Alright, let me start off by saying that I know there is going to be some flak from this. Okay, a lot of flak, but I really have (read: want) to say it. Rugers are ugly. They're fine firearms, they function flawlessly, and they feel decent in the hand, but they're damned ugly. Granted, they're built like Sherman tanks, but they're not quite as pretty.
The single actions are fine, except for the flattened rear of the trigger-guard that used to smash the middle finger, and I really must say that the stainless Blackhawk Hunter Bisley truly is a good-looking firearm. Really though, that's it.
The automatics? God, they look awful. They shoot great, but damnit can't they do something for the appearance of the thing? Ergonomics are fine, reliability is superb, but most other automatics pull off the same with aplomb. Glocks have always been kind of cool and streamlined. Sigs are really tough, and H&Ks just look like they mean business. Even the Springfield XD, an extremely un-attractive weapon, looks like a peach next to a Ruger. Honestly, I once used a P-89 to scotch the wheels of my car when I parked it on a hill.
How about the revolvers? I have a Redhawk, and it is a decent-looking, plain-jane thumper, even if it does look like a Model 29 on Prednisone, but the old Speed and Security Sixes? No, no, no! Great shooting guns, and of course, form follows function, but Hell, Smith pulls it off beautifully. Colt's aren't as pretty as Smiths (now that should stir the pot), but they are a damn sight nicer than Ruger. What happened to the LCR? It looks like a multi-head socket tool out of Sharper Image. The Super Redhawk is a firearm I really liked in the Target Gray with the wood inlay, but it still looks like I should grip it by the barrel and use it to hammer down the tent spikes.
I know, I know, how dare I? Eh, I've dared worse, but in this case, I think I'm saying what we're all thinking. Come on now, when was the last time you said "man, that P-94 is one good-looking firearm, much more attractive than my Mil-Spec 1911."
Yeah, I didn't think so...
The single actions are fine, except for the flattened rear of the trigger-guard that used to smash the middle finger, and I really must say that the stainless Blackhawk Hunter Bisley truly is a good-looking firearm. Really though, that's it.
The automatics? God, they look awful. They shoot great, but damnit can't they do something for the appearance of the thing? Ergonomics are fine, reliability is superb, but most other automatics pull off the same with aplomb. Glocks have always been kind of cool and streamlined. Sigs are really tough, and H&Ks just look like they mean business. Even the Springfield XD, an extremely un-attractive weapon, looks like a peach next to a Ruger. Honestly, I once used a P-89 to scotch the wheels of my car when I parked it on a hill.
How about the revolvers? I have a Redhawk, and it is a decent-looking, plain-jane thumper, even if it does look like a Model 29 on Prednisone, but the old Speed and Security Sixes? No, no, no! Great shooting guns, and of course, form follows function, but Hell, Smith pulls it off beautifully. Colt's aren't as pretty as Smiths (now that should stir the pot), but they are a damn sight nicer than Ruger. What happened to the LCR? It looks like a multi-head socket tool out of Sharper Image. The Super Redhawk is a firearm I really liked in the Target Gray with the wood inlay, but it still looks like I should grip it by the barrel and use it to hammer down the tent spikes.
I know, I know, how dare I? Eh, I've dared worse, but in this case, I think I'm saying what we're all thinking. Come on now, when was the last time you said "man, that P-94 is one good-looking firearm, much more attractive than my Mil-Spec 1911."
Yeah, I didn't think so...
Last edited:
