So is Hudson dead?

I am all for innovation and building a better mouse trap. But to think that anything within the Hudson pistol design hasn't already been R&Ded and proven not to work better in the long run by established gun manufactures is very short sighted. If the unique features of the Hudson pistol were in fact superior don't you think it would already be patented and on the market? Just because someone dreams up a different way to assemble a mouse trap doesn't automatically make it better. Different? Absolutely. Better? I highly doubt it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Justin

In thinking about small gun startups with founders from outside of the industry that actually made it, the only one I can think of off of the top of my head is Boberg, and they ended up selling out to American Derringer..

---

Bond Arms ... not the fat old lady that thinks she's a boudoir model.

I had the chance to put one of the H9 pistols in my hand. It felt amazing, sights were on point and the trigger was exceptional. That being said, I didn't get to shoot it. The price point was what steered me away from it, and now I'm REALLY glad I didn't buy one. I truly hope they get their debts and legal issues settled. It would be nice to see them stay in business. Regardless, not sure if I'd still buy one at $500. None of my firearms are "safe queens". What's the point if you can't enjoy shooting them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CHA-LEE

I am all for innovation and building a better mouse trap. But to think that anything within the Hudson pistol design hasn't already been R&Ded and proven not to work better in the long run by established gun manufactures is very short sighted. If the unique features of the Hudson pistol were in fact superior don't you think it would already be patented and on the market? Just because someone dreams up a different way to assemble a mouse trap doesn't automatically make it better. Different? Absolutely. Better? I highly doubt it.

---

While I get your point, your comments sound very short sighted in relation to how new ideas come about...

Massive corporations don't generally create the new idea. They generally BUY the new idea from the inventor and patent/license/etc such ideas.


ETA: In this particular case, the concepts that Hudson based their H9 weren't necessarily new, but that doesn't stop them from having a new tweak, a new layout, etc to make it work where others have failed.

Its easy to make a "New" gun configuration idea last for 100,1000, or even 10,000 rounds before it fails. Its a vastly different proposition to make a configuration last 100K+ rounds before a catastrophic failure. There is a lot of information out there on how the Hudson barrel locking lugs were shearing off after only a few thousand rounds of use. Like I said before if their unique configuration design, such as the barrel lockup, was in fact superior to what is already on the market then other companies would already be doing it.

Maybe I am jaded to this kind of "New" stuff because I am not a gun collector with a safe full of guns I don't shoot. I shoot all of my guns on a regular basis and they all get used HARD. To me guns are nothing more than a tool to get the job done. Long term reliability is far higher on my priority list than looking cool or cool new features. I also understand that once a tool has been used to its service life it gets pitched in the trash and replaced. Since I started shooting competition I have used up and thrown away at least 4 pistols and all of them had major replacement components fed to them or repaired during their service life at (Barrels, Slides, Frames, etc). The majority of those major component failures was primarily due to lightening parts excessively or using really light springs so the parts get beat up faster than they should. My oldest 2011 Limited gun that I still use regularly has over 100K on it and its still chugging along as it should.

I would like to see a Hudson customer that has put over 25k through it without a catastrophic failure. I don't think it exists due to it failing before that point or most people simply don't shoot that much. If that is true, then how can anyone claim that the unique features on the Hudson pistols are on par with much less better than existing designs.

I'm not necessarily saying that Hudson, in particular, had a good idea or implemented it appropriately. The fact that they folded would suggest that one of those two was not true. My point was that new innovation doesn't always come from "Big Name X". In fact, very often it comes from "Big Name X" buying an idea from "small name y".

I expect you and I share many of the same ideals for our firearms and their reliability, and as such the brands/models that we have are similar or the same. I also am not a gun collector, and all of mine see use frequently. The only one that I can think of that doesn't is a revolver that came from my wife's Grandfather. She has a sentimental attachment, and I don't like revolvers, so it sits in its case in the safe.