Why do we care what our guns look good?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Depends on the gun.

Some are power tools. Some are works of art. Some are both.

Holster wear on a blue revolver can look good. The scratches and rust that usually accompany it look like crap. That's why most modern revolvers are stainless steel: whatever the safe queen collectors prefer, the market seems to want guns that don't have to be babied so much.
 
i use all of my guns, but not abuse em. if they are long guns, i hunt with em, if they are handguns, i carry and practice with them. i think that some good ole fashioned honest wear is going to happen, and i accept that. i even like it. i like the holster wear on my 642, i like the carbon blackened front of the cylinder on my GP100, the shiny parts on the rails and reciever on my pump shotguns mean that they work, and i know how to use them properly.

i do not like rust. most all of my guns are well used. some show signs of it, but they all get cleaned and i do not tolerate rust.

i guess you could say that i appreciate a well maintained firearm that has a little wear from honest use.
 
While I am much, much more concerned about function and reliability over cosmetics, I would gather that many concern themselves with a weapons looks because, well, lets face it...these are expensive, personal items. Thus, they are worth caring about. It is simply about taking pride in ownership. Of course, sometimes preserving a pristine finish is quite difficult (military use, for instance). But, I am assuming we are speaking of "civilian" pride here.

Of course, if the weapon is a rare "classic," the reasons for caring about the finish is a no-brainer.

Plus, lets face it, a crappy looking weapon may very well indicate a complete lack of care and maintenance (i.e., a potentially irresponsible owner). I would imagine nobody wants that stigma attached to themselves.
 
Last edited:
"How true. Talk about ugly and expensive, you should've seen my last divorce!"
lol-045.gif



Good looking guns, well, look good. Not that I'm shallow or easily distracted, but ... ooo, shiny ...
 
I care about the looks of one. Its my Thompson 1927A1. It doesn't see a lot of rangetime (all the .45ACP I find goes through my EDC), and it gets handled carefully due it its great looking blued finish...

Everything else is a tool, and treated as such. Some would say that's abusive.

DSCN0211.jpg
 
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I have an Ithica Model-37 12ga made in 1940. It doesn't have a speck of blue left on it, just a brown patina. However, it's the slickest pump shotgun I've ever handled. Works perfect every time and handles and points great. I think it's beautiful. YMMV.
 
I could honestly not give a darn about a scratch, heads of screws being worn or bluing in bad shape on any gun i own.
But you better believe i take good care of them mechanically and cleaning.

My 500SPX Mossberg has a warped,bent,jagged edges on some edges of the heat shield that i had trouble fitting due to the odd front sight they use on this model.

My 2 month old CZ Ultra Lux has lite scratches where the scope attaches on the rail due to me having a hard time removing dried up locktite.

My Taurus PT1911 is showing alot of holster wear from just normal use.

This may explain why all my guns are blued or black as i dont want to mess with shiny things.

But there is nothing wrong with being a little uptight about your guns looks, As long as you shoot it imo. Of course none of that applies too collectors.
 
clean guns work better

clean guns look better

it's all about context. If you want a gun that should be in a walnut and glass case....keep it there.

I never was one to replace form with function... If a grip or finish looks good and WORKS it stays... if not it goes. But... back to the premise above... if it works and looks good thats all the better.
 
Guns are expensive ... nobody likes ugly expensive things.

Then why do people like Glocks? Ha ha just kidding.

I think that its just some inborn, natural thing. The "pretty things are better than ugly things" mentality probably helped keep us alive in the wild. Bright or symmetrical foods probably tasted better or held more nutrients. In mates, the things that we find attractive were signs of good health and would help propagate our genes. Seems only natural that we employ the same subconscious logic when choosing something that we may need to use to save our lives.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top