Reviews truthful ones

[wcd]

Just wondering how do you get objective info on new offerings? Seems like a lot of the sites i see doing reviews are so blatantly biased its not even funny. Seems like a lot of reviewers are simply parroting a brochures, versus objective reviews.

Thanks

 

[Sigblitz]

There's a couple more threads discussing this.https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...ussion/462014-online-reviews-bad-example.html

 

[Sigblitz]

You're right. Seems like reviews are just cut and pasted.

 

[wcd]

There's a couple more threads discussing this.https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...ussion/462014-online-reviews-bad-example.html

I guess I should have noted firearms reviews. Not so much as reviews in general.

 

[wcd]

You're right. Seems like reviews are just cut and pasted.

Glad I did not purchase one of those R51's based on a blog review.

 

[Dean C.]

This is why I only trust Tim over at the Military Arms Channel on firearms. Him and the crew have consistently shown to be objective and unbiased in their reviews.

The exact polar opposite of MAC would be Sootch , he is almost as bad as the NRA in regards to giving out glowing reviews to garbage firearms

 

[DoggyDaddy]

I generally stick to buying guns that are at least 50 years old. Most of the reviewers are dead.

 

[Leadeye]

Want to know how reviews work?

Always follow the money

 

[Ruffnek]

Ah, the woes of internet shopping. I generally only spend money on stuff that is well-proven (Glock, BCM, Magpul, Aimpoint, etc.) mainly due to the fact that I don't have the disposable income of many other INGOers and anything I buy needs to fill a niche, so "buy once, cry once" has become my motto. Curse you rich people who have range toys. That being said, any purchase I make is precluded by at least days, usually weeks, of research on forums and hours of YouTube videos. For non-gun stuff, Amazon sometimes has dissenting opinions in their review section, but this assumes that someone was mad enough to come back. I NEVER trust the reviews of things on a manufacturer's site because any businessman worth his salt is going to block the negatives.

 

[2Lucky]

I always listen to see if this is a gun on loan from the manufacture or the reviewers personal gun. It makes a big difference.

 

[Tactically Fat]

I read an article a few years ago about this very thing.

The main jist of it is that they don't write articles about the poor performing firearms. Plain and simple. Article writers, such as those from Guns & Ammo, Shooting Times, Shotgun News, etc etc etc are literally inundated with firearms to review. A) they can't possibly review all of them, and B) like I said, why bother writing bad reviews of poor performing firearms? Their job is to write GOOD content in order to continue to sell their magazines.

It's a pretty simple concept when you think about it.

(I cannot remember reading an article/review about the Taurus Curve in either G&A or Shooting Times - yet adds for that stupid gun are pasted all over both mags every month)

 

[Ricnzak]

Here are a few I believe give a pretty objective review.
(As DC mentioned) Military Arms Channel
AK Operators Union. Rob is hard on testing rifles
Mr Guns and Gear seems on the up and up.

 

[worddoer]

Here are a few I believe give a pretty objective review.

(As DC mentioned) Military Arms Channel

AK Operators Union. Rob is hard on testing rifles

Mr Guns and Gear seems on the up and up.

^^^^^ +1 Yes to these on YouTube.

I would also add...

Aaron Cowan at Sage Dynamics - Very analytical with observed data points

InRangeTV - They test old, new and eclectic guns at many 2 gun competitions. Their equipments successes or failures are sometimes surprising even to them.

 

[wcd]

Ah, the woes of internet shopping. I generally only spend money on stuff that is well-proven (Glock, BCM, Magpul, Aimpoint, etc.) mainly due to the fact that I don't have the disposable income of many other INGOers and anything I buy needs to fill a niche, so "buy once, cry once" has become my motto. Curse you rich people who have range toys. That being said, any purchase I make is precluded by at least days, usually weeks, of research on forums and hours of YouTube videos. For non-gun stuff, Amazon sometimes has dissenting opinions in their review section, but this assumes that someone was mad enough to come back. I NEVER trust the reviews of things on a manufacturer's site because any businessman worth his salt is going to block the negatives.

I am there with you over a year of research on last purchase. I ended up listening to my wife and The Mouse!

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Just wondering how do you get objective info on new offerings? Seems like a lot of the sites i see doing reviews are so blatantly biased its not even funny. Seems like a lot of reviewers are simply parroting a brochures, versus objective reviews.

Thanks

That would be INGO's Tamara. She writes for various mags. Does not pull punches.

 

[DangerousDave]

I watch Hickok 45 on YouTube. I've found him to be honest and unbiased in his reviews. He'll tell you the good points and the negatives about each firearm he is testing.

 

[PaulKersey]

Regarding YouTube gun reviewers, I think Nutnfancy seems pretty objective - he openly criticizes items that do not perform. Many people complain about him for various reasons - length of videos, etc. However, I find him to be entertaining. Also, the range of products he reviews sets him apart - not just firearms but motorcycles, knives, watches etc. He even did a series on how to turn a Chevy Astro van into a camping vehicle. That is not something I have any practical use for, but it was interesting. The one thing that makes me scratch my head about him is his deep love for Keltec pistols.

 

[Ruffnek]

Regarding YouTube gun reviewers, I think Nutnfancy seems pretty objective - he openly criticizes items that do not perform. Many people complain about him for various reasons - length of videos, etc. However, I find him to be entertaining. Also, the range of products he reviews sets him apart - not just firearms but motorcycles, knives, watches etc. He even did a series on how to turn a Chevy Astro van into a camping vehicle. That is not something I have any practical use for, but it was interesting. The one thing that makes me scratch my head about him is his deep love for Keltec pistols.

I try to make it through a video of his now and then...and fail. Even if the video is covering something that interests me, it's just too long and dry.

 

[BE Mike]

I take reviews with a lot of grains of salt. I definitely don't accept all the reviews of one internet celebrity, nor do I accept every review from magazine articles. Often times, those who read magazine articles don't seem to pick up on the little negative statements, as there is so much information these days that people tend to skim over a lot of content and jump to the wrong conclusions. I like to see what regular people have to say about the firearms they own. If I were to have accepted the tidal wave of negativism about the Sig striker fired pistols, I'd never have found out how great my latest EDC is for me. One thing I've found is that once some negative reviews hit the internet, there is a tendency to pile on. Much of that comes from people who have no experience with a certain gun, but have intense loyalty to another brand. Over the years, I've found that even the most expensive guns can have problems with small parts failure. Almost all manufacturers have had recalls of one kind or another. One thing I find important is how a manufacturer handles problems. A warrantee is only as good as the manufacturer's willingness to satisfactorily respond.

 

[AGarbers]

I don’t put much stock in reviews. Generally they are about the product as it comes out of the box, not after it has been used. I often get emails from Midway and Brownells wanting me to review a product before I even receive it. In reality, a product shouldn’t be removed until after it has been used for a moderate time.