Jump to content


Photo

Another crummy Savage review


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 Stiff Neck

Stiff Neck

    Big Shooter

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,070 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 05 September 2006 - 08:23 AM

In this month's Predator Xtreme magazine there's a review of the new Savage LRVP 223. The three major issues with this article are:1. It was tested on an admittedly windy day2. It was tested with a no-name $150 scope3. It wasn't tested with anything heavier than 55 grainsYet another stupid gun review by an "expert". How can they possibly consider it fair to test a $900 rifle with a generic $150 scope? The magazine has lots of other articles about long range calibers like the 6.5-284, articles about long range prarie dog hunting, articles about ground hog hunting, etc. Surely none of the target audience who buys something like the LRVP would put a dog poop scope on it like the one used in the test. And I still can't figure out why they insist on testing rifles for accuracy on windy days. Why don't they wait until the wind dies down, or come back onother day? You don't see them testing rifles in the rain, why is wind acceptable? [/rant]

#2 Dan

Dan

    Plinker

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 35 posts
  • Location:Ventura, CA

Posted 05 September 2006 - 08:38 AM

Yeah, it doesn't surprise me. When I read gun reviews, I pretty much read them for the specs. on the gun, not so much for the writer's opinion. There are so many things that sway their opinion. As far as the wind goes, that's pretty crazy.

#3 ShooterJohn

ShooterJohn

    Admin

  • Root Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,590 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Northern, CA
  • Interests:Hunting, shooting sports and fishing.

Posted 05 September 2006 - 08:49 AM

Well, I've shot that particular gun and it is a GREAT shooter. If I didn't own close to a dozen squirrel shooters I'd have one already. I pay little mind to those types of reviews. It just shows ignorance on their part for attempting a real test under those circumstances. Crumby scope on a crumby day just gives you crumby results. They're only hurting their credibility as a magazine with that type of a review.

#4 Jason

Jason

    Big Kahuna

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,183 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Shooting, camping, scuba diving, American Revolution living history, fishing, ham radio.

Posted 05 September 2006 - 09:11 AM

That's too bad. I am not familar with that particular model but can tell you the Savage's get a bad rap from some writers. I have found some people just do not like the Savage and most of the time it has nothing to do with performance. They turn up their nose at what they percieve as a cheap rifle because they are priced well. Because it didn't cost twice as the other brands there must be something wrong with it. It doesn't have to be scientific. I get strange looks from guys when I tell them I purchased both Savages for my 17 HMR and 223 needs. Then I show them what they can do. There is an anti-Savage bias out there and it is unfounded. There is no better gun for the price out there. Out of the box their performance is fantastic. I had a problem with my 93R17 feeding shells from the clip, called Savage, and they sent me a new clip at no charge. The service is great. They may not be collector guns but they do the job and do it well.As for the article, the author should be ashamed of himself for running the test as you described. Very unscientific and it does the reader a disservice. To run the test in strong wind, with a no-name scope, and not using a wider selection of ammo, he didn't do the work required to find out if the rifle was good or bad. In my opinion this is where the anti-Savage bias comes in.Jason

#5 Steve C

Steve C

    Varmint Hunter

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 156 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Shingle Springs, CA
  • Interests:Hunting, family, church, bass guitar

Posted 05 September 2006 - 10:45 AM

Interesting. I've not been a big fan of "Predator Xtreme" since the first year or so. That's one reason i like the web. I can ask guys with no vested interest what they think. Most of us TRY to milk the most accuracy possible out of a gun. The mags just seem to try and make 'em look good for the pics alot of the time.just my .02, worth exactly what you paid for it. ;-)steve

#6 Stiff Neck

Stiff Neck

    Big Shooter

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,070 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 05 September 2006 - 05:08 PM

Yeah, I didn't pay for the magazine, it just started showing up a few months ago.

#7 Frank

Frank

    Big Kahuna

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,759 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Long Beach, Ca
  • Interests:Coyote Hunting #1, Valley Quail 2nd. Former (Idaho) mule deer hunter

Posted 05 September 2006 - 05:15 PM

Great points by all, and I completely agree....First, Predator Xtreme is a poor excuse for a magazine. Someone else actually mails me a copy every month for all the business I do with him. I do not tell him how bad that magazine really is of course. LOL Anyway, gun writers, their articles & targets are often the topics of discussion (& ridicule) in our hunting group, due to their poor knowledge &/or ability... Just makes you wonder how they get their jobs in the first place. Hmmm, then again, no different than any business I guess, huh?! LOLI've told this story before, but will say it again. Somewhere around 25 yrs ago or so, a friend & I had spent an evening & dinner with a V-E-R-Y well known hunter/gun writer. He is still alive today & his articles are in many magazines. Anyhow, I could not believe how UN-impressed we both were with this individual... for a TON of reasons. To this day, I cannot stomach to read any of his articles.Now don't misunderstand me, as there are some very good gun writers, however as in any trade, how many really stick to the wall / are worth their salt? Obviously this one sure doesn't / isn't.Frank

#8 Guest_SQUIRL-A-NATOR_*

Guest_SQUIRL-A-NATOR_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 September 2006 - 05:57 PM

AWWW... C'MON GUYS DONT BE SO HARD ON THEM. ;) I MEAN, AFTER YOU BUY A $900 DOLLAR RIFLE, ARENT YOU SUPPOSED TO HANDICAP URSELF WITH A PEICE OF dog poop SCOPE, AND EVEN WORSE PICK-AND-SAVE AMMO???? :lol: THATS WHAT I ALLWAYS DO WHEN I WANT TO GET THE BEST OUT OF A RIFLE :lol: :) LOOK IF THE THINGS COSTS MORE THAN $600 AND IT DONT SHOOT STRAIT, IT AINT THE RIFLE, ITS YOU OR SOMETHING YOU DID.... OR YOU PAYED TOOOO MUCH AT BIG-5 AND GOT SCREWED OVER, EITHER WAY, I KNOW THE RIFLE PERSONALLY, MY FRIENDS DAD (A GUN NUT WITH MORE MONEY THAN HE NEEDS TO SPEND ON ONE SINGLE HOBBY) OWNS ONE, WITH A LEUPOLD MARK 4 ON THERE, AND LET ME TELL YOU, BEAUTIFUL RIFLE. NO PROBLEMS HERE. I WOULD MIND HIM GIVING IT TO ME :D :)




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users