Gunblast: Reliable or Not?

[Longitude Zero]

It never ceases to amaze me that EVERY ONE of the weapons and merchandise he "evaluates" comes out with a positive recommendation.

The law of averages would tell a reasonable person that every once in a while a klanger would find its way into Jeff's hands. He had a positive recommendation on the Diamondback handgun that has been reported on various internet forums to be infested with difficulties.

Trustworthy or not??? Or is he nothing more than entertainment with little to no redeeming educational value???

[Mits3kgt88]

Hmm...I've only read a handful of his reviews. Maybe he tends to look the other way when he reviews a gun he likes and doesn't want them to look bad and inferior. Or maybe he's paid to review them. I don't know.

[jocko]

It never ceases to amaze me that EVERY ONE of the weapons and merchandise he "evaluates" comes out with a positive recommendation.

The law of averages would tell a reasonable person that every once in a while a klanger would find its way into Jeff's hands. He had a positive recommendation on the Diamondback handgun that has been reported on various internet forums to be infested with difficulties.

Trustworthy or not??? Or is he nothing more than entertainment with little to no redeeming educational value???

to think u hit the ol nail right on the head. I have an ol time good friend who was an outdoor writer for years. Basically he covered the fishing industry and he never gave a bad review on a laure, fish finder, rod or reel, and he has a home fu7ll of items those companies sent to him for evualiation with the below PS. tellinghim after the review, just keep the product. Now do u think he was going to give them a bad review and then in a round about way get banned by the fishing industry from getting any freebies to evualate, . He told me one bad review on a product and he was history. Might not be right bhut I bet this stillholds true today and that goes for the firearms industry also. Knock a glock for reliablity an d you wn't get anyt Sigs, or Smiths to write up about These gun makers know exactly who to send a product to for a "good" review. . How many bad reviews have we efvger read in the NRA magazine???

[Longitude Zero]

So true jocko. But to the best of my knowledge nobody here has ever had a review published in print anywhere, or have they?

[heeler]

Could be he is getting a highly prepped gun from the maker to assure it's stellar performance.
I had an old friend that worked for the now defunct Cycle Guide motorcycle magazine and they were always being accused of being overly biased about Honda motorcycles.
My friend was an honest guy and just told it as it was.
But one never really knows.
I always hate to question a man's integrity on no facts.
However I must admit he did get a lot of free evaulation gifts just as Jocko pointed out.

[Ubaldo99]

Too true. I posted a thread to this effect on another handgun forum and got back lots of comments along these lines. I've read quite a few "GunBlast" reviews and they are all invariably favorable. It is to Forums like "KahrTalk" and others that we must look to acquire a real-world assessment of the merit or defects of firearms.

[Jeremiah/Az]

He sure seems to get every new gun that comes out. I wonder if he buys them himself.

The only gun rag I have ever seen that will trash some guns is "Gun Tests" I believe is the name. They do not accept any advertising either. I dropped it because it didn't test many guns that I had any interest in.

[Bill K]

For reasons already stated I give very little weight to the Gunblast reviews.

[MrToad]

If Jeff is paid to do the review, he certainly doesn't appear to upsell. I watched his review of the P45/CW45 and he stated for the money he preferred the CW45 over the P45.

[mr surveyor]

About 10 years ago my son and I had the opportunity to beta test a package of high tech, rather small target group, technical equipment. We were fairly new to that type of technology, but our enthusiasm on related professional chat boards was well known. The equipment manufacturer arrainged for me (us) to beta test their first out units, and exchange for our documented efforts we could either keep the non serial numbered (no warranty) units, or buy the "ready for prime time" units later for 1/2 price. To make a long story a sentence or two shorter, I opted for the former (and believe it or not, we are still using these original beta units that were declared obsolete in 2006), and I wrote a couple of very detail specific related papers that were published in one of our profession related magazines. I won't go into further detail on the product, but I was, and still am amazed at the honesty of the manufacturer in actually building an entry level priced professional grade product out of the "consumer grade" parts that was every bit as good (or better) than most of the professional grade products on the market. Our "reviews", both published and website chatter, apparantly were well received by the manufacturer, and we were given the same opportunity to beta test the second generation of the tools. Same experience. Shortly after that, my son was recognized as the better "reviewer", and low and behold he was approached by another of our trade magazines to do product reviews for their publication 3-4 times per year. We've had stuff delivered to the office to "test and review" that was valued anywhere from $500 to the most expensive package of $180k. I don't think anyone that has wasted the time to read this jibberish this far would doubt me when I say that at least 1/3 of the stuff surv jr. does product reviews on is not ready for prime time. Now, how does the review go? The good traits get high praise, and the bad traits are mentioned with "needs some work, but further development should work great" type comments. It's the nature of capitalistic journalism.... the reviewer is paid by the publisher that is paid by the product manufacturer for the advertisement in the publication. Bad review equals bad advertisement equals lost customer for the publication. There just aren't very many publications (or web sites now) that can stay in business with only subscription fees or membership dues. Without all the slick, colored picture pages and inserts there wouldn't be many magazines (including the NRA mags) available. And without creative writing by the "product reviewers" there would be about 1/3 less products displayed in the printed publications or on the interenet super highway.

was I rambling again:confused:



surv

[QuercusMax]

It never ceases to amaze me that EVERY ONE of the weapons and merchandise he "evaluates" comes out with a positive recommendation.


Indeed, very suspicious. Either the reviewers are not very perceptive or they only publish the positive ones. In either case, you have to wonder if you, the reader, are getting the whole story.

We need to know the facts, which can be good or bad. But as several have pointed out, manufacturers are only interested in getting positive reviews. And many people actually don't want to hear negative reviews, because they are disappointing or downers.

I have written quite a few reviews on Amazon, and have been contacted by several book publishers who offered me other books for free. Unsurprisingly, this only happened from publishers whose books that I had given a positive review. I declined the offers.

I've only read Gunblast a little bit, but I didn't find it that helpful. Maybe this was the reason.

[les strat]

This is why I like Kickok45's youtube channel. He gives the ins and outs of each gun he gets/tries out. When he doesn't like something about a particular weapon, he states it, but in a nice way. I know he doesn't want to quit getting guns from Ruger, etc, but doesn't mind calling out things "some folks" won't like, like mag disconnects, excessive safety doo-dads....
But man can he shoot. He makes any gun look good!

[Longitude Zero]

Bout what I figured. This is another reason that I pay almost no attention to the self annointed so called gun cogescenti in the mags like Sanow, Marshall, Gary Paul and the lot of them are just paper posers.

Of all the writers the only real deal is the late Jim Cirillo. I had the good fortune to meet him and he is truly the master. Ayoob is kinda good, however he has light years to go to even be in the same class as JC.

[TheTman]

Gunblast did help influence me to buy my Charter Arms .44 special. There aren't that many lightweight .44's around, so I did read his review, and liked his accuracy results and the way he said the gun felt and that the recoil was not excessive for such a lightweight gun partially do to the nice rubber grips it came with. I found everything he said about it true, although I've never tried to duplicate the small groups he got.
I remember Jeff Cooper hating the gun, stating while the idea was great, the execution was terrible, but that was quite a few years ago, with different owners and such. I got about what I figured I'd get, a nice lightweight .44 special, that shoots better than you would think it would. I look at it as a shoot a little, but carry a lot gun. I don't think it will last much over maybe 10 thousand rounds. Since I replaced the rubber grips with the Barami Hip Grippers that have a hook to snag your belt or the top of your pants, the recoil is not nearly so pleasant, but concealibility has been enhanced greately. It did have to go back for service once, the cylinder got some play in it somehow and the firing pin did not striker the primer hard enough to detonate the cartridge. It was fixed free and back in my hands within a couple of weeks. Has shot fine ever since then. I wear my padded shorty biker gloves when shooting it, or else swap out the grips, a 5 minute job. I figure in a situation you're not going to worry about your shooting hand hurting until a lot later. It definately packs a wallop. I wanted a .44 special since thats about as close to a .45 as you can get in a rimmed cartridge, and there is very good SD ammo available for it.
Thats my experience, I felt what he said was true about the gun. Perhaps if he doesn't like a gun he states that privately to the gun maker. I do like Hickock45 too, he seems very honest and is one hell of a shot, and I trust his opinion very much. There are a lot of other youtube pieces on this or that gun, that I take with a grain of salt.

[O'Dell]

No question about it - Jeff never met a gun he didn't like. I used to use his reviews to reinforce my decision to buy a "questionable" gun I just wanted. Sometimes it worked out, sometimes not.

[steve666]

Below is a copy of the letter I sent to a popular gun magazine (G&A) about 5 years ago when I decided not to renew my subscription.

Honest Reviews?
Let me preface this by saying that I am a lifelong lover of guns and shooting. In my approximately 45 years of shooting I have used every type of firearm, from the smallest of vest pocket pistols thru crew served machine guns. As a result of this experience I am forced to conclude that your writers are the luckiest people in the world. They get to try both the latest and the greatest of firearms and get paid to do it. Also, they apparently have never found a firearm that they didn’t like. If they did they haven’t bothered to mention it to us. I have never seen a quote that is similar to the following: “If you have a choice between ABC MegaBlaster and a rock, choose the rock. It’s cheaper, more reliable, easier to throw, and you don’t need a permit to carry it.” In fact I have never seen a substantially negative statement about any firearm ever reviewed. People rely on your reviews to make informed choices. If all of your reviews are sugar-coated to avoid offending current or potential advertisers you are failing in your duty to your readers. I’m sorry but not all firearms are created equal, some need to be flushed like the c*** they are.

[TucsonMTB]

His reviews always have lots of excellent pictures and the video of him shooting the gun helps one get a feel for the product. I remember his review of at least one product being later than usual, compared to the release date and other reviewers. He later mentioned in a forum posting that pistol he had been sent had a malfunction, so he waited for a replacement before completing his review of that particular "dandy" new gun. :D

In other words, there is lots of good material to make your own decision in his product demonstrations. I usually enjoy them a lot.

[Longitude Zero]

Below is a copy of the letter I sent to a popular gun magazine (G&A) about 5 years ago when I decided not to renew my subscription.

Honest Reviews?
Let me preface this by saying that I am a lifelong lover of guns and shooting. In my approximately 45 years of shooting I have used every type of firearm, from the smallest of vest pocket pistols thru crew served machine guns. As a result of this experience I am forced to conclude that your writers are the luckiest people in the world. They get to try both the latest and the greatest of firearms and get paid to do it. Also, they apparently have never found a firearm that they didn’t like. If they did they haven’t bothered to mention it to us. I have never seen a quote that is similar to the following: “If you have a choice between ABC MegaBlaster and a rock, choose the rock. It’s cheaper, more reliable, easier to throw, and you don’t need a permit to carry it.” In fact I have never seen a substantially negative statement about any firearm ever reviewed. People rely on your reviews to make informed choices. If all of your reviews are sugar-coated to avoid offending current or potential advertisers you are failing in your duty to your readers. I’m sorry but not all firearms are created equal, some need to be flushed like the c*** they are.

My sentiments exactely about the VAST MAJORITY of the gun press in total. Thanks for posting.

Absolutley Tuscon. On the video situiton I am not so willing to accept. My neighbor works for one of the big three here in my city. Even someone with only home type equipment can distort/obfuscate/outright lie on video. Unless it has a continous nonstop timer counter visible I am skeptical. And even then....

[johnh]

I have done a few compensated product reviews online for companies over the years. My rule of thumb has always been if I like the product, I do the review. If I don't like it, I send it back, tell them my constructive opinion of the product, and do not do the review. The company at least gets my input and perhaps that is of some benefit. It is a service they are paying for, but I will not do a fluff review of something that I really do not like/advocate.

[MrToad]

I can very easily relate to what Mr. Surveyor said.

Not too long ago I used to do mobile tech reviews for a couple of websites, pro bono, and for hardware I was asked to either a)return the product once review was done, b)offer it up on the given website(s) as as contest item. For software items they were either trial versions or else they'd just give me a full version for review. It was expected of us to give an impartial review and not soft-peddle any obvious faults. I got to know a few other fairly well known mobile tech bloggers and one thing I found was consistent with the folks I dealt with: there were never any "paid" or "bought" reviews, and it was considered extremely bad form to gloss over faults.

Downplaying an obvious fault of a program or hardware item would reflect badly on our website(s), and ultimately on the manufacturers themselves. This is a lose-lose situation for all: the reviewer loses credibility and manufacturers will shy away from him or her and the website, and the manufacturer could potentially lose market share and integrity in the eyes of consumers, and possibly suffer legal consequences.

If gun reviewers are sugar-coating their reviews, that's really inexcusable and potentially very dangerous. My phone spontaneously rebooting during a call isn't quite in the same league as something like a gun that, for our like-minded group, is something that operates as essentially a safety device that could save lives.

EDIT: With regard to compensated reviews, I wouldn't have a problem with them as long as full disclosure in the review/website were done.

[les strat]

That's why most reviews in magazines I take with a grain of salt. That magazine/ezine is not going to lose thousands of dollars on advertisement or free gear from a company for a bad review of that gun, knife, reel, etc.

Can't remember the last time I read an article that basically said this ______ is a POS.

[wyntrout]

I have done a few compensated product reviews online for companies over the years. My rule of thumb has always been if I like the product, I do the review. If I don't like it, I send it back, tell them my constructive opinion of the product, and do not do the review. The company at least gets my input and perhaps that is of some benefit. It is a service they are paying for, but I will not do a fluff review of something that I really do not like/advocate.

Bravo, John. That's my thinking as well. I have an obsessive compulsion to speak my mind... often negative... it's like a wildcat trying to claw its way up out of my throat... really! I've tried to control that kind of stuff, especially with my wife!

I have kind of stood back from myself in a "detached mode" and observed that I knew I didn't want to say something... and shouldn't... but, there was this almost uncontrollable urge to make my comments! I realize and understand this and have tried to explain that to my wife.

I've gotten better at reducing but not completely eliminating these urges, but I couldn't begin to sell stuff that I didn't feel was up to my "standards" or expectations.

I, too, really like Hickok45 with his unrehearsed and honest gun tests.

I shudder and roll my eyes a lot in stores where some "associate" is telling a customer that the product in question is exactly what they need at the greatest price!

I've lost a lot of sales in our garage sales because I won't sell something to a customer that won't do what they are expecting it to do. I tell them what I would like to hear if I were in their shoes... a part of the Golden Rule... "Do unto others as you would have them do to you"... of course, I still have Cole Younger's corollary "Do unto others BEFORE they do unto you" if it looks like things are going the wrong way.

How's that for straying from the thread? :rolleyes: :blushing:

Wynn:D

[jlottmc]

I think it's about time to chime in on this one. I am suspicious of ALL gun writers. That said I look at what they like, how they liked it, their tone in the write up (a ho-hum attitude says a lot about a gun vs enthusiasm), and how many others I see writing about a gun, as well as what they say between them. I dismiss anything else as a paid puff piece. Usually works too.

[TucsonMTB]

Here is the review that, along with my experience shooting other .40 S&W carry guns, convinced me to buy a new PM40 on GunBroker.com.

http://knight67.blogspot.com/2008/04/gun-review-kahr-pm40.html