Heckler & Koch VP9 Review
- Thread starter Mrgunsngear
- Start date
I am saying HK did not insert itself with the modern striker fire when Glock was taking off yet they could have if they wanted to 25 years ago. I dont know whats worse,....The fact that HK had the technology to go head to head with Glock and didnt or that they didnt push a more USP style striker fire for police/military after Glock paved the way and their business strategy didn't think it was still viable? Either way HK dropped the ball on alot of levels. The HK P7, while being a innovative gun, is a white elephant compared to a Glock and the modern striker fire. The HK P7, while being a innovative gun, is a white elephant compared to a Glock simply because it was expensive, low capacity, and low volume . Practically a footnote in the world of police and military handguns. Yet, Glock continued to dominate the striker fire industry for decades when HK was clearly pushing the USP DA/SA line and resting on their military contracts. HK is inserting the VP9 to fill a huge untapped gap in the handgun industry. Its clear as day that HK is trying to go after the civilian market to raise revenue.
HK ignored the wave of the polymer striker fire future for 32 years. Thats has to be THE epic example of a firearm manufacture still in operation of being late to the party
Last edited:
That seems a tad drastic. It was very popular in Europe for a while when single stack pistols were the norm for plain clothes officers. I think it deserves a mention.
Ehh, going all the way back to 1982? It took a Glock a while to build that reputation and for polymer pistols to really gain that foothold in the US. Late to the party absolutely. 32 years so? Not sure. S&W didn't get the M&P out until 2005 and has made tremendous gains in the market.
What HK did was ignore a niche market: US police and civilians. While striker guns are getting inroads to the military, the companies that build serious military hardware: HK, Beretta, Sig and FN - have stuck largely to hammers to satisfy large government contracts.
Overall, you are grossly overstating the difficulty of making something Glock-like. Glock did it with no experience, but HK is going to struggle? That's ridiculous. Did HK have a hard time when they first started into recoil and gas driven actions after only making delayed blowback before? Nope.
This isn't amateur hour, like over at S&W. And these guns are simple. We're not talking about fusion reactors. HK is an expert in all the fundamentals of firearms production.
Overall, you are grossly overstating the difficulty of making something Glock-like. Glock did it with no experience, but HK is going to struggle? That's ridiculous. Did HK have a hard time when they first started into recoil and gas driven actions after only making delayed blowback before? Nope.
This isn't amateur hour, like over at S&W. And these guns are simple. We're not talking about fusion reactors. HK is an expert in all the fundamentals of firearms production.
And you don't find it odd the inventor of the striker fire isn't a dominating force in such a popular segment,me specially since its such a simple gun design to manufacture??? HK had every advantage to be a leader in the field. HK should have had a Glock counter part way before S&W and Springfield just to mention a few. Its funny how HK is now toted as the inventor of the striker fire but gets a free pass from their obvious absence with a competitive model for the last 15 years.
Last edited:
I think HK set them self up in a position that their VP9 HAS to be a huge run away success. I dont think that can even happen given the field is already saturated and the market is now so competitive. This doesn't mean the VP9 isn't a great gun but its not a original design and doesn't bring anything that new to the field that wasn't already there.
15 years ago when it was obvious the competitively priced striker fire was where the police market was going was the time for the debut of the VP9. Less completion and HK could have developed their own strong hold.
I am just kinda ****** as a HK fan that they didn't make a move in this market 15 years ago when they could have become a dominating force instead of a "follow the trend" player.
15 years ago when it was obvious the competitively priced striker fire was where the police market was going was the time for the debut of the VP9. Less completion and HK could have developed their own strong hold.
I am just kinda ****** as a HK fan that they didn't make a move in this market 15 years ago when they could have become a dominating force instead of a "follow the trend" player.
Last edited:
wild cat mccane
New member
You know what knocks my socks off?
People are comparing this new 2014 gun to the P99.
P99 is 15 years old and is competing against a new HK. Despite what new PPQ'ers are saying, the P99 does everything that PPQ does.
That is incredible on so many levels. Either everyone missed the boat on the Walther quality or this VP9 is one hunk of crap.
People are comparing this new 2014 gun to the P99.
P99 is 15 years old and is competing against a new HK. Despite what new PPQ'ers are saying, the P99 does everything that PPQ does.
That is incredible on so many levels. Either everyone missed the boat on the Walther quality or this VP9 is one hunk of crap.
Theohazard
New member
That's a false dichotomy; I don't think either are true. Gun technology doesn't move anywhere near as fast as many other forms of technology. Many older guns are still able to compete with newer guns, but that doesn't mean the new guns are crap or the old guns were ignored. What about designs even older than the P99 like 1911s and Glocks? By that logic, the P99 is crap because it competed with the Glock 17, which is almost 15 years older.wild cat mccane said:
You're a prophet, you're the only one that realizes the quality of the P99!!
But not. The P99 wasn't marketed well and the SW99 never caught on. It's just what happened. The P99 is a great pistol. But we're not talking about DA/SA striker fired pistols these days. Fact is something like the PPQ is easier for the average person to learn.
Stiker fired IDPA guns are a submarket of a submarket. They are popular here, but not in some sort of global firearms sales sense.
S&W and Glock have been sabotaging themselves for long enough that HK is guaranteed to sell a fair number of guns just to folks who are tired of guns that may or may not function, group or break. The M&P is 9 years old, and may have just gotten its accuracy problem fixed - ignoring the fragile striker problem or the original breaking trigger problem.
Folks know that isn't the kind of public beta testing HK engages in.
I don't know what all the griping is about. HK chose what they wanted to produce and when. They didn't lose out on some sort of development time - their competitors have been dumping half engineered crap on the market for years and sales seem fine. Maybe HK didn't do a striker plastic gun because they didn't want to be associated with all of that garbage.
Alternatively, HK took the mechanical disadvantages of striker fired recoil operated autos too seriously to go play on the dark side, until know.
It doesn't really matter: The new gun will work very, very well and sales will be brisk enough to make it worth HK's while. And folks who want a real military grade firearm, rather than S&W and Taurus's "great warranty!" range toys have got something to buy, now. It's a win for everyone when the best quality companies bring their show to town.
S&W and Glock have been sabotaging themselves for long enough that HK is guaranteed to sell a fair number of guns just to folks who are tired of guns that may or may not function, group or break. The M&P is 9 years old, and may have just gotten its accuracy problem fixed - ignoring the fragile striker problem or the original breaking trigger problem.
Folks know that isn't the kind of public beta testing HK engages in.
I don't know what all the griping is about. HK chose what they wanted to produce and when. They didn't lose out on some sort of development time - their competitors have been dumping half engineered crap on the market for years and sales seem fine. Maybe HK didn't do a striker plastic gun because they didn't want to be associated with all of that garbage.
Alternatively, HK took the mechanical disadvantages of striker fired recoil operated autos too seriously to go play on the dark side, until know.
It doesn't really matter: The new gun will work very, very well and sales will be brisk enough to make it worth HK's while. And folks who want a real military grade firearm, rather than S&W and Taurus's "great warranty!" range toys have got something to buy, now. It's a win for everyone when the best quality companies bring their show to town.
I wouldn't put S&W and Taurus on the same level, but more power to you.
But this market is a huge market. We're not just talking civilians, we're talking police and federal agencies as well. I've seen numerous times you mention HK not really "needing" to do this because they are a military firearms producer that has plenty going on. For a company that has plenty going on, their stock was downgraded by Moody's, something serious enough that HK released an official response. Frankly they have a cash flow problem. European nations are downsizing their armies left and right, Russia and China rely on in-house companies, and the US is facing the greatest DoD downsizing since the end of WWII. Police, federal, even civilian sales can keep a company running in lean times.
https://www.moodys.com/research/Moodys-downgrades-Heckler-Koch-to-Caa2-negative-outlook--PR_237140
Last edited:
I don't see that great a difference between two companies that sell semi-finished firearms to the public. Taurus are just bad, but I wouldn't take an M&P to a fight if I had any say in the matter.
And again, what is the problem? Whether HK was slow for good reason or not, the gun they didn't make last year is here now. And it works really well. So why the griping? According to many folks, the ultimate striker gun has been available from S&W for 9 years (as long as you don't need to hit things at any range or have the gun work without breaking).
https://www.facebook.com/LarryVicke...95755495415/10154269654745416/?type=1&fref=nf
And again, what is the problem? Whether HK was slow for good reason or not, the gun they didn't make last year is here now. And it works really well. So why the griping? According to many folks, the ultimate striker gun has been available from S&W for 9 years (as long as you don't need to hit things at any range or have the gun work without breaking).
https://www.facebook.com/LarryVicke...95755495415/10154269654745416/?type=1&fref=nf
I was responding to Mystos, when you jumped in and said you agree with him. So you don't? Fine.
I don't care about Larry Vickers or any other gun "personality". It is just a review to read.
And just so we're all clear - I haven't been that great a fan of HK since they started making guns like everyone else. My "defense" of HK is that there are so few companies serious about producing firearms, rather than gun shaped toys. HK does the real analysis, R&D and engineering before pumping some product out on the unsuspecting and overly enthusiastic civilian market.
The fact that isn't very profitable is too bad, but has my respect.
I don't care about Larry Vickers or any other gun "personality". It is just a review to read.
And just so we're all clear - I haven't been that great a fan of HK since they started making guns like everyone else. My "defense" of HK is that there are so few companies serious about producing firearms, rather than gun shaped toys. HK does the real analysis, R&D and engineering before pumping some product out on the unsuspecting and overly enthusiastic civilian market.
The fact that isn't very profitable is too bad, but has my respect.
I agree with him that it couldn't have hurt HK to have it to market a few years earlier. I think even HK would agree with that, not sure I'd call that griping.
You don't care about gun personalities but linked to a review by a gun personality? It is nice to see he has updated his views after using it.
Listen, I am an HK fan, even a fanboy by all accounts. I just try to be realistic in that all companies are run by humans and humans err on occasion.
Vickers is, at least, more capable of writing a reasoned review than some guy who "tests" the gun at an indoor 7 yard range with Bear ammo.
S&W is "erring" enough for multiple companies. It is embarrassing to be that company with its history and release such flawed product.
But it is more embarrassing that we buy them.
S&W is "erring" enough for multiple companies. It is embarrassing to be that company with its history and release such flawed product.
But it is more embarrassing that we buy them.
buckhorn_cortez
New member
But, the most insightful, prescient humans on the face of the earth inhabit gun forums. They have 20/10 (or better) hindsight and aren't afraid to let you know that they are smarter than any firearms manufacturer.
The only thing I never understand is that if they can truly predict the future and they're judgments are infallible - is why they haven't all won the PowerBall lottery multiple times...
As for the VP9 - I think I'll buy one. Basically a striker fired P30? Works for me.
sigarms228
New member
Not quite. The only parts they share are the sights, three pins, and the magazine I read. About as much as the new SIG P320 is a striker fired P226 I guess.
Not saying the VP9 won't be a nice pistol, though.