imfdb.org - Gun trends you dont understand....

imfdb.org (http://forum.imfdb.org/index.php)

- Just Guns (http://forum.imfdb.org/forumdisplay.php?f=4)

- - Gun trends you dont understand.... (http://forum.imfdb.org/showthread.php?t=1277)

Quote:

Originally Posted by MT2008 (Post 19386)

That's a good one. I've never fired a shotgun with an M4 stock, but does it really offer any advantage over the traditional side- or top-folding stocks? Or do people use them just for the sake of looking "tacticool"?

And of course, it goes without saying that anyone who sticks an M4 stock on their Ruger 10/22 is a poser.

http://imgur.com/l0hvL.jpg

Quote:

Originally Posted by S&Wshooter (Post 19390)

I know for a fact that squared trigger guards on Smith autos are a bit smaller than rounded ones, which may (usually does) cause discomfort

I thought we went over this once before. The squared trigger guard shave just as much space as the rounded trigger guards (in both 2nd and 3rd Gen models) if not more space.

All the other trends are notable, but I've not heard many people adamantly suggest the rounded guard is better, but quite the opposite. Aside from hardcore 1911 guys, most tacticool people prefer the squared trigger guard so they can wrap their support hand index finger around the front easier, i:e fulfill the purpose of it's existence. I do understand that someone else would want to do that, but I never shoot like that. I also don't suggest that round trigger guards are more tactically sound, they just have a more classic look that I can enjoy. If I ever do find a round guard fanboy out there, rest assured I will laugh at them.

The M4 stocks is a really good one though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yournamehere (Post 19416)

I thought we went over this once before. The squared trigger guard shave just as much space as the rounded trigger guards (in both 2nd and 3rd Gen models) if not more space.

Last time I was a Collectors I held 2 S&W autos that were almost exactly the same side-by-side. One had a rounded guard and one had a squared guard.
Squared trigger guard was a tiny bit smaller, but that tiny bit made a difference

Why exactly are two-tone guns popular? I've never seen the appeal

some look cool. Ive never liked engraved guns or guns with big billboard logos though, i like nice clean lines.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BurtReynoldsMoustache (Post 19413)

http://imgur.com/l0hvL.jpg

Weirdly, that ALMOST looks like it makes sense.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Checkman (Post 19405)

Laser sights and flashlights on everything. Sure they serve a purpose, but they're getting carried away.

Cammo patterns on shotguns, rifles, handguns, slingshots, pocketknives. How in the world did my poor old grandfather manage to bring home any game when he was growing up in the 1930's without any tacti-cool cammo shotguns? All he had was a blued-steel Remington Model 10. Poor old grandpa. It's a good thing he didn't starve before he made my dad or I wouldn't be here now.

Yes. YES. The deer don't know the difference. I can see it on a military weapon, but it's totally unnecessary on a sporting gun. I can't even count the number of times a day I get asked "Well why don't you have it in camo?" Sometimes the finish is peeling off already when I take out the gun in the store.

Oh, and guns with ridiculous muzzle brakes. At my store we have Mossberg .22s, .308s and shotguns with the Barret .50 cal-style muzzle brake, and another with a round pop-can sized brake with a picatinny rail on the bottom. It's absurd. And the Remington's with the breaching attachment. I have no objection to a civilian having one, but why would they need it?

Why did CZ decide to take a beautiful pistol, the CZ75, and make it so ugly?

The standard cz 75 and 85 look nice. Its all the spin offs that look weird, like the phantom.

Quote:

Originally Posted by k9870 (Post 19427)

The standard cz 75 and 85 look nice. Its all the spin offs that look weird, like the phantom.

The weird looking ones are just about the only ones I've ever seen for sale