H9 is back on the menu!

[G19Fan]

Why they would - is to right the wrong of Cy Hudson.

I acknowledge that it would not make good business sense on DD's part. Nor would I blame them for not doing it or hold it against them for not doing it. But if they chose to do it - I think it would be a good way to demonstrate their dedication. On a separate but related note - if I were DD one reason to do it is to buy up all the inferior H9s you can to turn them into scrap - so that those piles of excrement simply no longer exist.

Still don't see how that makes business sense or even buys loyalty in a super fickle gun market.

[RevolverRob]

The H9s never came with a thumb safety from the factory. Thumb safety kits were promised, and I believe eventually were on the market, but I never recalled the primary appeal of the H9 having to do anything with the idea that it could support a thumb safety, at least when it was all over P&S.

First, my opinion - I think P&S sucks, so I don't know what they were talking about back then (or now), because I have honestly never paid much attention to them.

Second, the appeal to the Hudson to me and other 1911-dorks was the 1911-shape, a decent trigger, and a 1911-style thumb safety.

Third, yea the thumb safety kit never made it to market.

If the new DD H9 has so little parts commonality with the Hudson version I don't see how they could support it.

Replace the broken/never-should-have been sold guns or at least offer the coupon below -

Hell, S&W doesn’t even support parts incompatible guns that they made, and are still ostensibly in the line up.

Best DD can do is some hat/t-shirt swag and a 15% off coupon against a new one with trade in, if that. JMO.

Right, but S&W would also recall and replace under recall guns that should have never left the factory in the first place. Which, judging by the ~8-9k or so Hudsons that ended up in circulation is ~50% of them.

I know it's a caveat emptor world and especially when you buy from a start up manufacturer.

I guess I'm still cranky about it ~5 years down the road now. The H9 is a promising gun and I hope that DD gives us a thumb safety - so I can buy one or twelve.

[Sensei]

Curious, is Daniel Defense going to honor Hudson's warranty claims and replace the first buyers broken

DD bought the rights to the design. They didn’t buy Hudson Mfg. LLC. Thus, they are in no way legally or morally responsible for the poor decisions of Hudson Mfg’s former customers.

[RevolverRob]

DD bought the rights to the design. They didn’t buy Hudson Mfg. LLC. Thus, they are in no way legally or morally responsible for the poor decisions of Hudson Mfg’s former customers.

That's one of the noticeable differences between you and me.

[the Schwartz]

Why they would - is to right the wrong of Cy Hudson.

I acknowledge that it would not make good business sense on DD's part. Nor would I blame them for not doing it or hold it against them for not doing it. But if they chose to do it - I think it would be a good way to demonstrate their dedication. On a separate but related note - if I were DD one reason to do it is to buy up all the inferior H9s you can to turn them into scrap - so that those piles of excrement simply no longer exist.

That's some awfully expensive ''satisfaction'' for a Pyrrhic victory, RR.

[Sensei]

Let me get this straight, in the gun enthusiast’s world, a company that buys a design from a separate company to improve upon the design is supposed to indemnify the other company’s former customers for the early generations that they never produced?

Did AOC hack RR’s account?

[fly out]

If I was running DD, I would never print the name "Hudson" on any of my materials. I might allow a SHOT booth rep to whisper, "Remember the Hudson? This is like that, only right."

Gun hipsters won't have to be reminded of the connection. This falls into the category of, If They Know, They Know. If someone doesn't know about Hudson, you certainly wouldn't want to bring it up.

[RevolverRob]

Let me get this straight, in the gun enthusiast’s world, a company that buys a design from a separate company to improve upon the design is supposed to indemnify the other company’s former customers for the early generations that they never produced?

Did AOC hack RR’s account?

Sure, we'll go with that. I thought I was clear - asking if DD will be/would be, not that they HAD to. Also I thought I was clear that it doesn't make financial sense to do so. And probably only business sense in the loosest way possible.

If I was running DD, I would never print the name "Hudson" on any of my materials. I might allow a SHOT booth rep to whisper, "Remember the Hudson? This is like that, only right."

Gun hipsters won't have to be reminded of the connection. This falls into the category of, If They Know, They Know. If someone doesn't know about Hudson, you certainly wouldn't want to bring it up.

I'm surprised they kept the H9 moniker, I would not have.

--

FWIW - folks seem to think I am suggesting something bizarre. When Bond Arms bought Boberg's IP - they agreed to provide some level of service and support to existing Boberg owners for a period of time. Bond Arms bought the Boberg IP and existing stock - NOT the company. Bond Arms then subsequently redesigned a decent portion of the Boberg to increase reliability. Did Bond Arms have to do this? Nope. Should they have been compelled by law to do it? No.

Daniel Defense should not be compelled to do so, either, nor did I say they HAD to.

--

Anyways moving on - I hope the thumb safety makes it to market this time.

[Sensei]

Sure, we'll go with that. I thought I was clear - asking if DD will be/would be, not that they HAD to. Also I thought I was clear that it doesn't make financial sense to do so. And probably only business sense in the loosest way possible.



I'm surprised they kept the H9 moniker, I would not have.

--

FWIW - folks seem to think I am suggesting something bizarre. When Bond Arms bought Boberg's IP - they agreed to provide some level of service and support to existing Boberg owners for a period of time. Bond Arms bought the Boberg IP and existing stock - NOT the company. Bond Arms then subsequently redesigned a decent portion of the Boberg to increase reliability. Did Bond Arms have to do this? Nope. Should they have been compelled by law to do it? No.

Daniel Defense should not be compelled to do so, either, nor did I say they HAD to.

--

Anyways moving on - I hope the thumb safety makes it to market this time.

Rob, I think the point than many of us have is that the video made it clear that, while DD may have bought the rights to the H9, this new offering is a complete redesign of the original concept. They share a single spring, the sear block spring, when it comes to parts commonality. Everything else is a complete redesign and not compatible with the original Hudson pistol - frame, barrel, slide, magazines, extractor, slide release, recoil spring, guide rod, etc. are all new design.

So, short of simply giving existing Hudson owners a new H9, how were you expecting them to service these problematic guns that share a single spring of parts commonality with their new design? Do you expect DD to manufacture brand new parts for a defective design? How will that help these problematic guns that suffer from a faulty design?

I like you man, but the concept that you’re floating is coming out of left field. It’s not only financially impossible, it would tarnish DDs reputation to work on guns that have no chance of ever running like their new product.

[Joe in PNG]

It may be a good idea for DD to make an offer for Hudson owners who want to trade their lemons for the new gun- say $400 or so (I'm just pulling a number out of the air here).
Then smelt the old guns.