Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 8/30/2004 3:13:56 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/31/2004 3:04:52 PM EST by redfisher]
Get a load of Popular Mechanics current issue....



there is actually a great review on many new H&K models, the (a new) Ump and others, plus the Knight's SR25, the venerable M4, and the ever popular XM-8 in its many variations- not a bad read, especially for a car rag. ......take it back

edited to add: the "Car Rag" reference shows my unfamiliarity with the magazine -up until now.
- count on that to change.

Link Posted: 8/30/2004 7:02:45 PM EST
I read Popular Mechanics regularly. Before I used the Internet and found AR15.com, that was the only way I could keep up with military technology developments.

I used to read Popular Science, but they were too politically correct. Every other month some soccer mom would write either of them and blast them for their gun ads or articles on guns and weapons technology. Popular Science caved in and you will hardly ever see any article about weapons technology that isn't military based or they have an article every so often on how technology can help with gun control.

On the other hand, Popular Mechanics' editor-in-chief got so tired defending themselves from the soccer moms, he blasted back in a full page editorial about how they are a magazine about technology and how firearm technologies had a proper place in the magazine. They will not bow down to politics, their position is to neutrally cover technology with no preconceived notions whether it's "bad" or "good."

They have as many articles about weapons tech as they do car tech usually and they try to stay neutral telling as many cons and pros as they can.
Link Posted: 8/30/2004 7:57:30 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/30/2004 7:59:02 PM EST by Skammy]

Originally Posted By wittzo:
I read Popular Mechanics regularly. Before I used the Internet and found AR15.com, that was the only way I could keep up with military technology developments.

I used to read Popular Science, but they were too politically correct. Every other month some soccer mom would write either of them and blast them for their gun ads or articles on guns and weapons technology. Popular Science caved in and you will hardly ever see any article about weapons technology that isn't military based or they have an article every so often on how technology can help with gun control.

On the other hand, Popular Mechanics' editor-in-chief got so tired defending themselves from the soccer moms, he blasted back in a full page editorial about how they are a magazine about technology and how firearm technologies had a proper place in the magazine. They will not bow down to politics, their position is to neutrally cover technology with no preconceived notions whether it's "bad" or "good."

They have as many articles about weapons tech as they do car tech usually and they try to stay neutral telling as many cons and pros as they can.



They arn't neutral.. they are pro-gun I remember reading the editors response to someone complaining about guns in the mag.. It's the only magazine i've run into that isn't a gun mag or military history and has gun ads
Link Posted: 8/30/2004 8:39:57 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/30/2004 8:42:52 PM EST by FishKepr]
Yep, this is nothing new. When the M4 came out PM did an extensive article on it complete with a large two-page photo with the many of the proposed accessories.

I remember that editorial when the editor gave the antis the finger. He was polite, but didn't pull any punches either. Many of their answers to the 'Letters to the Editor' have been what I would call strongly worded and definitly pro-gun rights.
Link Posted: 8/30/2004 8:54:53 PM EST
Popular Mechanics and National Geographic were the first two magazines I ever started reading at a really young age(like 8-9). Still get them both for a reason. PM is just so great on so many levels I just don't know where to begin.
Link Posted: 8/30/2004 9:25:10 PM EST

Originally Posted By FishKepr:
Yep, this is nothing new. When the M4 came out PM did an extensive article on it complete with a large two-page photo with the many of the proposed accessories.

I remember that editorial when the editor gave the antis the finger. He was polite, but didn't pull any punches either. Many of their answers to the 'Letters to the Editor' have been what I would call strongly worded and definitly pro-gun rights.



Unfortunatley that editor is retiring hopefully the new person will be similar..
Link Posted: 8/31/2004 9:27:15 AM EST

Originally Posted By wittzo:
I read Popular Mechanics regularly. Before I used the Internet and found AR15.com, that was the only way I could keep up with military technology developments.

I used to read Popular Science, but they were too politically correct. Every other month some soccer mom would write either of them and blast them for their gun ads or articles on guns and weapons technology. Popular Science caved in and you will hardly ever see any article about weapons technology that isn't military based or they have an article every so often on how technology can help with gun control.

On the other hand, Popular Mechanics' editor-in-chief got so tired defending themselves from the soccer moms, he blasted back in a full page editorial about how they are a magazine about technology and how firearm technologies had a proper place in the magazine. They will not bow down to politics, their position is to neutrally cover technology with no preconceived notions whether it's "bad" or "good."

They have as many articles about weapons tech as they do car tech usually and they try to stay neutral telling as many cons and pros as they can.



Have they ever done a "How do build your own AR" in the do-it-yourself section? They should.
Link Posted: 8/31/2004 2:33:27 PM EST
All AR-15er's might be interested in my quote that is in the latter section of this PM article. Its what we (KAC) think will be the "very soon" (near term) SCAR-Heavy (i.e., Mk11 type 20" barrel Upper and an SR-25 Battle Rifle Upper with a 14.5" barrel, URX, etc...all 7.62x51...all with a common collapsable buttstock Lower.
Link Posted: 8/31/2004 2:42:11 PM EST
I saw your quote when I first flipped through it the other day, pretty interesting. "CQB .308"

I expected the article to be nothing but praise for the XM8 and its new opportunities etc. but it has a pretty good M16/M4/Knights section and also went into Barrett's new big bore.
Top Top