Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Which Attribute of Guns is your LEAST favorite?

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow, Apr 14, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow

    Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Messages:
    13,146
    In other words, of these attributes, which one is the MOST important that your gun(s) NOT have?


    1. Fragile (Durable/Tough/Robust)
    2. Unreliable(Reliable)
    3. Ugly (Pretty)
    4. Foreign (Domestic)
    5. Expensive to Buy/Own (Inexpensive)
    6. Heavy/Large/Unwieldy (Light/Handy/Small)
    7. High Recoil & Blast (Mild Recoil and Blast)
    8. Inaccurate (Accurate)
    9. Other - Specify

    You must pick ONE - the one that is more important than the others to you.

    Parenthetically listed is the good corollary to the bad attribute.

    See Poll (be patient until I post the poll please).

    Mine is Fragility. I hate anything fragile. To me, guns are all about toughness and durability, and lasting generations, and working at the critical time(s) that the gun is needed, whether for hunting or self-defense. It occurred to me for the first time this weekend that I hate fiber optic sights such as the one on the shotgun I was toting around in briars and brambles and banging against trees. No, the F.O. front and rear tubes didn't break, but they very well could have and ruined my hunt, from being knocked around. Next chance I get, they're getting replaced with a brass bead and standard rear. To me, durability (lack of fragility) is even more important than gun reliability, because 99% of the time or better, you're only gonna need one shot, and so the rifle or shotgun or handgun doesn't even need to cycle, whether manually or by semi-auto operation, in order to effectuate it's purpose. I know that anything can break, but stuff on guns should be built to break few and far between in time, and only after thousands of rounds, and dozens of hunts or range trips. I'd put inaccurate #2, and unreliable as #3, and heavy/large/unwieldy #4.
     
  2. Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow

    Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Messages:
    13,146
    Oops, I screwed up and forgot to put "post a poll". Sigh, maybe a mod can add or I can post a new one with a poll when I get a minute. But pick one of the nine please.
     
  3. Cel

    Cel Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    204
    I do not like guns that are unreliable...
     
  4. CountGlockula

    CountGlockula Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    3,522
    Location:
    In a Los Angeles coffin.
    I choose...

    Ugly

    Guns are like hookers, doesn't matter how they look...as long as they get the job done.
     
  5. Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow

    Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Messages:
    13,146
    CG, I think you misunderstood the question. If all that matters is they get the job done, then you would NOT choose UGLY as your answer - you answer the one that is MOST IMPORTANT to you that your gun not have. You don't care if your gun is ugly, so that's not the most important to you. Pick again. :)

    I guess it's sort of a convoluted way to ask the question - let's try this. Pick the attribute in PARENTHESES above that it's most important to you that your gun DOES have.
     
  6. Kind of Blued

    Kind of Blued Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Messages:
    3,676
    Location:
    Rocky Mountains
    I've found that there are enough aesthetically-pleasing high-quality guns in this world that one has no excuse to buy an ugly one.

    It's not that I wouldn't buy an ugly gun if it were the best tool for the job, it's just that I don't think there is any niche that an attractive gun can't cover.
     
  7. Fish828

    Fish828 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2007
    Messages:
    171
    Location:
    Pittsburgh/Philadelphia
    for me, it's a toss up between unreliable and fragile as being attributes that my gun SHOULD NOT have. i think those two also kinda go hand in hand.
     
  8. HungSquirrel

    HungSquirrel Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2005
    Messages:
    266
    Location:
    Alabama, USA
    MDeViney:
    It's tough to find a reliable, attractive pistol new in box for less than $200. Ugly pistols have their market.
     
  9. Kind of Blued

    Kind of Blued Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Messages:
    3,676
    Location:
    Rocky Mountains
    The question was also phrased in a silly way... You would have to be a fool to say that it is "important that your gun not have" any of those. You should have made them either all positive or all negative, then formed the question.

    More appropriate would be "which of these is the least important aspect in a gun?".
     
  10. rbernie
    • Contributing Member

    rbernie Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2004
    Messages:
    20,451
    Location:
    Norra Texas
    Well, a gun that is fragile isn't a gun - it's a poor excuse for a club. I suppose that I would choose #1 (Fragile) the way that the poll is written.

    But my primary gripe among my reliable weapons is #7 (High Recoil & Blast). I don't mind recoil, but I find that excessive muzzle blast is a significant detractor...
     
  11. -v-

    -v- Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Messages:
    1,217
    Unreliable. For me reliable guns are not fragile and will work, always. You may need only 1 shot, or you may need to empty the mag to stop a threat. Thus, an unreliable gun is a liability to personal safety. All others are a secondary concern.
     
  12. jakemccoy

    jakemccoy Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    2,601
    Location:
    Northern California
    This thread is more complicated than it has to be...lol
     
  13. blackcash88

    blackcash88 member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2008
    Messages:
    886
    Unreliable, with is often caused by fragility. That's why I hate KT pistols, especially the P3AT.
     
  14. ctdonath

    ctdonath Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Messages:
    3,618
    Location:
    Cumming GA
    Most significant? Fragile & Unreliable are indistinguishable.
    It's a safety tool - therefore, it MUST GO BANG EVERY DANG TIME. It must be robust enough to stand up to the most extreme (albeit not unreasonable) conditions and still function. If it doesn't go bang when I expect it to, it is little more than a very expensive and very poor club.

    Comments on the other choices:
    3. Ugly
    "Pretty is as pretty does." "Form follows function." Truly ugly ones probably don't work reliably or appropriately.

    4. Foreign
    While I'd rather see "Made in USA", some other places simply do a better job. Culture is often linked to the tool's nuances; an AR15 is just plain a US-made item, while some other styles are best found from other sources.

    5. Expensive to Buy/Own
    Get what you pay for. You can get a lot for two digits - but know the limits. I'll pay four digits for something that's "right". Five digits is probably moving out of "tool" category and firmly into "collectable".

    6. Heavy/Large/Unwieldy (Light/Handy/Small)
    Depends on function. Home defense? AR15 SBR. Assured stop at a mile? Armalite AR50.

    7. High Recoil & Blast
    So long as it's not retna-detaching, fine. Suppressors are becoming a must-have for me, however: cutting noise & recoil is very desirable wherever possible.

    8. Inaccurate
    Relative to application. Less than minute-of-angle is mostly diminishing returns. Minute-of-bad-guy is usually enough. Less accurate than that is probably inadequate.
    It's really only "inaccurate" if it's less accurate than I am.

    9. Other - Specify
    Declining value (Value retention) As I age, I find that few things really hold value, and I'm looking for things that do: stuff that's really enduring, that transcends hype, that can easily be sold for at least close to its original value (inflation etc. adjusted). Really good tools can always be sold/traded regardless of age, and can be used hard (though cared for) without having to be treated like a collector's item.
     
  15. Sato Ord

    Sato Ord Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2008
    Messages:
    657
    Location:
    Melbourne Florida
    There is no "one" thing that stops me from buying a gun. I start with the look and feel of the piece. That's what attracts me to the weapon while it's still in the case. Then I check the caliber and see if it is within the parameters I've set for what I'm looking for in a pistol or rifle. Then I check the reliability and accuracy of it. If all of that is satisfactory I look at several others to see how it measures up to those other brands I may be more familiar with. If everything meshes together and I have the means I buy it.
     
  16. theotherwaldo

    theotherwaldo Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2008
    Messages:
    2,047
    Location:
    In the Wild Horse Desert of Texas
    Inaccurate.

    A weapon could be the perfect ideal in all other ways, but if it is insufficiently accurate for it's role then it is merely a public hazard.
     
  17. strat81

    strat81 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2006
    Messages:
    3,912
    Location:
    Nebraska
    Reliability/unreliability. If a gun doesn't work, it's nothing but an expensive club or paperweight (depending on size).
     
  18. Ala Dan

    Ala Dan Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    12,879
    Location:
    Home Of The First Capitol Of The Confederate State
    For Me, It Would Be

    #'s 2, 3, 7, and 8~! :scrutiny: ;) :D

    with the MOST important being UNRELIABLE~! :( :eek: :banghead:
     
  19. OOOXOOO

    OOOXOOO Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Messages:
    377
    A weapon that has proven itself unreliable ceases to be a weapon.#2
     
  20. DMK

    DMK Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    8,766
    Location:
    Over the hills and far, far away
    Biggest turn-offs, in this order:

    1) unreliable
    2) uncomfortable (I've owned guns that were painful to shoot, shot them very infrequently)
    3) Inaccurate
    4) bad ergonomics
    5) perceived recoil (often due to #4 or #2)
     
  21. husbandofaromanian

    husbandofaromanian Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2008
    Messages:
    336
    Location:
    Nashville, Tn
    Noise. That's why I own a silencer and I am in the process of getting a 2nd. If I can't suppress it, I don't want to shoot it.
     
  22. Jdude

    Jdude Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    380
    The biggest turn off for me is how expensive they are to feed.I'm starving myself here to keep my babies happy. :p
    Realistically, an unreliable gun is a club, and a fragile club is useless. So I vote #1 unreliable, #2 Fragile.
     
  23. TimboKhan

    TimboKhan Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2005
    Messages:
    8,047
    Location:
    Greeley, CO
    Reliability is the key for any gun I own, particularly with pistols. I simply won't own a pistol that is picky about ammo. If it won't feed whatever crap I happen to throw at it, I won't keep it. Revolvers and rifles seem to be less prone to these kinds of issues, but I did "torture test" my "all-around" AR with mixed magazines to make sure it would feed and function with different rounds. My other AR is a target/varmint rifle and so gets a special dispensation from this rule as long as it feeds it's favorite rounds.

    My Ruger P90 is pretty much the king of reliability. I have fed it crappy old handloads that no other pistol on the range would feed. Not only did it feed them, but I wasn't afraid of them on account of the guns strength. I should make it clear that I don't routinely feed my guns crappy ammo, but in some potential situations you simply can't be picky about the ammo you shoot. Realistically, all I mean is that I want HP and ball of varying bullet weights to all function equally reliably in my autos, to include mixed mags.

    Shotgunally speaking, Once I bought my 870, I pretty much lost all interest in any other shotgun. My 870 is fits me perfectly, cycles wet or dry, shoots great, and is as reliable as the day is long. I have always dreamed of owning a Red Label someday, but for all intents and purposes I am a one shotgun man.

    Phrased that way, I would have to say the gun's country of origin is least important to me. Made in the USA is great, but a good gun is a good gun regardless of where it originated from. I would say that most CZ, Beretta, FN, Taurus, Benelli, Sako, Tikka, Mil-Surp, Howa, and XD owners would agree that country of origin isn't a particularly big problem.
     
  24. Elza

    Elza Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2007
    Messages:
    692
    Location:
    North Texas
    Reliability!!
     
  25. pdowg881

    pdowg881 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    1,103
    Location:
    Southern NH
    Not really the gun itself but the cost to feed them is the aspect I dislike the most. Other than that reliablility and durbility followed by accuracy.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page