LMAO!

There are guys who appreciate fine pieces of work and guys who don't. The guys who don't will usually let it be known.


I look at it like this....a gun is a tool. A tool that gets carried around a lot. So if I'm gonna carry it around a lot I want it to look good. Even my synthetic stocked rifles look good. like most things I own, It doesent have the be the shiniest thing around but I do have to tolerate looking at it so I make my selections based accordingly.


Someone once said on here "life is too short to hunt with ugly rifles" . I tend to agree

For the longest time my dream rifle was a Dakota 10, cant tell you how many times I almost bought one, called. And talked to them etc.

... some were over the last decade or two I started to realize to truly appreciate something it means to use it for exactly what it was designed for, unfortunately and fortunately for me that’s a hard life, so I couldn’t make my self take a Dakota 10 with exhibit grade wood and take it 10 days hunting mule deer in the desert then 10 days in mountains hunting elk and then sand blasting it again chasing antelope, then knocking it over in a deer blind and beating the hell out of in a high rack or pickup cab, on top of that would be mediocre accurate compared to my synthetic and stainless steel systems

Rifles are just like custom spurs, a custom spur maker hates collectors, they want to see thier tools being used exactly what they are for. Wooden deke makers are same way.

I for the record I don’t consider my wife a tool to use or own.

I wouldnt sell any truck I’ve owned to any one I know either. I kind of rough on them.

Some simply have to be contrarians. It’s not an “either/or” proposition.

An aesthetically pleasing gun doesn’t have to be inaccurate or expensive.

What’s ironic is that all the butt-ugly military style platforms are all the rage - and they were never designed for accuracy to begin with.

I've hunted all over the country from the desert to the high mountains to the swamps and everything in between.


I've never been to a place where my guns get "beat up"


my Ruger has its fair share of scratches for a 20+ year old gun.....most of them were acquired from riding around in a open top jeep for miles thru South Texas. of course a soft case would have mitigated this. But even I would not consider it "beat up" just not in showroom quality anymore

My 40 year old Sako has killed most of my animals and still looks fine.

Everyone hunts differently just like everyone’s vehicle life’s differ.

I own one rifle with a wood stock...a Marlin Model 60 given to me by my Dad.

Everything else is matte finish, fiberglass stock, designed for low maintenance and minimal point of impact shift.

I have seen bone stock Savages on multiple occasions out shoot some crazy expensive custom rifles.

I once saw a guy with a blonde wood stock non accutrigger Savage 110 .243 with a nikon prostaff scope outshoot a guy with a Robar SR-90 with a Nightforce. The Robar owner was mad beyond belief. At the end of the day it is not the song, its the singer.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

Just like TDK telling me I was insulting him by saying his guns were too pretty to use. You're right.




Anyone that knows you wouldn't want your truck either

I like having cool stuff...what's cool to me might not be to Bobo or anyone else.

Exactly. So while saying aesthetics doesn’t matter to some doesn’t mean that there’s something wrong or elitist if others feel differently. There’s certainly no sense in implying nice rifles can’t shoot or nice rifles are all expensive or nice rifles can’t be used by real hunters because real hunters tear their rifles up, or etc., etc., etc.......

I mentioned Savages don’t appeal to me in appearance, because to me they barfed out a rifle on the assembly line when they made the bulk of them

Some read my disdain for their appearance as they don’t shoot

I never said that or even implied it!

Some rifles just are prettier than others and I prefer the prettier ones mostly

I too have always liked the Ruger 77 with the mat wood finish and nice lines. The Remmy 700 classic is nice as well. I've always been a fan of Remmys but never cared for the ultra glossy stocks on the BDL and older ADL.

Comparing your wife to a rifle is reaching quite a bit. My wife is my better half. I would rather spend an extra $200 on her than buy a stock that looks nicer than what I have. My rifles are not in a glass case and they are for me to hunt with and shoot at paper. Most of the time, I do those things on my own or with a few friends. I couldn’t care less what it looks like as long as it does what I want it to do. And that is shoot accurately and without issues.

Nobody said there aren’t some guns that look nicer than others. I just don’t get why a synthetic stocked Savage is bashed on as being ugly when a synthetic Ruger looks basically the same.

For what it’s worth, I like the way my AR15s look better than my bolt actions. And most people would say that AR15s are ugly. Aesthetics are in the eye of the beholder.

This was a zeroing shot at 100 yards this morning. Does it really matter what the rifle looks like that made it?

what does that prove?


a hunting rifle only needs to be so accurate. at normal hunting ranges there is not a scenario where a 1/2" MOA rifle will outperform a 1" MOA rifle

BOBO your Dakota 10 is my Cooper. I still want the dang thing but will likely never buy it.

And yourself has touted shot placement, same as anyone else. But, I do kill animals farther than "normal hunting ranges", so I'll give you that. But I will take an "ugly one" that shoots like that over a pretty one that won't. And yes aesthetically pleasing ones can too.

Not to beat this dead horse but anything in a laminate stock does not appeal to me either

How they even sell them I’ve never understood

I agree 100%. From a synthetic stock, factory "ugly" gun. I did use my hand loads but still...

^^^^

Every rifle in my safe will do that at 100 yards. Again what does that prove?



I’m not seeing the point or what at all it is to do with rifle aesthetics?

^^Excellent!

Go before show is my thing.

Not everyone shares the same attitude, and that's cool.

#golfclap

Ryan F, you could be too sensitive for this thread.

If so, just move on.

Btw, not a single person has claimed synthetic stocks make rifles ugly

Not a single claim of that.

The original topic was what is your personal head turner based on looks.

Then we had to get into the justification of why people own cheap/ugly rifles and then we get pictures of a X with a bullet hole in it

Synthetic stocks make rifles ugly.