Guns are supposed to be functional, reliable, and accurate. Rarely are looks a major consideration. If the gun works and works well, do looks really matter? Guns like the Glock series are as plain jane as they get, but they are functional, reliable, accurate, simplistic, efficient, and I can go on and on. That being said, there are some really ugly guns out there.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to follow and signup for notifications!
Today we are bringing you the best of the ugly guns. Best of the worst, that is. Sometimes a gun can be ugly and functional, but sometimes you can read a book by its cover. Sometimes you can tell a gun is poorly made by its external looks and design because sometimes, these guns are clearly not designed by people who shoot guns.
Let’s dive into the world’s ugliest guns.
This Weird Adler A110 Shotgun
The Adler A110 shotgun is a pretty neat design. It’s a Turkish-made lever action shotgun that is fairly modern. It’s neat, fairly cheap, and doesn’t look bad in most of the configurations they produce. They do produce one model that is absolutely ridiculous, though.
This model departs from all common sense and all sense of style and joy. Let’s start at the front and work our way back. What is this red muzzle device? Is it just a decoration? What does it do? Above the top, we have a carry handle-like design with what might be sights and a massive optics rail. Not only is it ugly, but it’s stupid. Why would you want to deal with a height over bore issue with a close-range weapon?
Then we get back to the stock. It’s an M4 adjustable style stock that seemingly lacks any palace to grab the gun. There is no real grip present. Not only is this one of the top ugly guns I’ve ever seen, but it’s not even functionally literate. Burn it with fire.
Nambu Type 94
The Nambu Type 94 was a 9mm Japanese pistol designed in 1929 and produced in 1935. It saw use by the Japanese military in WW2, and it is butt ugly. Not all the Nambu pistols are terrible looking, but this one takes the cake. It’s tough to describe accurately. The Nambu 94 pistols are atrocious.
It almost looks like a prop designed for a movie by someone who had never seen a semi-auto gun and then cast it from plastic. The Type 94 is not just ugly, but it’s a terrible gun. It holds six rounds of a very anemic cartridge.
These are ugly guns, but what makes them take the cake is their tendency to fire accidentally. The sear is outside of the pistol and can be accidentally tripped, causing the gun to discharge unintentionally. Ugly and non-functional? That’s a tough sell.
HK VP70
If you showed me the HK VP70 and then the P7 and told me the same company made these guns six years apart, I wouldn’t believe you. The HK VP70 seemed to attempt to have a futuristic design, but who knew the future would be so terrible. The HK VP70 was the first polymer frame handgun, and I understand why it wasn’t as successful as the Glock series.
These ugly guns were blowback operated, which meant excessive recoil. They also featured a terrible double-action-only trigger. Admittedly the guns held 18 rounds, which was pretty great for 1970.
The rifling was so deeply cut that it allowed gas to vent past the bullet. This helped reduce recoil and pressure on the VP70 slide but also reduced 9mm Parabellum to near .380 ACP velocities. The gun sucked, and HK would probably like to make it disappear.
Mossberg Blaze-47
Mossberg’s Blaze series of .22LR rifles are great. They are reliable little plinkers that are super cheap. They are fun to handle and shoot. That doesn’t mean Mossberg hasn’t made them ugly. The standard Blaze rifles are great, but the Blaze-47 series are ugly-butt guns.
These are designed to try and replicate an AK but just come off ugly as sin. There is something about the construction of these guns that just makes them abysmal to look at. Luckily these guns do function.
Sure the fake wood furniture might be uglier than your mom, but the gun goes bang. Personally, I’d grab a standard Blaze in a traditional layout before I even looked at a Blaze-47.
The Thunder Five
Did you think the Taurus Judge was the first .410 revolver? Nope, we have an even worse option in the form of the Thunder Five. Something about the short snub nose barrel contrasted with the three-inch chamber and massive Pachymar grips made the gun look goofy.
The gun has no sights, so its Point and Shoot, which in all fairness, sights probably wouldn’t help you.
The gun even has a manual safety lever making it a fairly odd double-action gun. The matte grey finish isn’t nice—functional, sure, but it’s not an S&W.
The Thunder 5 wasn’t produced for very long. It’s odd because the Taurus Judge would go on to be a great seller for Taurus. Maybe the less ugly Judge captured hearts a little easier.
The TR Imports Silver Eagle RZ17
I can’t leave Turkish shotguns alone. The TR Imports Silver Eagle RZ17 takes the Ugly Guns cake. I just have to ask why. Why is this thing even a thing? It’s a twelve-gauge pump action shotgun. Not too complicated to get right. How they managed to produce this thing is beyond me.
First, they tossed on a carry handle and raised front sight.
Not only is it ugly, but I have to ask… why? Why would you want a height over bore issue with a close-range weapon? To top that off, the RZ17 Tactical shotgun has a slide M4 style stock.
That’s not a big deal, but it uses a downward slope to it. To use raised sights on a carry handle, you really need an inline stock. To fix this, they installed a huge cheek riser on the stock. None of this is necessary, and it’s one of the few times where I’d say a bead sight would just be a better option.
Armscor M1600 SA
Another budget-grade rimfire rifle from a dubious origin makes the list. The Armscor M1600 SA is what happens when you build the gun your kid drew when he or she was five. It’s trying to mimic an M16/AR-15 design and does so in the most painfully awkward way possible. It takes ugly guns to the next level.
It’s not hard to make a semi-automatic .22LR look like an AR-15, so that is what makes the M1600 SA so bizarre. It has a carry handle and raised front sight, but also an inline stock so you can use the sights.
The stock kind of resembles an M16 fixed stock if you squint just right. The same goes for the pistol grip, and the handguard is something.
The good news is that the M1600 seems to perform well. I’ve never handled one before, but the reviews on the internet seem to state it’s a simple, functional semi-auto .22LR. I can’t say I understand the logic behind the looks, but at least it goes bang.
Your Favorite Ugly Guns
These are the ugly guns that stick out to me, but which ones stick out to you? Looks are relative. I know some people hate the AUG, but I love it. So let me know what you think is an ugly gun and why you think that.
