View Full Version : What about H&K design makes them reliable/high quality?
So, in searching on the forums for "H&K" and reading older threads, I've been able to gather that H&K's pistols are held in high regard for their quality & reliability. However, the thing I haven't really come across in the threads I've read so far are very specific discussions of WHAT makes this the case.
For example, I found a link to an interview where Larry Vickers & Ken Hackathorn talk about the design process the HK45. The jist of it seemed to be that they were really only looking to improve the ergonomics of the USP45 because it was already a reliable & accurate platform at that point. So, I still end up wondering what the roots of the USP45's established accuracy & reliability are and/or what goes into bringing those same qualities to the HK45s.
I realize it's probably a little bit of everything and not just "they only use X parts" or "their QC always includes ____", but I'd still like to try and better understand the specifics of what they're getting right at each point in the manufacturing process, if I can.
Thanks in advance to anyone who can offer some insight.
I think that it is whole "package" from very good engineering at design stage, then very deep testing (it takes HK forever to bring new product, but they also can design and deliver new one within a year). HK is also expert at very high quality machining/manufacturing processes (they are actually manufacturer of tooling and CNC machines) that allow "custom made" tolerances in mass production. Finally good selection of materials for barrels and slides. When they use MIM parts (and they use them), they have them made right.
Of course HK does not get everything perfect - like long sticking with their own idea of accessory rail (they put it first, but world moved on), ergonomy that not always work with current, most fashionable, shooting techniques (thumbs over safety high grip for example). But they seem to learn and improve on that -> P30, HK45C and HK45. But it seems that one area is completely unknown to HK engineers - decent pistol trigger. They design trigger in way that just allow them to be fully dependable in any condition and even work with broken parts (revert to DA-only), but they do not care about crisp release or short reset. But I love LEM trigger anyway.
HK also makes mistakes, happens to everyone. But nice is that they solve them in "retrofit-able" way (for eg USP firing pins), that does not leave customers with obsolete unit.
All this is backed in policy of not taking short-cuts and not looking to make profits by savings in engineering, manufacturing and materials. This, obviously, leads to make profit on high price. But it is not perfect world. Some time I think it is actually good that HK is not run by market-oriented sales-junkies.
i agree with above. all the quality and engineering, if they could just get the trigger right
I've been playing with H&Ks since 1984. So whats wrong with their triggers?:sarcastic:
The triggers aside, H&K has made some of the most inovative and most carefully thought out firearms in the world. They make guns that are obviously engineered by folks that really know and love guns.
I'm not one of the industry insiders that we have on this site, but i did just retire from a lifetime in the engineering field. It's not so much what HK has done right, it's more of the dearth of actual engineering in so many other makes that makes the HK's shine by comparison. The HK's are just very good engineers. And it's obvious at first glance. I don't want to slam some of the newer folks like FNusa, but generally americans don't have a great track record. Americans for instance can't seem to design good magazines (although many of their designs are not american). I don't believe folks like S & W have ever even attempted to build up a "bench" of expertise. They just farm out. The europeans seem to take more pride in their work. Now our aerospace boys are another story altogether. I worked on the B1 a bit. We do know how to engineer, but small arms just find no money.
Another way to look at it is, their guns are designed for combat, not match or competitions.
I'm not one of the industry insiders that we have on this site, but i did just retire from a lifetime in the engineering field. It's not so much what HK has done right, it's more of the dearth of actual engineering in so many other makes that makes the HK's shine by comparison. The HK's are just very good engineers. And it's obvious at first glance. I don't want to slam some of the newer folks like FNusa, but generally americans don't have a great track record. Americans for instance can't seem to design good magazines (although many of their designs are not american). I don't believe folks like S & W have ever even attempted to build up a "bench" of expertise. They just farm out. The europeans seem to take more pride in their work. Now our aerospace boys are another story altogether. I worked on the B1 a bit. We do know how to engineer, but small arms just find no money.
That is an observation that truly makes me sad... yet happy to hear we do something right.
Another way to look at it is, their guns are designed for combat, not match or competitions.
I think this is the truth. You'll never see hk advertise "match grade" this or that. They stick with what works. Their slogan "No Compromise" sums the company up perfectly.
Also the p30 could be the best feeling pistol of all time. Its hard to show customers anything else after they fondle a p30.
FChen17213
10-12-11, 21:27
Now if HK would make a P30 that is striker fired with a bore-axis as low as the Glock or M&P..........
Now if HK would make a P30 with a bore-axis as low as the Glock or M&P..........
:rolleyes: Really not that important.
misanthropist
10-12-11, 22:09
I'd take one with a bore axis a half-centimeter HIGHER if it meant I could get a trigger I like.
I cannot wrap my head around HK triggers. Too many years of 1911s and Glocks I guess. I guess I could retrain, but why? Oh, right...gen 4.
:rolleyes: Really not that important.
Agreed.
Awesome firearms that will go forever and are extremely accurate. You just have to love the trigger they offer....
:rolleyes: Really not that important.
Yeah, the P30's bore axis really isn't an issue in terms of controllability and follow-up shots. Bore axis is relevant to a point, but there are a lot of other factors at play in this.
In the end, the P30 is an incredibly reliable and accurate pistol that is a joy to shoot.
JSTICFRALL
10-12-11, 22:20
Other than the fact that the double action trigger on my P2000 is heavier than I'd like it to be, I absolutely love the feel and break of the single action pull. From the moment I first got my HK, I instantly noticed a huge quality improvement over every other handgun in its class. The machining is fantastic, the molding on the frame is top notch, and the way everything fits together works in harmony. I can agree with what was said above about HK's being built for combat. I trust my life to mine everyday I leave the house knowing that it's going to do it's job if I need it to.
I'd take one with a bore axis a half-centimeter HIGHER if it meant I could get a trigger I like.
I cannot wrap my head around HK triggers. Too many years of 1911s and Glocks I guess. I guess I could retrain, but why? Oh, right...gen 4.
I used to shoot 1911's with 2.25 lb triggers so i hear you, but a USP with the match trigger clocks at 5 lbs with just the right amount creep for the real world IMO. I think that trigger is near perfect. Reset distance is overrated IMO. Like most though, CCW has got me moving into safe actions. I've never felt an HK trigger that was anywhere near as sucky as a glock. I do carry a 19 though, sucky means safe. Try HK's match triggers, they nice.
gunnar4321
10-12-11, 23:12
Their older model pistols were also excellent. I'm talking about the P9S and the P7. The trigger on the P7 in particular is most excellent with a very low bore axis. No longer made (the P9S), both these pistols are worth a look.
misanthropist
10-13-11, 00:37
I used to shoot 1911's with 2.25 lb triggers so i hear you, but a USP with the match trigger clocks at 5 lbs with just the right amount creep for the real world IMO. I think that trigger is near perfect. Reset distance is overrated IMO. Like most though, CCW has got me moving into safe actions. I've never felt an HK trigger that was anywhere near as sucky as a glock. I do carry a 19 though, sucky means safe. Try HK's match triggers, they nice.
I'm sure the reset is totally manageable for anyone used to it...I just short-stroke everything with a longer reset than a Glock when I speed up because 99% of my shooting is on that platform.
I short-stroke non-SRT SIGs about 70% of the time when moving at speed. When I'm given a 5946 (as happens fairly frequently to regular shooters in Canada), it might as well be a single-shot because it is absolutely guaranteed that I will get the first shot off, then short-stroke and then, over the course of the next 3-4 seconds, tap-rack 14 times before I realize what's going on. It's a software problem, I know. The CPU runs on full autopilot until the mag is empty!
Anyway to get back on topic...I think the thing that makes HK guns reliable is the same thing that makes consumers bitch about HK: indifference to the consumer market and loyalty to the LE/Mil market.
Well, that and the willingness to retain a bunch of Germans purposed with the task of engineering for that market, I guess. You know the Germans...always interested in engineering solutions to problems, whether the problems exist or not.
Magic_Salad0892
10-13-11, 00:55
IMHO striker fired guns with a low bore axis is very important to me, for multiple reasons:
Striker Fired guns have less parts.
Less recoil (no matter how good a shooter you are, it takes less effort to shoot a Glock.)
Better concealment.
However, if Glocks weren't around, you'd see a USPC, or P2000 riding on my side.
IMHO striker fired guns with a low bore axis is very important to me, for multiple reasons:
Striker Fired guns have less parts.
Less recoil (no matter how good a shooter you are, it takes less effort to shoot a Glock.)
Better concealment.
However, if Glocks weren't around, you'd see a USPC, or P2000 riding on my side.
Agree on all counts. Bore axis may not be a make or break issue, but i will take any advantage i can. And Glock's are tops when it comes to overall shootability, imo.
For me, it takes much less effort to shoot my HK45 LEM than it does my G19. I don't get to shoot a lot these days but it feels and shoots much more natural. I just ordered a P30 in 9mm because I enjoy the 45 so much but wanted to be able to afford shooting by going with a 9mm with LEM. I may dump both Glocks 19s because of this.
IMHO striker fired guns with a low bore axis is very important to me, for multiple reasons:
Striker Fired guns have less parts.
Less recoil (no matter how good a shooter you are, it takes less effort to shoot a Glock.)
Better concealment.
However, if Glocks weren't around, you'd see a USPC, or P2000 riding on my side.
H&K has been there done that - go pick up and shoot a P7 series pistol and then tell me it didn't follow you home.
having owned 2 p30s, and a p2000sk, all v.3 and in 9mm, i still admire their ergonomics and high built quality.
the hk's trigger is european- aimed, mostly for local poilce forces.
i have found it and the strangly- placed decoker to be obtrusive and both detructed from the hk's other qualities.
all 3 were replaced with the new walther PPQ.
LEM triggers are the only way to end the trigger gripes and turn them into praise... also removes decockers & safety levers from the pistol.
Trust me, I have been around the block and back with H&K pistols, and initially never liked the LEM trigger when inspecting them at the gun counter.
My "light bulb moment" happened when I started shooting regularly and began to see my fundamentals of good trigger control at work, and then meeting a fellow H&K shooter at the range who put his light LEM USPC .45 in my hand for a few mags. After declining politely several times explaining the LEM is not for me he insisted, (thank goodness he did) after the 5th or 6th mag it clicked and I began to realize the potential of the LEM trigger. Now all of mine are LEM and I would never go back to a DA / SA version, ever.
And to add some value to this thread - H&K doesn't compromise from engineering to building; they use top quality materials to top quality machining and top quality QC. You won't find very many firearm manufacturers producing at this level in this day and age of "how do we make _____ cheaper to sell more of _____."
Agree on all counts. Bore axis may not be a make or break issue, but i will take any advantage i can. And Glock's are tops when it comes to overall shootability, imo.
I'm new to this forum, perhaps i need to get out the flame suit, but i couldn't disagree more about Glock "shootability. To me the Glocks shootabiity is near the bottom. No other gun i can think of demands such a lock down grip to keep that wind up trigger from moving the sights. I used to run a small corporate club. I would take newbies and oldies all the time and line up guns for them to try to see which ones they liked. Since this was 20 years ago, the guns were generally a S&W double action, 92, Hi-Power, Glock 17, and 1911. The glocks always were dead last. Comments were "whippy", twisting torque. FWIW they usually picked the Hi-Power, not that i endorse the model. The Glock of course can be driven fast and well, but it takes much more time and effort to maintain that 100% rock tight grip. Frankly i miss the ability to hold with a lighter grip that some others afford. Why do i carry and love the 19? Because the carry factors outweigh the shootability factor for me, at least at this moment. If i were to take on the bikers that just stole my lady, I'd likely grab a non-glock, although factory 33 rd mags would elicit some warm fuzzys. JMO
The distance in opinions on Glocks always amazes me in regards to the "shootability" aspect. You have people that you say don't like them and pick them dead last. But from my experiences on the range I've never seen a pistol that's as well taken to by the end users as the Glock series. Qualification scores almost universally go up with people issued these guns vs what they were previously carrying. Usually Sigs, Berettas, HK's, 1911's, and a few DA revolvers.
I realize that people will always have preferences, and that's perfectly fine. But I've come to the conclusion that if a person can't handle a Glock 9mm and make it work well then it's either they don't want to or they simply are so bad they shouldn't be using a pistol to begin with.
i don't know why people slob on the hk knob so much.
i think hk as a company and as inidivual models of firearms have glaring shortcomings just like every other manufacturer.
the hk accessory rail i would not blame on them. they were the first ever, another thing was adopted... they can't help that. but what the accessory rail DOES point out is that hk does NOT evolve individual model lines AT ALL. how can you produce a pistol for 10+ years and not even come out with the slightest generational change?
glock may claim "perfection" but to their credit they get close to that by improving things iteratively over ONE model platform.
what does hk do? they make another model line entirely, one that has awkward overlaps with previous model lines so you can never QUITE get all the features you know and love from any combination of stuff THEY make.
case in point. the p2000. was this a usp compact replacement? not quite because it comes in all kinds of variants that all don't include a safety. additionally it's got one variant that is a non standard decocking scheme. this makes me scream, why can't i just have a usp compact with a normal rail??!
the p30. is THIS the replacement for the usp? it doesn't it come with a compact... oh wait, the p30 IS the compact... the p30l is just longer... than a usp tactical with a threaded barrel... wait..??!.. WTF IS GOING ON HERE??? so what you're telling me is you traded the boxy ergonomic grips of the usp for the alienating finger grooves of spiderman grip. thanks hk. thanks. this makes me scream, why can't i have an p2000 with some normal hk levers??!
the hk45. glow in teh dark sights. palm face. not listening to larry vickers on grip. palm face. adding trigger guard groove. palm face.
i no longer feel a need in life to own an hk.
i will admit that hk does a great job with accuracy. i find their firearms easy to shoot despite whatever high bore axis discussions exist. their single action trigger pull is fine. their double action trigger pull is as bad as any other on the market. the best part about hk is supposed to be that it's possible to cary their firearms cocked and locked... but this is becoming less and less desireable it seems.
great things about hk. i've never worried about small parts breakage. i've not heard of many or any small parts breakages. they don't seem to change things that work like their slide architecture, barrel architecture, magazine architecture, RECOIL SPRING ASSEMBLY *ahem*.
hk has its merits. it also has its faults.
German - the engineers are executed if it does not perform flawlessly.
Fears makes people excel.
My thoughts echo some of montrala's. I work in an engineering discipline, and one thing you quickly realize is that Germans typically practice good QA processes when they build stuff. It's about testing, and quality assurance. I've worked with some German engineers, and they test the snot out of things, whether software or manufactured goods. Here in the US, whether you're talking software, cars, or widgets, we often tend to cut corners on stuff like QA. Our emphasis tends to be on aggressive schedules, shipping the product, and short-term ROI. Gotta keep those shareholders happy. And that IS important, no doubt. But when you let the importance of QA slip, you tend to do sloppy things, things of the sort that we see frequently in the US when manufacturers rush products to market before they are ready. And then we get the predictable recalls, failures, and so on. This is why, in the U.S., it so often takes 3 or 4 "generations" of a product before you finally get a really reliable version.
These are generalizations obviously, not every German company practices good QA and not every US company fails at QA. But I do think at least part of H&K's legendary reliability is due to good QA and testing.
I realize that people will always have preferences, and that's perfectly fine. But I've come to the conclusion that if a person can't handle a Glock 9mm and make it work well then it's either they don't want to or they simply are so bad they shouldn't be using a pistol to begin with.
It sure sounds like it's not perfectly fine with you if others experience does not agree with yours, as you feel the need to degegrate the shooting ability of those of which you have zero knowledge. Thats just plain bad manners.
After thinking about what you wrote I'm going to stand by what I said.
I've worked alongside a lot of people that carry firearms for a living for over twenty years now. And the simple fact is a number of them have zero business handling a gun. I've seen them go through training after training from range masters and they just don't get it. And they're never going to. That's a fact I had to grow to accept. They're perfectly satisfied with passing a qualification that could lead to a life or death encounter someday by a simple point.
And it's not just firearms handling. It's a outright lacking or caring of tactics and common sense in encounters that mean whether they see the sun rise again or not.
It was never my intention to offend you. I imagine you're probably a decent and capable person. But as to any bad manners on my part offending the average idiot out there? I'm alright with that anymore.
I've been playing with H&Ks since 1984. So whats wrong with their triggers?:sarcastic:
The triggers aside, H&K has made some of the most inovative and most carefully thought out firearms in the world. They make guns that are obviously engineered by folks that really know and love guns.
The trigger on my USP Elite, when in SA mode, is darn near as good as my 1911's. My 50 yd groups tell me the trigger is very good. It is the stock trigger, unworked.
Long Tom Coffin
10-15-11, 02:22
I'm new to this forum, perhaps i need to get out the flame suit, but i couldn't disagree more about Glock "shootability. To me the Glocks shootabiity is near the bottom. No other gun i can think of demands such a lock down grip to keep that wind up trigger from moving the sights. JMO
There are several on here who would disagree with you. I'm one of them. Glock triggers take learning, same as any other pistol. If you are twitching the front sight on a 19 and need an ape grip to correct it, it's because you don't have appropriate trigger discipline. That simple.
I happen to like the trigger on Glocks a lot. Probably because I am acclimated to them, true, but also because you can do anything you want to them. Glock triggers suck? No they don't, because you can make them into pretty much whatever you want to. I usually stick with the 3.5 and NY1, but I'm really starting to enjoy the new dot connector in my Gen4's.
I've had a chance to shoot a P30 several times. The DA/SA was nothing short of absolutely disgusting, which is unsurprising, but the LEM was quite nice.
Although not nice enough for me to pay ~$400 more at the shop for them, though. Are HK's well engineered and designed? In most cases, yes. Are they that significantly more well designed than glocks to command nearly twice the price tag? No, not nearly.
It must be different strokes for different folks. I dont understand how anyone can complain about the single action on the hk or the glock trigger. You want a craptastic trigger, try the sig dak. Get good at that and anything else is easy. Getting good at the dak is probably a waste if time.
I have owned HK's since they first came out with the USP. After trying so many other manu. out for years i always came back to HK. They are Big in Military Contract's so their business model is Naturally Top Tier it has to be. I'm not going to try and convince anyone on what to like or not. But give credit where it's due. I spent my carreer doing QC, Realiability, Failure Analysis and Lab. Some for a German Auto. So i'm OCD about quality.
Magic_Salad0892
10-15-11, 23:37
H&K has been there done that - go pick up and shoot a P7 series pistol and then tell me it didn't follow you home.
Didn't follow me home. :p
I wanted it to though.
I've been playing with H&Ks since 1984. So whats wrong with their triggers?:sarcastic:
The triggers aside, H&K has made some of the most inovative and most carefully thought out firearms in the world. They make guns that are obviously engineered by folks that really know and love guns.
I cannot agree with this. Some of their firearms are innovative, some well engineered, others are not. For instance the HK45 I had was anything but innovative, submitted for the now discontinued joint service pistol trials, it was clunky, heavy, big, awkward, ill-fitted, and so ridiculously overpriced considering it's polymer frame that it virtually canceled itself out, at least to my mind!
The specimen I owned was an early model, likely they've improved it somewhat, however the bulk of the design I found distinctly inferior to offerings from Glock, and S&W which being simpler, were easier to operate and maintain. The HK held less ammo in a bigger representation, it's accuracy was totally dependent upon the performance of a rubber O-ring, and though mine never suffered a failure as a result of the o-ring, it was a constant worry.
The trigger was lousy, it also has a groove integral to the trigger guard which would pinch the trigger finger between it and the trigger under recoil & reset. The grip inserts were poorly fitted, resulting in the pistol squirming in my hand when fired, it also would rattle considerablly when shaken lightly from side to side. further the seams were imperfect, again resulting in pinch, it's notable that the grip inserts of the M&P 45 I was comparing it to were both cosmetically & functionally perfect, amazing as the M&P was virtually half it's pricepoint!
Another thing I recall were the HK magazines, which are extremely expensive, the two or three, that came with mine had feed lips that were very very sharp, enough so to consistently cut you as you loaded them, they also had oversized baseplates that garishly protruded out the bottom of the pistol, contributing greatly to it's bulky feel. There were other issues as well, the pistol as I recall was awkward to disassemble requiring deft movement of the offhand, however the biggest was the absolute indifference of HK customer service to civilian customers, though at the time I was still active duty Navy....
Don't get me wrong, HK is an iconic name in firearms, they do have many fine examples of their work in the field, and many smarter, more experienced men & women swear by them, however it's my point that they are far from perfect, particularly when you consider that they are simply unable to compete with Glock, or S&W M&P at a reasonable pricepoint.....:(
Defaultmp3
10-16-11, 02:28
The HK held less ammo in a bigger representation, it's accuracy was totally dependent upon the performance of a rubber O-ring, and though mine never suffered a failure as a result of the o-ring, it was a constant worry.
The o-ring on the barrel only offers theoretical accuracy improvements, from what I've read. Ammunition would probably create a greater variance in accuracy than the loss of the o-ring.
There were other issues as well, the pistol as I recall was awkward to disassemble requiring deft movement of the offhand
I have only disassembled H&K polymer handguns, but I have to say, I'm not quite sure what you mean by that; I found them to be very easy to disassemble, dexterity not really needed at all.
I cannot agree with this. Some of their firearms are innovative, some well engineered, others are not. For instance the HK45 I had was anything but innovative, submitted for the now discontinued joint service pistol trials, it was clunky, heavy, big, awkward, ill-fitted, and so ridiculously overpriced considering it's polymer frame that it virtually canceled itself out, at least to my mind!
The specimen I owned was an early model, likely they've improved it somewhat, however the bulk of the design I found distinctly inferior to offerings from Glock, and S&W which being simpler, were easier to operate and maintain. The HK held less ammo in a bigger representation, it's accuracy was totally dependent upon the performance of a rubber O-ring, and though mine never suffered a failure as a result of the o-ring, it was a constant worry.
The trigger was lousy, it also has a groove integral to the trigger guard which would pinch the trigger finger between it and the trigger under recoil & reset. The grip inserts were poorly fitted, resulting in the pistol squirming in my hand when fired, it also would rattle considerablly when shaken lightly from side to side. further the seams were imperfect, again resulting in pinch, it's notable that the grip inserts of the M&P 45 I was comparing it to were both cosmetically & functionally perfect, amazing as the M&P was virtually half it's pricepoint!
Another thing I recall were the HK magazines, which are extremely expensive, the two or three, that came with mine had feed lips that were very very sharp, enough so to consistently cut you as you loaded them, they also had oversized baseplates that garishly protruded out the bottom of the pistol, contributing greatly to it's bulky feel. There were other issues as well, the pistol as I recall was awkward to disassemble requiring deft movement of the offhand, however the biggest was the absolute indifference of HK customer service to civilian customers, though at the time I was still active duty Navy....
Don't get me wrong, HK is an iconic name in firearms, they do have many fine examples of their work in the field, and many smarter, more experienced men & women swear by them, however it's my point that they are far from perfect, particularly when you consider that they are simply unable to compete with Glock, or S&W M&P at a reasonable pricepoint.....:(
This is flawed with so many wrong's imo i will not spend the time to counter each one. I see one has already hit a couple mis-takes. The o-ring a constant worry i believe there good for like thousand's of round's plus the gun works fine if the ring was not even there. And the gun comes with a few spare's :confused:
SWATcop556
10-16-11, 17:05
This is flawed with so many wrong's imo i will not spend the time to counter each one. I see one has already hit a couple mis-takes. The o-ring a constant worry i believe there good for like thousand's of round's plus the gun works fine if the ring was not even there. And the gun comes with a few spare's :confused:
Based off of your screen name and avatar, you are in no way a biased opinion on this subject matter are you? :dirol:
H&Ks are definately well made firearms with well executed designs, good quality materials, and good quality controls. However, like many German firearm makers, H&K has a tendency to disregard the concept of KISS. Many of their designs have more parts on average than competator's products. More parts means more fitting issues, more reliability issues, and more durability issues. However, despite the negatives to complex designs, H&K pulls it off well with their strict almost semi-custom level of quality.
As a piece of engineering, it's hard to beat H&K. However, they aren't quite as intuitive as many striker fired designs like the Glock and M&P. H&K has always been about "form follows function", which sometimes doesn't make the best ergonomics in a pistol. I shoot them very well, and particularly like the P30 9mm which in my opinion is probably the best 9mm pistol I have ever used.
This is flawed with so many wrong's imo i will not spend the time to counter each one. I see one has already hit a couple mis-takes. The o-ring a constant worry i believe there good for like thousand's of round's plus the gun works fine if the ring was not even there. And the gun comes with a few spare's :confused:
Is it? Cite them! I have fired the pistol with, and without the rubber o-ring, the pistols accuracy is indeed negatively impacted, HK will tell you that they are integral! You believing them good for thousands of rounds is meaningless to the context of my comments, they are rubber, rubber can fail!
You're free to an opinion, however I have actual "real world" experience with this particular specimen, thats my polite way of saying my opinion carries some weight....
I have no respect for kool-aid intoxication, I have offered a valid critique based upon first hand experience, what have you offered in reply? :rolleyes:
Could you tell us how significant the accuracy degredation was in your HK45 without the O ring? It seems as though you've experienced something noteworthy with it.
I ask because in the recent invterview with Vicker's and Hackathorn they state that over time it became apparent to them that the O ring was not having any significant affect on accuracy other than what they described as "minimal"
Could you tell us how significant the accuracy degredation was in your HK45 without the O ring? It seems as though you've experienced something noteworthy with it.
I ask because in the recent invterview with Vicker's and Hackathorn they state that over time it became apparent to them that the O ring was not having any significant affect on accuracy other than what they described as "minimal"
Vickers, Hackathorn... what do those guys know about pistols?
There's this dude on the internet that goes by the handle "Denali"... his opinions carry some WEIGHT!
:rolleyes:
As a piece of engineering, it's hard to beat H&K. However, they aren't quite as intuitive as many striker fired designs like the Glock and M&P. H&K has always been about "form follows function", which sometimes doesn't make the best ergonomics in a pistol.
They definitely have a German feel to them in the ergonomic sense, for better or worse.
How can anyone say the P30 or HK45 aren't as ergonomic as a Glocks or M&P? I don't think anyone is better than the other, its personal preference but the P30 is one of the most ergonomic pistols I've touched.
How can anyone say the P30 or HK45 aren't as ergonomic as a Glocks or M&P? I don't think anyone is better than the other, its personal preference but the P30 is one of the most ergonomic pistols I've touched.
There seem to be pretty dramatic differences in the ergonomics between their models - a USP 45 feels quite a bit different in the hand than an HK45. Like you say, much of it is personal preference. A P7 is about as comfortable a pistol as any I've handled, but some of their other models make me wonder whether or not they had a human hand available when they were designing the grip.
I assume you mean the USP series. The G21 and 20 are no more ergonomic unless you have large hands. What about the USPc line? I think the P2000 is extremely ergonomic.
I assume you mean the USP series. The G21 and 20 are no more ergonomic unless you have large hands. What about the USPc line? I think the P2000 is extremely ergonomic.
That's right - sorry. A USP in 45, or even a USPc for that matter. And agreed on the glock comparison: They're no certainly no worse than a G21 or 20. Then again, glocks are themselves designed in Austria, right? That's sort of like Germany. :D
It definitely does seem to vary depending on the line. I wonder if it has anything to do with their target market for a given model, or if it's just the development/improvement progression.
I would think development and improvement progression since the models were progressively ergonomic over the years.
Could you tell us how significant the accuracy degredation was in your HK45 without the O ring? It seems as though you've experienced something noteworthy with it.
Not really, it was an observation noted at the range, groups opened up with the o-ring removed, this was several years previous, I don't recall it as a spectacluar degradation, however it was noted by the small handful of us present. It prompted a phone call to HK USA, where they stated that the o-ring was integral, that accuracy would likely degrade as noted without it, however I am also well aware that today, they are now saying otherwise, yet the o-ring is still a part of the design!
I will add, as previously stated, that this was an early specimen, perhaps it was more lemon then flawed, always a possibilty....
One other thing, especially as I see the gathering of the "gamer crowd" storm clouds, who are enraged that anyone would report negatively, or truthfully about their most revered game symbol, I would remind you, and them, that this was a singular experience, that I have stated categorically that HK is an iconic name in firearms, one worthy of respect.
Nonetheless, my impression of the HK45 at that time was one of a poor & hurried design, one that was clearly not ready for prime time....;)
Vickers, Hackathorn... what do those guys know about pistols?
There's this dude on the internet that goes by the handle "Denali"... his opinions carry some WEIGHT!
:rolleyes:
Thanks, it's always of value when you "Rainbow Six" gamers weigh in with your special insight...:p
Nephrology
10-17-11, 14:06
H&Ks seem fine. Not in my price range for what they do. Maybe some day. For now I am OK with their cheap Austrian cousin.
I wonder why the P30 didn't get the O ring?
The Dumb Gun Collector
10-17-11, 21:28
" It's not so much what HK has done right, it's more of the dearth of actual engineering in so many other makes that makes the HK's shine by comparison."
This is my opinion also. I was talking to Ken Hackathorn about this one day and he told me that as much as he loved American manufacturers, their approach to engineering problems was almost the opposite of HK's. He said that when HK's engineers would meet they would determine what was absolutely necessary, and then multiply it. He said the approach here is "what can we get by with?"
I like HK because I was looking for a modernized 1911 style pistol. In other words, good trigger, thumb actuated safety, polymer, higher capacity, good ergonomics. The HK fit the bill. Mag release works pretty well too--no need to roll the pistol to punch the mag release, no matter how small your hands are.
I wonder why the P30 didn't get the O ring?
There was no need. P30 was finally built with sole purpose of winning tender for German Border Guard pistol against Walther P99. Tender specification asked some questions that P99 would answer, but P2000 would not. But did not ask for increased accuracy levels, over what HK can achieve without O-ring. Adding it would be redundant then and increase manufacturing cost and unit price. This could lead to loosing tender.
O-ring was introduced to pistols that were build for top accuracy per actual or desired use (pistols for SOF and sport shooters). P30 is plain vanilla service pistol for uniformed carry.
HK makes weapons first and foremost for big government procurement. I you ask why HK416 did not get new Tactical Pink coating and suede covered stock, it is because no big govt customer requested it.... yet :suicide:
GermanSynergy
10-18-11, 11:10
Nice try.
You make ignorant statements / assumptions with regarding Jody H and fail to back them up with anything of substance.
Your ad hominem attacks are hardly what one would consider to be mature.
The above is exactly why I rarely drop in on these forums anymore, it's almost as though he thinks I'm looking to amputate a portion of his anatomy, though I must add that M4 administration, is much better then most for weeding these "testosteroni's" out so that the adults can communicate....;)
Long Tom Coffin
10-18-11, 11:45
" It's not so much what HK has done right, it's more of the dearth of actual engineering in so many other makes that makes the HK's shine by comparison."
This is my opinion also. I was talking to Ken Hackathorn about this one day and he told me that as much as he loved American manufacturers, their approach to engineering problems was almost the opposite of HK's. He said that when HK's engineers would meet they would determine what was absolutely necessary, and then multiply it. He said the approach here is "what can we get by with?"
That's an interesting story, thanks for sharing Greg. It's always good to read about the opinions of the real knowledgeable people in the industry. As far as I'm concerned, Hackathorn, Vickers, et all have opinions that carry some weight! :D.
And what ken is saying makes a lot of sense in terms of the construction of HK pistols and mags. Engineering components being multiplied is obvious considering HK pistols in general and mags are usually overbuilt like brick shithouses.
But is it enough to justify the increased price? My attitude on purchasing pistols is similar to the "what can we get by with?" outlook. I'm not an operator, government agent, LEO, SWAT member, anything like that. I'm John Q. Public with a gun, 2.5 kids and a 9-5 job behind a desk. I can certainly understand that HK's bread and butter is big government contracts, and more power to them, but that's not necessarily going to work for me as a civilian carrier. HK's are nice, but when making my decisions about what I was going to carry, I also had to look at the fact that they were significantly more expensive than Glocks or M&P's, with significantly less armorer and aftermarket support, especially in my area. The local cabelas is the only shop I know of that carries HK pistols.
I shoot about 8000-12000 rounds a year.
Damn, reading all these comments about less than ideal triggers makes me say to myself "what if?" but I know that would be too easy of a scapegoat for me as I don't shoot that well with the HK at all.
I am a big government user and the HK P2000 is my duty pistol. Admittedly, I used to own a Glock 26 that I carried for CCW prior to becoming LE and I shot that much better, or at least so it seems. Many of my colleagues hate the LEM trigger. Even the ones that are able to shoot it very well. I would say by far that that is the biggest complaint I hear about the pistol. There are a handful of guys that have experienced broken parts and have called the pistol a piece of shit. They aren't gun guys and don't seem to understand that when you use something enough, it will break. We didn't all receive our pistols new while at the academy, so the range of rounds put through it could have been minuscule to heavy.
I wouldn't say the pistol doesn't have good ergonomics though. The one thing I like about it is the magazine release design. It is a lot easier to manipulate with either hand than the traditional button somewhere below the slide, especially if the pistol doesn't fit your hands great.
I can't scientifically test the materials that make up the gun, but there is a certain "something" that one feels and knows when they hold something made with quality. Similarly, you can also definitely tell what isn't made to the same standard. My duty pistol is definitely the former.
O-ring was introduced to pistols that were build for top accuracy per actual or desired use (pistols for SOF and sport shooters). P30 is plain vanilla service pistol for uniformed carry.
In other news, this group was shot, quite coincidentally, today with a garden variety training ammo and using that massive stock 0.140 wide front sight. This is not an exception from a rule as quite a few shooters have done the same or better.
That's not to dispute what you're saying; just to show that this plain vanilla service pistol would satisfy requirements of most discrete users without O-ring.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v466/Heartachedoc/photobucket-2846-1318991666813.jpg
P.S. P30 with LEM trigger.
Damn, reading all these comments about less than ideal triggers makes me say to myself "what if?" but I know that would be too easy of a scapegoat for me as I don't shoot that well with the HK at all.
I found the P30 V3 DA/SA trigger quite nice. The first time I shot the P30 I picked it up cold and shot a course of fire better than I did with service Sig Sauers that I have been using for 15 years. I find the stock P30 DA/SA trigger to be very similar to standard Sig DA/SA service trigger. Probably why I shoot it just as well.
The H&K trigger is a service pistol trigger. Like all things, if you are used to competition level triggers, or striker fired triggers then the H&K trigger is not going to come natural to you. I felt that the H&K overall feel and operation was very similar to the Sig platform in terms of grip angle, tall bore axis, pointability, and of course the trigger.
I would agree HK does seem to produce the most reliable out of the box pistols. With all the recent Glock issues it is clear that HK really does produce a weapon right and test the hell out of it before it hits the streets. My very first pistol I ever bought when I was 21 was an HK 40 USP V1. I have owned dozens of HK pistols since but do not currently own any anymore. I train and carry Glock pistols and decided to master a platform so I only use one now and went with Glock for several reasons over HK.
I do agree HK triggers suck except for the P7. I plan on buying another P7M13 someday when I have all my rifles purchased.
HK "In a world of compromise some don't"...Glock are you listening?!? We love you but hire some HK designers for God sake!
In other news, this group was shot, quite coincidentally, today with a garden variety training ammo and using that massive stock 0.140 wide front sight. This is not an exception from a rule as quite a few shooters have done the same or better.
That's not to dispute what you're saying; just to show that this plain vanilla service pistol would satisfy requirements of most discrete users without O-ring.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v466/Heartachedoc/photobucket-2846-1318991666813.jpg
P.S. P30 with LEM trigger.
If you insist, here is 27yard 10 shot group made off-hand (two hand grip). I put those two right side flyers, when got too excited about L-shaped hole I just made :o
HK P30L with LEM (6lb) using Geco 9x19 NATO steel jacket FMJ.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v286/montrala/Range%20reports/IMAG0145a.jpg
As I wrote before, accurate enough for plain vanilla duty pistol.
one thing u cant ever argue is the hk's accuracy.
gtmtnbiker98
10-19-11, 20:30
one thing u cant ever argue is the hk's accuracy.
Oh, somebody would find something to bitch about.
one thing u cant ever argue is the hk's accuracy.
I would certainly agree to that. First time I shot a full size H&K45 I rented it at a range to try out next to one of my high dollar 1911s. Out at 15 yards I shot it just as well as my pampered 1911. I was simply amazed that a dirty, abused, range gun that cost 1/2 as much as my 1911 (Les Baer in this case) could do that. I bought an H&K45 the next week.
Magic_Salad0892
10-21-11, 10:15
I cannot agree with this. Some of their firearms are innovative, some well engineered, others are not. For instance the HK45 I had was anything but innovative, submitted for the now discontinued joint service pistol trials, it was clunky, heavy, big, awkward, ill-fitted, and so ridiculously overpriced considering it's polymer frame that it virtually canceled itself out, at least to my mind!
The specimen I owned was an early model, likely they've improved it somewhat, however the bulk of the design I found distinctly inferior to offerings from Glock, and S&W which being simpler, were easier to operate and maintain. The HK held less ammo in a bigger representation, it's accuracy was totally dependent upon the performance of a rubber O-ring, and though mine never suffered a failure as a result of the o-ring, it was a constant worry.
The trigger was lousy, it also has a groove integral to the trigger guard which would pinch the trigger finger between it and the trigger under recoil & reset. The grip inserts were poorly fitted, resulting in the pistol squirming in my hand when fired, it also would rattle considerablly when shaken lightly from side to side. further the seams were imperfect, again resulting in pinch, it's notable that the grip inserts of the M&P 45 I was comparing it to were both cosmetically & functionally perfect, amazing as the M&P was virtually half it's pricepoint!
Another thing I recall were the HK magazines, which are extremely expensive, the two or three, that came with mine had feed lips that were very very sharp, enough so to consistently cut you as you loaded them, they also had oversized baseplates that garishly protruded out the bottom of the pistol, contributing greatly to it's bulky feel. There were other issues as well, the pistol as I recall was awkward to disassemble requiring deft movement of the offhand, however the biggest was the absolute indifference of HK customer service to civilian customers, though at the time I was still active duty Navy....
Don't get me wrong, HK is an iconic name in firearms, they do have many fine examples of their work in the field, and many smarter, more experienced men & women swear by them, however it's my point that they are far from perfect, particularly when you consider that they are simply unable to compete with Glock, or S&W M&P at a reasonable pricepoint.....:(
Weird. I love the HK45.
If I was a .45 ACP user, instead of a 9x19mm guy, I'd use an HK45C exclusively.
I have to disagree with literally... EVERYTHING in that sentence. However, I admit I have less than 2k rounds on that gun. I've only shot one that belonged to a family member.
Colorado S14
10-25-11, 14:13
I am an HK USP 9mm owner and figured I would throw my $.2 in here as well. My USP is old, 1994 old, regular barrel rifling not poly, non captured recoil assy. etc. I probably have close to 15,000 rounds through it over its life and have not had a single problem which was not user induced (I cut hammer spring once in an effort to reduce DA pull, had a few light strikes, a new spring and back to 100% operation). I did replace the trigger return and magazine springs at 10,000 for peace of mind.
For me the USP is a fantastic package, the ergonomics are just fine. I agree that the P30/HK45 and M&P feel better in the hand due to the more contoured frames. I also agree that the trigger is not as good as what you would get in a striker fired gun or some other SA/DA guns. The LEM is fantastic and I think I will finally come around and give that a shot this year. I have become a huge fan of the magazine release on the HK and much prefer it to a push style release. The multi-function/de-cocking lever is easy for me to reach when holstering, but I will say that it takes more effort than I wish, my wife struggles to de-cock sometimes. The slide stop/release is out of the way and large enough to be useful. Take down is not as easy as some others, but not a difficult chore.
When I compare it to other pistols I own or have shot I truly believe that the HK is the best gun for a survival/SHTF/self-defense/battlefield sidearm. I have more faith that it will go bang every time than any other gun I have owned (well my Browning BPS and Spikes AR come close). A close friend of mine is nuts about his XDM and aside from feeling cheap (the polymer) it has had issues frequently when compared to the HK. I do really like Glocks, they are a quality firearm and I actually find that they point very naturally for me. But again, due to some experience with light strikes and FTF/FTE I would feel more comfortable with the HK in the nightstand. I actually plan to buy the wife an M&P9C for Christmas and have not doubt it will be a great gun (the early unlocking on some concerns me) but from my experiences the M&P just does not have the durability track record of the HKs yet. I really wish that SIG held the same reputation with their new guns that they did in the past, many of their designs intrigue me.
I look forward to many more years our of my HK and look forward to my next HK purchase (P2000SK for CCW). I
Bad Medicine
10-25-11, 14:26
I cannot agree with this. Some of their firearms are innovative, some well engineered, others are not. For instance the HK45 I had was anything but innovative, submitted for the now discontinued joint service pistol trials, it was clunky, heavy, big, awkward, ill-fitted, and so ridiculously overpriced considering it's polymer frame that it virtually canceled itself out, at least to my mind!
The specimen I owned was an early model, likely they've improved it somewhat, however the bulk of the design I found distinctly inferior to offerings from Glock, and S&W which being simpler, were easier to operate and maintain. The HK held less ammo in a bigger representation, it's accuracy was totally dependent upon the performance of a rubber O-ring, and though mine never suffered a failure as a result of the o-ring, it was a constant worry.
The trigger was lousy, it also has a groove integral to the trigger guard which would pinch the trigger finger between it and the trigger under recoil & reset. The grip inserts were poorly fitted, resulting in the pistol squirming in my hand when fired, it also would rattle considerablly when shaken lightly from side to side. further the seams were imperfect, again resulting in pinch, it's notable that the grip inserts of the M&P 45 I was comparing it to were both cosmetically & functionally perfect, amazing as the M&P was virtually half it's pricepoint!
Another thing I recall were the HK magazines, which are extremely expensive, the two or three, that came with mine had feed lips that were very very sharp, enough so to consistently cut you as you loaded them, they also had oversized baseplates that garishly protruded out the bottom of the pistol, contributing greatly to it's bulky feel. There were other issues as well, the pistol as I recall was awkward to disassemble requiring deft movement of the offhand, however the biggest was the absolute indifference of HK customer service to civilian customers, though at the time I was still active duty Navy....
Don't get me wrong, HK is an iconic name in firearms, they do have many fine examples of their work in the field, and many smarter, more experienced men & women swear by them, however it's my point that they are far from perfect, particularly when you consider that they are simply unable to compete with Glock, or S&W M&P at a reasonable pricepoint.....:(
Buy yourself some gloves or stick with glock, all the more HKs for though of us that can appreciate them. I happen to love the ergonomics on the HK45 or any HK handgun compared to that of a glock where when I push out I am practically aiming at the celling. They aren't the same price as a glock or s&w because they aren't a baseline firearm with a barrel, chamber, and trigger. As far as customer service goes, I haven't had much expirence but I have spoke with numerous guys who have good turn around and communication.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.