So, I just went out with an 'old reliable' to thwack the 100-yard gong, and it occurred to me that some of my most-reliable shooters are also my 'ugliest'. Partly because they get used the most, and therfore scratched, dinged, and rusted the most. They also may sport more 'customizing' that is not done for beauty but more for function, and more for my particular quirks than anyone else's.
My most reliable grab-and-go rifles if there's a predator in the goat-pen:
Mauser 98 rebarreled in .308, cheapo Ramline fiberglass stock, spray-paint-over-Parkerizing, and Williams FP sight.
Marlin 1894css, with poorer-than-average wood-to-metal fit, worse-than-average rearward bolt-protrusion, and poor-man's 'beadblasting' done with fine-grit emory paper. Converted into 'Night Scout' by adding strange-looking light-mount, and non-traditional 'gizmo' sights.
Ruger 10/22, with tons of dings and scratches, a goofy-looking "flash-suppressor" (the crown is the one part of this gun NOT dinged up), an even goofier-looking Tapco stock, and a 'really stupid looking' (I've been told so, at least) 300-lumen flashlight under the forend that's even bigger and more awkward-looking than the one shown in this picture, PLUS a 'pistol laser' and Bushnell Holosight that together cost almost three times what the gun itself cost. Looks funny, but always hits what needs hit, day or night, time after time after time.
Just musing, but it's interesting how if I were going to 'show off my best guns' to someone, I could be showing them some real 'beaters'.
A better word would be "functional".
