Snap On Pancake

[chiefjason]

Finally managed to finish a personal holster. I had made another snap on rig earlier and had this grand notion of making it capable of being IWB or OWB. Well, it seems you can do both OK but neither well. So this time I went for a dedicated OWB rig. The changes I made for this one were integrated straps, double snaps, fully lined, and I left the bottom open. Basically, I fixed all the mistakes I made on my first one. I have to say that the lined holsters look great. But I don't see myself making many of them. Wow, that was a lot of work!

The holster is 4 layers of 5-6 oz Hermann Oak B grade leather, hand stitched, and vinegroon finished. Any critiques are welcome.

For your viewing pleasure. Front side snapped.

View of straps.

Back side.

First shot is a top edge and then a side edge. I'm much happier with the burnishing on this one. Even though evening out 4 layers was kind of tough.

Shot of the lining.

And the most important part, how it rides. Much tighter than the last one. These strap will not be slipping off and letting the holster move off my hip.

[Shooter McGavin]

Nice work. Thats some thick leather too, bet it was tough to get any kind of detail molding in there. Looks like youve left yourself plenty of room to get a solid grip on the gun, stayed off the safety, and provided a useful sweat shield.

Food for thought:

The extension of leather past the snaps is a bit too long. It provides no positive qualities, and may actually get caught on stuff and cause your snaps to unsnap.

Also, and this is certainly only a matter of personal preference, but I like to do the snaps in a diagonal fashion when I do the double snap models.

[chiefjason]

I like the look of the extra leather, but time will tell if it works well. That was one of the first thoughts I had when I put it one. It looks good but that's a lot of material to hang on something.

Honestly, this thing was easier to mold than I expected. The Hermann Oak leather is great to work with. But then again, stuff like the slide line is just added on, not molded. I tried to get the take down divet molded a bit and could not get anything worth pursuing. But working around the rail, trigger, and ejector was easy enough.

I've got a little more room there than I intended. I plan for safeties and a solid grip. But I would have liked to have gotten the trigger guard in a bit deeper. Although, with the thin leather around the front sight I would have taken a chance that the sight might be poking out a bit. Should have cut that a bit more generously. Always things you could do better next time.

I've been wearing it a couple days now an absolutely love the way it wears. A vast improvement over the first one. I catch myself reaching down to adjust the strap back on since the old ones used to slide off. Not these.

I like the way you handled the diagonal snaps and matching angle on the straps. Nice touch.

[sgb]

Nice chiefjason, awesome work Shooter McGavin. I just recently finished my first attempt at a snap on holster, got the snaps too tight. 8/9oz leather.

[katsass]

From the grumpy old guy: Well, you learned a valuable lesson IMO -- multitasking holsters just don't work out too damned well at all. Holsters are made (again IMO) to do one thing primarily -- hold that shooter securely in one place so that you know exactly where it is when you need it. Now, I no way am trashing your workmanship and/or execution of the rig you put together, BUT (that word always seems to show up in my evaluations) I feel that nothing has been gained in the style of rig you have produced over a standard pancake or, (my preference) Lobo's design of the 'Enhanced Pancake' holster. It/they use less leather, have no nasty snaps or straps, and keep the shooter in tighter and more secure to the body. I'm generally against snap closures, straps, T'nuts, springs, and such, so frequently now being used to assist in the retention of the firearm in the holster and/or securing it to the belt. Snaps can (and do) break or malfunction; Straps can (and do) become stretched and/or (more often) unsnapped at the least opportune moment; 'T'nuts were designed for wood working and can (and do) loosen with movement when used in leather; and to rely on a spring to assist in the retention of MY shooter in the holster, just ain't gonna happen ever again -- been there and done that. I'm very much a traditionalist in my design and work in holsters, and feel that, in most cases, less is more. The idea of an 'easy on -- easy off' rig is, in MOST cases not a necessity, just a convenience. While working in plain clothes I did use one, and since my Dept. required our gear to be of 'commercial manufacture', I found one I felt to be the best. That was some years ago, but the holster was made by AKER, and was an 'easy on' and (sort of) 'easy off' paddle holster and held fairly well in place. There were times, back then, that I needed to ditch a shooter in a hurry, lest someone 'accidentally' brushed up against me to see if I was carrying. Other than that type of situation I see very little reason for them and prefer to know my holster is solid and secure where I want it. After all of this, my point is to maybe look at what you really want to do do with your rig, and what the benefits are to the design you choose. Again, NO kick with your workmanship. You have executed your design well,and have done a good job. I just go off on a soapbox sometimes. Mike

Edited July 12, 2012 by katsass

[K-Man]

Just my opinion - I totally disagree with pretty much everything katsass wrote.

In particular, the holster pictured here is not a multi-task holster. Multi-task means that it functions in more than one way or facet. The holster pictured here is a general pancake style of holster, with the attachment to the belt done differently than the traditional pancake holster. I have no idea where that qualifies as multi-task. But this design of holster has advantages over the traditional - primarily it's easier and quicker to get on and off the belt. As most know, even though concealed carry is allowed in a number of states, there are often parameters within the law wherein certain places are off limits. So this style of holster is most advantageous to a user who visits places/facilities where concealed carry is not allowed. So being able to get the holster on and/or off the belt easier and quicker puts it head and shoulders over the traditional pancake holster being taken off and/or on the belt. A well-designed and well-constructed version of this holster will hold the gun in as close to the body as a traditional pancake. A well-designed and well-constructed version of this snap on style of pancake holster is every bit as good, and in some instances better IMO, than the traditional pancake. Also, keeping this style of holster secure on the belt is not all that difficult to accomplish either. I made a number of this style of holster for the Secret Service, to include the U.S. President's personal team.

The utilization of pull-the-dot, or similar, snaps are desired with this type of holster. I know of one holster maker who told his customer that the line 24 snaps were more secure than the pull-the-dots -- didn't take long to prove the holster maker wrong....

I never had a t-nut loosen or come undone on any holster I made where they were utilized. Yes, I've seen instances on other manufacturer's holsters where that did happen. That's because the maker never "set" the t-nuts.

Again, my comments here are my opinion that's based on the design, construction, and use of this style of holster.

Edited July 13, 2012 by K-Man

[katsass]

Just my opinion - I totally disagree with pretty much everything katsass wrote.

In particular, the holster pictured here is not a multi-task holster. Multi-task means that it functions in more than one way or facet. The holster pictured here is a general pancake style of holster, with the attachment to the belt done differently than the traditional pancake holster. I have no idea where that qualifies as multi-task. But this design of holster has advantages over the traditional - primarily it's easier and quicker to get on and off the belt. As most know, even though concealed carry is allowed in a number of states, there are often parameters within the law wherein certain places are off limits. So this style of holster is most advantageous to a user who visits places/facilities where concealed carry is not allowed. So being able to get the holster on and/or off the belt easier and quicker puts it head and shoulders over the traditional pancake holster being taken off and/or on the belt. A well-designed and well-constructed version of this holster will hold the gun in as close to the body as a traditional pancake. A well-designed and well-constructed version of this snap on style of pancake holster is every bit as good, and in some instances better IMO, than the traditional pancake. Also, keeping this style of holster secure on the belt is not all that difficult to accomplish either. I made a number of this style of holster for the Secret Service, to include the U.S. President's personal team.

The utilization of pull-the-dot, or similar, snaps are desired with this type of holster. I know of one holster maker who told his customer that the line 24 snaps were more secure than the pull-the-dots -- didn't take long to prove the holster maker wrong....

I never had a t-nut loosen or come undone on any holster I made where they were utilized. Yes, I've seen instances on other manufacturer's holsters where that did happen. That's because the maker never "set" the t-nuts.

Again, my comments here are my opinion that's based on the design, construction, and use of this style of holster.

From the grump: With all due respect K-Man, you seem to have misconstrued my statements. My initial statement went to chiefjason's initial statement, in which he indicated that his first try was to be a 'multitasker' --- and he found that it didn't work out too well. Being fully aware that there are many places that a concealed weapon is not allowed, or, in the situation which I vaguely described, I indicated that, as a LEO, were I to be in a situation where (and I HAVE been there) the quick removal of the entire rig was needed -- I utilized a paddle holster -- made by AKER of San Diego. (actually Chula Vista, CA --, nice folks) and certainly would not try to wear a pancake style when the possibility of those instances could arise. I personally do not care a whole bunch for pancakes, but of the ilk, I much prefer the 'Enhanced Pancake', designed by Ray of Lobo Gun Leather; a much better design I feel, than the common or standard pancake holster. The vast majority of the shooting public can plan on where and when they wish or need to travel to a location which restricts individuals from carrying a concealed weapon, even those with a concealed weapon permit, and plan accordingly. Most folks that carry concealed regularly have more than one holster in my experience, and if not, they damned well should.. I'm not knocking chiefjason in any way, nor the type of rig pictured in chiefjason's post, except to say that from the point of view of simple physics, when suspending a mass, the farther from that mass the suspension points are, the less practical the design. And you have to admit that the style of rig we are actually discussing has the suspension points out there a bit. My aversion to snaps (even 'pull-the-dots'), straps, spring steel retentions etc. comes from more than a couple of years of experience of working, living and playing in an area often covered by light to heavy brush which seems to want to grab, pull, scratch and tug at anything that gets close to it. Maybe a step or two down from the 'Big Thicket' in Texas, but generally rough country. A place where a good address is an RR (rural route) Box number, and the actual location of the residence is somewhere off on the end of one of a spiderweb of dirt trails through the brush, and, invisible from the location of said RR Box. A place that is often impossible or impractical to just put the car in 'Drive' and cruise up to the curb. As said, my experiences cover more than a few years, and unless you were asking your mother for a penny for candy in 1940, I think I may have a day or two on you. As to LEO experience, unless you have defied the norm and spent over 35 years at it, I may have a little on you there also. As to firearms experience, I spent an extended stay in the sun-and-fun capitol of South East Asia in my youth, and ended up as a LEO certified to teach the use of law enforcement handguns (both revolver and auto pistols), shotguns, tactical rifle, and full auto small arms. I was also a certified armorer. My entire intention was to suggest to chiefjason that he might think about the combination of his desires, uses, and the ultimate requirements for any given holster he wishes to construct, and consider all elements when doing his design. As to my opinions on mechanical devices commonly used in many holsters, from my personal experience, and those of others working, living and playing away from the paved streets and lights of the city, or the confines of a dedicated firing range, I'll stand by them. Mike.

Edited July 13, 2012 by katsass

[chiefjason]

First, thanks for the comments and advice. I always like reading through it and I sift through what I find helpful.

To clarify a few things. I have several styles of holster I rotate through for my G19. I love the hybrid beltslide holsters that I have been making lately and can generally conceal those in just a t shirt so I wear them often. I have a tuckable hybrid if I REALLY need to make it disappear. This holster is mainly for wearing around the house, quick trips out, or mainly for being able to ditch the holster in the truck before getting to work. I'm no fan of jamming a gun between the seats and prefer to wear it till the last block or so when it goes in the lock box. While this holster does not ride as tightly to my side as a belt worn pancake or beltslide; I can throw a t shirt over it if I need to in a pinch and it does not print as bad as the last one I made.

So, to sum it up I grossly overbuilt a holster that I need to be able to remove just to prove to myself that I could. I'm not sure I will be doing too many more lined holsters unless it's for family or someone is willing to pay me more for my time. This one took a long time to do.

I'm always interested in seeing other stuff so I need to look up that Lobo holster.

[K-Man]

katsass: The making of a multi-task holster can be done -- I've made hundreds of them. I've grown tired of listening to you and some others trying to portray that style (multi-task) of holster as an enigma. It clearly shows your lack of understanding and ability with respect to holster design, and the construction and function of the same.

While I may not have as much time as an LE as you do, I do have a great number of years in law enforcement (20+), as well as military experience, and a college degree in criminal justice -- all told 35+ years. During these years, I have been exposed to, handled, and fired a great variety of weapons. I would think that would qualify my experience in most people's mind. I've traveled all over the world and the U.S. and have worked in a number of harsh environments.

This snap-on style of holster has been made successfully by a number of holster-makers. And I'll say it again -- a well-designed and well-constructed version of this holster will equal, or better, a traditional pancake. Yes, sometimes you can look at a holster and tell right off what a poor design/representation it is based on "simple physics." I've found though in my own experience that those disparities are oftentimes overcome in the design and construction of the holster. And I doubt seriously we would have sold the number of them that we did, to include those Secret Service agents, if the design and execution of the same were flawed. You don't have to accept that, and don't really care if you do or not. It is what it is.

The "enhancement" utilized by Lobo in his pancake design is nothing new. I know of another holster maker who used that feature on his pocket holsters (long before Lobo used it on a pancake design). It generally allows the gun to sit deeper in the body of the holster and adds some degree of stability and security of the gun while in the holster.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion - and you're welcome to hold onto your opinions. But IMO you really have no leg to stand on when you don't have to look very far and see the number of holster makers that have great success in the making of this snap-on design (or multi-task design). I would encourage you to try and design/make one - perhaps your perspective/opinion would change.

[katsass]

katsass: The making of a multi-task holster can be done -- I've made hundreds of them. I've grown tired of listening to you and some others trying to portray that style (multi-task) of holster as an enigma. It clearly shows your lack of understanding and ability with respect to holster design, and the construction and function of the same.

While I may not have as much time as an LE as you do, I do have a great number of years in law enforcement (20+), as well as military experience, and a college degree in criminal justice -- all told 35+ years. During these years, I have been exposed to, handled, and fired a great variety of weapons. I would think that would qualify my experience in most people's mind. I've traveled all over the world and the U.S. and have worked in a number of harsh environments.

This snap-on style of holster has been made successfully by a number of holster-makers. And I'll say it again -- a well-designed and well-constructed version of this holster will equal, or better, a traditional pancake. Yes, sometimes you can look at a holster and tell right off what a poor design/representation it is based on "simple physics." I've found though in my own experience that those disparities are oftentimes overcome in the design and construction of the holster. And I doubt seriously we would have sold the number of them that we did, to include those Secret Service agents, if the design and execution of the same were flawed. You don't have to accept that, and don't really care if you do or not. It is what it is.

The "enhancement" utilized by Lobo in his pancake design is nothing new. I know of another holster maker who used that feature on his pocket holsters (long before Lobo used it on a pancake design). It generally allows the gun to sit deeper in the body of the holster and adds some degree of stability and security of the gun while in the holster.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion - and you're welcome to hold onto your opinions. But IMO you really have no leg to stand on when you don't have to look very far and see the number of holster makers that have great success in the making of this snap-on design (or multi-task design). I would encourage you to try and design/make one - perhaps your perspective/opinion would change.

K-Man, as you say, all are free to disagree with one another, but again I believe you misconstrued my statements regarding chiefjason's rig.. The holster that chiefjason pictured was/is not a multitask type holster -- period. He indicated that on previous attempt he tried to put together something similar to it which would serve as both an OWB as well as an IWB rig -- a multitask type holster --- it didn't work out too well. I still believe that a multitask holster is not quite as serviceable as one made specifically for a single purpose. I don't say that the type pictured is a bad design, I do say that there better designs (IMO) which serve the same purpose -- in a more compact, and less complex way. As to the number of the product sold, I have seen a number of rigs sold by many big name makers go on for years, and sold in huge numbers. How about the break-front styles so prevalent some years back? Or the cross draw pull-through styles? Both great successes -- for a while. I'm very much a traditionalist in my design and work, but I'll never dispute your right to move on to newer styles as you see fit, nor design as you wish, or hold your personal beliefs.. That is the beauty of this Republic in which we both reside, some of the the freedoms we both enjoy. I'll agree to disagree with you on some points here and there, but in the end, I'll bet we aren't to damned far apart, on too damned many things overall. 'Nuff said. Mike

[K-Man]

I give up - I'll let you all do what you want with respect to holsters. It's pointless IMO to try and explain my position any further. I'll take my tools and move on down the road. Good luck to you all.

[David C Gindrup]

very nice!!