New Holster Model

[malabar]

So this is my finalized version of of my new model. I call it the Shield. It's a quick-detachable, high-ride holster with a steel band in the mouth that adds real crispness to retention. It's made out of two layers of 6/7 veg-tan that have been treated with vinegaroon, then waxed and lacquered with an airbrush. The straps are detachable, so if they stretch they can be easily replaced. The snaps are military-grade pull-the-dots. It's sewn with 346 thread on top and 277 below.

The high-relief molding on the front keeps the back flat, enabling it to be pulled very tightly to the belt, for better concealment.

This version is cut to fit both the Glock 17 & 19.

Thoughts? Criticisms?

tk

Edited January 14, 2012 by malabar

[volpert]

So this is my finalized version of of my new model. I call it the Shield. It's a quick-detachable, high-ride holster with a steel band in the mouth that adds real crispness to retention. It's made out of two layers of 6/7 veg-tan that have been treated with vinegaroon, then waxed and lacquered with an airbrush. The straps are detachable, so if they stretch they can be easily replaced. The snaps are military-grade pull-the-dots. It's sewn with 346 thread on top and 277 below.

The high-relief molding on the front keeps the back flat, enabling it to be pulled very tightly to the belt, for better concealment.

This version is cut to fit both the Glock 17 & 19.

Thoughts? Criticisms?

tk

Very nice !

[wizard of tragacanth]

This design is interesting. I imagine that it is meant to be worn outside the belt but it looks like it may be even better if worn between the belt and the pants, creating more stability.

Nick

[malabar]

This design is interesting. I imagine that it is meant to be worn outside the belt but it looks like it may be even better if worn between the belt and the pants, creating more stability.

Nick

You're right: going inside the belt can help pull snap-on holsters in tight to the body.

I was after a design that gave me that kind of stability without needing to be inside the belt. The placement of inside-the-belt holsters is limited by the location of the belt loops. With this design, you can wrap around the hip, spanning the belt loops. That makes for better concealment, while still optimizing presentation. The side wings give this holster greater stability than you would typically get wit a snap-on design.

tk

[TwoMikes]

I think you need to extend the bottom a little bit more. I've found that a little bit of gun sticking out will pup upward when you sit especially in a car seat. Then you'll develop a bad habit of checking the security of your gun and end up getting made. Also leather at the bottom protects the crown of the barrel and the front sight from being hit and damaged.

[malabar]

I think you need to extend the bottom a little bit more. I've found that a little bit of gun sticking out will pup upward when you sit especially in a car seat. Then you'll develop a bad habit of checking the security of your gun and end up getting made. Also leather at the bottom protects the crown of the barrel and the front sight from being hit and damaged.

Yeah, I agree with you on both counts. This particular arrangement was a request from another instructor with whom I work. He's a very advanced shooter and I deferred to his judgement. I think the risk is minimal here because only a small amount of the muzzle is exposed -- but I typically would not expose even that amount.

These are the reasons why I don't make a yaqui belt slide-type holster. I've had several folks ask for them, and I explain that they can be dangerous for a variety of reasons, but people think they are the cat's meow -- because they are cheap and flexible.

Ever seen this?

http://www.itstactical.com/warcom/firearms/safety-warning-worn-leather-holsters-can-cause-accidental-discharges/

The human factor here is undeniable. The shooter had to know his holster had retired. But people do stupid things and I'd hate to see one of my holsters involved in this kind of an accident.

tk

[katsass]

So this is my finalized version of of my new model. I call it the Shield. It's a quick-detachable, high-ride holster with a steel band in the mouth that adds real crispness to retention. It's made out of two layers of 6/7 veg-tan that have been treated with vinegaroon, then waxed and lacquered with an airbrush. The straps are detachable, so if they stretch they can be easily replaced. The snaps are military-grade pull-the-dots. It's sewn with 346 thread on top and 277 below.

The high-relief molding on the front keeps the back flat, enabling it to be pulled very tightly to the belt, for better concealment.

This version is cut to fit both the Glock 17 & 19.

Thoughts? Criticisms?

tk

From the old grump; malabar, let me first say that I have absolutely no kicks with your workmanship in any way, you've done good, however, being old enough to have seen high ride holsters of many designs come and go, I think that you'll find that your rig MAY (notice that I say MAY) begin to 'fall-out' fairly soon. You have two (nice and wide) straps which are a weak point IMO, but not the only one. Being as low down as they are they will tend to have the weight of the shooter trying to pull away from the wearer's body from the start, thus applying a stretching torque to them right from day one. Being replaceable you have obviously taken this into consideration, but may not realized how fast the stretching may take place, and also where it may take place. High ride holster have a limit and apply a different type of pull to the belt carrying them, the belt will also try to stretch away from the body, more so as the gun rides higher. Years ago there was a rig (one of the best designed IMO) called the 'semi-shoulder' rig, that utilized high riding, cross draw, breakfront holsters. It was two piece (with inter-changeable holsters) which consisted of a 4" to 5" leather covered steel belt loop. It had a steel lined tang which rose about 2" above the belt. To this was attached the holster (with steel lining in it's back) by use of 'pull-the-dot' snaps. The holsters rode with the gun's muzzle just below the bottom of the belt --- as does yours. Those puppies sold like hotcakes! They then went the way of the unicorn. The 'fall-out' just could not be controlled, the belt was also under tension and stretched. 'Fall-out' ultimately reared it's ugly head and the holsters (luckily convertible to standard belt wear) ended up down on the wearer's waist.

Now I'm considered a somewhat grumpy, old (some say that when I was born the Dead Sea was only a little bit sick) and a bit pessimistic. I'm not saying that your design will ultimately fall prey to 'fall-out', however, I'd wear one for five or six hours daily for some months to prove the design. Actually, I hope it works. Mike

[Haystacker]

I like your out of the box thinking. If this is actually worn between the belt and pants then the stability issue may be offset. I'm with the "Old Grump" on this one. I sure hope it works.

[malabar]

From the old grump; malabar, let me first say that I have absolutely no kicks with your workmanship in any way, you've done good, however, being old enough to have seen high ride holsters of many designs come and go, I think that you'll find that your rig MAY (notice that I say MAY) begin to 'fall-out' fairly soon. You have two (nice and wide) straps which are a weak point IMO, but not the only one. Being as low down as they are they will tend to have the weight of the shooter trying to pull away from the wearer's body from the start, thus applying a stretching torque to them right from day one. Being replaceable you have obviously taken this into consideration, but may not realized how fast the stretching may take place, and also where it may take place. High ride holster have a limit and apply a different type of pull to the belt carrying them, the belt will also try to stretch away from the body, more so as the gun rides higher. Years ago there was a rig (one of the best designed IMO) called the 'semi-shoulder' rig, that utilized high riding, cross draw, breakfront holsters. It was two piece (with inter-changeable holsters) which consisted of a 4" to 5" leather covered steel belt loop. It had a steel lined tang which rose about 2" above the belt. To this was attached the holster (with steel lining in it's back) by use of 'pull-the-dot' snaps. The holsters rode with the gun's muzzle just below the bottom of the belt --- as does yours. Those puppies sold like hotcakes! They then went the way of the unicorn. The 'fall-out' just could not be controlled, the belt was also under tension and stretched. 'Fall-out' ultimately reared it's ugly head and the holsters (luckily convertible to standard belt wear) ended up down on the wearer's waist.

Now I'm considered a somewhat grumpy, old (some say that when I was born the Dead Sea was only a little bit sick) and a bit pessimistic. I'm not saying that your design will ultimately fall prey to 'fall-out', however, I'd wear one for five or six hours daily for some months to prove the design. Actually, I hope it works. Mike

Mike,

I'm not offended. I appreciate your candidness. And the insight that comes from having worked on holsters so long.

I have to see if I can track down some pictures of the holster you're talking about.

"Fall-Out" is a good term. I haven't used that term before, but I will from now on <g>. I agree that's the issue. If I can keep it pulled-in tight, it's a winner.

I'm hoping that the wide "wings" will help stabilize the tendency to pull away from the body. And by passing the straps through the wings of the holster, it keeps them short and tight to the belt. And a real gun belt is essential, or it will torque the belt. Maybe specialized leather for the straps will help.

I suspect a lot of it may depend on the specific gun. I carry a SIG P226, which is one of the more challenging guns for CCW leather for (although not quite as bad as the Beretta 92). I've worn one for a few weeks now and it seems to e doing OK, but I don't know how it will hold up month after month.

tk

[katsass]

Mike,

I'm not offended. I appreciate your candidness. And the insight that comes from having worked on holsters so long.

I have to see if I can track down some pictures of the holster you're talking about.

"Fall-Out" is a good term. I haven't used that term before, but I will from now on <g>. I agree that's the issue. If I can keep it pulled-in tight, it's a winner.

I'm hoping that the wide "wings" will help stabilize the tendency to pull away from the body. And by passing the straps through the wings of the holster, it keeps them short and tight to the belt. And a real gun belt is essential, or it will torque the belt. Maybe specialized leather for the straps will help.

I suspect a lot of it may depend on the specific gun. I carry a SIG P226, which is one of the more challenging guns for CCW leather for (although not quite as bad as the Beretta 92). I've worn one for a few weeks now and it seems to e doing OK, but I don't know how it will hold up month after month.

tk

Well, the holster was available in the late '50's sometime and into about '61 or so, i don't remember who made it. Actually it was a 'pull through' holster in that the gun was pulled through where the welt would be. Adjustable spring tension helped hold the shooter in the holster. Any auto with a bunch of weight in the grip will be difficult to keep in tight I expect. I carried a Glock 21 for a while on duty and it did well in a duty holster, but I could carry my S&W 539 (all steel) which actually weighed more than the loaded Glock, while off duty because the balance was better. Anyhoo, I do hope that you have the answer to carrying a hi-rise rig. Mike

P.S. I actually carried a 3" S&W M-24 more than anything else off duty.

P.P.S. There is a pic of a semi-shoulder rig on Google Images. It shows a J Frame Smith in it but doesn't show the setup very well. With anything larger than the litte Smith the thing just didn't work too well --- especially for the money back then.

Edited January 15, 2012 by katsass