturino who mentioned one time in an indirect way that you either write positive or you will not get any more work, the manufactures just won't send you any more firearms to test. Of course Mike is one of the last writers from a different era.

[bowfin]

I had subscribed to Gun Tests magazine at one time, but they lost me when they gave the Chipmunk single shot rifle a "Do Not Buy" rating because the teenager who tested it claimed it was a "little kid's gun". No kidding?...



...I thought that was the point behind the Chipmunk rifle. It's okay to have an opinion, but I'm only willing to pay for informed ones.