Lee Molds In The Gun Magazines

[Farmall 1066]

Why is it you rarely, if ever see a Lee mold used in an article about bullet casting?

I'll be the first to admit I have had a fair ammount of grief with some of them, but I sure have with Lyman's, too. I have had a few guns that shot the Lee's the best, while some preferred other types.

Lee does have a few innovative designs, and a few that fill "niche" spots pretty well, and they still don't get much mention by the press, negative or otherwise.

Not trying to bait anyone into an argument, but why do you think this is??

Andy

[mpmarty]

Interesting question.... It would seem that a search of the advertisers in any gun rag will show ads from those companies whose products receive favorable coverage in said gun rag.

[sqlbullet]

mpmarty nailed it. That was one of the reasons my dad stopped writing for certain computer magazines back in the '80's. He was tired of the editor telling him what a review needed to say.

Perhaps that practice has died, but my gut says otherwise.

[jlchucker]

Why bother reading any of the gun rags in the first place? Sites like this one are far more informative. Contributors, for the most part, are willing to share genuine expertise based upon actual experience, rather than graft from advertisers. I used to subscribe to 3 or 4 gun mags. Nowadays I don't subscribe to any, but I'm a member of this and two other gun-related websites.

[376Steyr]

Because half of the writers don't actually do any experimental work themselves, and instead endlessly rewrite Elmer Keith's old articles? And Elmer didn't use Lee moulds?

[Farmall 1066]

I have pretty well dropped all my subscriptions too, but I just find too much good information in "Handloader" and "Rifle" to let them slide. IMHO, they don't do as much "shilling" for the advertisers as some of the other magazines seem to do.

Do you think advertising dollars spent = product coverage in print?

Andy

[Rocky Raab]

I'm sick of answering anti-writer jibes, but can tell you that the above posts are purest BS. I won't convince anybody, though.

Tell ya what; y'all post what you do and we can all claim what crooked lying frauds all of "those" people are.

[bubba.50]

with a very few exceptions they're all pimps for the industry. whoever lines the pockets gets the ink. have you ever seen anything negative written about any product in a magazine lately? even when you know it's junk? if you took the good and the honest writers and put them all in one magazine it would be about the size of an old 25 cent comic book. my opinion and worth what you paid for it, bubba.

[EDK]

I subscribe to AMERICAN HANDGUNNER and GUNS for Mike Venturino and John Taffin's columns and articles plus GUNS OF THE OLD WEST for cowboy action/movie history. RIFLE and HANDLOADER are also good. BLACK POWDER CARTRIDGE NEWS too. Others have not been renewed for various reasons.

The Internet is just too much competition for the mass circulation magazines. They can't compete with the specialty sites....like us! and by the time they print something, it's basically old news. Look at the newspapers and old style net work news compared to other sources....too slow and their biases in reporting are pretty obvious...AND their own web sites are their competitors!

John Nesbitt's book MEGATRENDS, back in the 80s, showed which way the wind was going to blow. (I wish I'd read and remembered more of it.) Remember the ancient chinese curse, "May you live in interesting times!"

:cbpour::redneck::Fire:

[462]

Rocky,

If our perception isn't correct, I think that the magazines and writers would be wise to address the topic and eliminate the error of our thinking. Until then, their defenders are doing no more than offering excuses.

If magazine X tests gun-related product Y and it doesn't live up to the manufacturer's hype, and that information is not passed on to the readers, that magazine is not being honest. Automobile and consumer magazines tell is as it is, why can't/don't/won't the gun rags?

[NHlever]

It is probably true that there are times when "if you can't say something good about the subject, don't say anything". It is also true that gun writers have had a positive impact on many products they test. Though you may not think about it, writers do talk to the companies that produce the products they test, and do tell it like it is to them on many occassions. Sometimes the product that you see in the gun store has been modified, changed, or improved before you read the article, or see the product, and we do have to thank some gun writers for that. I was involved in firearm R&D for a long time, and know this to be true.

[Bass Ackward]

The real problem that we won't admit is the there is no standardization in this sport or industry. Every gun is a law unto itself.

For every person out there that swears by some cast design, you will find another that had no success with it. Each will believe in and voice his own opinion.

The mistake by us is reading anything by anyone looking for a ..... fact.

That includes this board.

[Rocky Raab]

462, I tried innumerable times to correct the mis-perception. Yet, mention the word "magazine" and people cannot wait to slander writers, editors and marketers again.

There is not one product you can name that everybody here will agree is good or bad. That seems to cause no great fire of umbrage. But let a writer say something is good, and he is instantly branded as a fraud and a liar.

Magazines don't run bad reviews, but the reason is that they simply don't have room to review all the GOOD products out there. There is only so much page space for articles, and so very many products that deserve good exposure.

When you see a product review and an ad for that product, why do you assume that the ad came first? Do you not realize that the magazine ad department contacts them to sell them an ad because a review will run in that issue? THAT's most often the order in which it happens, except in the case of long-standing ads from major manufacturers.

I have three product reviews either in print or accepted for print right now. I sent EACH of the manufacturers a courtesy copy of the review before publication so that they might know what to expect or (rarely) to catch any factual error I might have made or to tell me about some feature that will have been changed before the review comes out. I have NEVER had one object to anything I wrote, even if I found fault with something.

I have only once had an editor suggest/demand that I change something in deference to a big advertiser. I withdrew the article, and that editor very shortly left that magazine, also. (It was 25 years ago.) Not one other time, before or since.

Perceptions changed? Maybe. But I'm not holding my breath.

[9.3X62AL]

In an attempt to steer this thread toward its start point.......the Lee truncated cone autopistol castings and their bore-rider rifle designs have done GREAT work for me over a long span of years and a number of firearms. Yeah, some of their moulds need a bit of "Lee-menting" before they produce their best results, but the Lee moulds are awfully hard to beat in terms of "price paid vs. value received".

Lee seems to be well-represented in mainstream gun press advertisements. If writers aren't assigned to address the subject--or haven't elected to run a free-lance article--that sounds like an oppurtunity to me, not a failure.

[fredj338]

You don't see many articles on casting in the first place. I have used sopme Lee molds w/ success, but the horror stories about others is not something that anyone really wants to write about & risk having adv. $$ pulled. With most Lee stuff it's always buyer beware.

[AZ-Stew]

Why bother reading any of the gun rags in the first place? Sites like this one are far more informative.

Because I can't read this forum while sitting on the can in the morning.


I have three product reviews either in print or accepted for print right now. I sent EACH of the manufacturers a courtesy copy of the review before publication so that they might know what to expect or (rarely) to catch any factual error I might have made or to tell me about some feature that will have been changed before the review comes out. I have NEVER had one object to anything I wrote, even if I found fault with something.

I wish a writer had given me this courtesy when writing about a product I used to make for Ham Radio operators. Apparently, the bozo writer couldn't tell the difference between the "copper colored" and the "silver colored" leads when connecting it to the power supply. The semiconductor device immediately self destructed when reverse voltage was applied. He wrote it up in his review as my product not working when he received it, but that I had honored the warranty by sending him a replacement. As soon as I disassembled the returned product for inspection it was instantly apparent what had happened. Too late, though. The article appeared with a bad-but-replaced review, when it was actually his fault for not following instructions.

The thing I object to, and Rifle and Handloader are worst at it (are you listening, Dave Scovil?), is placing an ad for a product on the page facing the article text where the writer tells about his use of it. At least have the decency to place the ad several pages away from the article. We're not stupid. We'll find the ad. That tactic ranks right up there with "continued on page..." in the middle of an article.

Regards,

Stew

[sqlbullet]

having done at least some, though no where near my share (some was enough) page layout, I no longer complain about 'continued on page' situations. Reality is the cost to print those magazines exceeds by far the cost of my subscription, and advertiser revenue is a must.

Rocky may have a point. Today, it may be with many magazines the ad follows the review. Perhaps they do have a good sales department who gets the nod enough in advance to contact the vendor and say "Hey, we have a favorable review of your product coming up...Wouldn't you like a 1/2 page ad to go with that?".

I can only speak to how a few computer magazines were in the '80's that were targeted at the agriculture market. And then, not all. There were also a few that were straight forward.


Magazines don't run bad reviews, but the reason is that they simply don't have room to review all the GOOD products out there

This also may be, however, how do they know what is a 'good' product until they review it. They never pick a lemon? Or they deep six the preliminary work on anything that won't make the grade?

I also have a problem with this. As a monthly diversion, I don't care. But when I utilize online search or the CD's that I get sent, I want to find the product I am searching for information about, good or bad.

I subscribed to Gun Tests for a while, and found it to be quite good. I found some of their match-ups a little odd. But I felt like they would run a negative review.

[anachronism]

If you really want to win friends & influence people on the internet, try this. I posted it on 24 hour campfire a few years back.

"The purpose of magazines is to sell you something. Granted, you can get some good information from magazines, but you have to pay for it. First, someone has to buy the magazine (usually me). These magazines are loaded with advertising . All magazines have advertising, many of the stories you read are simply advertising copy, in story format. This rifle did this, I used this bullet and got perfect performance, I used this scope and saw God. Not all gunwriters are copy writers, though. The good ones have a more serious mission. Yup, they're there to sell you magazines , which are loaded with, you guessed it... advertising . The cycle repeats, over and over. I do like some magazines, however. I currently subscribe to two of the Wolfe publications, and pickup others on the newsstand as quality merits. Go ahead... flame away."

I'm not so much fire & brimstone anymore, but that particular thread was begging for someone to put the brakes on the mutual admiration society. BTW, I no longer subscribe to ANY magazines.

[runfiverun]

cause they broke them before they got a good boolit outta them.
you aked.

[JIMinPHX]

Because I can't read this forum while sitting on the can in the morning.


You could get a Blackberry...


like the one that Obama has.
:kidding:

[JIMinPHX]

Actually...
a serious question here -

If I were to just write up an article out of the blue, & I wanted to get it published in a gun related magazine, how would I go about submitting something like that?

I have something that I would like to write about & the article would happen to include a Lee mold as an ancillary item.

[mpmarty]

Thirty or forty years ago, Mr P.O. Ackley posed a suggestion to the effect that a group form a service to buy on the open market samples of firearms and test them and report fairly on their findings. He reasoned that most of the magazines of the day were reluctant to be critical of their customers wares. I wholeheartedly agree. If the shoe fits, and so on and so forth ad infinitem.

[PAT303]

I just find that every time a rifle is reviewed it shoots MOA out off the box and has a ''crisp'' trigger and doesn't walk shots off the target when it heats up,we all know for a fact that every factory rifle needs a bedding job,trigger job and load developement work to shoot it's best so why do the supplyed rifles shoot without it?.If rifles shot as good as they say gunsmiths would go broke overnight. Pat

[45-70 Chevroner]

All the above replys have good points whether serious or humerous. I don't think Lee cares one way or the other about getting a review good or bad. They know they make a good product and offer them at a very reasonable price. I know they make misstakes in production once in a while but so does Lyman, RCBS and so on. I personally never had to send anything back to Lee. I have read on several forums of people haveing to send stuff back to them but they were almost always satisified. I probably have 20 + moulds made by Lee and almost that many of Lymans and a few RCBS molds. If I need a new mold I always look to Lee first, because they are 1/4 to 1/2 the cost of others. I also at this time have 3 Lee electric furnaces. I've had them for at least 20+ years and they still work and they do leak a little. I had a Lyman before that and it lasted for about 17 years. I really can't complain about any of my molding equipment or reloading equipment except for the price. And in that catagory Lee comes out on top.

[Nora]

IMHO company's like Lee don't get the press coverage because they are average, boring, and can be afforded by the normal hobbyist. Not many would be willing part with the price asked for magazines to read about average. It's partly the fantasy of something better that sells. Let's face it Roland Martin wouldn't have the same following if he regularly showed up still wearing the same jeans and T shirt he was in to mow the lawn earlier that morning. Let alone pulling up to the dock in a 14ft Lund / 9.9hp Merc row boat combo. It takes the latest greatest and exciting to sell magazines. Ok show of hands. Who wants to watch me make a part work with a file? Now those who would rather watch Rick make the same part on his lathe to with in .0003" of print specification with all the trimmings of the latest and greatest. Even if both parts would do the job equally well, I know my vote would be Rick firing up his Lathe.

Nora

[blikseme300]

I always see the humorous side in the Lee bashing. If the other products are so superior why do they also have superior customer service?

Story:
I sat on a committee a while ago that had to decide which large UPS and generator to purchase for a large corporate building. Up-time was a critical requirement.

We narrowed it down to 2 companies and called in their representatives for a last meeting to answer some additional questions. Company 1 & 2 had almost the same amount of installs in the same city but company 2 had only 2 technicians to service/repair and the other had 10 technicians. Turns out that company 1 needed the 10 technicians to maintain their product up-time record. We recommend company 2.
/End Story

A smart man told me a long time ago: Price is what you pay, value is what you get. There is no direct relationship between the price and value of any product.

I own products from all the major manufacturers and do use my reloading equipment extensively. Many things have broken or worn out during my use. Some through normal wear & tear and others because I got stupid. There was no mathematical relationship between the price paid and the life of the products.

As to magazines: Yes, there are honest reviewers out there. The problem is that you need to have experience to be able to separate the nuggets from the dross. For newcomers to our hobby/sport/obsession it is not so easy.

My 2c, as usual.

Bliksem

[John Guedry]

I have wondered about this same thing myself. Even if it's not a test of the mold itself it's always my "trusty" Lyman/RCBS that drops bullets exactly the same down to within a multobillioneth of a grain.

[jlchucker]

Because I can't read this forum while sitting on the can in the morning.

Stew

You've got a point there, stew. Plus, some of those mags could come in handy in the outhouse if the empty roll has not been replaced by the last user.

John

[Rocky Raab]

JiminPhx, rather than derail the thread (even though it's already halfway across a dirt field), drop me a PM about "how to get published." I would be delighted to discuss it.

[happy7]

My guess is that the writers at handgunner, who are mainly the authors of cast bullet articles, even if published in other magazines, must have a dislike for Lee molds. I have wondered a lot about this. I sure would like it if our own Mike Venturino would answer this question.

[JIMinPHX]

Thirty or forty years ago, Mr P.O. Ackley posed a suggestion to the effect that a group form a service to buy on the open market samples of firearms and test them and report fairly on their findings. He reasoned that most of the magazines of the day were reluctant to be critical of their customers wares. I wholeheartedly agree. If the shoe fits, and so on and so forth ad infinitem.

We could do just that, here on this board. We would not even need to buy anything. Many of the board members already have large & diverse collections of casting equipment. We could start a thread & ask board members to objectively compare & contrast different brands of the same item.

[saigafan2008]

I just find that every time a rifle is reviewed it shoots MOA out off the box and has a ''crisp'' trigger and doesn't walk shots off the target when it heats up,we all know for a fact that every factory rifle needs a bedding job,trigger job and load developement work to shoot it's best so why do the supplyed rifles shoot without it?.If rifles shot as good as they say gunsmiths would go broke overnight. Pat

I wouldn't blame the reviewers for this, Pat.

I believe this is just the manufacturers playing the game. They know that everything is riding on a good review, so they guarantee the reviewer gets a "really good" rifle, shotgun, or handgun. I have no doubt that all products sent in for a review have been carefully inspected beforehand by the manufacturer and some, if necessary, tinkered with. After all, you're not gonna send a junk product in for a review. There's a lot of money riding on getting a good review!

I always ignore claims in the reviews of trigger pull, etc, because I know those can be easily doctored by the manufacturer and just as easily fixed by the real owner or his gunsmith. What matters to me is what kind of groups it shoots, has does it handle: is it too heavy or too light, does it come drilled and tapped for scope mounts, did the reviewer work up some loads for it, etc. Those are things that (in general) should be true for any gun in the line, including the one I get from my local gun shop.

Just my 2 cents.

Carl

[Rocky Raab]

I've only reviewed two guns, but can state that neither had been doctored or "cherry-picked" in any way that I could detect. Both were in the original boxes with original seals, and came right from normal stock. But I'll admit that I have no way of absolutely, positively guaranteeing that as both came directly from the manufacturer, not from a retail outlet.

I know what you're thinking, and no, I do not have the luxury of buying everything I review. I could, but I'd lose money on every article even if I re-sold the items (assuming I'd get only the pinchpenny prices many are willing to pay for used stuff.)

[sqlbullet]

Because I can't read this forum while sitting on the can in the morning.

Look into a wireless access point or router and a laptop with wireless networking. It is the 21st century.

[mpmarty]

I've got 802.11n wireless and a fairly new HP laptop. I don't cruise the 'net on the john as the info that came with the laptop warned against use in corrosive environments :kidding:

[Farmall 1066]

I certainly didn't mean for this to turn into a Lee or Gunwriter bashing melee, though, in hindsight, I don't see how it could have gone any other direction.
Sorry, my bad :oops:

My personal thought was that maybe their "hospitality suite" at the SHOT Show may have consisted of a plate of cold cuts and a bathtub full of iced Carlings Black Label beer! :kidding:

Andy

[Rocky Raab]

LOL! If a product maker ever had Carling's Black Label in their hospitality suite, that would be a sure invitation to have their product universally damned!

(Were you subject to pallets of rusty, tropic-hot steel cans of that vile stuff in some place like Danang? Unforgettable, huh?)

[lathesmith]

(Ahem) Getting back to the original question for a moment, I would like to state for the record that I HAVE seen articles about casting that have included Lee molds and equipment. Sorry, I can't cite chapter and verse at the moment, but within the last few years in either ST or G&A, I remember a guy did an article about the 41mag in which he used a Lee 2-banger for one of his cast loads. I didn't realize this was such a point of contention; the next time I see an article that includes Lee equipment in its text I'll be sure and make note of such.
Of course, the naysayers will claim this is going to be awhile, and they may be right, but NOT because Lee equipment is necessarily intentionally shunned by all. I think it will have more to do with the fact that I don't see tons of articles about casting in the Gun mags I read anyway, so I say it's just the law of averages at work.

lathesmith

[bruce drake]

Mike V has written a number of articles about his recently added WWII rifle collection where he has used Lee Molds in his writeups.

Not a Lee bash at all as I have every one of their 30 cal through 8mm rifle molds but I'd love for them to regularly offer molds in 266 and 257 in addition to their other line of molds. They sent me a note about four years ago stating they didn't have a high enough demand for those size rifle molds.

Bruce

[rbuck351]

Lee does not offer a large variaty of molds and many of there nose riders don't touch the bore because they are too small. I have 15 or 20 Lee molds and some are very good. My last one is in 338 and the nose measures .327, the 30cal moulds I have also measure .002/.003 under on the nose. It's kind of like buying short chambered rifle barrels as they aren't much good without finishing to size. I have several Lee pistol bullet molds and for the most part they are good. I would like to see them .001 or .002 bigger as it's much easier to size them than to swage them. As to why gunwriters don't write about them is probably because they can afford to buy molds that don't need messed with to make good boolits.

[Farmall 1066]

Rocky......I'll try my hand at running this further down the dirt road, it's sunk in over the axles already! :grin:

I'm only 36, so no Carlings in Danang, but I WAS a poor highschool kid once!
$ 6.00 per case warm meant a week worth of putting up hay would pay for a whole summer of partying! :drinks:

Thanks to you who have pointed out articles featuring Lee molds that I have missed or forgotten!

Andy

[AZ-Stew]

Look into a wireless access point or router and a laptop with wireless networking. It is the 21st century.

Already have it. I work for the world's largest semiconductor manufacturer (look it up) and sit behind a computer 8 hours/day, 5 days/week doing CAD mechanical design to MAKE the 21st century for the rest of you. There are four computers in the house, one of which is a laptop. I have wireless DSL internet that even works as far out as my detatched workshop. I wouldn't think of having a computer in the bathroom, but I will think about an Amazon Kindle once they get a color display on it and the price comes down to "reasonable".

Regards,

Stew

[stubshaft]

Because half of the writers don't actually do any experimental work themselves, and instead endlessly rewrite Elmer Keith's old articles? And Elmer didn't use Lee moulds?

I bet he would have if they were available.

[Recluse]

My guess would be because Richard Lee was so cantankerous, obnoxious, self-aggrandizing and constantly self-promoting while disparaging almost all competition that most gun-writers felt they didn't want to hear it from him if/when they wrote anything less than a glowing review.

I LIKE Lee stuff--most of it. I own a LOT of Lee stuff; I've also owned some junk stuff. I DEFEND Lee adamantly and at every opportunity.

But for as big of a genius as Richard Lee was/is, the equal flip side is he can be just as big of a horse's patooie.

Shouldn't have any bearing in our "above reproach" trade journalists, but journalists are human beings first, writers second.

As far as gun writers and "review, then ad," yeah, sometimes that happens. But more often than not, what you get in today's magazines (and not just limited to guns) is the old 50's and 60's version of Payola.

When is the last time ANY writer beat hell out of a lousy, sorry product from ANY major advertiser or contributor to the magazine, and either:

A, still had their job? or

B, the magazine still had said brand as a client?

There are good gun writers out there. The best ones are the one's whose names I cannot recall nor remember (sorry Mike) because it means I pay more attention to their content and conclusions than I do their reputation.

:coffee:

[Marlin Hunter]

Because I can't read this forum while sitting on the can in the morning.


Regards,

Stew

Get a laptop with a wireless router

:kidding:

[HORNET]

Marlin Hunter, refer to post #35....LOL

For reference, shortly after he joined this happy bunch of leadrunners, Mike V. wrote a post detailing the reality of making a living as a gunwriter. I think it was one of the first ones that he originated. I don't have a handy link to it, but it should be easy to find. Well worth reading.

[Farmall 1066]

I remember reading that post, though I can't find it now. He stated that editors often removed negative information the writers had included in the article, IIRC.
Also something to the effect of "the best I can do is the best I can do and still get paid"!
I can sure as hell respect that too!

Andy

[epj]

I have recently begun doing a little freelance writing for FMG. They are the publishers of American Handgunner, Guns, American Cop, and others. My first article, which should appear in print shortly, concerns bullet casting. Lee products are certainly prominently featured. The equipment shown is a mixture of Lee, Lyman, and RCBS.

Roy Huntington, the publisher, and I had a conversation early on concerning "telling it like it is". His statement to me was that he would NEVER ask me to write a favorable review of an unfavorable product. He is very adamant about this subject, and is quite put off by the notion that gun magazines (at least his gun magazines) cater to advertisers. I cannot speak for other publishers or other authors, but there's my first hand take on the subject.

[TAWILDCATT]

Dick Lee bashed Dillons all the time. but you do know they are actually friends. dillions powder measure is actually a Lee remake.It was sales talk.and it worked.
I think Mike said he left to mags because of their policy."gun tests" seams to be honest. I used to subscribe,only dropped it as I had to many mags and I expect to drop a few more,as my interest is waning about the newist guns.$700 to $2000 does not interest me. :coffeecom

[Farmall 1066]

I have seen a few articles in "Guns" magazine that I felt "told it like it was". Don't recall now which mag it was, but one of them had a back page article that pretty much said the only persons to blame for the Winchester plant closure was the folks at Winchester themselves! Pretty much said they'd lost interest in making guns, and focused on making money, IIRC. Scathing words for a gun magazine.

EPJ, keep us posted......I'd love to read your work. Can you say which magazine it will be in?

Andy

[epj]

EPJ, keep us posted......I'd love to read your work. Can you say which magazine it will be in?

Andy

Andy, I've been told it will be in the next American Handgunner Special Edition. The article covers bullet casting basics, and there is reference to this site for further information. I'll let you know whenever it actually comes out.

Regards,
Ed Jennings

[fourdollarbill]

Large companies like Pharmaceuticals have lobbyists to promote and sway politicians.
Medium sized companies have "lobbyists" to promote and sway advertisers.
Small companies like LEE rely more on innovation and track record.
Writers just collecting a pay check write the same thing over and over and it is easier for them to research the past and ad a few words to it. You will be hard pressed to find real innovation in a magazine unless you bring it to them like epj.
Just my opinion.

[NHlever]

I wouldn't blame the reviewers for this, Pat.

I believe this is just the manufacturers playing the game. They know that everything is riding on a good review, so they guarantee the reviewer gets a "really good" rifle, shotgun, or handgun. I have no doubt that all products sent in for a review have been carefully inspected beforehand by the manufacturer and some, if necessary, tinkered with. After all, you're not gonna send a junk product in for a review. There's a lot of money riding on getting a good review!

I always ignore claims in the reviews of trigger pull, etc, because I know those can be easily doctored by the manufacturer and just as easily fixed by the real owner or his gunsmith. What matters to me is what kind of groups it shoots, has does it handle: is it too heavy or too light, does it come drilled and tapped for scope mounts, did the reviewer work up some loads for it, etc. Those are things that (in general) should be true for any gun in the line, including the one I get from my local gun shop.

Just my 2 cents.

Carl

There is some truth to this. I worked for a firearms manufacturer for many years, and most, if not all "writer's guns" took a quick trip through customer service at the least. Many were not modified in any way, but I suppose some were, or a different rifle, or handgun was found. They mainly wanted a quick double check. When I first worked there, all guns were both function tested, and proof tested. Function testing included shooting a group at 50 ft with handguns, and 50 yds with rifles. Rimfire rifles were just tested as a precentage of the lot going through. As production numbers grew though ammo costs, and storage became really prohibitave, and they stopped the group shooting. Writer's guns, and those going to selected folks are still tested for grouping though. I expect that as long as the gun meets the company's "standards" it is shipped. I have read embarassing articles where an H&R Handi rifle outshot all but a very expensive Sako varmint rifle, etc. though. :D

[Rocky Raab]

Not that many moons ago, several major writers wrote blistering articles about the S&W key locks - some even claiming they were life-threatening. None of those writers were fired, S&W still advertises in those magazines; unfortunately, those damnable locks are still there - but it may be a legally-required thing to be able to sell any guns at all, so S&W may not be fully to blame.

Congrats, epj. Welcome to the fold of "gum wipers!" There's no feeling like that first "Pay to the Order Of..." I guarantee you!

[epj]

Congrats, epj. Welcome to the fold of "gum wipers!" There's no feeling like that first "Pay to the Order Of..." I guarantee you!

Thanks. I used to write pretty regularily for a Corvette magazine. The paychecks and the free parts I sometimes got to test (and keep) were pretty nice. That magazine didn't have a large staff, so I was almost a regular writer. Name on the masthead, etc.

[kingstrider]

As for why the gun rags don't promote Lee molds, I can only guess that it boils down to the mentality that Lee is somehow inferior to the other manufacturers. But the only people I know that still buy gun magazines are newbs to the hobby anyway.

[oldfart1956]

Fellers I don't post often..but I read every day. This one I just had to join in. I cast mainly roundballs for muzzleloaders with the exception of a couple conicals. I've got moulds by Lee (mainly) Rapine and Lyman. I've never had to modify or improve a Lee mould. My Rapines and Lymans cast just as nice a projectile as the Lee. ;) Why don't the gun rags mention Lee moulds more? Mebbe Lee doesn't ante up the bribes? What really puzzles me is why anyone buys a magazine that accepts advertising dollars and then expects an unbiased review of said product. If the author/writer starts out the article with "I asked my friend at Winchester/Remington/Ziess etc.. etc. etc. to send me a new doo-dad for review..." your b.s. meter should start beeping. Any time an ad for an item being "tested" is in that magazine your b.s. meter should be screaming. Someone said why can't they just go out and buy the item and give it an honest test. They can. They do. Gun Tests magazine has been doing it for years. Someone asked why can't they "tell it like it is?" Someone does. Gun Tests magazine. No flowing praise, no hype payed for by the manufacturers. No advertising!! All the warts, failures and some they've actually called JUNK! (T/C's Triump and barrels from Spain..) They don't care what the manufacturers think! I love it. Honest reports..no hype, no b.s.! And no I don't work for them. Audie..the Oldfart..

[Rocky Raab]

So calling something junk makes it "honest" and praising something makes it BS?

All right. Let's call Gun Tests reviews "honest." If they praise something, is that BS?

My point is that a given review just might not reflect what you or I might think of the same product. Suppose something gets called junk for a reason that has no bearing on its use (it doesn't come in camo, for example)? Is the product junk?

Or is the REVIEW junk?

[qajaq59]

To be honest I don't really think Lee needs or even wants reviews. They're making good money just selling a low cost product to the average loader. Their molds are never going to be super stars. But they work ok, and plenty of people buy them. What would a review do for them? If it was bad, some wouldn't believe it. And if it was good, there'd be others that wouldn't believe that either. If they were charging $200 per mold, then reviews might help impress people looking for some status. But for $20 who cares?

[mpmarty]

My personal BS alert sounds off frequently when reading stuff from such rags as Consumer Reports. I really dislike reading somebody pontificating on a subject they know nothing about. Years ago when I had just bought my first SAAB Turbo CR badmouthed them for putting the ignition key on the floor between the seats. Guess what... all SAABs have had that feature as there is a locking dog that runs from the ign switch to the gear shift mechanism locking the tranny in reverse before the key can be removed. Too bad Government Motors aka BO bought the firm and then killed it with "innovation" aka make it cheaper or else!

[Wayne Smith]

Rocky, I have one example that questions your perceptions - and may not apply directly. It wasn't that long ago that the American Rifleman published a very positive review of the Charter Arms revolvers when every experienced salesman with whom I have had contact complains of the poor detailing and the poor functioning and the rate of return for repair of these same revolvers.

I have to wonder when I see two data points like this that just don't add up. Did Charter maybe make a few good ones and the NRA got one of those and wrote it up? If that is the case it demonstrates the weakness of the system. In my business we look for broad based, repeatable research, not case studies.

[Char-Gar]

My thoughts on the issue at hand;

1. I dont have a clue why Lee molds don't show up more often in gun magazine articles.
2. Gun magazines and gun writers are just folks trying to make a living the old fashioned American way though capitalism. I don't understand why folks expect them to be anything else.
3. In this thread I ran accross the following, to wit

" A smart man told me a long time ago: Price is what you pay, value is what you get. There is no direct relationship between the price and value of any product."

The first sentence on price and value is very accurate and true.

The second sentence is true sometimes and often untrue as well. Some thing are priced to all the market will bear and not priced to represent the cost of manufacture. However, plenty of things out there you buy do reflect where higher price means more value. Some things can be made cheaply and some things can be made well, but often they cannot be made cheaply and well.

[AZ-Stew]

Get a laptop with a wireless router

:kidding:

See Post #42.

Regards,

Stew

[HangFireW8]

I'm sick of answering anti-writer jibes, but can tell you that the above posts are purest BS. I won't convince anybody, though.

Tell ya what; y'all post what you do and we can all claim what crooked lying frauds all of "those" people are.

I'm a defense contractor; have at it! :)

As for journalistic integrity, give me a free hunt on a private ranch, let me use your brand new rifle and cartridge, feed me steaks, and I'll write you a hell of a magazine article. Let's face it, there are certain markets where this thing is allowed/expected, and others where it is more than frowned upon. In music DJ's call it "payola". It doesn't matter if it is cash or services, it's all the same.

No conspiracy theory here, though. There is a simpler reason that you don't see a lot of mainstream articles on cast boolits, Lee or otherwise. Its not a growth market, at least, not a big one. Magazines engage in boosterism in order to grow the market, and therefore grow their advertising base.

Gun sales down? Invent or find a new market, call it Silly Wets and sell people otherwise useless hand rifles. People get tired of shooting Silly Wets or discover the nearest Silly Wet range is 500 miles away? Write articles about hunting with Silly Wet guns.

The Silly Wet craze running dry? Write articles about plastic AutoRifles. Don't need one for defense? Write articles about varminting. Don't varmint? Write about winning competitions with plastic AutoRifles.

Democrats sweep an election? Write about soon-to-be-banned guns. Write about them a lot. Sell a lot. Fill the coffers of the advertisers in a feeding frenzy. Then, write about something else so everyone trades in their almost-banned handgun for something new.

Happy with your handgun? It's not small enough, it's not flat enough, it's not powerful enough, it's too powerful. Trade it in and buy something new. Keep that market vibrant.

Rifle inaccurate? Post a new tech preview article and claim you haven't had time to test it. Only accurate with a few loads? Print only those few loads. There are lots of ways to tell only the good part of the truth.

Gun writers get blackballed? As Jamison or Dean Spier. One sued an advertiser, the other told the truth about one of the hottest brands of the time. Good thing Pseudonyms exist.

It's all about telling the truth in new original ways. "Has more sectional density than a 300 Win Mag" is one of my favorites. I didn't realize entire cartridges had a measured sectional density. :) I suppose they were comparing to the 150gr or rare 125gr load. Another favorite is, shoots flatter than X, ignoring mismatched comparisons and remaining energy at range. It's all in how you pitch it. Can't match this velocity in handloads? We use magic fairy pixie dust gunpowder. Sorry, you can't have any.

Gun writers have a sort of integrity. What they don't say and what they don't write about is the real story you won't hear in the glossy magazines.

The glossy magazine market is what it is, accept it. Read between the lines. Post experiences in forums like this one. Let subscriptions run out when they get too annoying. Buy only what you need, not what they want.

-HF

[awaveritt]

Its not a growth market, at least, not a big one. Magazines engage in boosterism in order to grow the market, and therefore grow their advertising base.


Exactly! That's why I stopped buying fly fishing magazines when I bought my bamboo rod. Last year's graphite rod was so, well, last year. As if I would go buy another $600 fly rod because it was supposedly this or that much better/improved. Give me a break.

It seems casting bullets is in a similar category. There is an esoteric level to any pursuit that seems to boil it down to its essence - and those that find it, soon lose interest in what the masses are doing. Advertisers know this and choose to spend their money elsewhere. Anyone casting boolits doesn't need to learn about Lee moulds in a magazine.

[HangFireW8]

Exactly! That's why I stopped buying fly fishing magazines when I bought my bamboo rod. Last year's graphite rod was so, well, last year. As if I would go buy another $600 fly rod because it was supposedly this or that much better/improved. Give me a break.

Save your fly rod money and buy this power cord instead. You need it. Really. Never mind the 50 foot of corroded 16ga 50 year old house wiring that it plugs into, that runs by every electronic noise generating apparatus in your house:

http://www.dedicatedaudio.com/inc/sdetail/22704

Use this to power your A/V system and all your problems will be solved. :kidding:

-HF

[qajaq59]

Use this to power your A/V system and all your problems will be solved. P. T. Barnum's spirit is alive and well!!!:bigsmyl2:

[Marlin Hunter]

Save your fly rod money and buy this power cord instead. You need it. Really. Never mind the 50 foot of corroded 16ga 50 year old house wiring that it plugs into, that runs by every electronic noise generating apparatus in your house:

http://www.dedicatedaudio.com/inc/sdetail/22704

Use this to power your A/V system and all your problems will be solved. :kidding:

-HF


$1750 for 3 feet of extension cord? :groner:

I bet the government purchased several miles of that stuff.