Guns you don't like...

vincyr said:

Amen to that. I have come to the opinion that the 327 Fed Mag is the most versatile caliber for any part of the country that doesn't have big grizzlies. I really like my Single Seven.

Click to expand...

Agreed. And I really like my Taurus m327b2

Why all the 10/22 haters? 10/22s are like pizza. When they're good, they're really good, and when they're bad, they're still pretty good!


Oh, and +1 to these:

Legionnaire said:

And honestly, I don't really care for the AR15 platform.

Click to expand...

460Shooter said:

Airweight 357’s and 44 mags. Ahhhh.....,, nope.

Click to expand...

Riomouse911 said:

For me? Commemorative guns and guns that are highly engraved with gold or other metal accents (Grade IV-V Brownings, etc.

Click to expand...

Flintshooter said:

There are a few guns I wouldn’t spend money on because I see no practical use. But there is only one type of firearm I actually hate. Hate to the point that I wouldn’t have one if it was offered to me free and even seeing one makes my blood boil a little.
Inline bolt-action “muzzleloaders”. If someone wants all the advantages of a modern firearm buy a cartridge rifle. They still make ‘em.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't own a muzzle loader if they would let me use my bolt rifles in the archery areas once or twice a year lol. Thus I own the closest thing I can get, which is a coated, break barrel inline.
I keep wanting to try a more traditional sidelock, but cleaning a wood and blue muzzle loader with the garden hose just doesn't feel right......

I will dislike the "popular kids" of the gun world. Glocks and CZs.

jmr40 said:

I'd agree, but I challenge you to name a single gun with the safety in the trigger. Glocks do not have a safety at all. The blade on Glocks and all other guns who use that design is there to prevent the gun from firing when it is dropped. It is NOT a safety.

This is what happens when people comment and have no idea what they are talking about. And you'd think that as long as Glocks have been around this should be common knowledge by now.

Click to expand...

If that is not a definition of a safety it sure sounds like one; a totally brain dead one.

The Glock trigger dingus is simply a grip safety moved to a more sensible location.

I don't like all these goofy red-headed step-children to the original CZ-75.

Don't even like looking at them for the most part as they are such an affront to my eye where the original and even the *B* are a joy to behold.

Rhinos too - like vinegar in my eye!

Todd.

I'm not too crazy about most striker fired guns, metal or polymer. The more "normal" they look the better. I do have 3 Taurus PT111 G2's and they are a good little gun.
Never a huge fan of 1911's, and after the 3 of them I owned, I have little chance of ever becoming one. My 3 .45 ACP pistols do me just fine. A Sar K2 45, a Sig P220, and a EAA witness all are dead on reliable, something even my garbage Colt Combat Commander could never be.
And I hate guns that seem to be ugly for no sane reason, like Glocks.

Give me an all steel or at least all metal DA/SA gun and I'm usually happy.

The CA approved ones with nannys to help users figure out what state their weapon is. That is speaking of the implementation of the LCI on some handguns. I really dislike the one on the Sig P229. When I first got this I debated a replacement slide that doesn't have that. Sig won't sell that to me in CA nor could I get a caliber exchange kit since the accompanying mag was greater than 10 rounds. There was something I wasn't able to determine that is integrated with the mag disconnect with CA approved variant. (?)

The laser etched warnings that are present as well. I have had so few to really dislike other than the more recent ones. Push came to shove and with an instance coming up, the Sig P229 is going to go.

I have a long list of firearm platforms that are very popular that I just have no attraction for...

1. The venerable AK47/SKS. I hate stamped metal guns and the commie guns are crude and offensive to me. I shot an AK for the first time last summer and it just cemented my dislike of them.

2. Single-shot rifles from H&R. Crude. My brother had one in .204 Ruger and it was inaccurate and ugly.

3. Pretty much every semi-auto from Ruger. Again, the fit and finish is subpar and the polymer feels cheaper than that used on other semi-auto pistols; even my $199 Taurus G2c. My first carry gun was a Ruger P90 .45 acp and it offended me with it's enormous clunkiness, though it was reliable and reasonably accurate, I just never warmed up to it.

4. Any gun with the words "Grip Zone" on them. I love my XDS, but SA seems to turn me off with a lot of their other offerings.

5. CZ guns. I don't like religious cults and I don't like gun cults. I don't like the below average fit and finish and the lettering on the slide looks like it was done by Airsoft.

6. Early Glocks. Ugly and feel funny. Gen 3 and later? Love them! You want to pay $2000 or more for a rare early Glock? Fine. I have no interest.

7. 1911s. Love the looks and how they feel. Navy issued me one and I shot it well. I just can't get over their weight and low capacity and finicky reliability. I love single-action pistols, but I would never use one as a carry gun. Weight/size/capacity makes the 1911 a poor choice for self-defense.

8. Hi-Points. I get that they work and are appropriately priced. The moped/fat-chick of the gun world. Fun to ride until your friends see you.

9. HKs. I worked for an ammo company that had every flavor of high-end weapon on the market and got to play with them. My first thought upon handling an HK USP was that it was over-hyped, clunky, complicated, and just not my thing.

10. Sig semi-autos. Heavy, thick, and overpriced. Ironic that my favorite gun of all time is currently my Sig P365. Wonderful little pistol. Can't stand it's big brothers.

There you go. Generally, I like guns with above average fit and finish and simpler controls. I grew up in my dad's gun shop where there were quite a few high-end custom rifles, some approaching six figures. So my tolerance for crude weapons is pretty low.

Striker fired handguns.

I wouldn't say don't like but more like they don't do anything for me. Top of the list are straight blowback pistols like the Walther PP and PPK. Nicely made guns and all but typically they have heavy DA triggers and aren't a lot of fun to shoot. I much prefer delayed blowback in pocket size guns like the Colt Mustang or SIG P238.

Most Glocks and Springfield Armory XD series guns don't appeal to me as they don't feel all that comfortable in my hand. Same with the Beretta Model 92.

jmr40 said:

I'd agree, but I challenge you to name a single gun with the safety in the trigger. Glocks do not have a safety at all. The blade on Glocks and all other guns who use that design is there to prevent the gun from firing when it is dropped. It is NOT a safety.

This is what happens when people comment and have no idea what they are talking about. And you'd think that as long as Glocks have been around this should be common knowledge by now.

Click to expand...

I agree that iat a drop safety and at one time glock said that for a while.


However, to be fair, glock calls the dingle blade a trigger safety and notes something as the drop safety.

https://us.glock.com/en/learn/glock-pistols/safe-action-system

So in defense of the person you quoted, it's glocks fault that it's not common knowledge.

For ME, ones that hurt to shoot. Another, for EDC, is anything with an external safety or decocker or different trigger pulls, type stuff. 'Worried' about reholstering for a IWB holster and those scary strikers? Take the holster off to reholster..'Ease and speed' of reholstering for the everyday citizen never made any sense to me.
External safeties on strikers smacks of marketing 101, and relying on the lack of knowledge by the buying public of what a striker is and how it words. At least on a Glock with a very slightly compressed striker spring when one in chamber..it's the same as a revolver with the hammer down...How many DA revolvers have a safety?

BUT, in my quest to find the 3-4 handguns that I really like..I handled/shot many that I really didn't like.
1911/45cal
Sig 365
Ruger LCP
S&W 642
Ruger LC-9
Beretta 92FS
Glock 43(see 'hurt my hand)
Springfield XD
Sig 320
Uberti Cattleman Bird's Head

..some others..but holy moly..LOTS of selection these days.

I dislike guns that can't be made to fire accurately or reliably.
I dislike guns that are unnecessarily painful to shoot.
I dislike guns that drastically lose value when used - unless I'm buying them cheap.

I'm not very concerned about how a gun looks or what materials go into it, as long as it is functional and reliable.
Aesthetics are for aesthetes.

"Dislike" is too strong a word, but I certainly am "disinterested" in almost all new guns. I can see the utility in plastic guns (handguns and rifles) but have no desire to own one. There are currently available guns that are of some interest to me, like a few of the S&W revolvers, but modern manufacturing methods and quality control just don't do it for me. I am tired of being the quality control department.

Of the very few newly-made guns which I do like, I already have most of them, and already have gotten them working the way they're supposed to.

So I don't really buy guns any more...

FN PS90

But only based on looks, I've never actually fired the gun. Ironically I own an FS2000 which is another Scifi looking gun that I think looks "cool". ...but I'm not a fan of shooting it.

Skeletonized ARs, and cosmetically Glocks. I respect Glocks for being very reliable and modular pistols they're just ugly IMO. As I mentioned in the cartridges thread, the P64. I love the safety on them as its essentially foolproof when on, but they are very unpleasant guns to shoot. They're pretty accurate, but unpleasant along with a small mag. Only reason why I even still have mine is because it was my first pistol so its sentimental. Most modern revolvers, and even some older ones. There's nothing wrong with them I just like old service revolvers more cosmetically, even if functionally they weren't always the best. I hate the sights on my Steyr M95. I otherwise think its a cool gun but 500 yd battle sights are just ridiculous. 22lr revolvers annoy me too, as in modern days having a new revolver that's not in a powerhouse round is lame IMO. I can definitely understand their appeal to those who like them but I just think theyre lame

jmr40 said:

I'd agree, but I challenge you to name a single gun with the safety in the trigger. Glocks do not have a safety at all. The blade on Glocks and all other guns who use that design is there to prevent the gun from firing when it is dropped. It is NOT a safety.

This is what happens when people comment and have no idea what they are talking about. And you'd think that as long as Glocks have been around this should be common knowledge by now.

Click to expand...

To Quote Glock:

Trigger Safety

The trigger safety is the first safety in the firing sequence. It’s incorporated into the trigger in the form of a lever and when it is engaged blocks the trigger from moving rearward. To fire the pistol, the trigger safety and the trigger itself must be deliberately depressed at the same time. If the trigger safety is not depressed, the trigger will not move rearwards and allow the pistol to fire.

The trigger safety is designed to prevent the pistol from firing if it’s dropped or if the trigger is subjected to any pressure that isn’t a direct firing pull.

Click to expand...

Oh, and Glock claims to have three safeties:
Trigger Safety
Firing Pin Safety
Drop Safety

In the world according to me guns are a lot like trucks and motorcycles and I guess a few other things. My own taste leans towards plain, this is especially true of AR type rifles.My neighbor has his motorcycle and I have mine. He ordered a custom LED lighting kit for his bike. Over the course of a week we spent evenings dressing out his bike with strips of LED lighting and drinking beers or Jack. When we were done his bike came out nice and he looks at me and says "now we order you a set and start on your bike". No, I don't want the look on my bike. I am not much on anything tacticool as it does nothing for me. Some AR rifles I have seen I just consider buck butt ugly. Matter of fact if any of my dogs had faces as ugly as those rifles I would shave their butts and walk them backwards. However, if one's taste leans towards that look then cool with me. God, you have to love this country.

Whatever trips your trigger.

Ron

I intensely dislike AKs, because it's the preferred weapon of enemies who've tried to do me harm with them ...

I also don't like my hunting rifles, bolt-action or lever action, in stainless steel with black synthetic furniture. Polished blue steel and maple burl for me.

And I've never seen the need for an AR pistol.

Now that I thought about it one thing I don't like on a 1911 is a bobbed mainspring housing. May work and feel perfectly fine for most people but in my hand it feels very uncomfortable. I much prefer a straight mainspring housing on all of my 1911s.

And I … prefer the arched MSH. So there! (but we're all different, so let's just agree to celebrate diversity, right?)

I personally despise ARs. I shot the M-16 more than a few times in the Air Force, I have tried a buddies AR15 and I just don’t like them. I guess I am a Fudd at heart.

Delete