quote:

Originally posted by caneau:
Heck, I think we witnessed an entire caliber being killed off with .40 S&W.

Speak for yourself. I just bought a G22. It will fit with a large number of .40 Glocks, Berettas, Kahrs, Sigs, Walthers, and others in my safes. Killed off? Hardly.

quote:

Originally posted by RX-79G:
For all the action in the industry, it involves an amazing amount of sameness.

Why is it impossible to buy a Kahr sized DA/SA pistol?

Why are highly accurate pistols relegated to customs and Euro weirdness?

Why aren't there more guns with changeable trigger systems like DA/LEM?

Where are all the cool tiny guns? Doesn't everyone want a .22 LR Walther TPH if the price was reasonable? Or a DA micro revolver?


I'm personally moving backward in time - those S&W 39s are starting to look pretty sweet.

With regards to your first question, there are (P239, XDe), but their space efficiency is horrible. The need for a hammer axle that must be placed away from the firing pin's axis really runs a number on how much grip can the pistol have before becoming a 1911 in size. Striker fired designs can have a coaxial striker spring, which really cuts down on space usage.

But that also bleeds into the answers (in my opinion) to your other questions: the market didn't want it enough. DA/SA doesn't have the space efficieny to make an awesome carry gun for the market, at least not when compared to striker fired pistols that already dominate the small CCW market (and have IMO, on and off since the Colt 1903 pocket hammerless).

Continuing down the list, I believe modern pistols are already mechanically more accurate than most shooters. I would bet a standard Glock 19 is more accurate than 100% of shooters out there (the 100% figure being accurate to 3 sig figs, or whatever similar definition that exists within statistical analysis). A more mechanically accurate pistol isn't always necessary, since simply lightening the trigger vastly improves most shooters' perceived accuracy. After all, a light trigger can cover up bad shooting habits that are otherwise exposed by heavier trigger pulls. That being said, improved ergonomics may always help in this regard, but will probably go unnoticed, since "feels good in the hand at the gun store" and "ergonomically optimal for precision shooting under _____________ condition" may well be two very different things.

In my opinion, a changeable trigger mechanism is of questionable use. While supported by HK for certain pistols, it isn't an easy job to do for many people. It is not as easy as, say, changing the upper on an AR15. Furthermore, it appears most of these available conversion types go between DA/SA and some form of DAO (HK, SIG) or SAO (CZ). Considering DAO has few remaining fans, and the attempts to augment it have largely been bandaids against the popularity of striker fired pistols, I suspect there aren't many consumers looking for such conversions. Between DA/SA and SAO may find a few takers, but I believe people who are looking for SAO (and by extension, Cocked and Locked) will inevitably gravitate towards one of the greatest SAO triggers extant: the 1911.

As for tiny 22s, I can think of derringers, revolvers (NAA SAO types come to mind, LCR22 exists, but has a heavy trigger to ignite rimfire primers - this part is probably why there are fewer small DA 22 revolvers), semi autos (Beretta 21/mouse guns/tip ups, though they aren't teeny tiny, neither is the 92fs; Browning 1911-22 compact, falls under the same as the Beretta; and most of the early 2000s "tactical" style 22s [Ruger SR22, Walther P22, MP22 Compact] are indeed smaller versions of their 9mm centerfire inspirations). Those aren't going to fit in a shirt pocket, of course.


If you were asking w.r.t. new designs coming onto the market, I probably misinterpreted your question. I do not know the answer to that. My best guess is as it was earlier: they probably aren't all that popular. Not when everyone's bestselling guns are AR15s and 380/9mm single
/staggered stack, striker fired polymer pistols.

Only new handgun that I would be interested in-the 7.5 FK Brno

Im not really looking for something new or exciting around the next corner when it comes to the gun industry. I honestly don't know what could really come out as the next best thing since white bread, sex and haircuts when it comes to guns or optics. Tritium, ACOG, RMR/Red-dots, kydex, night vision / thermal... what else could there be?


lighter, smaller, cheaper...
Outside of that, I really can't think of anything else.

Don't tell me that a gun that shoots itself or a guided bullet is going to be "a thing", that would just take the fun out of all of this!

A "new and improved" caliber? Don't we have enough of them?

However, until the day comes where we all go "WOW!", I'll toss some money aside for the few toys on my "want" list (when the next batch of $500-$700 H&K P-7s come in from Germany or when those crates of Gov'mt 1911's finally hit the market). I'll stick to buying a few cases of ammo and trying to improve my skills with the toys I have.

There's a ton of people out there trying to re-invent the wheel or build a better mousetrap when it comes to this industry. Some are successful, take for instance Magpul and the products that they are putting out. Great company & great products! However, there's a bunch out there that suck. How many ways can you put magazines on a plate carrier? Leather or Kydex?

I'll agree that the industry is stagnant now, but again, until that "WOW" comes along, I'll keep trying to get smaller groups a little quicker.

quote:

Originally posted by Prefontaine:
This is a golden age of firearms to me, so hard to complain. So many things out, a plethora. Pick, and choose. If you have everything you need or want, then shoot more.

This.

This is a golden age, and you have some luxury in buying since we got favorable election result. Shoot and enjoy.

I would add that there are several new rifles out that are accurate and inexpensive...maybe not exiting but lots of fun to shoot.

Go burn some powder!

The use of polymer has been one of the few major groundbreaking changes in the last century. The rest has been small incremental changes enhanced by marketing.
Projectile design has been another actual improvement but that's not all that exciting to look at.
The laws of physics and other design constraints have been the limiting factors.

There are many areas where improvement can happen that aren't in the world of scifi.

1) Recoil mitigation -- look at what Kriss did and see if something similar is possible with handguns. There has to be a better way to limit muzzle flip

2) Better out of the box triggers. In 100 years, why is the 1911 still king? Why does anything have more than a 5 lbs pull weight or any sort of stacking or grit? Why is having an acceptable trigger pull a "premium"? Why does my 50 year old I-Frame have a better trigger pull than the best new revolvers on the market?

3) Better and more integrated sights and lights. Why do these look and feel like an afterthought on nearly every gun?

4) Even if a design is interesting, I hesitate buy it immediately because I know it will have a factory recall within the first year or two. At least with a Glock, I think they have most of the kinks worked out.

There is no such thing as product maturity. It's just another word for complacency. The rifle market was mature until about 2003 when everyone and their brother decided the AR-15 was cool again.

And the FK BRNO is just another piece of vaporware until I see one at a gun store or show.

quote:

Originally posted by glow:



With regards to your first question, there are (P239, XDe), but their space efficiency is horrible. The need for a hammer axle that must be placed away from the firing pin's axis really runs a number on how much grip can the pistol have before becoming a 1911 in size. Striker fired designs can have a coaxial striker spring, which really cuts down on space usage.

Your post reads like you have never heard of a DA/SA striker gun, or have never seen a small gun with a hammer, like the Astra Cub, Beretta 21 or Walther PPK.

Current gun trends do not erase 100 years of firearms history.

Just get a CZ. Then, before you know it, you'll own 8 CZ's.

quote:

Originally posted by caneau:
In the last 5 years or so, I've gotten very bored with the handgun industry.

Shoot more, worry about the firearms industry less. Train, practice, compete, push your limits, consume mortgage payments worth of ammo, wear out a barrel or three.

Then you won't be bored.

Innovation doesn't happen on a set schedule. Add to that the fact that sometimes innovative ideas exceed the capacity of technology to make it actually come alive.

I think we are in the Golden Age of guns.

quote:

Originally posted by fritz:

quote:

Originally posted by caneau:
In the last 5 years or so, I've gotten very bored with the handgun industry.

Shoot more, worry about the firearms industry less. Train, practice, compete, push your limits, consume mortgage payments worth of ammo, wear out a barrel or three.

Then you won't be bored.

Been there and done that. Actually that's how I got bored. I shot so many different guns that they all just seemed very similar...because they were. A box or two of ammo in, and it's just another striker fired polymer gun. Or just another 1911.

I've shot plenty of CZs too. A Shadow might be in my future because they are really neat guns. Far more interesting than the Legion. But it is a 40 year old design at its heart.

At the end of the day, I think what's lacking is concepts. Just like Ford or BMW releases a concept of what is "to be" in a decade. The ideas might seem strange or half baked but a lot of ideas in production today. Just the other day I saw a 2011 Ford Mustang/Taurus concept drawing that looked just like a 2 door Tesla. It was wild 6 years ago. It would look ordinary today. The firearm industry seems to be lacking that type of thinking and innovation.

I would hate to think this is the golden age. The thought that this is as good as it gets is disappointing.

quote:

Originally posted by motorheadjohn:

quote:

Originally posted by Prefontaine:
This is a golden age of firearms to me, so hard to complain. So many things out, a plethora. Pick, and choose. If you have everything you need or want, then shoot more.

This.

This is a golden age, and you have some luxury in buying since we got favorable election result. Shoot and enjoy.

I would add that there are several new rifles out that are accurate and inexpensive...maybe not exiting but lots of fun to shoot.

Go burn some powder!

Agreed. Happens from time to time in art, literature, whatever.

And when it happens, it usually boils down to de gustibus non disputandum. Personal choice starts to win out.

Do I like Michelangelo or Leonardo? Both are masters, but one suits me more.

BCM AR or DD AR? AR or SCAR? Glock or HK?

I will agree with the OP that I am starting to experience some ennui with the market offerings (at least within my budget) and am really starting to move to training over acquisition of new toys.

quote:

Originally posted by RX-79G:

quote:

Originally posted by glow:



With regards to your first question, there are (P239, XDe), but their space efficiency is horrible. The need for a hammer axle that must be placed away from the firing pin's axis really runs a number on how much grip can the pistol have before becoming a 1911 in size. Striker fired designs can have a coaxial striker spring, which really cuts down on space usage.

Your post reads like you have never heard of a DA/SA striker gun, or have never seen a small gun with a hammer, like the Astra Cub, Beretta 21 or Walther PPK.

Current gun trends do not erase 100 years of firearms history.

There are exactly zero DA/SA striker designs in history. At least amongst the crowd of production guns. Some may be willing to count the Walther P99 and its licensed clones, but I have owned one, and it always defaults to a third mode, "AS." So it is correctly AS/DA/SA.

As for "100 years of firearms history," whatever that is directed at, I will leave you with the Kahr MK9. Just as a reminder, you have to include the whole pistol in the measurement.

BuddyChryst pretty much covered it. Until ammunition changes in a profound way, weapons will stay basically as they have been for 150 years. Remember, the flintlock was cutting edge technology for 200 years. It took the invention of self contained cartridges to advance gun design.

quote:

Originally posted by glow:
There are exactly zero DA/SA striker designs in history. At least amongst the crowd of production guns. Some may be willing to count the Walther P99 and its licensed clones, but I have owned one, and it always defaults to a third mode, "AS." So it is correctly AS/DA/SA.

As for "100 years of firearms history," whatever that is directed at, I will leave you with the Kahr MK9. Just as a reminder, you have to include the whole pistol in the measurement.

Walther calls the P99 a traditional DA/SA action. The AS isn't a carry mode, it is a long take up on the single action trigger.

The CZ-110 was also DA/SA striker fired.


The Kahr is not DA/SA at all.

The 100 years refers to all of the firearms in history that demonstrate that hammers do not prevent guns from being small. All of the smallest pocket pistols right now have hammers. P32, Seecamp, Beretta 950, etc.

Just a small point:

"Innovate" doesn't always have to mean new and better. A classy rearrangement of old technology is perfectly legit and very welcome if done nicely. The Beretta M9A3 or the Seecamp aren't radical new firearms - they are newer versions of tested designs with additional common features. For years people wanted a single stack Glock, and Glock made that happen. I just would like to see more of that sort of obvious conceptual plug and play go on.

quote:

Originally posted by Delta-3:
BuddyChryst pretty much covered it. Until ammunition changes in a profound way, weapons will stay basically as they have been for 150 years. Remember, the flintlock was cutting edge technology for 200 years. It took the invention of self contained cartridges to advance gun design.

Then again, in the 1960's there was the MBA Gyrojet pistol. Revolutionary ammo that were really small rockets. Near useless at short defensive ranges (velocity) and horribly inaccurate as well as unreliable. What is there not to like? Like a lot of innovations (good & bad) it was DOA when it hit the market. Unfortunately, a profound flop.

I remember when it was introduced. I've always wondered what would have happened had it been developed further. Given the fact it was rocket ammo, it would seem the recoil characteristics would be minimal out of the barrel. Unlike conventional ammo, it reached full velocity after accelerating well beyond the barrel.

Excerpt:
"Each rocket "motor" burned for about one tenth of a second; maximum velocity of about 380 meters per second (~1250 fps) was achieved at ranges about 20 meters from muzzle, while muzzle velocity was as low as 30 meters per second (~100 fps)."

Link:
http://modernfirearms.net/hand...g/usa/gyrojet-e.html

Bottom line on all this stuff is you have to make money to stay in business. The firearms development graveyards are filled with companies that had good or interesting ideas that never made it. Growing up in the fifties and sixties, I saw lots of firearms and autos that fell by the wayside. Back then, there was real product differentiation. Then, over the decades, the products became homogenized. Sad, but true.

On the other hand, don't fall back too much into the Good Old Days nostalgia. I was heavy into S&W revolvers when I started shooting. That was the Bangor Punta era. QC sucked. Got tired of sending the damn things back to warranty stations - took months. Bought a ton of tools from Brownell's and several gunsmithing books (no Internet then). Taught myself how to do everything, except machining.

End of soliloquy.

Sometimes I think we get spoiled living in the age of high tech, where new innovation has often been measured in months and even weeks. But even there things slow down. But too often we kind of expect change in the tech world to happen quickly, and now that mentality filters into other aspects of our lives.

In this op/ed of one I think what will truly innovate the gun world is advancements in propellants more than anything else. Smokeless powder has been the "IT" medium for well over a century; figuring out a new means of getting that projectile down range, that's where the 'next' development should be. Everything else is just baby steps and rehashing of the what's already happened in the past.

Alas, I doubt that the handheld CCW rail gun will come be in my lifetime...