Author Topic: handi rifle in fur fish and game mag (Read 1657 times)

ohiobenito · « **on:** July 17, 2009, 11:48:29 AM »

there is a nice write up on a 243 handi In FFG. The author uses the rifle for predator hunting. The article almost reads like an advertisement for the rifle. check it out if you get a chance

trotterlg · « **Reply #1 on:** July 17, 2009, 11:52:26 AM »

Check and see if H&R (or whatever they are called now) doesn't have an advertisement in the magazine and you will know why they like the rifle so much. Larry

chipmunk · « **Reply #2 on:** July 17, 2009, 12:12:10 PM »

...H&R has been putting full back page ads on fur-fish-game for awhile now

trotterlg · « **Reply #3 on:** July 17, 2009, 12:20:42 PM »

Gee.......................Wonder why FFG likes the H&R guns so much? Larry

billy_56081 · « **Reply #4 on:** July 17, 2009, 01:05:34 PM »

I like my H&R so much. I've seen other rifles featured in stories in FFG and they weren't advertised in the magazine. So do you subscribe to FFG larry?

mitchell · « **Reply #5 on:** July 17, 2009, 01:27:30 PM »

i think what larry's point is , you always like somthing more when you get paid to say it.

tonyd2 · « **Reply #6 on:** July 17, 2009, 02:25:10 PM »

I have been reading FFG since I was 15 years old. I am now 72 yrs old. I used to trap with a guy who submitted articles to this mag. FFG publishes articles from guys like us and has real world info that is useful to the common man. Read it and see it aint FIELD & STREAM

Tony

spruce · « **Reply #7 on:** July 17, 2009, 03:23:57 PM »

FFG is an old, respected magazine with a lot of loyal readers, BUT...........

When was the last time you read a BAD review on ANY gun in ANY gun magazine?

I read so many glowing reports on Taurus handguns that I finally bought one a few years ago - won't make that mistake again!

Gun Tests magazine (while expensive)does have honest reviews.

Sorry, just a bit cynical when it comes to gun writers!

trotterlg · « **Reply #8 on:** July 17, 2009, 03:25:02 PM »

I'm not 72, but I am 62, and I have given up believing anything in a gun mag but the price on the front cover. If there is an advertisement for the product in the magazine that is doing the review it should be a big red flag for anyone who wants to learn the honest truth about the item. When was last time you saw a product panned in a magazine that had a full page advertisement printed for it? Larry

GatCat · « **Reply #9 on:** July 17, 2009, 08:24:37 PM »

I enjoy reading FFG, I think it is about the best mag out there for the "average Joe". The article in question was NOT a product review by magazine staff; it was a submitted and printed article. To me, it was an honest appraisal. The fellow wanted a simple, light rifle to carry, bought a youth .243, discovered the stock was too short, bought an adult butt stock from NEF. Shoots it with open sights, at reasonable range, with adequate accuracy.
Yep, NEF runs ads in the mag, as does Marlin, and others, I'm sure. SO WHAT ! The reason they advertise in that mag, is no doubt due to demographics..the average reader of FFG is the person that NEF's appeal to..thrifty, traditional, and practical.
Geez, a product we like gets some good print, and some folks whine about it.
Go figure !!
Mark

billy_56081 · « **Reply #10 on:** July 18, 2009, 01:59:01 AM »

I guess I saw it as a straight forward story, in one of the last straight forward magazines. Not everything is a conspiracy.

The story made no spectacular claims. It sounded like many threads that we have right here on GBO. The guy wanted a light weight powerful rifle for carrying and was powerful enough for mountain lions. He claimed it shot 1.5 inch groups and was ligh weight.

deadrabbit · « **Reply #11 on:** July 18, 2009, 06:26:42 PM »

FFG has always had stories for thrifty sportsman. If you want to read about a $5000 gun, FFG is the wrong place to read. It just makes sense for them to have a handi story. Their history dates back to the old Hunter-Trader-Trapper mags of many years ago. FFG is a great mag in my opinion

Singleshotsam · « **Reply #12 on:** July 18, 2009, 07:47:05 PM »

I've really yet to read a gun rag that wasn't plucking to get a free rifle to add to their personal collection, or getting a kickback from the company getting the write up. Be it $5000.00 rifles or $100 dollar hi-points. I base my purchase of interntet forums or from personal experience.

billy_56081 · « **Reply #13 on:** July 19, 2009, 04:19:18 AM »

So of all the posters here who is a FFG subscriber?

I am because FFG is one of the few magazines not part of a big magazine conglomerate. I trust them to have unbiased stories.

trotterlg · « **Reply #14 on:** July 19, 2009, 12:40:20 PM »

I would not suggest that FFG is not an honest magazine. I will say that it is considered very bad form to print an article extolling the virtues of a product while also carrying paid advertising for the product, at the very least it gives the appearance of being biased. Kind of like the news carrying a favorable news item about Obama while being sponsored by the Democratic party. Larry

44 Man · « **Reply #15 on:** July 19, 2009, 01:53:38 PM »

Ok, you are complaining because gun mags write up great articles of guns that are advertised in the mag. Big deal. And one fellow says he doesn't believe anything written in the gun mags because they always like the guns they are writing about. Ok. But think truthfully, when was the last time you really bought a 'new' (not used where we don't know what the original condition was) gun and have it not work well. Some have better accuracy than others, and some have triggers that can use a little work, but I have not had a truly bad rifle in a long time. Quality control seem to be continually improving at the factorys. Yes, maybe we aren't pleased with the wood for a price point, but most shoot well, some VERY well right out of the box. Even the triggers have improved from the days of the 'Lawyer proof' triggers, as seen in the savage and several others. If I were a gun writer, I would be hard pressed to find fault with most guns now days. I think sometimes it is hard for them to find enough 'problem areas' to have a balanced article. 44 Man

billy_56081 · « **Reply #16 on:** July 19, 2009, 02:09:29 PM »

Again I ask, are you a subscriber to FFG?

I am.

Singleshotsam · « **Reply #17 on:** July 20, 2009, 05:17:07 AM »

I am not a subscriber to any gun magazine. They are a waste of money. What can you read in a gun mag that cannot be found on the internet, with better information I might add. Does FFG print in their handi aritcle that the .243 has had bbl issues in the past w/ some models. Do they add that the extractor versions are more reliable than the ejector versions? What about sometimes needing to float or bed to forend to achieve the best accuracy possible? Did they suggest that it is best that each bbl have it's own dedicated reciever? No, they don't because FFG wants to keep Remington's ad money. Not that I'm opposed that Remington is making ad money to get more guns in the hands of customers, but because they are plucking Remington's product for them in an attempt to throw them a bone so they will keep ad money coming. Gun rags are as biased towards gun manufactures as the media is biased towards politics.

If I want to research a gun to buy I find the experts on those guns. For handi-rifles it is GBO NEF Forums. For Remington Shotguns I have a forum I go to for them. Remington 700's are another forum, and still yet again for AR15... The last thing I ever do is purchase a product based on a gun rag review... Most of the time I find that I know more about the weapon than they do.

hunt-m-up · « **Reply #18 on:** July 20, 2009, 08:01:21 AM »

I don't subscribe to any of them, because I believe it's a waste of $$ for me personally. If I were to get one, FFG would probably be it, but they are no different from any other business who supports their loyal customers/advertisers. The sales rep will always throw some advertorial,etc. in to sweeten the media buy, especially a large one.

ohiobenito · « **Reply #19 on:** July 20, 2009, 12:28:06 PM »

fur fish and game is not a gun mag. it is a magazine for the "practical outdoorsman" I am 30 and have been reading ffg for 15 years. This is the only magazine, besides Backwoodsman, that doesn't try and sellyou the fancy scentlock clothes or some winchester short magnum. This magazine is about getting out there and getting some game or fish with some simple equipment. This author wrote about the handi- and gave it a solid review. he mentioned a modest price, but also mentioned a little stiff trigger. I just thought you boys would like to see the handi get a little credit. From a guy who hunts pumpkinheads with open sights no less

billy_56081 · « **Reply #20 on:** July 20, 2009, 12:52:21 PM »

Exactly, I guess we should no longer trust any information on GBO if it pertains to a sponsor. Yeah I also use my own personal experience along with what I read to form my decisions. And from being a subscriber to FFG and from personal experience I see FFG as one of the most straight forward outdoor magazines going. Maybe the naysayers should buy a few issues and then form an opinion.

I have to say this article is very much in line with my own personal experence and also with many that have been shared here. Heck my superlight handi hornet groups from .5 to .75 inch 100 yard 3 shot groups. If remarnefh&r were a sponsor here would that make me a liar? Can anone here point out another 243 win that weighs in under 6Lb?

AtlLaw · « **Reply #21 on:** July 20, 2009, 01:02:33 PM »

50 some-odd years ago, since I was always in the woods anyway, I decided I'd try making some spare spending money by trapping. FF&G became my "bible" for that pass time. It was a great, and creditable, industry magazine then and seems to still be so now.

trotterlg · « **Reply #22 on:** July 20, 2009, 01:10:10 PM »

You miss the point, it is not that the article is wrong or biased, however by carrying a full page advertisement for the product it gives the appearance that it could be related to the money the sponsor spent. One thing for sure, if the article had said the H&R was a P.O.S. they never would have published it. In journalism appearance is everything, so if there is any question about the motives for the story you have to error on the safe side and either not run the ad or not run the article. Here on GB it is the same way for me, Wayne York does good work, I am sure there are others who are even better, but (in my opinion) he pays to play so he gets the referrals. There is nothing wrong with that, it is how a business is run, you just need to understand the rules. Larry

billy_56081 · « **Reply #23 on:** July 20, 2009, 01:21:03 PM »

So if someone writes up a good review of one of the GBO sponsors here on GBO should Matt or Bill trash it because of bad taste? I have read good reviews of Handi's b
Before in FFG, should the managment not have accepted thje adds for them later then?

So I have had one naysayer fess up, any others?

db22 · « **Reply #24 on:** July 20, 2009, 04:07:22 PM »

Quote from: billy_56081 on July 19, 2009, 02:09:29 PM

Again I ask, are you a subscriber to FFG?

I am.

I am a subscriber, and trust what I read in FFG. Some years back, Field & Stream ran an article about squirrel hunting. There was a sidebar listing the editors' picks for best squirrel guns. That sidebar included a Browning shotgun priced over a thousand dollars. The least expensive gun listed was a Ruger 10/22 target model, at over $400. FFG would never insult its' readers with such ridiculous suggestions.

jon f · « **Reply #25 on:** July 21, 2009, 01:55:52 AM »

what is wrong with a handi rifle getting a good revue ? I'm sick and tired of reading about AR15 / M16 copies..ugliest rifles ever made....
My 2 cents worth..

spooked · « **Reply #26 on:** July 21, 2009, 05:40:23 AM »

This old crip enjoys reading every issue of this magazine,can't git out and use my 158's as much as i'd like enjoy seeing the advertizing. helps to keep up with the new stuff.. I am presently a subsciber, will keep getting it unless the O makes me to poor

Lucky Joe · « **Reply #27 on:** July 21, 2009, 02:55:46 PM »

Fur Fish Game has been coming to our home since 1927 or before. When I was 13 years old my father told me now it was my turn to subscribe, been doing so ever since I'm now 61 years old. It is not a gun rag in the traditional way, they do have the gun rack which is one article once a month. I used to get a lot and I mean a lot of magazines each month now the only ones that come are Fur Fish Game and The American Rifleman.

My gun/reloading/library room has over 9,000 books and magazines pertaining to the outdoor sports we all enjoy. Here is one.

Singleshotsam · « **Reply #28 on:** July 24, 2009, 08:13:00 AM »

"I guess we should no longer trust any information on GBO if it pertains to a sponsor. "

How do you figure that? Mueller scopes is a GBO sponsor and there are lots of write ups on here about them. Only they are written by people who will list the advantages and dis-advantages of the scope in question. If a line of their scopes has or had issues in the past w/ tracking then likely somebody would let you know about it. In a magazine, if Mueller is a sponsor and has a paid advertisement in it, most likely they will only sing the advantages of the scope and leave you ignorant about the disadvantages or problems that particular line of scopes has.

FFG may be a different drummer, but I doubt it. Just because it's your favorite rag Billy is no reason to not list its faults. I've read lots of magazine w/ lots of "consumer reviews" and all they are is plugs to get a fool part w/ his money. Face it, FFG finally threw H&R a bone w/ a nice review of one of their guns, because H&R spends lots of money to advertise.

All of us on this forum know that H&R guns are damn fine shooters for the most part. Do you really need a paid writer to tell you that? I don't.

billy_56081 · « **Reply #29 on:** July 24, 2009, 10:14:16 AM »

Being a member of GBO and a subscriber to FFG allows me to have and educated and informed opinion on both. Are the naysayers here so informed?