View Single Post
 
Old 08-10-2017, 12:44 PM
Watchdog Watchdog is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 12,572
Likes: 21,054
Liked 32,463 Times in 7,773 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rednichols View Post
Second, consider that pistol makers give NO consideration to holsters when they develop a pistol...
I'm not being smart alecky here...but why should they? They're gun manufacturers. Holster makers design and craft their holsters to fit a particular gun, not vice versa. It's been that way since handguns came into being. I know that no one went to Sam Colt or Col. Scholfield and said, "Here...make me a revolver to fit this holster I just made."

Quote:
Originally Posted by rednichols View Post
...a very old case in point was the Smith M59 that had such a gigantic slide stop that it wouldn't allow pistols go into some holsters; and Smith declined to do anything about it until holsters started actually pushing the slide stops out of the pistol! Accessory makers, too -- trigger shoes were wider than the trigger guard and caused all kinds of discharges at the end of the last century.
This isn't clear to me. Are you saying the Smith M59 wouldn't fit holsters that were specifically designed for it, or that they wouldn't fit holsters that were already on the market and fitting similar pistols?

Quote:
Originally Posted by rednichols View Post
Fourth, consider that when guards began to be covered by holsters it was because of the 1911 suddenly being carried in Condition One (1970s); and attacks by BGs on holstered pistols became the norm. These pistols had/have external safeties and most holsters blocked the firing pins, except at a pistol range.
I'm sure you know more about holsters and holster R&D than I do, but I'm going to disagree wholeheartedly with that statement. There's no way from 1912 to 1970 that people weren't carrying their 1911s cocked and locked. The pistol was designed to be carried that way...no one in 1970 "suddenly" just had some sort of "Ah, ha!" moment and started carrying in Condition 1 and everyone else followed suit. And I don't believe that "attacks by bad guys" was the tipping point for holsters to start covering the trigger/trigger guard. Sorry, I just can't agree with that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rednichols View Post
Fifth, consider that when holster makers were confronted with the new Glock-action type pistols, they assumed that this "Big Bear" paradigm should be applied to these, too. Been that way ever since, to the present day.
Well, sorry again, but you've completely lost and confused me now, because I simply don't know what the hell the "Big Bear Paradigm" is. I've never heard that term or euphemism or analogy or whatever it is before.

I'll leave this for the more intelligent forum members to figure all this out and maybe report their findings. It's just too pretty a day here to sit shaking my head in front of an unfeeling computer monitor.
Reply With Quote
The Following 10 Users Like Post: