Most credible gun magazines?
 

I know they got ro cater to their advertisers, but some are more credible than others. I get american rifleman with my nra membership but would like something else too. American rifleman at least has report jamming from guns. Some mags on the other hand fire 50 shots then decide a gun is super awesome. Got any mags you'd reccomend?

Well, I've got a subscription to Man At Arms, but they cater exclusively to old gun collectors. I always take home unsold copies of Guns and Ammo from work, but that's almost exclusively for Garry James' articles and to keep abreast of new developments I can expect customers to ask about, I tend to take it all with a grain of salt. Rifle magazine is pretty good, and if you reload you can always find interesting stuff in Handloader.

I read Guns & Ammo's Handgun oriented magazine and it seems alright. No magazine is going to tell you the absolute truth though

I know none will be absolute truth but some are worse than others. Like gunblast, if its a ruger, taurus or charter arms automatic glowing review. Or a 5'' group off a benchrest being called "acceptable combat accuracy."

some mags also have too much ads not enough reviews. And its almost sad, that the only way to tell credibility is to see if the magazine has given negative reviews, like in american rifleman there was a special on carry .380s, that said "naa guardian trigger is too stiff" or "the keltec stovepiped."

I have a subscription to Guns & Ammo and also to Guns Weapons Law Enforcement

Ive heard SWAT does good reviews, but is it a gun mag or more gear oriented?

My grandfather has a subscription to "Guns & Ammo" and gives me the issues when he's done with them. Usually, I like reading them, but I find they have a few too many positive reviews (I remember how much they extolled the .45 GAP Glocks when those came out, even though in retrospect most people now agree that the .45 GAP is a redundant and useless round).

Also, I think that buying a new weapon based on its review in a gun rag is a dumb idea. Unlike cars or gadgets or almost any other consumer product, firearms last forever even with minimal maintenance, so it's never worthwhile to buy a new weapon (even a new make/variant of an old design, like an AR-15 or 1911) as soon as it comes out. Most people - myself included - buy old, used firearms that are still in good condition. So regardless of what a review says, I'm not likely to make a buying decision based on it.

I'm that way also. I have a few that I bought new, but it's usually because there wasn't much of a price difference between used vs new. Or new is what was mostly around. Once you shoot it, it's used then anyway. My S&W 586 and Hi-Power Mark III are older guns that where supposedly unfired since leaving the factory of course that didn't last long.

As far as magazines go I like American Handgunner, they do articles on whatever flavor of the month, but also do them on older handguns also. I have thought about subscribing to them and Gun Digest.

They just don't make them like they used to

Depends on who "they" is. Wheelguns, Id say older ones had more care given and seem smoother. Autos, I think newer ones will be more reliable.

"They" is almost everybody. Most new developments are just updated copies of old designs, soulless polymer framed gun, copies of newer innovative ideas, or and AR

There is a lot of hype about old guns though. I mean a new sig/cz/Smith/beretta is going to be asolutely reliable. Id take a modern springer loaded as a defensive gun over any 1960s 1911s. Ill take the cz75 b over a pre b. But id also rather have a old school k frame smith over a modern one.

That can go either way, but more often than not it's usually the case. The only example where I can think of newer is better is the Mini-14, thicker barrels.

Depends on how old you mean. See below.

My 92FS Inox was made in '93, I'll take it over the newer ones with their plastic guide rods and shit ass warnings on the dust cover. Same with my SIG P220. I watched a video a few days ago where a guy had a older German made P226 and a newer American one. The German made had twice the number of rounds compared to the newer and had less finish wear on the barrel hood. Older autos are usually better fitted, because they had to be to work.

For a defensive gun a Springer Loaded is better than an unmodified 1960s 1911 (which is either going to be a well worn M1911A1 or Colt Government Commercial). I actually have a Springfield Loaded, I would take a 1960s Colt Commercial over it. You can always add better sights, checkering and whatever tactical bs on them which wasn't available back in the day.

Anyone know of any credible reviewers on the net? Most of what I see is incredibly biased

I usually just watch videos on youtube, while there are some that were given guns to test, Nutnfancy, hickok45 etc. (Most of hickok's guns are his own though) A lot on youtube show their own personal guns and will tell you if something was or goes wrong with them because they are not being paid. Nutnfancy does a thorough job on his gun reviews. But they are so long you can watch 5 other vids on the same gun he tested by the time you get through one of his vids. Then your getting 5 opinions vs 1.

Nutnfancy has different tastes in guns, hes into being all tactical. But he is unbiased and thorough, bit long winded though and cares too much about weight. Yeah, a 7lb rifle is easier to tote than a 12 pound one, but a 26 ounce handgun isnt vastly superior to a 28 ounce one base don weight alone....

Hickock45 is entertaining and a great shot, reviews are not thorough at all though....

Id say any new ruger is probably better than old besides their 22 pistols. The new 77s have lighter crisper triggers, the gp100 are now 9lb pulls instead of 14, the minis have heavier barrels and now ruger makes standard capacity magazines. The company is better, guns are better.

I think smith and wesson would dominate the market if they removed internal locks. People say they want old all forged smiths with deep blue steel and very nice wood grips and all the extra hand fitting. Problem is though, i think the same people would bitch about extra price and not buy it.....Taking out ILs would not affect price and would take some people off the fence.

While I agree with you that this is true more often than not, there are some exceptions. I think many of the AR-15s that are being made today are vastly superior to those made in the 1980s (and I'm not saying this because new ones come with accessory rails and other modern features). My uncle owns a 1980s-vintage Colt AR-15 A2, and I'd rather have my 2010-vintage DPMS Panther over his rifle any day. Unfortunately for him, he lives in New York, so he probably won't ever be able to buy a new AR again.

Gun tests does fair reviews but theres not many.

Buy factory mags, or Mec-Gar replacements (they make or have made a lot of factory magazines for gun manufacturers). Search around on the internet before you buy them too, a lot of gun sotres will charge almost right at MSRP for them which is nuts, and you can usually find good deals on places like GunBro... oh you meant reading material...

[/intentionallymisinterpretedforthelulz]

I dont see why everybody doesnt buy mecgar, there the same size, ultra reliable, and hold more ammo, hell they make the factory mags for most companies and those companies still sell the lowest capacity ones.

HAHA, we are off topic, and yet we are not! Mec-Gar makes some very credible gun magazines!

American rifleman is on and off for me. I get it for free (nra member) and it has some good history stuff, has a mininum of political stuff (the nra political magazine is for that, even though during the 2008 election all they friggin talked about was politics and no guns) and like all gun mags gives you a heads up on upcoming guns. However, some reviews sucked bad. Like the benelli MR1. They put a scope on it with match ammo and shot 2.5'' groups at 100 off a bench, which is awful, most value brands wer eover 3 inches. They said "this is acceptable combat accuracy" then stated how uber reliable it was.....in their whopping 200 rounds through it. Then go on about how it is the ultimate home defense gun. Then theres the judge. they touted it as the greatest home defense pistol, anti carjacker whatever, and just shot up some paper, not even mentioning how poor 410 penetration is. At least there review about multiple 380 pistols during the 380 fad was good, they stated jams, failure to go into battery, etc.

Odd. I sell the MR-1 at work and everyone who's bought one reported much better accuracy than that.

They may get it, the thing is thats what the magazine got as their accuracy, and they say how great it is, simply since benelli/beretta gives the nra money.

If you haven't already ya'll should check out http://www.youtube.com/user/Sturmgewehre

He's been on youtube for a while but I think just started being more active with vids in the past few months. He deserves way more subscribers for his quality of work. He's also not annoying to hear either.

Yeah he posts a lot at TFL and knows his stuff.