Thread: Nz outdoor hunting

Has anyone ever read an honest, unbiased (ie unpaid for) gear report in any mag?

Originally Posted by Pengy

Has anyone ever read an honest, unbiased (ie unpaid for) gear report in any mag?

Let me think............................................. ..um, um...............................no not based on the information on the articles.

Some one gave me a subscription as a present, ran out a couple of years ago but was pestered by them to renew for months, all pc crap, never a bad product, nothing leaks. Only one looked after is the wholesalers etc.

Originally Posted by rockland

That magazine is easily the worst, with too much swearing,references to drinking and some really shocking gory photos that should not have been published IMO.
Our local Public Library was getting it for their magazine rack.Had a chat with the head librarian and now they subscribe to Rod and Rifle instead.

LOL, I hope your pet librarian never drops in here for a look then.....

B

Originally Posted by Pengy

Has anyone ever read an honest, unbiased (ie unpaid for) gear report in any mag?

No. And to be my critical self I am sure I have yet to see a decent group shot and published.
Some of the shooting is average at best from reputable gear.

And some of the people these mags have got to test shotguns over the years I have never heard of.
You get to know who is who when you shoot the clay target circut.


Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

Your right ,a 50mm group even at 50m doesn't really cut it but the fact the group is 75mm low & 85mm right of center makes me wonder how many animals the expert that did it has shot. Wouldn't even hit many rabbits I would think.
I suspect the Des Coe's, Paul Vincent & John Wooley's of NZ don't get asked to do the test because most of the shot guns feature are below there standard of half descent. As for all the other crap ,WTF is it for ?

You guys think you might have some unrealistic expectations?

"Never read a bad review" - of course you haven't read a bad review because the bad reviews don't get printed You expect the writers to buy the gear they review? No, it is supplied to them and most likely by companies that already pay for advertisement in the magazines. And writers and editors do not bite the hand that feeds them. The magazines are a competitive market, so printing bad reviews gets you less advertising income and less items to review.
Also writers don't often get a piece of gear for months on end to use prior to putting something to print and as the vast majority of them also have day jobs and families they aren't exactly full time in the hills - so if a bit of kit doesn't fail on them in the first couple to four trips then they will write that - of course that doesn't mean the same bit of kit will therefore last someone 20 years.

“Never seen a good group” – yep, again not surprising considering writers basically have to stick with factory ammunition and that stuff isn’t cheap considering what writers get paid for a magazine article. And please forgive the writer for not wasting ammunition to re-sight the rifle in every time they tray another ammunition through it! There is likely some discussion here of practical accuracy compared to "it does 0.5MOA but I never shoot it that way in the hills". You are right though - some writers, including myself, simply can’t shoot a decent 100m group…

"Never heard of the shotgun writers" - not surprising this either - the shotgun writers are unlikely to be competitive shooters - most writers are not. As a competitive pistol and shotgun shooter yourself R93 would you be happy putting your training at risk by learning a new trigger, new stock, new ammunition every month?
A little while ago I offered one of the wholesalers the opportunity to send me one of their new long range scopes. I had a couple of long range steel competitions coming up and I would have been able to run a direct comparison of their new scope against some of the top end brands. You can see this as a risk for them though? What happens if their brand new and reasonably untested scope doesn’t stack up in direct comparison to the competition… and so it is safer for them to send it to someone who will test it by itself. Same could well be said for a shotgun, pistol, or essentially any piece of kit.

Now I do a little bit of writing for NZ Guns & Hunting (so go ahead and make your assumptions about my bias for this post ). I only do a little bit of writing because I don't have the patience for it and most of the time I don't feel I have sufficient expertise to comment much. I have only really done product reviews on stuff I have personally brought and so my negative comments have been limited to little things (and for the most part these negative comments have made it to print). My writing is also not so flash and I tend to try and focus more on photography than the actual article content.
Anyway, I was given a bit of advice from a writer I respect a few years ago - they said "only write something in a review based on your own experience, if the review goes bad then write that, if it felt cheap but worked for you then write that, if it was awesome then write that – let your editor decide what to publish or not publish”.

But bottom line the consumer votes with their money and you guys don't bother buying magazines... I do recommend though that you give writing a go for yourself – writing 3 or 4 articles will go a long way to pay for your next helicopter trip!


By the by - this post is one of the reasons some of what I write doesn't get printed - I simply don't know when to shut up, meaning a few of my articles are simply too long to be printed. A couple of years ago, after reading a couple of articles on shooting technique I didn't agree with, I wrote up my shooting approach at a long range steel competition (mostly a field competition). I went into detail about position set up, natural point of aim, hard hold vs free recoil, bipod technique, wind calling and bracketing, rapid fire technique, some reloading considerations, hand placement, breathing, holding vs dialing wind, competition tactics, mind set, etc... but it ended up so long it will never be printed.

My suggestion is not to take it personally.

I stand by my observations and do not see factory ammo as an excuse. A lot of rifle reviews I have seen, are done with reloads and factory ammo.






Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Gillie

A couple of years ago, after reading a couple of articles on shooting technique I didn't agree with, I wrote up my shooting approach at a long range steel competition (mostly a field competition). I went into detail about position set up, natural point of aim, hard hold vs free recoil, bipod technique, wind calling and bracketing, rapid fire technique, some reloading considerations, hand placement, breathing, holding vs dialing wind, competition tactics, mind set, etc... but it ended up so long it will never be printed.

Id like to read that.

Originally Posted by mikee

Its good for "dunny" reading though. Dual purpose even, in emergencies

I get it free from the mother in law as a subscription, so yes, its my dunny reading!

Originally Posted by R93

Worst magazine I have laid eyes on period.
FFS there is some shit written in all seriousness these days.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

says the guy with over 8000 posts most of which is pure bla bla bla?

Originally Posted by R93

My suggestion is not to take it personally.

I stand by my observations and do not see factory ammo as an excuse. A lot of rifle reviews I have seen, are done with reloads and factory ammo.

No worries R93, if i had taken something personally i wouldn't have bothered to reply - just trying to show the other side of the argument.

If a base requirement of being a magazine writer was being an exceptional reloader and an exceptional shooter there there would be very few writers. Also in my experience, you simply don't get paid enough for articles to warrant going through a reasonable load development for a rifle. A bit different if you already have the reloading components and a range of suitable powders and projectiles on hand but otherwise the writer will have to pay for that out of their own pocket.

Originally Posted by scoped

says the guy with over 8000 posts most of which is pure bla bla bla?

You are such a joy germ Scoped.

Originally Posted by scoped

says the guy with over 8000 posts most of which is pure bla bla bla?

The forum has an ignore function, you should use it.

Or have missed that like you missed the irony in your post.😆

On reflection I agree with you, but no one has to pay good coin to read my drivel.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by scoped

says the guy with over 8000 posts most of which is pure bla bla bla?

Those 8k+ make some of the drivel readable & help to maintain some semblance of normality that makes the multitude of posts at least readable.
Perhaps a little gratitude to R93 would be in order?