Pocket carry with a MRDS

[RJ]

So I went ahead and ordered a Sig OEM P365 Grip module and a few 10 round mags from Osage County Guns; they arrived yesterday. I put my P365X FCU into the module, and will see how this goes shooting tomorrow. I also need a no-kidding kydex pocket holster, so I am planning to buy a Vedder Pocket Locker.

I will also do some dry timings for comparison. I like @Clusterfrack’s suggestion to start from the pocket, hands on grip, and AIWB, hands at sides. I plan to compare using the four Gabe White standards, same as before. I’ll include runs of my G19 AIWB in a JM CK AIWB 2.5, and my G34 in my USPSA rig. More to follow.

[RJ]

BLUF

Finished up testing today. Bottom line up front:

1) Pocket carry with an MRDS is very doable.
2) I perceived no impediment to the draw from the pocket, at all, due to the MRDS.
3) The P365(X) in the Vedder holster is slightly more weight efficient than a Glock 19, in terms of ounces per round.

The P365(X), in a kydex Vedder Pocket holster, pocket carry, is a very capable 10+1 alternative to a 5-shot .38 LCR in a Desantis Nemesis, “for me”. My draw times are better than AIWB, from the pocket, and I shoot it better than my LCR; the optic being a big advantage.

A bonus surprise discovery of this effort was that a P365(X) in a JM CK AIWB WC 2.5, with the pinky 10 round magazine, was a very good AIWB option.




Process

So I got a chance to put my thoughts together on this exercise over the last week. This included a short 60 round session at my LGS with the new configuration. I also did a series of dry timed runs, comparing pocket carry with my Glocu 34 OWB USPSA rig. I’ll refer to the new configuration of putting the P365X FCU and slide assy on the new Sig OEM P365 grip module as a P365(X). For discussion, I’ll break this down into physical, functional, and operational aspects.




Physical

Total weight of the P365(X) in my JM CK AIWB 2.5 was 27.3 oz. With 10+1 rounds on board, this computes to 2.5 oz per round. Not bad. (For this test, I used Speer Gold Dot 115 JHP for the representative carry ammo. I have used this previously as carry ammo for our P365.) Holstered in the Vedder, the rig is 25.8 oz, for a metric of 2.3 oz per round. This is very good. By comparison, my G19.5 MOS in a JM CK AIWB at weighs in at 37.9 oz, with 16 rounds, for 2.4 oz per round.

As a warm up, I spent the weekend driving, eating out, walking etc. AIWB with the JM CK. Putting on and off was easy, and I was surprised to find the pinky extension mag didn’t add a lot to printing.


Functional

I shot the new configuration briefly (60 rounds) at my local square range.



Objective results were: a score of 8/10 on Find Your Level at 5 yards, and an 87-1X at 25 yards, standing two-handed unsupported. Out of the three mag types I had (standard 10 round, pinky 10 round, sleeved 12-round) I thought the pinky 10 round was the best combination of compactness and shootability. The pinky rest gave me just enough on the nose of the grip to feel fairly comfortable. I used that mag to score of 8/10 on Find Your Level at 5 yards, and an 87-1X on “The Test” (10 rounds x 10 yards x 10 seconds).

By the way, one very useful accidental discovery of this experiment was that carrying the P365(X) AIWB with the 10+1 pinky mag was pretty darn comfortable. It might be the best AIWB experience for me so far, and far more useful to have 11 rounds than 5 in my LCR, in comparison. I can see this being a preferred mode of carry this summer when I’m out and about in the RV.


Operational

I did a series of dry draws with the P365(X) in the JM CK, hands at sides, and in the Vedder, hands in pocket on the gun. The “hands in pocket” start is pretty much how I am when I’m say waiting for the gas pump to fill; or at the checkout line at WalMart.

Timing results were interesting. I have included the previous data for comparison in the table. I used the same 4 Gabe White tests as before.



The data indicates that from the pocket, I’m close to my G34 OWB times, the average of the four drills being only ¼ second slower. And this is faster than AIWB. It makes sense, since I don’t have the delay of fishing around in my pocket for the gun.

I noticed that since my draws were very explosive, the holster ended up being flung several feet away during the draw. I had to locate and re-holster outside the pocket for each repetition. Not a big deal, just something I hadn’t expected (but should have).

Wrapping up, this was a very interesting exercise for me. I ended up with two more solid carry options (pocket, and AIWB) with the only cost being a Sig grip module and 10 round mag. I’m very impressed with the utility of this little P365 in that regard. It is quite the chameleon.

[RJ]

Just wanted to add a footnote to the report, with some physical comparisons.

Picture showing relative size of P365(X) in the Vedder, back to back with Ruger LCR in the Desantis Nemesis.

P365(X) is shown with Dream Plastics cover over HS 407


Picture showing the P365(X) sitting on top of the Ruger LCR. It's interesting that the Ruger rig is actually slightly larger than the Sig.

Photo has some parallax; the Desantis holster is in fact slightly larger than the Vedder.

[JHC]

The challenge for pocket carry of a one and only primary is the brutally slow draw if you hand is not already gripping it.

So how is the pocket carried RDS 365 working while moving to cover? I would try and draw it from hand outside the pocket in a few different positions and add logical/reasonable amounts of movement before settling on conclusions.

For example I thought my HPG chest holster was fine for rucking with the dog. Then I drilled it on the range simulated one hand tied up with a leash and movement as in chaos of a dog with a rapid fox in the road etc etc and the HPG idea collapsed in on itself for me.
I went back to belt carry. Just a for example.

[GearFondler]

The challenge for pocket carry of a one and only primary is the brutally slow draw if you hand is not already gripping it.

Add some dampness to the equation from prolonged sweating or rain and it really gets ugly... Something I noticed over the weekend working my ass off outside.

[JCN]

Add some dampness to the equation from prolonged sweating or rain and it really gets ugly... Something I noticed over the weekend working my ass off outside.

@JodyH had a good quote about the wet pockets and why the P365 SAS is her/his/their pocket semi of choice.

[RJ]

Adding another postscript.

I’ve been carrying the P365(X) with the 407K in the Vedder for the last 3 weeks 24/7 camping in the RV. If pants are on, gun is on sort of thing.

Pros are it still slips into my pocket with ease.

Cons are access while seated, restaurant, or in the truck, is difficult. The optic, while not fouling the draw, actually is just big enough, that it makes the gun feel larger than it is. It presses sometimes (depending on choice of pants) against the pocket to where it’s a bit uncomfortable. This is worse with jeans, better with cargo shorts.

I switched back to my LCR and Nemesis rig today for comparison. Although seemingly almost the same size, it’s easier in the pocket. Of course the trade is 5 .38 WCs vs 11 9mm JHPs.

I may end up putting the FCU back in the Wilson Combat module and loading 12+1 to carry AIWB with my normal JM CK WC 2.5 as a final comparison.

[feudist]

Just spitballin'.

Assuming an optically equipped J-frame/LCR, how would in-fight reliability with increased high speed precision balance against on board capacity and easier trigger?

Also assuming some type of fairing for the optic(like a Webley cylinder fairing in reverse) would it be pocketable? Would such a contraption outperform a CTC equipped snub enough to matter?

[RevolverRob]

Just spitballin'.

Assuming an optically equipped J-frame/LCR, how would in-fight reliability with increased high speed precision balance against on board capacity and easier trigger?

Also assuming some type of fairing for the optic (like a Webley cylinder fairing in reverse) would it be pocketable? Would such a contraption outperform a CTC equipped snub enough to matter?

Eh? Can you clarify what you mean?

Allchin makes a J-Frame optic mount. And I have an extremely ugly 642 that I don't care if it gets uglier at this point. With the new micro-optics out there, it might be viable.



But what might be best is...dovetailing the top of the frame or coming up with a low mount dovetail like the D&L rear sight and using one of the Leupold Micro Deltapoints. Alas, just from googling and scaling in Photoshop, it won't work...Tried it with an LCR as well, same thing.

So you're stuck making the gun taller and quite a bit taller with the way the revolver optic mounts work vs. semi-auto. You just can't bury this thing into the top strap. Until Ruger or Smith come out with a top strap that is machined from the factory for an Acro Cut, you'll be kind of stuck.

[feudist]

Eh? Can you clarify what you mean?

Allchin makes a J-Frame optic mount. And I have an extremely ugly 642 that I don't care if it gets uglier at this point. With the new micro-optics out there, it might be viable.



But what might be best is...dovetailing the top of the frame or coming up with a low mount dovetail like the D&L rear sight and using one of the Leupold Micro Deltapoints. Alas, just from googling and scaling in Photoshop, it won't work...Tried it with an LCR as well, same thing.

So you're stuck making the gun taller and quite a bit taller with the way the revolver optic mounts work vs. semi-auto. You just can't bury this thing into the top strap. Until Ruger or Smith come out with a top strap that is machined from the factory for an Acro Cut, you'll be kind of stuck.

I was picturing a way to reduce the snagging of the optic in the side dimension.