A couple years ago I shot another fellow's gun at my club, it was some kind of high end semi pistol, I can't remember, and it had a can, and an optic, all three top of the line. The shooter was a new shooter and member, and took to the sport full bore. I hadn't asked him, he just offered, and since I'd never shot a rig like that, esp. and expensive gitup like it, I gladly took him up on his kind offer. Well, the gun was accurate, it shot nicely, it was certainly a cadillac of a gitup. When I picked it up I was thinking a silver unicorn might appear, but for some reason I was not impressed in the least. In fact I found it boring.

I don't know why I was not impressed. I suppose if I could have had a use for this type of setup, I might have felt differently. On the other had, I've picked up some very nice rifles that I had no use for, but was extremely impressed, so that blows that theory. I also shot a full auto MP5 one time, and although I had never planned on getting anything like it, I also felt great joy But I actually felt nothing when I shot his rig, and I love pistols and revolvers, but I was glad to get back to shooting my Ruger MK II or 92 or whatever I may have been shooting that day.

Have you experience something like this ? I can't explain it.

I haven’t but I will say that recently I have taken to building custom Glock pistols with high end components and optics and Anjou them quite a bit but that may be because I’m the one building them.

The only high end gun that I hated was an older Sig 210. It was a practical hatred. The lack of a beaver tail and a big spur hammer left me with a bloody hand. Otherwise it was a sweet pistol.

I feel this way about Luger pistols. Years ago I worked for an LGS owner who was a Luger expert and he tried to instill some appreciation of them into me.
Nice gun. Finely crafted and the commercial models were beautifully finished.
Meh....

Yes, sure. I actually feel that way about semi-auto pistols in general. Not as emphatically perhaps, but the same notion. Pistols are efficient bullet-placing machines. They do their job, very precisely when you think about it, and at high volumes if necessary. In a way, it is a little boring.

To be honest, I enjoy shooting revolvers a little more. Not what I would take to war, but as far as pure enjoyment. I think it has something to do with being closer to the action, literally closer to the moving parts of the gun, vs. having everything enclosed. Also the feeling that you have a limited number of rounds before a tactically inefficient reload, and you'd best make every shot count.

Yes, all the high-end 1911's I've had the pleasure of shooting...WC, Nighthawk etc.

Very nice pistols, but they just don't do anything for me. I didn't feel the need to jump online and buy one immediately following my range session.

I don't think I could ever justify spending $4k+ for a pistol, no matter how nice it was.

quote:

Yes, all the high-end 1911's I've had the pleasure of shooting...WC, Nighthawk etc.

Same.

My appreciation for a firearm comes after very much research. I have never been impressed with any firearm from a casual encounter.
There are many things which impress me: engineering, uniqueness of operation, beauty, rarity, historical importance, innovation, accuracy, etc.
A firearm does not have to have all or many of these attributes.
I cannot evaluate a firearm in half an hour, or 8 hours. Most certainly I cannot form a positive opinion by firing at the range a couple of times.
One thing that does NOT impress me is how cheaply I can purchase a firearm. Cheap seems to drive the firearms industry and most firearm owners. Sad.

I bought a LWRC REPR, put e Leupold MK6 on it, totally tricked the thing out (IIRC I had something like $6000 into the setup), I shot it once and traded it for a NIB P210-6 and cash. The REPR did absolutely NOTHING for me.

A friend that's OCD about one hole accuracy has a 10/22 setup that's a total bore to shoot. You could be standing on a tightrope and sneeze when pulling the trigger and still hit the X.

quote:

Originally posted by Leemur:
A friend that's OCD about one hole accuracy has a 10/22 setup that's a total bore to shoot.

I don't get how people consider a accurate rifle to be boring. Do you only find shooting to be interesting when you miss a target?

There is a growing focus on tactical 22lr steel matches. They are similar to precision/tactical/steel matches for center fire rifles, but scaled down in distance for 22lr rifles. Only the most accurate, very high-end 10/22 rifles can (sort of) hang in the ranks of competing with Anschutz, Remy 40-x conversions, Kimbers, and special bolt action builds. In the 22lr match I attend, targets vary in distance from 50 to a little over 200 yards. The best shooters in the state, using some of the best rifles/ammo/optics one can buy, still missed plenty targets with gentle breezes. These are rifle systems capable of one-hole groups at 50 yards, and groups at 100 yards that might embarrass at number of people with their precision center-fire rifles.

And then there's the Know-Your-Limits rack. Round steel targets from 2" down to 1/4" in diameter, decreasing in 1/4" increments, placed at 50 yards. One shot per target, starting big, then progressing to the smallest.

IMO stretching our capabilities and expanding our understanding through competition is a great cure for boredom. Repeatedly punching holes in paper targets from the same (probably relatively close) distance is a recipe for boredom.

It's fun to shoot but there's very little skill involved. I swear Stevie Wonder could be a sniper with that rifle. *shrug*

quote:

Originally posted by Leemur:
It's fun to shoot but there's very little skill involved. I swear Stevie Wonder could be a sniper with that rifle. *shrug*

At what distances are you shooting? What size are the targets? What size are the groups?

Man, I need a rifle that takes no skill to shoot. I've had to work my ass off to obtain .2" 5-round groups at 50 yards and .4" groups at 100 yards with my 22lr Kimber. The sub 1.5" group at 200 yards is my nemesis.

I was hitting bulls eyes between 25-50 yards. I've watched him effortlessly do the same out to 100.

I kind of feel this way about every Glock I've ever seen or handled. I want to like them, because I know they are super reliable. I love the size and capacity of the G19. But I just don't care for the way they feel and shoot. Doesn't matter if it's stock or Zev'd to the 9's with an RMR and suppressor.

No 1911 has ever blown the wind up my skirt either. I appreciate the work and craftsmanship, but no desire to own one.

Shotguns for me. I don't hunt or shoot clays, so there's just no thrill there. I don't feel a difference between a Browning and an 870, other than auch lighter wallet.
I've got a 590 for bump in the night stuff, but only because it was $250.

AK47 and that ilk. They do nothing for me.

quote:

Originally posted by cmr076:
I bought a LWRC REPR, put e Leupold MK6 on it, totally tricked the thing out (IIRC I had something like $6000 into the setup), I shot it once and traded it for a NIB P210-6 and cash. The REPR did absolutely NOTHING for me.

Holy shit, that example takes the whole cake cmr. We need a brain scientist to tune in and tell us what the hell is going on. Geez !

The M24. I shot one for a two week school. Honestly it was meh. I may have been something in the 19080's.

Bought a $1200 AR that could shoot circles around it with a longer effective range, especially with the mil spec ammo.

Dry fired a Colt Python a few times and it did nothing for me.