Book Review: Kokalis's Weapons Tests and Evaluations

["Eric Benson" <ebenson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Weapons Tests and Evaluations:
The Best of Soldier of Fortune

Eric Benson

Overall Rating: 3.5 out of 5

Condensed Review:
Interesting read, but one that should be taken with a grain of salt.  At a
$40 street price, it's a bit overpriced.

Official Description:
Weapons Tests and Evaluations: The Best of Soldier of Fortune
by Peter G. Kokalis
Peter G. Kokalis has traveled the globe for 20 years, risking enemy fire
from the jungles of El Salvador to the deserts of Africa, to bring more
exclusives to readers of "Soldier Of Fortune" magazine than any other writer
on small arms. In this comprehensive anthology of Kokalis' best articles
from SOF and Fighting Firearms magazines, you'll get authoritative reviews
and detailed information on dozens of handguns, rifles, SMGs, sniper rifles,
and shotguns.  You'll also travel with him as he trains El Salvador's
Atlacatl Battalion, visits the cagey gun dealers of Afghanistan to test the
elusive Soviet AGS-17, and goes where no Western writer has gone before for
his groundbreaking eight-part series examining the weapons of the Chinese
army. 8 1/2 x 11, softcover, photos, illus., 416 pp.
ISBN:   1-58160-122-0
Suggested Retail: $45.00
Sources:  http://www.paladin-press.com/


The Long Version:
Kokalis's Weapons Tests and Evaluations is an interesting read for armchair
tactical operators.  The book is a collection of various stories and weapons
reviews that Kokalis wrote during his tenure at Soldier of Fortune magazine.
As a collection, the articles date from 1982 to 2000, with many of the
articles coming from before 1990.  Because of the dates of when the articles
were originally written, Kokalis skips many newer designs.  At the time,
Kokalis professes to be the first or one of the first to review some of the
systems (AGS-17, etc).  Today, others have reviewed and evaluated the
systems and his information seems more dated.

It is somewhat difficult to review the book without commenting on Kokalis.
In the opening, Kokalis describes his extensive - and classified - military
background, but yet, when it comes time to review the weapons, it always
seems to come back to the same few instances and comments.  Is it that his
record is classified or is it because his experience is really based on a
few places that he went in his early days of SOF?  Far be it from me, an
armchair soldier to question is background, but it does raise a flag about
his experience.

Kokalis apparently holds journalistic integrity and scientific methodology
in low regard.  As a 'journalist', he taught courses in small arms handling
and secured ammunition and parts for the El Salvador police and military.
Ahem, the presence (or absence) of journalists should not impact the story.
I understand his desire to help the train the units, however, there is a
difference between a good field reporter and changing the story by helping
one side or the other.  Kokalis makes much ado about following military
specifications for the M16A2 evaluation, but admits to changing the
specification to evaluate other criteria.  The evaluation either is a
mil-spec test or it is not.  You can't alter the test and then advertise it
as meeting the standard.  Given that they had the information, it would also
have been nice if they would have provided tabular or graphical results,
allowing the reader to draw their own conclusions.

There is a noticeable difference between the types of articles written prior
to 1990 and the type of articles written after 1990.  In the reviews prior
to about 1990, Kokalis went on location and reviewed things not available in
the United States.  His evaluations, while interspersed with social
commentary, point out flaws in the design of the weapons.  Post 1990, the
reviews gradually change from the early SOF style to that of Guns and Ammo
or American Rifleman.  The reviews generally become more favorable and he
seems to have fewer complaints about the weapons.  Is it a function of the
weapons he reviewed. or something else?

The book is a good read, but should be taken with a grain of salt or two.
Kokalis isn't shy about his opinions; by the end, it's obvious that he has
an axe or two to grind.  It's up to reader to decide if they agree with the
comments.

For most of us, the closest we will ever get to many of the weapons Kokalis
reviewed is in the pages of Jane's Infantry Weapons.  If we're lucky, we
will see it in a museum.  Shooting one would be akin to a wet dream.

Kokalis's Weapons Tests and Evaluations provides useful qualitative
information that most of us simply don't have access to.  Jane's Infantry
Weapons and other books can provide the 'data', but provide little in terms
of field evaluations.  The field evaluations are of value for the Millennium
's End audience.  One of the challenges for the average player or game
master is to find information outside simply the statistics or raw
performance.  It's easy to simply look at the numbers and min-max equipment.
Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with everything Kokalis writes,
Weapons Tests and Evaluations provides players with a better feel for the
weapons he reviews.

The book is moderately expensive ($40 street price) for the information it
contains.  Seeing how all of the information in the book was pulled out of
back issues of SOF; I think a $30 price would have been more appropriate.
As it is, it's not hugely overpriced against the competition, but a few
dollars less would have been more appropriate.