Other thoughts on "tactical" vs traditional rifle

[Sleestak]

“Tactical”….grrrrrrrrrr! Make me king for a day and I’d have that word stricken from the English language.

View attachment 578418

Given the above definition, what on God’s great, green earth could be “tactical” about an air rifle, or, for that matter, 90% of all products labeled tactical (think tactical socks, tactical underwear, etc)? Anybody here going to be clearing buildings or trenches with a tactical airgun? To be fair though, one could probably clear buildings and trenches with a suitably soiled pair of tactical underwear…

The vast majority of products with “tactical” in their title are anything but, and are nothing more than a marketing ploy making use of a word that sounds kinda cool.

If you like the tactical look, rock on, brother! But in my humble…ahem…opinion, the usefulness of guns/rifles that are truly tactical, or designed to look tactical, doesn’t carry over well to other applications such as hunting or shooting from the bench.

And don’t even get me started on the word “operator”…

Rant over.

Justin

Ugh, tell me about it... for example the endless Bearskin Tactical Hoodie commercials on YT. Between the repetition and it being touted as a "tactical hoodie" it's probably one of the most annoying commercials going. What's next? Tactical kilts?

It could be the best product in the world but I'll never buy it now out of spite and will just have to settle for "traditional hoodies"

 

[kwaping]

I really want to like the tactical but just cant seem to embrace it. But I also prefer to hunt without scopes. I like the fact that my Dragon Claw has open sights and just cant get used to hunting with a scope. Despite being in my 60s and needing glasses to read (or see this screen) My distance vision is better than ever.

Ah, the no-scope bit is telling. You just like the more raw, traditional experience. No shame in that, but also no shame in not wanting that.

This makes me think of archery. I shoot with a recurve bow, no sights. It's weak and I'm not that accurate, but I like the raw experience of it. My son, on the other hand, really enjoys his compound bow, with stabilizer and multi-pin sight. He's way more accurate and effective with it, and that's great for him.

This is why there are so many different models of airgun, and bows, and cars, and ... etc.

 

[Sleestak]

"tactical"​

I really despise this look . Reminds me of the Armed Forces , and the Karen's think your carrying a "AR" killing machine . I would bet if you set up a table in a Mall with 10 tactical guns on it AND 9 of them were Air guns , 99 percent of the people would say they are ALL AR15's military guns designed to kill .

Yes i know the tactical stock is designed to be rugged , easily exchange parts of a real "AR " and have a working gun again in the battle field .
Reminds me of when i was a kid and wanted a real looking 6 shooter cowboy gun and Daisy complied .

The only beef I really have is that they go so far out of their way to make a gun look tactical that it no longer has anything to do w actual function. And as durability goes there is nothing rugged about air guns...especially in comparison to the real thing. So yeah, it's often down to just looks.

Anyone who's actually humped a M16 around for any length of time will probably opt out of the tactical look. Just sayin

 

[Oakland FL Airgunner]

I like both. For a hunting gun I prefer a traditionally styled rifle. They are more comfortable to carry and point. For target shooting I prefer a gun with a vertical pistol grip. Especially when shooting prone or from a bench.

When FX came out with the DRS tactical there seemed to be a few people who were against the AR15ish style to it. And they didn’t just think it was ugly. They almost seemed to be offended by it. I don’t understand why.

I think this is a good point. I don't do target shooting. Just hunting. For hunting i always grab my wood stocks.

 

[Oakland FL Airgunner]

Ah, the no-scope bit is telling. You just like the more raw, traditional experience. No shame in that, but also no shame in not wanting that.

This makes me think of archery. I shoot with a recurve bow, no sights. It's weak and I'm not that accurate, but I like the raw experience of it. My son, on the other hand, really enjoys his compound bow, with stabilizer and multi-pin sight. He's way more accurate and effective with it, and that's great for him.

This is why there are so many different models of airgun, and bows, and cars, and ... etc.

Sounds familiar my son has my old 308 Ruger that he put a scope on and he can now drive nails at 100 yards. I like the experience and risk of knowing that the shot depends completely on me

 

[L.Leon]

The only beef I really have is that they go so far out of their way to make a gun look tactical that it no longer has anything to do w actual function. And as durability goes there is nothing rugged about air guns...especially in comparison to the real thing. So yeah, it's often down to just looks.

Anyone who's actually humped a M16 around for any length of time will probably opt out of the tactical look. Just sayin

Those who “humped” any AR or M anything are precisely those who might/may appreciate the attributes of a tactical rig… There’s a reason the Garand went the way of the Dodo. Tactical can be very practical for many folks. The ergos fit a wide variety of body types. Not an “end all, be all” but certainly a very important feature of tactical arms…

 

[Sleestak]

Those who “humped” any AR or M anything are precisely those who might/may appreciate the attributes of a tactical rig… There’s a reason the Garand went the way of the Dodo. Tactical can be very practical for many folks. The ergos fit a wide variety of body types. Not an “end all, be all” but certainly a very important feature of tactical arms…

I never said that the style doesn't have any functional attributes, and it may be chosen it for practical purposes... but 100% it wouldn't be for any tacticool / wannabe aesthetics

Anyway, it's got to be cheaper to manufacture a gun and stick a outsourced composit AR buttstock, grips and handguard on it and call it one size fits all. So like it or not that's the direction it we'llcontinue to go.

 

[jps2486]

“Tactical”….grrrrrrrrrr! Make me king for a day and I’d have that word stricken from the English language.

View attachment 578418

Given the above definition, what on God’s great, green earth could be “tactical” about an air rifle, or, for that matter, 90% of all products labeled tactical (think tactical socks, tactical underwear, etc)? Anybody here going to be clearing buildings or trenches with a tactical airgun? To be fair though, one could probably clear buildings and trenches with a suitably soiled pair of tactical underwear…

The vast majority of products with “tactical” in their title are anything but, and are nothing more than a marketing ploy making use of a word that sounds kinda cool.

If you like the tactical look, rock on, brother! But in my humble…ahem…opinion, the usefulness of guns/rifles that are truly tactical, or designed to look tactical, doesn’t carry over well to other applications such as hunting or shooting from the bench.

And don’t even get me started on the word “operator”…

Rant over.

Justin

There are those who probably never served, that want to play soldier and run through obstacles shooting imaginary bad guys. Getting back to the subject at hand, each style of rifle has its purpose. Testicle (tactical) rifles are tools to perform certain functions like bench rest or PRS
but aren’t much to look at. But you can’t beat a conventional gun with a beautiful wood stock that shoots good and looks good.

 

[L.Leon]

I never that the style isn't functional and it may be chosen it for it's practical attributes... but 100% it wouldn't be for any tacticool / wannabe aesthetics

Have never fallen for “tacticool” anything , it’s understood that there’s a point of diminishing returns… As for wannabes’? Don’t know any… It’s not a “vs” thing. For sporting purpose? Classic rifles are simply sweet, for quick manipulations and deployment? Sensibly equipped Tactical rigs rule… There are no classical long or short arms in the military. Simply speaking to practicality…

 

[Oakland FL Airgunner]

There are those who probably never served, that want to play soldier and run through obstacles shooting imaginary bad guys. Getting back to the subject at hand, each style of rifle has its purpose. Testicle (tactical) rifles are tools to perform certain functions like bench rest or PRS
but aren’t much to look at. But you can’t beat a conventional gun with a beautiful wood stock that shoots good and looks good.

Well said!

 

[L.Leon]

There are those who probably never served, that want to play soldier and run through obstacles shooting imaginary bad guys. Getting back to the subject at hand, each style of rifle has its purpose. Testicle (tactical) rifles are tools to perform certain functions like bench rest or PRS
but aren’t much to look at. But you can’t beat a conventional gun with a beautiful wood stock that shoots good and looks good.

So “those” who choose a tactical PCP are “playing at being soldiers“?… Thank you for your service… Because of men like you I get to shoot in my backyard. God Bless America…

 

[Sleestak]

Have never fallen for “tacticool” anything , it’s understood that there’s a point of diminishing returns… As for wannabes’? Don’t know any… It’s not a “vs” thing. For sporting purpose? Classic rifles are simply sweet, for quick manipulations and deployment? Sensibly equipped Tactical rigs rule… There are no classical long or short arms in the military. Simply speaking to practicality…

They are what they are. Stripped down shooting tools.

The term gets thrown around a lot too, probably too often

Wood furnitured airguns that have side levers even get called tactical for some reason..so it's definately a spectrum

 

[RickH]

I like both styles and have airguns and powder burners in both. I use them for different applications and have learned over the years what works best for me. As for the argument that tactical isn’t useful for hunting, well, yes it is. Just different.

Rick H.