Is trying to make your gun "look cool" okay?

[Zaydok Allen]

Yes, yes it is ok. In fact that is one of the things I tell people shopping for a their first gun.

The "cooler" you feel a gun is, the more you love it. The more you love it, the more likely you are to dry fire it, live fire it, develope muscle memory, and become proficient with it.

I actually consider personalization, customizing, and "coolifying" a gun to be vital aspects of being a skilled shooter.

It also inspires proper gun upkeep. When I hear someone say "I only clean my gun about every 1000 rounds." I think "Hmm, you must not like it very much."

 

[Claude Clay]

its what pleases you -- it is your $$ after-all (taxes and fees are paid)

just add that what pleases your eye now may not so much as the years go by.
the days of $60 scratch & dent's are gone so i'd be loath to destroy potential future
value for what may be 'cool' today.
but on the 3rd hand...if it pleases ua -- go for it

 

[Reloadron]

460 Kodiak:

I actually consider personalization, customizing, and "coolifying" a gun to be vital aspects of being a skilled shooter.

OK, that said why is it that when we look at the shooters shooting matches like NRA High Power their rifles are pretty much lacking whistles and bells? Rifles like those seen in this link? Why was it in 1969 the Marine Corps handed me an M14 stock rifle and taught me how to place round after round in the black at 500 meters in the prone position. Sorry but I do not see "coolifying" a rifle (or much any gun) as instilling the needed disciplines in a truly successful match great shooters. I guess I just have to disagree with that statement.

Ron

 

[Zaydok Allen]

OK, that said why is it that when we look at the shooters shooting matches like NRA High Power their rifles are pretty much lacking whistles and bells? Rifles like those seen in this link? Why was it in 1969 the Marine Corps handed me an M14 stock rifle and taught me how to place round after round in the black at 500 meters in the prone position. Sorry but I do not see "coolifying" a rifle (or much any gun) as instilling the needed disciplines in a truly successful match great shooters. I guess I just have to disagree with that statement.

Well man, I consider it vital because it will inspire handling and practice as stated in the below comment.

The "cooler" you feel a gun is, the more you love it. The more you love it, the more likely you are to dry fire it, live fire it, develope muscle memory, and become proficient with it.

I certainly agree with you that good training, handling techniques, discipline, and practice will teach anyone how to shoot any gun. Sight picture, largly, is sight picture, recoil management is recoil management, and learning true marksmanship, as it sounds like you did, is scientific. Some people have a natural ability as well. Thanks for your service by the way.

I did not mean to say or imply that having a ""cool" gun will magically make you a better shooter. I just mean that it will help an average shooter, (not a soldier, or competitor) learn faster, through an inspiration to practice. Yes there are lots of people who shoot bare bones guns at an expert level.

For example, I had a full sized pistol I did not think was that great. I shot it fine, but was never very inspired to practice with it even though it was my home defense gun. As a result, I got rid of it because I realized I was more proficient with another gun because I practiced with it, and realized I really just liked that gun more because I thought it was cool. I own no GLOCKS because I don't find them pleasing to the eye, or very cool. I have shot one, and shot it well, but I know if I bought one, I just wouldn't shoot it, or develope true proficiency with it.

So I think the word "vital" is maybe what is bugging you about my original comment. Perhaps a better way to say it is that I think having a gun that an average shooter finds "cool" will help inspire practice, and increase proficiency with the use of that firearm, just by way of that shooter liking the gun. Maybe not vital, but I think it helps. Better?

 

[BSA1]

Methinks the couple of posters who are so dead set against changing the appearance of firearms need to get away from the computer and go outside to see real life.

Don't take life to serious. After all you are not going to get out of it alive.

 

[06]

Guess the question is--do you want a gun for show or for go? Will it stand harsh treatment-rain, mud, dropped, used as a club or shield? "Cool" may let you down if the going gets tough.

 

[DammitBoy]

Everyone's definition of "cool" is different...



This is one of my idea's of cool, a tribute to Angelina Jolie's gun in the movie 'Wanted'.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

There are really only two questions that have to be answered to figure this out:

1. Is it your gun?

2. Do you want to make it "look cool"?


If the answer to both of these is "yes", then it's OK to make your gun look cool.

It might look stupid, silly, or impractical to others, but they are totally free to do (or not do) to their own whatever they wish.

 

[Reloadron]

So I think the word "vital" is maybe what is bugging you about my original comment. Perhaps a better way to say it is that I think having a gun that an average shooter finds "cool" will help inspire practice, and increase proficiency with the use of that firearm, just by way of that shooter liking the gun. Maybe not vital, but I think it helps. Better?

I can agree with that. Way back in the thread's beginning I mentioned it really matters not what I think of a tacticool gun. It only matters it makes the shooter happy in which case I am happy for the shooter. My only point in my last post was I did not see coolness or tacticool as vital got good marksmanship. Again, just my opinion. Matters not really.

Ron

 

[Reloadron]

Methinks the couple of posters who are so dead set against changing the appearance of firearms need to get away from the computer and go outside to see real life.

Don't take life to serious. After all you are not going to get out of it alive.

Just on the off chance that comment was aimed at me please go back and read what I mentioned in post #33. I am not at all opposed to changing the appearance of a firearm. I figure if it belongs to someone they have every right to change how it looks or modify it in any way they wish.

Ron

 

[stressed]

Damn M2, nice collection!

For "looks" I have numerous 9mm carbines that were military SMG's at one point in their lives. I like that they are quiet, accurate for 9mm and have pretty much no recoil.

 

[larryh1108]

I think having a gun that an average shooter finds "cool" will help inspire practice, and increase proficiency with the use of that firearm, just by way of that shooter liking the gun.

I think this sums it up as well as anything that can be said. If you like it and it makes you handle it and practice with it more then it is a good thing.

 

[Trent]

Having a gun that the average shooter finds cool = shooting better is not quite right.

Having a gun that YOU find cool (interesting, whatever) = shooting better is still not quite right (I have a lot of *really flipping cool* belt fed and 50 BMG rifles that are safe queens).

Having a gun that is practical and suits you well, well, now THAT will make you shoot better and practice more.

Having a good training (with instructor) and practice regimen, well, that'll make you shoot even better.

Shooting is a deteriorating skill, if you aren't out once a month practicing, you are moving backwards, not even maintaining skill level. If you don't get periodic good instruction (conventional teacher, or getting your butt handed to you at a competition - peer instruction) - then your learning will progress at a slower rate.

You want to get better, grab whatever gun you have and go learn how to use it.

 

[dmazur]

It's America, and (so far) it is a land of relative freedom.

So we have "tuner cars" with more air dams, spoilers and flares than you would believe possible.

And "antique cars" with original parts, carefully repainted and restored.

And "jeeps", modified for mud-crawling, including diamond plate on the corners.

While car - firearms analogies often fail (especially when discussing 2A), I believe thinking of guns this way makes a certain amount of sense.

There are certain groups who view things as "good", and others view them as frivolous or even downright stupid.

Personally, I applaud all of these efforts at personalization. As long as it doesn't stray into something dangerous, I don't see the harm. Except perhaps to create divisiveness among gun owners, based on the different types of visual appearances.

Like the tuner cars. I really don't care what they look like, as long as the drivers follow the traffic laws and don't endanger others.

But if someone expects a tricked-out M4 means they don't have to follow safety rules at our range? Not going to happen...

 

[Officers'Wife]

Having a gun that the average shooter finds cool = shooting better is not quite right.

Having a gun that YOU find cool (interesting, whatever) = shooting better is still not quite right (I have a lot of *really flipping cool* belt fed and 50 BMG rifles that are safe queens).

Having a gun that is practical and suits you well, well, now THAT will make you shoot better and practice more.

Having a good training (with instructor) and practice regimen, well, that'll make you shoot even better.

Shooting is a deteriorating skill, if you aren't out once a month practicing, you are moving backwards, not even maintaining skill level. If you don't get periodic good instruction (conventional teacher, or getting your butt handed to you at a competition - peer instruction) - then your learning will progress at a slower rate.

You want to get better, grab whatever gun you have and go learn how to use it.

Hi Trent,

I remember a few years ago one of the employees bought the cutest little .22 caliber rifle with a wood stock. He replaced the wood with a stock that looked like #9 wire and a forearm that looked like a milk jug melted over too hot a fire. After discovering he could no longer hit anything with the rifle he sold it to my uncle for about a tenth of what he paid for it.

My uncle took it and a seasoned stick of wild cherry to an old craftsman near Knox who fit all new "furniture" for the weapon. After the "uncooling" process the little rifle was as accurate as any I've ever seen in that old man's hands. Cool, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[captain awesome]

As others have said; Cool is in the eye of the beholder and is highly subjective.

Cool can be a 3x9 hunting scope atop a deep blue steel bolt action paired with a polished shiny deep redish brown stock with irregular patterns in The wood, or iron wood grips Made from a Root burl On a nickel plated revolver.

Cool can be a stailainless steel 1911 with cocobolo grips and every internal upgrade you can find or afford.

Cool can be an ar15 with a 1-4 power scope and red dot on top of that with a light, an infrared laser and nightvision, forgrip handle, colapsing stock, hogue grip, bipod and range finder all painted in desert tan to match. ( not my cup of tea, but to each his own)

My point is that you would be hard pressed to find someone that has never picked something or modified something or built something one way over another because they thought it would look nicer(in essence; cooler) the way they chose, or even "does something" they think is cool but basicly uneeded. But NO ONE goes entirely by functionality with everything in their life, no matter what they claim. There will always be somewhat of a preference based on how something looks, no matter what they say. So anyone who gets upset or makes fun of you for making something look they way you want it is a hypocrite to some degree. i am not just talking about firearms either.

I used to think otherwise but have grown up since then.

 

[huntsman]

^ all my guns are stone cold stock except 1, I went with a Hogue grip not to look cool but to manage recoil and better fit. I did swap out the pick guard on my bass but only after I found one for 50% off.

 

[Officers'Wife]

Except for the recoil pad on my Enfield and the grips on my Commander all of mine are as they came out of the factory. The only thing I've put on them is wear.

 

[dmazur]

Well, I'll have to confess to adding different grips to my Commander, too.

And having a couple of Ruger No. 1's rebarreled / restocked to get a more weatherproof setup. (Black GunKote and laminated instead of the original blued & walnut.)

So, I suppose I fall into the "jeep" category (using my previous analogy.)

I believe I am tolerant of those who think guns are like tuner cars, but I sure am not in that camp myself...

 

[KTXdm9]

its what pleases you -- it is your $$ after-all (taxes and fees are paid)

This

 

[ArmedOkie]

...most of the so called functional junk isn't actually functional in the real world anyway. If the military doesn't use it then its no good... if it worked in the real world the military would be using it.

I have one argument with this...
the venerable 223 cartridge
Such a POS


I'm already in my flame suit and waiting for you, AR boys

all in good fun, of course!

 

[Marvinash]

Looking good; looking silly.

The Zombie comment is the one that hit home. I like good looking guns. Tactical guns, collector gems, innovative designs. But I hear too many grown men talking about "zombies" a little too seriously. It's disturbing.
Being out at the range and seeing all the ARs dressed up like Barbie dolls may be fun - and of course it's your money - but maybe I'm sensitive to the image gun owners project at a time when the anti-gun tactic is to contend that were all carrying unnecessarily dangerous firepower to satisfy some delusional belief about impending threats that don't exist.
They do exist, but it's harder to make that argument when we give the opposition media ammo in the form of zombies or equally absurd tho imaginary enemies that require tactical gear that they see no reason for.

And POS.223? With all the accolades the AK47 earned in Vietnam, the response of the Russians at the close of that war was to take that weapon's .30 caliber cartridge and replace with their own version of the high velocity .22s, the 5.45x39mm in the AK74: the only major change in over 50 years.

 

[dmazur]

...venerable 223 cartridge

And, as I understand it, the conditions changed in Afghanistan and Iraq. When long range was needed to reply to the bad guys shooting old bolt-action Enfields and the like, our troops wanted the M14 back again.

Advantages of low-recoil firepower and lightweight ammo aren't always advantages, in other words.

I believe the Navy still has a few M14's (or even NATO compliant Garands) for shooting mines.

The mistake to avoid, IMO, is assuming that any weapon is versatile enough to handle everything.

Back to thread topic -

If you're going to modify a gun, I would first choose to make it more accurate, or more reliable. Better-looking would be last on the list. (And, in re zombies, I thought Hornady's Zombie Max ammo was a Photoshop prank. But no, it wasn't... zombie ammo)

 

[Marvinash]

M14/m16

I'd never speak ill of the M14.
I was in country 6 weeks when we turned in our M14s. Those of us with combat MOSs had been trained on the new weapon, and it seemed pretty cool at Ft. Ord. But having it handed to me in VN was disconcerting. In our particular location, a battle rifle would have served us better than an assault weapon.
You're right. The idea if a single universal weapon for all branches under all conditions limits situational effectiveness.
But the .223 a POS? Hardly.

If loving your gun brings you to obsessive perfection in technique and maintenence, dress it up!
But the morons who do go mad dress up like the Joker; create Goth freak cults with imaginary threats and play with serious tools like they're paintball fanatics.
Maybe living in CA has cost me my sense of humor about mocking the threat posed by those who have the political leverage to marginalize those of us who take the 2nd Amend. as an unassailable right.
The worst laws passed here were based on guns that "looked" scary to someone with too much power to legislate and too little knowledge of the real damage they've done.

 

[Archie]

What's Cool?

Knowing full well that beauty or cool is in the eye of the beholder, I think it's just fine to alter the appearance of a firearm to suit one's personality, shooting style or sense of cool.

I've never been one for bicycle reflectors in the grips, a lensatic compass built into anything, or a whistle to call one's horse integral with the hammer spur. However, I do appreciate good finishes (blue, primarily), attractive and functional grips and even modest and tasteful engraving. In general, I'm a simple, 'less is more' kind of fellow.

Most of my alterations have been to make the device more 'shootable' for my style and mode of shooting. Typically I've put better sights (visible, not adjustable or 'night') on my pistols. Also altered and replaced grips for better control. Someday I'm going to get something engraved. But probably no jumping deer, antelope or nekkid women.