2 Attachment(s)
Couldn't believe my eyes Part II
My first thread on the subject of John Bianchi's latest catalogue offerings ran its course, and some posters thought perhaps I was being petty. Not knowing who I am, could lead some to think that way, so here's my joining thread with my CV : http://www.defensivecarry.com/forum/...ker-house.html which explains where I'm coming from.
I would rarely "make it personal" in posting my instructional comments; but when you understand that John has always taken credit for my designs and my quality standards, I guess I was shocked that he himself didn't learn anything from it! Buyers make decisions based on brand, and on the brand's reputation.
Design: the initial post was about workmanship, and I showed the progenitor holster from the 1980s Bianchi International, and the current one from the 2013 Frontier Gunleather.
Here's the "Bianchi" design (it's in his 1980s catalogue, but its my work):
Attachment 67902
Circle marked 1: the "overstrap" is horizontal and tight across the hammer spur; that's to keep the revolver from being pulled out with the thumbreak snapped. In this case it's a crossdraw, so that would be from the FRONT of the wearer. Circle marked 2: the edge of the revolver's trigger guard is barely visible; that is so that the wearer gets a full grip when drawing, and even oversized grips don't interfere with the holster's edge. Circle marked 3: the saddlers tacking stitch effectively "clamps" the thick welt that's stitched into the seam, into a broad support for the revolver frame. This works with the thumbreak to keep the revolver from being pulled out with the break snapped up. Circle marked 4: open muzzle; why close off the holster and make it longer (industry practice would be for the longer barrel versions to be the same) if it's not a field holster (brush, twigs, etc.).
And here's how it devolved into John's current offering:
Attachment 67903
This design is the work of an amateur, and I don't see how John could have put his name to it (but I know what his excuses would be):
Circle marked 1: the overstrap is angled and resting also on the revolver frame; good retention cannot be PREDICTED from such an arrangement. Circle marked 2: leather extends into the open area of the revolver guard, that's meant to be reserved for the shooter's hand (by the revolver maker). Circle marked 3: simple backtack means that the inner welt/spacer is not clamped broadly, and good retention cannot be PREDICTED. Circle marked 4: see above. Lines: because a sidedraw holster, the carry angle is off by a measured 5 degrees (the first example above is nominated as a crossdraw) for comfort, concealment, and presentation. Styling: misses all the cues from the revolver itself, and styling has suffered.
I write this thread because, unless YOU know the difference in good design from bad design, you are understandably going to rely on the BRAND (and in this case, John's name is absolutely inseparable from the word BIANCHI, as demonstrated in the first thread). Petty? I hope not. Did you learn something about holster design and workmanship? I hope so.
