Walther SSP

Fozzy357 · Post by **Fozzy357** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 3:57 pm

After 2 years on the market, have all the kinks been worked out?

Reinhamre · Post by **Reinhamre** » Fri Sep 14, 2007 5:15 am

Hi,
The SSP is expensive so you should not buy before having had the opportunity to test shooting the gun.
I think Walther is uncertain of the success for the SSP as they still produce the GSP Expert, (and a Hämmerli SP20).

I know that several shooter claiming that their SSP is the best and they perform better when they shoot SSP, but I am not convinced, although next generation may be good.
The force is probably only in the shooters head anyway.

Kent

Richard H · Post by **Richard H** » Fri Sep 14, 2007 9:20 am

If they stopped producing the GSP they wouldn't have a .32 either so that might be part of the reason why they still make the GSP.

David Levene · Post by **David Levene** » Fri Sep 14, 2007 12:10 pm

Richard H wrote:If they stopped producing the GSP they wouldn't have a .32 either

SP20?

Fozzy357 · Post by **Fozzy357** » Fri Sep 14, 2007 4:23 pm

Happy for the info!

Tycho · Post by **Tycho** » Sat Sep 15, 2007 1:47 am

There are 2 guys in my club using SSP's. They are still constantly tinkering around, tightening screws, adjusting things. The thing itself seems to work, more or less, but I find loose rearsights etc. a bit frightening, not even my MG2 has kinks like that. Besides, I've shot them both - and in the recoil management / shot recovery department, they are lightyears behind every other state of the art target pistol like the SP1 or the MG2. My gut says that there is a lot of potential in the design, but it would take a lot of work under a high uncertainty to release it.

rrpc · Post by **rrpc** » Tue Sep 18, 2007 12:41 pm

It's a hell of a lot of money for something that still doesn't seem to work very well. I had strongly considered buying one because of it's supposedly dual purpose (SP and RF), the fact that it exploited all the ISSF regs to the limit and hadn't compromised like other pistols either on grip thickness or barrel length, but in the end it was the mixed reports and especially the price that put me off.

I eventually decided on the Pardini SP New and haven't regretted it for one minute. Far cheaper and very nice to shoot.

Mark Briggs · Post by **Mark Briggs** » Tue Sep 18, 2007 2:34 pm

rrpc - you've hit on a very valid point. None of the high-end pistols at the moment are "ideal". The SSP has its drawbacks. The MG-2 has had many of its drawbacks noted here, as has the SP20. The Pardini likewise has its drawbacks (I own an SP1 Electronic and can't shoot it worth a hoot - it's a beautiful pistol, works very well, but I can't shoot it very well because its muzzle-heavy balance just doesn't suit me). So that leaves every one of us in something of a crap shoot when we want to purchase a new pistol. A friend of mine doesn't shoot standard or rapid fire, but used to be quite good at standard with his GSP. I am coming to agree with his stance that the industry hasn't yet completed the evolution to the newest form of standard pistol, and what we have now is an "in between" generation that's being pushed hard by the need to have a pistol that works well, even in the Rapid Fire event. Perhaps another 5 years under the current rules will allow manufacturers to have products better suited to our needs, but at the moment it's very much "buyer beware" in the standard pistol market.

rrpc · Post by **rrpc** » Tue Sep 18, 2007 4:45 pm

Mark Briggs wrote:The Pardini likewise has its drawbacks (I own an SP1 Electronic and can't shoot it worth a hoot - it's a beautiful pistol, works very well, but I can't shoot it very well because its muzzle-heavy balance just doesn't suit me).

Yet if you try the GSP, it's even more muzzle heavy. I understand the design philosophy of the SSP; the top loading feature allows the grip to be more ergonomic and the barrel to be full length and at the same time bring the rearsight as far back as possible.

It will take probably more manufacturers to 'copy' and perfect this design before we see any major improvements. At the same time, it's not a mass market, so progress will be slow.

Tycho · Post by **Tycho** » Tue Sep 18, 2007 11:32 pm

We've had that design since the 70s - FAS! Works probably better (after 20 years of development) than the SSP, is nicer to shoot - and nobody picked it up for 25 years, until Walther started with the SSP. A Hammerli guy once told me that it would be very risky from a marketing point of view to go with the toploader concept, because it was so highly associated with FAS and their early troubles...

rrpc · Post by **rrpc** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 3:01 am

Tycho wrote:We've had that design since the 70s - FAS! Works probably better (after 20 years of development) than the SSP, is nicer to shoot - and nobody picked it up for 25 years, until Walther started with the SSP. A Hammerli guy once told me that it would be very risky from a marketing point of view to go with the toploader concept, because it was so highly associated with FAS and their early troubles...

Sorry! forgot totally about the FAS. You don't see too many of them around now.

JamesH · Post by **JamesH** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:59 am

Sorry! forgot totally about the FAS. You don't see too many of them around now.

I don't understand it, here in Aus they have been very popular, I had a 601 and 602, never a malfunction with either with the right ammo.

But now I can't buy a new 607 for love or money. The importer claims its hard to get FAS to agree to an order.

Still, the Izh35M is as good or better and seems to clean itself.

rrpc · Post by **rrpc** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 5:39 am

Do FAS have a website?

julioalperi · Post by **julioalperi** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 7:11 am

Yes,
www.fasdomino.com

rrpc · Post by **rrpc** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 7:24 am

Thanks for that. Have added it to my links :)

Mike M. · Post by **Mike M.** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 11:27 am

Unique's DES-96 was a top-loader. Good gun, from all reports.

rrpc · Post by **rrpc** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 11:32 am

Having looked at the FAS website I note that they are still producing/selling the OP601 .22 short for RF.

Surely by now they would have adapted it for the new regs?

Tycho · Post by **Tycho** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 1:41 pm

I think FAS went through a change of ownership, last year in Milano there was a bunch of new guys standing around at the FAS table. The 601 are probably those they didn't throw away, may be a guy around who invents something for the .22 short :-) 607 looks more or less the same, last I saw, different grip, few and small mods - but it was a good gun anyway, so not too much needed. Put a Morini rear sight on it and voila - not the best for RF, but a VERY good pistol for precision/rapid and standard.

rrpc · Post by **rrpc** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 3:14 pm

Tycho wrote:I think FAS went through a change of ownership, last year in Milano there was a bunch of new guys standing around at the FAS table. The 601 are probably those they didn't throw away, may be a guy around who invents something for the .22 short :-)

I'm sure there are plenty of disciplines outside ISSF that would use the .22 short. Just surprised after such a long time that FAS haven't progressed a new pistol for the discipline. It's a bit worrying that a company that specialises in ISSF pistols haven't actually got something in the pipeline.

Tycho wrote:607 looks more or less the same, last I saw, different grip, few and small mods - but it was a good gun anyway, so not too much needed. Put a Morini rear sight on it and voila - not the best for RF, but a VERY good pistol for precision/rapid and standard.

Will it take the Morini rear sight?

Tycho · Post by **Tycho** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 3:44 pm

Cut off the original rearsight slightly behind the vertical screw, mount the Morini - et voila. But don't ask me which version of the Morini sight I have on my one, can't keep them apart. Easy operation, not exactly drop in, but definitely no rocket science.