What might be the next innovation in handguns?

[TunnelRat]

Originally Posted by T. O'Heir

Polymer frames and "safe action" trigger systems didn't change anything. The triggers might have made a possible reduction in the number of cops being shot by other cops while playing "Quick Draw" in the locker room. Polymer frames are about weight reduction and nothing else.
"...pressure on the trigger face reaches a predetermined point, the weapon fires..." All triggers do that now. Electric triggers aren't new either. They've been on target firearms for eons.
"...cycle reliably in outer space..." Firearms will do that now. Including the use of smokeless gun powder. Smokeless gun powder creates its own oxygen for the burn. The issue is with the physics that will send the shooter backwards at the same velocity as the projectile goes forward.
"...Most people cannot rack the slide..." Nonsense. And "adolescent and teen" are the same thing. "Lighter, shorter trigger pulls" do not exist in factory firearms. And they will not happen in factory firearms unless the U.S. Courts start throwing our or refusing to hear all the frivolous law suits. There's a class action suit that has been filed, up here, against S&W trying to blame them for the actions of a criminal nut case. Said nut case obtained the pistol illegally from gang bangers. Highly unlikely it'll be heard though. Our Courts really dislike people wasting the Court's time.
"...a plastic slide with a steel subframe..." That's not a plastic slide. It's steel covered with plastic. Just like all Glocks.
"...They tried that..." HK tried caseless ammo too.
There needs to be a totally new energy source that does not create recoil. Not sure if that's possible.

Besides weight reduction polymer frames also noticeably reduce the cost of the firearm through the use of injection molding. While many might argue that this is predominantly enjoyed by the manufacturer, it has also allowed a wide assortment of very affordably priced firearms that are also quite reliable. One person might not care, but reliable firearms that can be owned by the masses is something worth noting imo.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[Jim Watson]

There needs to be a totally new energy source that does not create recoil. Not sure if that's possible.

Probably not. I once read an engineering study of a hypothetical gas dynamic laser rifle. It was to energize an IR beam with a delivered energy of something like .45 ACP +P.
But the surge of gas along the lasing tube generated recoil comparable to a .458 Win Mag.

[gbclarkson]

I'm not sure, but the next generation of small arms will have to cycle reliably in outer space.

I was joking... I was trying to poke fun the current political climate. I apologize for not inserting a smiley face after my post.

[youngridge]

More conceal ability and capacity seems to be what’s ‘in’ now, more so in the 9mm, I would think they would develop larger calibers in smaller fire arms. Sky’s the limit but the money is where what the consumer wants.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Fishbed77]

I'm not sure, but the next generation of small arms will have to cycle reliably in outer space.

This comment may have been tongue-in-cheek, but any modern firearm should in theory cycle just fine in the vacuum of space, since modern smokeless powder contains its own oxidizer.

[Cheapshooter]

There needs to be a totally new energy source that does not create recoil.

Why?
Maybe people just need to learn to shoot, and recoil is a part of it!
Until the last ten or so years that has been the case. In all but the most powerful magnums, nobody cared about a little recoil. Those that shot the "big guns" knew, appriciated and respected the power in their hands.
Seems like in the past ten years or so there has been an influx of hyper sensitive people buying guns that don't understand the basic princilpe of equal and opposite force.

[veprdude]

I think the next manufacturer to introduce a magazine that comprises the main grip or a substantial portion of it would be a small game changer. Imagine the capacity of the whole pistol grip as a magazine instead of what you can cram into a magazine and then cram into the grip... Glock 17 with a 30 round mag.

If the gun control folk take over enough seats and the Presidency I could see mandated keyed safeties kinda like what Taurus puts on their stuff so a loaded gun can't be left around.

[Road_Clam]

The SMART gun ! Oh wait, they already tried, it came with big corporate hype, and got squashed with big consumer fear.

[Tactical Jackalope]

Probably RDS (red dot sights) as the standard on all pistols, at this rate.

[kozak6]

I predict a big comeback in rotating barrels once Glock gets around to releasing the 46 for the rest of us.

[Nathan]

It sounds far out, but the technology isn't as extreme as it seems. With the quality graduates produced by the university system these days, I think we have the right stuff to see a prototype in the 2020s.

I'm not sure, but the next generation of small arms will have to cycle reliably in outer space.

Are you sure? We can’t even go to the moon anymore....I literally mean we don’t have that capability.

From my point of view, the 1911 is still pretty innovative.


I think innovation will come in successfully marketing and producing a women’s handgun. Sure, we have had J frame Ladysmith and pink pistols, but I mean real women’s guns. I’m thinking I frame 5 shot 38 s&w, a small 9x19 or 380 that really fits most smaller women’s hands, etc. It would have to be ultra easy to rack the slide too.

[Dave T]

What ever it may be, you can rest assured it will have an optical sight and be a 9mm.

Being an old geezer, who only occasionally crawls out from under my rock, I will probably be underwhelmed. (lol)

Dave

[Lohman446]

Why?
Maybe people just need to learn to shoot, and recoil is a part of it!
Until the last ten or so years that has been the case. In all but the most powerful magnums, nobody cared about a little recoil. Those that shot the "big guns" knew, appriciated and respected the power in their hands.
Seems like in the past ten years or so there has been an influx of hyper sensitive people buying guns that don't understand the basic princilpe of equal and opposite force.

The .40 was introduced in 1990 specifically because of recoil concerns around the 10MM. Prior to this the FBI authorized both a .38 Special load and a .357 load in its handguns and most agents are said to have qualified with and opted for the former.

This idea that recoil sensitivity is a new thing ignores premises that suggest, strongly, otherwise.

[USNRet93]

Originally Posted by Lohman446

The .40 was introduced in 1990 specifically because of recoil concerns around the 10MM. Prior to this the FBI authorized both a .38 Special load and a .357 load in its handguns and most agents are said to have qualified with and opted for the former.

This idea that recoil sensitivity is a new thing ignores premises that suggest, strongly, otherwise.

Yup, and some of 'us' aren't just wimps but actually have damage to their wrist/thumb that makes 'recoil' a BIG issue if they really want to often shoot the guns they own(which I do..no safe queens for me thanks).

[Cheapshooter]

The .40 was introduced in 1990 specifically because of recoil concerns around the 10MM. Prior to this the FBI authorized both a .38 Special load and a .357 load in its handguns and most agents are said to have qualified with and opted for the former.

This idea that recoil sensitivity is a new thing ignores premises that suggest, strongly, otherwise.

So my time frame may have been off a bit. But I'm betting Elmer Keith would disagree with the premise that learning how to shoot a hard recoiling gun isn't the answer.

[TunnelRat]

Originally Posted by Cheapshooter

So my time frame may have been off a bit. But I'm betting Elmer Keith would disagree with the premise that learning how to shoot a hard recoiling gun isn't the answer.

You're picking as an example a person who was famous at least in part for hot rodding cartridges. Kind of obvious where he'd stand on the issue.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[Cheapshooter]

You're picking as an example a person who was famous at least in part for hot rodding cartridges. Kind of obvious where he'd stand on the issue.

But the pertinent part is his belief that you can learn to handle the recoil. And that it is mostly mental!
But as with so many things today, people are looking for the easy way out.

[TunnelRat]

I disagree that people wanting less recoil is a "new" thing. There have been and will always be the Elmer Keiths of the world. That doesn't make them the norm. There are still people shooting magnums to this day. I'm not sure the percentage of the population has changed that dramatically, especially when you factor in the recent growth of 10mm.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[Dave T]

But as with so many things today, people are looking for the easy way out.

Cheapshooter, that was a cheapshot. I owned and shot 44 Magnums for years. Mostly old 3-screw, Flat-top Ruger Blackhawks. Even owned a Model 29 for a brief while back then. Now I have severe arthritis in my shoulders, elbows, wrists, and hands. According to you, I was "looking for the easy way out" when I sold them and quit shooting full house 357 Magnums as well.

Guess you're more of a man than I am.

Dave...looking for the easy way out.

[Cheapshooter]

Dave T you are not who I am talking about. There are reasons of course for needing a firearm with less recoil. But it seems in recent years it's becoming a must for newer shooters to have the lowest recoiling gun, but with magnum power. But they would be perfectly capable of shooting a harder kickng gun if they spent some time learning how to handle recoil, and getting over the mental block about.

[veprdude]

Ever see WW2 artillery fire? There's some kind of shock absorber that the barrel sinks into. Maybe a barrel with a shock to reduce recoil.

[Lohman446]

Until the last ten or so years that has been the case. In all but the most powerful magnums, nobody cared about a little recoil.

So my time frame may have been off a bit. But I'm betting Elmer Keith would disagree with the premise that learning how to shoot a hard recoiling gun isn't the answer.

Your initial argument is off. The fact of the matter is people DID care about recoil. Hence the FBI offering the 38 special load even after the 357 revolver was introduced AND the bureau had switched to 357 revolvers as normal. While folks like Elmer Keith have been able to get impressive results the move towards heavier recoil has been resisted by all but the most committed shooters. Hence why many law enforcement agencies, whose agents carry firearms as part of the job rather than as being "gun nuts", didn't even commit to switching out of 38 special to 357 magnum even when they had firearms capable of it. I'm sure we have all heard stories of the 44 Magnum for sale with 44 rounds of ammunition left in the box. A good share of our fathers and grandfathers (or for some of you your own generation), who were by no means part of the current generational sensitivity shift you seem concerned about, simply were not interested in having a firearm that was problematic to shoot without excessive practice. The .41 Magnum designed as the middle ground between the .357 and 44 never did have the sales those behind it hoped for.

At one time in rifles the big game cartridges that we generally consider "classic" (like the .416 Rigby) were replacing heavier recoiling black powder firearms and recoil reduction was a big selling point of these big bores.

Now we have members of this board who advocate for lighter recoiling guns specifically due to follow-up shots that have nothing to do with their ability to handle recoil. Three shots of 9MM are ballistic ally superior to two shots of .40 and can be delivered in the same amount of time with controlled fire I believe is a reasonable synopsis of the argument. This may be a relatively new argument, at least in regards to the amount of support it has, but it is not based on some recoil sensitivity thing it is based on a tactical assessment. Please note this is not my argument and I am not going to advance if the argument is right or wrong itself only that it is a reasonable argument put forward in favor of the 9MM cartridge in guns of size and weight similar to harder recoiling cartridges.

Now technology has helped us get more powerful handguns, at an "affordable" price, with less perceived recoil. I think there is a reason Smith and Wesson ships the .460 and 500 with compensators on them and I doubt they would have pushed these to market had this alleged recoil sensitivity thing (the 500 was introduced in 2003) really been a sign of the times.

The move to ultra-light, ultra small, "pocket" 9MMs which have substantial perceived recoil due to size and weight further indicates that there is not some new recoil sensitivity. If anything modern firearm manufacturers and buyers seem accepting of recoil if it allows them to get 9MM cartridges into guns of a size that just a couple decades ago would have been chambered in 32. Surely those who have bought polymer pocket 9MMs realize they recoil more than the steel pocket .32s of yesterday. Especially those who have owned both. Yet one of these things is manufactured in something new every year and one is not.

But it seems in recent years it's becoming a must for newer shooters to have the lowest recoiling gun, but with magnum power

IF this were possible why not? I would love a gun with the sheer stopping power of a .500 that was the size, weight, and capacity of a .22 and had the same recoil. I mean why would this be a bad thing? I believe you are incorrectly attributing motivation though.

But as with so many things today, people are looking for the easy way out.

I think if one is going to be derisive they should at least have the premises lined up and fact checked enough that they are right. Its very easy to be derisive if accuracy is not required. There are, in fact, things one can even by correctly derisive about. I simply do not believe that recoil concerns being a recent phenomena is one of them.

This theory that recoil sensitivity is new disregards the fact that people like Keith were pushing the envelope and not everyone joined in on the results specifically because of the recoil. This is not "we want less recoil" winning the day it is "here is a gun with better ballistics BUT more recoil" NOT winning the day for the non-committed shooter. You seem to be trying to reverse this in your narrative which allows you to place blame on current trends and I believe it is simply incorrect in regards to what happened.

[bill460]

Originally Posted by Nathan

Are you sure? We can’t even go to the moon anymore....I literally mean we don’t have that capability.

Forget the Moon, we can't even reach low Earth orbit any longer in a manned vehicle, since we abandoned the Shuttle. We have to buy rides with the Russians to get to the International Space Station. Pathetic.

[m&p45acp10+1]

Lighter guns that have improved sights,red dots, with slides that are easy to rack, and cut slides, and ported barrels. That would be a nice thing to see in a standard gun that does have a 4 figure price tag.

That said. The FN509 Tactical I have is an awesome gun. I added a Vortex red dot, and a compensator. The flush fit 17 round magazine when loaded does not make the gun feel like a boat anchor. The 24 round mags do not make it feel too heavy when it is fully loaded.

The thing I like about it being a lefty is that it is 100% ambidextrous with no tools or work having to be done. The mag release works from both sides. The slide lock can be worked from either side of the gun.

[Cheapshooter]

Guess I, along with most of my shooting buddies are just out of touch, or anomalies. We do shoot a lot of lower recoil guns like rimfires, and 38 Spcl. target loads, standard pressure 9MM out of full size service pistols, and others. But we also like shooting the thumpers, and big boomers just as much. Several of us hunt with TC Contender pistols in calibers like 7-30 Watters, 357 Harrett, 35 Remington, and 45-70. Nothing puts a grin on my face like a couple dozen or so rounds of 45-70 through a 10" 'Tender!