I take reviews with a lot of grains of salt. I definitely don't accept all the reviews of one internet celebrity, nor do I accept every review from magazine articles. Often times, those who read magazine articles don't seem to pick up on the little negative statements, as there is so much information these days that people tend to skim over a lot of content and jump to the wrong conclusions. I like to see what regular people have to say about the firearms they own. If I were to have accepted the tidal wave of negativism about the Sig striker fired pistols, I'd never have found out how great my latest EDC is for me. One thing I've found is that once some negative reviews hit the internet, there is a tendency to pile on. Much of that comes from people who have no experience with a certain gun, but have intense loyalty to another brand. Over the years, I've found that even the most expensive guns can have problems with small parts failure. Almost all manufacturers have had recalls of one kind or another. One thing I find important is how a manufacturer handles problems. A warrantee is only as good as the manufacturer's willingness to satisfactorily respond.
I totally agree. I have been looking at the Standard single action revolver, which is a high quality copy of the Colt Peacemaker. Everyone that I know that own one loves it. I have shot one and agree that it probably the highest quality production SAA made at this time. Yet countless folks degrade it because it doesn’t have the Colt logo. These same folks have no issues praising non-Colt 1911s. It seems hypocritical to base an opinion on something without even using it, or calling a firearm overpriced because it isn’t a Colt.