The pistol design elements mix-and-match game

[Joe in PNG]

A CZ P07/9 SAO with a 1911 style trigger.

[OlongJohnson]

Or if Smith re-introduced the original model 39, for us single stack double action guys.

I've sold four 3953s in the past several months. I get the desire for single stacks, but a 10+ lb trigger on a skinny compact is a bit much. I had a 6946, an M11-A1, and a USP Compact. Put them all on the bench, got out the calipers, and made a table of measurements. Decided the USPc was the one to move forward with unless I got to a point where it wasn't working. The 3953 is just a 6946 with a slightly skinnier grip and 40% less capacity. Also, if you ever detail strip a 3rd-gen, you'll understand why they couldn't stay in production. Very expensive to machine, very intricate with lots of little pieces. It has even more complexity than an H&K and is a great deal less durable without the modularity, adaptability and tuneability that is the reward for an H&K's complexity. A classic Sig humbles them both with its elegant simplicity and excellence when unkittened, but it is what it is and that's that, unless you like DAK.

A G48 that was as reliable as a G19, or a P365 XL that wasn't a fully-cocked SA would be compelling.

Hell, considering the modularity of the P30 grip, I'd almost bet that someone (HK??) could design grip modules that would, once installed, give a USP squared-off grip.

A thing that I do not understand is how the squared-off grip guns are generally associated with higher performance shooting and gunhandling, yet it's a coin toss on whether new designs will attempt to follow the performance or will instead try to get super-swoopy-curvy. Is it case of "feels good in the hand" driving sales and therefore designs?

@Clusterfrack is right on the money. It's a consistency thing, at least for some of us.

To be clear, I think we're talking about a performance difference that's pretty subjective and of like a .0001% difference for some people. In the grand scheme of things, it probably does not matter. For myself, it's a matter of "the grass is greener" and wishing that few degrees of lateral movement under recoil could be eliminated more easily, or grip could be established just a little more consistently but, it's just not that big of a deal.

Lots of people have measured objective differences in performance between USPs and pick-your-version spiderman grip HKs. Especially as you go to a larger backstrap on the P30/VP9, it doesn't actually increase the reach to the trigger, it just puts a bigger and bigger hump in the middle of the backstrap. To me, this seems backward. You want to maximize contact firmness at the top and bottom of the grip; the middle does little to control the rotation of muzzle rise. The backstrap hump reduces pressure at the top and bottom, putting a nice round pivot in the middle. I believe this is why many have reported struggling with elevation control in rapid fire.

I really wish all the German manufacturers would forget Nills Griffe. I believe he's the source of that design thinking; whether through actual consultation or just imitation.

P2000 with the ability to be run SAO (i.e. hammer back, safety on). If there's a way to convert one, please enlighten me. Prior searches for such a conversion have universally resulted in a dead end.

Not P2000, but you can always put a V9 plate in a USPc.

[Sig_Fiend]

Lots of people have measured objective differences in performance between USPs and pick-your-version spiderman grip HKs. Especially as you go to a larger backstrap on the P30/VP9, it doesn't actually increase the reach to the trigger, it just puts a bigger and bigger hump in the middle of the backstrap. To me, this seems backward. You want to maximize contact firmness at the top and bottom of the grip; the middle does little to control the rotation of muzzle rise. The backstrap hump reduces pressure at the top and bottom, putting a nice round pivot in the middle. I believe this is why many have reported struggling with elevation control in rapid fire.

I really wish all the German manufacturers would forget Nills Griffe. I believe he's the source of that design thinking; whether through actual consultation or just imitation.

I get what you mean and know there's an objective difference. I just didn't want to oversell too much.

EXACTLY. IMO, the P2000 style backstraps had the right strategy in that the XL backstrap has the increased thickness in the grip arch area. I much prefer that consistent angle of the backstrap and consistent grip pressure as opposed to the P30 style of basically having a large tumor in the middle of the palm as you go larger. If I can find someone willing to prototype it and 3D print it, I'll gladly pay a healthy sum. I reached out to a few small businesses in the recent past, but no one wants to touch that with a 10ft pole.