Raven Concealment Systems Perun (Phantom Replacement)

[frozentundra]

I just wanted to share my initial impression of the Raven Perun.

I was very excited by this holster when first announced. I am a lefty and was excited about not having to wait for a left handed version to be made. I also liked being able to use an RMR and the belt attachments.

I ordered the holster last week and it was promptly shipped. It arrives in a neat bag with all of the attachments and instructions inside. Overall the holster is very nicely made with no production marks and crisp, clean lines. I quickly changed the belt loops to a lefty configuration and inserted my Glock 17.

This is where I was disappointed. With the tensioner all the way in the negative position, the gun slid in and out with virtually no retention. At this point I began to adjust the tensioner and found that even at full tension, the gun would would not stay holstered when I turned the holster upside down and shook the holster. The 17 would drop right out onto my work bench.

To make sure I was not crazy, I tried this with a Gen 3 17, a Gen 2 17, and my Agency, which is also a Gen 3. All three guns popped right out at maximum tension. Additionally, all three guns rattle when placed fully in the holster. This bothered me the most; I expect that my pistols stay in place once in the holster.

I feel that RCS has the bones of a really nice holster, but perhaps needs some additional refinement.

I also had this experience with the Eidolon. The G19 Perun That I got had decent retention on my Gen4 G19 with the adjustment screw in the minus position. I like a lot of retention, so I wound up settling on about 75% of max. Max retention is too much for me on my sample.

I would kindly request a replacement. I'll bet they would accomodate you.

[Leroy Suggs]

They must be inconsistent. My 17 has good retention at 50%.
My 43 has good retention at 80%.
By good I mean you can't shake the gun out upside down.

On second thought. Maybe the Glocks are inconsistent.

[Larry T]

The Eidolon is my main holster, and you definitely do NOT get that snappy "kydex click". I was planning on trying the Perun to compare it to my Bravo BCA for OWB concealment. I talked to someone at Raven several months ago about the Eidolon retention being barely enough to hold a G17 upside down without falling out. He almost laughed at that test being a viable retention benchmark.

[Peally]

Falling out from shaking isn't key, falling out when it's actually on your belt is the important bit. I'd be more curious about that test.

[orionz06]

The Eidolon is my main holster, and you definitely do NOT get that snappy "kydex click". I was planning on trying the Perun to compare it to my Bravo BCA for OWB concealment. I talked to someone at Raven several months ago about the Eidolon retention being barely enough to hold a G17 upside down without falling out. He almost laughed at that test being a viable retention benchmark.

It's not though, it's a YouTube thing. I couldn't care less if the gun flies outta the holster when shook like that. In most cases a gun falling out means that when worn it can actually be drawn. The belt and the body add a good bit of retention and one must account for that.

[Larry T]

Good points on the "upside down test". I've never felt the retention on the Eidolon was too light and my "backup" holster has the "hard click" that makes a slow discreet draw tougher than with the Eidolon.

[Peally]

I haven't inverted and shook a holster in probably a decade; however, I've recently had some kydex holsters with tuck-strut type attachment methods and so much retention that when I attempted to draw the gun the entire holster came out of my pants and bent the crap out of the strut at the holster attachment point. It did this even when I cinched my belt down so much it was uncomfortable and unrealistic to wear.

Man with the word crap in there when I speed read this it was an entirely different mental scenario.

[WDR]

It's not though, it's a YouTube thing. I couldn't care less if the gun flies outta the holster when shook like that. In most cases a gun falling out means that when worn it can actually be drawn. The belt and the body add a good bit of retention and one must account for that.

I may be recalling things wrong, but I seem to recall Todd being an advocate for strong retention from a holster when inverted ( maybe not shook), and it seems like he specifically said that he didn't like holster designs that relied on belt tension to retain the gun in them (IIRC he was speaking about his dislike of "hybrid" holsters at the time, maybe specifically the Comp-Tac M-TAC holster, if my memory serves). I didn't care for the M-TAC because of weak retention and the lack of a "click" when the gun was fully inserted, but I have carried in a C-TAC for a long time, which has a more positive "click" when the gun is holstered.

I replaced one of their older more hand made/custom holster with a "new" C-TAC that is obviously made with some sort of CNC dummy/mold. I was less impressed with that holster than the old one, even though visually it looked nicer coming out of the package, it lacked the close fit of the older holster and had some sharp protrusions on the body side that make it somewhat less comfortable to wear. The retention, while adjustable in the same way the old one was, isn't as definite, and lacks some of the positve "click" of the old one, no matter the adjustment. The guns ( a couple Glock 19's a Gen 3 and a Gen 4) tend to move around a fair bit more in the new holster as well. I can rock them up and down with pressure on the butt of the gun. Not enough to worry me, or rattle around much (especially when it's in my pants and the belt is on), but the differences are there. Also, the Glock frames must differ enough dimensionally between 3rd and 4th Generation that it effects retention. If I get it set "just right" for the 3rd Gen... the 4th Gen fit is too tight, almost resulting in results similar to Tom_Jones above.

Of note here, I have a Raven VGII that has similar issues on the differing Gen3/4 frames.... it's loose on a Gen3, but fit is tight/good on the Gen 4. If they want to make a universal fit holster, they very well may have to make some dimensional tolerance compromises. Going from one type or production to another (as both Comp-Tac and Raven seem to have done) can bring to light some issues. This isn't a dig at either company, it's just the facts of making things easier to produce vs sticking with a more custom/hand made concept.

I personally like a gun to "click" into a kydex hoslter because it gives me some feed back that the gun is indeed fully inserted into the holster. I also don't like a gun to loose or rattle once holstered, like the new C-TAC does. I keep meaning to buy a dedicated AIWB holster to try, but I have not pulled the trigger yet, and the new C-TAC works well enough for me that I have not given up on it yet.

That said, everyone has their opinions about such things. And I am of the mind that if the belt helps with retaining the gun, it isn't a bad thing. Retaining the gun while inverted in your hand is probably good. Unless it's too much and you end up giving yourself a wedgie when you draw.

[orionz06]

I may be recalling things wrong, but I seem to recall Todd being an advocate for strong retention from a holster when inverted ( maybe not shook), and it seems like he specifically said that he didn't like holster designs that relied on belt tension to retain the gun in them (IIRC he was speaking about his dislike of "hybrid" holsters at the time, maybe specifically the Comp-Tac M-TAC holster, if my memory serves). I didn't care for the M-TAC because of weak retention and the lack of a "click" when the gun was fully inserted, but I have carried in a C-TAC for a long time, which has a more positive "click" when the gun is holstered.

I don't like a holster that relies on belt tension either but it does influence the draw force.

[WDR]

I don't like a holster that relies on belt tension either but it does influence the draw force.

That was part of the argument, as I recall, as no one ( generally anyway) is walking around without a belt while wearing a IWB holster so weak retention without one shouldn't count against the holster. Todd disagreed I think. I tried to search the blog (it seems like it was a blog post, or the comments on one where this came up in the past), but I can't find it. It may be been in a thread on the forums.

However, this is drifting away from the main focus of this thread, so I'll nip this in the bud here.