JonInWA
12-08-2015, 03:23 PM
Okay, so the thread title should have read "...Heckler & Koch VP40....darn Shift key... [fixed -- TJ]
As I recently related in this thread on the forum https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?17908-Recent-Acquisition-initial-Report-and-Assessment-Glock-Gen4-G22 I obtained a Glock Gen4 G22 in .40 S&W caliber to both "cover myself" in the event of a 9mm/.45 ACP ammunition shortage, as well as to run and test a Gen4 Glock. As related on the thread, to date I've been pleased with it, but somewhat wanted a pistol to that would allow me to compete in the new IDPA CCP division, which requires a barrel less than 4.2" in .40S&W.
The candidates considered were:
-Walther P5 (vintage, expensive, butt-heel magazine release, expensive magazines, acquired taste triggerpull-I've previously owned 3 or so of them...);
-Walther PPQ;
-Sigpro SP2022 (DA/SA);
-Steyr M1A1 (Interesting, but unsure if Steyr has finally manufactured a truly reliable Willi Bubits designed pistol without lurking gremlins in the machine...);
-FN FNS;
-Glock Gen4 G23;
-CZ P07;
-Heckler & Koch VP40.
The candidate field pretty quickly narrowed itself down to two serious contenders for me: The CZ PO7 and the HK VP40. The Walther P5 was simply too expensive, too limiting, and not in .40; the PPQ I never really seriously considered, due to descriptions of a too light trigger and potential/perceived issues with the magazine release; the Sigpro is a good gun, but has a high bore axis, lack of suitable grip adjustments to satisfy me (based on my previous experience with a Sigpro 2340), and somewhat hindered vis-a-vis the competition with its DA/SA trigger; the Steyr, while interesting, was eliminated due to potential quirkiness and its unique sight system (which I used decently on a previous M40, but which I decided was simply "too different" for me these days); the FNS due to some significant sight issues experienced with one owned by a very experienced shooting friend (the rear sight required milling down to to provide a decent center mass POA/POI-I didn't want the aggro potentially involved); the Glock Gen4 G23 was tempting, due to its commonality with my other Glocks as one of my primary platforms, but ultimately I decided that even in Gen4 guise, in .40 the "juice simply wouldn't warrant the squeeze" as discussed in DocGKR's duty ammunition thread.
The CZ PO7 was tempting-I have several friends that are very successfully running Cee Zeds, and in their PO7s and PO9 CZ provides each gun with a DA/SA decocker (the default set-up) as well as an optional manual safety DA/SA or SA set-up. One close friend has quite the little cottage industry going providing smoother PO triggers/trigger components/triggerjobs, which made it even more tempting.
But ultimately, I choose the Heckler & Koch VP40, for several reasons. First, HK simply has a superb reputation for quality-in terms of materials used and in assembly/quality control. While I consider my Glocks to all be problem free and fully capable, HK was a lurking temptation. And the VP pistols eliminated two of my previous significant qualms-they come with an intrinsically quite nice trigger/triggerpull, and they're priced competitively-on the high side of competitiveness, but still reasonably competitively.
Second, I liked the inherent adjustability inherent, what with their 3 backstraps and six side panels. While I've been well served by my Glocks, and still argue that within reasonable size/grip parameters shooteers can quickly adapt and adjust to most platforms, assuming they have somewhat decent intrinsic ergos, it's still nice to have the adjustability and grip customizing features provided out of the box by HK in the VP series.
Third. since the VPs use P30 magazines, magazines are both reasonably available, and fairly reasonably priced (in my neck of the woods, they're easily obtainable for $39). When previously considering HK pistols, the combination of high price, marginal triggerpulls, and limited availability (and expensive) magazines have hetrofor eliminated HKs from my ownership consideration (except for one P7 PSP that I owned in the 1990s for several years-but that's another story/thread).
Fourth, whether by deliberate design or fortuitous quirk, the VP40 barrel length barely squeaks past the IDPA 4.2" criteria-by a couple of hundredths of an inch....And, really neatly straddles the "duty gun/compact gun" parameters nicely, providing more than sufficient barrel length and sight radius to really shine without feeling compromised by one or the other category.
The one I chose was HK's "LE Configuration" providing the gun with 3 magazines and a set of Mepro Lite tritium nightsights. It's a nice package, at a very decent price savings-especially since I'd be needing a bare minimum of 4 magazines anyhow, and the Meps have a good day and night sight picture, as well as the now tactically requisite hook to perform interesting emergency reloads with one's belt, shoe phone heel, various bodily and physical appendages, etc. Essentially you're getting a $160 package for $100-and the $160 applies only if you don't have to pay extra for the sight installation. Another very nice plus is that I found the sights to be properly regulated out of the box, which was not the case with my new Glock Gen4 G22...
After the obligatory initial field stripping, cleaning and lubing, my initial firing, using predominantly Remington/UMC 165 gr cartridges, with some 18o gr Federal brass-cased HST was highly successful. The VP40 is an exceptionally easy gun to shoot, and shoot well. Triggerpull is excellent, with a short reset. After initially using a Tactical Tailor universal Low Profile holster (which initially worked quide well, but then I found some of the protrusion of the HK's levers/appendages would slightly catch on the internal seams on draws), Blade-Tech was good enough to very expeditiously make a one-off modification to one of their VP9 Nano IWB holsters for me (they actually have a VP40/VP40 mold/exemplar pistol on hand, and will be incorporating it into their regular production option list), which is very comfortable and effective for concealed carry and competiton. Once they get their mold guns, I'll likely have Olen Holsters make me one of their OWB rigs as well.
And the the backstrap/side panel customization. Over on the HKPro forum, with some judicious use of the Search function, I quickly discovered a very detailed thread guiding one of achieving the individually ideal backstrap/panel configuration-Here's the key take-out from the thread:
With leaving the side panels alone, swap out the different backstraps, while trying the following: Look at the target object with the pistol at your chest prior to press-out; Close your eyes and keep them closed; Press out the pistol to your natural extended shooting position; Open eyes and see where the front sight is vertically; If the front sight is too low, install a larger backstrap and repeat above steps; If the front sight is too high, install a smaller backstrap and repeat-Ultimately, you want the front and rear sights aligned for elevation on target naturally after your press-out. Then, for the side panels, install them for comfort and to get as much skin contact on the gun with a comfortable grip, as well as some people like the side panels to drive how their trigger finger lands on the trigger (and on the magazine release paddles)
The out-of-the-box HK default is a the Medium backstrap and Medium side panels. After experimentation, I switched things out to the Small backstrap, a Small left panel, and a Medium right panel; that seems to provide me with both the right natural sight alignment on draw and presentation, along with a superb feel and index. The adjustment is easily accomplished by drifting out the gun's backstrap retention/lanyard pin (although why HK uses a roll pin instead of a solid pin is beyond me, but it came out and was re-installed with no damage or drama with a good punch-I believe 3/32). Just in case, I've already ordered 2 spares, at only $1 apiece from HK Parts.
Interestingly, HK's RSA replacement interval for the flat-wired VP 40 RSA is at a minimum of 10K rounds-significantly less frequently than the 5,000-7,500 interval recommended by Glock for their Gen4 RSAs. However, the HK RSA goes for $27, which is significantly more expensive than Glock's Gen4 RSA as I recall-so if you factor in price, it may be a wash between the two.
So-Now I feel more than adequately covered by .40 chambered pistols for both real-world and competition needs. I plan in using the VP40 in this month's IDPA match; I'll keep the forum duly notified if anything of particular interest occurs. It appears to be an excellent gun; while I doubt I'll be significantly deviating from choosing Glock as my primary platform of choice, I am glad to have had the opportunity to acquire the VP40. I'll see how it does over time.
Best, Jon
As I recently related in this thread on the forum https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?17908-Recent-Acquisition-initial-Report-and-Assessment-Glock-Gen4-G22 I obtained a Glock Gen4 G22 in .40 S&W caliber to both "cover myself" in the event of a 9mm/.45 ACP ammunition shortage, as well as to run and test a Gen4 Glock. As related on the thread, to date I've been pleased with it, but somewhat wanted a pistol to that would allow me to compete in the new IDPA CCP division, which requires a barrel less than 4.2" in .40S&W.
The candidates considered were:
-Walther P5 (vintage, expensive, butt-heel magazine release, expensive magazines, acquired taste triggerpull-I've previously owned 3 or so of them...);
-Walther PPQ;
-Sigpro SP2022 (DA/SA);
-Steyr M1A1 (Interesting, but unsure if Steyr has finally manufactured a truly reliable Willi Bubits designed pistol without lurking gremlins in the machine...);
-FN FNS;
-Glock Gen4 G23;
-CZ P07;
-Heckler & Koch VP40.
The candidate field pretty quickly narrowed itself down to two serious contenders for me: The CZ PO7 and the HK VP40. The Walther P5 was simply too expensive, too limiting, and not in .40; the PPQ I never really seriously considered, due to descriptions of a too light trigger and potential/perceived issues with the magazine release; the Sigpro is a good gun, but has a high bore axis, lack of suitable grip adjustments to satisfy me (based on my previous experience with a Sigpro 2340), and somewhat hindered vis-a-vis the competition with its DA/SA trigger; the Steyr, while interesting, was eliminated due to potential quirkiness and its unique sight system (which I used decently on a previous M40, but which I decided was simply "too different" for me these days); the FNS due to some significant sight issues experienced with one owned by a very experienced shooting friend (the rear sight required milling down to to provide a decent center mass POA/POI-I didn't want the aggro potentially involved); the Glock Gen4 G23 was tempting, due to its commonality with my other Glocks as one of my primary platforms, but ultimately I decided that even in Gen4 guise, in .40 the "juice simply wouldn't warrant the squeeze" as discussed in DocGKR's duty ammunition thread.
The CZ PO7 was tempting-I have several friends that are very successfully running Cee Zeds, and in their PO7s and PO9 CZ provides each gun with a DA/SA decocker (the default set-up) as well as an optional manual safety DA/SA or SA set-up. One close friend has quite the little cottage industry going providing smoother PO triggers/trigger components/triggerjobs, which made it even more tempting.
But ultimately, I choose the Heckler & Koch VP40, for several reasons. First, HK simply has a superb reputation for quality-in terms of materials used and in assembly/quality control. While I consider my Glocks to all be problem free and fully capable, HK was a lurking temptation. And the VP pistols eliminated two of my previous significant qualms-they come with an intrinsically quite nice trigger/triggerpull, and they're priced competitively-on the high side of competitiveness, but still reasonably competitively.
Second, I liked the inherent adjustability inherent, what with their 3 backstraps and six side panels. While I've been well served by my Glocks, and still argue that within reasonable size/grip parameters shooteers can quickly adapt and adjust to most platforms, assuming they have somewhat decent intrinsic ergos, it's still nice to have the adjustability and grip customizing features provided out of the box by HK in the VP series.
Third. since the VPs use P30 magazines, magazines are both reasonably available, and fairly reasonably priced (in my neck of the woods, they're easily obtainable for $39). When previously considering HK pistols, the combination of high price, marginal triggerpulls, and limited availability (and expensive) magazines have hetrofor eliminated HKs from my ownership consideration (except for one P7 PSP that I owned in the 1990s for several years-but that's another story/thread).
Fourth, whether by deliberate design or fortuitous quirk, the VP40 barrel length barely squeaks past the IDPA 4.2" criteria-by a couple of hundredths of an inch....And, really neatly straddles the "duty gun/compact gun" parameters nicely, providing more than sufficient barrel length and sight radius to really shine without feeling compromised by one or the other category.
The one I chose was HK's "LE Configuration" providing the gun with 3 magazines and a set of Mepro Lite tritium nightsights. It's a nice package, at a very decent price savings-especially since I'd be needing a bare minimum of 4 magazines anyhow, and the Meps have a good day and night sight picture, as well as the now tactically requisite hook to perform interesting emergency reloads with one's belt, shoe phone heel, various bodily and physical appendages, etc. Essentially you're getting a $160 package for $100-and the $160 applies only if you don't have to pay extra for the sight installation. Another very nice plus is that I found the sights to be properly regulated out of the box, which was not the case with my new Glock Gen4 G22...
After the obligatory initial field stripping, cleaning and lubing, my initial firing, using predominantly Remington/UMC 165 gr cartridges, with some 18o gr Federal brass-cased HST was highly successful. The VP40 is an exceptionally easy gun to shoot, and shoot well. Triggerpull is excellent, with a short reset. After initially using a Tactical Tailor universal Low Profile holster (which initially worked quide well, but then I found some of the protrusion of the HK's levers/appendages would slightly catch on the internal seams on draws), Blade-Tech was good enough to very expeditiously make a one-off modification to one of their VP9 Nano IWB holsters for me (they actually have a VP40/VP40 mold/exemplar pistol on hand, and will be incorporating it into their regular production option list), which is very comfortable and effective for concealed carry and competiton. Once they get their mold guns, I'll likely have Olen Holsters make me one of their OWB rigs as well.
And the the backstrap/side panel customization. Over on the HKPro forum, with some judicious use of the Search function, I quickly discovered a very detailed thread guiding one of achieving the individually ideal backstrap/panel configuration-Here's the key take-out from the thread:
With leaving the side panels alone, swap out the different backstraps, while trying the following: Look at the target object with the pistol at your chest prior to press-out; Close your eyes and keep them closed; Press out the pistol to your natural extended shooting position; Open eyes and see where the front sight is vertically; If the front sight is too low, install a larger backstrap and repeat above steps; If the front sight is too high, install a smaller backstrap and repeat-Ultimately, you want the front and rear sights aligned for elevation on target naturally after your press-out. Then, for the side panels, install them for comfort and to get as much skin contact on the gun with a comfortable grip, as well as some people like the side panels to drive how their trigger finger lands on the trigger (and on the magazine release paddles)
The out-of-the-box HK default is a the Medium backstrap and Medium side panels. After experimentation, I switched things out to the Small backstrap, a Small left panel, and a Medium right panel; that seems to provide me with both the right natural sight alignment on draw and presentation, along with a superb feel and index. The adjustment is easily accomplished by drifting out the gun's backstrap retention/lanyard pin (although why HK uses a roll pin instead of a solid pin is beyond me, but it came out and was re-installed with no damage or drama with a good punch-I believe 3/32). Just in case, I've already ordered 2 spares, at only $1 apiece from HK Parts.
Interestingly, HK's RSA replacement interval for the flat-wired VP 40 RSA is at a minimum of 10K rounds-significantly less frequently than the 5,000-7,500 interval recommended by Glock for their Gen4 RSAs. However, the HK RSA goes for $27, which is significantly more expensive than Glock's Gen4 RSA as I recall-so if you factor in price, it may be a wash between the two.
So-Now I feel more than adequately covered by .40 chambered pistols for both real-world and competition needs. I plan in using the VP40 in this month's IDPA match; I'll keep the forum duly notified if anything of particular interest occurs. It appears to be an excellent gun; while I doubt I'll be significantly deviating from choosing Glock as my primary platform of choice, I am glad to have had the opportunity to acquire the VP40. I'll see how it does over time.
Best, Jon