Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Classy guns - do aesthetics matter to you?

Curious if others find hunting with and shooting classy guns adds to the experience. I have and have owned nice wood stock rifles as well as composite ones. I personally much prefer the nice wood stock rifles. The composite stocks are superior in nearly every regard except one, the personal one. At least for me. I believe something like a Model 70 Featherweight is one of the classiest rifles ever designed. My old Model 70 also fits the definition of 'Just feels right' and classy to me. What are your thoughts?

I use plenty of both. I really like a nice blued/wood stock rifles myself. But I am pretty good at messing them up.

My old 1953 M70 30-06 is beat up enough to where I don' t care. My Win M88 308 stock is still pretty nice. I hunt it, but usually have along something else for bad weather.

The other wood stocks I probably use most are on a 444 Marlin and Ruger 10/22 Deluxe grade. I don't baby them, but try to at least not totally abuse them. The Marlin had a hanging treestand dropped on it while bear hunting in da U.P.

That said, I will be hunting with the traditional AR-15 in 450 Bushmaster this evening........

Aesthetics matter greatly to me.

In my opinion, the most stylish rifle ever created is the Winchester 1885 (Browning 1878).

I love the IDEA of beautiful wood. I avoid it because it never gets used. I can't stand the thought of putting a gouge in a perfect piece of lumber. It seems out of line to pay $1000 + for something I just wont use.

That being said, I still plan on getting a custom Ruger #1 in .257 WTHBY and a .404 Jeff with nice wood at some point. I can't imagine either of those would get used hard enough to matter.

I count aesthetics to be as much of a factor as anything else when buying rifles (and shotguns). The thing is, aesthetics has a different meaning to each of us. What may be aesthetically pleasing to me may not be the case with the next guy.

That said, what could be more aesthetically pleasing than a pre64 Winchester, pre-war Savage lever action, or pre-war custom rifle built by a man with good taste? "Modern" rifles built of stainless steel and composites, guns built on the AR platform, etc., to me are merely really efficient tools (and I do own a couple in that category), and while they may be aesthetically pleasing to some (most) they don't rate as such with me.

I like fine wood, classic guns as much as the next guy.

But, for hard use, "pretty is as pretty does", I like tough, functional rifles. There is a beauty in tough functionality.

Like this .375 H&H, M-70 Classic. Even with Tupperware stock, it's a pleasure to use and not that bad to look at.

DF

Yes, "class" is perhaps the single largest factor for me personally when it comes to firearms. I own plenty of rifles, shotguns, and handguns that cater more toward practical use than pure beauty, but I still prefer classic lines, blued steel, and a nice piece of walnut.

Centershot: I do NOT Hunt with any of my many aesthetically pleasing high dollar "collector Rifles" anymore.
This morning my Whitetail Hunt saw me carrying a plain Jane (but ultra accurate!) Remington 700 Sendero in 270 Winchester with a Leupold 6.5x20x40mm variable scope with 30mm tube.
Not a cheap gun but an extremely efficient and not unhandsome gun.
I used to Hunt (both Varmints and big game) with high dollar handsome Rifles (like Kimbers of Oregon, Sakos, pre-64 Model 70's Browning Safaris etc etc etc) but no more.
The dollars put at risk these days using my "collector" guns afield is just not prudent in my opinion.
I denounce NO one who uses their "classy Rifles" afield - its just no longer appealing to me.
Here in about 8 - 10 years I will be selling off my collectible guns and wish to achieve ALL the appreciation in value possible from each and evry one of them.
Great picture by the way of that dark horned Bull Elk - congratulations on that trophy.
These past weeks saw me Hunting Elk with a Remington 700 Classic in 7mm Remington Magnum.
No worries Hunting with that run of the mill (but very accurate and utilitarian!) and pleasant looking rig.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

I never bought a gun with an eye toward maintaining its value; value for re-sale or value for an heir. I buy them to please me in the here and now and if that includes using them to hunt with the attendant risk of damage, then so be it. After I'm gone, I won't care- I'll be dead. I have no heirs, I'm the Last of the Mohicans so the only person I need to watch out for is myself.

Yes it matters to me.
I own stainless synthetics, but most are walnut and blued steel.
Life is to short to hunt with an ugly rifle.

I have made a couple attempts to combine toughness with good looks and have been somewhat successful.

Here is an example, it's a military Mauser action with ceracote metal finish and a stock finish that consist of thinned epoxy applied to a warm stock, the epoxy absorbs into the wood.

Then I put several coats of true oil over the hard epoxy coating.

Her is another, this is also a military Mauser action that has been cerakoted with a stainless barrel.
The stock finish on this is a polyurethane.

The wood floors in my home have a poly finish and it is tuff stuff and water proof.

Seems to work for gunstocks also.

If I have learned anyhing in a lifetime of hunting and shooting it is that PERFORMANCE = BEAUTY



But having something pretty to look at can be nice too !

I certainly APPRECIATE both. I have good looking wood/blue and I have synthetic/ss - blued. I hunt all of them

Rough hunt-- practicality
Bad wx -- practicality
Normal wx -- I hunt whatever rifle or cartridge I'm in the mood to hunt.

Jerry

The best looking rifle I own is Is a Browning Belgian FN Mauser
30-06. It has a 3-9 x 50 Leupold so it is the brightest and happens to be the most accurate as well.
I bought it pre-dented so I don't mind hunting with it.
whelennut

And they are not mutually exclusive as your second picture bears out. Other than Black Rifles (Matter), about as ugly as I'll go is wood/stainless.

I've always preferred a good-looking stick of wood on my rifles. It doesn't mean I don't have some that are somewhat 'plain-jane' nor does it rule out synthetics.
The warmth of a wood stock cannot be matched by a synthetic, at least in my book.
I just prefer a good looking piece of wood on my guns.

Be they Blonds:



Brunettes




Young one's (built this summer):



Or a Senior Citizen (built in 1906)

Aesthetics? Savage bolt action rifles need not apply.

How about this for a Savage Bolt rifle? Ok, they had to import it from Germany but they did stamp their name on it....

Yes, aesthetics matter, but a very finely crafted stainless rifle in a high quality stock also has an aesthetic appeal.
I have no use for a cheap RAR or Savage in a plastic stock.

Now shotguns are another matter all together. A proper shotgun has 2 barrels,deep bluing,elegant engraving, and fine walnut.

"Old Ugly" is famous, a legendary .458 WM...

So ugly, it's almost pretty...

DF