Roughshot Posted June 4, 2007 Report Share Posted June 4, 2007 Anyone else read this seems to contrast with most opinions on this forum. Was interested in one but was slightly put of by the threads on here describing unreliability and guns falling apart :blink: . Was quite surprised by what the review said. So for one last time Webley and Scott 810 automatic cheap and cheerful roughshooting gun or piece of junk? Review on shootingtimes.co.uk Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham M Posted June 5, 2007 Report Share Posted June 5, 2007 These magazines rely on the goodwill that they can generate from the gun makers and the advertising of those company’s products (brings in the money). As such you won’t find a bad review anywhere in the shooting press about any gun they have reviewed. The best way to find out is to read what other owners have found out by experience. G.M. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnGalway Posted June 5, 2007 Report Share Posted June 5, 2007 Same as Graham, I've never seen a bad review of anything in any shooting magazine that I've bought. I don't know anyone who has either. Like Graham says, find some owners and ask lots of questions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markm Posted June 5, 2007 Report Share Posted June 5, 2007 As a shooting times subscriber (and I have been for a number of years) really that is wrong as they should be giving an unbiased truthful opinion allowing a reader / potential customer to gain anothers insight. When I think about it I have never seen a bad review of anything in the magazines, soprting gun is also the same, every gun gets at least 8/10 for marks on value for money, reliability etc etc. Its funny because a lot of other magazine for different sports etc etc are a lot more truthful and will say if a product is ****, I used (many moons ago) buy and ICE magazine and they were very honest often describing items from companies like kenwood, pioneer, jvc as poor in comparision to cheaper alternatives, really if they give a bad review of a product that is truthful then the manufacturer should do something about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunkield Posted June 5, 2007 Report Share Posted June 5, 2007 Mags need 2 things to survive. Revenue from customers. Revenue from advertisers. They will not 'dis' a product from someone who provides them with one of their lifelines. It just isn't in their best interest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
v-max Posted June 5, 2007 Report Share Posted June 5, 2007 Hello my brother got 1 in camo left hand & very good 65mm cart's no bother & my mate got 1 in black syn like my fabarm & it's never missed a beat either 65mm cart's easy.Think there an old berreta paten not sure on model but these 2 are good & i think an ideal rough gun pigen/foreshore/rookery's etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roughshot Posted June 5, 2007 Author Report Share Posted June 5, 2007 Thanks Eventhough only one of you commented on the gun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oly Posted June 5, 2007 Report Share Posted June 5, 2007 Same as Graham, I've never seen a bad review of anything in any shooting magazine that I've bought. I don't know anyone who has either. Like Graham says, find some owners and ask lots of questions One word LIBEL!! If you forced me to put it in either of your two catagories of cheap and cheerful roughshooting gun or piece of junk...from what I have heard I would go with piece of junk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.