Cliff Grays Podcast with Aaron Davidson

[Flyjunky]

Did you not see the “beta male” part your buddy Aaron spewed first? How is that not name calling? Aaron himself may be a great guy. It’s his choice in words and his marketing model I find douchey.

It’s no flex. I only state all that to say I simply don’t buy the lack of time argument. Like exercise, or going to church, or spending time with your kids, or anything else beneficial, when it’s important enough you make the time to learn!

Do you personally know anyone who owns a gw gun that doesn’t practice with it?

Do you build your own guns? Do you load all your own ammo?

Btw, I don’t know Aaron or have any of his products but just because of the hate I think I’ll get a set of the gen 2 revics just because of this thread.

 

[Cliff Gray]

Btw, I don’t know Aaron or have any of his products but just because of the hate I think I’ll get a set of the gen 2 revics just because of this thread.

bwhaahah!

they are pretty great

 

[180ls1]

I'd hate to see what some of you all do when you drive past a small town restaurant with "world famous cheeseburgers."

 

[HuntHarder]

I'd hate to see what some of you all do when you drive past a small town restaurant with "wold famous cheeseburgers."

It's Beta Slogan rage!

 

[SDHNTR]

Do you personally know anyone who owns a gw gun that doesn’t practice with it?

Do you build your own guns? Do you load all your own ammo?

Btw, I don’t know Aaron or have any of his products but just because of the hate I think I’ll get a set of the gen 2 revics just because of this thread.

Yes, to all of your questions. A firm yes, especially to the first question. As stated before, I know 2 guys with GW guns. Neither knows anything about them. Neither knows a thing about ballistics. Neither cares. Neither has any interest in learning the how or why. They just think they can twist the turret and kill stuff. Thats all they care about and precisely why they bought the rifle over other options. Line up their customers and I’d be willing to bet the majority are similar. Theatrics aside, THAT is their target market. The baffling part is most of you guys seem to think that’s OK.

 

[Flyjunky]

Yes, to all of your questions. A firm yes, especially to the first question. As stated before, I know 2 guys with GW guns. Neither knows anything about them. Neither knows a thing about ballistics. Neither cares. Neither has any interest in learning the how or why. They just think they can twist the turret and kill stuff. Thats all they care about and precisely why they bought the rifle over other options. Line up their customers and I’d be willing to bet the majority are similar. Theatrics aside, THAT is their target market. The baffling part is most of you guys seem to think that’s OK.

If that’s the case then those people are the problem, not GW. If people aren’t smart enough to look past any marketing then I don’t know what to say.

Like I said before, I would bet money not a single person at GW tells someone they don’t need to practice or learn the finer points of lr shooting.

What about other companies who put an accuracy “guarantee” in their literature? Do you complain about those companies as well? I mean, after sighting in at 100 those rifles should hold that guarantee to 800 correct? No need to practice.

 

[Macintosh]

Food for thought.

Despite some having their panties in a wad a bit much, I believe a few folks are suggesting it would be a lot more responsible (but probably a lot less sexy) to say something like "the gun can shoot 1000 yards out of the box--can you?" It's a bit disingenuous to not at least acknowledge that the slogan and probably some other communication is riding that line of selling people on the idea that the gun alone is all they need to drop that elk/mule deer/etc in its tracks at 800, 900, etc yards next month. Just as one example, that's a totally different ballgame than a 100 yard accuracy guarantee which is not overtly encouraging people to shoot at longer and longer distances, quite possibly beyond their skill level.

That said, on my first look the website seems to me to be selling the shooting school pretty aggressively too. Could they be more forward about suggesting the shooter's skill is an important part of the equation that isnt included with the rifle? Sure, and maybe they should since they're pushing hunting specifically at long range, which is clearly an "optional" element of hunting that's not without controversy on multiple fronts—enough that's its leading to experimental regulation on all of us in some places.

But they also say this:

A quality tool is still just a tool in the wrong hands. The proper skill and training combined with quality tools are what produce proficient long range hunters. Many groups advertise they’ll teach you how to shoot long range. Gunwerks’ approach is different. Gunwerks Long Range University provides superior equipment, teaches the science, practices in real-world situations and does it in a progressive manner to not just walk you in to steel at 1000 yards, but leaves you with the tools and the knowledge to be confident pulling off your one shot of a lifetime.

 

[eric1115]

Food for thought.

Despite some having their panties in a wad a bit much, I believe a few folks are suggesting it would be a lot more responsible (but probably a lot less sexy) to say something like "the gun can shoot 1000 yards out of the box--can you?" It's a bit disingenuous to not at least acknowledge that the slogan and probably some other communication is riding that line of selling people on the idea that the gun alone is all they need to drop that elk/mule deer/etc in its tracks at 800, 900, etc yards next month. Just as one example, that's a totally different ballgame than a 100 yard accuracy guarantee which is not overtly encouraging people to shoot at longer and longer distances, quite possibly beyond their skill level.

That said, on my first look the website seems to me to be selling the shooting school pretty aggressively too. Could they be more forward about suggesting the shooter's skill is an important part of the equation that isnt included with the rifle? Sure, and maybe they should since they're pushing hunting specifically at long range, which is clearly an "optional" element of hunting that's not without controversy on multiple fronts enough that's its leading to experimental regulation on all of us in some places.

But they also say this:

A quality tool is still just a tool in the wrong hands. The proper skill and training combined with quality tools are what produce proficient long range hunters. Many groups advertise they’ll teach you how to shoot long range. Gunwerks’ approach is different. Gunwerks Long Range University provides superior equipment, teaches the science, practices in real-world situations and does it in a progressive manner to not just walk you in to steel at 1000 yards, but leaves you with the tools and the knowledge to be confident pulling off your one shot of a lifetime.

Hey! You get your moderate and thoughtful take out of here. This is a discussion between fans and haters!

 

[MtnW]

I'd hate to see what some of you all do when you drive past a small town restaurant with "world famous cheeseburgers."

If there are a lot of local license plates on the vehicles in the parking lot and the parking lot is pretty full, I usually stop.
If the lot only has a couple BMW’s with California plates I keep driving!
How about you?

 

[JGRaider]

I have no dog in this fight. I love the learning process and figuring stuff out for myself. I have never and almost certainly will never own a GW rifle or go on a guided hunt.

How is what a guide does materially different than what GW does? A guy wants success (on a hunt, or in putting together a reliable, accurate shooting system) without devoting all the time required to build the skills and knowledge to do so himself. How is a dude who doesn't want to spend years learning about elk sign/habitat/patterns any different than a dude that doesn't want to spend years personally figuring out what works and what doesn't with rifles, scopes, rings, reloading, and shooting solutions?

I'm not saying either or both are good or bad, just wondering if you think guides serve the same role for actual hunting as GW does for shooting systems. I have my thoughts on both, but curious to hear yours.

I don't know why people do what they do, but I'm sure they have their reasons. The reason hunters booked with me is that I had access to 150,000 acres of private land in Texas where there is little public land. You want access to prime hunting you hire people like me to gain access which is otherwise impossible on your own especially if you live a long ways away. Most were excellent hunters and shooters, but there were numerous lardassss rich guys without much of a clue about his equipment......like the clown from CA who showed up wanting to "make sure his rifle was sighted in" first morning of the hunt. He had his Swarovski scope in one hand, and rifle in the other.

 

[chicoredneck]

Aaron Davidson hit on this already, but how did people lose track of what makes us as humans successful? We hunt, as we always have, based off our ingenuity, intelligence, and foresight. We all want to be successful. Anyone who says otherwise is being disingenuous. In the hunting world, holding back the use technology not only stifles innovation, it’s immoral if you take into account the most basic consideration of other human beings. Who are you to decide how I pursue happiness as long as it does not interfere with yours? We effectively manage game populations through tag allocations. Trying to manage game populations through technology restriction's during any legal weapon seasons, as seems to be the current buzz, is silly and will just result in human ingenuity finding work arounds like we do with everything. It’s also anti freedom.