Okay,
How much will it cost?
What new features does it have?
What grip sizes is it available in?
Will it accept existing Walter accessories for the GSP?
Who's using it now?
What's it's performance like?
Is it suitable for a beginner?
What are it's problems?
What does it look like?
Not just by looking at a picture but also by discusing the subject in length with the Walther people.For starters the magazine is no longer in front of the trigger but in the grip.This allows for : a) maximum barell length which is translated into greater accuracy b)maximum grip length which leads to better hold and stability.Imagine using a grip like the one on your air pistol and still being able to box your standard sport pistol c)better weight distribution making it a lot less nose heavy than the GSP.
Soisinoid Salakuost wrote:Not just by looking at a picture but also by discusing the subject in length with the Walther people.For starters the magazine is no longer in front of the trigger but in the grip.This allows for : a) maximum barell length which is translated into greater accuracy b)maximum grip length which leads to better hold and stability.Imagine using a grip like the one on your air pistol and still being able to box your standard sport pistol c)better weight distribution making it a lot less nose heavy than the GSP.
I see, so you are basing your claims on what the manufacturer has told you. That seems pretty reasonable to me, it must be a fantastic gun.
Why will the pistol be any better than others with the magazine in the grip?
Who says that a 6" barrel is any more accurate than a 5" one or a 4" one?
I would hate to shoot Standard Pistol with an Air Pistol grip. They are designed to do different jobs.
Why is a less nose heavy weight distribution any better for Standard Pistol?
It may very well be a good gun, but let's wait until impartial people have tried it before making extravagant claims.
I think Dionisios is right. The rumours have been around for about 18 months now, on very high level, that Walther is coming back because of the new RF rules. And in that light it makes sense that they are going for a mag-in-the-grip design; it's pretty obvious from the early tests that a well balanced pistol without the heavy frontweight is easier to shoot in 4sec than a CM22 or a fully loaded Pardini SP. They were the dominant RFP pistol providers once, before Pardini, so they probably see a marketing chance. Besides, we know that they have excellent connections to Russia - and, to specualte a bit, the RFP of Vokhmianin & Co, which was built by Razaryenov (or something like that) could be an excellent base for .22LR SSP...
So, what advantage does the SSP offer over the Match Guns MG2?
As you may recall, the MG2 has a grip that is adjustable vertically and laterally, relative to the barrel. It has a rear sight that is adjustable for windage and elevation (pretty standard, of course), and for rear notch width and depth. The sight adjustments have pictographs engraved on the sight to aid in getting any adjustment right the first time (no need to refer to notes as to whether clockwise is up or down or left or right). The MG2 has a dryfire provision that allows a partial hammer fall (no concern over damaging the firing pin or chamber, or needing to switch a complete dryfire trigger, a la GSP). Additionally, the firing pin is of the same design as that of the IZH 35, so that even if one lets the hammer fall on an empty chamber, without the dry-fire engaged, the breech face is struck by the broad area of the firing pin and not by the chisel point - greatly reducing any peening of the breech face. Weights can be added (or removed) at the front of the barrel to achieve a desired balance. The MG2 has as low a bore line as the rules permit (perhaps making it, along with the Baikal IZH 35, a prime contender for a rapid-fire pistol under the 2005 rules.
Now the MG2 is not perfect. It has more fiddly parts than any other target pistol I've owned, with the possible exception of the Unique Des 69. It has the same safety issue as any tubular-magazine fed rifle. It requires the removal of seven (count them, seven) screws of four different lengths and two different hex-wrench sizes to "field strip" to the point where one can clean the barrel and slide. Does the SSP improve on these shortcomings?
Curious,
Mike T.
Given the provisional 2005 rules with a single allowable malfunction, if a new gun is on the blocks, it will also need to prove its reliability.
It is interesting to see enthusiasm and hype about new things, it gives manufacturers two bites at the marketing cherry, one with the pre-release and then again when they launch it. Come to think of it, we see this all the time on the UK news.
In fairness, the old model is long in the tooth and Walther have come up with some innovative designs elsewhere in their product range. Innovation is probably what is required to address the new requirements of the rapid event but would require input from top shooters in the event probably more minded on the Olympics at the moment. R&D for what is a relatively small production run must be considerable and against what have been provisional rules as well.
Hopefully, Walther has thoroughly tested this "innovative" new design, and won't use their customers as guinea pigs again. Last time they gave us a radically new pistol, it came in the form of their free pistol. That lemon came with an inherently flawed trigger design. Then, they abandoned their customers, leaving many with a useless (and expensive) wall hanger. Although the fatal flaw came in the form of a poorly designed and unserviceable electronic trigger (which is unrelated to this new gun), the real offense came from Walther's unwillingness to take responsibility for their own mistake. Isn't that nice technical support?
Personally, I'd save my cash.
I suggest you don't by anything new then, because that's how everything is made nowadays. My Walther FP works great as do a couple of others that I know of, and yes I also know of ones that don't work too. A friend of mine has had some success on making new electronics for them so there might be hope (he has actually made one that works for himself).
A frontierbreaking, perfect .22 auto match pistol for the ISSF Standard Pistol /new Rapid Fire programs? That´s really good news.
Walther advertizers have opened their mouths (too) wide many times before. The last was the "Superbly fantastic Walther 300 AP". So fantastic that some of my shooting pals, that bought this wonder, do not use them anymore. Traded them away fast, some after a few weeks only.
I have bought some claimed "fantastic" Walthers during the years too. But I do not own any now! Two GSPs, two CO2 match pistols, and one underspanner air pistol. They all suffered from nonperfect triggers. In fact I shot better scores with other brands, so i departed from the Walther guns.
But let´s give the new SSP a fair try. Maybe Walther have learned some from previous errors? I will not judge a gun untill I have tested it thorougly. Or untill some very experienced and knowledgeable person, with no bias, has.
So " Soisinoid" ( "Solenoid"? og "Sossidgeous"? Or better "Dionisios"? I think. Maybe you are an experiences shooter, maybe not. I understand that you have just heard about the pistol, and not fired it yourself. How can you then be so sure that it is a marvelous gun? You heard it from advertizing, you said? I do not gather my reliable information from ads, Dionisious. And I think you should not, either.
MAS wrote:But let´s give the new SSP a fair try. Maybe Walther have learned some from previous errors? I will not judge a gun untill I have tested it thorougly. Or untill some very experienced and knowledgeable person, with no bias, has.
