OWB “Duty/retention” Holster for p365XL w Romeo Zero

[Gadfly]

As the thread title says… My agency is now appoving the 365x and XL with Romeo Zero RDS. There are tons of IWB holsters on the market. But we have some agents who want to carry the 365 wRDS as their only duty gun, so they would need an exposed OWB holster with some form of retention. Desatis makes a leather thumb break, and Galco makes the FLETCH holster. But I was wondering is anyone makes a SLS/ALS type of holster for 365 with RDS?

Could not find anything from G Code, Bianchi, Safarilant, Blackhawk, CompTac…

Any suggestions?

[ssb]

https://blackhawk.com/t-series-l2c/

This is the only one I’m aware of.

[Gadfly]

https://blackhawk.com/t-series-l2c/

This is the only one I’m aware of.

While I am not a Blackhawk fan, this beats the hell out of a SERPA. And since we don’t allow trigger finger holster retention, it meets our needs. It also helps that it is low priced, as most cops are cheap SOBs.

Thanks!

Any other options are still appreciated.

[ssb]

While I am not a Blackhawk fan, this beats the hell out of a SERPA. And since we don’t allow trigger finger holster retention, it meets our needs. It also helps that it is low priced, as most cops are cheap SOBs.

Thanks!

Any other options are still appreciated.

I didn’t have extensive use of mine - it was mostly for hiking - but I found mine to be well made and fairly intuitive. My only hesitation about the retention system is that I’m already used to ALS, and it’s just different enough to matter.

[HCM]

While I am not a Blackhawk fan, this beats the hell out of a SERPA. And since we don’t allow trigger finger holster retention, it meets our needs. It also helps that it is low priced, as most cops are cheap SOBs.

Thanks!

Any other options are still appreciated.

Uhh when did we stop allowing trigger finger holster retention?

I’m a SERPA hater so I’m not complaining- PM me if it’s in writing …

[Clark Jackson]

As the thread title says… My agency is now appoving the 365x and XL with Romeo Zero RDS. There are tons of IWB holsters on the market. But we have some agents who want to carry the 365 wRDS as their only duty gun, so they would need an exposed OWB holster with some form of retention. Desatis makes a leather thumb break, and Galco makes the FLETCH holster. But I was wondering is anyone makes a SLS/ALS type of holster for 365 with RDS?

Could not find anything from G Code, Bianchi, Safarilant, Blackhawk, CompTac…

Any suggestions?

The popularity of the SIG P320 and P365 series of pistols is currently very high as evidenced by a cursory check of sales/availability along with the passionate P-F responses to any criticisms of said platforms.

Weapon popularity usually brings with it many indicators of support equipment suitability. The free market, I believe, provides mostly accurate assessments of equipment performance which subsequently informs purchasing decisions. I find this especially true when the topic shifts from the trivial to the consequential.

For the P365 series of pistols, the free market shows us there are almost no options for reliable retention holsters for the mission profile of an overt armed professional. This lack of free market support highlights the obvious: the carry method is not appropriate for the P365 series of pistols regardless of how much technology is on it or how large a magazine is stuffed into it.

IMHO, the mindset which accepts any micro pistol (or variant) as appropriate for overt armed professional use is irresponsible and indicates the level of ignorance/arrogance concerning the realities of armed combat. As with many armed professional organizations, I expect there are those who demonstrate a willful indifference to reality for the sake of personal comfort (aka laziness).

In my experience, the ignorant, arrogant, and/or lazy are those least-likely to re-enter the kill zone. Hard. Pass.

Recommendations:
1) Attempt to professionally educate those who may believe the P365/XL are appropriate for an overt armed professional mission; these people may simply not know any better and just need an experienced voice of reason.

2) Avoid those in your organization whose ignorance, arrogance, and/or laziness allow them to ignore the realities of their chosen profession.

3) Encourage your agency to provide officers a robust and suitable weapon platform, associated equipment, and training commensurate to their duties and responsibilities.

[kwb377]

https://www.daraholsters.com/Level-II/

I've used two of these over the course of about a year...currently carrying a PDP on duty in one. Shows fitment for 365XL, and they're optic cut.

No issues...good stuff.

[Le Français]

IMHO, the mindset which accepts any micro pistol (or variant) as appropriate for overt armed professional use is irresponsible and indicates the level of ignorance/arrogance concerning the realities of armed combat. As with many armed professional organizations, I expect there are those who demonstrate a willful indifference to reality for the sake of personal comfort (aka laziness).

In my experience, the ignorant, arrogant, and/or lazy are those least-likely to re-enter the kill zone. Hard. Pass.

Recommendations:
1) Attempt to professionally educate those who may believe the P365/XL are appropriate for an overt armed professional mission; these people may simply not know any better and just need an experienced voice of reason.

2) Avoid those in your organization whose ignorance, arrogance, and/or laziness allow them to ignore the realities of their chosen profession.

3) Encourage your agency to provide officers a robust and suitable weapon platform, associated equipment, and training commensurate to their duties and responsibilities.

For people who spend the vast majority of their work time carrying concealed in plainclothes, I think there is an argument for dedicating completely to one compact pistol, and using it even when carrying overtly. I've used small Glocks for this, especially since they can be fed by larger capacity magazines. Many people have noticed that their performance with a G26 is on par with larger models, for example. Consider also that Gadfly's agency provides long guns, which are often carried as primary weapons when wearing guns and armor overtly.

What I really don't get, and what you may be referencing, is carrying a tiny gun like a G43 or J-frame as a duty gun.

[Gadfly]

Uhh when did we stop allowing trigger finger holster retention?

I’m a SERPA hater so I’m not complaining- PM me if it’s in writing …

It’s just our local AOR. Not nationwide.

Our SAC let the FIs put the squash on trigger finger holsters in our AOR. We convinced him via the FLETC study, and the timing of issuing new guns, which would require most folks to purchase new holsters anyway. There was a little resistance, but not much. A couple ASACs being the biggest whiners. It falls under the catch all “unsafe activities at the range”, which is a policy, even if there is no specific serpa prohibition in policy.

Our current holster issue that just came up is folks stuffing their 365s into full size holster during qual. As in not wanting to swap holsters from qualing with full size glocks or p320s. We have been pushing this for a while, and finally have management support to say if you don’t wear a holster specifically made for the gun, you can’t qual with that gun.

With the upcoming swap to RDS guns, lots of folks about to have to buy new holsters yet again.

[Gadfly]

IMHO, the mindset which accepts any micro pistol (or variant) as appropriate for overt armed professional use is irresponsible and indicates the level of ignorance/arrogance concerning the realities of armed combat. As with many armed professional organizations, I expect there are those who demonstrate a willful indifference to reality for the sake of personal comfort (aka laziness).

In my experience, the ignorant, arrogant, and/or lazy are those least-likely to re-enter the kill zone. Hard. Pass.

Recommendations:
1) Attempt to professionally educate those who may believe the P365/XL are appropriate for an overt armed professional mission; these people may simply not know any better and just need an experienced voice of reason.

2) Avoid those in your organization whose ignorance, arrogance, and/or laziness allow them to ignore the realities of their chosen profession.

3) Encourage your agency to provide officers a robust and suitable weapon platform, associated equipment, and training commensurate to their duties and responsibilities.

You humble opinion is just that. And is not taking into account my female co workers who are 5’2” and have small hands. I have a few who want to just run the 365xl as a primary. And by policy they can. My goal is to find them something with retention that they can safely use.

And your assertion that the 365 series is somehow lacking? We have hundreds is not thousands in use in our agency. They run. You can ring IDPA size steel at 100yrds all day long with one. I can say I have seen only one crap out on us. Is it small? Yes. Can I run a larger gun a little better? Yes. But I am 5’10. I will be running a Glock or 320 in the duty rig… and grab a rifle. For the smaller statures agents, if they can run a smaller gun more comfortably, then let them. 12+1 is not a huge load out, but it is still respectable.

Not everyone in the agency is a door kicker.

[Clark Jackson]

For people who spend the vast majority of their work time carrying concealed in plainclothes, I think there is an argument for dedicating completely to one compact pistol, and using it even when carrying overtly. I've used small Glocks for this, especially since they can be fed by larger capacity magazines. Many people have noticed that their performance with a G26 is on par with larger models, for example. Consider also that Gadfly's agency provides long guns, which are often carried as primary weapons when wearing guns and armor overtly.

What I really don't get, and what you may be referencing, is carrying a tiny gun like a G43 or J-frame as a duty gun.

I appreciate the carry one type of firearm for everything (within reason). However, applied as justification for the over armed professional carry of a micro pistol I respectfully disagree. As to the type of pistols I’m referencing, I consider any P365 series gun to be inappropriate as a primary weapon for overt carry by an armed professional. I'm not talking about a concealed carry, an undercover carry, a close target reconnaissance carry or any other a non- or semi-permissive environment carry. I consider the P365 series of pistols to be in the same family as the G43/48 family although this comment will make many bristle and yes, I understand there are differences, but there's no one I've met (again, outliers are a thing) who is so small - and can still adequately serve in the armed professions - who cannot competently wield at least a Glock 19 or equivalent pistol.

I've been told on P-F repeatedly, and with great passion, the P365 series is like nothing Glock currently has on the market. This is usually written in the context of providing evidence as to why ABC flavor of P365 pistol should be everyone's solution to all carry needs. Therefore, based on popular opinion of P-F expertise concerning the SIG P365 series, I have to reject the "performance comparison" of the G26 with larger Glock models regardless of the potential validity of the statement were it made in a different discussion.


It’s just our local AOR. Not nationwide.

Our SAC let the FIs put the squash on trigger finger holsters in our AOR. We convinced him via the FLETC study, and the timing of issuing new guns, which would require most folks to purchase new holsters anyway. There was a little resistance, but not much. A couple ASACs being the biggest whiners. It falls under the catch all “unsafe activities at the range”, which is a policy, even if there is no specific serpa prohibition in policy.

Our current holster issue that just came up is folks stuffing their 365s into full size holster during qual. As in not wanting to swap holsters from qualing with full size glocks or p320s. We have been pushing this for a while, and finally have management support to say if you don’t wear a holster specifically made for the gun, you can’t qual with that gun.

With the upcoming swap to RDS guns, lots of folks about to have to buy new holsters yet again.

Not willing to swap holsters? Instructors and RSOs could not stop them?

YIKES!

Laziness is addictive and can be dangerous, but coupled with apathy it is legitimately deadly. It is disheartening to hear instructors, RSOs, or even other shooters are prohibited from stopping safety violations without the explicit approval of management. What does the negligent discharge and injury rate look like in your AOR?

You mentioned the RDS guns and new holsters. It sounds like your organization is conducting a forced move from iron sights to RDS: how is this being received? I’m curious how the current iron sight shooters are taking it because the RDS can be frustrating at first. I see push-back from those who are competent (or believe so) with iron sights and are unwilling to invest (there's that lazy thing again) to learn something new.


You humble opinion is just that. And is not taking into account my female co workers who are 5’2” and have small hands. I have a few who want to just run the 365xl as a primary. And by policy they can. My goal is to find them something with retention that they can safely use.

And your assertion that the 365 series is somehow lacking? We have hundreds is not thousands in use in our agency. They run. You can ring IDPA size steel at 100yrds all day long with one. I can say I have seen only one crap out on us. Is it small? Yes. Can I run a larger gun a little better? Yes. But I am 5’10. I will be running a Glock or 320 in the duty rig… and grab a rifle. For the smaller statures agents, if they can run a smaller gun more comfortably, then let them. 12+1 is not a huge load out, but it is still respectable.

Not everyone in the agency is a door kicker.

You are correct, my opinion is just an opinion but it is an informed one. None-the-less, still just an opinion. That said, based on the OP, I was under the impression opinions were solicited. I hope I did not misinterpret.

If opinions were solicited, as I believe they were, my opinion of a service/fighting pistol is germane to holster selection. Therefore, I felt it worth sharing this educated opinion while fully understanding the inherent P-F backlash to any criticism of SIG particularly if said criticism involves the P365 series.

Yes, in the context of this thread and discussion, the 365 is lacking. I am not commenting on the design’s ability to function (i.e., the cycle of operation). I am commenting on the design’s suitability for the overt armed professional. The P365 is not a service/fighting pistol. It is a concealment pistol. It is a back-up pistol. It is a personal defense pistol. There is a difference between something carried to immediately defend oneself vs something used to seek out and engage deadly threats. The P365 series are personal protection pistols that fill a role, but not the overt armed professional one.

Concerning smaller stature individuals, I have a female friend who is 4’11 and her hands are so small she would sometimes miss the trigger safety on her Glock 26.4. She picked up a P320 and did great. Based on this and the ever present “comfort” justification, I respectfully reject the notion that the P365 series is on par with the P320 series or comparable sized pistols. I believe my position is reinforced by your comments regarding ease of shooting larger pistols well and the superior ammunition capacity as compared to the P365 series. Both valid points and I concur.

Rifles. I believe you and Le Français made mention of rifles. I have some experience with rifles and their practical application in deadly force situations. I can confidently say this: if the rifle does not work (for whatever reason) or cannot be used (for whatever reason), no rational person wants the next available weapon to be less than optimal. The end.

Your last line is interesting to me. “Not everyone is a door kicker.” I know what this means, but I do not fully understand how it ties into this discussion. I provided opinions based on some important assumptions: those carrying P365 pistols were overt, armed professionals whose duties and responsibilities require them to interact with the public as enforcers of criminal law who are clearly identified as such including the obvious tools of the trade (body camera, pistol, magazines, radio, pepper spray, baton, body armor, "POLICE" markings, handcuffs/restraints, etc.). If you please, clarify the "not everyone is a door kicker" statement because if the P365s are just for intelligence personnel, crime scene technicians, public relations folks, etc. it may change my entire opinion.

[JCN]

Clark Jackson this isn’t meant to be a dig, but mainly a “help me understand how you know what you know” thing.

Can you share with me as a relative newcomer to PF what your military / duty / LEO experience is?

I like to learn but it helps to understand the context of where someone’s informed opinion is coming from.

[runcible]

... The free market, I believe, provides mostly accurate assessments of equipment performance which subsequently informs purchasing decisions. ... For the P365 series of pistols, the free market shows us there are almost no options for reliable retention holsters for the mission profile of an overt armed professional. This lack of free market support highlights the obvious: the carry method is not appropriate for the P365 series of pistols regardless of how much technology is on it or how large a magazine is stuffed into it.

IMHO, the mindset which accepts any micro pistol (or variant) as appropriate for overt armed professional use is irresponsible and indicates the level of ignorance/arrogance concerning the realities of armed combat. As with many armed professional organizations, I expect there are those who demonstrate a willful indifference to reality for the sake of personal comfort (aka laziness).

In my experience, the ignorant, arrogant, and/or lazy are those least-likely to re-enter the kill zone. Hard. Pass.

Recommendations:
1) Attempt to professionally educate those who may believe the P365/XL are appropriate for an overt armed professional mission; these people may simply not know any better and just need an experienced voice of reason.

2) Avoid those in your organization whose ignorance, arrogance, and/or laziness allow them to ignore the realities of their chosen profession.

3) Encourage your agency to provide officers a robust and suitable weapon platform, associated equipment, and training commensurate to their duties and responsibilities.


I appreciate the carry one type of firearm for everything (within reason). However, applied as justification for the over armed professional carry of a micro pistol I respectfully disagree. As to the type of pistols I’m referencing, I consider any P365 series gun to be inappropriate as a primary weapon for overt carry by an armed professional. I'm not talking about a concealed carry, an undercover carry, a close target reconnaissance carry or any other a non- or semi-permissive environment carry. I consider the P365 series of pistols to be in the same family as the G43/48 family although this comment will make many bristle and yes, I understand there are differences, but there's no one I've met (again, outliers are a thing) who is so small - and can still adequately serve in the armed professions - who cannot competently wield at least a Glock 19 or equivalent pistol.

I've been told on P-F repeatedly, and with great passion, the P365 series is like nothing Glock currently has on the market. This is usually written in the context of providing evidence as to why ABC flavor of P365 pistol should be everyone's solution to all carry needs. Therefore, based on popular opinion of P-F expertise concerning the SIG P365 series, I have to reject the "performance comparison" of the G26 with larger Glock models regardless of the potential validity of the statement were it made in a different discussion.

...

Laziness is addictive and can be dangerous, but coupled with apathy it is legitimately deadly. It is disheartening to hear instructors, RSOs, or even other shooters are prohibited from stopping safety violations without the explicit approval of management. What does the negligent discharge and injury rate look like in your AOR?

You mentioned the RDS guns and new holsters. It sounds like your organization is conducting a forced move from iron sights to RDS: how is this being received? I’m curious how the current iron sight shooters are taking it because the RDS can be frustrating at first. I see push-back from those who are competent (or believe so) with iron sights and are unwilling to invest (there's that lazy thing again) to learn something new.

You are correct, my opinion is just an opinion but it is an informed one. None-the-less, still just an opinion. That said, based on the OP, I was under the impression opinions were solicited. I hope I did not misinterpret.

If opinions were solicited, as I believe they were, my opinion of a service/fighting pistol is germane to holster selection. Therefore, I felt it worth sharing this educated opinion while fully understanding the inherent P-F backlash to any criticism of SIG particularly if said criticism involves the P365 series.

Yes, in the context of this thread and discussion, the 365 is lacking. I am not commenting on the design’s ability to function (i.e., the cycle of operation). I am commenting on the design’s suitability for the overt armed professional. The P365 is not a service/fighting pistol. It is a concealment pistol. It is a back-up pistol. It is a personal defense pistol. There is a difference between something carried to immediately defend oneself vs something used to seek out and engage deadly threats. The P365 series are personal protection pistols that fill a role, but not the overt armed professional one.

Concerning smaller stature individuals, I have a female friend who is 4’11 and her hands are so small she would sometimes miss the trigger safety on her Glock 26.4. She picked up a P320 and did great. Based on this and the ever present “comfort” justification, I respectfully reject the notion that the P365 series is on par with the P320 series or comparable sized pistols. I believe my position is reinforced by your comments regarding ease of shooting larger pistols well and the superior ammunition capacity as compared to the P365 series. Both valid points and I concur.

Rifles. I believe you and Le Français made mention of rifles. I have some experience with rifles and their practical application in deadly force situations. I can confidently say this: if the rifle does not work (for whatever reason) or cannot be used (for whatever reason), no rational person wants the next available weapon to be less than optimal. The end.

Your last line is interesting to me. “Not everyone is a door kicker.” I know what this means, but I do not fully understand how it ties into this discussion. I provided opinions based on some important assumptions: those carrying P365 pistols were overt, armed professionals whose duties and responsibilities require them to interact with the public as enforcers of criminal law who are clearly identified as such including the obvious tools of the trade (body camera, pistol, magazines, radio, pepper spray, baton, body armor, "POLICE" markings, handcuffs/restraints, etc.). If you please, clarify the "not everyone is a door kicker" statement because if the P365s are just for intelligence personnel, crime scene technicians, public relations folks, etc. it may change my entire opinion.


Clark,

I think that I understand the points that you're making, but I'd offer that I think there's a broader context that might lend one to arrive at a different conclusion.

Purely shooting- or combat-oriented valuations are why the default work gun where several of us are at is a specific permutation of the P320 X-Carry, as opposed to something more X-Compact or G19-like in profile. This in turn nudges more people to run smaller guns when able, because the X-Carry just isn't optimal nor overly suitable for un-overt work - it's a stretch even for the low-vis profile. That said, I'm familiar with the body of study and conclusions that underpined the MHS\G45 configurations, and I don't disagree; but I do think that there are competing factors to determine external geometry.

At my old old workplace, M9s were the available GPF option with their 15rd capacity; and that was acceptable. The SOF G19s also had a 15rd capacity, and that wasn't of-concern. At my more recent old workplace, running P229s with 12rd capacity or P239s with 7rd capacity was a largely untested concern, but never seemed to overly-evidence a lackadaiscal attitude; but I'll return to this subject shortly. The P365XLs, either running 12rd or 15rd magazines, overlaps with both of those options for capacity. If the P365XL is deficient on account of capacity, are the M9 and G19 also deficient? I appreciate that you wrote, "regardless of how much technology is on it or how large a magazine is stuffed into it," so I'm really trying to drill down on what your apprehension is other than the general idea of implied intentions.

If it is a matter of pure performance; whether that be in such realms as precision, accuracy, rapidity of delivery, and manipulations; then I'd be glad to read why you don't find that an acceptable reason for a user's selection of the P365XL if it outperforms competing options.

I do not find your hand-wave reference of a vaguely described female friend to further this conversation: certainly, it addressed at best the question of whether she could be great or not great with a P320, but offered no performance comparison as relates to the P320 and P365 FOWs and her specific reality.

I just can't get behind mindset as a martial art or an uncompromising attitude for all-combat at all-times to the exclusion of contextual propriety.

Further, and what I suspect is subtly causing friction for many, is that you are explicitly framing someone else's conversation and offering a curiously specific and not wholly applicable framework for how this is all supposed to be discussed. For example, from where originates, "body camera, pistol, magazines, radio, pepper spray, baton, body armor, "POLICE" markings, handcuffs/restraints, etc?" From where arrives, "overt, armed professionals whose duties and responsibilities require them to interact with the public as enforcers of criminal law who are clearly identified as such including the obvious tools of the trade?" Are you offering that the P365XL would be more suitable or less unsuitable if the user wore "SHERIFF" placards, or did not carry pepper spray? What if they enforced administrative law?

Put more succinctly: from what context and experience do you become the arbiter of this concern?

In closing, and bearing with my recent remarks on TLR-7s: the P365XL may or may not have more virtuous shooting characteristics than a P320C variant, but it has a greater ability and rapidity to shifting modalities than the X-Carry option does, by far. There is a logistical burden and requirement for managing multiple guns at any one time and\or with any one car; and not everyone is provided for in that manner.

[runcible]

Here's the Reader's Digest version, Clark:

"What are the performance, capacity, discriminatory, and geometric characteristics of a pistol acceptable for overt LE work, based on your experience; and why?"

[Le Français]

while fully understanding the inherent P-F backlash to any criticism of SIG particularly if said criticism involves the P365 series.


Where have you noticed an inherent P-F backlash to any criticism of SIG? I’m not invested in brand loyalty, and maybe my antipathy for the P320 colors my perception, but I’ve noticed if anything a tendency for PF to be anti-SIG.

[Le Français]

Clark Jackson, I think you are a little too quick on the trigger with spirited accusations of laziness and apathy. Perhaps you should take a step back and realize that the picture you have in your mind and to which you direct your criticism may not fit the facts.

Consider, hypothetically, a small-framed and small-handed agent who works almost exclusively in plainclothes in a context where true concealment is required and the cop concealment/gun tumor look is not acceptable. Consider that this agent is restricted by policy to SIG P320s, P365s, or 9mm double-stack Glocks. Consider that for some hand/body sizes, the P365XL may actually be the best performing of those options across such categories as manipulations, shootability, and concealment. Even if, for such an agent, another of those pistols (say, a G17) would shoot better all else being equal, consider that all else is not equal, and that swapping between guns with different grip angles and triggers, etc., itself often brings a performance penalty.

[Clark Jackson]

Clark Jackson this isn’t meant to be a dig, but mainly a “help me understand how you know what you know” thing.

Can you share with me as a relative newcomer to PF what your military / duty / LEO experience is?

I like to learn but it helps to understand the context of where someone’s informed opinion is coming from.

Respectfully, I am not interested in providing my resume because I believe it is unproductive. As I have said many times before, the information people provide is either good or it is not and their resume is largely irrelevant. Resumes too often lead to bias which results in misinformed opinions. At P-F you can see examples of people deferring to less-qualified members because those members are big names or big personalities while simultaneously and without hesitation challenging others who I know are much more experienced/trained. This observation has led me to prefer a more pure discussion of topics (sans resumes) and keep critical thinking at a premium while minimizing personal bias.

runcible
Thank you for taking the time to write such a thorough reply. I’ll attempt to answer your questions and address your comments as efficiently as possible.

Clark,

I think that I understand the points that you're making, but I'd offer that I think there's a broader context that might lend one to arrive at a different conclusion.

Purely shooting- or combat-oriented valuations are why the default work gun where several of us are at is a specific permutation of the P320 X-Carry, as opposed to something more X-Compact or G19-like in profile. This in turn nudges more people to run smaller guns when able, because the X-Carry just isn't optimal nor overly suitable for un-overt work - it's a stretch even for the low-vis profile.

I agree. I was addressing, very specifically, overt armed professionals (e.g., uniformed law enforcement, uniformed military police, uniformed military, uniformed armed security guards, etc.) and was specifically not addressing the need for concealment weapons because there are times when the optimal pistol must be sacrificed in the name of concealability because the mission can (and often will) dictate the equipment.



At my old old workplace, M9s were the available GPF option with their 15rd capacity; and that was acceptable. The SOF G19s also had a 15rd capacity, and that wasn't of-concern. At my more recent old workplace, running P229s with 12rd capacity or P239s with 7rd capacity was a largely untested concern, but never seemed to overly-evidence a lackadaiscal attitude; but I'll return to this subject shortly.

The metrics for proficiency have a significant impact on the concerns of end-users, instructors, and leaders. If the metric for proficiency is a typical organizational qualification course of fire, the challenge to choose (let alone mandate and enforce) the use of the most efficient pistol may be insurmountable. It is almost impossible to convince end-users to choose and leaders to enforce use of a pistol if the argument can easily be boiled down to “comfort” and “just as good as” discussions. These are often the arguments presented within institutions where the only metric of proficiency is an administrative qualification course of fire. Qualification courses of fire mask component skill deficiencies. When those deficiencies are laid bare, through realistic metrics, the equipment decision becomes much clearer and the focus shifts from comfort to mission profile.

In my experience, laziness or lackadaisical culture is most often present in organizations long on tools but short on knowledge and leadership. Not a commentary on your former place of employment but on everyone’s former and/or current place of employment. It’s not hard to see when you look for it and that should be considered when forming opinions as to future equipment and training selections.



If it is a matter of pure performance; whether that be in such realms as precision, accuracy, rapidity of delivery, and manipulations; then I'd be glad to read why you don't find that an acceptable reason for a user's selection of the P365XL if it outperforms competing options.
Great point and I do not disagree with where you are coming from, let me elaborate.

My mindset: perform as advertised and do it on demand. I do not care how you get it done, just get it done. Therefore, if you are the outlier who performs better with a P365 than you do a P320, then get after it with that P365.

Logic dictates we carry the weapon with which we consistently perform the best, with the least amount of effort, and without regard to changing environs (cold, wet, hot, dry, light, dark, tired, hungry, injured, stressed, with/without gloves, etc.).

Again, I must stress this performance must be done through realistic metrics that emphasize component skills and cannot be based on a single drill or administrative qualification course of fire which is designed as a mirror fog/sobriety test more than an actual evaluation of a shooter’s proficiency. If you are the outlier, I would fully support carrying the smallest weapon in lieu of the larger one. That said, my experience and data does not support the aforementioned. Therefore, I must conclude the debate point is less about supporting actual outliers and more about protecting positions of personal preference and/or bias. Unfortunately, I cannot share the information I have and even if I could, I am not sure I would. I think it is incumbent upon all of us to determine if what people say is valid or invalid and to do so heuristically where/when possible. Otherwise, it is too easy to dismiss divergent view points in favor of theoretical and/or anecdotal "evidence" simply because it supports our position.



I do not find your hand-wave reference of a vaguely described female friend to further this conversation: certainly, it addressed at best the question of whether she could be great or not great with a P320, but offered no performance comparison as relates to the P320 and P365 FOWs and her specific reality.

I just can't get behind mindset as a martial art or an uncompromising attitude for all-combat at all-times to the exclusion of contextual propriety.
I’m sorry you feel it is a hand-wave reference. That does does not alter the fact that possession of specific experience with the type of person (small statured) cited as a supporting argument for use of a suboptimal pistol within a specific carry configuration and mission profile is relevant to the discussion at hand. I have a very close friend who fits the description of what anyone would reasonably call a small statured person. I mentored this person through a portion of her firearms proficiency journey and learned some things along the way. I doubt many have the same experience which prompted me to share this personally obtained knowledge for consideration especially because it is direct counterpoint to a popular debate point concerning small pistols.

I do not have an uncompromising attitude for all-combat at all-times to the exclusion of context. I have repeatedly and exhaustively stated my opinion within a very specific context while providing caveats for mission profiles and personnel outliers. I do not know how to be more explicit.



Further, and what I suspect is subtly causing friction for many, is that you are explicitly framing someone else's conversation and offering a curiously specific and not wholly applicable framework for how this is all supposed to be discussed. For example, from where originates, "body camera, pistol, magazines, radio, pepper spray, baton, body armor, "POLICE" markings, handcuffs/restraints, etc?" From where arrives, "overt, armed professionals whose duties and responsibilities require them to interact with the public as enforcers of criminal law who are clearly identified as such including the obvious tools of the trade?" Are you offering that the P365XL would be more suitable or less unsuitable if the user wore "SHERIFF" placards, or did not carry pepper spray? What if they enforced administrative law?

Put more succinctly: from what context and experience do you become the arbiter of this concern?
I do not understand who the someone else is or what conversation they had which I am framing for this discussion. I have re-read that portion a few times and I simply do not know what that means.

As for the rest of the quote, I was attempting to spell out what I consider an “overtly armed professional” because there seems to be an inexplicable inability to clearly delineate overt from covert carry in this thread. That distinction is skewing the discussion as it pertains to a specific pistol and supporting equipment for a specific mission.

I enjoyed most of your post runcible. Your last three emotionally charged lines regarding a sheriff placard, pepper spray, and administrative law are a little too biting and baited for my taste. I prefer to avoid a post-for-post debate of that style. As such, you'll forgive me for not addressing those points.


Here's the Reader's Digest version, Clark:

"What are the performance, capacity, discriminatory, and geometric characteristics of a pistol acceptable for overt LE work, based on your experience; and why?"
Please see my earlier comments to JCN post regarding resumes.


Clark Jackson, I think you are a little too quick on the trigger with spirited accusations of laziness and apathy. Perhaps you should take a step back and realize that the picture you have in your mind and to which you direct your criticism may not fit the facts.

Consider, hypothetically, a small-framed and small-handed agent who works almost exclusively in plainclothes in a context where true concealment is required and the cop concealment/gun tumor look is not acceptable. Consider that this agent is restricted by policy to SIG P320s, P365s, or 9mm double-stack Glocks. Consider that for some hand/body sizes, the P365XL may actually be the best performing of those options across such categories as manipulations, shootability, and concealment. Even if, for such an agent, another of those pistols (say, a G17) would shoot better all else being equal, consider that all else is not equal, and that swapping between guns with different grip angles and triggers, etc., itself often brings a performance penalty.
Le Français, thank you for taking the time to reply. I could have taken a step back and changed my outlook at the beginning of this thread, but that would have immediately derailed the thread. The OP specifically sought information for a reliable retention holster for overt – not concealment – carry.

I will take a moment to touch on the points you made because I respect the time you took to make those points and agree with some of them. Considering the hypothetical organizational restrictions above:

- I agree working almost exclusively in plain clothes requires the ability to reasonably conceal the weapon. I will point out this is often a problem exacerbated by the individual’s unwillingness to alter their clothing, belt, holster, etc. and instead rely upon what they would wear without a gun, organizationally issued equipment, and/or the least expensive gear options on the market (I believe Gadfly quote was "cheap bastards"). This is not always the case, but I’m willing to bet it’s the most common scenario.

- “Consider that for some hand/body sizes, the P365XL may actually be the best performing of those options across such categories as manipulations, shootability, and concealment.” If, hypothetically, the individual shooter could prove the smaller pistol was the “best performing in manipulations and shootability" through on-demand demonstration of proficiency in component skills, and not through an organizational administrative qualification course of fire, they should carry that weapon. Unfortunately, I doubt these instances are anything close to common.

This puts us back where we started: people will discount their performance shortfalls with ego-soothing arguments centered on the "benefits" of comfort and concealability. Again, not trying to get into the merits of comfort and concealment within certain contexts because the OP was not about that and therefore my responses were tailored appropriately to active retention holsters and overt carry.

- I agree swapping platforms from one manufacturer to another (e.g., SIG & Glock) is inadvisable. I wholeheartedly agree changing platforms incurs a performance penalty. This performance penalty is amplified with the introduction of an RDS.

On the note of laziness and apathy: I always give people the benefit of the doubt and assume they are not lazy or apathetic. That said, my experiences with the armed professions have shown me most people make gear selections based on ignorance/misinformation or laziness/apathy. I truly feel sorry for the ignorant/misinformed because they are victims of those resources they've relied upon for education and often they are lied to by the organizations they trust most.

Regardless, when the uninitiated are questioned about their equipment choices they are confronted with three courses of action: 1) admit their ignorance / misinformed decision making process; 2) admit their laziness/apathy; 3) emotionally defend their position with theoretical arguments.

In all of those instances I am happy to provide additional information in an altruistic attempt to help the person because I was once that person and in some areas may still be that person.

Hopefully this discussion is an example of my attempts to help and share knowledge, and not as taken a debate match to be "won."

[kwb377]

Hopefully this discussion is an example of my attempts to help and share knowledge, and not as taken a debate match to be "won."

After reading (some) of that novel, the first word that came to mind was "bloviate".

[JCN]

Clark Jackson

So you want me to believe that you have an informed opinion because “trust me I have an informed opinion?”

:D

I’ll probably listen to the agency armorers instead.

I’ve found your opinions on shooting skills and drills questionable and incompletely vetted so without any context I’m going to lump your equipment opinions into a similar boat.

Regarding “lazy” P365XL shooters, it wouldn’t be difficult for a competent shooter to make Turbo pin runs with one.

So what does that say if you can’t hit those performance benchmarks despite 100k rounds and taking GW class three times with a superior Glock?

[Clark Jackson]

After reading (some) of that novel, the first word that came to mind was "bloviate".

And that's the problem with the forum. I'll keep this response shorter than a novel.

When people are having a discussion and someone is asked by multiple people to expand on their thoughts and then do so, it is poor form to critique the response with an ad hominem attack.

[Clark Jackson]

Clark Jackson

So you want me to believe that you have an informed opinion because “trust me I have an informed opinion?”

:D

I’ll probably listen to the agency armorers instead.

I’ve found your opinions on shooting skills and drills questionable and incompletely vetted so without any context I’m going to lump your equipment opinions into a similar boat.

Regarding “lazy” P365XL shooters, it wouldn’t be difficult for a competent shooter to make Turbo pin runs with one.

So what does that say if you can’t hit those performance benchmarks despite 100k rounds and taking GW class three times with a superior Glock?

Listen to whomever you choose, that's the beauty of the forum. It's not about making you do anything. I'm just providing information. I did not call P365XL shooters lazy; stop dog whistling to the SIG owners/shooters. I may have missed it, but I do not remember how being an armorer tied into the discussion here. Turbo Pins are irrelevant to the discussion as are the merits of SIG vs Glock. Straw men.

You have misread, misunderstood, or otherwise bastardized my entire discussion here.

[JCN]

Listen to whomever you choose, that's the beauty of the forum. It's not about making you do anything. I'm just providing information. I did not call P365XL shooters lazy; stop dog whistling to the SIG owners/shooters. You have misread, misunderstood, or otherwise bastardized my entire discussion here.

You didn’t provide information though.

You provided an opinion.

I wanted to give your opinion weight.

But without context your opinion isn’t necessarily educated.

I haven’t found your opinions on firearms training to be educated nor informational.

I have threads upon threads talking about how I do not shoot a P365 the best. There’s probably a 15% performance reduction of that gun compared to some of my others.

But the flip side is that a Glock 19 is also 15% worse performance wise than an Edc X9…

So why don’t you sell your car and buy something better performing than a stock Glock?

If people are lazy in their training, what does that say about someone who can’t pass Turbo standards despite multiple attempts and 10s of thousands of rounds of training?

Maybe you should sell a kidney and buy an Alien so you can be even better prepared!


https://youtu.be/GBxfT72Z03I

Basically everything you’re accusing others of doing (protecting their ego to justify their own choices) is what you’re doing.

1. Someone asked a question about holsters IN THE HOLSTER SUBFORUM.
2. P365XL are approved at multiple large agencies.
3. Everyone agrees that they shoot worse than the best handguns out there.
4. Nobody thinks a Glock is the best handgun out there.
5. Clark comes in tilting at windmills.
6. Clark wants to be taken seriously but can’t give any reason why he should be taken seriously.

[runcible]

Clark,

I appreciate the thoughtful and considered reply.

I would offer in the background that historically being a vocal critic of Sig's past conduct in Gov solicitations and small parts support to existing contracts, I would not generally be considered biased in Sig's favor. Having participated in an agency-level recall of Sig service weapons, it's a lot of fun and lost time.

In further background, there are many agencies wherein whom might be classified overt or uniformed situationally, but not always and perhaps not even generally. One might wake-up, knock out some casework in plainclothes and wearing OWB gear, adjust their profile for an interview by going IWB, and then drive out into the afternoon for a pre-planned or more spontaneous enforcement action wherein they wear explicitly marked overt equipment over their plainclothes attire. A minority of those may even change into a specified uniform and matching overt equipment for specialty roles in the enforcement action; or may be running an overt-equivalent ensemble carried concealed for a low-vis mission set. Afterwards, most everyone doffs their overt equipment, dons OWB or IWB concealment gear, and heads on to the next task or home. If one's government provided vehicle has locking storage, then one could use the overt pistol for overt things and leave the discrete pistol locked up; but there's justifications, expenses, and logistics involved with such a setup. Especially with older vehicles at the end of their effective lifespans, many may find themselves cable locking a bagged rifle to an installed shackle point, vice any enclosing storage; that mostly precludes extra pistols being stowed there. There are policy and liability concerns at hand. Thus, whatever pistol such a person walks out the door with, is the pistol that they are most likely to use in any of the described rolls, to include the overt ones. It is for this such pattern of life that I asked after your specific definition, since until your introduction of it into the conversation, I did not see it represented here.

Ref: TLR-7 remarks, which mirror the underlying logic that I'm presenting: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?13613-Utility-of-a-WML-for-Concealed-Carry&p=1326036&viewfull=1#post1326036

(As far as the subject of admin arrests, I suppose we'll have to leave that one tongue-in-cheek. It's a sore subject this last 13 months...)

As far as the hand-wave remark, at a previous workplace I spent several years optimizing firearms training for those at the radical ends of physical demographics; this was very often an uphill experience against the well-intentioned but staid opinions of some of my peers. Our authorized weapons list at the time was not ideal, and very few were truly served better by our smaller offering, though it was an easy if unsupported attempt at a solution for other instructors to issue them out rather than work with a shooter. (Hilariously, my own experience wearing a size 4 USGI Nomex flyer's glove and size 2 of other USGI gloves was that I was capable of greater precision and shorter splits with the single-stack, but that I was capable of faster and more consistently successful manipulations (to include reloads) with the double-stack; and with the double-stack I remained.) I thus imagine that there's a lot uncovered past the point of "good enough" or "acceptable," and it is not so easily simplified to either conclusion upon any significant scrutiny.

FWIW, I've mulled over the exact same RFI as Gadfly has, and to no particular satisfaction. The optics aren't mandatory, but they are coming; there's certainly plenty of them floating about in the field already and for some time. For many, it's a potential lifeline to make it to mandatory retirement without the additional stress from qualifications with diminishing eyesight and without accruing potential liability on the march to 57 (or 60, for those chosen few...). I think it's a question that quite a many have been asking themselves, in isolation.

[Clark Jackson]

You didn’t provide information though.

You provided an opinion.

I wanted to give your opinion weight.

But without context your opinion isn’t necessarily educated.

I haven’t found your opinions on firearms training to be educated nor informational.



I disagree. I provided information and thoroughly explained that information. Opinions are information. You may not find value in the provided information (or opinions or however you choose to label it). And that is okay. I provided so much information another user felt compelled to post a pithy ad hominem attack where I was accused of writing a novel.

If the resume is what is holding you back from seeing the value of what I have shared there is not much more to say. You have made it clear I have nothing to offer you and I am more than satisfied with that outcome. Your continued push to place yourself above me (and others) based on my training journal, your accomplishments as a competitive shooter, or your ability to purchase and carry whatever firearms you choose provide me with valuable insights.




I have threads upon threads talking about how I do not shoot a P365 the best. There’s probably a 15% performance reduction of that gun compared to some of my others.

But the flip side is that a Glock 19 is also 15% worse performance wise than an Edc X9…


Thank you for your contributions to a body of empirical data concerning your measurable performance across these three platforms.



So why don’t you sell your car and buy something better performing than a stock Glock?

My gear selection is limited based on personal and professional responsibilities. Your assumptions of my economic status reveal a bias which distorts your perception of others and most assuredly influences how you read and interpret their posts.



If people are lazy in their training, what does that say about someone who can’t pass Turbo standards despite multiple attempts and 10s of thousands of rounds of training?

Maybe you should sell a kidney and buy an Alien so you can be even better prepared!

Another bastardization of the discussion in this thread topped with ad hominem attacks about my proficiency with firearms and economic status (again, twice in one post) in what I can only assess as an attempt to cow me into deferring to you on any topic on which we disagree. Another example of why it is so difficult to enjoy P-F today.

I never accused anyone of being lazy in training. I did use the ubiquitous "people" to identify the very real presence of lazy equipment decisions made by those within the armed professions.

And what does it say about someone who cannot pass (is it a pass/fail thing?) Turbo standards despite multiple attempts (did I attempt to earn a Turbo pin multiple times?) and 10s of thousands of rounds of training (some journeys are longer than others)? This is another example of why it is difficult to write insightful, honest training posts on P-F.

My training journals and discussion about Gabe's courses should have made it clear the attainment of a turbo pin was never the end-state, but that is an nuanced discussion. Based on both the tone and content of your posts, it is abundantly clear you are no interested in participating in that type of a discussion with me and I could not be more relieved.

When we attempt to understand why anyone does something solely through siloed experience and/or personal bias we condemn ourselves to reach false conclusions.




Basically everything you’re accusing others of doing (protecting their ego to justify their own choices) is what you’re doing.

1. Someone asked a question about holsters IN THE HOLSTER SUBFORUM.
2. P365XL are approved at multiple large agencies.
3. Everyone agrees that they shoot worse than the best handguns out there.
4. Nobody thinks a Glock is the best handgun out there.
5. Clark comes in tilting at windmills.
6. Clark wants to be taken seriously but can’t give any reason why he should be taken seriously.

I'm sorry you feel this way, but you are incorrect.

I never accused anyone of anything. In this thread I specifically addressed carrying a larger SIG over a smaller SIG. The Glock argument is beyond irrelevant here. The bastardization of what I have written continues.

I think Don Quixote is fantastic.

I could care less if you take me seriously, truly.

[Clark Jackson]

Clark,

I appreciate the thoughtful and considered reply.

I would offer in the background that historically being a vocal critic of Sig's past conduct in Gov solicitations and small parts support to existing contracts, I would not generally be considered biased in Sig's favor. Having participated in an agency-level recall of Sig service weapons, it's a lot of fun and lost time.

In further background, there are many agencies wherein whom might be classified overt or uniformed situationally, but not always and perhaps not even generally. One might wake-up, knock out some casework in plainclothes and wearing OWB gear, adjust their profile for an interview by going IWB, and then drive out into the afternoon for a pre-planned or more spontaneous enforcement action wherein they wear explicitly marked overt equipment over their plainclothes attire. A minority of those may even change into a specified uniform and matching overt equipment for specialty roles in the enforcement action; or may be running an overt-equivalent ensemble carried concealed for a low-vis mission set. Afterwards, most everyone doffs their overt equipment, dons OWB or IWB concealment gear, and heads on to the next task or home. If one's government provided vehicle has locking storage, then one could use the overt pistol for overt things and leave the discrete pistol locked up; but there's justifications, expenses, and logistics involved with such a setup. Especially with older vehicles at the end of their effective lifespans, many may find themselves cable locking a bagged rifle to an installed shackle point, vice any enclosing storage; that mostly precludes extra pistols being stowed there. There are policy and liability concerns at hand. Thus, whatever pistol such a person walks out the door with, is the pistol that they are most likely to use in any of the described rolls, to include the overt ones. It is for this such pattern of life that I asked after your specific definition, since until your introduction of it into the conversation, I did not see it represented here.

Ref: TLR-7 remarks, which mirror the underlying logic that I'm presenting: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?13613-Utility-of-a-WML-for-Concealed-Carry&p=1326036&viewfull=1#post1326036

(As far as the subject of admin arrests, I suppose we'll have to leave that one tongue-in-cheek. It's a sore subject this last 13 months...)

As far as the hand-wave remark, at a previous workplace I spent several years optimizing firearms training for those at the radical ends of physical demographics; this was very often an uphill experience against the well-intentioned but staid opinions of some of my peers. Our authorized weapons list at the time was not ideal, and very few were truly served better by our smaller offering, though it was an easy if unsupported attempt at a solution for other instructors to issue them out rather than work with a shooter. (Hilariously, my own experience wearing a size 4 USGI Nomex flyer's glove and size 2 of other USGI gloves was that I was capable of greater precision and shorter splits with the single-stack, but that I was capable of faster and more consistently successful manipulations (to include reloads) with the double-stack; and with the double-stack I remained.) I thus imagine that there's a lot uncovered past the point of "good enough" or "acceptable," and it is not so easily simplified to either conclusion upon any significant scrutiny.

FWIW, I've mulled over the exact same RFI as Gadfly has, and to no particular satisfaction. The optics aren't mandatory, but they are coming; there's certainly plenty of them floating about in the field already and for some time. For many, it's a potential lifeline to make it to mandatory retirement without the additional stress from qualifications with diminishing eyesight and without accruing potential liability on the march to 57 (or 60, for those chosen few...). I think it's a question that quite a many have been asking themselves, in isolation.

Jules, thank you. This post was an absolute pleasure to read and a breath of fresh air. I wish all of P-F could emulate this type of post.

Seriously, thank you for taking the time to write and post it. Most informative and enjoyable.

Feel free to PM me if you want to discuss anything from the thread. I would be more than happy to do so.

[JCN]

I’m very thankful to the actual experts here (runcible, Gadfly Le Français et al) who have the patience of saints. That’s not my forte. Sorry for diluting the thread.

[Le Français]

Clark Jackson, JCN

This is going to be blunt, though it’s not meant to be brutal: I don’t think either of you has the social skills to make your conversation in this thread anything but an unproductive mess.

ETA: Let me add that for what it’s worth (not much), I think you have both brought up some good points, and probably are closer to agreeing than what threatens to become a nasty forum argument would suggest.

[JCN]

Clark Jackson, JCN

This is going to be blunt, though it’s not meant to be brutal: I don’t think either of you has the social skills to make your conversation in this thread anything but an unproductive mess.

Agreed. Sorry.

[HeavyDuty]

https://www.daraholsters.com/Level-II/

I've used two of these over the course of about a year...currently carrying a PDP on duty in one. Shows fitment for 365XL, and they're optic cut.

No issues...good stuff.

I couldn’t find a key for the asterisk that is in the P365XL listing - does anyone else see it?

[RJ]

I couldn’t find a key for the asterisk that is in the P365XL listing - does anyone else see it?

Nothing I can see?

The asterisk is on everything in the list below; not sure what's common there:

Glock 40 MOS, HK USP 9/40 full size, Sig 229 Legion E2, Sig P365XL, Walther PPS M2 and PPS M2 RMSc.

[HeavyDuty]

Nothing I can see?

The asterisk is on everything in the list below; not sure what's common there:

Glock 40 MOS, HK USP 9/40 full size, Sig 229 Legion E2, Sig P365XL, Walther PPS M2 and PPS M2 RMSc.

Ah, ok - I didn’t look at others, I was looking for a footnote.

[runcible]

Closer... I'd like to try one, but I don't see the Sig P365 compatible options live on-site just yet.

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2023/06/23/owb-solis-safariland/
https://safariland.com/collections/owb-holsters/products/solis-als-concealment-owb-holster?avad=202211_b3188542d

[WobblyPossum]

Closer... I'd like to try one, but I don't see the Sig P365 compatible options live on-site just yet.

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2023/06/23/owb-solis-safariland/
https://safariland.com/collections/owb-holsters/products/solis-als-concealment-owb-holster?avad=202211_b3188542d

Oh, that is interesting. I think we’ve only got one guy carrying a P365 variant in a SERPA but if I could convince him to replace it with one of these, I’d be satisfied. We don’t have any kind of AOR-wide prohibition on the trigger finger release holsters like a couple of the other AORs do so I can’t just tell him he’s not allowed to use his SERPA anymore. I’ve pretty much only seen him use the SERPA during qualifications, but that’s where he’s drawing and reholstering the most.

[jlw]

Closer... I'd like to try one, but I don't see the Sig P365 compatible options live on-site just yet.

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2023/06/23/owb-solis-safariland/
https://safariland.com/collections/owb-holsters/products/solis-als-concealment-owb-holster?avad=202211_b3188542d


Optics Planet has the 365 holster listed:

https://www.opticsplanet.com/safariland-solis-rds-holster.html?_iv_code=DS-HT5-SSRDSH-SOLIS-1-465-2-7-C1-411

Unfortunately, these holsters are made for a WML as Safariland has deemed that optic also means WML.

[runcible]

Optics Planet has the 365 holster listed:

https://www.opticsplanet.com/safariland-solis-rds-holster.html?_iv_code=DS-HT5-SSRDSH-SOLIS-1-465-2-7-C1-411

Unfortunately, these holsters are made for a WML as Safariland has deemed that optic also means WML.

My favorite part of Optics Planet is them calling me for any backorder over 2 years long, which js most of my orders with them. I believe the longest one was 6.5 years total and they called me about it in 2021.

Much is listed, less is in stock at the time... if ever.

[jlw]

My favorite part of Optics Planet is them calling me for any backorder over 2 years long, which js most of my orders with them. I believe the longest one was 6.5 years total and they called me about it in 2021.

Much is listed, less is in stock at the time... if ever.

I don't order from them often, and I haven't in several years, but I haven't had any issues getting stuff from them. Your review is not the only negative one I have seen though. I googles the holster, and it popped up there.

I have had issues with Safariland with both taking forever to ship and with horrid customer service. I'm truly hoping that US Duty Gear takes off and is able to give them some competition.

[Up1911Fan]

Emailed Safariland about making the holster posted above for the P365 series. Hopefully others do as well.

[Chuck Whitlock]

Optics Planet has the 365 holster listed:

https://www.opticsplanet.com/safariland-solis-rds-holster.html?_iv_code=DS-HT5-SSRDSH-SOLIS-1-465-2-7-C1-411

Unfortunately, these holsters are made for a WML as Safariland has deemed that optic also means WML.

Safariland's website only shows the Glock 43X and 48.

[jlw]

Safariland's website only shows the Glock 43X and 48.

Yup, but their webpage is notoriously inconsistent with their actual offerings. All of the announcements state that it is available for the 48, 43x and 365XL.

[Up1911Fan]

I really want this available for the Macro.

[jlw]

I really want this available for the Macro.

Wilson Combat is supposed to be releasing Macro sized modules in July. They will have two versions. One will have the same rail as the XL models; so, you would be able to use the XL holster.

[Up1911Fan]

Wilson Combat is supposed to be releasing Macro sized modules in July. They will have two versions. One will have the same rail as the XL models; so, you would be able to use the XL holster.

I have several Macro's from Boresite, not interested in changing that, but an ALS sure would be nice.

[Jeff S.]

I’ve used a Dara duty holster with my P365XL, albeit without a light, and really liked it. Never had a problem with the release lever, though I prefer the safariland style.


This thread is really fascinating to read through. The P365XL is the perfect gun for me; it’s so easy to shoot and to conceal. I can get my whole hand on it even with large hands, it disappears in an AIWB holster, and I can shoot it just as well as my P320 compact (second place in quals with the XL). The Macro (especially the style without porting) really blurs the lines between a duty sidearm and conceal carry pistol. I’ve since traded a gun for scrubs, but if I started carrying a gun for a living again, it would be with the Macro.

[Gadfly]

So glad Safariland Finally made an RDS ALS for the 365. I am guessing since it works for the regular 365 and the XL, that is it relying on the flashlight to lock the gun in the holster.

I was about to say they only did this because of the Macro. BUT… the macro uses a Pic rail, and it would have a larger/wider dust cover.

Thanks for the input.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Up1911Fan]

So glad Safariland Finally made an RDS ALS for the 365. I am guessing since it works for the regular 365 and the XL, that is it relying on the flashlight to lock the gun in the holster.

I was about to say they only did this because of the Macro. BUT… the macro uses a Pic rail, and it would have a larger/wider dust cover.

Thanks for the input.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I was hoping these would fit the Macro with a light but I think that pic rail is gonna make it a no go.

[runcible]

https://safariland.com/products/solis-als-concealment-owb-holster

Well, the P365 family is now/again listed as an option for the Solis - but only for sans WML. While

Curiously, the G43X/G48 and TLR-7sub option is presently delisted.

[jlw]

https://safariland.com/products/solis-als-concealment-owb-holster

Well, the P365 family is now/again listed as an option for the Solis - but only for sans WML. While

Curiously, the G43X/G48 and TLR-7sub option is presently delisted.

Thanks for posting this. I ordered one for my Macro. I wish they had them for the Fuse. Word has it that retention holsters for the Fuse will be available first quarter, but I don't know in what form.

[jlw]

https://safariland.com/products/solis-als-concealment-owb-holster

Well, the P365 family is now/again listed as an option for the Solis - but only for sans WML. While

Curiously, the G43X/G48 and TLR-7sub option is presently delisted.

I ordered yesterday evening and just got the shipping notice.

i contacted the ALS nub folks. They already have one of these holsters ordered and will be releasing a product for it.

[HeavyDuty]

I ordered yesterday evening and just got the shipping notice.

i contacted the ALS nub folks. They already have one of these holsters ordered and will be releasing a product for it.

I’m curious if a 6006 ALS Guard will fit.

[jlw]

I ordered in the evening of 11/19. I received my holster yesterday

[runcible]

https://soldiersystems.net/2025/05/10/safariland-expands-solis-holster-to-include-sig-sauer-p365-family/

https://safariland.com/collections/owb-holsters/products/solis-als-concealment-owb-holster?avad=202211_e318d1fd9

Life sucks at the org referenced earlier in this thread, but hey... new bucket dropped.

[runcible]

(I believe WobblePoss is running a Solis for a different combo, and has some relevant observations regarding the good and the bad of the relatively exposed optic, which I imagine was a design concession that they had to make for profile/semi-concealment purposes. It's a concession I'm willing to make to get active retention, especially with the current direction of things.)

[WobblyPossum]

(I believe WobblePoss is running a Solis for a different combo, and has some relevant observations regarding the good and the bad of the relatively exposed optic, which I imagine was a design concession that they had to make for profile/semi-concealment purposes. It's a concession I'm willing to make to get active retention, especially with the current direction of things.)

I briefly ran a Macro with Romeo-X Compact as my primary handgun recently. I was using the Solis as the retention holster for enforcement actions. I was a little concerned that the holster didn’t cover the optic at all and those concerns were thrust into the forefront of my mind when I found myself prone on a set of railroad tracks, watching the back of a house while we were waiting for a search warrant to be signed. I was armed with a rifle so my pistol remained holstered and all I could think as I went prone was that the large, jagged rocks covering the railroad tracks would completely wreck my optic if I rolled a little bit to my right. Shortly afterwards I transitioned back to using my G19 as my primary handgun. I’m not a massive fan of the Safariland 7TS holster I’m carrying it in on enforcement actions but the fact that it protects my optic is a massive difference in terms of peace of mind. The Solis likely wasn’t designed to be a holster for the kind of use I wanted a holster for.

[jlw]

https://soldiersystems.net/2025/05/10/safariland-expands-solis-holster-to-include-sig-sauer-p365-family/

https://safariland.com/collections/owb-holsters/products/solis-als-concealment-owb-holster?avad=202211_e318d1fd9

Life sucks at the org referenced earlier in this thread, but hey... new bucket dropped.


LOL. I see the post the same weekend that a local kydex bender notifies my Level 2 for the Fuse is ready.

I've got Solis holsters for the G19 and the 365 Macro/XL. I'll add them for the 48 and the Fuse.

[HeavyDuty]

Safariland has so many SKUs that I think you pretty much have to order Solis direct. I like retention holsters for wear out at the ranch.