I got my hands on a Savage Fox A Grade that had made the rounds of several other outdoor writers as a field test gun. Frankly, I was impressed. As I said before, basically an RBL dressed up to look like a Fox . . . but since Savage owns the name and they did that once before (Fox Model B, which was a Stevens dressed up to look like a Fox) that didn't bother me all that much. The gun performed perfectly with both factory loads and reloads. I had an assignment to review the gun in Pointing Dog Journal. Liked it so much I decided to buy one. The field test gun had matte finish barrels and I wanted a traditional blue. No problem, they say.
So gun arrives at my gunsmith's with blued barrels. But he points out that there's something strange about the checkering on the wrist. Looks like it's 2-toned. That's because half the panel is clearly coarser than the other half. Not sure how you screw up laser checkering, but they did. So I told them I was sending it back. Profuse apology . . . we'll make sure the next one is right.
Attempt #2 arrived . . . with matte finish barrels, as well as the same screwed up checkering. At which point I told the guy at Savage (or actually the conglomerate that owns Savage) that they really need to lean on CSMC about quality control. Bad marks to both CSMC and Savage for missing that. Also told them that I was done trying to get one that was right, and I wouldn't be doing an article on the gun.
We're talking a gun that retailed in the mid-$4K range, so more like an RBL in that respect than either a Model 21 or an A-10. But when something as glaring as the checkering is messed up, someone's not doing their job. And when those guns were still being marketed actively, I saw several on the Internet (mostly on Cabela's website) with the same messed up checkering. That makes 3 companies that screwed up, because Cabela's should have sent them back to Savage.
And there lies the problem with gun writers. You should’ve wrote the article about the gun they sent you. Instead...they wait for a “perfect example” to write a glowing review on. What the consumer will get is usually entirely different.
Seriously, when’s the last time anyone’s read a negative review on a gun? It doesn’t happen that often. It seems gun writers are bound to write more than glowing reviews on the guns in hopes of receiving some sort of perk (free gun, discounted gun, trip, free or discounted services, etc), very few in my circle take a gun review very seriously that appears in a magazine.
