Do aesthetics affect your buying?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
OOgsAggie

OOgsAggie

Member
Nov 23, 2020
48
15
Texas, United States
To qualify, do you buy purely for form and practicality be damned? Or are your gun buys purely a matter of function and who cares if it looks like a hot mess? I assume most of us somewhere in between.

I ask specifically because I have been flirting with an AirForce Talon/Escape for awhile. It checks numerous boxes for me. Light, simple, inexpensive, POWERFUL! It should be a no brainer. I just simply can’t get over the “frumpy” looks. It doesn’t look bad by any means but as they say eye of the beholder and all. I just can’t seem to convince myself into it and it boils down to not looking attractive to me.

So convince me I am crazy, or do you all have the same hangups?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AirgunAmateur
shausen said:
I pretty much agree with what @Vetmx and @Filnez and others say about "classic" looks. I want a wood stock and I'm not a fan of "tactical" looks. However, as I have tinnitus, there is one function I can't give away and that's the quiet. For instance, I hate the synthetic stock of the HW110. Gross. However, if it's the most quiet gun out there, then I will purchase that one. I plan to go to AoA next year and find out for myself. My aesthetic sensibilities are rooting for the Daystate Revere. Which was AoA's recommendation when I asked them about my hearing dilemma. I'll keep an eye out for what @intenseaty22 said about the sub-12 model. Would probably be quieter anyway. I don't like the looks of the higher level Daystates with those bulbous tubes. And I hate thumbhole stocks. Eew! Between considerations of disposable income and my interest being limited to FT and 10m I feel my aesthetic choices are congruent with functionality. I think there's considerable choices at all levels for both looks and function. Which is pretty cool.

It is interesting to read about the various notions on this topic. Horses for courses.
Click to expand...
The Sub-12 Revere is a dream to shoot. It is very quiet indeed. It is also very accurate, even shooting some slugs respectively well for a non slug gun in such low power.

Here’s what I mean about the looks with the shorter air tube. Even though one doesn’t have the LDC, I think you can see what I mean.
8075BAB6-AAF0-4489-A419-3A4C072FDD44.jpeg

B911DE91-491E-4666-BD17-4E1C38A33552.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peskådot671
Upvote 0
I buy for purpose and my purpose is using them for pesting. That being said, I look at what's the most powerful without sacrificing accuracy. I look at the weight of the gun as well as the magazine capacity. I also look at the customization of the platform meaning, how well will it allow me to put my desired accessories on it. It's no wonder I have 3 Impact M3's, I mean, they do it all. At this point though, for what I use them for majority of the time, the M3 Compacts are the perfect rifles for me.
 
Upvote 0
intenseaty22 said:
The Sub-12 Revere is a dream to shoot. It is very quiet indeed. It is also very accurate, even shooting some slugs respectively well for a non slug gun in such low power.

Here’s what I mean about the looks with the shorter air tube. Even though one doesn’t have the LDC, I think you can see what I mean.
View attachment 311692
View attachment 311691
Click to expand...
Those are sexy guns!!
 
Upvote 1
Peskådot671 said:
Gotta have both for me. It's usually looks/aesthetics that catch my attention first. But if it can't shoot accurately or aftermarket support is not available, I'll pass. I happen to like both "tactical" (I hate that term) and traditional or thumbhole stocked airguns. Even FT airguns like Franklink posted look cool to me and I know all the added doodads serve a purpose.
Click to expand...
You posted EXACTLY how I feel. Could not have said it better myself.👍👍
 
  • Like
Reactions: peebrainz, Peskådot671 and Mr303
Upvote 0
My Avenger Bullpup is "functionally ugly " and I don’t really like the chunky look and it’s a bit cumbersome but it is a great shooter and accurate.
My Texan SS is "industrially ugly" meaning form fits function but it’s nothing to look at. I’ll fabricate a wood fore end for it because the stock one is too narrow. The new fore end will be a nice piece of wood though.
So I’m in the functional group since a wood stock is nice but not necessarily the best choice for modern firearms or airguns.
I sure like the ergonomics of the AR platform though my ‘64 Winchester 700 in wood is a beautiful gun handles well and drives tacks.

I’ll add when crawling through brush or in harsh weather hunting a synthetic stock is far more desirable. Imho
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
I like my Wildcat MKIII sniper .22 when I go into the woods, nice and compact considering it has a 700mm barrel. When stalking I use a single point tactical sling hooked to a pic rail attachment.
Bench shooting, I like my traditional Crown with camo laminate, it’s just pleasing to look at. Just got a Wolverine in camo laminate, looks a lot like the Crown. Also have a Huntsman Revere which will go in the woods in the future. And then there’s the Impact, obviously not even close to traditional but to me looks good and of course function is legendary.
 
Upvote 0
Aesthetics matter to me when I’m buying a new gun. The inherent accuracy of any new gun is potluck and there are so many options that I make aesthetics a primary factor. For example I hate all black chassis / AR wannabe guns and I don’t plan to ever own one.

For used rifles, if a gun is proven to be particularly accurate, aesthetics matter much much less. I have a green and purple stocked Anschutz 22LR with a black spray painted barrel and I love shooting it. I hate looking at it but for $1100 I couldn’t get a more accurate gun. But I was only interested when it started stacking shots on paper.
 
Upvote 0
OOgsAggie said:
To qualify, do you buy purely for form and practicality be damned? Or are your gun buys purely a matter of function and who cares if it looks like a hot mess? I assume most of us somewhere in between.

I ask specifically because I have been flirting with an AirForce Talon/Escape for awhile. It checks numerous boxes for me. Light, simple, inexpensive, POWERFUL! It should be a no brainer. I just simply can’t get over the “frumpy” looks. It doesn’t look bad by any means but as they say eye of the beholder and all. I just can’t seem to convince myself into it and it boils down to not looking attractive to me.

So convince me I am crazy, or do you all have the same hangups?
Click to expand...
I like the talon P ! It checks off a lot of good. I don’t think it’s that frumpy at all.

Since this is a hobby as well as a sport I do like me a good looking rifle or carbine. Art if you will ..

I have a nice variety of rifles … some tacticool and some wood units. I have to believe most of us do it like that. Beauty is in the eye of who ??? 🧐
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Resources
Menu