The Future of Modular Pistols

[SC Shooter]

I think we will find that modulate weapons are the "next" generation.

 

[Hangingrock]

The reason the ARs modularity exploded in the civilian market is because Colt lost the rights to the tech package TCB

Not really. Every war since Viet-Nam has been fought with the M16 by the armed forces of this country. At some point thru generational usage it was going to be become popular with the public. Stoner had a modular weapons system that USMC expressed interest during Viet-Nam. There was a limited field test/evaluation in Viet-Nam. The weapons were problematic and withdrawn. ( Decades in the past Leatherneck magazine had an article on this subject) I understand there was limited usage by SEALS.

 

[boricua9mm]

I am not at all interested in a modular pistol... I guess if one pistol is all I could afford, maybe.. but I own dozens upon dozens so it would only be another craptastic poly gun.

I'm with ya. Honestly, for my purposes I'd do just fine with a full size or a compact for hearth and home, and a pocketable semi-auto while I'm around town. That's not to say I don't own any guns in between, its just that they're superfluous. A "subcompact" grip may hide easier, but it is also harder to grab and draw when you need to. Of course, to really take advantage of that frame size, they're gonna need to use the shorter magazine as well. Pocket carry isn't on the Military's mind, and the gun is still too big for that anyways. At that point, why bother? Adding in the potential disaster on the logistics side for the Military for grip frames and their associated mags, and I just don't see it adding as much value as is being discussed here.

Sadly, the next great advancements in handguns seem to be going ignored right about now. I think Steyr and Caracal are on the right path; there is a lot to gain by combining a lower bore axis with decreased slide mass and a lockup & recoil system to accommodate it all. The advantages afforded to the shooter far outweigh the ability to change its shoes before going out. I have absolutely no need for any more firearms, but if I buy anything else, it will be a pistol design that tips its hat to those specific areas.

 

[JohnBiltz]

The big three for the AR, IMO, was its been in service for so long, when the ban came in Colt backed out of production opening the market to small manufactures which spurred innovation, which face it, Colt is not known for; the ban increased the desire for them among consumers. People want what they can't have.

 

[JohnBiltz]

The thing about modularity it requires success. Its why I thought it was a lot more important to Sig to win the government contract than it was to Glock to win. For it to really take off you need the aftermarket guys to come in which means there has to be a lot of them out there. Without the numbers the market is not there to bring in the aftermarket guys. I also think the 10/22 is a much better example of this than the AR. The 320 could be for pistols what the 10/22 is for rifles. If I was Ruger I would be working on a .22 modular pistol yesterday.

 

[Zerodefect]

I doubt it. But more power to them.

Aftermarket stuff is key. That's why all of my serious stuff is Glock, 1911, AR15. Every singlle part is available aftermarket to make each of those 100% fitted to my specific needs.

 

[Nuclear]

Now that the military is buying them for the troops, the market will explode. People will want the same handgun the military uses (I don't know why, but they do), ex-military will want the guns they carried, you can buy one gun, and get different grip modules for much less than a new gun (not everybody can afford multiple guns) and if they bring out a 22lr trainer, that's another market. Different colors, with a rail, without a rail, single stack (why not?), so long as Sig doesn't get stupid and start suing people who come out with this stuff.

 

[Old Dog]

Sadly, the next great advancements in handguns seem to be going ignored right about now. I think Steyr and Caracal are on the right path; there is a lot to gain by combining a lower bore axis with decreased slide mass and a lockup & recoil system to accommodate it all. The advantages afforded to the shooter far outweigh the ability to change its shoes before going out. I have absolutely no need for any more firearms, but if I buy anything else, it will be a pistol design that tips its hat to those specific areas.

I'm curious as to why you believe this. The "great advancements" you speak of are basically minor engineering tweaks that may, for some shooters, only slightly reduce felt recoil -- which is pretty subjective anyway, and varies widely dependent on an individual's shooting experience and physical strength -- and haven't (as yet) demonstrated significant improvements in the hands of competition and combat shooters.

 

[boricua9mm]

I'm curious as to why you believe this. The "great advancements" you speak of are basically minor engineering tweaks that may, for some shooters, only slightly reduce felt recoil -- which is pretty subjective anyway, and varies widely dependent on an individual's shooting experience and physical strength -- and haven't (as yet) demonstrated significant improvements in the hands of competition and combat shooters.

For the sake of that part of the discussion, recoil and muzzle rise are two separate factors that significantly impact the shooters ability to put rounds on target very quickly. By and large, it is also one of the critical factors in the mass exodus away from .40 S&W.

I'm a SIG, HK and Glock guy. Shoot the P7 next to any classic P-Series SIG, for example, and it becomes crystal clear which one returns to target faster. The P7 series did indeed have its 15 seconds of fame in competition circuits for that very reason, and that's despite the fact that they get blazing hot in short order. The P7's gas retardation system has its drawbacks, but it's not the only way to skin the cat.

As to why we have not seen such designs take a foothold, that is directly related to how many companies have identified this issue and taken steps to address it. Right now there is only Steyr and Caracal, and possibly Hudson. Steyr has very minimal presence stateside, and Caracal recalled all of their pistols and has yet to come to market with its revision outside of a tradeshow booth. Close, but no cigar.

Some of the manufacturers are getting the hint and trying to address the issues of bore axis and slide mass, but not with the same focus as the two other companies. Interestingly enough, the Steyr and Caracal were both designed by the same guy (Wilhelm Bubits) who also was a Glock engineer previously.

 

[barnbwt]

As to why we have not seen such designs take a foothold, that is directly related to how many companies have identified this issue and taken steps to address it. Right now there is only Steyr and Caracal, and possibly Hudson.

Haven't heard of Strike One, Boberg, the R51, or the CCP? The R51, for instance, was quite possibly an enormous leap forward as far as recoil mitigation, but Remington's incompetence will forever tarnish faith in the system of operation (not unlike how the Rogak killed the Steyr GB, and possibly the P7 as well). The Strike One has a ridiculously low bore axis for a gun that still has a moving barrel, the Boberg's feed system damps a huge amount of recoil while employing a locking system that is incredibly strong for it size. The CCP is mostly warmed-over ideas from HK and therefore a valid concept, but again somewhat bungled by incompetent manufacture.

Don't get me started on the Hudson; there is nothing innovative about it at all. Most blatant gun hype-job I've seen since the R51 pre-release journalism. A SIG's locking system. A Glock's striker. A uselessly large & heavy slide/frame. A marginally lower bore axis that's about the same as any other striker gun. So innovative. Very telling that no one had even heard of these guys until halfway through SHOT, and then suddenly they were being mentioned everywhere despite no one having any experience with their products (or any reason to think Hudson could deliver on their promises). They have a really cool website that's nicer than any of the big gun manufacturers, though.

TCB

 

[boricua9mm]

Haven't heard of Strike One, Boberg, the R51, or the CCP?

Vaporware, end of story.

 

[jhb]

yes. this is the future of pistols. every other firearm and aftermarket maker will be scrambling to compete in this market in the next few years. its well overdue, considering the popularity of the ar15 and the money it brought into the firearm industry.

old dawgs will frown and huff and puff and try to get in the way like they did on plastic frame and striker fired pistols, but much like the general on horseback that frowned at planes flying overhead and said air superiority wouldnt go anywhere ..........he was wrong and so are they.

the good news is they will keep making steel and metal framed pistols and will if the market wants them. so its not really a loss of anything. rather this is just another expansion of options. nothing to frown on at all.

 

[oss117]

I look to see there being companies who start making just serial numbered trigger groups. Kind of like the lower receiver manufacturing.

Then other companies building all the components to go around that trigger.

Ok, I said "P320 trigger group", but this is really what I was thinking.

 

[jjones45]

Don't get me started on the Hudson; there is nothing innovative about it at all. Most blatant gun hype-job I've seen since the R51 pre-release journalism. A SIG's locking system. A Glock's striker. A uselessly large & heavy slide/frame. A marginally lower bore axis that's about the same as any other striker gun. So innovative. Very telling that no one had even heard of these guys until halfway through SHOT, and then suddenly they were being mentioned everywhere despite no one having any experience with their products (or any reason to think Hudson could deliver on their promises). They have a really cool website that's nicer than any of the big gun manufacturers, though.

TCB

Can we at least give this company a chance to fail? Is the Hudson the most hyped pistol ever? Maybe. It is however unique in the handgun world and deserves a chance to make its bones. It is heavy, but then again it's an all steel full size handgun. Full size 9mm 1911's have less capacity and have similar weight. Hudson could be a nice alternative to those who like striker fired systems but hate polymer guns since there are few all metal strikers available. If they offer full modularity who knows what different options Hudson can offer if they stick around and have the capital. Aluminum, steel and polymer frames is all sizes. I guess I'm just one who likes variety in the firearms world. The more variety of guns that work well, the better for the consumer. As far as the whole bore axis thing, that seems to be the first thing brought up about any gun these days and almost the most important thing to some people. In my opinion its getting ridiculous. I don't buy all the way into that bore axis argument, it's more the design of the firearm and recoil system that mitigates recoil and muzzle flip. There's a guy on YouTube that test 10 popular guns and ranks them by their measured bore axis. His results are kind of surprising as some guns that are not regarded as having a high bore axis are actually higher than some that are known to be high. Then he talks about the felt recoil and muzzle flip which doesn't always coincide with the lowest bore axis

 

[barnbwt]

Vaporware, end of story.

They never made any of those, huh? If you say so. The other innovative pistol, the Maxim, that's vaporware.

jjones, my point is that a) there have been other products (successful ones, even) that offer all the Hudson purports to and more, yet Hudson flim-flams about its unique and brand new capabilities, b) Hudson touts their innovation despite their product essentially being an all-metal Glock that wears 1911 grip panels, and c) the H9 suddenly burst onto the gun-news scene with no history, no experience, no product, no real 'plan' for ensuring quality production that I can tell from their releases ("it's gonna be great"), and yet almost every single writer immediately starts chiming in about how much of a compelling game-changer the pistol will be. Even though any kind of scrutiny beyond "that looks Robocop cool" strongly suggests the concept is a combination of the poorest traits of 1911s (size/weight) and Glocks (poorer trigger, less accuracy potential) sold for considerably more money than either of these or other new-production designs typically go for, from an outfit with no experience delivering satisfactory +1000$ gunsmithing, and has several very serious intrinsic design flaws like the ability to be holstered with anything on the accessory rail. Media-manipulation may be smart business, but is very off-putting to folks who look for that sort of thing as a warning sign.

I've read a couple reports already from SHOT that the trigger was lousy, despite the frequent ad-copy in many articles about a "1911-quality trigger, but with Glock reliability & ease of use). Anyone who knows how strikers work vs hammers, knows that a "1911-quality trigger" in a striker gun is nearly impossible to pull off safely. So right off the bat, I became skeptical, and it appears to be proving out in practice almost immediately. I like new designs, but I like honesty more; these guys peg the flim-flam meter for me (but that's obviously not the same as actually failing to deliver)

TCB

 

[barnbwt]

As far as the whole bore axis thing, that seems to be the first thing brought up about any gun these days and almost the most important thing to some people. In my opinion its getting ridiculous. I don't buy all the way into that bore axis argument, it's more the design of the firearm and recoil system that mitigates recoil and muzzle flip.

Eh, it's very real physics (contrary to what many claim, a lower bore does not 'drive your hand straight back harder,' it strikes your hand with equal force, but without an off-axis moment component that rotates the bore upward) but it's also not anything a human's hand can't deal with adequately in existing designs. It's also not that significant a factor compared to --as you said-- better or worse spring buffering arrangements. Slide mass is truly the more important aspect, which goes along with buffer system design. And last but not least, grip design; 1911's are okay I suppose, but grip panels really are an antiquated and less efficient means of getting a good, repeatable fit between gun and mitt compared to fully molded/machined designs with some range of adjustability.

So it's really only a factor in certain gun designs; smaller snubs or pocket guns where you have fewer fingers available to counteract that muzzle flip is the big one. That's why the Chiappa Rhino effectively reduces the pain of 357 and improves split times in the little 2" version, and why the Boberg was such a slick concept for making a pocket gun controllable (the fact Arne was able to fire a number of 460 Rowland rounds from a test-bed prototype gun that small was impressive; that it "wasn't all that bad" was astonishing)

 

[jjones45]

barnbwt
I never thought of the H9 as having a 1911 trigger because like you said it would be unsafe in a sa pistol that doesn't have at least one real manual safety, but more 1911 like in design since it is a straight back trigger. Yes Hudson is a new company that hasn't proved anything, but one has to start somewhere. Look at all the doubt glock got when they initially came out. I don't have a crystal ball to look into to see if the H9 will be a success, but to shoot it down before it's even distributed is unfair. I have to admit $1147 msrp is high for a no name firearm with absolutely no track record, but if these eventually work well I can see the value in it. It weighs about the same as a sig p229 at 34 ounces with all forged metal slide, barrel, and frame. You mention this essentially being a glock with 1911 grip panels. Is that so bad? I mean every company these days make a glock like pistol with better ergonomics and triggers right? Why not an all metal version with 1911 ergonomics? Sigs glock just won the mhs contract so there is demand for such things. This pistol is unique in the fact that no other metal framed striker fired gun has a 1911 grip, trigger, rsa in front of the trigger guard, and uses 5906 style magazines which are a proven magazine. Hudson mentions economic designs maybe in the future for the "$500 gun guys" and also the modularity possibilites in the future because of the serialized chassis system. People have to realize this is a true start up company. There will be growing pains and learning experiences. I have a feeling if this gun was offered at a msrp of like $599 it wouldn't draw so much skepticism. This gun more than anything has a lot of people excited and I can't figure out why so many people aren't thrilled about that. If you don't want one don't buy one, it's really that simple. If it fails then people can say I told you so, but until then let's give it a chance. No new gun company's would ever exist ever again if we don't give them a chance.

 

[kozak6]

You guys ever hear about those modular pistols? How about those those things anyways?

Consider the Ruger American pistol, which appears to be Ruger's response to the P320.

Despite having a seemingly similar serialized subframe, the pistol ...isn't so modular. Although the subframe may or may not be swappable (has anybody tried?), there are only two calibers in two sizes (with one piece grip inserts and magazine accessories to make up the difference), and each is sold separately with no option for a conversion kit.

This suggests that while complete modularity is a nice idea, perhaps it isn't that practical yet.

 

[vba]

Now that the military is buying them for the troops, the market will explode. People will want the same handgun the military uses (I don't know why, but they do), ex-military will want the guns they carried, you can buy one gun, and get different grip modules for much less than a new gun (not everybody can afford multiple guns) and if they bring out a 22lr trainer, that's another market. Different colors, with a rail, without a rail, single stack (why not?), so long as Sig doesn't get stupid and start suing people who come out with this stuff.

Wrong, as stated above, it is not simply a matter to buy different grip modules for much less than a new gun. One needs to buy a new slide, barrel and magazines to fit the new grip module. You might as well buy a new gun.

 

[pblanc]

Wrong, as stated above, it is not simply a matter to buy different grip modules for much less than a new gun. One needs to buy a new slide, barrel and magazines to fit the new grip module. You might as well buy a new gun.

No, you don't have to buy a new upper when you change grip modules on a P320. As an example, consider the P320 carry model which has a compact upper on a grip module that has the same length as that of the full-size model, and accepts full-size magazines. You can put a compact grip module, or a subcompact grip module on that upper. The full-size magazines will work with all three grip modules, the compacts will work with the subcompact grip module.

Grip modules and P320 magazines can be found for around $35 each if you shop around. So if you have a carry model P320, for an addition $140-150 you can have a pistol with three different magazine and grip lengths.

 

[vba]

pblanc;

Why in the world would one want to put a full size grip module on a compact upper? When I buy a compact model of gun it makes much more sense to me to to have a compact grip frame as the grip is the most difficult to conceal.

I realize the military doesn't need to conceal but what's the point of a compact slide on a full size frame for them?

 

[jjones45]

It's that commander size idea. Full frame with a compact shorter slide. The only gun I really like that setup with is a 1911 commander. Companies other than sig offer that same size however. A few that come to mind are the fns, p30, and xdm 3.8. I believe they all have compact slides similar in length to let's say a p320 compact and full size grips similar to the p320 full size. Sig also offers the p220 and p227 in that carry size. There is actually people who want that option. I'm in agreement with you on buying a compact upper with a compact grip on most occasions unless we are talking commanders lol. That's my favorite pistol

 

[pblanc]

pblanc;

Why in the world would one want to put a full size grip module on a compact upper? When I buy a compact model of gun it makes much more sense to me to to have a compact grip frame as the grip is the most difficult to conceal.

I realize the military doesn't need to conceal but what's the point of a compact slide on a full size frame for them?

The carry model of the P320 was introduced at the request of law enforcement agencies that do not carry a duty pistol concealed. Why go with the longer grip length? Greater magazine capacity and a more comfortable grip for those with larger hands.

Why not just go with the full-size P320 instead of the carry? The carry model is lighter and a bit quicker on the draw from holster. The compact really doesn't give away all that much in barrel length and sight radius compared to the full-size model, certainly not enough to significantly affect its function as a self-defense pistol. Some folks perceive the full-size P320 to be top-heavy. I am not one of them but the carry model would certainly be less top heavy for those folks. And the shorter slide and barrel makes the pistol more comfortable to wear holstered while sitting in a car.

Having a carry model P320 with a compact grip and magazines makes considerable sense for those individuals with larger hands who want the compact size for carry with the option of a larger, more comfortable grip length for range shooting.

 

[jhb]

Wrong, as stated above, it is not simply a matter to buy different grip modules for much less than a new gun. One needs to buy a new slide, barrel and magazines to fit the new grip module. You might as well buy a new gun.

as the business exists currently. this will change as manufacturers realize folks will buy slides mags and grip and keep their trigger assembly to have one basic shooting platform and various options. one of them will wake up to this and when they do the rest will follow suit.


the future will reduce these components to be much cheaper than buying another pistol.

this is an exciting change. we are seeing the future. more options and better pricing, how can we complain about that.