[High Altitude]

Would anyone care to comment based on experience or give opinions on the different clip/belt loop configurations of IWB holstes?

It seems that there are three basic styles.

1. The clips/belt loops that are fore and aft of the gun.

2. There is only one clip/belt loop and it is behind the gun.

3. One clip/belt loop and it is directly on the side of the gun.

How does the various locations of the clips/belt loops affect the performance of the holster?

 

[oregonshooter]

1. Most stable, little to no movement of holster
2. skip (no experience)
3. Tend to move around a little, but offer smaller placement increments on the belt (in between loops)

 

[maclean3]

1). What oregonshooter said. Additionally, they tend to be more comfortable because they spread the weight over a larger "footprint area" - sort of like a snowshoe effect.

2). A little puzzled with this one but perhaps one of our leatherbenders will chime in.

3). Again, what OS said. Also works the opposite of the wider spread loops in that they concentrate the weapon's weight onto a smaller area of the hip. I use one for my Airweight J-frame (15 oz.) but hate them for anything heavier.

Personally, I prefer the wider spread loops and even have one on order for my J-frame. When it arrives, my current holster (type 3) will probably find its way to "the box" and be an emergency backup only.
Jack

 

[oregonshooter]

More things to consider...

#3 will be more comfy during driving, less foot print.
#3 usually will hold the gun higher (#1 design is limited) for a better grip.

#4 OWB is the best of all these, except requires long cover garments. After 15+ years of IWB, I'm willing to buy tall polo shirts for the comfort. And NO it has nothing to do with my new love handles!

 

[rocky]

1 never tried
2 tends to let the gun rock a bit , atleast with the Tuck this Desantis nylon I have
3 rock a little , but not much for me.

haven't tried loops yet, my next holster will have this option

 

[Gary Brommeland]

Howdy!

Option # 1: Superb - IMHO, the single best method of attaching an IWB to the belt. It offers excellent stability and GREATLY enhances concealment. Solid, reliable and offers no drawbacks to my knowledge. (I'm wearing such a holster as I type this)

Option # 2: Just plain sucks, IMHO. It allows the firearm to "rock" on the belt, constantly changing it's rake angle. It also permits you to be EASILY disarmed and killed w/ your own gun from behind.

Option #3: Not as good as #1, but a solid system that's been around a long time. It's main drawback is that it compromises concealment somewhat. Otherwise, solid and reliable.

 

[acparmed]

Howdy!

Option # 1: Superb - IMHO, the single best method of attaching an IWB to the belt. It offers excellent stability and GREATLY enhances concealment. Solid, reliable and offers no drawbacks to my knowledge. (I'm wearing such a holster as I type this)

Option # 2: Just plain sucks, IMHO. It allows the firearm to "rock" on the belt, constantly changing it's rake angle. It also permits you to be EASILY disarmed and killed w/ your own gun from behind.

Option #3: Not as good as #1, but a solid system that's been around a long time. It's main drawback is that it compromises concealment somewhat. Otherwise, solid and reliable.

Reference Option #2: Gary, I believe that you are a brilliant and innovative holster maker. Tho I don't own one of your holsters, I can see in their design great workmanship. AND I hear good things via word of mouth. (Your best advertising). With that caveat let me say this: I have 2 Andrews Leather McDaniel IWB for my 1911's. They both have the second option. They are made with the rough side leather out and with a gripping star washer between the loop and where it attaches to the holster itself (which allows you to set the rake and then lock it) and has never moved an iota on me. I carry it at the 4 O’clock position. It's fast, stable and very concealable. I carry a full size 1911 under a t-shirt in the summer time here in Vegas and there is no sign of 'printing' (I'm 5'8" and 150#, so I'm not a big guy).

So I have to disagree with you on this point. No offense intended.

 

[oregonshooter]

PS. I want to be first to get suck up points in and say that I own a MAXCON 5 from Gary and it's the shizzle for design #1. He even has a reinforced mouth version called the MAXCON 6 now, although he's been too busy making holsters to update his website.

Back to work Gary!! LOL
j/k

 

[Gary Brommeland]

Reference Option #2: Gary, I have 2 Andrews Leather McDaniel IWB for my 1911's. They both have the second option. They are made with the rough side leather out and with a gripping star washer between the loop and where it attaches to the holster itself (which allows you to set the rake and then lock it) and has never moved an iota on me. I carry it at the 4 O’clock position. It's fast, stable and very concealable. I carry a full size 1911 under a t-shirt in the summer time here in Vegas and there is no sign of 'printing' (I'm 5'8" and 150#, so I'm not a big guy).

So I have to disagree with you on this point. No offense intended.

No offense taken. (I gotta admit that I was expecting such a response from you - I know that you are a big fan of Sam's work. 'Sorry, but I couldn't resist yankin' yer chain a bit :biggrin
I qualified my statement as being my opinion, and everyone certainly has a right to their own view of things. Furthermore, what works for one person, does not necessarily work for another.
Having said that, I know Sam and although he and I have vastly differing viewpoints on some design concepts, I respect him and his work. The McDaniel works BECAUSE it is rough out. That extra friction makes all the difference and I agree with you that IT is a viable design. (However, with a forceful yank the disarm thing still stands.)
However, when this belt loop design is employed w/ a smooth-out holster, I stand by my original statement.
I certainly don't ever intend to offend anyone (except Liberals). I just have this habit of being pretty blunt. 'Sorry.

 

[P95Carry]

Welcome High Altitude :smile:

I am just chipping in to promote OWB LOL! :wink: If it's remotely too warm I sweat gallons - I don't want pants 2" bigger than I need and - all my cover garments always have generous length and so a ''tight-in'' OWB is a breeze to conceal.

I am biased - in case no one noticed - just me!:haha:

 

[Gary Brommeland]

PS
Back to work Gary!! LOL
j/k

Yes,Sir!

 

[ExSoldier]

Reference Option #2: Gary, I believe that you are a brilliant and innovative holster maker. Tho I don't own one of your holsters, I can see in their design great workmanship. AND I hear good things via word of mouth. (Your best advertising). With that caveat let me say this: I have 2 Andrews Leather McDaniel IWB for my 1911's. They both have the second option. They are made with the rough side leather out and with a gripping star washer between the loop and where it attaches to the holster itself (which allows you to set the rake and then lock it) and has never moved an iota on me. I carry it at the 4 O’clock position. It's fast, stable and very concealable. I carry a full size 1911 under a t-shirt in the summer time here in Vegas and there is no sign of 'printing' (I'm 5'8" and 150#, so I'm not a big guy).

So I have to disagree with you on this point. No offense intended.

Yeah, I LOVE My McDaniel IWB too. I use if for both my 1911's and my BHP. One other requirement for me is the additrion of a shield to prevent the gun from digging into my side. My "love handles" long ago transformed into LIFTING BARS. I'm about to get an H&K USP standard size 45 and I'm wondering if IWB carry is practical for this one. It's a big gun. But then, I'm about 6' and 250 lbs. So it might work. I carried my Glock M21 for years in a Sam Andrews IPSC Paddle Holster and it worked great.

 

[maclean3]

PS. I want to be first to get suck up points in and say that I own a MAXCON 5 from Gary and it's the shizzle for design #1. He even has a reinforced mouth version called the MAXCON 6 now, although he's been too busy making holsters to update his website.

Geez, Gary mentioned the MaxCon6 when I called to order my Wilderness belt ... I thought I'd just heard him wrong :dunno:. I GOTTS'TA have me one a those when I get the new .45!
Jack

 

[soflasmg]

Must...

buy.....

Maxcon.....

6....

 

[rocky]

Can't say for leather ,but unless I wear a tight fitting pair of pants, the Nylon Tuck this does rock a bit. Especially with soft pants like cotton dockers or 511 pants.

 

[Eric Larsen]

Well you guys all nailed it.
The main thing you guys have to figure out is each design has its "inherent strengths" and its personal strengths with its owners/designers.
Inherent strengths are the facts.........#1 style with spread out loops is thinner and more stable by design! Cant be denied.
Personal strengths are just like Gary and the others commenting on how the holster works for "THEM". My Pro is a Summer Special style Wrap around design with a clip/loop over the gun. Its much more convenient than the first style, but not quite as comfortable.

All have strengths and weakness's.....both inherent and personal.

Shoot well.

 

[Mark Garrity]

I'm with Gary in opinion on this one; two lops fore and aft of the gun will be the most comfortable, most concealable, and most stable for most people. This is how I carry daily. One loop, two loops, a wide split loop, or a clip directly on the front of the holster body is the original design that has been worn for decades and serves it's purpose. Though it will shift more and can be slightly less concealable due to the extra thickness of the loop(s) directly ovr the pistol, many people swear by it and find it very comfortable and concealable. One advantage- this style can be made to ride deeper than a front and rear loop style; depending on the design and placement of the loop, and not sacrifice good initial grip if the cant is correct. As to one rear off-set loop; I've experimented with it and found it to shift too much for personal liking, even with a good solid belt. I don't see any real advantage to it; unless you're packing a revolver, only want one loop to contend with, and want to keep the bulk off the cylinder.
Just my 2 cents.