Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

4 inch Steel Frame Walther Q4


highhope
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 1/17/2020 at 9:01 PM, BritinUSA said:

Personally, I think the non-optic version may be the way to go for CO, as the slide can be milled deeper to lower the dot height.

dot height wont be an issue after practice enough to master the index... maybe takes 1-2 months dry fire

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, B_RAD said:

Ha. It's a sweet gun! So, yeah. Probably. 

It does look really sweet, I'm going to have to get one for sure. If you haven't seen the post about the slim grips for the SF check it out. Looks 1911/2011-ish and pretty thin, I like it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Prov1x said:

It does look really sweet, I'm going to have to get one for sure. If you haven't seen the post about the slim grips for the SF check it out. Looks 1911/2011-ish and pretty thin, I like it. 

You talking about the LOK grips?

 

I got a pair. They are the 💩!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, rowdyb said:

For 1,400 a gun and over weight for ccp, I don't see why anyone would get a 4" gun.


These have got to be marketed to the GunFighterDeathStalker Shooting School’s customers. I can’t conceive of any other market.
 

“I really want to appendix carry a gun each day which is the size of a Glock 19, but weighs as much as one that’s made out of tungsten.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went to a pre-Shot Show event yesterday at Pro-Gun Club in Boulder, NV. Headed right to the Walther booth, and there they were, the new Q4 in optic plate and iron sight configurations.

I have shot Walthers for a number of years, being attracted to their paddle magazine releases and their triggers. I was fine with poly until someone talked me into trying the Q5 steel frame. I have been shooting it for a few months now and am really spoiled.

When I picked up the Q4 SF, it had all the ergonomics and balance of the Q5 SF. They somehow have the weight distribution well thought out like the Q5 because it seemed as though I was shooting the 5". Maybe eliminating those lightening cuts did it. The recoil and muzzle flip seemed minimal, the dot staying in the Vortex Venom window and coming right back on target. Thank you TPC!

Same grip as the 5". The grip is really nice, but just a little to big for me. On my 5" I went with LOK thin grips and clearanced them for my thumb to hit the mag release without having to change my grip. I will do the same for the 4".

The 4" has what they call a "duty-optimized" beaver tail. It gives a higher purchase for better recoil control over a poly. And because it is shorter, I think it will carry better in a holster or for CCW than the 5". It is more rounded than a poly, so it fits the web of my hand better.

So, the Q4 SF in not available yet, but I'll be buying one as soon as they are available. I'm going with the skinny adaptor plate with the Shield RMSc instead of milling my own, like I usually do. I'm thinking of using the Q4 for competition and carry. Looks like it would be fine for both.

Disclaimer: I am not affiliated with Walther and have never received anything of value from Walther. They just work for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Prov1x said:

What's your point? 

 

The point is just my curiosity about the effect of the presence ,or lack there of, for their contingency program on sales.

 

I know many people who bought various Walthers solely off hoping to recoup the purchase cost in a year of competition. With that very visible option gone are the guns still an attractive purchase?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, rowdyb said:

The point is just my curiosity about the effect of the presence ,or lack there of, for their contingency program on sales.

 

I know many people who bought various Walthers solely off hoping to recoup the purchase cost in a year of competition. With that very visible option gone are the guns still an attractive purchase?

Why wouldn't it be a viable option? Steel framed gun, less recoil than plastic guns, accurate, reliable, 2 guns in 1 with optic plates etc...

 

Edited by Prov1x
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, rowdyb said:

The point is just my curiosity about the effect of the presence ,or lack there of, for their contingency program on sales.

 

I know many people who bought various Walthers solely off hoping to recoup the purchase cost in a year of competition. With that very visible option gone are the guns still an attractive purchase?

The Walthers are awesome guns. They’re extremely accurate. It’s the only striker fired steel frame gun. I feel it’s one of the better made guns out there IMO. The contingency program got the gun in hands of people who might not have tried it out otherwise. I doubt there were a ton of people who didn’t like it, but shot it anyways. That sounds like a success. 
 

 


 

 

Edited by B_RAD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Prov1x said:

Why wouldn't it be a viable option?

personal preferences. the rare bad experience tainting an opinion. other options generally. reasons are endless as much as why someone doesn't shoot one as why one does.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...