So you're the guy from MAC. Right? This post pretty much mirrors his video on the gun.
Printable View
I used to own the older H9, so I bought one of these.
I have fired 200 rounds through it and plan on firing more. There were zero stoppages, however I noticed a significant number of design deficiencies, and here are the areas in need of improvement:
Grip- The spot where the frame and the backstrap meet is not well blended. The backstrap beavertail has sharp edges that don't properly line up with the frame. This results in these edges digging into the shooter's hand. I recommend better machining in this area.
Slide stop/release- This extends far back, and I was having intermittent failures to lock back due to interaction with my support hand palm. I believe that the slide stop/release itself should be shortened, so that it does not extend as far to the rear. As is, it is very susceptible to conflicts with modern firing grips.
Barrel/recoil spring- This firearm is far too picky about how the recoil spring nestles into the barrel. A modern pistol should be difficult or impossible to put together incorrectly, not the other way around. I strongly recommend a redesign of this interface so that the pistol cannot be easily reassembled incorrectly.
Magazine- While cycling, the slide tends to push the next round in the magazine forwards slightly while in the pistol. This means that when ejecting a partial magazine, the top round may cause the magazine to fail to eject, requiring manual stripping for removal.
I recommend a redesign of the interior geometry so that the top round in the magazine cannot cause this failure.
Follower- I know that Daniel Defense has a thing for yellow followers, but they don't contrast enough with brass cases, especially when trying to see how many rounds are remaining in the magazine through the witness holes in the back. This follower should be another color.
Manual ejection- when manually unloading the pistol, rounds are particularly difficult to clear from the chamber. They stick on the extractor and this requires sudden force to overcome. This could be a safety or even tactical hazard.
Trigger- it's mediocre. I can live with it, but would really like a stronger reset.
Sights- The Hudson H9 had a similar issue in which it was calibrated for a so-called "combat hold", and therefore POI was low. On the H9, this was remedied with a shorter replacement front sight, but on the Daniel H9, I found that the POI was so low that it was below the torso at 25 yards, and I am not sure that there is a low enough front sight to fix this. Therefore, a taller rear sight would be the next step. I have ordered replacement sights from Trijicon, but it is hard to tell if this will even fix the issue, as they are both a standard Sig #8 height.
In my opinion, there is no need to reinvent the wheel here; pistol sights have been utilized one way for more than a hundred years and it has worked fine. In fact, in the Daniel H9 manual, it even shows that the POI is at the tip of the front sight blade. Intentionally creating a pistol that shoots low, especially that low, is nonsensical. I recommend that the guns just ship with a taller rear sight, or better yet, taller, optic compatible sights.
Additionally, my pistol was not firing center due to sights that were installed visually off-center from the factory. I confirmed this with a set of calipers after the fact. This is a QC issue that should not be present on such a firearm.
Because of these issues, I was not able to properly measure the accuracy of this pistol, however it did not appear to be particularly accurate. This is concerning, as detailed in the next point below.
Barrel- I have seen reports online of the barrel failing to stabilize ammunition, resulting in a "keyhole" effect in which the bullets tumble. This is a serious defect, and if as widespread as I suspect, requires a new barrel for every pistol. My pistol was so hard to group due to the previously mentioned issues with the sights, that I could not get a good judge of the accuracy, but it did not seem particularly accurate. I will be testing this more during future range sessions to see if this is a problem for me as well. Looking through the barrel though, I can see that the rifling is not as crisp or strong as I would expect, which does not instill a lot of confidence. With this rifling design, even slight over-boring would result in the issues with keyholing and accuracy.
Optic plates- optic plates are outdated and inferior to slides that are directly cut for optics. I have not had the ability to mount an optic to this pistol yet because the plates are not yet available, but it appears to be a flawed design from the start. The slide should be RMR cut from the factory, period. This is a modern combat pistol, and should have a durable system for mounting optics, especially with the aforementioned issues with the iron sights.
This pistol is not ready for serious usage, in my opinion. This is yet another example of beta testing by the masses. Hopefully they fix these issues with the next generation.
Nice right up.
Fudge me. I was really wanting to like this pistol.
1200 pistol that keyholes and often doesn’t function well with a bore axis similar to a Glock 17. Why buy this thing? Why even care about it?
The big reviewers are being paid by Leviathan Group to say kind, and likely untrue, things about it. You’ll notice anyone not under their umbrella is having a terrible time with this pistol.
I dont see the appeal, its basically an updated cz75 compact with stiker.
Metal frame, good trigger, low bore axis, compact size.
At best, its not great for any one thing, just a neat middle of the road pistol