Anyone seen anything about new Gadgets being produced? Would love to get one for my 48
Printable View
Anyone seen anything about new Gadgets being produced? Would love to get one for my 48
Darn, I could use one myself for a new gun. I looked on gunbroker and was surprised not to see anything for sale. Usually when stuff gets discontinued the parts are listed for a huge premium. But maybe I wasn't sure what search terms to use.
I tried SCD, Tau, Striker Controlled Device and Tau Gadget.
Two issues on the secondary market as I see it.
1. Risk of clone/knockoff much too high for a life safety device.
2. No one knew they were going to be discontinued so there was no buy up of remaining stock. Also anyone that uses one isn’t willing to give it up for what the market would bear for a used gun part.
I had great luck sourcing two for my new Gen 5s with a WTB thread here on PF. You are communicating to without a doubt the largest group of SCD users on the planet so extras exist. They are also some of the most professional, polite, friendly people Ive had the pleasure to “ Meet” so If there is one to be had its here.
Good luck with your search.
Just the thoughts of an aging redneck…
Clay
I’ve thought about trying to source some Gen 5s here, but I would like to have back up SCDs in case they break. My hope is we see a quality manufacturer produce some soon.
Imagine if one of the tactical super stud YouTube guys preached how much you needed the SCD on your Glock. Even some one like Hicock45 (due to his kind personality and large audience) would be a great promoter of an SCD like item.
One can dream.
Making a profit on items crafted with premium materials and inspected according to high standards is not easy. The gadgets were not cheap price wise, and with inflation would be costing even more now. Law enforcement purchasing agents were not buyers. The man in the street was not a potential customer. I never owned one and don't know any local owners. I regret not having bought a couple.
It really is a shame the market didn’t adopt the SCD on a broader scale. It’s a fantastic idea for a “black box” platform like a Glock. Then again, if people aren’t privy to why such a thing is even remotely a good idea, they won’t perceive the need. We’ve had Glocks since the ‘80s and it wasn't until just a handful of years ago that the SCD came around. Since then everyone and their brother has come out with a black, generic, striker fired pistol without a safety. So why would anyone ever “need” one?
Just “learn how to reholster” they say. Well, uh, yeah….about that…
What's funny is that I have a prototype SCD that fits the G3 and G4 standard frames, so it persuaded me to pick up a Gen 3 17 (California) to go with it :cool:
Because in cars it isn't always about you. Sometimes some else runs into you. With a gun its all you. Know yourself, know the gun, know your gear and buy accordingly.
I don't have collapsible holsters, I don't own any piece of clothing with draw strings lower than the hoody. I always look and lift my shirt/sweater up when re holstering. I don't see a point to them for me. IF God forbid I have to pull it for self defense I ain't putting it anywhere until either the cops show up or the bad guy is super obviously dead. Like fell off a cliff, walked into spinning propeller blades, or fell head first into a working wood chipper...obvious
Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk
Then don't use one.
But by your reasoning one could carry a 1911 cocked and unlocked with the same security and peace of mind, but who would do that? The only difference would be a more sensitive trigger but that wouldn't matter because your plan eliminates all the variables, right?
And for the record, I'm not trying to bust your balls or pick a fight... I'm just pointing out why so many of us prefer to have the extra layer of protection even if we may not ever need it.
None of which answered the question @GearFondler rhetorically asked, "why not have that extra layer of security and protection if you can?"
You don't want it, fine. You're mistake free and invincible, fine. But you didn't offer a reason why one shouldn't have it.
To each his own. I felt the same way about night sights for 30 years or so. And then I found a reason to have them and haven't looked back.
Not worth arguing over...so I'll leave it there.
I love the SCD. Initially if I recall correctly there was no way to legally export them from the United States so obviously I don't have any but I must have tried them on guns when I was in the US or something because I developed a strong attachment to them.
Anyway the big battle from my perspective is that you're fighting against twenty or thirty years of very successful branding from Glock, a company who has sold, I guess, several times as many units as TDG.
They spent years telling everyone they were safe as is, and people bought in en masse, and now you're swimming upstream trying to convince people that not only is an improvement available, but that they themselves were wrong in their previous assessment of their gun. And it's a particularly hard one, because frankly the auto pistol with no external safety as a safe gun is in my opinion a really counterintuitive concept. You have to let go of a bunch of very core ideas about what makes a machine safe to operate, and I think part of how Glock achieved this was by convincing people that Glocks were safe AS LONG AS YOU WERE SERIOUS TACTICAL LEGIT.
It's like selling a performance car which has no neutral by convincing buyers that a REAL driver is only going to start the engine to DRIVE. Like a PROFESSIONAL. And at first everyone is like "that's dumb" but otherwise the car kicks ass and it slowly comes to dominate the market, but everyone who has one, had to join the no-neutral cult to buy in.
So now, you need to convince all the buyers that actually, either the cult was always wrong and they got suckered, or the cult might be right for professional racers, but that's not what you are and you need to spend money to admit it.
Ironically, I think the harder it is to convince someone of something, the harder it is to win them back. You'd think it would be the opposite: you wear someone down and they finally agree the sky is red, but the tiniest bit of evidence and they're back to team blue. But in my experience, once you get someone to swallow a really hard pill, they're never going to admit it was a waste of time.
Tough row to hoe.
Well how safe is safe? Surely having an empty chamber is safer still. Or keep all the ammo in a separate pocket altogether.
It's not exactly like the difference between an unloaded gun in a safe with no one around vs twirling a cocked 1911 on your finger like in a western movie while downing a liter of whiskey.
Personally I don't care. Carry the gun disassembled in different pockets and have someone else carry the ammo. I'm fine with that. I'm simply answering the question of "why not have the extra layer of security"
Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk
I also love the SCD, and never owned a Glock prior to being able to have one. All of my Glocks save the G44 have one, and the G44 only doesn’t have one because Tom never sold one for it. I think (hope) I still have a spare in my parts bin.
I sincerely hope someone takes up the SCD either as a primary product or as an accessory, but either way, maintains the quality and QA/QC Tom brought.
There’s some combination of trigger weight and length of trigger pull that makes me feel like a SCD or external hammer is a good idea. A stock Glock is right around that line. A snubby with a 10# trigger can go in a pocket without concern. When I thumb the hammer on my P-07 on holstering, it’s mainly to confirm that it’s decocked. But a fully tensioned striker with a light, short pull really demands a SCD. I hope this happens soon.
To each their own. I've carried Glocks (without SCD) and cocked and locked Colt Gov't Model on my agency's tactical team for years without a mishap. That doesn't mean that Mr. Murphy was never in the area...only that his attention was directed elsewhere.
Whatever gets you through the day. I'll drink to that.
An SCD changes my whole outlook on the Glock. With a the right propaganda I bet the masses can be convinced to look into them within a few years.
Your examples are not good ones, because they all involve compromises that would slow down one’s ability to put shots on target under stress. In other words, there are operational downsides to every example you used. On the other hand, the SCD doesn’t at all negatively impact one’s ability to deploy the weapon quickly and efficiently.
There is literally no downside to the SCD, other than the nominal monetary expense (which in the grand scheme of how much most of us on this forum spend on gun stuff is frankly trivial) and the minimal effort it takes to install it.
That is why many of us choose to use the SCD - it makes the weapon more forgiving of potentially catastrophic mistakes in reholstering, especially under stress, while costing us practically nothing.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Maybe turn it into a Pez dispenser.
https://i.gifer.com/2fC0.gif
With the patent gone, it wouldn't surprise me, if at some point Glock started it as a factory option. Seems to me that it would be a value proposition to law enforcement clients.
Observation - I've never seen a SCD user angry because someone else didn't see the value in the SCD but I've seen a lot of SCD critics / naysayers show disdain or irritation towards those that see value in the SCD.
It reminds me of a pretty good definition of anger I heard a while back... "anger is being pissed because everyone doesn't think like you do."
I've seen a non-zero number of people with new holes in them, occasionally fatal, and I'm sure they were equally sure of their infallibility prior to material evidence to the contrary. I'm not infallible nor do I have a crystal ball as to what my next lethal force encounter will look like, so I'll continue to use the SCD on my Glocks. If the SCD did not exist, I'd be back to carrying a hammer fired Sig.
To elaborate, people get scenarios in their head where they just get to hold the gun scanning alertly until the cops show up and stuff just doesn't always work out like that.
What did it for me was the prospect of running away and having to jump a fence. Is that going to come up? I doubt it but I don't get to pick when I have to scoot and where the fences are. I do get to pick adding an element of safety to reholstering under stress.
The tribe has spoken.
Same could be said for revolvers. The people who put holes in themselves is non-zero. The only zero is a gun without ammo.
I'm not sure about all the alert scanning but if I'm involved in a self defense scenario I'm not going to be holstering and unholstering. When I hear sirens close by remove the mag and chambered round, put it on the car or ground step away with my hands visible.
As for getting some scenario...I don't know where I'd be running to or what fences I'll be jumping over. I can't think of one place I go that has a fence. Even most neighbors here don't have fencing. And if I'm jumping over some guys backyard fence 3 streets down I'm not in a self defense situation....why am I even in his backyard?
Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk
Because shit happens.
Here's a more realistic one. Somebody opens fire and your wife gets hit. You return fire and the gunman disappears behind cover. You don't know if he's coming back. You need to help your wife to cover, apply a TQ and be prepared to use your gun again if the gunman returns. Now you have to reholster with slippery bloody hands, in a hurry, while shook up. Or leave it on the floor.
'I'll never have to reholster' is short-sighted.
I swear it’s like we went back to 2013 or so with these arguments from 4RNR :rolleyes:
We get it, it’s not for you. Your point is made, now can everyone else discuss the SCD rebirth if that’s ok with you?