Thumbcocker
Active Member
The algorithm popped up a review of an iteration of the Sig 365 on my feed. I think the 365 is a pretty good pistol for what it is (polymer frame, bottom feeding, brass puker) and own one. The article was a proported review of the gun and detailed its history and features. Ok. That a light and optic could be fitted. Not my thing but ok. That an expansion chamber would reduce muzzle flip by "an estimated 30%". Ok. Not really an issue for me as I don't find the muzzle flip to be an issue, but then my gunfighter days are behind me, I hope. The author said the gun was "a joy to shoot ". What was apparently considered superfluous by the author was any shooting results. No targets. No group size. Nada. WTF. Are those of us who want to know how a gun actually shoots such a minority that authors no longer feel the need to actually show shooting results? I own guns because I like to shoot them. If I want information on a gun how it shoots is my top priority. It seems like 10 yards is now considered "long distance" for many reviewers. At least they show targets. Is the handgun market now reduced to selling polymer framed, striker fired, pocket guns to scared people? I cut my teeth reading Elmer and Skeeter and Ross. I guess I am a dinosaur. Sorry for the rant.