SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  SIG Pistols    Hudson H9
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Hudson H9 Login/Join 
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by sigspecops:
It's gonna be a hard sell at that price.


That is what people said about 'custom glocks' produced by glock smiths.
 
Posts: 6633 | Location: Virginia | Registered: December 23, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
E tan e epi tas
Picture of cslinger
posted Hide Post
All steel. New engineering. I personally think the price is pretty fair. I mean assuming it is a quality reliable piece of work.


"Guns are tools. The only weapon ever created was man."
 
Posts: 7631 | Location: On the water | Registered: July 25, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Rustpot
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by DSgrouse:
quote:
Originally posted by sigspecops:
It's gonna be a hard sell at that price.


That is what people said about 'custom glocks' produced by glock smiths.

Considering how well Legions, Wilson 92s, and other $1,000+ guns sell I think it's fair.

If it works and has the trigger we're hoping for they'll sell enough. I don't think they're looking to outsell plastic service pistols, but recoup R&D and build a brand. 1,000 guns at $1,000 is a million bucks. I think they might sell a bit more than that.

How many new metal guns have we seen in the last 5 years? And how many of those were just chops and variations on existing designs (Anything Sig makes, new 1911's), and how many that are left actually worked (R51, Kimber Solo)? I can only think of the Boberg, and that thing was interesting if nothing else.
 
Posts: 6029 | Location: Romeo, MI | Registered: January 03, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Fighting the good fight
Picture of RogueJSK
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Dakor:
I don't believe the frame is steel; rather its aluminum with a steel slide.


Where have you seen that the frame is aluminum?

Per the Hudson Mfg. website (bold emphasis mine): "Taking cues from its legendary predecessors, the Hudson H9 does not stray from its roots. From its steel frame to its straight-pull trigger to its striker-fired design, the H9 will feel instantly familiar with any firearms enthusiasts."
 
Posts: 32430 | Location: Northwest Arkansas | Registered: January 06, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Fighting the good fight
Picture of RogueJSK
posted Hide Post
A few more tidbits from today's press release by Hudson: http://www.shootingwire.com/story/392922

-Black nitride finish
-There's a brief mention of a "stainless steel insert chassis", but it doesn't elaborate on that. (P320-style modularity, perhaps? Or maybe a partly aluminum frame with steel inserts?)
-The standard trigger with the Glock-style trigger safety lever can be swapped out for an optional solid trigger, to make it even more like a 1911 trigger.
 
Posts: 32430 | Location: Northwest Arkansas | Registered: January 06, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Honky Lips
Picture of FenderBender
posted Hide Post
interesting.

I want to see it in 10mm Big Grin
 
Posts: 8144 | Registered: July 24, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by DMF:
quote:
Originally posted by Dusty78:
. . . just looks silly.
Looks is a poor way to judge a tool.

Remember, more than 30 years ago another company created a pistol many people thought (and many still do think it) looked silly, or even downright ugly, and it was/is a huge success.


You must mean CZ right? Big Grin
 
Posts: 269 | Registered: August 12, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Res ipsa loquitur
Picture of BB61
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by mhughes:
Am I wrong or is that a very different barrel profile/lockup as well


That's what I was thinking. It reminded me of a P7.


__________________________

 
Posts: 12436 | Registered: October 13, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Honky Lips
Picture of FenderBender
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Tompow:
quote:
Originally posted by DMF:
quote:
Originally posted by Dusty78:
. . . just looks silly.
Looks is a poor way to judge a tool.

Remember, more than 30 years ago another company created a pistol many people thought (and many still do think it) looked silly, or even downright ugly, and it was/is a huge success.


You must mean CZ right? Big Grin


75 was 42 years ago Wink
 
Posts: 8144 | Registered: July 24, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
An investment in knowledge
pays the best interest
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by RogueJSK:
quote:
Originally posted by Dakor:
I don't believe the frame is steel; rather its aluminum with a steel slide.


Where have you seen that the frame is aluminum?

Per the Hudson Mfg. website (bold emphasis mine): "Taking cues from its legendary predecessors, the Hudson H9 does not stray from its roots. From its steel frame to its straight-pull trigger to its striker-fired design, the H9 will feel instantly familiar with any firearms enthusiasts."


Per your other post, I believe a steel chassis may have been referenced in an article or their video, so I was assuming (being all metal) the frame would be Al... would be really freakin' cool if it were Ti but not likely at their price point Cool
 
Posts: 3362 | Location: Mid-Atlantic | Registered: December 27, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member!
posted Hide Post
The looks are growing on me, but the biggest problem in my head is going to be the weight. Being so beefy, that thing looks like it has a lot more metal than a 1911 and an all-steel 1911 is not lightweight. Who wants to carry around all that weight for a pistol in 9mm? Look at the amount of metal around the grip straps and bottom. Those front divot cuts on top and below the checking look 1/4 inch deep, which means the front strap is at least that thick in metal. And take a look at the bottom of the trigger guard. It's as thick as a Glock, except made of steel!

I could be completely wrong of course, but it sure "looks" heavy. Heck it makes the old S&W's look svelte. Probably awesome to shoot, but not exactly a carry-all-day piece.
 
Posts: 4340 | Location: Boise, ID USA | Registered: February 14, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
34 oz iirc
 
Posts: 6633 | Location: Virginia | Registered: December 23, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Fighting the good fight
Picture of RogueJSK
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by DSgrouse:
34 oz iirc


Correct. (That's the unloaded weight.)

It's the exact same weight as a P226, or a couple ounces lighter than a Commander 1911.

That's not overly heavy. Balance is a different factor, though...
 
Posts: 32430 | Location: Northwest Arkansas | Registered: January 06, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Who said anything about carrying it?

This would strictly be a range toy for me, and yes I think a big old P226 is too big for carrying also.
 
Posts: 472 | Location: Montgomery County, PA | Registered: December 17, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
I carry a 226 elite sao with mec gar 18+2.....
Or a full size 1911
Or a vbob
Hk usp 40/45 or 9 tac.
This will not be any different.
 
Posts: 6633 | Location: Virginia | Registered: December 23, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Speling Champ
posted Hide Post
I'm intrigued by this design. That frame captured recoil spring and very low bore axis should make this a very controllable pistol.

The biggest mistake Chiappa made with their Rhino line revolvers was failure to take advantage of their innovative low bore/bottom cylinder barrel design and move into true big bore calibers. A Rhino in .44 mag would have been the shit and may have given Chiappa a real shot at a strong entry into the guide gun market.

I see the potential in this Hudson semi auto in the same way. Like someone else said earlier-bring on the 10mm! The Glock 20 with hot Double Tap or BuffaloBore loads still has some fierce recoil but how more more controllable would those loads be in a pistol like the H9 (or the new Russian PL-14) with such a low bore design?

If this concept proves out this design may be as revolutionary to the pistol world as the introduction of polymer.
 
Posts: 1603 | Location: Utah | Registered: July 06, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
An investment in knowledge
pays the best interest
posted Hide Post
OcCurt, I respectfully disagree. 357 magnums in my Chiapa are painful because the recoil goes straight into my palm/wrist. 38's hummm nicely in that design though.
I think with the big bores one might want some of the energy dissipated by torque. The heavy frame can tame recoil simply through inertia but that doesn't require an unconventional design like the H9.
 
Posts: 3362 | Location: Mid-Atlantic | Registered: December 27, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by RogueJSK:
quote:
Originally posted by DSgrouse:
34 oz iirc


Correct. (That's the unloaded weight.)

It's the exact same weight as a P226, or a couple ounces lighter than a Commander 1911.

That's not overly heavy. Balance is a different factor, though...


Strange, MY Commander weighs 27 oz. Perhaps you are speaking of a Combat Commander.
 
Posts: 3278 | Location: Florence, Alabama, USA | Registered: July 05, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Fighting the good fight
Picture of RogueJSK
posted Hide Post
Yes, the steel-framed Combat Commander, not the alloy-framed Lightweight Commander.
 
Posts: 32430 | Location: Northwest Arkansas | Registered: January 06, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Rail-less
and
Tail-less
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by sigspecops:
It's gonna be a hard sell at that price.


I've paid more for pocket guns. $1000 for a gun is not that crazy anymore.


_______________________________________________
Use thumb-size bullets to create fist-size holes.
 
Posts: 13190 | Location: Charlotte, NC | Registered: May 07, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8  
 

SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  SIG Pistols    Hudson H9

© SIGforum 2024