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.

All steel. New engineering. I personally think the price is pretty fair. I mean assuming it is a quality reliable piece of work.

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.

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."

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.

interesting.

I want to see it in 10mm

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?

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.

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?

75 was 42 years ago

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

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.

34 oz iirc

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...

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Yes, the steel-framed Combat Commander, not the alloy-framed Lightweight Commander.

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.