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.