ken_mays

I’ve never really seen the point of buying a tiny concealable auto and then bulking it out with extended grips, or far worse IMO, pinky extensions. Maybe if that was your only gun and you had to make it comfortable for range sessions or weren’t going to carry it, but most of us have multiple pistols and are buying these subcompacts to do subcompact things. Makes more sense to carry an extra capacity mag as your reload.

Correct

I bought a Hudson H9 and liked it. I bought an Arsenal Strike One and liked it (for the most part). I'll pretty much buy any crazy pistol you put in front of me, if it's well-built and I like the design, so I'm down for this unless I learn something that makes it a no-go. Just from the photos, I don't see much not to like about the RIA.

The grip looks like a separate piece, much like a 2011 frame. If this takes off and doesn't Hudson itself into obscurity, I feel certain we'll see different grip materials offered.

I can verify a Burris Fastfire 3 does NOT line up with the screws on top of the slide. The hole spacing on the Burris is too wide. It seems as though some mini-RDS might fit, but I don't have any to try. My P17 has been typically reliable for a .22 auto, maybe 1 failure to eject out of 10 magazines. Generally the case will get extracted but wind up wedged somehow in the ejection port. I did have keyholing problems with Federal bulk pack, but I haven't seen it happen with anything else. The rifling does look shallow to me, so maybe it's a bullet diameter issue.

I bought the SIG P320 sights from Dawson Precision, black front and rear. Front sight height is .300". I had to buy the .330" tall front and file it down to height. I moved from the RMR to a Holosun 507C.

Learn how to remove tiny broken screws without destroying the surrounding surfaces

Quick addendum - existing HP holsters and most 1911 holster are going to be a no-go for this model because of the new takedown lever on the right side of the frame. I do have a couple of leather 1911 holsters that will fit it.

Hammer fired guns tend to have one advantage - they will usually light harder primers than striker fired guns. This is pretty much a non-issue if you only ever buy factory ammo, but if you reload, you're aware of the primer shortage. I've known folks to use small rifle primers when they couldn't get hold of small pistol, and you really need a hammer fired gun to reliably ignite those.

I think it was more about FN having a metal framed 9mm to compete with similar offerings from the competition. Their FN 509 based polymer striker guns leave something to be desired IMO and they weren't exactly blowing their competitors off the road. I've owned several and I would rather shoot the new High Power than any of them. I'm also glad they took the opportunity to redesign it from the ground up and modernize it.

I recently picked up a Springfield SA 35 as well as a Girsan MC P35 Ops. The SA 35 has minimal but important improvements such as a good trigger, good sights, and an extended safety lever you can easily get ahold of and manipulate. The grips aren't the prettiest but they are contoured (unlike the flat panel traditional BHP grips) and quite comfortable. The Girsan has more design updates, adding a beavertail, light rail, straight trigger (which I find far more comfortable than the curved standard trigger), good visible and adjustable sights, aggressive G10 grips, and a modestly flared magwell. But the SA 35 comes out ahead on the trigger, mine measures at 4.5 # and is pretty smooth out of the box except for a slight false break that will likely go away with more use. The sights are right on for me and it's easy to see it shoots tightly. The Girsan has a trigger measuring just over 7 # and was hitting a good bit left for me, so I had to crank the sights over. I haven't yet sat down and tried to wring the best groups I can out of it, but I am certain the 7# trigger isn't doing it any favors. I tend to push left when I have a hard trigger to work with, so I'm willing to bet it would shoot straighter for me once the trigger is lightened up. Both have some sharp edges, the Springfield more so. There's a real risk of cutting yourself on the ejection port edge, the safety lever is not as comfortable as it could be, and I'd love to see a mild carry melt done to it. Both guns cost me about $650. If I could own just one? Right now it'd be the SA 35 because it is more like a High Power and more pleasant to shoot.

I wanted to bump this thread now that the new FN High Power is starting to hit the streets. My FFL managed to track down a couple at his distributor and I bought the FDE version. Price was near $1100. Mine came with plastic FDE grip panels installed, a spare pair of OD green grips, two 17 round mags, and a carrying case. The first thing you notice picking it up is that it doesn't feel much like a High Power. The grip feels longer, front-to-back, and flatter on the sides than the traditional BHP which has a real wasp waist shape by comparison. The trigger is very nice, mine breaks right at 4 pounds. The reset is shorter and crisper than any BHP trigger I have. The sights are serrated black and are easy to acquire and align. The thumb safety is ambi and much like the later BHP safeties, except crisper snapping on or off ( though still too light IMO ) and easier to get underneath to activate. Shooting was pleasant. I put about 100 rounds through it in a short range session. I had about two or three instances of premature slide lock with rounds in the mag, and I realized I was inducing it by accidentally pressing down on the forward end of the slide stop with a thumbs-forward grip. If you shoot with high thumbs pressed against the frame, you'll have to remember not to do it with this gun (or the front of the slide stop could be trimmed to remove the largely useless forward end, or replaced with an aftermarket part). Function was good otherwise and recoil was softer than in a traditional BHP. Accuracy was excellent, every bit as good as any other BHP I ever owned, and sights were very close to right on for my 124gr handloads. Hammer bite was nonexistent and not even close to happening from what I could tell, due to the rather small hammer spur and overall grip shape. Rapid reloads are a bit easier than on traditional BHPs because the new magazine design isn't as square as the old magazines. It's closer to a Beretta 92 or SIG P226 in shape. In fact, Beretta 92 mags will fit very nicely in the HP but won't lock in. I'm pleased with the redesign and look forward to spending a lot more time at the range with this one.

From what I've seen and heard, the barrel fit isn't as good as Staccato/STI. There isn't an optic plate available for any but the little-loved Springfield Hex optics at this point, but it's just a matter of time until CHPW or someone offers one. I also have noticed owners have had to do some basic tweaking and adjustment of things like extractor tension, but honestly I expect to have to do that on Springfield 1911s anyway, they are a soup sandwich out of the box for things like that (especially 9mm). The triggers on the ones I've handled have been nothing special, but again that's easily fixed. I'm definitely interested in owning one, but I'll wait till I can pick one up secondhand. I already have enough quality 2011s that I'm in no rush to pay full retail.

https://shootersconnectionstore.com/Gun-Parts/1911-2011-Pistols/Trigger-Group/Triggers

I've owned the P365 for a few years and really liked it for pocket carry. The grip was just the right size to get a decent 3-finger grip and it shot quite well for me. I picked up a Hellcat not long after they had hit shelves. Handling and shooting it, it was not appreciably visibly larger than the P365 but it was just a little too big in every dimension. The slide was too tall, the grip just a hair too fat. Bottom line, larger than I could do for pocket carry. And if I'm going to wear a belt holster, I have a dozen pistols I like better for that anyway. Compared to the P365, I thought the trigger reach was a bit excessive, as was the recoil. I liked the sights, they were quick to pick up and I could shoot it as accurately as the P365. However, it was not for me and I moved it along quickly. It would be a strong contender if you're going to holster it and want something as small as possible.

I owned one for a few years and recently sold it. I had a few minor complaints: it was oversprung for the ammo I was using, and it shot much too high with the iron sight installed. I think they might ship with two different spring weights now but at the time, I didn’t want to shoot it badly enough to go chase one down. The rear sight was a nonissue for me because I used a RDS instead. The holster they included was junk and never worked right for me. I also didn’t care for the trigger shape was it tended to cause my finger to drag along the bottom of the guard. But all that aside, I think they are a good value and are a quality product.

Since the pin locations look identical to the polymer version, I am assuming they still use the same steel breech block and rear guide block the original version uses.

How accurate are those, generally? I have a Daisy Powerline and can't routinely hit anything much past 10 yards with BBs.

This is what I received when I ordered dies and bullets from Ammo Supply Warehouse. It's a place to start, at least, with a common powder. Disclosure: I never got around to loading any .22 TCM with this combo.

I'm glad S&W is experimenting with metal frames again, but personally I see this as a bit of a step backward. I'm not sold on the reasons for replacing a light, non-corrosive, impact resistant polymer frame with a marginally lighter, far more expensive frame that is subject to cumulative stress fatigue and finish wear. I'd rather see them come up with a steel frame, which would hold up to repeated stress better than aluminum and provide a real recoil reduction benefit.

My opinion is that what HK offers is essentially an overbuilt handgun in any given caliber that will keep working long after you've lost interest in shooting it. More than many other brands, they are designed to have a high mean time between failures and minimal parts breakage. The USP, P30 and HK45 designs in particular have held up to insane round counts. They are good "take them to war" pistols for that reason. However, for standard recreational or even competitive shooters, other platforms are more desirable for other reasons (ergonomics, size, etc.) I've owned a fair number of HKs and sold many of them. Some I still keep and take them out from time to time. The USPs in particular feel rather clunky and unrefined while shooting due to their size and triggers, compared to other models like the S&W M&P, Walther PPQ/PDP, or even Glocks. The HK VP9 and possibly the P30 series are a little more in line with modern designs but still feel a bit large for what they are. They have all been uniformly quite accurate and dependable.

DM incoming, will take it

I've built my own, 2x6 for the frame and legs and 2x4s for the top, and then bought a Formica countertop to put over the top of it all.

Nice Firestar, you don't often see the box. The finish is actually a nickel finish that they called "Starvel".

Heckuva deal with the 507 included!