A caution about gun writers and online reviews:

[SCCY Marshal]

...I was honestly shocked at the level of legitimately technical information present in that one article, when compared to those of today...

If you like the oldies and dead writers, have a present on a slow server:

https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmZ47SecPyF6Z8D...dv4ZVXXXWSzYRv

[HCM]

This statement serves as a a caution about gun writers and online reviews:

...Trigger-wise, the Colt uses a “V” mainspring rather than a flat mainspring (though the “V” shaped spring happens to be flat). Because of this, the Colt is long action and S&W has a short action design. All things being equal, the Colt’s long action double action pull will feel lighter through the longer arc since there is more leverage...

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/or...s-colt-python/

I assume that Valdés read somewhere - probably in a few places - that the stacking in the trigger strokes of Clot's V-spring revolvers were the function of the V spring when it's actually the function of the geometry of other parts, as is the length of the trigger stroke. Also, if he wants to discuss the length of the trigger stroke, it would be nice if he mentioned that pre-WWII S&W's had longer trigger strokes - with the correspondingly better DA "pull" but that the travel was shortened to slightly decrease lock time for target shooters who fired in SA mode.

There are online reviews and then there is the cesspool that is TTAG. TTAG should not be mistaken for a valid source of information.

[Guerrero]

I pretty much gave up on any of the various gun magazines I still get in the mail. I think I did a 5 year subscription or something on some of them, or maybe I'm still getting some from NRA membership, but they basically go straight in the recycling or I take them to work for the boys to grab up. Sometimes I'll peruse like a history article or something, but the reviews are basicially just ad copy.

That said, what are some of the GOOD info sources on the internet (besides P-F)? I generally like soldiersystems.net and thefirearmblog.com, for isntance.

Well, this guy named @jetfire sometimes has something worthwhile to say.

[jetfire]

Well, this guy named @jetfire sometimes has something worthwhile to say.

Thanks!

[JAD]

I just re-upped my sub to Handloader after many years. Holy crap it’s good.

[BobM]

I have my grandpa’s Gun Digest collection, complete until 1997 except for the second edition. I started buying them for a while ago after he passed in 97 but as time went on, it seemed that the technical knowledge in the articles was declining.

[SCCY Marshal]

I have my grandpa’s Gun Digest collection, complete until 1997 except for the second edition. I started buying them for a while ago after he passed in 97 but as time went on, it seemed that the technical knowledge in the articles was declining.

'94 was really good and I consider '95 to be the last worthwhile one. It at least had a bit on 30-30 also-rans, guy hunting squirrel with an Intratec DC-9 out of spite, and a couple other things. Get into the current century and it's garbage, though.

[vtfarmer]

'94 was really good and I consider '95 to be the last worthwhile one. It at least had a bit on 30-30 also-rans, guy hunting squirrel with an Intratec DC-9 out of spite, and a couple other things. Get into the current century and it's garbage, though.

I stopped adding to my Gun Digest collection some years back. Have most of them, missing six of the early ones. Have the first 18 Handloader's Digests. Lost my enthusiasm for it. I try to keep in mind that it's just my viewpoint. Back in the early Nineties I was in my mentor's one station cellar range with a few others. I was reading a gun mag while waiting my turn. My friend looked over at me and said, "It doesn't seem like gun magazines are as good as they used to be. They don't have the real interesting articles they used to have." I looked at him and had no clue what he meant. Ten years later I understood completely. Any time I picked up a magazine, it was- " Ho hum, another article about caliber x versus caliber y. Revolver versus semi-auto. Seen it six or eight times before. Seen it done better. Ho hum." I try hard to remember that there is a steady stream of newcomers to whom it's all fresh and new. It does get exasperating sometimes to see something that's been around forever presented as new and original, as if no one ever thought of it before. I'm getting old and cynical, I try to keep that in mind.

[jtcarm]

If you like the oldies and dead writers, have a present on a slow server:

https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmZ47SecPyF6Z8D...dv4ZVXXXWSzYRv

While everyone else was partying in college, I was reading old issues of “Outdoor Life” on microfiche in the library basement.

Yeah, that’s nerd with a capital “N”.

[gato naranja]

I try hard to remember that there is a steady stream of newcomers to whom it's all fresh and new. It does get exasperating sometimes to see something that's been around forever presented as new and original, as if no one ever thought of it before. I'm getting old and cynical, I try to keep that in mind.

Knowledge increases with each generation, but wisdom dies off.

I do believe that most current gunwriting is more marketing and salespitching than it used to be, but that is what the present world seems to be about. Guys like Roy Dunlap and Phil Sharpe would probably have to wear gun gaming shirts with multi-nat corporate logos to sell books or articles these days.