Maybe it's a result of function over form philosophy. It's a tool so as long it works great for the intended purpose then that's fine for me. I just wish the market would swing back to DA/SA exposed hammers.
SIGs....no beauty contest winners there
Originally posted by Dogguy
ummmmm....
I'd say this Sig is quite pretty
No, not "quite pretty", that Sig is GORGEOUS. Not California approved, unfortunately.
Dan
Being from Texas, I don't keep up with all of Cali's restrictions, but what exactly makes it non-approved?
In another thread someone already said this. But Ill reapeat it... Imagine showing up to a Cowboy Action shooting Event and whiping this thing out... You would be the talk of the entire day, if not entire season.... LMAO!!If the OCC chopper guys made guns...
"...Mossberg asked us to do a 'Rifleman' tribute gun..."
-Bill
I would agree with that. For example, I find the appearance of the Springfield XDm off-putting compared to the relatively simpler and cleaner XD.They think they have to cut notches in every surface and fit odd angles to trigger guards, grips, etc.
At least everything on it is functional, without superfluous notches and odd angles.I think Glock did more to popularize ugly guns than any other company.
I enjoy the fine lines of a classic firearm (FN P35, Browning Superposed, Colt Python, etc.). But my GLOCK G19 is as ugly as an Irish Wolfhound. And Irish Wolfhound owners are quick to point out that there's one VERY important thing that makes their dog quite beautiful - there are no longer wolves...in Ireland!