Do you like "Pretty Guns"?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joe Farmer, the senior Smallbore Champion (in his 80's at the time)

Z6WlU9s.jpg

had this amazing piece of wood on his Bleiker smallbore action.

X2mkAO1.jpg

Joe said he purchased the stock wood at Camp Perry, 1968 I think, for $100 and had been offered more than a thousand for the blank. Joe kept it, made it into a lefty stock, with that lefty action. Joe was a rightly, but macular edema had ruined his right eye, so he shot left handed!

Anyway, guys with rifles that pretty have to take real good care of the things. My rifles look more like angry beavers got a hold of the things, as I really don't care what the wood looks like, and they get scratched up.

Quinn Moore, a Camp Perry Civilian Service rifle champion used to say "Do you want to shoot your rifle or make love to it?" Quinn cared little about the appearance of his rifles, his primary concern was whether they put the bullet in the center, each and every trigger pull.

This is an example of a glue gun.

NUiCkCS.jpg

n2ghHn2.jpg

to keep the rifle in place, particularly during the rapids, some shooters sprayed their mitts and guns with an icky glue. And given enough applications, the rifle was covered with the stuff. It may not have been pretty, but pretty only wins beauty pageants, not rifle matches.
 
After further consideration, I've determined that my opposition to ugly guns is greater than my affinity for pretty ones. I find no beauty in cheaply made, poorly fitted guns no matter how well they perform. Likewise, a finely crafted specimen that performs poorly isn't very attractive either.
 
I remember when I was a kid seeing a Winchester 94 Thomas Jefferson commemorative rifle with lots of factory engraving one of my uncles had. . I thought it was beautiful. I do like pretty guns but as others have said my idea of pretty might be different from others. I don't mind some engraving on a gun but I wouldn't want one covered in it. I like a matte stainless finish but I honestly don't want anything too shiny. I guess getting older has turned me into a bit of a curmudgeon. I have always liked bluing just fine & I appreciate fine walnut stocks but most of my wood stocked guns are the cheaper ones with birch stocks. For handguns I like matte stainless & salt nitrided finishes. An all business look is fine with me & I really like not worrying about rusting a blued finish by carrying it.
 
I like "pretty guns". My dream was always to have a real nice custom sporter made from a Mauser. The kind with real nice wood, and engraving you see at auctions that cost about what a nice car does... Of course, not being a wealthy collector, I never did get one made, or buy one.

I did have my Lee Enfield shortened into a "tanker" or "scout" and a scout style mount made by my gunsmith for a red dot. I then shortened the wood, relieving a spot in the upper handguard for the red dot mount, and had a lady refinish it for me. I think it turned out "pretty", and I've gotten comments to that effect from a lot of people.

Of course I've also got comments of how I ruined a piece of history too, but hey, it's MY damn rifle, and besides, it already had holes in it from a scope mount anyhow.

In any case, it's the prettiest gun I have.

IUTZir3.jpg
 
^^

See above.

If one cannot enjoy fine figured hardwood, spalted maple or burled walnut stocks on a handgun or furniture on a rifle; if one cannot love the look of color-case hardening, shiny nickel, polished stainless steel or deep royal bluing ... I feel sorry for you.

And if all one appreciates is the appearance of molded black polymer and stamped matte black slides slides and receivers on one's firearms, I feel even more sorrow... Some of us appreciate a woman who's seen a few seasons and has some curves, some of us cannot fathom the appeal. "I only like guns that look functional" or "They're just tools" is the disclaimer of one with zero appreciation for an artisan's work or, for that matter, any type of art whatsoever... Finding the artistic value in firearms is part of understanding the joys of collecting firearms.

Frankly, I don't understand those who claim to not like "pretty guns."
 
Dont care, as long as it walks the walk.

Pretty guns rarely do. A scratch free pistol is almost always a sign of mediocre performance. (At best)

So I've grown to love holster wear, and the scars of training and competition.
 
Eh, no disrespect intended, but ... bullpoop. A pretty gun can be functional. Good design is good design, and the debate over art vs. function is old, but ultimately, meaningless. History is replete with cases of artistic masterpieces that represent pinnacles of performance. A scratch free pistol is a sign of a conscientious owner, not "almost always a sign of mediocre performance (at best)." I've got plenty of handguns that are both pretty, yet bear the scars of training and competition.
 
If "pretty" means "pleasing to the eye," then I think everyone likes pretty guns, if they like guns at all. That said, the debates that I see are: (a) whether form takes priority over function; and (b) what constitutes "pretty." For me, function takes a pronounced priority over form. If it doesn't shoot right, nothing else really matters. And I prefer a good-looking, 100% functional gun to an ugly, 100% functional gun.

As to what constitutes pretty, I have simple tastes. I don't care for a bunch of intricate engraving. I'd much rather have clean lines and either a matte finish (I kind of like Parkerizing) or a nice blue. 1911s, BHPs, CZs, etc.
 
Seems people assume pretty guns don't work just as well as other guns out there?

I was unaware that they magically stop working with some Flitz or patterned scratches applied.. learn something new everyday.


/sarcasm
 
All the guns in my collection are tools and shooters.
If I can't shoot it, I won't buy it.
My guns are knocked and scratched, but they are clean, and they shoot.
I don't worry about scratching it, or dropping it, or finger prints.
So, I can say, I don't care for "pretty" guns.
 
What is comical is the context here. For some people, a $500 Ruger with $1000 worth of engraving is "too pretty to shoot" or not a serious tool. How many $100,000 British double rifles saw heavy use in Africa and had to be refurbished by the manufacturer? Lots. The idea that somehow a little engraving precludes a firearm from serious use is baffling. To use or not to use is a personal choice.


From what I read of him, he used that one a bunch for some years.
Yep, Elmer Keith's #5 was reblued several times during his lifetime. It's back up for auction next month.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top