I have a Compact Carry with Langdon trigger parts and had a P-07 with a full house Cajun trigger package installed by them. Found the PX-4 more controllable and recoil impulse IMO was considerably flatter.
Though the CZ was plenty accurate I didn’t find it particularly pleasant to shoot.
I really like the PX4 Subcompact, but the larger Px4's that have the rotary lockup have a different - "flatter" is a good description - recoil sensation that is not simply due to weight/length differences. The SC would benefit by the rotary sytem, though I can see why it was not possible given the OAL.
(That being said, the SC does have the good points of being simpler, as well as more tolerant of less-than-optimal lubrication.)
The whole PX4 line is sort of doomed to second-tier status unless Beretta redoes the grip shape/texture like they did when the Nano evolved into the APX Carry. This is a pity, as despite the "unusual" (for a handgun) lockup, these things remain one of the better pistols out there, and are usually priced significantly lower than the latest flavor of the month in 9mm bullet launchers.
gn
"On the internet, nobody knows if you are a dog... or even a cat."
How much of a capital investment for Beretta is it to make a change to the mold so the the PX4 is not completely smooth sided?
Gaming will get you killed in the streets. Dueling will get you killed in the fields.
-Alexander Hamilton
PX4 2.0?
Injection molded polymer of the type used in grip frames is a bit outside my bailiwick, but the dies and related slides are not cheap. It isn't like the old days of die-making where it was all done essentially by hand and pantographs, but it is still a chunk of change.
That said, any new dies of similar size should (!) be able to be run in the existing molding machinery... at least in theory.
Beretta can certainly do it, as the APX Carry grip is a fantastic upgrade of the Nano grip (the square trigger guard notwithstanding); no "death grip" is required, and it indexes in the hand much more reliably. A similar redesign is - IMHO - the last piece of the PX4 that needs to fall into place, as Ernest Langdon and Beretta have done the rest. Do the compact first and see how she sells.
gn
"On the internet, nobody knows if you are a dog... or even a cat."
I don't disagree with you. I just think the LTT PX4 project got a lot publicity when it took off and they were unable to keep production up with demand several times.
That was probably the time to realize that a little bit of investment in the platform is warranted. Now that the hype has died down a bit, I don't know what would be necessary for them to get the message.
Recently we had some strong sentiments expressed of the forum on Walther's ability to do market research and marketing.
I'm not sure Beretta is all that much better, but at least Ernest consults for them and tells them what's up.
Gaming will get you killed in the streets. Dueling will get you killed in the fields.
-Alexander Hamilton
Agreed, grip frame sides are smooth texture-wise and could use some re-work. I’ve solved the problem with the Talon rubber like pebble texture stick ons. I cut them out on the front and back. The factory texture on the fore and aft pistol grip give plenty of texture bite. With the Talon set up I can fire long strings without the pistol shifting in hand and no need to re-grip. The pistol stays locked in hand. Maybe that’s why my PX4 CC shipped with the Talon. Good call Ernest and Beretta.
The Talon appliques help - and I still have a set that I made on my pet Subcompact - though the PX4 still lacks the subtle sculpting that would be a real aid to me in getting a good, repeatable grip more quickly.
I personally am sold on the PX4 as a platform but the feedback I constantly get is that its grip feels inferior, in contrast with current offerings like the M&P 2.0 and others. That is hard to overcome these days.
gn
"On the internet, nobody knows if you are a dog... or even a cat."