VP9 SK

officially shit

>>33338973
Why should we care?

Looks like something Batman would throw at bane

>>33338973
So a P30sk but worse?

File: _DSC0346.jpg (385KB, 3261x2160px) Image search: [Google]

385KB, 3261x2160px

>>33338973
>fat, chunky grip that holds all of 10 rounds in the magazine
>giant finger grooves where the last one is too far down on the grip for many people's fingers to sit in it and not on the pointy edge
>still no VP9 Compact appears to be in the works.

I am encouraged that they seem to have done away with the trough in the bottom of the trigger guard, but it also annoys me that HK-USA appears to make these product images in Photoshop, instead of taking a picture of the actual fucking gun. The charging supports on the new guns should be serrated.

Also, I'm kind of hoping that they will offer some of the Euro variants to our market, since Euros get options like push button magazine release and a manual safety. Fuck, just thinking about that....I hope that these take the P30SK/P2000SK magazines and not something totally new.

Even the European HK website has real photos of the gun with updated charging supports, instead of just a Photoshop creation.
http://www.heckler-koch.com/en/products/military/pistols/sfp9/sfp9-sk/product-overview.html

>>33338973
All following measurements in inches
lenght- 6.61
>glock 26 - 6.49 winner
height - 4.57
>glock 26 - 4.17 winner
width - 1.31
>glock 26 - 1.18 winner
barrel lenght - 3.39
>glock 26 - 3.42 winner
sight radius - 5.73 winner
>glock 26 - 5.39

Glock 26 - 4
H&K VP9SK - 1

This is without counting aftermarket support nor price (which i'm sure will be 600+ like the VP9s were when they came to market)

Veredict- no thanks

>>33339121
>go to precision rifles
>msg90
>no psg1
Feels bad.

>>33339142
When you've owned and carried guns for more than a few years, you'll start to understand that 0.03 inches difference in some dimension doesn't make or break a carry gun. A lot of factors go into a good carry gun, like the trigger pull quality, handle ergonomics, reliability, and is it generally small enough for YOU to carry it concealed comfortably. Sure the Glock may be 0.13 inches thinner, but for a lot of people, 0.13 inches isn't enough to make or break their ability to conceal it comfortably.

>>33339192
Exactly my point.
Glock 26 is a great fit for me in all aspects. So why would I go try a bigger subcompact that'll most likely be more expensive.
Thus, veredict stands

>>33339249
>Exactly my point.
You need to go back and read my post for comprehension this time.

>>33339192
This. I used to agonize about the width of a carry gun. After carrying my PX4 Compact which is 1.3 inches in width, it actually conceals better than my Glock 19 that has a width of 1.18 inches.

Don't be a nerd that agonizes over 0.02 inches in sight radius or whatever. Most of the time that information is off and has no real bearing on how it performs.

>>33338973
>subcompacts
Ugh.