Posted: 5/26/2026 11:58:13 AM EDT
|
I am not sure if it is easier or more difficult to buy guns these days based on the sheer amount of information that is available from so many sources. Information coming from manufacturers, paid influencers, regular Joe's sharing their shooting experiences. On one hand, you can learn a lot from watching videos of people with their experiences with different firearms. On the other, you can learn a lot from watching videos of people with their experiences with different firearms.  Do you find that issues are just much more amplified on the internet these days? it seems like unless you go custom, every manufacturer is pumping out guns with issues involving QC I was looking at a few different guns and after looking at so much online content about them, i'm not sure i would buy any of them now.
|
Having a bayonet is the very definition of bringing a knife to a gun fight
|
I bought a SA-35 and have around 600 problem free rounds through it now. I too had heard of the extractor issues, and just decided I'll replace it when the time comes. It's a great gun. Attached File If anything the Youtube reviews gave me the heads up on the issue. |
|
It’s almost as if there is too much information available. For me it creates “analysis paralysis”. For internet reviews and topics of discussion they typically seem to focus on the negatives. Which are likely a small sample size. But if I’m shopping for a gun for a specific use I want to hear or read about the bad. Like functionality or longevity. The good is likely subjective such as trigger feel and accuracy. It can be tiresome. |
|
I just take their videos with a grain of salt. Lots of them are just pure entertainment value. Especially those EDC and round high count BS. Those things look brand new. As to QC issues, yes the internet does amplify the issue. I think it is good as it put the co on notice, but it shouldn’t deter you from buying. I will say that in my lifetime of buying guns I have only encountered 1 lemon. All my guns have been reliable and accurate. Maybe I’ve been lucky or I’m just good at maintaining my stuff. Nowadays, it’s extremely hard to buy crap, but it does happen. |
|
Originally Posted By sydney7629: Do you find that issues are just much more amplified on the internet these days? it seems like unless you go custom, every manufacturer is pumping out guns with issues involving QC yes, it is with everything....trucks, guns, 4-wheelers, chainsaws, tools, anything and everything. |
|
I grew up with the internet.* While I obviously understand that ARFCOM is on the internet, I somewhat treat it differently than Reddit or youtube (I have more trust of ARFCOM, because many members are long-standing and quite knowledgeable). I still mainly rely on my personal experiences and those of folks I trust (including ARFCOM) as well as brand reputation before buying a handgun. I mainly have experience with Springfield/HS Produkt pistols-- that's because a relative introduced me to the XD9 and I eventually bought one and I've been using Springfield pistols ever since. When I recently bought my first revolver, I went with a Ruger because of my personal experiences with their rifles, recommendations on ARFCOM, and recommendations of other trusted folks. But (and this is a big thing), I sought out a lot of those recommendations due to the documented quality issues with new production revolvers. So, I guess my take is trust the internet/youtube to highlight potential problems, but trust but verify. *When I was a kid, the internet was basically used for flash games and google searches; it wasn't nearly as predominant as it is today. |
|
I don’t watch gun content on YouTube, at least not reviews or shooting… what little I do see are one-off videos for disassembly and such. As to other internet info, you can find a problem on anything if you look hard enough. Resale value is a more fundamental measure of how a gun is widely perceived. For example, there’s a reason that used Taurus guns almost always trade at a steep discount on the used market. |
https://www.guntechtips.com
No, I think there literally are more QC issues nowadays.  I like having more information available. The YouTubers aren’t reliable so I look for experience on the forums mostly. I use that info to make decisions like buying a used MD-made M9A1 instead of one made in TN. Also I recently learned (from YouTube, in this case) that the Century AES-10B2 is just like the well-made Romanian imported RPKs of old. I’ve wanted an RPK for a while so I picked one up. I got excellent heads-up info from the internet too… “Brownells just discontinued their retro BRN-10 and only the latest ones came with heat shields in the handguard.” -Let me go buy one immediately. Same for when the VEPR-12 got banned from import in 2017. (Before that, I was tracking the QC issues on the gas port holes, but fortunately I got a great one.) Also I was informed that the earlier models had a tack-welded folding stock that could be rendered foldable again so I sought one out and got it for $800. All this good Internet info allows me to make informed decisions like that. 
|
|
It is extremely challenging to find reliable info these days. YouTube big names are mostly bought and paid for. Even so, there is no editor function or business owner function, so content is unreliable at best. I’m really mad at YouTube demonetization and the companies paying under the table. It has killed the value of content. Forums are helpful, but people get trapped in their 1 experience. 1 good or bad experience. Reddit and Facebook have kind of a cult of personality thing going on where content is as much about the poster than the gun. People get into the buy what I bought mode or I paid $$$ so I’m ignoring the bad accuracy and ftf’s. Still, there is kind of a strong push to not let mistakes out the door. There is also a strong push to drive towards as machined without QC vs putting your company name in a fitter and inspector’s hands. Humans just have a higher failure rate than machines. |
|
Originally Posted By sydney7629:Do you find that issues are just much more amplified on the internet these days? it seems like unless you go custom, every manufacturer is pumping out guns with issues involving QC I was looking at a few different guns and after looking at so much online content about them, i'm not sure i would buy any of them now. I have owned a lot of guns that were reportedly problematic on the internet. I've not had any of those issues. Personally I also think folks in social media are often too picky about inconsequential things. Take triggers for instance. Folks often complain about poor triggers in guns that are perfectly fine. Maybe coming from a C&R world has trained me just to make things work. Old C&R handguns had horrible ergonomics and often gritty or heavy triggers. Not that I'd use a C&R for SD, but I wouldn't let the shortcomings ruin my enjoyment. There's also the pressure to jump to the latest thing. Find something that works for SD and CCW, and stick with it. My CCWs have always been at least 5 years on the market and once I've decided it works for me, I'll stick with a CCW for at least 5 or more years before even considering something else. I don't even try brand new guns. I wait until they've simmered in the market for at least a year or two. There's an old saying in the car world, never buy the first model year of any car. I think it's true in guns as well. |
|
10-15 years ago I would research the shit out of products on the internet. Maybe I was too trusting of what I was reading but I felt like I could get good feedback on items. Now days I hardly look for reviews. I may browse a few forums and see if I can find a common theme but that’s about it. Been eyeballing a Springfield Prodigy. Every single person I have talked to in person has loved theirs, except for one guy who “preferred his Stacatto” yet the internet tells me the prodigy is the biggest steaming pile of shit out there. lol. So who’s right? |
|
Originally Posted By dmk0210: I have owned a lot of guns that were reportedly problematic on the internet. I've not had any of those issues. Personally I also think folks in social media are often too picky about inconsequential things. Take triggers for instance. Folks often complain about poor triggers in guns that are perfectly fine. Same. I've had a factory warranty issue on a total of one new in the box firearm, and it wasn't even defective, but a workmanship issue that they resolved. In terms of the triggers, I respect everyone's opinion, but I'm not at all picky. In almost every instance where I was warned about the trigger, I tried the gun in question, and I thought it was either fine or (and most of the time this is the case) an actually very nice trigger pull. I don't understand this part, but then again, I spend more on ammunition than guns and have fewer firearms than many Arfcommers clearly have. Once again, I'm not down on anyone for enjoying the hobby differently, but there's areas where my preferences and experiences simply don't align with others. |
|
I recently got an impulse craving for the Armscorp STK150 1911/Glock 19 Gen 3 mishmash clone. For the last couple of weeks I've watched just about every YouTube review video on it that makes it seem very attractive. Thankfully I found one in stock at a LGS. They wanted waaay too much for it but at least I could put my hands on it. Thank goodness I did. That thing is a heavy beast with some very unusual internals that totally turned me off of it. Saved myself several hundred dollars. |
Joined:
Sep 2022
Posts:
2686
EE: 0% (0)
USA
|
Easier if you're able to filter the subjective and random stuff out. E.g. if the reviewer points out that the charging handle is reciprocating, that's likely a useful piece if information. If a reviewer says that a gun is smooth-shooting, I don't even know what that means. QC is hard to assess over the Internet. But warranty experience matters. |
|
Originally Posted By dmk0210: I think a lot of issues are put under a microscope and amplified in forums and social media. I have owned a lot of guns that were reportedly problematic on the internet. I've not had any of those issues. Originally Posted By dmk0210: I think a lot of issues are put under a microscope and amplified in forums and social media. I have owned a lot of guns that were reportedly problematic on the internet. I've not had any of those issues. Originally Posted By NN300BLK:Same. I've had a factory warranty issue on a total of one new in the box firearm, and it wasn't even defective, but a workmanship issue that they resolved. Once the guns have been in production for a year or two, maybe most issues have been resolved (certainly not always, but mostly). |
|
Originally Posted By dmk0210: I wonder if maybe it's because a lot of YT and Social Media reviewers are very early adopters. Everyone eagerly awaits to see reviews of that brand new gun they saw released at Shot Show and nobody cares about a review that's two years late, because everyone's moved on to the next new thing. Originally Posted By dmk0210: I wonder if maybe it's because a lot of YT and Social Media reviewers are very early adopters. Everyone eagerly awaits to see reviews of that brand new gun they saw released at Shot Show and nobody cares about a review that's two years late, because everyone's moved on to the next new thing. Some just get sent test samples to showcase (that they can usually buy for a reduced price, if they want) but that all tends to introduce bias because even if they’re fairly objective, if they write a negative review they may not have early access to that manufacturer’s models anymore so it’d hurt their own content/channel. The biggest problem I have when searching for good info in all the clutter is that everyone talks about something before it is released (so most people talking have no experience with it) and then once it’s released and available it’s hardly discussed (or it’s much harder to find those discussions) unless it’s a really popular item. Because yeah, like you said, they’ve all moved onto “the next new thing” (that they also don’t really know about). Once the guns have been in production for a year or two, maybe most issues have been resolved (certainly not always, but mostly). Like SIG after 2005. It generally doesn’t pay to be an early adopter. It’s usually more expensive at the initial release, and you can end up with an inferior product because it was revised later (as you said). Or you can be a guy who didn’t buy an M249S initially, and then they got more expensive, and revised to have a worse trigger, and more expensive again. Then production paused for a while and extra expensive. Fortunately I found a used one prior to their pause in production and got a good deal. These things can be difficult to predict.
|
|
Originally Posted By KitBuilder:It generally doesn’t pay to be an early adopter. It’s usually more expensive at the initial release, and you can end up with an inferior product because it was revised later (as you said). Or you can be a guy who didn’t buy an M249S initially, and then they got more expensive, and revised to have a worse trigger, and more expensive again. Then production paused for a while and extra expensive. Fortunately I found a used one prior to their pause in production and got a good deal. These things can be difficult to predict.  I know I've been guilty of that in certain circumstances. These are often special cases though. Something that may have been around a while but we just can't get here. |
|
Originally Posted By KitBuilder: Most of the gunTubers (especially those with early or pre-release access to new models) aren’t “adopters;” they’re promoters. Some just get sent test samples to showcase (that they can usually buy for a reduced price, if they want) but that all tends to introduce bias because even if they’re fairly objective, if they write a negative review they may not have early access to that manufacturer’s models anymore so it’d hurt their own content/channel. Then there are the guys who are super critical and find something wrong with everything. Sometimes influencers, but much more in forums, Reddit and facebook. It's cool to be a critic in social media. |
|
Originally Posted By dmk0210: I wonder if maybe it's because a lot of YT and Social Media reviewers are very early adopters. Everyone eagerly awaits to see reviews of that brand new gun they saw released at Shot Show and nobody cares about a review that's two years late, because everyone's moved on to the next new thing. Once the guns have been in production for a year or two, maybe most issues have been resolved (certainly not always, but mostly). Originally Posted By dmk0210: Originally Posted By dmk0210: I think a lot of issues are put under a microscope and amplified in forums and social media. I have owned a lot of guns that were reportedly problematic on the internet. I've not had any of those issues. Originally Posted By NN300BLK:Same. I've had a factory warranty issue on a total of one new in the box firearm, and it wasn't even defective, but a workmanship issue that they resolved. Once the guns have been in production for a year or two, maybe most issues have been resolved (certainly not always, but mostly). Well, in my case, there was a bit of over-coating on a metal part, which they resolved. There was a secondary "feel" issue, but it passed all of the factory safety function tests during the warranty work, so I am completely satisfied with their warranty repair work. I later replaced the grip module with one that was a better size for me and it resolved the secondary issue--there was some mold flashing FOD stuck between the FCU and the grip module when I first got the gun and I suspected the grip module was tight on the FCU. So, both issues were likely due to normal variations in the manufacturing process rather than being an early production gun (the gun had been out for several years at this point). |
|
If you want to feel good about a purchase, you have two feel good options. 1. Get on the Internet and tell people their gun choice sucks but yours is the best. 2. Find positive YouTube reviews to validate your purchase. The reality is there are very few bad pistols out these days. The old saying “Beware the man with one gun, he can probably use it” is a crock of shit. In reality he probably argues about it on Reddit 3 hours per day, has shot it twice, and has less than 500 rounds through any pistol platform over his entire lifetime. He feels like an expert when he quotes spec sheets and YouTube reviews to validate his limited options and experience, and that’s what matters most to him. Majority of YouTube guys know this. They’re not just selling guns when they’re shilling, they’re selling validation. |
|
The urge to jump on the next hot thing, using internet info only without putting hands on to an item, is the problem. I gravitate to older used classic stuff, my total of new in box guns purchased in the last 15 years is only 4. And all 4 were already established designs with proven track records dating back decades I agree QC in general is not what it used to be. But then again I see lots of posts point out very small functionally inconsequential “ defects” that don’t mean anything. People taking run of the mill production guns and looking at things literally under a magnifying glass then complaining. Unrealistic expectations in a lot of cases. People expecting semi custom level quality on mass produced utility guns I am old enough to have experienced when there were just a handful of service caliber semi auto pistols on the market. Back then owning a pistol that would feed hollow points was considered a rare prize. Now it is a standard expectation ( as it should be today) Back in the 70’s for example, if you wanted a 1911 you had to buy a colt or old military surplus gun. There were not 30 factories churning them out. Overall even though they had a monopoly on the market, colt quality was better then. |
|
Originally Posted By JThompson: I find onLine reviews via boards like this better than YouTube reviews. Will watch YT review but then see if the gun board reviews mimic them. I don't think the issues are amplified but rather the quality has gone down. But don't ever forget that people on forums are also influenced by social media (there is a reason they call popular people on Social Media Influencers). Just putting out a seed of doubt or seed of hype can have a ripple effect in forums and even discussion among friends. |
|
As someone who is relatively new to guns, I believe GunTubers make it so much more difficult to learn the ins and outs of what works for new shooters. It took me a while to figure out most of them are like low IQ wine connoisseurs. "This gun has bold high capacity with hints of grip texture, accuracy, and concealability." |
| Every company can put out a bad gun. Buy what you want and let them fix it if there’s a problem. Only guns I’ve ever had problems with (in over 300 in my lifetime) were a FN FNX with a false trigger reset, a Sig P938 that was stovepipe city, and a Sig 551A1 with a rear drum sight that would spin freely. All were fixed and returned in proper working order. |
|
Originally Posted By captain127: The urge to jump on the next hot thing, using internet info only without putting hands on to an item, is the problem. I gravitate to older used classic stuff, my total of new in box guns purchased in the last 15 years is only 4. And all 4 were already established designs with proven track records dating back decades I agree QC in general is not what it used to be. But then again I see lots of posts point out very small functionally inconsequential “ defects” that don’t mean anything. People taking run of the mill production guns and looking at things literally under a magnifying glass then complaining. Unrealistic expectations in a lot of cases. People expecting semi custom level quality on mass produced utility guns I am old enough to have experienced when there were just a handful of service caliber semi auto pistols on the market. Back then owning a pistol that would feed hollow points was considered a rare prize. Now it is a standard expectation ( as it should be today) Back in the 70’s for example, if you wanted a 1911 you had to buy a colt or old military surplus gun. There were not 30 factories churning them out. Overall even though they had a monopoly on the market, colt quality was better then. While the urge to upgrade to the hot new thing certainly exists, my hunch is that it is less common than the internet would imply. Out of the upgrades I've done in the past 5 years, I bought a micro 9 (which having 2x the capacity of the old single stack micros is a huge incentive) and I sold an XDM Elite Compact (which is really between a G26 and G19 in overall size) in favor of an Echelon 4.0c. And this was in part due to the micro 9 effectively obsoleting the subcompact size for me (and as much as I like the XDM line, they feel very chunky in my hand and just never really felt right, though I can shoot them really well). 2011 style pistols seemed to have exploded in popularity, but the price has also seemed to come down. And I think the compensated stuff has a solid following, but in both cases, I have to wonder just how much the competition segment of the gun owning community shapes this perspective. A larger issue is that hype =/= sales volume or popularity. The Hudson H9 was the darling of the internet, but less of than 10k were made if I recall correctly. |
|
Originally Posted By DetroitSounds: Fuck GunTubers, and the majority of the gun community's biased, skewed opinions. There's only ONE sure shot way to know if a gun is for you. Buy, try, sell, buy, try, shoot, clean, shoot more, sell, buy, try.. keep. |
|
Originally Posted By cms81586: Nah he’s not wrong. Name a Guntuber with more than 1000 followers that isn’t an astronomical narcissist douche. They’ve decreased slightly since YouTube started demonetizing their content. Hammer Striker. His content is pretty informative-- good if you're looking to buy a gun, but not so much if you're just looking for entertainment. |
Joined:
Nov 2022
Posts:
1312
EE: 100% (7)
MI, USA
|
Originally Posted By cms81586: Nah he's not wrong. Name a Guntuber with more than 1000 followers that isn't an astronomical narcissist douche. They've decreased slightly since YouTube started demonetizing their content. Originally Posted By cms81586: Originally Posted By SquatchAv8: Dude, chill. It's just the internet. Nah he's not wrong. Name a Guntuber with more than 1000 followers that isn't an astronomical narcissist douche. They've decreased slightly since YouTube started demonetizing their content. |
|
It's true that so much info is at your fingertips but like the rest of the internet how much is complete bullshit? Also seems to me a lot of very knowledgeable real life experience "influencers" are over looked for the well polished presentations. I will pick a variety of reviews etc. and look for trends. Anything that gets glowing reports or anything that simply trashes something and I move on. Still even though the truth is out there it can be hard to find. |
If you think I am sexy now just wait until you find out I have full medical and dental.
Personal pronouns are; Bro/Dude
Personal pronouns are; Bro/Dude
|
The last few guns I purchased I did zero research on for the reasons stated above….too much noise online. I know the CC9, the bodyguard 2.0 and the m9 are gonna be good, I do not need some jerk off on youtube telling me that with their clickbait video thumbnail. I got sucked into the youtube gun marketing machine maybe 7-8 years ago and went crazy with building rifles and buying CZ’s and off hand niche calibers like the 5.7, 357 sig, 32 acp and such. If I had a time machine I would have had ADCO build my 11.3 upper again, buy a HK 556 rifle, stick with the glock 26 and saved a ton of money on holsters and guns I dont shoot. One positive that came out of it was my one and only drunk purchase. James Reeves was shooting a Ruger American 300 suppressed. I went to my LGS’s website and bought the exact setup. I enjoy shooting that |
|
it's really just a matter of incentives. When YouTube (or really any kind of content creation) became a viable business model for people to chase, the game was afoot. The problem is that once someone has committed to that particular treadmill, they have to maintain it or they are going to go bankrupt. If you want to get paid, you need traffic and views. To get that you have to create new stuff constantly, and make things that people will click on. Trying to make money on the internet with gun stuff in particular is really difficult because none of the platforms will actually let you monetize it. YouTube won't pay you for the ads they're showing on your videos, and the big internet ad companies won't do business with you, either. So you have to chase sponsorships from related companies willing to pay you, or you have to try and extract money directly from your audience via subscriptions/services/sales. All of it hinges on eyeballs, and like it or not people generally want to watch/read the same stuff. Content about using what you have to go train and get good doesn't get traction, but talking about the latest thing always does. There's also only so much you can actually produce on a weekly basis before you've effectively said everything you need to say. But the treadmill demands more, or else your livlihood goes out the window. |
|
Most YouTube videos are put out by shills getting paid off with free guns, money, or both. You see the same thing with cheaper optics. Osight shills are the most hilarious. |
Froot Loops are all the same flavor. They just taste like froot. Whatever the heck that is.
|
Originally Posted By DavidY: Most YouTube videos are put out by shills getting paid off with free guns, money, or both. You see the same thing with cheaper optics. Osight shills are the most hilarious. I was following until the Osight comment. That is good stuff? |