I don’t think most of us on this board are in their target demographic for this…thing. I’m sure they’ll sell a few handfuls and send some copies out to the IG Influencers/Entertrainers to hype it up.
I’m just amused holster makers keep emulating this as peak operatorerer.
“Conspiracy theories are just spoiler alerts these days.”
"Do not want" is a memeOriginally Posted by RealSelf
It is interesting in this photo the rounds are pointed inboard, and on the website the rounds are pointed outboard. The inboard orientation makes it much more interesting to me. I am not going to put $10 down for a reservation when I don't have a price range for the final product.
The ignorance/arrogance displayed by many here seems a touch ironic considering the once held way of the forum here was not to speak on things you have no direct experience with. You may have experience with other holsters which *look* similar to this but in reality nobody here has likely even seen one in the wild... let alone actually used one. Would it be too much to simply ask that we as a collective hold our judgement and simply share real world experiences once they become available. If you don't like the aesthetic, don't buy it... that's literally all we have right now is looks. There's really nothing added here saying you don't like how it looks.
If you're open to embracing new ideas/technology then I don't think you'll easily find a company that surpasses RCS in this avenue. They have continued to attempt to innovate despite people complaining incessantly about it not being ____. Even a company like PHLster which has some novel designs, still simply uses the old molded kydex design envelope for most everything's basic form. I've honestly been less than thrilled with the reality of having to tinker heavily with holsters to get them to *work* for me as an individual. The fact that this holster claims to not need any of this tinkering/adjustment I'd say is monumental if it delivers on this claim.
That top down view that @DLWinner posted is certainly interesting. If I had to guess I'd say this design will work well for some and suboptimaly for others depending on how rounded or flat one's abdomin happens to be.
It also verifies what I suspected from the first picture... It's designed for a monoblock or dual clips and the dual clips look to offer infinite height adjustment.
Edit to add: I like the new idea but the execution looks like it may unacceptably thick as well.
I am open to new technologies and I hope this is a great product. I would be more than happy to eat crow about this.
I didn't start this thread to bash on RCS, but I do see some issues with the CAD drawings on the press release. Outboard bullet orientation requires, at least to me, an awkward twist of the wrist to perform.
The Edelon had some great ideas, but it required just as much fiddling as any other AIWB holster that I used.
@taskernetwork on IG has a series of pictures, 7 & 9 look particularly interesting regarding the geometry.
I have no clue how to correctly link to IG or BBcode the pictures correctly.
So - look - I'll be really direct. If you think RCS is the first company to try to reinvent the holster or make it 'less form of the pistol more form of the holster' - then there is about ~100+ years of holster evolution to investigate that demonstrates that isn't true. Perhaps more importantly, RCS has had absolutely zero innovation in the past ~10 years and therefore they had to come up with a 'game changer' to even attempt to regain relevance as a company.
The simple fact is - it is not difficult to build a holster that is different. It is next to impossible to build one that is different and works. I've carried guns long enough and bought enough holsters already to know enough to be skeptical and especially to be skeptical of a company like RCS where the good idea fairy visits but is usually overshadowed by the poor execution spectre.
I also admit that I think it's arrogant to assume one must put hands on a design in order to understand it will be poor. It doesn't take a PhD in Anatomy (which I actually do have) to look at that thing and know - human crotches are not shaped this way...at all.
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.
Last edited by RealSelf; 03-20-2024 at 02:01 PM.
Reply With Quote