This gun will take first, second, and third places in the Compact Carry Division at the next Winter Indoors IDPA Nationals.Originally Posted by GJM
This gun will take first, second, and third places in the Compact Carry Division at the next Winter Indoors IDPA Nationals.
Doesn't read posts longer than two paragraphs.
I've been following Bill Blowers use of the Q5 Steel Frame and they seem very impressive. I've handled and dry-fired the standard PPQ but haven't pursued anything non-Glock for a long time. I kinda want to try one of these + ACRO + a comp since Mayhem-Syndicate has some prototyped, I can imagine it would make a great red dot platform.
So I have some interesting insight into this gun and the company to share as I had the opportunity to spend some time at Ulm shortly before the Steel Frame was shown publicly.
Most importantly is that Walther Ulm/Do is essentially 2 companies today. Their headquarters and flagship facility is located in Ulm Germany accross the street from the famed proof house. In this facility they have an engineering team and they produce the PPQ, PPS, high-end rim fire and air-gun competition guns and slides for the new PPK. They also OEM parts for some other manufacturers that would likely surprise some people. Walther also has a portion of the Umarex facility in Arnsberg. This facility manufacturers the P22, PK380, CCP and other cheaper rim fire products. The two facilities have almost no interaction or communication in regards to production or engineering. When questions were posed to engineers at Ulm about products made in Arnsberg they had no answers and couldn't careless less to try to get them. They seemed to view Arnsberg as the dirty others. It is possible to identify which products come from which facility by the proof marks if you are able to see and by feel if you are blind. Ulm has the same antler proof mark that HK does and Arnsberg has a triple crown in a shield.
Now onto the gun itself. The 4 in SF was the natural progression of the line and was planned should the 5 in sell well. The frames for the 5 in pistols take 5 times as much machine time as a PPQ slide. The 4 in guns might be a little less due to the reduced beaver tail which is very complex to cut and if it should make it onto an eventual 4 in SF was a big topic of discussion when I was there. So they have to find about 6 times the margin in the gun for it to make sense to produce. The SF is not simply a steel frame on a PPQ. It has a redesigned slide, barrel and take down mechanism vis-a-vis the polymer guns. This was to account for the different material properties and the guns were very thoroughly tested. This will avoid problems such as Sig's breaking locking blocks faster on steel framed guns. They took around 4 years to get everything right and the team at Ulm was extremely proud of the gun, and after spending time with it they should be.
Now as to the why. The 5 in gun is self evident. A heavy gun is advantageous in competition. The reasons for the 4in become more obscure. Despite this, this was the version that I wanted. I definitely don't need it. I forgot who on here said it but in the Glock 44 thread someone asked if people still shoot for fun. This gun would fall into that for me. There is something satisfying about an all metal gun and these guns just shoot so well. They are a little nicer and have a different pride of ownership than a generic plastic gun that looks like every other plastic gun. And a 1500 dollar dolled up Glock is not my cup of tea. It seems like someone spending 100k in parts for Civic. This is different as it is born different.
As an aside, It looks like they finally got a Q4 plate for the RMR with a build in rear sight in the video. Hopefully they start selling it as it was the thing I was most vocal about regarding the PPQ. Its need for an optic solution that retains iron sight.
Last edited by call_me_ski; 01-19-2020 at 02:20 PM.
It's still tantamount to carrying a 1911 or a Beretta 92 cocked and unlocked, in my opinion. For me, it needs a safety. And honestly, so does a Glock--though a Glock trigger seems mushy enough to present slightly more margin for error. Kahr is my new comfort zone for safety-less striker-fired pistols. Speaking of steel-framed SFA guns... the K9 has been doing it for 25 years.
So if they offer a safety... I'd be very interested.
As a fan of metal framed pistols, I’m very excited for this one. The Q5 steel frame seems awesome but the holes in the slide turned me off a bit.
Gonna be awesome to shoot and a good cool weather carry/HD.
Purchase-wise, it’s either the Q5 or the DWX this year.
My thoughts as well. And thanks for all the info. I was aware of the difference between the Ulm/Umarex guns... but it's interesting to hear an insider's perspective.
Until the grip safety of a 1911 is depressed, it won't fire. It performs the same function as the "trigger safety" on the Glock & PPQ and the "trigger safety" is less likely to get depressed until the shooter is ready to fire. The trouble with thumb safeties is that they tend to get knocked off riding in the holster. That means we're back to making sure the holster design is a good fit for each particular handgun.
I won't tell anyone they're foolish for carrying a handgun with a manually operated safety, but I don't think a manually operated safety is necessary or desirable on handguns like Glock, PPQ or P365. In most cases, holsters are more important for safe handgun handling than manual safeties.
Last edited by MistWolf; 01-19-2020 at 02:54 PM.
We wish to thank the United Network Command for Law and Enforcement, without whose assistance this program would not have been possible.
Anyone have any insight into the beavertail designs on the PPQ and the Q5? I find them to be horrid comparatively speaking. The edges are too squared off on the PPQ and they're too sharp on the Q5.
They dont seem very ergonomic to me at all.
Same here.
Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.
I went to a pre-Shot Show event yesterday at Pro-Gun Club in Boulder, NV. Headed right to the Walther booth, and there they were, the new Q4 in optic plate and iron sight configurations.
I have shot Walthers for a number of years, being attracted to their paddle magazine releases and their triggers. I was fine with poly until someone talked me into trying the Q5 steel frame. I have been shooting it for a few months now and am really spoiled.
When I picked up the Q4 SF, it had all the ergonomics and balance of the Q5 SF. They somehow have the weight distribution well thought out like the Q5 because it seemed as though I was shooting the 5". Maybe eliminating those lightening cuts did it. The recoil and muzzle flip seemed minimal, the dot staying in the Vortex Venom window and coming right back on target. Thank you TPC!
Same grip as the 5". The grip is really nice, but just a little to big for me. On my 5" I went with LOK thin grips and clearanced them for my thumb to hit the mag release without having to change my grip. I will do the same for the 4".
The 4" has what they call a "duty-optimized" beaver tail. It gives a higher purchase for better recoil control over a poly. And because it is shorter, I think it will carry better in a holster or for CCW than the 5". It is more rounded than a poly, so it fits the web of my hand better.
So, the Q4 SF in not available yet, but I'll be buying one as soon as they are available. I'm going with the skinny adaptor plate with the Shield RMSc instead of milling my own, like I usually do. I'm thinking of using the Q4 for competition and carry. Looks like it would be fine for both.
Disclaimer: I am not affiliated with Walther and have never received anything of value from Walther. They just work for me.
With liberty and justice for all...must be 18, void where prohibited, some restrictions may apply, not available in all states.
Reply With Quote