- Thread starter jevan126
- Start date
Is this the 4th issue? I will have to keep an eye out for it.
I just grabbed a copy today but haven't had a chance to thumb through it yet.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
SOB! Been looking for one All Day! LOL.
i have the app in my ipad but it still only has the 2012 and 2013 issues
Link to buy from publisher: https://store.intermediaoutdoors.com/products.php?product=Guns-and-Ammo-Sniper-2014
I bought it and it makes me feel like gas guns are taking over, is this the case? Either way it's a great magazine!
Ben
Ben
Yup that's pretty much what I thought. Just got mine today and it's like the dam GQ Magazine for all the whoes who of the Gas Gun World. LOL. It's a buyer's guide that will sure to cost a lot of people A LOT of Money this year!
Some How DPMS Gen II Still looks like the Best Deal Around!
Here is a piece of advice.
ALL MAGAZINES ARE ADDS
ALL of them... Unless its some peer reviewed journal for advancement of a field/industry/discipline.
Magaizines get 90% + of their revenue from advertising. They get said money from the shit they show in the Mags. Hence why everything reviewed is the greatest shit since sliced bread. If someone gets a bad review (which they never do) it would be beacuse they did not pay to play.
So with that being said, ALL MAGAZINES (not clips for the mouth breathers) are 100% worthless. They may have only been 99% worthless before the invention of the internet as the only way to showcase products to the masses, but today, they aren't worth the paper they are printed on.
ALL MAGAZINES ARE ADDS
ALL of them... Unless its some peer reviewed journal for advancement of a field/industry/discipline.
Magaizines get 90% + of their revenue from advertising. They get said money from the shit they show in the Mags. Hence why everything reviewed is the greatest shit since sliced bread. If someone gets a bad review (which they never do) it would be beacuse they did not pay to play.
So with that being said, ALL MAGAZINES (not clips for the mouth breathers) are 100% worthless. They may have only been 99% worthless before the invention of the internet as the only way to showcase products to the masses, but today, they aren't worth the paper they are printed on.
True [MENTION=7585]Cobracutter[/MENTION] but they are fun to thumb through, and they just might make someone buy new gear, which I love since then I might buy their old gear
Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk
Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk
I have the older mags and like them, this new one seemed to fall short, even the rangefinder stuff wasn't in depth at all. Wasn't impressed this time - and a loooonnnggg wait for the next one
I dissagree with you CobraCutter, magazines give lots of information and different pictures that you might not get unless you actually found the product in a store. Also I know for a fact that there are some magazines that are not biased toward any products they review.
I definitely prefer reviews like those from 8541 Tactical.
Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk
I do agree that you can't always believe every magazine out there, But there are some that I have found to be pretty damn accurate and very infomative. This SNIPER magazine is spot on with it's results, I have a JP LRP-07 and I also have a good friend who has The PredatOBR 7.62 and the Sniper reviews are right on the money with these two rifles.
Please show me a magazine that gives BAD reviews of a product.... I will be waiting
You are just naive to the industry and how it works.
Magazines come and go every year. When one fails, they create a new one to sell to the mouth breathers at walmart/royal farms/7-11 because of the shiny pictures.
The writers usually don't know their ass from a hole in the ground, and get the products for super cheap/Free if they write a decent review.
Almost all the money is from advertising, both by regular adds in them, and manufactures/distributors paying for their own reviews. This is why you cannot believe anything you read in them
Even a clock is right twice a day.
There is no one "honest" who would create a magazine. From a financial aspect, its not viable and not worth the time/effort. A REAL magazine with actual integrity, would lose money faster than the sinking titanic. Hence why they are all shit.
Over the years I have dropped most of them. I do pick this one up, and maintain my subscription to SWAT.
Maybe CobraCutter can point us to peer reviewed journals that we may enjoy. This is not a slam, I've done plenty of research through peer reviewed journals. It's just that there's not a lot of gun reviews that are peer reviewed in the same way.
I completely agree that most magazines are either advertisements or thinly veiled feel good, look at me I'm a gun writer attempt.
Maybe CobraCutter can point us to peer reviewed journals that we may enjoy. This is not a slam, I've done plenty of research through peer reviewed journals. It's just that there's not a lot of gun reviews that are peer reviewed in the same way.
I completely agree that most magazines are either advertisements or thinly veiled feel good, look at me I'm a gun writer attempt.
There is SOME stuff that comes out in Military/Defense journals. If you have access to a service library, they are pretty good about stocking a ton of journals.
Just keep in mind, who is writing them and why. Plenty of Officers all around who are either trying to suck their way up the Chain or ensure that cushy DEF CTR job is there when they retire/seperate.
Many of the REAL papers as we call them, either never get published or don't happen often as they tend to point out failures in those around them. This is not taken kindly by those with power.
Just keep in mind, who is writing them and why. Plenty of Officers all around who are either trying to suck their way up the Chain or ensure that cushy DEF CTR job is there when they retire/seperate.
Many of the REAL papers as we call them, either never get published or don't happen often as they tend to point out failures in those around them. This is not taken kindly by those with power.
Not to be contrarian, but I just reinstated my subscription to Gun Tests Magazine, which does not accept advertising. It has historically been (IMHO) a "cuts right down to the bone objective" source of comparative info on both current and older firearms and accessories, and is not sparing about issuing 'F' grades for many of the guns it tests. I just got my first new issue and in a review of large number aftermarket AR magazines, it flunked most of them. Personally, I think they abused those magazines a lot worse than I ever would, but a failure is a failure.
I also picked up the latest Sniper, which is way off my personal page. I normally scan and skip my way through rack purchased magazines in about a half hour. This one I am reading all the way through. I see a lot of positive, and it may be favorable toward some advertisers; but that's a surmise on my part, and I am most definitely not in a secure position to criticize.
Greg
I also picked up the latest Sniper, which is way off my personal page. I normally scan and skip my way through rack purchased magazines in about a half hour. This one I am reading all the way through. I see a lot of positive, and it may be favorable toward some advertisers; but that's a surmise on my part, and I am most definitely not in a secure position to criticize.
Greg
Last edited:
Greg, I used to get Gun Test magazine and liked it for that reason alone. No advertising.
In the end I felt their comparisons were off base. I'm sure they were doing what they could with what they had, but at times comparisons between guns simply were not close to apples or oranges.
I eventually dropped my subscription as there just wants enough info for me. Maybe that's gotten better?
In the end I felt their comparisons were off base. I'm sure they were doing what they could with what they had, but at times comparisons between guns simply were not close to apples or oranges.
I eventually dropped my subscription as there just wants enough info for me. Maybe that's gotten better?
This is true. If we based our information off of magazines, we would all believe Tactical Rifles made the best rifles in the world.
Saw this, and ran out to grab the latest issue, having been a fan of the previous issues. Hate to say it, but I am not sure that I am a big fan of this issue?
To address that issue (as in magazine issue), and some of the other issues brought up (as in complaints/problems):
Contributors/Authors - Tom Beckstrand, who is the man behind this magazine, made it clear up front that it was his intention to have only quality material in this magazine from quality contributors. Based on what I have seen, IMHO that is the case. This issue fell short in this case to some extent, because there was only 6 main contributors (Beckstrand, Hodnett, Hoffman, Lamb, Teague, Wojcik). Beckstrand actually wrote 11 out of the 19 articles. I was hoping to see more from people like Bartlett, Bynum, Galli, Giannelli, Horner, Howe, Litz, Payne, Spooner, Webb, etc. There are a LOT of quality shooters out there who could have contributed quality material.
Content Quality - IMHO there was NOT anything in this issue (or the others) that was complete BS. Some of the "value" may be limited/questionable, but I have not found anything that was not at least 90% on the level. In this particular issue, I was disappointed that over 50% of the content was "product review" driven, and per some of the comments above, it was not extremely detailed info on the products, or something that you couldn't find elsewhere. I wouldn't call the content inaccurate or worthless by any stretch, but IMHO this issue was not an improvement going forward.
I was really surprised when the original issue came out years ago, as I didn't think that kind of publication would ever make its way to public book sellers. I was glad it did come out, because I was hoping that it may directly or indirectly help some snipers who are not closely tied into the various training/shooting communities.
I know Tom has come here in the past to comment, not sure if he will do it again, probably will drop him a note and see?
Original "Sniper Magazine" issue/post:
http://www.snipershide.com/shooting/bear-pit/78750-sniper-magazine.html
To address that issue (as in magazine issue), and some of the other issues brought up (as in complaints/problems):
Contributors/Authors - Tom Beckstrand, who is the man behind this magazine, made it clear up front that it was his intention to have only quality material in this magazine from quality contributors. Based on what I have seen, IMHO that is the case. This issue fell short in this case to some extent, because there was only 6 main contributors (Beckstrand, Hodnett, Hoffman, Lamb, Teague, Wojcik). Beckstrand actually wrote 11 out of the 19 articles. I was hoping to see more from people like Bartlett, Bynum, Galli, Giannelli, Horner, Howe, Litz, Payne, Spooner, Webb, etc. There are a LOT of quality shooters out there who could have contributed quality material.
Content Quality - IMHO there was NOT anything in this issue (or the others) that was complete BS. Some of the "value" may be limited/questionable, but I have not found anything that was not at least 90% on the level. In this particular issue, I was disappointed that over 50% of the content was "product review" driven, and per some of the comments above, it was not extremely detailed info on the products, or something that you couldn't find elsewhere. I wouldn't call the content inaccurate or worthless by any stretch, but IMHO this issue was not an improvement going forward.
I was really surprised when the original issue came out years ago, as I didn't think that kind of publication would ever make its way to public book sellers. I was glad it did come out, because I was hoping that it may directly or indirectly help some snipers who are not closely tied into the various training/shooting communities.
I know Tom has come here in the past to comment, not sure if he will do it again, probably will drop him a note and see?
Original "Sniper Magazine" issue/post:
http://www.snipershide.com/shooting/bear-pit/78750-sniper-magazine.html
Last edited:
IMO with this issue they have jumped the shark.... or the Gucci sharkskin handbag !
Articles = ads.
Little to none on the 'how -to'....self admitted in the land nav article...sell sell sell.
Oh well . Had to happen to make it profitable , as others have pointed out.
At least the Lamb article on the Confederate sniper was interesting!.....something you would never get out of an ad like the rest of the mag...HA!
FWIW
YMMV
Articles = ads.
Little to none on the 'how -to'....self admitted in the land nav article...sell sell sell.
Oh well . Had to happen to make it profitable , as others have pointed out.
At least the Lamb article on the Confederate sniper was interesting!.....something you would never get out of an ad like the rest of the mag...HA!
FWIW
YMMV
We agree again.
I bought it, yes it is advertising for guns and equipment but they talk about three of the best gas guns. It talks about the most common guns that come up on here all the time, JP, LMT and Larue. To be honest if these type magazines weren't out there how would most people hear about new improved gear.
That is my point exactly, there is information that most people would never hear about. I know you rarely here a bad review on a gun in a magazine but it still gives you information and pictures that is very helpful when trying to decide what a person might want in a gun and or equipment. Plus what better way to kill time then reading about guns.
Off topic as it doesn't cater to the "sniper" crowd exclusively; but I've read a quite a few bad reviews in Recoil. I tend to refer to the forums for reviews and honest opinions, however even then some members exhibit preference towards their high dollar purchases so I take all reviews with a grain of salt.
Gun rags are just entertainment and a time killer, nothing more nothing less...at least in my opinion.
Gun rags are just entertainment and a time killer, nothing more nothing less...at least in my opinion.
The thing I like about Gun Tests (and dislike about the more conventional Gun Magazines/Rags) is that the firearms they test/review are a lot more attainable than the Multi-$K Wundergewehren that are all we usually get to see in the others.
Greg
Greg
Is there anywhere to get any of the back issues?
The thing I didn't like about Gun Tests when I was subscribing 8 years ago or so, was the plethora of 1911 reviews and the fact that they reviewed a lot of handguns, and only a few rifles.
Are they dropping the digital version????
I haven't read ANYTHING in Recoil since they went off on how civilians don't "need" certain guns.
I certainly disagree with what was written and am not trying to defend it by any means but here are my thoughts on the matter. It seemed more of poor writing than interjection of opinion. The writer was regurgitating H&K's policy and reasoning for not selling the MP7 to civilians. In poor taste it read as if he was trying to spruce it up or justify it. Regardless, if I recall correctly he wrote a retraction and apologized.
I think you might think a bit differently of this one, Cobra. Although it has it's fair share of ads (what mag doesn't anymore?), the majority of the articles are well written and get into some more technical aspects of LR/Precision shooting. Let's just say that it's one of the better of the gun mags out there. I actually appreciated the content of the articles.
Also, it appears the editor pens most of the articles himself.
I will, however, have to forgive them for placing that fucking tacticaltrifles.net ad at the bottom of page 73.
ETA - @ Cobra, if you'd like to check it out, PM me your address and I'll send my copy over to you.
Similar threads
