Rifle Scopes Guns and Ammo: RIP

[Rancid Coolaid]

Craig Boddington reviews the Countersniper 10-40X in this month's new Guns and Ammo. He compares it to "other" tactical scopes and says it competes well. He failed to mention whether he is comparing to Barska or BSA or Nightforce.

I've been a G&A subscriber for awhile, now I'm done. Their love for Leupold is understandable, given Leupold's constant advertising, but Countersniper?

They are now, reservedly, promoting pure shit - and Countersniper has not ad in the mag.

As a fellow Marine, I am surprised to see Boddington put his reputation and name behind something so obviously geared toward the mall ninja and airsoft crowd.

The things they say are almost as amusing as the things they don't.

It's good for a chuckle, and maybe starting a camp fire, or swatting at flies, but G&A is dead to me.

 

[M4guru]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

G&A has been dead to me for a long time. Along with all others, save SWAT and Small Arms Review.

 

[Explorer]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

Most of these press products are sold to the masses, not those like the audience of this crowd. Meaning those who are weekenders, once or twice a year. NOTHING wrong with that but the two markets seldom mix well.
I do agree though, can't remember the last one I paid more than a glance to.

 

[JCH]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

what page is it on? I can't find it...

we are talking abou the issue with the new Taurus 380 and 9mm?

 

[Stewart]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

Sad times indeed. Remember the good old Cooper articles and his "Thoughts from the Gunners Guru" back in the day. I can remember running home from school to meet the arrival of the mail to see what he had to say...........

 

[Rancid Coolaid]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JCH</div><div class="ubbcode-body">what page is it on? I can't find it...

we are talking abou the issue with the new Taurus 380 and 9mm? </div></div>

It starts on page 18, thrown in with a review of the Taurus Judge.

It's funny how he says it doesn't track perfectly and has some issues - but claims that the competition does too. Again, is the competition Barska or BSA. He says it is for the military and LE shooter, which should really appeal to the mall ninja crowd.

 

[al redneck]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

I quit getting G&A about 15 years ago. They never did a review on anything but what they liked it. I remember reading a rifle review where it shot about 3 moa and they thought it showed good accuracy. Guns magazine seems to cover alot of stuff and isn't full of crap. Shotgun News has started having some good articles too.

david

 

[titandriver]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

I packed 'em all in after the umpteenth "30:06 or 308" article --- prolly been fifteen years ago!

 

[JCH]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rancid Coolaid</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JCH</div><div class="ubbcode-body">what page is it on? I can't find it...

we are talking abou the issue with the new Taurus 380 and 9mm? </div></div>

It starts on page 18, thrown in with a review of the Taurus Judge.

It's funny how he says it doesn't track perfectly and has some issues - but claims that the competition does too. Again, is the competition Barska or BSA. He says it is for the military and LE shooter, which should really appeal to the mall ninja crowd.</div></div>

just read it. It goes to show how little gunwriters actually do to the stuff they are reviewing. He states he only checked the tracking while looking at a small diamond he was shooting at on paper. Go figure.

Hope PP doesn't post up something.

 

[MontanaMarine]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

I started reading Guns and Ammo back in the 1970s. Elmer Keith, Skeeter Skelton, Bill Jordan, Jeff Cooper, Bob Milek, are among those I recall off the top of my head.

Times sure have changed. I haven't bought a copy in over ten years. Every once in a while I'll see one in a waiting room or something. Pretty weak.

 

[LoneWolfUSMC]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

I saw the issue and almost bought it just to see. Then I realized that would be rewarding them for putting it out there.

What is ridiculous is that some poor cop who isn't gun savvy is going to buy one and think it's good to go. Hopefully it won't get anyone killed.

 

[PeteCamp]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

In a sudden fit of lunacy I bought a copy of Special Weapons. Absolute gargage. From the legendary performance of 9mm FMJ to the little hole in the nose of MK262 77gr .223 being the key to its enhanced ballistics - absolute trash. Wish we could bill these magazine companies for their abuses.

 

[azemspilot]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

I quit buying Guns and Ammo 10 years ago. I quit reading the last page every month at the grocery store after Jeff Cooper died.

 

[Wild_Bill]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

talking about total rubbish i saw an article on the 38 S&W and 1911 38 Super comparison come on not even the 38 Special the 38 Mith and wesson how could you compare these this day and age most thought it was 38 Special where the PlusP is close to the 38 Super 1911 loads and the super also has PlusP and they are the cartriges i would have assumed but no total crap both old lead bullet loads how can companies say this is relevant im glad i did not buy it. Here in Australia their are so called experts trumping up total crap because they were paid. I write technical articles and was told years ago if the product is not up to standard return the product and tell the importer what the problems are and you dont think it would be in their intertest publishing the article i have never had an importer upset with it but if you lie then your reputation is fried.

 

[hibc]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

G&A has been dead for several years now, their reviews flat out suck and the guys that do the reviewing can not shoot and in reality know little about firearms, optics, and ammo. It seems like their idea of reviewing a rifle is a couple of 3 shot groups from 50 to 100 yards and a few paragraphs of excuses about why the review was cut short or why they could only get the groups down to almost an inch, it was getting dark, the wind was blowing, it was cold, blah blah blah blah........ all the reviews are the same. There are not many good gun magazines. Somebody needs to start a really good one.

 

[jpmuscle]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

I got a kick out of Warlock review issue a few back when they had it on the front cover with a counter sniper scope on top. sad

 

[hibc]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jpmuscle</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I got a kick out of Warlock review issue a few back when they had it on the front cover with a counter sniper scope on top. sad</div></div> It was the "Warlord"

 

[jpmuscle]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

I stand cprrected Its 6am and i havnt slept in 23 hours

 

[Matthais_31]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: al redneck</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Shotgun News has started having some good articles too.

david </div></div>

Whilst I dont doubt that the magazine has some articles, Shotgun News are not immune the charm of the Countersniper:

http://www.countersniperoptics.com/ShotGunNews.pdf

Its a .pdf file so youll need a reader to view it. However to sum it up, they claim Countersniper Optics are on par with S&B...

Matthais_31

 

[Greg Langelius *]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

I get G&A as a gift subscription my Brother started several years back and keeps reviewing. It's like the energizer bunny, it keeps coming, and coming, and coming. I agree, it's writers are simply not in intimate touch with our market.

But they are constrained to work within a market which not only exists, but thrives.

That market A) equates purchase price with desirability, and B) is probably overly accepting of 'coolness' as a factor of that desirability. The manufacturers cater to this market and it provides the bulk of their income. They advertise in the basis of circulation volume, and they reach their market, through G&A and magazines like it.

That simply is, and has been, the American way.

Fact is, if there was a viable market in what we covet, we'd see the magazines, and the mainstream manufacturers would cater to us. We remain a niche marketplace with little in the way of magazine buying power to support the sort of articles and values we espouse. As a contributor to the first two issues of <span style="font-style: italic">Tactical Shooter</span>, and witness to its subsequent demise due to the simple fact that the advertisers weren't getting a return for their money, I can have little difficulty fixing the blame for that reality.

If we want that to change, we need to do the changing in and of ourselves. Until we can put our money where our mouths are and support the marketing of mainstream manufacturers' efforts to reach our market, we will remain forever a niche marketplace which is rightly ignored by the mainstream manufacturers. Until we get off our lofty pedestals and begin seeing and saying about the positive aspects of their efforts, and resist the temptation to condemn based on nit-picky elitist criticism, they will never take us seriously. Until we can provide magazines with circulation revenue and respectable article copy, there will be nothing for them to print and none of us to read it.

If you don't like a thing, there are (at least) two ways to deal with it, either point fingers and guffaw, or do something positive to make it more likable. One of these is an adult response.

Greg

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

The market will decide the fate of G&A. I miss Gun writer's like Jim Carmichael and Jack O'Conner. I learned a thing or two from them.

Today, it seems gun writer journalism is mostly about imagination and elaboration rather than facts and teaching moments.

 

[SWFA]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

I've spent some time with Craig in the arctic hunting and he is a very honest, genuine guy. I can't believe he would write something like that, he usually calls a spade a spade or does not say anything at all. I have not read it yet but can't wait to.

I just got an e-mail from Dark Ops Holdings announcing their Facebook page and noticed they were bragging about the cover and review.


http://www.facebook.com/pages/Dark-Ops-Holdings/184361582624?ref=ts

Chris Farris

 

[Rancid Coolaid]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

Their marketing strategy: if you tell a lie long enough, it becomes true.


It's a sad, sad thing.

 

[PJC7250]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

I read G & A and also watch the TV series on the Outdoor network. You have to understand who they are marketing to in terms of equipment. Do you think the once a year deer hunter taking his Remington 7600 pump into the woods every year is going to spend $1,500 on a USO, Nightforce, Swarovski, I.O.R.....etc. They might spend a few hundred on a 3x9 Leupold. To most once a year hunters a $90.00 scope suits their needs just fine for shots out to 100 plus yards. People on this forum are willing to pay for the best equipment that will satisfy their needs or the mission at hand and not settle for mediocre equipment or just plain old "crap". I think you have to view and evaluate these and similar publications with a grain of salt. I don't believe for one minute that Craig Boddington uses a Barska or BSA on any of his hunting rigs. PAT.

 

[Sean the Nailer]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

I stopped buying and reading both G&A, and Shooting Times over 10 years ago.

G&A was for the Colonel, and Shooting Times was for the 'Dumb Crook Lineup'. That was all.

I haven't found a factual reference, except for Precision Shooting. The rest are just 'brainwash-Blathering-Baiting'.

 

[ChadTRG42]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rancid Coolaid</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> and Countersniper has not ad in the mag. </div></div>

It doesn't matter if they have an ad or not, because they may still contribute to the mag for promoting their product. When my wife was in this business, she told me all about how products make their way into articles and get rave reviews. And it doesn't matter the actual quality of the item either. It is a business.
I'm a subscriber, and I'll read it later tonight. It does suck when you know something about the items and when the articles do not represent the actual facts or quality of the item.

 

[1979Wolf]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

ADVERTISING!! They all push shit that sells to the masses. Product's quality no longer sells, it's how "cool" it looks, etc. Times have changed, generally speaking, people are stupid as fuck now days.

 

[-=boone=-]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

I saw the magazine cover and was very disapointed in G&A but have yet to see them put junk on the T.V. series, I wonder why that is?

 

[Phil1]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: PAT</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You have to understand who they are marketing to in terms of equipment. Do you think the once a year deer hunter taking his Remington 7600 pump into the woods every year is going to spend $1,500 on a USO, Nightforce, Swarovski, I.O.R.....etc. They might spend a few hundred on a 3x9 Leupold. To most once a year hunters a $90.00 scope suits their needs just fine for shots out to 100 plus yards. People on this forum are willing to pay for the best equipment that will satisfy their needs or the mission at hand and not settle for mediocre equipment or just plain old "crap". I think you have to view and evaluate these and similar publications with a grain of salt. I don't believe for one minute that Craig Boddington uses a Barska or BSA on any of his hunting rigs. PAT. </div></div>

+1

The people who buy such magazines are indifferent to 1-3 moa inaccuracy in some rifles, scopes, etc. Will still read a story about the merits of .308 vrs .30-06 even though there was a similar story a year ago.

IMO they must pay the writers very little because none of the reviews have any real detail when evaluating any product.

 

[ChadTRG42]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Racialist</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> generally speaking, people are stupid as fuck now days.</div></div>

Best line on here!!! I get amazed about how dumb people really are by some of the decisions they make and questions they ask.

 

[Grand]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

The scientific method of testing products is all but gone from mainstream gun mags. Even Handloader and Rifle now run their share of "gun tests" without any meaningful data behind them.

 

[saryan]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

I had a friend that got screwed on a CS scope. Gun show guy told him that it was a "spec op scope". Biggest pile of crap ever. Nikon's $270 scope is 10x the scope that will ever be.

 

[sandwarrior]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rancid Coolaid</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

...

It's good for a chuckle, and maybe starting a camp fire, or swatting at flies, but G&A is dead to me.</div></div>

I like the way it makes pretty colors when you throw them in the fire.

Edit:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Racialist</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> generally speaking, people are stupid as fuck now days.</div></div>

That's what my wife tells me:

I don't clean/do dishes
I can't drive
I don't get along well w/others
I think I know it all
...and the list goes on.

Seriously, about G&A sometimes I find informative information. But as a reloader I use what out of the books that's been tested. And I test it when it hits the range to see that it gets done what Sierra, Hornady, Berger and Speer all say they do. I experiment with all kinds of rounds and all kinds of powders and bullets. Taking a generic 2 pages of non-specific, "accurate-as all hell" off the front of the landrover, that tells next to nothing about what really makes the load tick is a waste of time. I also get a little fired up when I look at some of the "poor" gunwriters, who've been on their fifth or sixth "Once in a lifetime Hunt/Safari". Reminds me of why I couldn't get a tag in the trophy area southeast of Helena, Mt. It was supposed to be a drawing but it was a giveaway.

All of that crap is why I almost quit reading hunting/gun mags altogether.

 

[Mute]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

Hell, I don't think I've even picked up a G&A magazine since I was 16 years old.

 

[mastersgt]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rancid Coolaid</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Craig Boddington reviews the Countersniper 10-40X in this month's new Guns and Ammo. He compares it to "other" tactical scopes and says it competes well. He failed to mention whether he is comparing to Barska or BSA or Nightforce.

I've been a G&A subscriber for awhile, now I'm done. Their love for Leupold is understandable, given Leupold's constant advertising, but Countersniper?

They are now, reservedly, promoting pure shit - and Countersniper has not ad in the mag.

As a fellow Marine, I am surprised to see Boddington put his reputation and name behind something so obviously geared toward the mall ninja and airsoft crowd.

The things they say are almost as amusing as the things they don't.

It's good for a chuckle, and maybe starting a camp fire, or swatting at flies, but G&A is dead to me. </div></div>

Boddington is a Paid off jerk wad. He will write a good review for anyone if there is enough cash behind it. I have hunted with him in the past and can say that he should just go back to writing about hunting in the US because he has no place outside the Rockies. His hunting prowess and etiquet is poor at best and he is a sissy when it comes to anything hard. He actually had to have a tracker carry his double because it was too heavy after about 3 miles..

 

[exhogflyer]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

About the only 3 mags out there good anymore are Precision Shooting,Varmint Hunter, and Very High Power.All 3 of which I currently get.All the rest are pretty much comic books...

 

[1shot2kill]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

can anyone remember the first last or middle time that a s&w firearm received a bad review......
think about it every time i open a gun magazine watch a hunting/shooting show i read or hear s&w blah blah blah please dont sue us etc.
the point is you will never receive a unbiased opinion from a magazine or a TV show as long as there annual salary is influenced by it if you want a great place to look for limitless info from windrunners all the way down to mil surplus socks click on the link below and you can find what you need


http://snipershide.com/

 

[Smallmouth Crazy]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

I used to buy them years back as well as Shooting Times, but when you look at the price of a magazine anymore($8-10 on average) its alot easier just to come home and look up what you need online.

 

[1911.it]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

The only gun mag I receive on a regular basis is the NRA American Rifleman. It does have some good articles fairly regularly and seems fairly unbiased but I never read it cover to cover.

 

[Bacarrat]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

All magazines, no matter what the hobby or topic is going to be driven by advertising dollars. So take what you read with a grain of salt.

 

[Fritz24]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 1shot2kill</div><div class="ubbcode-body">can anyone remember the first last or middle time that a s&w firearm received a bad review......
think about it every time i open a gun magazine watch a hunting/shooting show i read or hear s&w blah blah blah please dont sue us etc.
the point is you will never receive a unbiased opinion from a magazine or a TV show as long as there annual salary is influenced by it if you want a great place to look for limitless info from windrunners all the way down to mil surplus socks click on the link below and you can find what you need


http://snipershide.com/ </div></div>

Good point - it really is the way of our society these days. Pastor, politician, journalist, what have you - all are basically glorified salesmen either shilling or protecting a paycheck...and little else really. It's understandable up to a point - we all like to make money and feel secure. But some careers and avocations must remain objective to remain credible. Seems we've lost sight of that...

I'm thankful for sites like this where you can get an unvarnished review of products and such - REALLY unvarnished sometimes!

 

[desertfox01]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

I remember a article awhile back, think it was in G$A about a Patrol Carbine (will leave the manufacturers name out). Author raves about it. get to the test firing and the Author is only getting 2 and 3 inch groups with match ammo........at 50 yards. now this rifle is market as a Police patrol rifle!!! I am sorry, it is not difficult to build a AR that can shoot 2 or 3 inch groups and smaller at 100 yards. but to praise the accuracy of this rifle really just urked me.

 

[PeteCamp]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

Don't want to drag us off topic but...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="font-weight: bold">Pastor</span>, politician, journalist, what have you - all are basically glorified salesmen either shilling or protecting a paycheck...and little else really.</div></div>
Change that to (some) TV preachers, and I'll go along with you. I put in 14 days straight of 24 hour a day on call work (every 6 weeks) for our PD as a Chaplain and receive no salary - not a dime because no one wants to challenge the ACLU. I preach every Sunday at a small church, whose congregation cannot afford anyone even part-time, for car expense money - no salary. That requires about 10-12 hours of preparation per hour in the pulpit. I have two bachelor's and a master's degree. The vast majority of pastors receive way less money than you might think and put up with way more garbage than anyone can imagine. I put in 25 years full-time in a church and my wife and I survive now on her salary. (ER Nurse) I don't try to "sell" anything. I try to warn people that the bridge ahead is out and it is a long drop into a very bad place. This isn't a sob story. I have invested my life in other people because of my beliefs. And I'm just one of countless thousands. Please don't lump us with the chowderheads in Washington.

Carry on gentlemen.

 

[noname]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

magazine readers want a good story, something to provide the adventure and excitement they miss in their daily life. may or may not have anything to do with reality.

 

[RollingThunder51]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

One of the ones you should now add to your list now that you are done reading crap.

http://www.precisionshooting.com/

 

[ssgp2]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: desertfox01</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I remember a article awhile back, think it was in G$A about a Patrol Carbine (will leave the manufacturers name out). Author raves about it. get to the test firing and the Author is only getting 2 and 3 inch groups with match ammo........at 50 yards. now this rifle is market as a Police patrol rifle!!! I am sorry, it is not difficult to build a AR that can shoot 2 or 3 inch groups and smaller at 100 yards. but to praise the accuracy of this rifle really just urked me. </div></div>

I have come to believe that for some shooters, accuracy means that the firing pin is hitting the primer...

 

[fuzzytek]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

I have been getting annoyed at a few magazines lately. They cover story a .50 cal sniper rifle with a S&B scope with BORS attached. Then the article states that testing such a precision firearm they put a Bushnell or something. Whats up with that. I've seen mags with articles of one rifle covering four or six pages and three different scopes. I know bushnell and others make some decent tac scopes but at least keep it on the rifle if it gets reviewed with it, not bait and switch.

 

[GIO]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

I really enjoy magazines but most aren't worth the time/Money, IMO Guns magazine and American Handgunner (same publisher) are pretty good. SWAT has gotten much better and Gun Digest is pretty decent at times. Clayshooting USA is a quality mag if you like that sport.

Off topic but Saveur is the only cooking mag worth buying, (sorry, my Chef job pays for my gun habit)

GIO

 

[RobG]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

Magazine?? Why pay for all those "awesome reviews" of advertisers products? I haven't had a mag script in years.

 

[kyle1974]

Re: Guns and Ammo: RIP

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ssgp2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

I have come to believe that for some shooters, accuracy means that the firing pin is hitting the primer... </div></div>

I was shooting a couple weekends ago, and there was a guy and his wife, sighting in their rifles... they would shoot three or four times, jack with the scope, shoot once, jack with it some more...

I looked at their targets, and there was no grouping... shit all over the place.

he finally hit a bullseye and told his wife "finally, that should do it now"

LMAO.... I would imagine people that shoot like that would be perfectly happy with one of these scopes.