New Holster Model

[katsass]

Mike,

I'm not really expressing an opinion here, because I don't really have answers, just questions.....

I'm assuming the long-term longevity of a holster is affected by a variety of factors, including materials storage and the style of holster. For example, I have a Lawrence gunfighter rig for a single six that I think dates from the 1960s. I used it a lot in the late 70s when I got it, then didn't touch it for a couple of decades. When I took it out of the box a couple of yeas ago, the stitching on the belt had disintegrated, and the holster was going, too. I assume storage and lack of use are factors, but I'm doubtful it would have held up a whole lot better with daily use. Similarly, I have a Lawrence pistol belt from the late 70s (Actually, my oldest boy liberated it 10 years ago). It was a real beauty -- lacquered, three layers, suede lining, 1/4' thick. It was the stiffest belt I had ever seen when I bought it. Today it's as limp as a wet noodle, and the surface leather is eroding. it was $25 or $30 when I bought it and I think I got my money's worth.

I have a S&W OWB holster for my model 28 also from the '70s that's still serviceable. It was not a particularly complex design, just line leather folded over with a welt and a retaining strap. But that might be why it's still serviceable -- changes in the leather are less important than if it had been heavily molded.

I really like the holsters you make, they're very distinctive and I'd like to be able to handle one some day, to get a real fee for the fit of the gun, etc. My holsters are a different style, I like the feel of the gun "popping" in and out of the body, and most of mine are flat to the body for concealment and comfort. When I make a pancake, I laminate the back plate of the holster for precisely the reasons you mention -- it creates a stiff spine that allows the holster to ride higher, for a better presentation. But I'm starting to think that any design that pushes the limits of the leather also will have a shorter life span. I don't really know how long you can expect a heavily molded holster to last. 10 tears? 20 years? I doubt it will be 40 or 50.

I've used a kydex holster for training and they have their pluses and minuses. Never seen one I like for concealment. I think leather is always going to be more comfortable. But it you're going to be in a marine environment, where your holster will be getting wet regularly, they have an advantage. And they clean up real easy. I used a quick-detachable avenger last month in a carbine class I took. I liked it better than the kydex holster I had used before for training. But it was a rainy day, and I was down in the mud with it, and the natural color of the horsehide looks pretty "aged." <g>

But I think you're right that kydex can be used to enhance a good leather holster. Paddles are a good example. I've also made clips for IWBs whose functions would be hard to duplicate in leather.

tk

tk, I think you are correct in the variable factors effecting the longevity of holsters. Leather, stitching, design, care and environment all come to my mind. It seems to me that over the past 50 or so years, commercial construction of holsters has leaned toward lighter leather. I'm not sure, however I have a suspicion that commercial makers 'introduce' firmness in their rigs in the molding stage, possibility with an alcohol bath., to make up for the lighter weight, along with much more 'boning' type molding. I do use lighter leather than most, however I use two layers of it, bonded together to reach the weight I feel sufficient to the task. John Bianchi started out doing this, however I am sure that this type of construction can cause difficulties in the mechanized manufacturing process --- as well as increased cost. I don't see any commercial mass produced pieces made this way. As to stitching I feel that hand saddle stitching will hold up better than the machine lock stitch. Hand stitching however is generally not compatible with modern machinery and construction techniques --- if for no other reason but cost. Many outfits like to use synthetic stitching thread, I just don't care for it. Some years ago while involved in the testing of commercial holsters which may be issued to the troops, a unique problem arose with a new model holster from a large, well know manufacturer. The holster was a 'sandwich' style, stitched (by machine) on both edges with a monofilament thread. A small (around 100 #) female clerk was recruited to do nothing more than firmly grasp the butt of the holstered (blue) gun, then fall to the ground while holding on to the shooter. That holster unzipped like tearing a postage stamp from a perforated page. Naturally it was not selected by the Dept. The upshot in my mind is that many of the synthetics will cut through leather easier than good old waxed linen thread. Now, I was taught to stitch by a WWI cavalry soldier, and a grumpier, louder and more profane speaking old man there never was, but he taught me how to stitch well --- at least I believe so. He swore that no machine stitch will hold up as well as a well done saddle stitch. Later I heard the the Army (back then) would not even purchase tack for their horses unless it was hand stitched. Actually I believe what he said, after fully understanding the machine made lock stitch. Care and environment go hand in hand, in my opinion. The type of care for a rig worn along the gulf coast will differ from one worn out here in the desert. Different climate = different needs for the leather. As to design, I'm very much a traditionalist. I don't care much for straps, multi-carry options or 'adjustable' things. To me, less is more, generally speaking. Along the lines of design we get into concealed carry. A truism for concealed carry is that "you dress to conceal". A whole bunch of folks argue this point, swearing up and down that they can carry a full sized 1911 while clad in shorts, a tank top and flip flops while the shooter remains totally concealed. They even point to the fact that 'George' down the street, or the wife just can't see their gun while clad this way. That may be so, but George nor Mama are the bad guys. The real bad guy, one that has spent time in the joint or even a County jail, has learned to OBSERVE. They watch everyone and anything going on while sitting,behind bars, walking the yard, or on a work detail. They note the slightest things, and often the biggest give away to a person carrying concealed is the person himself. With the weight of a shooter on your hip, forward in your appendix,or in the small of your back, unconscious movements will give you away. It actually takes years of constant carry to become (almost) unaware of that thing on your belt or in a shoulder rig. I don't know how often I have observed a LEO unconsciously reach down and reposition that heavy Sam Browne rig on his waist, but it's a lot.. Most folks don't even pay attention to the folks around them. Who looks at the guy standing outside the market as you enter. What is different about someone sitting and relaxing in the mall. If they are the bad guy, they are watching people, and nobody notices them. as they look for victims --- AND the plain clothes cop.

OK, I'm off the soapbox. Thank you for your opinion of my work, I appreciate it. We do have different styles and that's just as things should be. All of my stuff is made to order, however a local sporting goods store has asked me to make a couple of samples. They feel that an actual holster or two would assist in sales for me, and I'm sure that they are right. As soon as I can clean up what orders I do have I'm considering making one for a 1911 and possibly one for a Smith K-Frame. When that occurs I wouldn't be too opposed to shipping one to you to play with for a week or two prior to getting it over to the store. Good luck in your leatherwork. Mike

Edited January 17, 2012 by katsass

[Colt Hammerless]

Katsass, I had to laugh at your story about your friend losing his Smith out of the helicopter. I have a friend in Border Patrol, and they've been having lots of problems with their shoulder holsters. Lots of guns falling out unexpectedly. One guy he knows was leaning out of a helicopter searching the desert brush when he lost his H&K. I don't think they ever found it. My friend has had his fall out several times. Once in a meeting at work, once in a hotel as he was opening the door to his room, and once in a grocery store parking lot while he was off duty and not in uniform. Some people in the parking lot started to scramble, but oddly, no one called the police. That fall broke his rear site, and he had to get a new gun. Sorry for the tangent, back to regular programming.

Colt Hammerless

[katsass]

Katsass, I had to laugh at your story about your friend losing his Smith out of the helicopter. I have a friend in Border Patrol, and they've been having lots of problems with their shoulder holsters. Lots of guns falling out unexpectedly. One guy he knows was leaning out of a helicopter searching the desert brush when he lost his H&K. I don't think they ever found it. My friend has had his fall out several times. Once in a meeting at work, once in a hotel as he was opening the door to his room, and once in a grocery store parking lot while he was off duty and not in uniform. Some people in the parking lot started to scramble, but oddly, no one called the police. That fall broke his rear site, and he had to get a new gun. Sorry for the tangent, back to regular programming.

Colt Hammerless

Well, the worst I ever heard of was a LEO from my Dept.that just always seemed to step in it. He hit a public restroom, jumped into a stall, and dropped his trousers. His off duty shooter somehow fell and skidded into the next (occupied) stall. That patron beat feet it out in a hurry and called the Dept. to report a strange man playing with a gun in the restroom. Mike

Edited January 17, 2012 by katsass

[K-Man]

Malabar:

You can take this information for what you deem it's worth. From the looks of it, your design apprears to be worn only in the appendix area. A high riding holster such as that, and worn in that area, is not going to conceal well at all for the vast majority of people because of body shape. A high riding holster in and of itself has the great tendency to lean out away from the body, and with all of the form of the holster on the outside, you just compound the issue. You thus have two issues - lack of concealability and discomfort in wearing the gun/holster. If you go with a paddle style attachment, you're still going to need some way to secure it in place, otherwise it's going to slide all over the waistband.

With respect to hand sewing versus machine stitch, my experience has been that I have never had a stitch pop loose or the thread deteriorate with machine sewing. I've used nylon bonded thread exclusively. Some of the gear I've made has lasted for over 10 years and still functions today. I would estimate that I have made 15,000 pieces in the last 8-9 years alone. Some of that gear has been used in some pretty harsh environments to include the middle east and special ops. The machines I have used to sew nearly all of my products has been the Artisan Toro 3000 and Cobra Class 4.

Good luck with the holster design.

Edited January 17, 2012 by K-Man

[malabar]

Malabar:

You can take this information for what you deem it's worth. From the looks of it, your design apprears to be worn only in the appendix area. A high riding holster such as that, and worn in that area, is not going to conceal well at all for the vast majority of people because of body shape. A high riding holster in and of itself has the great tendency to lean out away from the body, and with all of the form of the holster on the outside, you just compound the issue. You thus have two issues - lack of concealability and discomfort in wearing the gun/holster. If you go with a paddle style attachment, you're still going to need some way to secure it in place, otherwise it's going to slide all over the waistband.

With respect to hand sewing versus machine stitch, my experience has been that I have never had a stitch pop loose or the thread deteriorate with machine sewing. I've used nylon bonded thread exclusively. Some of the gear I've made has lasted for over 10 years and still functions today. I would estimate that I have made 15,000 pieces in the last 8-9 years alone. Some of that gear has been used in some pretty harsh environments to include the middle east and special ops. The machines I have used to sew nearly all of my products has been the Artisan Toro 3000 and Cobra Class 4.

Good luck with the holster design.

I agree that I don't think it would work very well in the Appendix area, but it's intended to be worn around 3:30-4 o'clock, just behind the strong side hip, as in the photo below (this is an earlier prototype). It seems to work pretty well there. I've worn the prototype for several weeks without problem (and an earlier prototype before that), but the real question is, what will happen with six months of daily wear.

What I read into Mike's comment about the paddle was that it would be a way of exerting counter force on the holster, and I think he's right. Think of the holster as a see-saw and the belt as the fulcrum. Gravity pulls down on the grip of the pistol, and the pistol's natural tendency is to pivot on the fulcrum. But because the holster extends below the fulcrum, and the straps hold it tight, it stays rigidly in place. Until the straps start to stretch. Mike's suggestion is that a "paddle" will help oppose the force of gravity and keep the holster tucked in tight.

My wife is suggesting making special straps with a non-stretching layer of vinyl laminated inside. It's an interesting idea that I'll almost certainly try.

I'm using the Cobra Class 4 as well and am very pleased with it, and I'm using heavier thread than many. But is it as good as hand stitching? Many years ago (OK, it's like 30), I hand-stitched some holsters for cap-and-ball revolvers and sewed them up by hand with waxed linen. Wish I had one, but I don't -- I sold them with the revolvers when I went to college and needed money. But I'd bet dollars to donuts they're as functional today as they were 30 years ago. Heck, I found a couple of rolls of the waxed linen thread and IT's stil as good as the day I bought it. The problem with the lock-stitch is that if you break a stitch, everything can come apart (which is what happened with my old Lawrence rig -- the individual stitches had no strength on their own).

Now, I like the stuff I'm making today. It's practical, has a great "feel," and conceals well. It's not practical to hand-stitch it. But will it be good 40 years from now? I'm somewhat doubtful. These are designs that push the characteristics of the leather to the max. When the leather starts to degrade, the holster will become markedly less effective -- which is what Mike described with the semi-shoulder holsters.

tk

Edited January 18, 2012 by malabar

[Colt Hammerless]

Reading this thread has had me again thinking about an idea I've had for some time now. I was thinking about how to keep the grip of a 1911 or some other long gripped pistol tighter against one's body, even when at a regular ride height. I too was picturing the holster as sort of a see-saw. I thought, what if there was a thick piece of leather on the outside of the holster on the back side along the slide (or barrel in the case of a revolver,) and below the belt, that would keep the holster and gun from tipping away. It would have to be pretty thick, at least a 1/4 inch, about 16 oz. Go put your highest riding holster on and wedge something about that thickness (maybe even thicker) between the holster and your body, and below the belt, and see what you think. It seems to work. I think it might even be a good option for IWB and normal ride heights. I've read about a high ride design by Bob Mernickle that I think may be along the same lines, though I'm not sure.

Colt Hammerless

[K-Man]

Malabar:

What does the current model have for a degree of cant? From the current picture, it looks like a near vertical cant.

I know of at least one holstermaker who patented a design for a high ride holster with an elongated paddle on it. That design was very short-lived.

Where in central Florida are you?

Never mind - I found your Facebook page. Looking at the pictures you've posted there - I have to be honest and say I don't see how you can claim that the gun/holster is concealed (other than it being under the black sweatshirt). You can clearly see a large object.

Another issue present with high rise holsters is the larger gun requires an extended draw in order to clear the holster. You start pushing that holster farther back on the waistband, with a small degree of cant, and the user struggles to clear.

Edited January 18, 2012 by K-Man

[Denster]

K-Man and Katsass pretty well covered the ride hieght and cant.

A few things I noted. I've never been much of a fan of snap on OWB holsters. That is a YMMV situation of course but I don't see any advantage for the added complication. I also don't see the purpose behind flat back designs. It complicates the build process and does not add materially to the concealablity over a well designed pancake. It also gives up much of the pancakes retention ability by not having a bind on the holster with the weapon in this would also be escaberated by the use of 5/6 for the outer panel.

I'm curious as to what price point you intended to bring this holster in at? With all of the complications you've added. ie: Flat back, metal reinforcement, snap on loops etc. it looks like a time consuming design to build.

[K-Man]

IMO, the flat back designs are worthless. They push everything out and away from the body. In addition, they put added stress on the stitching because all of the weight is supported by those stitch lines.

If Malabar would allow me, I have a couple of pics of a customer wearing one of our pancake holsters with a SIG P226 in it, and can post them here. If you compare his pictures of his holster being worn with mine, you would be able to clearly see how a pancake design is markedly better in concealing in comparison to the flat back design.

My experience has been that a snap-on holster, if built/designed properly, is but a variant of the pancake design. Separate straps have a greater potential of stretching and wearing out than a strap that is an extension from the body of the holster itself.

Edited January 18, 2012 by K-Man

[malabar]

K-Man and Katsass pretty well covered the ride hieght and cant.

A few things I noted. I've never been much of a fan of snap on OWB holsters. That is a YMMV situation of course but I don't see any advantage for the added complication. I also don't see the purpose behind flat back designs. It complicates the build process and does not add materially to the concealablity over a well designed pancake. It also gives up much of the pancakes retention ability by not having a bind on the holster with the weapon in this would also be escaberated by the use of 5/6 for the outer panel.

I'm curious as to what price point you intended to bring this holster in at? With all of the complications you've added. ie: Flat back, metal reinforcement, snap on loops etc. it looks like a time consuming design to build.

As you say, your mileage may vary. I target my holsters to civilians who are carrying concealed.

Most non-LEOs see a real advantage in a holster that mounts and dismounts quickly and easily. It makes it a snap to run into the post office, or the kid's school. Pop off the holster, put it in the glovebox and go.

"It also gives up much of the pancakes retention ability by not having a bind on the holster with the weapon in this would also be escaberated by the use of 5/6 for the outer panel." I'm not sure I understand this sentence. Are you saying that flat-backed holsters don't have positive retention? Some of the best makers in the business would disagree with you. You can turn my holsters upside down and they hold the gun. And I typically use 6/7 for the outer plate.

I make my pancakes the same way -- flat back, molding on the front. And they are high-ride, too. Why? Easier to conceal for most people. The bottom of the gun is less prone to sticking out below the bottom of a shirt. Now, does that affect proper presentation? Absolutely. But like everything else associated with firearms, it's a compromise. I think the trick is to get it high enough to conceal more easily, without pushing it so high that it affects stability, or makes a proper presentation difficult. As others have pointed out, there have been quite a few designs chasing that combination of high ride, stability and proper presentation.

Price point? I figure $75, like my sidestrap IWB. Takes me a little over an hour to make one, although that hour tends to be broken up into five to 10-minute increments over the course of several days. With about $15 in materials, that's $60 profit per holster. Actually, $48 profit, after the government takes its share <g>

tk

[Denster]

As you say, your mileage may vary. I target my holsters to civilians who are carrying concealed.

Most non-LEOs see a real advantage in a holster that mounts and dismounts quickly and easily. It makes it a snap to run into the post office, or the kid's school. Pop off the holster, put it in the glovebox and go.

"It also gives up much of the pancakes retention ability by not having a bind on the holster with the weapon in this would also be escaberated by the use of 5/6 for the outer panel." I'm not sure I understand this sentence. Are you saying that flat-backed holsters don't have positive retention? Some of the best makers in the business would disagree with you. You can turn my holsters upside down and they hold the gun. And I typically use 6/7 for the outer plate.

I make my pancakes the same way -- flat back, molding on the front. And they are high-ride, too. Why? Easier to conceal for most people. The bottom of the gun is less prone to sticking out below the bottom of a shirt. Now, does that affect proper presentation? Absolutely. But like everything else associated with firearms, it's a compromise. I think the trick is to get it high enough to conceal more easily, without pushing it so high that it affects stability, or makes a proper presentation difficult. As others have pointed out, there have been quite a few designs chasing that combination of high ride, stability and proper presentation.

Price point? I figure $75, like my sidestrap IWB. Takes me a little over an hour to make one, although that hour tends to be broken up into five to 10-minute increments over the course of several days. With about $15 in materials, that's $60 profit per holster. Actually, $48 profit, after the government takes its share <g>

tk

I'm afraid I still fail to see the real advantage. Schools and the Post Office are gun free zones not holster free zones. Seems much simpler to just secure the weapon.

What I meant by the bind is that pancake designs where the centerline of the gun is aligned with the centerline of the holster puts pressure aganst the back and front of the holster when it is on the belt with the weapon in. This pressure is one of the things that gives even a poorely designed pancake holster good retention when it is worn. With the flat back design most of that pressure is lost. You essentially have the entire holster pouch attached to a flat back. Then with the 5/6 OZ weight leather you may have good retention when new but long term I think is problematic.

I doubt whether too many of the better holster makers would disagree.

It sounds like you are a pretty efficient workman to complete those holsters in an hour. Better than I could do.

You might be well served to take K-Man up on his offer to post photos of well designed pancake holsters and explain the drawbacks of your design. Legitimatly he is one of those better holster makers you refered to.

[malabar]

IMO, the flat back designs are worthless. They push everything out and away from the body. In addition, they put added stress on the stitching because all of the weight is supported by those stitch lines.

If Malabar would allow me, I have a couple of pics of a customer wearing one of our pancake holsters with a SIG P226 in it, and can post them here. If you compare his pictures of his holster being worn with mine, you would be able to clearly see how a pancake design is markedly better in concealing in comparison to the flat back design.

My experience has been that a snap-on holster, if built/designed properly, is but a variant of the pancake design. Separate straps have a greater potential of stretching and wearing out than a strap that is an extension from the body of the holster itself.

Having some issues with posting comments to my own thread. If anyone sees an incomplete version of this post, my apology...

"IMO, the flat back designs are worthless. They push everything out and away from the body. In addition, they put added stress on the stitching because all of the weight is supported by those stitch lines."

That's an interesting perspective. It's certainly easier to build holsters where the gun is sandwiched equally between two pieces of leather. But the outer surface of the holster won't be any further from the body regardless of which design you use. What you get with a flat back is a holster that molds more easily to the contour of the body. That can mean a more comfortable holster, depending, of course, on a variety of other factors as well. And I'm not sure your comment about stitch lines is correct. It seems to me that in a standard pancake, the force of the gun entering the holster is directly transferred to prying the two layers apart, which would be harder on the stitching. It seems to me that in a flat-backed design, more of that force is absorbed directly by the leather.

Either way, what you get with a flat-backed holster that is hard-molded is a fit where the gun kind of "clicks" in and out of place with a velvety feel.

Now, I've never handled your holsters, so I can't make any observations about them. But what I have observed with the regular pancakes (and here I mean the store-bought holsters I've had access to for many years) is this: When you flex the side "wings" of the holster in toward the body, simulating the forces applied when you mount the holster, the outer plate gets stretched, pulling it in toward the surface of the gun, while the inner plate gets compressed, pushing it slightly away from the surface of the gun. This affects the feel of the gun when drawing and reholstering. It's why so many off-the-shelf holsters have a "soggy" feel when drawing and reholstering. I'm not suggesting that applies to the work of anyone on this forum, it's simply one of the issues I've tried to address in my own designs.

Yeah, that's a lousy photo on the facebook page, which is why I didn't post it here. I should reshoot those photos. There's a big bulge in the side of my fleece sweatshirt, but it's not the pistol, as you could probably tell if you look at the photo I posted on this forum -- the bulge is at 3 p,m. and the pistol is back at 4:30, and quite tight to the body.

By all means, feel free to post any photos that you think expand the conversation.

"Separate straps have a greater potential of stretching and wearing out than a strap that is an extension from the body of the holster itself."

I'm curious: Why would this be the case? By using separate straps you can make them out of heavier leather than the body of the holster itself. And many highly regarded makers would disagree with you. Of course, that doesn't mean you're wrong, but I'd like to understand how you arrived at this conclusion.

tk

[malabar]

...

What I meant by the bind is that pancake designs where the centerline of the gun is aligned with the centerline of the holster puts pressure aganst the back and front of the holster when it is on the belt with the weapon in. This pressure is one of the things that gives even a poorely designed pancake holster good retention when it is worn. With the flat back design most of that pressure is lost. You essentially have the entire holster pouch attached to a flat back. Then with the 5/6 OZ weight leather you may have good retention when new but long term I think is problematic.

I doubt whether too many of the better holster makers would disagree....

Yeah, I got you. Even old and saggy pancakes often "grab" the gun.

And I suspect there's a huge difference in the way a handmade pancake behaves and a mass-market pancake behaves.

My flat-backed designs were inspired by some of the designs from Milt Sparks. A lot of folks simply like the "feel" of the draw from the heavily molded holsters.

tk

[Denster]

Yeah, I got you. Even old and saggy pancakes often "grab" the gun.

And I suspect there's a huge difference in the way a handmade pancake behaves and a mass-market pancake behaves.

My flat-backed designs were inspired by some of the designs from Milt Sparks. A lot of folks simply like the "feel" of the draw from the heavily molded holsters.

tk

You suspect there is a huge difference? If you are going to be in the holster business you should have a pretty good working knowledge of holsters in general not just the particular style you choose to build. Just my opinion YMMV

[K-Man]

Malabar:

I'll go snag those pics and post them up shortly.

Are you referring to Milt Sparks and Matt DelFatti as the other holster makers who use straps? If so, their strap designs are vastly different from yours. I can only tell you what my experience has been in utilizing the style of strap you show on your design. You're going to be replacing those a lot more often than you think. While you may think that's not a big deal, it affects your reputation as a holster maker who makes (or doesn't) a durable, functional holster.

With respect to the flat back, all front pouch aspect, you are putting all the stress of carrying the gun on that single front piece of leather. Where do you think the relief to that is going to be ? It's on the stitch line. In addition, balancing a gun in a high ride holster creates additional stress. With a traditional pancake style of holster, you have both pieces of leather essentially carrying that stress. Thus it takes the stress off the stitch line to a great extent.

Your attempt to make an all leather version (flat back/pouch front) of a hybrid (kydex/leather) holster is just simply not going to work IMO. I designed (and sold quite well) an IWB that some saw as an all leather hybrid holster. It wasn't really that though because I set it up as what I would term an abbreviated pancake holster. In fact, I took one of my existing pancake holster designs I had at the time and modified it. That particular holster was the most desired at the time of our IWB or OWB holsters we offered.

The click or snap you get is from the holster being well-molded.

Presentation/draw of the gun, and the ease to do so, is tantamount to a well-designed holster. And unless you've got a high/long middle body, a person is going to struggle getting a large frame gun out of a high ride holster that is near vertical in cant. If you're stuck on making a high ride holster, you would be much better off making something for a 3"/3.5" barrel length and no larger. In most short-barreled guns, i.e., Glock 26, 3" 1911, etc., where does most of the weight lie? In the grip. So you're right back to the balancing act.

Like Denster said, trying to build in too many aspects is creating a complex situation. I encourage folks to think outside the box and to evaluate and investigate new ways to make a holster. Don't concern yourself with how it looks. The aesthetics (sp?) always follow suit to a well-designed holster. Simplicity is oftentimes key to success.

I would encourage you to step back and re-evaluate your design and goal. Focus on the basic goals of function and durability. Design something that is going to function and appeal to the largest group of users. What you show in this design is only going to work, realistically if at all, for a very small group of people.

That's my opinion, and I'm stickin' to it.

[K-Man]

Here are the pics of the pancake holster we made, with a SIG P226 in it. There is approximately a 15-18 degreee cant on the gun. The holster is now about 8 years old and still functions as well as the first day.

And a picture of the other holster design I mentioned:

[TwinOaks]

K-man, I've been reading this and having flashbacks!!! Ah......hindsight is a fine thing, but only once one has the seasoning to see their mistakes.

Malabar, I hope you have good success with your holster design. In a year or two, when you're writing a 'thank you' letter to a forum member for helping you learn what works, what sells, and for pointing out where you were going wrong.....gimme a shout. I think I can drag up the letter I sent to K-man doing exactly the same thing. This thread is strikingly similar to the thread in which I made a complete arse of myself...arguing holster design with one of the best in the business. Thankfully, that post was lost in the great crash.

[Eaglestroker]

Reading this thread has had me again thinking about an idea I've had for some time now. I was thinking about how to keep the grip of a 1911 or some other long gripped pistol tighter against one's body, even when at a regular ride height. I too was picturing the holster as sort of a see-saw. I thought, what if there was a thick piece of leather on the outside of the holster on the back side along the slide (or barrel in the case of a revolver,) and below the belt, that would keep the holster and gun from tipping away. It would have to be pretty thick, at least a 1/4 inch, about 16 oz. Go put your highest riding holster on and wedge something about that thickness (maybe even thicker) between the holster and your body, and below the belt, and see what you think. It seems to work. I think it might even be a good option for IWB and normal ride heights. I've read about a high ride design by Bob Mernickle that I think may be along the same lines, though I'm not sure.

Colt Hammerless

Mernickle does this with a cross draw they make. Seems popular I see them alot on the S&W forums.

[woodandsteel]

Well, as a relative newcomer (I've been making holsters just over a year) this has been a very educational thread. Let's keep it from getting nasty, though. K-man, you've got many years of experience you share from, and I appreciate the opportunity to learn from your insights. Your points make sense.

On Malabar's behalf, though, Milt Sparks, Galco, and El Paso Saddlery all make flat-backed holsters, and that design does seem to add to comfort, even if it loses something in strength or retention.

http://www.epsaddlery.com/pc-150-11-snap-off-elite-thumbreak.aspx

When I first started making my own holsters, I made a flat-backed IWB design that is quite comfortable, and I still wear it, but I never quite got it right, and decided it was more work than it was worth.

K-man, after I made that holster, I saw a picture of yours and though, "Well, shoot! That's what I was going for, and that guy already did it way better!".

Why did you stop making that one?

[katsass]

From the grumpy old guy; I lurk here a lot, and add a comment or two when I feel it warranted or when I feel that I may add an idea or experience which may assist someone. I get the hell out leave the thread alone when my voice would just be reiterating the same advice in repetition, or when someones 'knowledge' and/or ego seems to be getting in the way of constructive comment --- I just see no reason in that sort of thing. One thing I seem to have noticed is that many different styles of rigs are presented on here, and certain styles seem to be in vogue regionally, ie. that which is popular in the mid-west may not do as well in the mountain states or out here in the desert. I personally have had but one request for and IWB holster in the last five years. That one was changed to an inside the belt rig, and a year or so later the customer met me and thanked me for the suggestion.and the change. Of course, I'm but a dinky little outfit that makes items to order and in no way am I 'THE EXPERT' on the ergo-dynamics and geometric relationships between anatomical structure of the human creature and a chunk of dead cow skin. I just know (think that I know?) what I can make work well for my customers. One thing I do know however, is that lack of age or experience really is no block for ideas. Thinking along a different line than tradition dictates is the seed of invention.and I dislike seeing contention rear it's uncomely countenance in, what I would expect to be a positive, or at the least, a non confrontational congress of ideas. Mike

Edited January 21, 2012 by katsass

[K-Man]

woodandsteel: I set aside making/offering IWB and OWB holsters last year when we went fulltime living in our 5th Wheel RV. I simply did not have the room to accomodate all the logistics associated with making those styles of holster.

katsass: I don't know that anyone has claimed here to be an EXPERT when it comes to holsters. Malabar asked for suggestions/criticism. I simply related what my experience(s) has been and the foundation for the same. In my comments, I don't see any reason to waist bandwidth with flowery responses. My experience has been, too, that people are not very receptive to being told they're doing something wrong, especially if they've been doing it that way for years.

If I was offbase, I doubt seriously we would have the long term success that we have had. I have learned from Tony Kanaley, Matt Del Fatti, and Lou Alessi (rest his soul) primarily - followed their processes and basic design form. Each of those gentlemen have/had 30+ years of experience designing and making holsters. I think it would be fair to say they know what they're doing. Though I've seen some holstermakers with an equal or greater number of years of experience who's advice/processes I wouldn't give you a wooden nickel for. Why? Because their holsters break down in short order in all respects.

Designing a new holster is a challenge for most, while others have a much easier time at it. I agree that lack of age or experience should not be a block for designing and incorporating new features. Understanding the basics, and implementing those in the design, is holstermaking 101 though.

People are welcome to do whatever they want, however they want, when it comes to making a holster. If I stepped on toes with my responses, well, maybe they should have been wearing steel toe boots....

[Denster]

Maybe it's just me. Where does anyone see any contention rearing it's ugly head here? Malabar asked for critique on a new design that I presume he is going to market. When I post holsters I have built for critique I may not agree with some of the responses I get but sometimes it does cause me to rethink some things and make changes I didn't notice but someone else did and I end up with a better product in the end. Marketing a new design can be expensive in time materials and energy it's not a bad thing to have some different input. Obviously Malabar is somewhat new to the business, we all were at one time, but it is obvious he does have some talent.

I just noticed K-Man's response. Yeah what he said!

Edited January 21, 2012 by Denster

[woodandsteel]

If I was offbase, I doubt seriously we would have the long term success that we have had. I have learned from Tony Kanaley, Matt Del Fatti, and Lou Alessi (rest his soul) primarily - followed their processes and basic design form. Each of those gentlemen have/had 30+ years of experience designing and making holsters. I think it would be fair to say they know what they're doing. Though I've seen some holstermakers with an equal or greater number of years of experience who's advice/processes I wouldn't give you a wooden nickel for. Why? Because their holsters break down in short order in all respects.

Designing a new holster is a challenge for most, while others have a much easier time at it. I agree that lack of age or experience should not be a block for designing and incorporating new features. Understanding the basics, and implementing those in the design, is holstermaking 101 though.

The more I make holsters, inspect classic designs and other makers' work, and try to to come up with my own good, functional, improved designs, the more I see that most of the best design ideas have already been done before. Often when I go through the process of tweaking design ideas, I end up with the same design someone before me ended up with. Many times we're all finding the same solution to a problem. That shouldn't discourage anyone from still trying to make a new and better design but, for me, it instills more respect for the great designs and makers who have come before me.

I haven't had the benefit of apprenticing with a holster maker, but with the internet I've spent a lot of time studying the work of Alessi, Del Fatti, Tony Kanaley, Lobo, Particle, K-Man, Dwight, Katsass, Brigade Gunleather, Ryan Grizzle, and many more. When I first saw Malabar's work a few weeks ago, I asked him about how he was doing it, to learn how he was doing his flat-backed holsters. I try to learn from everyone!

Edited January 22, 2012 by woodandsteel

[woodandsteel]

woodandsteel: I set aside making/offering IWB and OWB holsters last year when we went fulltime living in our 5th Wheel RV. I simply did not have the room to accomodate all the logistics associated with making those styles of holster.

It's a really great looking execution of the hybrid style design. I especially like your use of the punched slot as a solution to molding and stitching around the end of the barrel. Was it a profitable design?

[K-Man]

woodandsteel: It was very much a profitable design. The picture shown is of the prototype. I made a couple of minor tweaks afterwards, but nothing that changed the shape or function of the holster.

Edited January 22, 2012 by K-Man