ltwguns.com

Two distinct domains characterize the uniqueness of custom pistols. The first, foremost, and most commonly acknowledged is the domain of artistic metal crafting. Special attributes in this category not only instill exceptional aesthetic values but frequently convey practical functional benefits, as well. For example, improved gripping attributes, reduced light reflection from critical surfaces, and enhanced holstering properties might directly result from the artisan's efforts. It is clear, therefore, that firearms beauty is not just skin deep.

A second, more subtle, domain also exists in the realm of custom gun production. This is the domain of mechanical design innovation. While usually less visible, unique mechanical features of pistols may well impart some huge advantages. Benefits might be found to impact on firearm safety, shooting accuracy, weapon durability, and flexibility of gun configuration. Custom gun making offers an ideal framework for implementing new firearm design concepts, without the need for access to major production facilities.


In the second domain, some major R&D contributions lie, waiting to be discovered. Here are a few ideas:

1. Interchangeable front and rear sights that may be conveniently removed, without losing the basic settings of sight adjustment.
2. Built-in recoil buffer features, protecting pistol components at the limits of rearward and forward slide motion.
3. Automatic, or manually adjustable, accommodation of cartridges of differing power levels.
4. Adjustable, yet positively secure, precision slide to frame track mating.
5. Quick change pistol grips.

As always, an appreciative audience looks forward in anticipation of tomorrow's creations from those gifted in the art and science of firearms development.

I think that the ability for the user to change a manual safety from one side to the other, by field or detail stripping, rather than an ambidextrious safety, would be desireable.

Of course, it has been done (see the Bren Ten - a great design feature on a flawed gun).

Hi ArmaLube,
I think that I must be from a slightly different camp. I believe that the innovation is in the metal work, and that the two are not divisable.
I don't want to come off as they type that believe that if JMB didn't design it, it isn't good, but I do believe that the basic 1911 style handgun, especially as executed by todays masters, is very beautiful and utilitarian.
Newer designs of pistols have come and gone, as you'd expect over the last 93 years. The 1911 doesn't need much change.

When I look through your list of what you'd consider innovative, I just see unnecessary and complicated contraptions that in any form could not improve on what we already have. Most of the suggestions that you'd make would remind me of a Swiss Army Knife. Something that can be used to do just about anything, but can't do any of it well.

Just a rundown of what I mean, here is the quick and simple of why I like guns as they are being built.

1. I don't want interchangable sights. Once my sights are POI for me, I'd damn near prefer them welded in place.

2. Bill Wilson has made a fortune off of Shock-Buffs and Full Length Guide Rods. I'm convinced that neither do anything substantial. It is not unusual for a well built gun to last 50K or even 100K rounds, maybe more. Adding in extra stuff (which can fail) is a complication that I'm not going to want.

3. In a good 1911, the ability to spit out most loads is almost guarenteed. With a quick spring change, it's near impossible to foul things up because of power. Moreover, if you have a gun that you want to shoot over a range of fourty power factor points, you're probably on the Swiss Army Knife track again. You'd be better served having two guns for the two styles of shooting.

4. On some of those guns where they have 100K rounds, retirement is generally not because the frame/slide interface is worn beyond use. End user adjustments in this area are probably going to create more problems then it could possible ever solve. Some may make a case for Accu-Rails on a bi-metal gun, but this is about the only argument that will get much notice.

5. I want my grip to be the same every time I grab it.


In conclusion, I really believe that the Swiss Army Gun isn't a thing of the future. If we were only allowed one gun our entire lives, maybe having something that was convertable would be worthwhile. As it is, me, and probably the rest of the gun buying public, isn't going to sign on. I guess this is why the El Camino just never caught on.

Hello Stokes,

The intent of my post was to stimulate creative thinking. Apparently, the quest for creative ideas and new concepts in pistol design are not of interest to you. That is perfectly OK. You are completely entitled to your views.

The world of pistols extends well beyond the Browning model 1911, although it is a grand design that will always be with us. Other successful pistol designs and a variety of pistol features, of course, exist and serve huge numbers of followers. Consider, for example, the unique mechanisms of the Glock designs, SigArms SA/DA pistols, IMI Desert Eagle gas operated pistols, and other introductions that permanently and beneficially altered the world of pistols.

Whether you agree or not, artistic rendition of outward firearm features and the fundamental creation of new firearm design principles and mechanisms are completely different fields of skill and achievement.

The five comments you make are simple matters of opinion, and you are welcome to them. The remarks made in my post were not directed toward those who might share your manner of thinking. Designers of advanced forms of future firearms will have a special kind of mental reach that is not only rare but impossible for some to comprehend.

Your characterization of my post as describing a 'Swiss Army Gun' indicates that you missed the point entirely. While agreement with the views of others is not necessary, having respect for them is something you may wish to consider.

Since your reply exhibits essentally no diplomacy, I have avoided its use here.

ArmaLube

Everyone is being pretty civil here, thanks. Slightly heated threads bring out the best ideas. I thought this was a good exchange and was looking forward to reading it.
I thought Armalube brought up some interesting ideas, some of which we will probably see. However, I have a slight penchant for the working 1911 pattern guns. Interesting to see where this goes.

_________________
Heirloom Precision, LLC.
480-804-1911

"If everyone is thinking alike, someone isn't thinking."
- General George Patton Jr

There was an article about a new pistol design by Craig Custom a few issues back in American Handgunner. It looked like a pretty innovative design but is he selling any? I don't say that to be a smart ass but I am trying to make a point. I haven't seen or heard anything about that pistol except for that article. Innovations don't necessarily become commercial successes.

_________________
Dave Berryhill
Berryhill Custom, LLC

Greetings Steve and Dave,

Your inputs are certainly appreciated. The 1911, as everyone knows, is a revered and classic platform. Those who prefer it for ordinary use or for custom refinement have made an outstanding choice. One that certainly requires no defense.

Still, the Berettas, S&W third gen autos, Wildeys, original Auto-Mags, and the like have been gems in the handgun field. Also, commercial success while always a goal, many times just isn't achieved. The magical lure of advanced mechancal design, unsurpassed firing performance, and aesthetic excellence, combined with commercial success represents an elusive collection of objectives. Nonetheless, the challenge is a great Mt. Everest, always beconing new climbers.

It is interesting to note that a master custom craftman can bestow artistic magnificence upon virtually any firearm. The weapon is the canvas. The rendition and resulting 'new object' are the master's creation.

Without detracting from the wonderful world of custom firearm workmanship, my intention has been to simply direct some focus on the 'hidden world' of mechanical gun design and the intrigue that lies therein.

Great guns are great guns, regardless of the form or source of their greatness. May God bless the firearm DaVincis and all students of the art, as well.

_________________
Bob

AAAAACCCKKK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

My EYES, my EYES!!!! Must rinse them with Holy Water!!!!!!!!!

_________________
CT Brian Custom
'Blending Art With Firepower'

Tim,
Whatever you do, stay away from the light. I'm on my way in the water truck.

_________________
Heirloom Precision, LLC.
480-804-1911

"If everyone is thinking alike, someone isn't thinking."
- General George Patton Jr

_________________
John Del Pinto

John,

As you know, we each perceive the world in our own way. Your way is not only the best for you, but it is just as good if not better than anyone else's. Viewponts change and adjust to our learning experiences.

Thanks for your comments. Wishing you the very best with your forthcoming surgery and all else of importance.

Bob

Thanks for your well wishing. If I didnt convey it, my response was tongue in check. I dont think there have been any real innovations in the last 100 years. Same metallic cartridges, same basic function. I dont consider the use of plastics an innovation, but basic evolution. If handheld weaponry had the same innovations and design advances as man made flight, we'd being using phasers like on Star Trek.

_________________
John Del Pinto

I'm pretty sure I have seen a phaser or two that came out of the Christiansen camp!

Be well!

_________________
damian@adcofirearms.com
http://www.adcofirearms.com

Hello again, Bob.

My apologies if my reply sparked indignation. Luckily, my skin is quite thick, easily deflecting snide commentary with little effort. I’ll attempt to continue this discussion understanding the differences between us.

I think that our basic differences come down to terminology and semantics. While it was presumptuous for me to assume that you might be discussing 1911 platforms, I would suggest that the realm of “custom pistols” would only include changes to existing platforms, and not that of new platforms designs. This is especially true when predicating the subject with “subtle”. Changing subsystems in existing platforms can be subtle, where wholly new designs would surely not be held in such light regard.

With that being said, I would welcome new designs with my checkbook ready. Fortunately, we live in a society where the selfishness of Capitalism is King, where I control my checkbook and only support the efforts I wish to support. I believe that the vast majority of us would agree that firearms are primarily tools, with aesthetics taking a distant second. In such an arrangement, new firearms design will be restricted by their commercial success in a utilitarian environment. Indubitably, beautiful or innovative firearms will always have a market, but only if they are of usefulness as a tool first.

The nature of tools is generally simple. Straightforward designs specific to predescribed tasks. Until we’ve progress past mechanics controlling explosive propulsion of projectiles as our tools, the Swiss Army Gun is just not going to be of much commercial success. The field of new weapon design has vast capacity for development. I have much doubt that our current firearms technology has a fraction of this growing room, and certainly doesn’t have the interest of the buying public. I’m ignorant about laser guns and photon torpedoes, but it would be of little surprise to me if this is the area where the innovations will develop. This would leave little use for many of the previously suggested areas of improvement.

Nonetheless, I would be remised if I were to stifle creative thinking and design concepts. I can only hope that I’m way off target, with new, innovative and useful designs just around the corner.

Thank God, John Moses Browning, Armand Swenson, Craig Wetstein, Dick Heinie, and Ned Christiansen for the advancement of my favorite firearm, the 1911.

In my opinion, the two biggest areas that pistol technology, and other firearms, could benefit from are optical sights and cartridge technology.

Specifically, i'm hoping for the day to come soon when we can practically place durable red-dot style sights on pistols. The Dr. Optics are a start, but something smaller and more durable is needed for widespread civilian and LE use. It would need to work in a wide variety of holsters without being overly bulky.

Bullet technology has come a long way in the last few years. But, the other parts of the modern cartridge could also be improved. If more advanced propellents could be developed, higher velocities could be gained from handguns. Higher velocity would allow the development of more lethal pistol rounds. Rifle velocity out of a pistol, without decreasing bullet size by much, would be ideal. Obviously, that would pose some problems wiht heat, but I think that they could be worked out.

Another area of pistol technology that could be improved is in finishing. Boron Carbide may have come the closest to being the perfect finish. Glock's tennifer is excellent also. From my understanding, however, it is done as part of the heat treat process. That would preclude any aftermarket application.

Greetings Drummer,

You make some interesting points. Difficulty in achieving simulaneous focus on both sights and target is always annoying. And, while conventional scopes solve this problem, they usually add too much bulk and weight. A special new optical system, similar to the reflex systems, would be great.

Metal finishing is also an area with much potential. Vapor depostion will support some exotic coating applications. Boron carbide has some terrific attributes, as does titanium nitride (TiN) which has a black variety in addition to the usual gold color. As you know, these are tough materials with some very low friction attributes.

Thanks for your remarks.

Bob