doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Consumer Reports, October, 1965-12 gauge doubles!

If I'm looking to purchase I go and look at the product and try to talk to people that own it and get their opinion. Then I make up my mind. I look at any "rag" and it is going to have employees that can be gotten or the magazine will be bias. Thats just the way it is. No trust.

CR's only comment about double guns today would be in the vein of "Don't own a gun of any kind. They are dangerous." CR has been a liberal political rag for as long as I have been aware of it. They trashed my '72 Suburban for the same reason they would trash a Suburban today. It is not politically correct and Republicans love them. Only Democrats in the higher income brackets would meet CR's criteria for ownership.

Politically correct takes on a new meaning when you're paying $5.85/gallon with a Silverado half-ton in the shed. North America is in for a rough ride.

Hear! Hear!

Best,

Mike

I hope I didn't appear bitter or politically biased by mentioning political parties by name in my post. However, the overall attitude of CR about certain consumer products or brands of consumer products reminds me of a situation that existed in an earlier era that younger forum participants may not be aware of and older ones may have forgotten. In the late sixties and early seventies, the Federal Government decided to put pressure on the car companies to slow down or cease production and development of the "more interesting" of their products, like large displacement, high horsepower cars with low end nameplates. The reasons given for such pressure varied, but safety and fuel consumption were among those discussed. It is interesting that these particular vehicles appealed to a politically conservative group as well as those across the political spectrum who were of a lower income bracket. Oddly, no particular pressure was put on makers of high end nameplates like Cadillac, Lincoln, Ferrari, Porche, to limit the performance level of their products in the name of safety or fuel consumption. Just as the SUV of today is allowed to remain politically correct for liberals and conservatives alike, as long as their income level is sufficient, the performance cars (as well as gas guzzler SUVs) of the seventies were also accepted by the powers that be at CR and the Federal Government as long as they were marketed toward the upper classes.

Larger insurance companies had a hand in that, as well.
Best,
Ted

I think a couple of things need to be pointed out here for the benefit of our younger members. Double triggers and splinter forends were,in general, considerd old fashioned on double guns in the mid 60's. Single selective triggers and beavertail forends were all the rage so I cetainly understand CRs review from this perspective. Additionally barrels over 26" were considered excessivly long and anything less than a 12 ga was considered a toy or ladies gun. I also can remember a "bargian barrel" of damascus shotguns including Parkers for sale at my local gun dealer for under $100. Times and opinions have certainly changed.
Jim

Ted, interesting thread. How things change.

JC
P.S.: Do give AYA Jeff my regards, his knowledge is missed. jc

I see their opinion on guns is worth about as much as their opinion on vehicles. I'm still driving the same 1998 pickup truck that they universally panned, 340,000 miles on it right now and it still does duty pulling my big tractor. If consumer reports pans it then it's probably OK.

Does anyone know who made the Atlas guns of that era? Scalloped boxlocks, from the look of the photos in the article.
Best,
Ted