[madangler1]

I saw the brief video. Looking forward to finding out more tomorrow. Looks mostly cosmetic changes initially and differentiation between a "duty" and "compact" size VP9 variant so to speak (G17 vs G19 etc). Glad to see they are optics ready. The VP9 has Walther PDP ergonomics, both of which are far superior to the Glock when running red dots. They point far better when drawing from a holster in my opinion, than any optic mounted Glock I have tried.

Between the VP9 and Walther PDP, I prefer the VP9 slightly over the PDP due to the paddle magazine release and grip. My VP9 had a serration job with a laser at my LGS, which gives me as good or superior grip to my PDP. I'll try to post pics later.

 

[Uncle Jesse]

I don't know all of the details, but proofing shouldn't make a difference for importation. I mean, there are plenty of German-proofed VP9sk pistols out there.

It’s not the proofing itself. Rather it’s that the German proof marks (CIP/N) indicate that full assembly took place in Germany. You’re right that there are plenty of German-proofed VP9s (of all shapes and sizes) here in the U.S. but since 2020ish, they have all had Georgia proof marks. This is because something changed with respect to the ATF’s vacillating interpretations of the already stupid GCA point system. Most polymer-framed striker-fired pistols barely make enough points anyway, meaning that any change in the way those points are calculated can make or break the ability of that type of pistol to be imported.

My own theory is that the ATF stopped giving points from the “Double Action” category to striker-fired pistols whose strikers are fully cocked, but who knows what the full story really was?

In any case, HK USA chose the age-old workaround/loophole of importing VP9s as parts, rather than complete pistols, and assembling them here (hence, Georgia proof marks), thereby bypassing most of the GCA point system, because it doesn’t apply to guns “made” in the U.S.

That’s why I’m wondering what’s going to happen with this next-gen VP9. Even though the ATF often applies the GCA rules inconsistently, whenever they do change their minds about something, it’s always increased restrictions, not decreased. So if the new VP9 we get will be 100% made and assembled in Germany, how then did HK make it compliant with GCA?

 

[Uncle Jesse]

So is this our third and final gun? Or will there be more?

According to that HK USA announcement, there will be 4 new guns released.

1. CC9
2. MR556A4
3. VP9 2nd-gen?
4. ???

 

[RetropM]

The announcement said "3 major new/enhanced platforms" before february; I think the MRA4 and VP9A1 definitely fit as two "enhanced" platforms. I didn't realize there was a 4th.

I know some folks here seem disappointed, but we really are getting a LOT at once by HK standards.

 

[PJenning]

4. Optics ready P30\L.. v4 from factory with threaded barrel and o ring like other models. Well at least an optics ready slide update,not confirmed just what I'd like to see. On a serious note I figured this VP9A1 would be the last of new stuff from their announcement but if we are expecting a 4th release that would be great

 

[AIRB0RNE6176]

I'll be in Columbus, GA next week for 4 days, so this VP9A1 K and more info on it will be a priority.

This is awesome.

 

[igs]

According to that HK USA announcement, there will be 4 new guns released.

1. CC9
2. MR556A4
3. VP9 2nd-gen?
4. ???

G36? UMP?

 

[RetropM]

G36? UMP?

Sadly I think they are still working out some kinks with those... more like 2026 or later.

 

[DragonHerder]

It’s not the proofing itself. Rather it’s that the German proof marks (CIP/N) indicate that full assembly took place in Germany. You’re right that there are plenty of German-proofed VP9s (of all shapes and sizes) here in the U.S. but since 2020ish, they have all had Georgia proof marks. This is because something changed with respect to the ATF’s vacillating interpretations of the already stupid GCA point system. Most polymer-framed striker-fired pistols barely make enough points anyway, meaning that any change in the way those points are calculated can make or break the ability of that type of pistol to be imported.

My own theory is that the ATF stopped giving points from the “Double Action” category to striker-fired pistols whose strikers are fully cocked, but who knows what the full story really was?

In any case, HK USA chose the age-old workaround/loophole of importing VP9s as parts, rather than complete pistols, and assembling them here (hence, Georgia proof marks), thereby bypassing most of the GCA point system, because it doesn’t apply to guns “made” in the U.S.

That’s why I’m wondering what’s going to happen with this next-gen VP9. Even though the ATF often applies the GCA rules inconsistently, whenever they do change their minds about something, it’s always increased restrictions, not decreased. So if the new VP9 we get will be 100% made and assembled in Germany, how then did HK make it compliant with GCA?

From what I remember, when I added up the points list, even if the ATF ruled the VP9 to be SAO, HK could've met the points list with an adjustable rear sight (as found on Gen 3/4 Glock 34/35) that gets replaced as soon as it gets to the US.

I remember watching a video about Zastava's US operation that showed how they remove pinned/welded muzzle caps, screw on muzzle brakes, then send the caps back to Serbia to be reused.

 

[DragonHerder]

Sadly I think they are still working out some kinks with those... more like 2026 or later.

They probably need to further scale up US operations to make that viable due to the combo of US and German import/export regs, and that's if it's a viable business case.

If they need new receiver/stock molds for US production, that can get really expensive, really quickly, especially if they offer multiple variations.

 

[RetropM]

They probably need to further scale up US operations to make that viable due to the combo of US and German import/export regs, and that's if it's a viable business case.

If they need new receiver/stock molds for US production, that can get really expensive, really quickly, especially if they offer multiple variations.

It is definitely a combination of US and German regulations, some of which have nothing to do with where the guns are made.

For the US side it is of course importation criteria, by German export laws for military weapons are even more strict.

 

[Uncle Jesse]

From what I remember, when I added up the points list, even if the ATF ruled the VP9 to be SAO, HK could've met the points list with an adjustable rear sight (as found on Gen 3/4 Glock 34/35) that gets replaced as soon as it gets to the US.

I remember watching a video about Zastava's US operation that showed how they remove pinned/welded muzzle caps, screw on muzzle brakes, then send the caps back to Serbia to be reused.

You’re absolutely right. And that’s where the ATF’s inconsistent application of the rules starts to get annoying. I was told that the VP9SK is imported with a metal back strap that incorporates a thumb rest (for both the minimum weight and target grip point values) and a set of adjustable sights. All of those are then removed and shipped back to Germany for the next round. And then he said that the ATF won’t let them do that anymore. How do they decide when, how, and what a manufacturer can or cannot do those things?

 

[DragonHerder]

You’re absolutely right. And that’s where the ATF’s inconsistent application of the rules starts to get annoying. I was told that the VP9SK is imported with a metal back strap that incorporates a thumb rest (for both the minimum weight and target grip point values) and a set of adjustable sights. All of those are then removed and shipped back to Germany for the next round. And then he said that the ATF won’t let them do that anymore. How do they decide when, how, and what a manufacturer can or cannot do those things?

Yes, the ATF is big on things being allowed... until they aren't, along with inconsistent enforcement.

Somehow the Beretta 1301, which is legitmately used for sporting purposes in competition, now has a compliance problem while the legions of mag fed junk Turkish shotguns don't.

 

[Uncle Jesse]

Does anyone know the reason for the different specs between the VP9 and SFP9? I know that the slide weight difference is because of the +P rating for the VP9, but it seems like a headache to produce two separate lineups that are otherwise very similar. Even if they call them different names, it seems much more logical to streamline them. I get the feeling that the next-gen pistol, even if it keeps the different names depending on the market, will be one single specification just to make life easier.

 

[Uncle Jesse]

Yes, the ATF is big on things being allowed... until they aren't, along with inconsistent enforcement.

Somehow the Beretta 1301, which is legitmately used for sporting purposes in competition, now has a compliance problem while the legions of mag fed junk Turkish shotguns don't.

Exactly. It’s completely ridiculous.

And yeah, I also noticed all the talk about the 1301. It didn’t make sense to me either. I think we can all agree that economic protectionism is one of things that originally drove the GCA (and the different regs that sprouted from it). But then why over-regulate the premium product (1301) and not the one with mass appeal (Turkish)?

 

[DragonHerder]

Exactly. It’s completely ridiculous.

And yeah, I also noticed all the talk about the 1301. It didn’t make sense to me either. I think we can all agree that economic protectionism is one of things that originally drove the GCA (and the different regs that sprouted from it). But then why over-regulate the premium product (1301) and not the one with mass appeal (Turkish)?

I don't know if protectionism is more of a factor in the 1301 decision than the random whack-a-mole nature of Turkish shotgun manufacturers, brands, and importers.

 

[DragonHerder]

Does anyone know the reason for the different specs between the VP9 and SFP9? I know that the slide weight difference is because of the +P rating for the VP9, but it seems like a headache to produce two separate lineups that are otherwise very similar. Even if they call them different names, it seems much more logical to streamline them. I get the feeling that the next-gen pistol, even if it keeps the different names depending on the market, will be one single specification just to make life easier.

FWIU, the military reject (?) SIG M17/18s that were sold on the open market have heavier slides than the consumer market P320s, in theory to deal with M1152 115gr ball. That load is supposedly getting 1326 fps out of the 4.7" M17, so that's pretty spicy even accounting for the extra 0.7" of barrel over most 9x19 test barrels.

All they did on the general market P320s was mill out more of the interior of the slide so that they worked more reliably with cheap, lightly loaded, 115gr ammo.

If HK did it the same way with the VP/SFP, that's just one less milling operation for Euro market pistols.

 

[augustusKC]

You’re absolutely right. And that’s where the ATF’s inconsistent application of the rules starts to get annoying. I was told that the VP9SK is imported with a metal back strap that incorporates a thumb rest (for both the minimum weight and target grip point values) and a set of adjustable sights. All of those are then removed and shipped back to Germany for the next round. And then he said that the ATF won’t let them do that anymore. How do they decide when, how, and what a manufacturer can or cannot do those things?

This is a guess but perhaps the incoming administration combined with the Supreme Court Chevron decision means that the ATF has less incentive to make administrative rulings that are past the letter of the actual law.

 

[RetropM]

What's even crazier about the Beretta 1301 debacle is that Beretta likely "knew better", even though I side with them over the ATF. That is to say, they probably knew it could be coming sooner or later. I say that because Benelli M4 shotguns have been subject to the same restrictions for decades and Beretta owns Benelli. Crazy.

As far as the VP9 goes, I think time will tell. I am excited about the new models, regardless of where they are proofed.

 

[Mawashi]

I don't think we will see an update of the Match. And maybe not the SK, at least for a while. I don't think it would help the SK line that much.
As for the L, that would just require putting the L slide on the new frame.

And on that note, and for that reason and along with others, I doubt HK made any changes to the internal mechanism, other than maybe some nickel plating. But I could be wrong....

Agee with @RetroM and you. Real interested to see if slides interchange with the A1….mainly the Match on an A1 full size frame. I haven’t heard that they will or won’t yet.
Also have preference for the German made guns but that is purely subjective. There has been no difference in quality with what they have done in the states so far…HK USA even modestly improved the frame of the 45C.