Guns Magazine: Surplus Edition (a disappointment)

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Guns Magazine: Surplus Edition (a disappointment)

Posted: 4/8/2015 10:22:07 PM EDT

I look forward to this special issue each year, but I almost tossed it halfway through. There is a feature on the PU sniper that touts the amazing features of the Mitchell's Mauser version. The whole four pages sounded like an expanded version of the ads you see for Mitchell's. How these were hand picked and are the last surplus coming in because of UN pressure.

As a gun collector it insults my intelligence. It makes several soft mentions of the refinishing and mark scrubbing, so Im guessing this maddened "Mitchell." Either the editors are too stupid to notice, or they're in on it (to quote De Niro in Casino)

Posted: 4/8/2015 11:12:20 PM EDT

[#1]

Welcome to the world of printed gun writers: don't write anything unless someone is paying you to write their view.

Every single magazine is nothing but ads, even the so called "practical" articles are just rehashed instructions peppered with brand names who paid for the article.

Even the NRA magazines now days are nothing more than page after page of "buy this product because I was paid to say this/given a free one".

Posted: 4/9/2015 8:11:59 AM EDT

[#2]

It is something of a disappointment that the articles are so "product" driven on certain guns. I can overlook the adds because that's essential in the magazine industry. At the end of the day you still get some pretty pictures and some history in a physical format (as opposed to reading on the net).

As to the Mitchell Snipers, all I know is to stay away from their Mausers. I would not trust that their snipers got similar treatment (if they were ever snipers to begin with). I will spend my money with a more reputable dealer who will generally be selling a real sniper for less than a Mitchell one that is questionable.

Posted: 4/9/2015 9:32:50 AM EDT

[#3]

Ya, I just think once you sink to trumpeting Mitchell's Mausers greatness, you've fallen to a new ring of hell

Posted: 4/9/2015 9:44:22 AM EDT

[#4]

I don't even waste my time or money on gun magazines anymore. The last couple of times I bought one I ended up feeling violated after reading it.

Posted: 4/9/2015 5:15:43 PM EDT

[#5]

The only mag i buy now is gun test only honest ones that give real life reviews of guns purchased at local stores not mfg specially prep crap like the other gun mags get.

Posted: 4/9/2015 9:40:51 PM EDT

[#6]

Quote History

Quoted:
The only mag i buy now is gun test only honest ones that give real life reviews of guns purchased at local stores not mfg specially prep crap like the other gun mags get.

View Quote

This.

Posted: 4/10/2015 7:53:41 AM EDT

[#7]

I have the new copy and am also disappointed.

Is this the GunTests site for the mag mentioned above: http://www.gun-tests.com ?

Posted: 4/10/2015 2:41:27 PM EDT

[#8]

Uh, guys, they have been printing and reprinting the same articles since 1985. No really, 1985. I have the first four original editions-which I bought when I was still in High School.... and nothing has changed. Why? Because there is essentially no change in surplus firearms, duh. It's all the same crap that was around in 1985. How much can you "discover" about a K98 or a 1891 Mosin Nagant? Really?

Posted: 4/10/2015 9:50:39 PM EDT

[#9]

Quote History

Quoted:
I have the new copy and am also disappointed.

Is this the GunTests site for the mag mentioned above: http://www.gun-tests.com ?

View Quote

Yes.

Posted: 4/11/2015 10:53:11 PM EDT

[#10]

Not much new in this one. The old Surplus series was pretty good esp in the early nineties when there was no other source of info if you didn't have a significant private gun book library.

The internet has pretty much made the surplus mags obsolete and like pointed out they rarely have articles in them of unusual surplus arms esp in the newer Guns version short of the Sheehan articles which are prettygood.

Posted: 4/12/2015 7:00:11 PM EDT

[#11]

An editor for a now defunct gun magazine posted on another gun board . He said they would not publish an article that showed a gun in a bad light . if the sample had an issue they would retest it until it passed.

Posted: 4/13/2015 6:20:15 AM EDT

[#12]

Pre-internet the Surplus editions the gun rag companies would put out along with the odd Shotgun News mil-surp article were a great thing to the budding "cruffer", now not so much.

LOL....I judge the "character" of the various gun rags by their inclusion of Mitchell's Mauser ads....Seems most are found wanting. That includes American Rifleman. They all should be indicted as a party to fraud.

Posted: 4/14/2015 11:57:57 AM EDT

[#13]

I've been buying up old editions of Guns & Ammo and the G&A Annuals from the 1970s and early 80s. IMHO, those years seemed to be the indian summer of gun magazines, or maybe it was because that's when I first got interested in shooting.

I stopped reading gun magazines years ago because they had become adds for high dollar guns that I couldn't afford and the articles were short and shallow! I will buy the Shotgun News annual, though, but mostly for the gunsmithing articles.

Posted: 4/14/2015 6:24:05 PM EDT

[#14]

Quote History

Quoted:
Uh, guys, they have been printing and reprinting the same articles since 1985. No really, 1985. I have the first four original editions-which I bought when I was still in High School.... and nothing has changed. Why? Because there is essentially no change in surplus firearms, duh. It's all the same crap that was around in 1985. How much can you "discover" about a K98 or a 1891 Mosin Nagant? Really?

View Quote

Man speaks the truth.

Posted: 4/14/2015 7:35:04 PM EDT

[#15]

Quote History

Quoted:
Uh, guys, they have been printing and reprinting the same articles since 1985. No really, 1985. I have the first four original editions-which I bought when I was still in High School.... and nothing has changed. Why? Because there is essentially no change in surplus firearms, duh. It's all the same crap that was around in 1985. How much can you "discover" about a K98 or a 1891 Mosin Nagant? Really?

View Quote

This has nothing to do with new info, but everything to do with supporting shiesty companies. Yes really, read the original post.

Posted: 6/23/2015 9:26:53 PM EDT

[#16]

I have noticed that they praise century arms (I know they bring in a bunch of surplus) and that they are the best put together or refurbished rifles you can buy.

Between that and the MM ads I'm tired of reading the crap they spew in them

I will buy one every now and again for looking at the pretty pics or a time waster on a trip.

I really wish a gun mag would come out and have the balls to say the truth, but then it wouldn't last long due to not getting ad $$$$

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Guns Magazine: Surplus Edition (a disappointment)

Armory » Curios & Relics

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us