Square guns....?

[Spirit 1]

Hi all!

Of the many things I just can't figure out, square handguns sit near the top. What I mean are semi-auto pistols that look like they were cut out of various pieces of square bar stock then wire brushed & assembled. The sharp edges on slide and frame or most everywhere just don't make sense to me.

Adding to this, sights [especially rear] that have sharp square edges & corners throughout, instead of the mfgr. making even a basic attempt to round them off. In many cases the rear sights are also very high and wide, far more than necessary.

All those sharp square edges will be the first to wear, downgrading the finish. They won't help a bit holstering & unholstering. There's zero comfort factor. To me they just look like a cookie cutter design lacking aesthetics & ergonomics desired & necessary in a handgun.

Is it just me???

[cannon]

No it's not just you.

[gatesbox]

How about an example of a pistol that you think has crude construction....

[XDRoX]

How about an example of a pistol that you think has crude construction....

I'd like to see what you're talking about as well. When someone says square gun, Glock is the first thing that comes to mind, but Glocks don't have any of the characteristics that you're describing.

[Spirit 1]

How about an example of a pistol that you think has crude construction....

I didn't give any particular examples because I don't want to insult anybody's favorite gun. Different strokes for different folks. To me, form should follow function, especially when function of a handgun is so ultra-critical.

Oh, and not speaking of crude construction per se, some are extreme quality guns.

[someR1]

[XDRoX]

...look like they were cut out of various pieces of square bar stock then wire brushed & assembled. The sharp edges on slide and frame or most everywhere just don't make sense to me.

...sights [especially rear] that have sharp square edges & corners throughout, instead of the mfgr. making even a basic attempt to round them off. In many cases the rear sights are also very high and wide, far more than necessary.

All those sharp square edges will be the first to wear, downgrading the finish. They won't help a bit holstering & unholstering. There's zero comfort factor. To me they just look like a cookie cutter design lacking aesthetics & ergonomics desired & necessary in a handgun.

I didn't give any particular examples because I don't want to insult anybody's favorite gun. Different strokes for different folks. To me, form should follow function, especially when function of a handgun is so ultra-critical.

Sorry, but I have no idea what you're talking about. I own more than a few guns, and none of mine have any of these characteristics that you are referring to. One thing to start a thread like this, but another thing not to give us one example of what you're talking about.

To not give an example makes you're claims sound very unfounded.

[Spirit 1]

Sorry, but I have no idea what you're talking about. I own more than a few guns, and none of mine have any of these characteristics that you are referring to. One thing to start a thread like this, but another thing not to give us one example of what you're talking about.

To not give an example makes you're claims sound very unfounded.

Well, let's see here: have you ever noticed the difference in style between a UPS delivery van and a Ferrari?

It's a subject I wanted to bring up for discussion without directly insulting anybody's favorite gun.

If you cannot notice the difference in the many current firearms offered that have primarily, or all, 90* square edges with virtually no tapering or rounding as in esthetics & ergonomics then I guess this thread doesn't apply to you.

[djleisure]

Not square?



Square?



Both are good to go in my book.

[Ubermcoupe]

Is it just me???

From this point, yes.

There are some guns that I own that are "square" - I guess
Some that are "not rounded" and some that are in between. I guess it really comes down to preference and there are ways that people (as suggested through forums like this) have dealt with rounding off corners, stippling, changing sights, and just plain customization. Without particular specifics I still have no idea what you are trying to describe.

If you're ranting, I get it, but that doesn't mean I will have any idea what pistol(s) you may be describing. If I knew that I (or others) may be able to point you in a direction on why the manufacturer designed that specific pistol(s) that way.

Best of luck.

[451040]

If you cannot notice the difference in the many current firearms offered that have primarily, or all, 90* square edges with virtually no tapering or rounding as in esthetics & ergonomics then I guess this thread doesn't apply to you.

If you cannot provide examples of what you are concerned about then I guess this thread is pointless.

[Fishslayer]

Look at the G**** & XD fanbois squirm...

I call them (and some others) boxy black "me too" tacticool handguns. When viewing a collection of G***** I usually wonder how one tells them apart. Maybe that's the explanation for putting paint in the lettering?

IIRC there IS a reason for the square top slide. Supposedly the flat top aids the human eye to align the sights perpendicular to the target, or some such.

[Lead Waster]

Maybe OP is spoiled by Italian styling? (ie Beretta 92f)

[J.D.Allen]

Look at the G**** & XD fanbois squirm...

I call them (and some others) boxy black "me too" tacticool handguns. When viewing a collection of G***** I usually wonder how one tells them apart. Maybe that's the explanation for putting paint in the lettering?

IIRC there IS a reason for the square top slide. Supposedly the flat top aids the human eye to align the sights perpendicular to the target, or some such.

Is Glock a bad word now???

[djleisure]

Is Glock a bad word now???

Yes.

Heh, JK. I was trying to figure out what he was writing as well. Gc*ck? Man, I dunno...