Firearms Talk banner
1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
821 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
On a scale of 1-10 with 10 being the most concerned about looks/appearance of a semi auto and 1 being more concerned about performance, dependability/accuracy....where do you fall?

I say this because in my years poking around Youtube, web forums, interacting with gun-friendly friends and even hanging at my local gunshop....Ive seen and heard so many different gun personalities over the years. Some folks can pick up a used gun with a horrible finish, chewed up grips, scratch marks and excessive holster wear etc and it DOESNT EVEN PHASE THEM. They are looking strictly at the mechanics and performance of the gun.

Me, I admittedly lean slightly towards the looks/appearance side of a gun when making a purchase and put myself at a 7. I simply couldnt live with a gun that shot straight but was butt-ugly! I can deal with minor scratches and holster wear.....but I do have my line that I wont cross based on my personal preference of its appearance. I think some pistols out there are absolutely stunning pieces of art and go beyond self defense (aka safe queens).

Now, obviously there are new guns out there that look absolutely STUNNING and give the best of both worlds in terms of performance.....but for the most part I am seeing who prefers the visual appeal of a gun over the raw performance. Its a tricky question, be honest!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,626 Posts
I'd say about a 5 for my 1911, and a 3 for my other firearms.

Regarding my 1911, I loved the look of the all black and minimal SS accents of the SIG Nitron; it was the reason why I chose that particular model from SIG. I would have ended up with a Para or similar model also all black if I didn't get the deal I got on my SIG 1911. I have become a true die hard fan of SIGs for their quality however, not for their looks. My P229R is a bad *** pistol and it happens to look cool as well. My Beretta 84FS was purchased at the time based on price and capacity. My PWS MK114 was strictly purchased based on spec, since it's an AR they mostly all look the same anyway...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,856 Posts
Probably about a 3 or all I would have are 1911's, Hipower's and maybe a CZ. The closest thing I have to a 1911 is my Sig 238 and I shot one first. IMHO it is the best small 380 out there. I would like to shoot a 938. Lets face it, anyone who buys a Glock or XD is out for performance not beauty.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,141 Posts
Lets face it, anyone who buys a Glock or XD is out for performance not beauty.
Truth, my XD45 is freakin olive drab; it was my first firearm that wasn't stainless or blued, also my first tupperware.

For me, it's about how it feels in my hand. I bought a CZ75b in the only finish they make that makes me consider having a working firearm coated. It's duoton-black slide and black plastic grips with that funky goldish finish on the rest of it. Heck, those are USM colors, gaggity gag. But it is sooooooo comfy to hold and to shoot. It was also a trade-in they let me buy for $400.

http://images.search.yahoo.com/imag...b=14bfp0kck&sigi=113cekcr9&.crumb=..9dWz/1JyW
pic from teh web

Now the Bersa Thunder .380 that i had did have a beautiful flat nickel finish that i loved, and that "james bond" profile...gotta get me a replacement after Christmas.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
821 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Probably about a 3 or all I would have are 1911's, Hipower's and maybe a CZ. The closest thing I have to a 1911 is my Sig 238 and I shot one first. IMHO it is the best small 380 out there. I would like to shoot a 938. Lets face it, anyone who buys a Glock or XD is out for performance not beauty.
Ehhh not quite, thats the beauty of this is that I think looks & appearance in guns are very subjective. For example, I think my Glock 26 Gen3 is far from ugly. In fact I think its a very nice looking, sleek little compact pistol.

1911's are another story in itself. The original blued Colt 1911 was plain jane and nothing spectacular but still strikes many as a beautiful gun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,878 Posts
None because of the appearence, only bought to fill a need. My first semi-auto was a KT pf-9 , that should be proof enough. Good for a few years till a smoother shooting pistol came along cheap. CW9 kahr. Never had a interest in a prudy handgun just practical.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,150 Posts
I can't put a ratio to it. It's gotta look good enough to spark interest but it also has to run perfectly to be considered.

I've see some beautiful ornate old world percussion pistols that I appreciate but have no interest in owning.

I've also seen and fired mainstays of modern reliability such as GLOCKs but I only shot them because a buddy brought his to the range and would never have touched something that ugly of my own accord.

Heartstrings are funny that way....1911's, Hi Powers, CZ's "all steel units"...

I guess you could say the gun on my hip has got to meet the same criteria as the lady on my arm...Ready to go whenever I need her and sexy enough to make the other fella's want to touch her...;)

Tack
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,260 Posts
For me the less rounded the edges are i'll probably hate it. I also don't like black or shiny stainless. Im going to say 6.5.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
544 Posts
For a cc/hd gun, function is all that matters. For everything else, i like a good looking weapon. Other than my m&p, snubby, and ar, all of my guns are blued steel with wood furniture. All of them are kept in the best condition possible. So i guess i am anywhere between a 6 and a 10 depending on the purpose of the gun.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,602 Posts
I would have to rank my tastes as a 2 on the scale. I am a cheap SOB when it comes to my guns. I look for used or scratch and dent Items no matter what I am buying. My 1911 needed a complete rebuild when dad bought it (He picked it up for me while I was waiting on my permit, and it was added to mine at the time the permit was issued). My Desert eagle .357 Still has holster wear on it from the previous owner, my GP100 has mild wear on it from when dad had it (bought new in 1986, given to me in 1997 as a wedding present). The only handgun I have that "pretty" was a purchase factor is my Ruger Vaquero, I fell in love with it at first sight, went and shot a friend's at the local range, and I still looked for one used before finding one with a small scratch on the right grip at my LGS. The owner was going to send the grips back to Ruger, and get a new set for it. I talked him down by $60, and we made a deal. The only other hand gun that I did not buy due to looks or functionality is my mom's old Jennings J22. The only reason I have it, and take it out and shoot it is, who it belonged to. I lost my mother in 2003, and it is a way of keeping her memory alive. It is an ugly piece of [email protected], unreliable as he!!, but it brings back some good memories of a great woman. Even if nobody else agrees, I call it a good enough reason to keep it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
664 Posts
A 5 across the board. I want a good looking gun but I also want it to be dependable and accurate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
461 Posts
My first guns were "pretty" cowboy type. I loved the look. But they were also good guns. Marlin 39 100th anniversary 22, Ruger Single Six convertible 22/22 Mag, Marlin 336 C 30-30. All great guns - but with a "look".
Many years go by ... I re-enter the world of guns. With a friend, go through CC class - certificate. Then first gun I buy is a heavily used S&W Model 14 38 Special police gun. Lots of holster wear, had even been used as a range rental gun for a while. Didn't matter to me. It was my first real home protection gun and I wanted a substantial and simple revolver. It was perfect. It is a very easy gun to shoot - and has a cop's perfected trigger action.
Next gun was for concealed carry - S&W 438 Airweight 38 Special snubnose revolver. You can't say that one is pretty. But it has gone with me many places - which is what it was for.
Next ... Ruger LCP 380. Not pretty either. But it has been a nearly constant companion - back pocket holster - goes everywhere...

Then a Ruger LC9. Reason - entry into the 9 mm world - a little more power.

Then ... Ruger Mark III 22. I had such a good time with Mark III's as rentals that I had to have one to practice with. It's an excellent gun. but is it pretty? -- not really...

Then a near duplication of the the S&W Airweight --- a Ruger LCR 38 Special snubnose revolver. Why? It shoots lighter that the Smith due to a kinder grip and it carries slightly lighter. Otherwise, I have no really good reason for that buy. I just did...

So... My early guns were for nostalgia - looks. These later ones - more for function. So my early years - rank = 9.
Later years - rank = 3

....
Just to add...
I feel another purchase coming on - likely a larger caliber revolver - a 357, maybe, or even something as outrageous as a 44 Mag.
I just like revolvers...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,141 Posts
The only other hand gun that I did not buy due to looks or functionality is my mom's old Jennings J22. The only reason I have it, and take it out and shoot it is, who it belonged to. I lost my mother in 2003, and it is a way of keeping her memory alive. It is an ugly piece of [email protected], unreliable as he!!, but it brings back some good memories of a great woman. Even if nobody else agrees, I call it a good enough reason to keep it.
The snubbie .38 my grandmother gave me as a teen is still at my parents' house. I hate shooting that thing with its tiny grips and loud bark, but it makes me think of Granny's mac & cheese and basketball-shaped chihuahua. It is an old Titan POC. It was my first centerfire pistol and she swapped it to me for an airhorn because she didn't like it much either (and she had the killer chihuahua).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
821 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
Great feedback guys....I guess I should have rephrased some of my original post.

Of course NOBODY (I hope) would buy a gun that didnt perform well and was prone to failure. I guess my goal was to see who could deal with other issues of a gun such as heavy weight/low capacity/extra features/etc and be able to block out the cons of that gun based on looks alone.

For example, if you had your sights set on a GORGEOUS custom Wilson Combat 1911 yet they fudged with the design so much that it was super heavy, held a smaller capacity like 5+1, was super picky with ammo would you still buy it based on its stellar looks & design?

Thats sort of what I was getting at with this thread. But yeah to keep it simple....how many of those out there would spring for the extra few hundred on a gun that looked WAY better than a competitor that was cheaper, less picky with ammo feeding, yet didnt have a great finish & bells & whistles? Would you be able to go with the lower end looks if it performed slightly better? Again I fully admit although I would never buy a junk gun that looked great....I still tend to buy guns based on looks & appearance just as much as capacity & practicality.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top