Yeah, I mean it's fine that it's lead to a wood & metal vs. plastic/ tactical vs. traditional conversation because those are usually the two most obvious attributes to any build. But it kind of takes a sick mind to not have a love for finely crafted wood stocks and grips, so it's not really even a topic that can be debated if you have any taste and not too many of us will disagree on the matterIt appears to me that most of us have misunderstood the OP's question:
He wanted to leave wooden furniture out of the discussion.
But most responses discuss the perceived importance and beauty of wooden stocks....
(Or maybe I misundersood the OP?!)
On a scale from 1 to 5 for how important the looks of a gun are — I'd be a 5.5.
(Wooden furniture? — Yes, please! For my dining room table and my entertainment center.
But please, not on my killing tools — I like them tough, lean & mean.
I have other items to "remind me of grandpa and my childhood in the woods" — I don't need an archaic looking gun for that.)
Sorry, I seem to be in the minority here — but thankfully today we have plenty of great guns that cater to all flavors of aesthetics — and that is great!!
Cheers,
Matthias
I was going more for the thought process we often won't admit to, buying something primarily based upon looks vs. functionality. Looks are often the most frequently made comment whenever something new comes along, so it does matter to most of us.
There have been a few purchases that I've made thru the years on items based on bling factor, but I've also sensibly bought items that I initially found visually repugnant but warmed up to as value and performance became more apparent.
Upvote 0
