Skeletonized wood stock, patterned barrel, multiple colors of metal around the rifle; it's as attractive as plaid pants with a striped jacket over a polka-dot shirt. That wood would have made a pretty stock in a traditional pattern.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Sort of like someone decided to practice a whole bunch of techniques on one gun, regardless of the fact that they don't work with one another.
Bob,
That's similar to what I was thinking also. Either trying to hard to show off individual pieces, or just doesn't care about an overall theme that ties the rifle together.
Its a 10/22. Let us pray that this is the work of an overindulgent father for his son's first rifle. Maybe the kid picked out all the parts? We hope?
On a serious note, I have to ask, why is it so tempting for people to seriously intentionally uglify weapons? some of the ugly guns you have shown us, have been uglified for mechanical reasons (such as the Mosin Nagant bolt action pistol a few weeks ago.) But this, this was taking a perfectly fine, functioning weapon, and doing shit to it that never should be done to a weapon.
end rant.
Actually, I can't tell if that's simply ugly metalwork on the barrel, or if it is one of Volquartsen's Tensioned barrels. If the latter, it's at least functional. (and probably a very lightweight tackdriver)
On the other hand, the rubber armoured scope simply screams CHEAP, and the scope base and rings simply match absolutely nothing. Seriously to whoever made this thing, rings come in black to match your scope...
Just checked volquartsen's site. I'm now convinced that the barrel is one of their ~ $300 carbon fiber tensioned barrels.
That's not a kid's rifle, that's the rifle of someone who is serious about having an ultra lightweight 22 for putting critters in the pot.
It's still freakin' UGLY though
Post a Comment