I have never seen a shot string posted buy this guy for the few reviews I watched (Hatsan Jet I think).
How can you have a PCP review without a shot string?
Upvote 0
N/A Air gun reviews, the good, the bad and the ugly
- Thread starter nobody1
- Start date
How can you have a PCP review without a shot string?
I just thought about it and Andy’s Airgun Reviews seems decent and someone mentioned Steve’s AEAC reviews. They’ve been pretty thorough. Albeit I don’t watch them regularly. I used to watch Dana’s Mountain Sport Airgun reviews and could appreciate his efforts. There was a reviewer on AGN a while back that asked us what we’d like to see or what we appreciate in a review. I though that was respectable. Can’t recall who it was.
In criticizing these reviewers, what criteria are you using? What are key elements of a review? Someone mentioned shot string data, what else? What makes a review worthwhile?
In criticizing these reviewers, what criteria are you using? What are key elements of a review? Someone mentioned shot string data, what else? What makes a review worthwhile?
Upvote 0
Knowing the reviewer paid for the product instead of getting it for free, but that isn't how most popular reviewers work, hence the common bias towards all the good and none of the ugly.
-Matt
Upvote 0
Three things. First is if you are going to review or promote something, at least be qualified. But the blind leading the more blind thing seems to be working for most. Second and third, tell the good and the bad. It doesn’t matter how far in depth you go, it can take the better part of a year to get the most out of a gun. Even people with limited intelligence and an itchy “click buy” finger can understand that. Just tell the truth about weak or potentially weak areas. Tell the whole story about your limited or not limited time with the gun. Not reviewing something that has some issues or not talking about issues with gun you review is just another way of selling your soul. Selling your soul cloaked in a vail of dignity is still selling it. Either you review/test airguns for the viewers or you don’t.
What you’re saying makes sense, but some reviewers have built a reputation on their ability to communicate what they think or have discovered about airguns or they’re simply good at documenting or demonstrating real-wold use and potential of specific airguns. I think prompts companies to send certain individuals airguns. Some of these folks have a following so in essence they get free advertisement in exchange for an airgun. If a reviewer has built a following and is in this situation, I don’t knock them. However, I can appreciate admitting that the guns was loaned to them, given to them, or letting us know that they purchased it with their own money.
I’m acquainted with a couple reviewer/promoters and I don’t doubt much of what they say because they have demonstrated integrity beforehand. I’ve also experienced some behind the scenes practices that I did not appreciate nor did I opt to participate. I won’t elaborate any further on that point, but there is more than meets the eye when it comes to promotion. Reviews are just that, they are people promoting products for various reasons. Simply put, they are commercial advertisements. And at the end of the day we’re talking about how we wish to be sold products.
Upvote 0
He's not a youtuber, but I find a Tom Gaylord's reviews to be pretty good, even if way too many of them do focus on obscure and damaged antiques. "Today I'm starting a five part series on a Record Jumbo that I bought in Nashville. It's missing the rear sight and the right grip, so hopefully I can find replacements."
Upvote 0
Reviews ≠ commercial advertisement, sponsored advertisement, rather they are often displayed under the guise of such. "Some reviewers", more like some personas / popular youtubers with a lot of followers / view counts. Often times they aren't reviews, rather as you said just adverts for why you should buy the product.
-Matt
Upvote 0
To me the most important thing is to spend a lot of time with a gun to really learn the strong points and the week points, then ad all the technical data ( and that also takes time )
Can't stand those that take a gun out the box, shoot it half a day making a video and that's it box it back up and sell it,.....ho yeah and every gun for some reason is hole in hole and the best gun they reviewed
Upvote 0
Let me add, Matt Dubber's 9-part video series covering the basics of our hobby was recommended to me as a newbie, best leg up I could have gotten. WM
Upvote 0
I don't watch His videos since I'm not interested in FX but the little I have seen comes across as a very competent individual
Upvote 0
Videos or write-ups here on AGN?
Is there a preference when looking up info on guns that you're interested in? I'm not necessarily talking about the typical box opening, or introduction to a new gun type information, but rather in-depth details where somebody has (or is going to spend) spent months with a gun, figuring out...
www.airgunnation.com There have been more than a few "projects" since that request for preferred format.
Seems the diehards, the truly afflicted and addicted, prefer the geek out type of material, whereas the newcomers and the fly-by-nighters that burn fast and bright in the hobby, eat up the YouTube type, lighter and fluffier content.
Upvote 0
I don’t watch much, but I’ve heard him speak about growing up shooting competitively. Not sure, but I think he shot 10m. He’s no slouch. I like the work that he’s done with Claudio Flores. Claudio is another that I enjoy watching.
Upvote 0
@Franklink I joined AGNVideos or write-ups here on AGN?
Is there a preference when looking up info on guns that you're interested in? I'm not necessarily talking about the typical box opening, or introduction to a new gun type information, but rather in-depth details where somebody has (or is going to spend) spent months with a gun, figuring out...
There have been more than a few "projects" since that request for preferred format.
Seems the diehards, the truly afflicted and addicted, prefer the geek out type of material, whereas the newcomers and the fly-by-nighters that burn fast and bright in the hobby, eat up the YouTube type, lighter and fluffier content.
Upvote 0
He does them all the time, generally when it's freezing outside, look for his Maverick reviews, which is what I was searching for btw, has a cool bit on wind affecting pellet slight tossed in.
Upvote 0
Really, any serious reviewer needs to include chrony data regardless of what it is they’re reviewing. I don’t care if I’m buying a Red Ryder or something similar for which velocities don’t really matter at all, it’s just one of the most basic parts of an airgun review. It determines your trajectory, what pellets or slugs will be suitable, what game you can hunt with it, how backyard friendly it will be, etc….
Upvote 0
Tom Gaylord AKA BB Pelletier has the most thorough reviews I have seen.
He probably spends a few days with each air gun he reviews.
You will see plenty of shot strings, even some disassembly.
I can only wish most reviewers were so thorough.
Upvote 0
And he obviously doesn't post pictures of bogus shot groups or cherry picked velocities. In fact, he frequently just posts the raw data even when the numbers or groups would indicate that there is some sort of malfunction with the gear being tested.
And all that despite being hosted on the webpage of what is probably the biggest airgun seller in the US.
Upvote 0