What's wrong with traditional diamond-shaped checkering?

[Echo40]

For the past twenty years or so, it seems like every new pistol features some sort of "New and Improved" texturing on the grips, but as I go through all of my pistols, feeling all the different sorts of textures they have to their grips, the one that always feels the best to me is the traditional diamond-shaped checkering. It just seems to have just the right amount of texture to get a solid purchase on without it causing skin irritation while shooting.

Which leaves me wondering; "What exactly was wrong with diamond-shaped checkering?" Why did it need to be improved upon? Granted, my palms are almost never oily, in fact, if anything they're a bit too dry for most of the year, so I don't have any issues keeping a hold on my firearms due to perspiration, nor do I work with any greasy/oily substances that might make my hands artificially more slippery. So I dunno, maybe if I were a mechanic or a fry cook or working at a Vasoline factory, then maybe I might need my firearms to have a grip texture similar to high grit sandpaper, but as it stands, traditional checkering seems sufficient.

Either way, I'm genuinely curious. Is diamond-shaped checkering somehow a bad thing? Because it seems like they don't even offer it on new firearms anymore and I don't understand why.

 

[Alk8944]

Mostly they just want to "Do it my way"!

The only thing about conventional checkering is that it can be very hard on clothing when carrying a concealed weapon, or in uniform. It can also be hard on your hands with heavy recoiling handguns like the magnums. Both of these can be remedied by lightly sanding the sharp points off of new checkering. This does not negatively impact the utility of checkering to enhance gripping. And many gun owners want something "different" for personal reasons, like fancy wood, synthetics, etc.

 

[Rpg]

I routinely have my new to me 1911's checkered pretty aggressively along the back and front strap. There's no reason to checker the stocks on a 1911: 1911's are properly gripped front to back, not side to side.

Not every one likes checkering as aggressive as I do. I've had folks complain that it's too sharp for them to shoot comfortably. I've been checkering my 1911's this way for 40+ years, so I'm used to it.

 

[Grayfox]

After a lifetime of working with my hands, they're hard and calloused. Sharp cut checking and I just don't get along. However, I do just fine with pressed checkering and some of my grips do have that. For the most part, I prefer smooth grips and that's what many of my guns have.
As for all the new types of checkering and grip materials, all I can say is meh.

 

[Pisgah]

They did it to drive their OCD customers crazy...

 

[M29since14]

Something "new" to sell, and probably more easily and more quickly generated with machines than conventional checkering. Like Rpg, I strongly prefer aggressive checkering on the front strap of .45s and I haven't bought a 1911 in many years that did not come from the factory with checkered front strap. (Conversely, I got no use for front serrations.)

I like conventional checkering, both for utility and looks. Fish scales and such, not so much.

 

[chief38]

Human nature, salesmanship, marketing are all reasons! When everyone buys bell-bottom pants, they change back to straight legged pants. When everyone ran out to buy wide ties, they switched back to narrow.

Someone always comes out with a product with a different slant so they can sell new product. Sometimes there is actually an improvement, but it's more about marketing then anything else.

 

[RetCapt]

I don't think there is anything wrong with traditional diamond cut checkered wood. I think that it is one of the several elements that make grips usable and suitable to different shooters.

I am talking DA revolvers here, but I will get to semi-auto pistols further on.

When I started in LE, DA revolver grips were wood. Often very attractive wood. The problem for an LEO was ruining grips by contact with car door pillars, doorways (especially the jail), furniture, counters, etc. You name it. I hated ruining my beautiful wood grips.

For department shoots, using 38+p and .357 magnum rounds, the checkering worked well. Rather than a revolver, especially a snub, rolling up in the hand, the traction of the grip allowed the wrist to ride up with the recoil of the revolver.

So far, so good. The majority of PPC matches in northern and central Calif were held in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Valleys (AKA: the Central Valley) in summer. Summer temperatures normally exceed 100 deg. Even in dry Calif, this is hot. Assuming approx 45 minutes on the line in a PPC match, one is going to sweat. The normal checkering did not work well for many. Many shooters put some sort of friction tape around the grip to get the desired purchase. Many shooters carried a rosin bag out on the line.

Somewhere in all this Rogers and Hogue introduced their composite grips. To begin with, these grips were more expendable, so no more ruin of our treasured (and now valuable) wood grips. The Rogers grips, to me, had the perfect configuration. The checkering was very subtle, but that was offset by the ideal shape. But I kept the rosin bag handy. The original nylon Hogue grip had a stippled pattern. To me, that stippled surface on nylon was and is the ideal DA revolver grip surface. Given how prolific these grips were on the firing line and for duty, many shooters agreed. When Rogers, or maybe Safariland by then, introduced the black version of the original grips, they went to a less slick version, which greatly enhanced grip traction.

Going now to semi-autos, other than the 1911 variants, most pistols, especially the newer ones, had composite grip panels which had checkering as part of the molding process. Even newer pistols have the grip panels as part of the polymer frame casting. On my third gen S&W 6906, I could have replaced the composite grip panels with wood, but I have never seen the need to do so. This grip, for me, is the most perfect grip I have ever experienced. Grips are a very personal and individual choice.

To (finally) answer the question, there is nothing wrong with traditional diamond cut checkering on wood, but for many of us, for practical (not aesthetic) purposes, there are better options.

 

[Hair Trigger]

Way back when, checkering was probably the quickest and most consistent way to get a rough surface for a good grip that was artfully done. It became the standard until laser engraving or CNC milling made almost any cut design you wanted possible. I like them both, but I don't care for the laser-cut checkering that only makes the cross-hatch pattern but doesn't cut the miniature diamonds. It's as bad as impressed checkering, where a die just pushes dimples into the wood in a checkered pattern. Really nice hand-cut checkering is an art form, and expensive to mass produce, probably a big reason you don't see it much any more except on really high-end guns.