PDA

View Full Version : Thoughts on "ugly"


Daryl
September 3, 2010, 12:23 PM
These days, it seems like you can't mention some brands of pistols without getting comments about how "ugly" they are.

I'll freely admit to using the word myself in reference to some guns at times, but I also wonder about the relavance.

Don't get me wrong; a well dressed 1911 is a thing of beauty, but how long does that beauty last on a carry gun that's carried daily?

How much does it matter if the gun is carried concealed?

I guess the real question is:

How important is the appearance of a firearm for you to carry?

My wife doesn't like my carry gun because it's "ugly".

My carry gun is a Glock, and it's not what most folks would call "pretty". It's pure utility, and fits my hand like a well made glove. It shoots accurately, points naturally, functions flawlessly, and holds more ammo than any other firearm I own. In a tool that may be needed to save my family or my own life, appearances don't count for anything.

I have had prettier guns that were both heavier, and less reliable. They were also more expensive.

The first time I ever saw a Glock (G17), I swore I'd never own one. Obviously, that time has changed.

Daryl

roman3
September 3, 2010, 12:29 PM
Looks are way down on the list.

Glocks are not ugly compared to some guns. They are not however beautiful.

I do draw the line at some point, the HI-point would not be a gun for me no matter how functional it was. And if I had been a Japanese officer of WW2 I would have used my samurai sword before ever packing a Type 94.

Win73
September 3, 2010, 12:31 PM
Ugly is as ugly does!

grumpa72
September 3, 2010, 12:35 PM
I don't judge a gun's "ugliness" by its wear or its loss of bluing from honest use. My judgement is reserved for those pistols that are plain ugly right out of the box. For instance, on one of the 1911 forums, someone posted a 1911, from near the end of WW I, and it didn't have a shred of bluing on it. It was far from cosmetically attractive but I thought it was a very nice looking gun.

aarondhgraham
September 3, 2010, 12:36 PM
Life is too short to carry an ugly handgun.

I often wonder the same thing when I am buying a gun,,,
I don't care how functional the gun might be,,,
If it doesn't please my eye I won't get it.

But fortunately for me,,,
Beauty and functionality are not mutually exclusive.

I recently bought my first semi-auto,,,
I spent about 8 months trying different pistols,,,
Lots of people at my range allowed me to shoot their guns.

I finally found the gun that balanced beauty and performance,,,
So I bought it and am extremely happy I did.

It's all about saying I want both.

If we all just went for utility and no aesthetics,,,
We would probably all drive Fords, wear Levi's, and shoot Glocks.

By the way, the pistol I chose was a CZ-75B,,,
She's lovely and functions flawlessly.
http://www.aarondgraham.com/pics/tmavazena.jpg

.

Furminator
September 3, 2010, 12:36 PM
I don't think Glocks and other polymer pistols are unattractive at all. I like the shape of the Glock, simple and elegant. Now if they were just a bit thinner...

Amin Parker
September 3, 2010, 12:36 PM
I like this.

I am of the opinion that all guns are beautiful. Some are prettier than others, for example a Colt Python vs a Glock.

That being said, all of them, even Glocks have visual appeal. I admire the finish, the little curves and wonder whos idea it was to do it in that particular way.

As far as pistols go, the Browning High Power in my opinion is the best balance of beauty and practicality. Its been my carry gun for years and i am completely in love with it. Its got tons of history behind it, was the first of its kind and is a legend that will never go out of fashion.

One can compare them to cars or buildings. Compare a Jag E Type to a Toyota Camry or a beautiful historical building to the latest office park. They both work but one is just more special than the other.

Wishoot
September 3, 2010, 12:45 PM
None of my guns are beauty queens, or safe queens for that matter.

One of my CZ82's looks like it's been through absolute He**, yet it's my favorite gun to shoot.

Although I appreciate the look of a finely tuned firearm, looks are way down on my lists. Reliability and ergonomics are tops in my book.

Furminator
September 3, 2010, 12:46 PM
I guess if I had to choose the gun I found most appealing, it would be a S&W Model 13 with a three inch barrel and a nice set of wooden grips.

Kreyzhorse
September 3, 2010, 12:56 PM
I don't own an ugly gun although my Glock isn't exactly pretty.

Personally, I don't think that looks mean that much overall when buying a gun. I'm more concerned about function and how well the gun fits my hand.

raftman
September 3, 2010, 01:05 PM
It's largely subjective. A lot of people say the CZ-52 looks cool, I think it's ugly.

For the most part ugly... or even not-so-flawless fit and finish is forgivable as long the firearm functions well and does the job well. For example, people that have handled a SCCY will often say it looks good, and it feels well-made, and many if most people that have fired one will say it's a piece of junk.

On the other hand, my Arcus 98DAC is a rather homely pistol with average fit and finish. But it's completely reliable and very accurate. Eats anything, from cheap steel-cased Wolf to the fancy schmancy SD ammo that sells for $50 for 20 rounds.

http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c306/HoboFactory/98dac.jpg?1283537071

O'Dell
September 3, 2010, 01:06 PM
I don't try to buy on "looks", but I'm sure aesthetics enters in if only subconsciously. Personally, I think my nickel SIG P220 has a beautifully classic look, and it performs beautifully too. The all stainless 4586 also performs well, looks good, but it is really too heavy. On the ugly side of the ledger are the compact 24/7 45 and the M&P compact 45. The proportions aren't right, but they shoot well, so I suppose beauty is as beauty does.

NightSleeper
September 3, 2010, 02:04 PM
Nothing more beautiful to me than my Walther PPK/s ... :cool:

Shadi Khalil
September 3, 2010, 02:35 PM
I don't doubt that fuctionality and certain features will drive a purchase but I also think looks play a pretty significant roll. It's just like buying anything else, cars, houses, clothes..ect. I think its human nature, something has to catch your eye to peek your interest and ussually its the more attractive option that you will further investigate.

spclPatrolGroup
September 3, 2010, 03:24 PM
I would like to know what gun your wife thinks is ugly. I like to have as many ugly things around me as possible, especially in front of the ladies, if I can get enough ugly things around me, pretty soon, I dont look half bad:)

Daryl
September 3, 2010, 03:28 PM
I do draw the line at some point, the HI-point would not be a gun for me no matter how functional it was.

I would have to agree, but not because of asthetics.

I don't like pot-metal in firearms chambered for centerfire cartridges. In fact, I don't like it for rimfire cartridges either, but I do own one .22 rifle that has a pot-metal reciever, and it's performed well for the last 30 years.

In my younger years, I wanted things of extreme beauty. The prettier, the better. This was true of guns, cars, and gals.

As I've aged, I've learned to appreciate the true beauty of simplicity. I learned that the prettiest things of all kinds tended to be complicated, often tempermental, or even unreliable.

My wife has a beauty that runs far deeper than the surface. She is there for me always; supportive, genuine, and trustable. As we grow older, she only becomes more and more beautiful to me.

In some ways, I feel similar about a good fitting, reliable handgun. It has a beauty all it's own. The pretty ones of the past that disappointed me no longer hold any appeal at all.

Daryl

Fiv3
September 3, 2010, 04:15 PM
I'm a function kind of guy. I think that's why I like milsurp and glocks.

My Glock 36 is not a beautiful gun inasmuch as it has gracious curves and tooling. It's a functional hunk of steel and plastic. It's reliable, not fussy about what it eats, and didn't cost a great sum of money. it's the gun the protects my castle.

My Chinese Tok isn't even as good looking as the largely utilitarian russian version. It has tool marks and sharp edges on the slide and frame. However, it's probably 30+ years old and shoots great. It goes bang every time, and appears to be engineered in such a way a truck could drive over it and it would still function.

My Nagant revolver is an ugly little beast. It's goofy overly thin barrel paired with the rather wimpy cartridge isn't helped by the complicated action. However, there in lies the beauty. This gun was manufactured in 1936. What has it seen? What storied could it tell? Did it save a soldier's life? Did it take an officer's in a "game" of roulette? 74 years later it still cycles and shoots fine.

I have a wonderful "hardboiled" S&W model 36 that belonged to my father in law. It's an old school Smith so the trigger is incredible, no lock, and bank vault lock up. It's also an heirloom as it belonged to HIS father before him. As a non-blood relative, it is not my place to potentially damage or lose family history. Instead, i carry a Ruger LCR. It gives me the firepower of the 36 in a modern package that is both lighter, cheaper, and not sentimental. That said, the LCR looks like something that popped out of an SP101 after a one night stand with a Glock.
But it functions flawlessly, and I trust my life to it every day.

dnr1128
September 3, 2010, 04:23 PM
Ugly is a personal preference, not an absolute. What is absolute, however, is functionality. I don't care how sexy a handgun looks; if it doesn't fire when I pull the trigger, it's junk iron. Guns are tools to be used for their designed purpose. When it wears out, fix it or chunk it and get another one.

Radar
September 3, 2010, 04:38 PM
I've never seen an ugly gun of any kind, only interesting ones.
My only qualm with any of them are the polymers...I just like the feel of an all metal handgun.

Daryl
September 3, 2010, 05:12 PM
I've never seen an ugly gun of any kind, only interesting ones.
My only qualm with any of them are the polymers...I just like the feel of an all metal handgun.

I feel much the same way. My G23 isn't ugly to me, even if others claim they are.

I will even agree with steel as a preference on most of my firearms. it looks better, and feels better when shooting...

but it's also heavier to carry on an all day, every day basis.

My Glock 23 draws smoothly, shoots straight, and handles great...and looks good...for me.

Truly, I think "for me" is a key phrase in this discussion. ;)

Daryl

Sevens
September 3, 2010, 05:42 PM
The first time I ever saw a Glock (G17), I swore I'd never own one. Obviously, that time has changed.
I felt similarly... I even got to shoot one the first time I saw one. I never said I wouldn't own one but for years I figured I'd never have any desire to own one. I first saw/shot one in 1988 or '89, I think.

These days, my carry gun is also a Glock. (29) That it's ugly is not just a bonus but dang near a requirement for me. Since it's going to get banged up, worn, sweated on, covered in dust and lint and get shot a lot, the fact that it's ugly is of great personal benefit to me.

I've always been very drawn to guns and especially to my guns. I'd lose sleep if I had a gorgeous gun and I tore it up by carrying it. I know some people laugh at that, but I can't change how I feel. At least I'm honest about it -- so think about that before you slag me. I know there are folks that think nothing of dropping two grand on a carry gun and then laugh at me because I say or do something that precipitates the preposterous, "what, isn't your life worth two thousand dollars?!" That attitude sickens me.

If someone wants to carry anything, I don't have a problem with it. But don't hassle me because I'm honest when I say that I don't want to carry an expensive & pretty pistol and would rather carry a tool like this Glock.

That's not to say that a worn gun is ugly -- far from it, actually. A pretty gun is a pretty gun, an ugly one is ugly and wear is something different altogether.

If you carry a Python and it was mint when you got it and it's worn to bare metal now, I would never shed a tear nor tell you that's it's a mistake. It's not what I would do, but for someone else -- I'm all good with it.

Me... I'd rather carry something that won't look any worse if it got ran over by a truck.

HisSoldier
September 3, 2010, 06:15 PM
A lot of people say the CZ-52 looks cool, I think it's ugly.


The most aesthetic lines of any guns grace the form of the Luger, though most of us would prefer a 1911 for function to a Luger.

My new addition, the type 94 Nambu, takes the cake for the ugliest gun IMHO, and even though it's ugly it's very poor in stopping power with it's weak cartridge, unpractical with it's design faults (push the side of the receiver right and it'll go off!) so this gun has it all :rolleyes:.

Still, I consider the Glock to be uglier than all of them because it was the first practical plastic gun to hit the market. It destroyed the concept of the "keeper".

The Glock is something to throw away at the end of the day, anything made of plastic is to me.

That dysfunctional and extremely ugly Nambu is way way more interesting to me than a dumpster full of Glocks. It has ten times as much character.

Daryl
September 3, 2010, 06:49 PM
That dysfunctional and extremely ugly Nambu is way way more interesting to me than a dumpster full of Glocks. It has ten times as much character.


I must admit that "interesting" and "character" are not things I look for in a carry gun.

The gun going off with a push on the side of the reciever would definitely be "interesting".

I felt similarly... I even got to shoot one the first time I saw one. I never said I wouldn't own one but for years I figured I'd never have any desire to own one. I first saw/shot one in 1988 or '89, I think.


I was working in a gunshop in 1986 when I saw my first G17. Sitting next to a Colt Mustang, Colt Gov model .380, Browning Hi-Powers, and 1911's, it looked like someone had stuck a cheap electric mixer in the case. We thought it would be a short lived fad, and we were wrong.

The look and feel of Glock's pistols has changed for the better since then IMO, and they've more than proven their abilities.

We live and learn.

Daryl

ksblazer
September 3, 2010, 07:17 PM
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder as they say.

IMO for a carry gun. Good looks is way down there on the list of things that are important to me. I would rather have an "ugly" gun that functions and shoots straight over a sexy gun that dosent'. Plus as mentioned if it's getting carried it's not going to stay beautiful for long.

It's seems to me that most of us don't carry our beauty qween guns that we paid extra $$ for. They stay in the safe and come out at the range.

THORN74
September 3, 2010, 08:38 PM
My wife doesn't like my carry gun because it's "ugly".

one of the basic diff between men and women. For a woman things need to be pleasing to the eye, have some element of design. for a man, who give a **** if its ugly as long as it does the JOB!!!

Jim243
September 3, 2010, 09:22 PM
I get the feeling that some of us are being less than truthful, or at least deluding ourselves as to what we find important.

We all do not drive the same car or even same color car. Or have the same type of house or even same color house, so why should we be concerned if Sam likes the CZ and Bob the M&P or Larry the Glock.

My only observation is that the Glock is like the Big Mac (only one way) and most others are like the Wopper (have it your way). Both will do the same job, have way too many calories, way too much fat and clog your arteries in the long run.

Me I have to stick with the grilled chicken, I have had way too many Big Macs and Woppers in my life time. But every now and then I will cheat and grab a berger. Which one? It depends on how I am feeling at the time.

A lot like buying guns, I would say.

Jim

HisSoldier
September 3, 2010, 09:50 PM
Yeah, I buy a lot of those little .25's, not much use, not pretty, but they appeal to me. I also have European autos from early in the 20th century just because they are so different. Two Lugers, lots of Spanish guns. Very few of my guns are for self defense.

The assumption going in seems to be 1. for carry concealed, 2. adequate stopping power, 3. trendy, two tones, (Used to be forward serrations until everyone finally got tired of that fad) rails, gimmicks of any kind that say "I'm tacticool!". 4. "I know a .32 isn't adequate but please tell me it is!".

The average person reading this isn't a student of gun design history or (Like me) gunsmith wannabees. :o

If you take away the looks all you have left is function.

Dashunde
September 5, 2010, 11:10 AM
It's not so much about looks for me - its the feel, and theres two versions of that.
My 1911 looks great and feels even better in my hand.
My G27 looks ok and feels ok in my hand, but more importantly it gives me a feeling of certainty and security that it will do its job if I do mine.

For me, an ugly gun is one I dont trust.

jad0110
September 5, 2010, 08:19 PM
Don't get me wrong; a well dressed 1911 is a thing of beauty, but how long does that beauty last on a carry gun that's carried daily?

It gets even better looking, IMO. Nothing like some honest holster wear to make a gun more interesting. Gives it character. I love the look of my well worn blued Ruger Police Service Six. YMMV.

fallingrock71
September 5, 2010, 11:18 PM
Function over form for me. More so the older I get. I see a gun as tool. No different than a hammer really. If it happens to be easy on the eyes, well that's a bonus I suppose. Same for cars. Volvo 240/740/940's sure don't get me any looks, but knowing that up to 400,000 miles or so on the clock ain't much to fret about sure is nice. That and the ability to fix anything that could possibly go wrong with em with a modest set of tools in the driveway. Yep, keep the form I'll take the function.:cool:

imthegrumpyone
September 6, 2010, 03:59 AM
Only thing comes to my mind is GLOCK :( :D

blume357
September 6, 2010, 06:35 AM
but you know in the end you dance with the one that brung you.

I'd never seriously tell someone (at least face to face) that their handgun was ugly. I'm tempted to compare this discussion to wives and girl friends but then that would be sexist and politically incorrect.

I'll just leave with this toast, which has always been my favorite...

"Gentlemen, Here's to our wives and girl friends!...... and may they never meet."

roy reali
September 6, 2010, 06:59 AM
I will not buy, carry, nor shoot any gun I think is ugly. I realize that makes me seem cheap and superficial, but oh well! I like handguns that are not box-shaped. I know that some square-like handguns are great, they function well and could save my hide. I also realize that a good-looking gun that is a POS is useless. I try to find guns the combine looks and function.