Originally Posted by
RealSelf
Skepticism is good, in a healthy dose but you seem skeptical in the extreme. Even if they have underdelivered on past products, in your opinion, it would be arrogant to me to assume this will be the same because well.... it's a *different* holster entirely. I believe you are doing a very *extreme* amount of speculating on the workings of RCS, saying they've not been relevant in ten years. They are still in business, that says something.
In this world to even remain in business is not something to be taken for granted, good/great products or not. If the company needed 10 years to build for the future and/or get on good financial footing then that is their perogative. You as a consumer have zero right speculating on their business as a whole and the direction they have taken. Perhaps you should contact the owner directly rather than spout your best guess about this.
I've never said they were the first to attempt to reinvent the holster but what I did say is that it's clear they've been willing to abandon the status quo in favor of trying to innovate. The reality is that you've not named a single company that is currently in business which is even in the conversation as attempting innovating at a deep level beyond just little tweaks and a few added 'features' here and there. Kydex is all very similar, IMO.
You're speculating entirely that it will be a poor design based on looks alone, that's incredibly foolish IMO. The form is exactly what they felt it needed to be, they can literally 3D print these things in any shape they want. Why use a shape that looks 'wrong' if not for functional advantage? Looks can be deceiving and yet you somehow seem to consider yourself an expert on their entire business because you've tried a few of their products.
The other thing is you're speculating for everyone as to whether a design 'works', in your view. Humans do not agree on anything being ideal in general, we have unique tastes and/or needs ultimately. One man's trash is another man's treasure, my friend. I hear people wax eloquently about all sorts of holsters and on the other side of the coin there are just as many who say it doesn't 'work' for them. 'Work' in this case is subjective, not objective. It holds a pistol to a belt, therefore it does work.
I think you are missing the big picture entirely, most all holsters for the last 100 years as you mention, have been one or maybe two pieces of material that are molded around the pistol and bonded together (rivets, screws, thread, glue, etc). This may have been high tech for the last century but 3-D printing is clearly the way of the future when you can design any shape you want on CAD and there's almost an unlimited capacity to build it inexpensively.
I do not know of any other makers going down this path on a large scale as this, naturally RCS is going to take what is likely a large amount of abuse over abandoning the old ways as the purists cry that the old ways work just fine.... blah, blah, blah.... you cannot reinvent the holster. As was said in Moneyball, " the first man over the wall always gets bloody". This will be no different but I predict that it will change the way makers approach building holsters from a materials standpoint if nothing else.
Reply With Quote
