Superfluous Bulls--t.
 

What's the deal with newer autos having slide serrations on the front of the slide? If you rack it from the front you have a good chance of shooting yourself. (For that matter what was the deal with the failed Remington 51 resurrection? The pistol had a "Style wave" down the side) Let's quit trying to "Tart it up" and concentrate on producing quality. I have many WW 1 and 2 pistols that were built with bombs falling, food shortages, and invasion happening, and they function flawlessly; A few years ago I bought a Auto Ordinance 1911 .45 NIB. It beat itself to death after 500 rounds. :cool:

Speaking of Auto Ordnance, forward slide serrations, and tarted-up in the same sentence;

https://www.auto-ordnance.com/trump-45-1911/

Kinda like back in the '50s, when cars all had cool hood ornaments.

Look, but don't touch.

Vote with your wallet.

Simple !

:burnout:

Yes!
 

Thanks for the link. THAT'S what I'm talking about. I dunno- I don't get it.:o:o

Hello k98mike,

Where do you come down on this concept (PS; I don't own one);

http://www.defensereview.com/chiappa...-applications/

The concept of the Rem 51 is kinda echoed here, in that the barrel being lower in the frame causes the recoil impulse to be somewhat more tamed.

:confused:

Reason
 

The revolver design you sent a link of seems fine to me....because there seems to be a reason for everything on it.

I'm a fan of serrations on the front of the slide. Yes, I'm old and my first "real" pistol was a Colt Commander. I've been a firearms instructor at my Sheriff's Office and at our Federal Court. Also, I've been fortunate to attend training from many of the top ranked folks. I retired in May and will be 62 in a few days. All that being said means I've seen many options in how guns are manipulated. My main method in performing a chamber check is to bring my hand below the front of the pistol and grab the slide with thumb and fingers pressing it to the rear. I can then see the round in the chamber. In darkness I can raise my index finger up to feel the cartridge in the chamber. At no time is any part of my hand in front of the muzzle. This is a completely safe method to determine the status of the pistol. Every time I went on shift I would use this method to check the condition of my pistol before placing it in the holster. This was my mental 'tune up' that bad things could happen during my tour. I've seen other methods taught but this in the one I felt was the best. Having forward slide serrations helps facilitate the method. YMMV.

G2

Firearms manufacturers, constantly seeking to differentiate themselves in the marketplace, regularly make any number of modifications, "enhancements" and changes to older designs to make them "unique" and patent worthy.

This protection of designs and differentiation is different today from it's origins back in the earlier days of the industrial revolution. Studying Paul Mauser's world and working on the book taught me a number of things about that period, and with a few notable exceptions today there isn't much true and significant innovation going on.

In those early days, entire careers were invested by innovative gunsmith designers like Mauser, Federle, Nickl, Seidel, and Petter with decades required to perfect basic designs. The same thing for modern semi-automatic rifles from Garand and Stoner.

Today, minor changes like milling forward grip patterns substitute for innovation.

This has resulted in a very confusing marketplace for consumers, and especially new gun buyers. Many are simply at the mercy of the gun salesman in the store that is motivated by commissions, or the well meaning "expert" friend without much practical experience beyond one or two chosen favorite guns. This is one reason I like to bring a variety of firearms to basic classes I teach. Students can get some hands on experience with different designs.

A most damaging issue is something I call "Brand Pollution" that happens when a well known respected brand releases cost reduced products under the same branding. Smith and Wesson has been particularly guilty of that, as have a number of brands like Walther, Colt, and others releasing pot metal constructed .22LR pistols manufactured by GSG and it's partner companies (along with their pellet guns). There is a vast difference between a historic German Walther PP / PPK trainer from the 1930's and 1940's as compared to the modern one that looks the same to a consumer.

I've had multiple students turn up in class with brand new Smith and Wesson pistols (like the Sigma and the new .380 Bodyguard) that either are wildly inaccurate to shoot or jam in the first few firings. All carry the same "Smith and Wesson" name that they put on quality M&P pistols and the consumer can't tell the difference.

What designs are the best? There are certainly plenty of options. In many cases, they have been the tried and true, consistently manufactured quality handguns invented well in the past. The M1911a1, CZ-75, Luger, Mauser,HSc and original Walther PP / PPK all represent innovation and many still set the standard. Modern manufacturing has produced refined versions of these firearms from CZ (Dan Wesson), SIG, HK and others that approach full custom products at production prices. Any number of mil-spec AR-15 rifle "manufacturers" source parts from centralized specialists (making barrels or receivers) and offer lower cost precision products.