Does appearance matter?

I've owned a lot of "plain" looking guns, but I don't know that I've ever owned an ugly one.

Plus 1 CajunBass. I own only Savage rifles. Now they are not by far Beautiful Rifles,but I don't consider them Ugly.

I also own a PT1911 (Dont go there please:D ). I put custome Cheery Wood Grips on it. I think it is one Sweet looking Pistol.

As one Poster said- Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

I also Agree that a Pistol is a tool of defense. You start looking at it as more than that and you are starting to scare me. I love my rifles and pistol's , but they are tools. Apperance does matter some what, As long as it's not a obsession--- Ok rip me up for that one now :D

As for the Pink Truck--My wife would Love it.:D
 
Last edited:
and to quote Townsend Whelen, "only accurate guns are interesting."
Click to expand...

Not to split hairs, but the actual quote was, "Only accurate rifles are interesting". Which makes more sense in the context of light-weight, short-barreled handguns that are more suitable for self-defense, where reliability and compactness might well be more "interesting" (and important) than accuracy.
 
Of all the cliches and sayings in the gun world, "guns are just tools", is the worst and the one I wish would go away the most (followed closely by "solution to a problem that doesn't exist")
 
constantine said:
When I out shoot a high dollar 1911 with my Glock 19, does it really matter?
Click to expand...

The funny part is when (probably more like if) you show up at a competition, or have to actually use your Glock 19 in anger, and find out just how bad you are compared to a decent 1911 shooter with an expensive gun! ;)
 
arizonaopa said:
I have seen many posts about good looking and ugly guns. I just wonder why this is such an issue. People say Hi-Point and Glock are ugly. It seems to me that if the weapon goes bang and is accurate when I pull the trigger, why worry about appearance. Granted, I have some guns that I collect due to the good appearance of the workmanship, but these are not guns that I take to the range. Just wondering about what others think.
Click to expand...

I don't see why appearance should matter, especially if you're talking about carrying to protect yourself. The way I see it is a criminal isn't going to be looking at the type of gun you have if he's trying to rob or harm you. The only person that will say anything is a true gun snob. I personally don't care what anyone chooses to use. If it makes you happy and feel safe then that's all that matters
 
If it makes you happy and feel safe then that's all that matters
Click to expand...

That is why appearance matters. Some of them are just to make me happy. Some of them are to make me safe. Most of them can do both at the same time. The last one is my preference. ;)
 
Chaz88 said:
That is why appearance matters. Some of them are just to make me happy. Some of them are to make me safe. Most of them can do both at the same time. The last one is my preference. ;)
Click to expand...

Lol well said. That's funny. "Most of them can do both at the same time." This is true.

15 handguns and my 2 favorites are my GLOCK 19 and SIG P226 e2.
 
I hear the "X are Tools mentality a lot". It's true of guns and it's true of guitars. The only difference is you sometimes want your instrument to look professional (whether a jazz guitar or a solid black spikester for death metal), where as typically in shooting competitions/classes people don't care about a gun's look. Or, if they do, I can't figure out what's up with race guns :eek:

A tool will get the job done. A classic car which functions fine internally has no need for leather upholstering, dashboard refitting, or a new paint job. It will get you from point A to point B.

For a lot of people, dropping money on an object is a personal experience, and if it's something they hope to use a lot they want it to be something they like looking at. I like the sleek black look of my CZ 75. I appreciate the fine wood of the CZ 452. For others, they don't want to spend the extra time, money or energy.

For those who say it doesn't matter at all, would you carry a bright triple-tone 1911 or S&W Revolver colored orange, pink, and purple? If you like those colors, substitute ones that you don't like.

If the answer is that you wouldn't carry it, then you've admitted that, to some degree, appearance matters. You may disagree about how much, but it's there. If you would still carry your choice of handguns in those colors, then you can probably say that appearance doesn't matter to you.
 
Looks do count,if a gun works fine but looks like crap,for example the Glock looks like two blocks stuck together at right angles,it works but blah,
On the other hand the Colt 1911a1 ,even as a parkerized issue from an armory with the white rack no. Spray painted on its plastic grip panels it has beauty and soul as does the Browning Hi-Power,you can tell the artist ,the master had put his heart and soul into their design they ooze class and beauty ,they are the best even still today ,right down to the fact of safe cocked and locked carry.Luger another beauty even the CZ-75 is beauty and let us not forget Walthers beauty's
Most offerings today are merely a product up for sale,sold as good,functional and especially new ,this sells to people who increasingly nowadays will say"I don't like guns ,I carry one because I have too"! Many are embarrassed to even suggest a gun might be beautiful and that they enjoy just looking at it.
 
I'm wondering why so many people find Glocks to be "ugly". Believe or not, I like the look of the Glocks - clear lines, almost no protruding details. They have just their specific "Glock" style. Well, I like the look of my HK USP a lot more than the Glock's but this was not the reason I preferred USP over Glock.
 
i dont think too many guns are "ugly". i don't own a glock, but i think they look pretty cool. but i think everything can have a purpose, i own a very old davis industies pot-metal pistol that lives in my bathroom. i know some ppl that keeps hipoints c9's for this reason. sometimes looks really dont matter.
 
With image being as important as so many make it out to be, appearance seems to be one of the first bit of criteria for people be it a firearm or anything else. Same holds true for brand name.
 
I bought a NAA Mini 22S revolver because it was so cute. Actually, it evokes the cuteness metric that is biologically built into to us so that we take care of babies. Car manufacturers and other product designers deliberately use it to appeal to certain market slickes. It works for inanimate objects.

However, my carry guns are Glocks - they work.
 
When I out shoot a high dollar 1911 with my Glock 19, does it really matter?
Click to expand...

Can you quantify "outshoot"? In competition, you have accuracy and speed. The gun (shooting within the same class) rarely provides an advantage to the shooter. Take you Glock 19, load it with 8 shots and shoot against a really good shooter with a 1911 - it will all come down to the shooter's speed and accuracy - NOT the gun.

I guarantee you won't outshoot a competent shooter with a .40 caliber 2011 race gun using your Glock 19.

I also think it's interesting that some people with Glocks always claim "it's a tool" but revel in being a "Glock guy," and appropriate and assign the self-invented mystique of Glock superiority to themselves for using one.
 
Can you quantify "outshoot"? In competition, you have accuracy and speed. The gun (shooting within the same class) rarely provides an advantage to the shooter. Take you Glock 19, load it with 8 shots and shoot against a really good shooter with a 1911 - it will all come down to the shooter's speed and accuracy - NOT the gun.

I guarantee you won't outshoot a competent shooter with a .40 caliber 2011 race gun using your Glock 19.
Click to expand...

So it's the shooters speed and accuracy that count, but a Glock can't beat a race gun. Got it. :confused:

Give me a $5000 race gun and Jerry Miculek a Hi-Point, and I'm betting Jerry would make me look stupid real quick.
 
Give me a $5000 race gun and Jerry Miculek a Hi-Point, and I'm betting Jerry would make me look stupid real quick.
Click to expand...

This is probably true for 99.9% of the shooters out there, myself included. Most handguns are more accurate than their owners. Take ANY gun and drop it in a ransom rest. Odds are the groups will be pretty close from one gun to another - taking into account ammo bias for the individual gun.
 
allure

For many of us, I think there is an allure or attraction to certain mechanical devices to include firearms. A Garand seems handsome to me, as does the Win 88, the sleek old Rem 14/141 pumps, Browning HP pistol, to name a few. I've thought the VW bug is odd looking, and the smart cars terrible.

There are ugly cars, there are ugly guns. What do you drive?
 
JN01 said:
So it's the shooters speed and accuracy that count, but a Glock can't beat a race gun. Got it. :confused:

Give me a $5000 race gun and Jerry Miculek a Hi-Point, and I'm betting Jerry would make me look stupid real quick.
Click to expand...

I'll just quote this for buckhorn_cortez as my response.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top