Innovation in handguns

[Que]

I did know about H&K's plastic handgun but when did you last see one?

Every time that I open my handgun vault The VP70Z is actually fairly common. One or two of the shops around here always seems to have one. They aren't a thing of beauty but they are fun to shoot once you replace the striker spring with a reduced power spring. The VP70/VP70Z was actually quite innovative in a number of ways.

 

[BlueTrain]

Well, I haven't seen one yet but I've seen a Liberator and at least three Gatling guns. But I am also always wondering why I don't see lots and lots of used Colt revolvers, if they made so many.

But in a way, your example proves my point. There have been innovative guns in the past but more recent ones from the same manufacturers have been more conventional, which is neither good nor bad, just a curious fact. Still, not everyone is making the same gun. Berettas are still a little different and they are widely used. And like I said in another post, there is the matter of timing and even whim on the part of the buying public. And that's anything but easy to predict. Sometimes it even works the opposite of the way it usually does. Take the USP for example.

Apparently the USP was originally designed with civilian sales in mind, especially for the American market. Yet it ended up being adopted by the German army, replacing a gun that had been in use since 1938 in one form or another. Innovative? Not particularly. But well executed.

 

[rigby06]

I don't know if this design was innovative or just interesting, but the squeeze cocking design on the H&K P7 series is interesting, the de-cocker on the Walther P99 was different. Everything else that I have seen in the last 30 years are just refinements on existing designs.

Don't get me wrong I like most of the modern refinements, I just have not seen anything unique come along in a long time.

 

[PSP]

The Boberg is pretty innovative, or will be if we ever see them in stores. I can't speak to it's practicality or reliability, but the action is certainly interesting.

http://www.bobergarms.com/

 

[lawnboy]

Originally Posted by lawnboy
The gun itself was the innovation. It supplanted the sword, bow, knife or whatever predecessor you like as the individual weapon of choice. Once you got to "gun" all subsequent "innovation" has been refinement of the basic principle.

Are electroshock weapons (stun guns, tasers, etc) the next step in the progression?

Could be. Who knows? Could be lightsabers for all I know.

There is no rule that says innovation must continue. The fork as been in common use in our culture for hundreds of years. The chopstick has been in use in its part of the world for thousands of years. You can make them bigger, smaller, or of different material but they're still forks and chopsticks. Ditto with guns.

 

[BlueTrain]

The H&K P7 was certainly innovative and as far as I know, unique. But at the same time it was expensive and a little too different. The design was intended to satisify a finite set of specifications, as were two others that were in no way similiar to the P7, that is, in the way they worked. But it didn't catch on, even though it was used more widely than you might think. A more jaded opinion would be that it was a solution to a non-problem but that has been said of a lot of things.

 

[mavracer]

By definition Ruger's SR1911 is inovative it's newly introduced. But truely new and original designs are few. I can't right off think of any features that have been introduced in the last 30 years that are new designs. The last was probably the HK P7. Sure there have been new manufacturing techniques.
I find ammunition even less innovative IMHO there has only been one truely successful cartridge introduced in the last 50 years the 40 S&W.

 

[Silent Titan]

there was the Mateba Autorevolver, cool concept and a neat looking gun. i dont think it was the first to try this but still an interesting inovation.

 

[Cascade1911]

The only real innovation in firearms I've seen in my lifetime (1964>) is the HK G11. only problem is its complexity made it not really battle ready. Anything else? Changes in action and materials. I think you're not going to see anything new in case contained chemical launched projectile weapons. Roman short sword, Scottish Claymore, Japanese Samar ii, whatever. Next up? I'd like to say energy weapons but the sad thing is, we might be seeing the end of single combat weapons......or maybe not.....what is next

 

[mavracer]

there was the Mateba Autorevolver, cool concept and a neat looking gun. i dont think it was the first to try this but still an interesting inovation.

LOL this is one of the problems with what passes for innovation. I find this to be amusing. Googal webley fosbey it was designed in 1895 predating the metaba by a mere 102 years.

 

[SIGSHR]

I distinguish between change, innovation, and improvement. The use of investment casting to produce firearms-Ruger, e.g. combined all 3-it was a major change in the way firearms were manufactured, it was an innovation, and it was an improvement-it allowed high quality firearms to be produced at lower cost. Conversely the jury is still out on MIM parts. As others have noted, features such as rotating barrels, etc are nothing new, as a Dan Wesson aficionado I note the Merwin & Hulbert revolvers of the 19th Century had easily changed barrels. S&W shooters will probably agree the introduction of the internal lock was a change and an innovation but NOT an improvement, as a Steel & Walnut Man I see the use of aluminum, titanium and polymers for handgun frames as a change but not an improvement.
As a member of the SNM-Sons of Neanderthal Man-I freely confess that my taste in handguns is firmly rooted in the past, designs such as the M1911, the S&W Double Action, the older Colt double action, the newer Colt/Dan Wesson
double action (designed by the same man) have lasted as long as they have because they work and no one has really come up with anything that much better.
The biggest innovations in handgun ammunition have been the development of JHP and hollow point bullets that are say, 95% reliable, perhaps somewhere someone is developing a powder that gives the performance of Unique or 2400 while generating only 10,000 PSI of pressure. Or reduces the sound of discharge to 5db. One field of development that could be studied is recoil taming devices. I think the individual who develops a practical, easily used and economical device that reduces the recoil of say a 44 Magnum to that of a 22 Short will make a fortune and hailed as the great genous since John M. Browning.

 

[C0untZer0]

In some market segments - like shotguns I think innovation does pay. The KSG is certainly generating a lot of interest, and unless they really make a quality goof on some critical component - I think those things are going to FLY off the shelves.

I don't think innovation necesarily pays with handguns. When the HK P7 came out - that was truly innovative. I spent more time learning how to fire that pistol than anything else. To me, squeezing the grip is second nature, and I absolutely cannot stand most of the long pull or heavy pull, or mushy DOA triggers out there (crappy triggers when compared to the HK P7 M8 IMO). But companies have to make money. There is money to be made in taking a proven and popular design, shaving a few bucks here and there by outsourcing the manufacturing, and that's it.

I don't think innovation in the handgun market pays.

You take whatever gun you've been making for years and you put picatinny rails on all four sides of it, give it a new name with the word "Tactical" in it - and it'll sell like crazy. More than a few people will buy it so they can mount their flashlight on the side, laser on the bottom, and super high tech sight on the top.

You take a team of top-rate engineers and pay them six figure incomes to come up with something TRULY innovative and you'll lose your shirt.

 

[Deja vu]

There are many guns that have been called innovative.

The Invention of the automatic fire arm was innovative. The invention of the repeating fire arm was innovative as was the invention of smokeless powder and the brass cased bullet. All of these could be deemed successful innovations.

But not all innovations are seen as successful. I would say the Jyrojet was innovative. I would also say the Taurus Judge was innovative (shotgun, revolver hand gun all in one). While not always practical they can be fun. If I had lots of money I would buy a Jyrojet but I cant afford the ammo.

I would say moon clips for revolvers where pretty innovative as well. As others have mentioned sights have really been innovative recently as well. My J-frame has a crimson trace 305 on it. Even 20 years ago laser sights where at best a thing for science fiction for small arms. My brother bought an air-light S&W which is so light it feels like a toy yet it can handle shooting real ammo, i would say that was innovative as well.

Grips have changed some as well. I remember the first time I saw a rubber grip on a hand gun and though that it was a great idea for recoil.

 

[BlueTrain]

Rubber grips do help in some ways on a handgun but they aren't old school walnut. Of course, hard rubber was used before the turn of the century. Did you ever see an old single action with well worn hard rubber grips? They hold up better than some wooden grips.

I'd have to say that more progress has been made in manufacturing technique than in design. More correctly, I imagine that progress in design follows progress in manufacturing. Interchangeable parts, for instance. Getting away from hand fitting at least makes them more affordable and easier to repair, though it doesn't always make them more reliable or more accurate.

Clips to allow the use of rimless cartridges in revolvers was a clever idea, to be sure, but it was more of a "make-do" thing than anything else. Lots of clever ideas are ultimately pretty pointless. Anyone remember trounds and that revolver that used a magazine? That's from about 50 years ago. One of the features, if I recall correctly, was that the handgun could be incorporated into a rifle. That idea wasn't unique and it was applied to other models. In fact, I wonder why that idea isn't followed through more often.

The basic idea is to have a handgun that would also function as a shoulder fired weapon. Sounds good, doesn't it? But you would either have a handgun with a too-powerful cartridge (Elmer Keither would not agree) or a rifle with a weak cartridge (which anyone who owns a .22 rifle ought to disagree with). Ultimately, I suppose that the owner might have trouble making up his mind just what it was and what it was good for.

For a while, Lugers and Mauser military models could be had with detachable shoulder stocks. A few other pistols had them, too, including Browning Hi-Powers. I was fortunate to own a Mauser C-96 with the shoulder stock (I was living overseas where it was legal). And frankly, it was no substitute for any rifle. I really didn't have enough experience with it to form an all-round opinion of the combination. One of the shortcomings was a less than perfectly rigid stock fitting but that was probably a function of the age of the thing. I think it had its uses but neither as a handgun nor a rifle. In this country I believe legal considerations probably stifled any experimenting along those lines, something that could be said of other things.

 

[MartinR]

High cost of ammo

IMHO, a propelling factor in major inovation in the firearm world will be cost - especially brass and lead for ammo.

Similarly, cost will ultimately be the push for alternative energy sources.

 

[BlueTrain]

While I generally agree that cost is sometimes an overriding factor, it certainly wasn't the reason for the switch from muzzleloading to cartridges. Unless you're just shooting to have fun, cost of ammunition that big a factor, not to me, anyway. I do realize you may need to expend more than a few boxes to achieve real proficiency, it shouldn't be necessary to do that much more to maintain a decent skill level if you aren't a trick shooter or a competitive target shooter. But I've talked about that before in other threads. Too much shooting even reduces your skills, I believe.

More to the point, however, cost must have been one reason for the switch to plastic guns, although it seems like the flexibility offered by that would also be an advantage. But there may not be any flexibility at all, for all I know. The flexibility probably has to be in the minds of management first. Ruger has certainly introduced lots of new models over the years, not merely variations on a theme. S&W was introducing new models almost monthly, it seemed, at one time but they were all just variations of the same models they had been making since WWI.

 

[mrray13]

One of the features, if I recall correctly, was that the handgun could be incorporated into a rifle. That idea wasn't unique and it was applied to other models. In fact, I wonder why that idea isn't followed through more often.

The basic idea is to have a handgun that would also function as a shoulder fired weapon. Sounds good, doesn't it? But you would either have a handgun with a too-powerful cartridge (Elmer Keither would not agree) or a rifle with a weak cartridge (which anyone who owns a .22 rifle ought to disagree with). Ultimately, I suppose that the owner might have trouble making up his mind just what it was and what it was good for.

And again, Glock did this with their detachable stock. A friend had that piece, and it really made for a fun day at the range. Would be awesome, and IMHO, only needed on something like the G18.

Is it innovative? No, as you already pointed out, it was done a few times over before Gaston could, um, lol, perfect it.

Right now, innovation in handguns is going to be materials, ala the Ruger LCR. I felt it was innovative when it came out, now there are a few polymer revolvers out there. Was the whole concept innovative? No, but the basic material was.

The Boberg pistol mentioned earlier seems like a possible step forward in pocket pistol design, although I'm sure I've seen that action style before somewhere. I haven't found it yet, so it might be that I've seen the Boberg before.

The KRISS is innovative, although I can't see that applied to handguns. I actually want to see that action applied to an intermediate caliber, like 5.56.

In short, I don't know what the next step will be, but I'm sure it's coming. What will it be? Who knows, but that's kinda the exciting part. I'm perfectly happy with 1911s, Glocks and traditional DA/SA revolvers and autos. I have a sample of each, even a SA cap and ball just for good measure, lol. Yet, I look forward to getting online everyday, logging in to a gun forum or two, and see what is happening, has happened in the world of firearms. Will it only be progressive? Maybe, but it's usually still pretty cool, IMO.

 

[BigShep85]

Innovations?

I thought when ruger came out with their lcr that the trigger sytems was really good innovation in triggers, I mean have you pulled the trigger on that thing? compared to most other revolvers it is a head above the rest hands down i know its a revolver but the trigger design is a step in the right direction for all. I was also reading on a post earlier about a Madusa? I checked on it and it was a gun made in the mid 1990's that got discontinued, why? It loaded and shot almost every round and ejected them all without a switch in cylinders, if that is not innovation I dont know what is, but why discontinue it?
If there was one produced today I would buy it just because it would shoot anything you had handy. What good is a .45 if you only have .38 shells on hand by chance, if you had a gun with that kind of innovation you wouldn't need a .38, .357, .22 .380 in seperate guns, only one for all rounds. I am just saying there have been some great innovations, I dont understand why they dont keep those ideas around. It's like sometimes they are onto a great idea and they scrap it for no reason.

 

[Cascade1911]

Jeesh....I think a lot of you are sure lowering the bar on "Innovation".

To me:

Cartridge vs Muzzle-loader = Innovation
Lever action vs single shot = Innovation
Sixgun vs singleshot pistol = Innovation
Autoloader vs revolver = Innovation


Cast vs Forged?
Plastic vs steel?
Striker vs hammer?
LCR trigger?
Rubber grips?

These may be improvements but I would hardly call them innovations.

 

[C0untZer0]

Innovation is expensive and risky.

Any new design or system is going to have some bugs that need to worked out of it which is expensive in itself. Even if a company pours hundreds of thousands of dollars into a really good testing program - some necesary refinements or changes aren't going to come to light until the weapon gets into service. If you look at the way military programs work - the A1 version of anything from the M16 to the M1 Tank, - when it actually gets into service things turn up that need to be changed.

But this process can be disastrous for a gun company - if a problem in their design or mfg process only after it is released (which is inevitable), their product can get labeled as unreliable and that is a very very difficult label to overcome. Why risk the expense of innovation and a possible hit to your reputation? There really has to be a payoff, and I don't think there is a payoff in the market.

I also think about the effect of LE on this whole thing. In general LE agencies have been a factor to discourage innovation in two ways. First of all, LE agency priorities are different from an individual gun owner. They need to choose a duty firearm that can generally work for an entire department of different people with different handsizes, wrist strength etc.. Their budgets almost always suck, they need to worry about not choosing a weapon or caliber that makes them look blood thirsty or trigger happpy, they need to worry about every possible thing that might get them sued - including accidental discharges. Just the fact that LE duty pistols have 6 - 8lb trigger pulls - doesn't that discourage innovation in cocking and firing mechanisms?

I think it's a sad fact too that LE sales drive sales in the private market. People hear that such-and-such pistol is the official issue pistol XYZ Police Force so they go out and buy one too.