HK likes to release mature products. Taking their time allows also to see what didn't work for competition. Problem with plates flying of Glock M.O.S. prompted HK to delay release of HK OR to investigate causes and apply lessons learned to their design.
If can’t be mature if it hasn’t been released.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sorry, guys, two years into it I am not buying "not releasing immature products" anymore. It is either not a priority for them, or their resources are stretched, or something else.
Last edited by YVK; 12-15-2018 at 06:40 AM.
“When you wake up in the morning, Pooh," said Piglet at last, "what's the first thing you say to yourself?"
"What's for breakfast?" said Pooh. "What do you say, Piglet?"
"I say, I wonder what's going to happen exciting today?" said Piglet.
Pooh nodded thoughtfully. "It's the same thing," he said.”
As a long time Glock MOS and Walther Q5 multi optic user, there are definite improvements that can be made in better supporting the optic, having larger screws less likely to be stripped, and coexistence with a wider range of rear sights. I have no idea whether the delay is due to more HK engineering work, or regular HK “urgency.” I still remember waiting nearly five years for a V9 plate for my HK45 to materialize.
The bad thing about HK product development is they seem to be detached from any sense of US urgency when it comes to responding to short term trends. That is also the good thing about HK product development.
2. Other companies can afford to release product and meh... if it doesn't work, we will upgrade it along a way. This is a case both with Glock and CZ - both companies are known to release problematic products. HK can't afford that luxury, because once they did that, all confidence in HK build over decades is gone overnight and they can basically close the shop. Because HK sells on confidence. They can do small tweaks along the way (like with stronger recoil spring in VP9) but they can't afford anything to show up as plain wrong. Same philosophy applies for example to Aimpoint.
TL;DR HK is taking time with everything, if you have problem with that, change brand to one that release "early access" products to everyone.
I don't know if stronger recoil spring in the VP9 is a good tweak. Haven't heard anyone complaining about it being too weak. I thought that the gun was over-sprung to begin with.
You kind of confirm my post of HK being stretched. However, they've to understand that delaying a release after publicly announcing a product is a very negative thing. They can take all their sweet time to develop it and it is understandable that designs might change after the announcement. However, should that happen, it must become their priority to rectify that. Reasons don't really matter. Release of a product on a website is a promise of impending availability, and breaking that promise for two years causes a direct loss of consumer confidence. That same confidence that you imply is very important for HK's business model.
I have changed brands. No regrets so far. Still have one HK and still watching company's progress, mildly excited about the VP9-B but have gone away from HK mania. Quality and timeliness of response to market demands should not be mutually exclusive.
Well, I sort of see it both ways. I can understand that for modern production lines, you have them scheduled for months/years in advance. If you miss the slot, then it's a struggle to reschedule product in the short term. Of course, you can contract it out, but down that path lies a whole new set of dragons.
This is exacerbated by the fact that large customers typically have very tight delivery schedules, and if you don't meet them, then the company is up for paying penalties. So, a "nice to have in the market" consumer product will take second billing to a time-constrained production run. Still, their tardiness in shipping product have saved me many thousands over the last few years (although quite a bit of money has gone to other vendors).