Is the HK USP40c worth the money
- Thread starter rblack
- Start date
msu_cj_grad
Inactive
"If they give you the market value of the gun, then sell it for the market value, they make no profit and go out of business. How do you think they pay their overhead (rent, taxes, employees, electric bill, etc.) not to mention make some profit, if they buy things for the same price they sell them?"
When I'm talking about this, I'm mainly talking about my local sporting goods store. They already make a pretty penny off the new items they sell at higher prices then competitors, and then jack up the price of something they buy used nearly 100% to make more of a profit. I don't see a problem with making a $50 to $75 profit per item, but $150 to $200... please. They wouldn't even give him $400 for a gun that doesn't have holster wear, has only fired less than 1000 rounds, and had an extra mag and a slip on grip (by Uncle Mikes I think). That's where I get the phrase "jack-up rip-off artists.":barf:
When I'm talking about this, I'm mainly talking about my local sporting goods store. They already make a pretty penny off the new items they sell at higher prices then competitors, and then jack up the price of something they buy used nearly 100% to make more of a profit. I don't see a problem with making a $50 to $75 profit per item, but $150 to $200... please. They wouldn't even give him $400 for a gun that doesn't have holster wear, has only fired less than 1000 rounds, and had an extra mag and a slip on grip (by Uncle Mikes I think). That's where I get the phrase "jack-up rip-off artists.":barf:
USPc's are fine pistols.
They are however, too large and have poor DA and OK SA trigger pulls. I'd like to see them with smoother, aluminum triggers. And smaller, but that's unrealistic at this stage of the game.
The slide width of a USPc is 20%+/- wider than that of a Kimber or comparable 1911. That's quite a difference, when you think about it.
As MZB pointed out, the grip width of a Kimber is listed as narrower than the slide width of a USPc. And you can buy narrower replacement grips if you chose to slim it down further.
They are however, too large and have poor DA and OK SA trigger pulls. I'd like to see them with smoother, aluminum triggers. And smaller, but that's unrealistic at this stage of the game.
The slide width of a USPc is 20%+/- wider than that of a Kimber or comparable 1911. That's quite a difference, when you think about it.
As MZB pointed out, the grip width of a Kimber is listed as narrower than the slide width of a USPc. And you can buy narrower replacement grips if you chose to slim it down further.
Guys,
I think you may be getting your wires crossed. The USP is a big gun but the USPc is much smaller. The USPc is a tad smaller than the equivalent Glock series of compact pistols.
For concealed carry pistol selection with regards to size, do 2 main things:
1. Hold the gun and manipulate its controls. If it is comfortable then go to step 2.
2. Put the gun in your waistband preferably in a holster (since you should carry the gun in one) and sit, jump, run, bend (you get the drift). Again it is which one is more comfortable. A slim and/or short slide gun may or may not be comfortable for you compared to a larger gun.
Remember other issues such as reliability, durability, parts availability etc. With the USPc you can't go wrong. If not that then a Sig 229 although heavier. If you do not mind the Glock manual of arms then also a good choice.
I think you may be getting your wires crossed. The USP is a big gun but the USPc is much smaller. The USPc is a tad smaller than the equivalent Glock series of compact pistols.
For concealed carry pistol selection with regards to size, do 2 main things:
1. Hold the gun and manipulate its controls. If it is comfortable then go to step 2.
2. Put the gun in your waistband preferably in a holster (since you should carry the gun in one) and sit, jump, run, bend (you get the drift). Again it is which one is more comfortable. A slim and/or short slide gun may or may not be comfortable for you compared to a larger gun.
Remember other issues such as reliability, durability, parts availability etc. With the USPc you can't go wrong. If not that then a Sig 229 although heavier. If you do not mind the Glock manual of arms then also a good choice.
Archer1440
New member
Hmm... I think I smell smoke... could be some flames are about to begin here... hope not.
Now, since the original question was "is the HK worth the money" I propose we all agree that it's good to have choices, and leave it at that. To each, his own.
Mind you I'm a Cooperite and admirer of 1911's, but I also know a good thing when I shoot it.
Yes, the HK is worth the money. Get one.
Now, since the original question was "is the HK worth the money" I propose we all agree that it's good to have choices, and leave it at that. To each, his own.
Mind you I'm a Cooperite and admirer of 1911's, but I also know a good thing when I shoot it.
Yes, the HK is worth the money. Get one.
Last edited:
There is a thread a while back regarding a three-year old accidentally killing his dad (a cop) with the latter's sidearm, a Glock. I commented then that if it were a USP, the child couldn't have pulled the 12-13# DA trigger, had the gun been in a loaded-hammer down-safety off condition. I still feel that the heavy trigger pull is an important safety characteristic, along with the long travel. The work required to activate the gun would simply be too much for a child. Now, in an adrenaline-charged gunfight scenario, 12 lbs is nothing to highly charged (but not panicky nervous!) combatant. I believe i could "squeeze the oil" out of the grip/trigger if i were in this predicament. Aiming? you've mentioned the solution, have a firm grip and concentrate at the task. IMO, nothing good will come out of a haphazard reaction to a threat, even if the gun were in a SA first shot condition.
Best regards,
New_comer
brass shower
New member
My experience with the USP 40C
Wanting to add something different to my pistol collection (all the "serious" guns are Glocks) I took one on a trade a few months ago Rod. Nice looking and feeling pistol. When I got it home I immediately broke it down, cleaned, and lubed it. I liked the simplicity of the takedown operation, though it was not as simple as the Glock. When I got it to the range there were a few things I didnt like about it. Here is my comparisons with a Glock 23 which I also shot that day.
1. DA trigger very heavy. While managable it would be better if you knew where it would break. SA was nice, however for consistency I liked the Glock 23 since I knew where it was going to break every time.
2. It was more difficult to control than the G23. Muzzle rise was quite pronounced, and while not painful, it took longer to bring back on target. The G23's recoil was a tad more "stingy" but it was quicker to bring back on target. I suspect this is due to the barrel being higher relative to the shooter's hand.
3. The ambidextrous magazine release was nice but I'm not left handed. I managed to trip it unintentionally. Familiarity and training would probably fix that.
4. Accuracy was actually slightly worse than the G23 when I fired it, especially during rapid fire. My shooting partner experienced the opposite effect. I didnt put it in a ransom rest this was just offhand. I chalk this one up to my familiarity with Glock triggers.
5. This one was the big turn off, I experienced 3 failures to feed. one was with American eagle 155gr FMJ, the other 2 with winchester 180gr grey box HP. I doubt it was operator induced due to limp wristing since I had a death grip on the thing while trying to control it.
I really wanted to like this gun but I didnt want to spend the time getting it to work. The operational reasons above and the unavailability of full capacity magazines for us lowly citizens pretty much made my mind up for me. I didnt think it was worth the prices being asked for it, I sold it to someone who did. Try one out if at all possible before you buy one, you might love it.
Wanting to add something different to my pistol collection (all the "serious" guns are Glocks) I took one on a trade a few months ago Rod. Nice looking and feeling pistol. When I got it home I immediately broke it down, cleaned, and lubed it. I liked the simplicity of the takedown operation, though it was not as simple as the Glock. When I got it to the range there were a few things I didnt like about it. Here is my comparisons with a Glock 23 which I also shot that day.
1. DA trigger very heavy. While managable it would be better if you knew where it would break. SA was nice, however for consistency I liked the Glock 23 since I knew where it was going to break every time.
2. It was more difficult to control than the G23. Muzzle rise was quite pronounced, and while not painful, it took longer to bring back on target. The G23's recoil was a tad more "stingy" but it was quicker to bring back on target. I suspect this is due to the barrel being higher relative to the shooter's hand.
3. The ambidextrous magazine release was nice but I'm not left handed. I managed to trip it unintentionally. Familiarity and training would probably fix that.
4. Accuracy was actually slightly worse than the G23 when I fired it, especially during rapid fire. My shooting partner experienced the opposite effect. I didnt put it in a ransom rest this was just offhand. I chalk this one up to my familiarity with Glock triggers.
5. This one was the big turn off, I experienced 3 failures to feed. one was with American eagle 155gr FMJ, the other 2 with winchester 180gr grey box HP. I doubt it was operator induced due to limp wristing since I had a death grip on the thing while trying to control it.
I really wanted to like this gun but I didnt want to spend the time getting it to work. The operational reasons above and the unavailability of full capacity magazines for us lowly citizens pretty much made my mind up for me. I didnt think it was worth the prices being asked for it, I sold it to someone who did. Try one out if at all possible before you buy one, you might love it.
Mo_Zam_Beek
New member
From the Kimber web site
.40 Compact AL / SS
Width - 1.28 inches
Weight - 28 oz
Capacity 7 +1
Sight Rad 5.7"
Barrel 4"
From the HK site
.40 Compact
Width- 1.14 inches
Weight 24.48 oz
Capacity 12*
Barrel 3.58"
Sight Rad 5.35 inches
.40 Compact AL / SS
Width - 1.28 inches
Weight - 28 oz
Capacity 7 +1
Sight Rad 5.7"
Barrel 4"
From the HK site
.40 Compact
Width- 1.14 inches
Weight 24.48 oz
Capacity 12*
Barrel 3.58"
Sight Rad 5.35 inches
I'd like to thank everyone for their sincere replies. I just got rid of a brand new Glock 23, even thou it was very accurate and reliable. I also got rid of a Glock 27 some time back. They are very nice guns, just not for me I guess.
I'm going to talk to my dealer Monday morning and try to decide what exactly I'll do. He is getting prices on a couple of commander size 1911's for me also.
Again, thanks
I'm going to talk to my dealer Monday morning and try to decide what exactly I'll do. He is getting prices on a couple of commander size 1911's for me also.
Again, thanks
MoZamBeek said:
"M1911 - The safety is not as good as a 1911 -- it's a bit mushy. And if you push it too far, you decock.
Are you sure you own one? Safe is up, decock is down (V1) - smells a bit trollish - esp considering your handle."
I know quite well how the safety works. The problem, like I said, is that when lowering the safety of the USP, if you push it down too far, you don't just take it off safe, you also decock.
"M1911 - The slides of both the .40 and .45 USPc are f*ckin huge! Compare them against a 1911 slide and you'll see what I mean. Completely unnecessary and inexcusable, IMNSHO. These are supposed to be guns for carrying concealed. What part of "concealed" doesn't HK understand?
Yes - go to the kimber sight and the HK sight. Do the comparison - I just did last week - if memory serves me - 100'ths of an inch and the HK weighs less, costs less (AL/Stainless), does not have reliability problems out of the box, the polymer frame will out last the AL frame, and the HK has a higer capacity."
Higher capacity? 1 whole round for the USPc .45 versus the Kimber (8+1 versus 7+1), BFD. My Kimbers frame is steel, it will last forever. Weight doesn't bother me -- I have to carry either in a holster. No, it isn't 100ths of an inch, its about .20 in. difference in width. Doesn't sound like much, but hold them up together and look at them.
"Do some homework on the net - search for feeding problems, KBs, reliability issues, compare sizes and weights.
In the end the answer will be clear."
It is for me. But my answer is probably different that yours. Like I said, the USP is a good gun -- I have 2 (I also have 5 M1911s and I'm buying another).
But it isn't perfect IMHO and I described the things that I don't like. You don't have to agree with me; isn't it great that we've got so many choices? But calling me a troll is an uncalled for flame.
M1911
"M1911 - The safety is not as good as a 1911 -- it's a bit mushy. And if you push it too far, you decock.
Are you sure you own one? Safe is up, decock is down (V1) - smells a bit trollish - esp considering your handle."
I know quite well how the safety works. The problem, like I said, is that when lowering the safety of the USP, if you push it down too far, you don't just take it off safe, you also decock.
"M1911 - The slides of both the .40 and .45 USPc are f*ckin huge! Compare them against a 1911 slide and you'll see what I mean. Completely unnecessary and inexcusable, IMNSHO. These are supposed to be guns for carrying concealed. What part of "concealed" doesn't HK understand?
Yes - go to the kimber sight and the HK sight. Do the comparison - I just did last week - if memory serves me - 100'ths of an inch and the HK weighs less, costs less (AL/Stainless), does not have reliability problems out of the box, the polymer frame will out last the AL frame, and the HK has a higer capacity."
Higher capacity? 1 whole round for the USPc .45 versus the Kimber (8+1 versus 7+1), BFD. My Kimbers frame is steel, it will last forever. Weight doesn't bother me -- I have to carry either in a holster. No, it isn't 100ths of an inch, its about .20 in. difference in width. Doesn't sound like much, but hold them up together and look at them.
"Do some homework on the net - search for feeding problems, KBs, reliability issues, compare sizes and weights.
In the end the answer will be clear."
It is for me. But my answer is probably different that yours. Like I said, the USP is a good gun -- I have 2 (I also have 5 M1911s and I'm buying another).
But it isn't perfect IMHO and I described the things that I don't like. You don't have to agree with me; isn't it great that we've got so many choices? But calling me a troll is an uncalled for flame.
M1911
Last edited:
I don't own any Compacts, but I have a USP9 and USP45 (full size). They're some of my all-time favorite guns.
The AB-coded guns have smoother trigger pulls (not lighter, but much smoother). My USP9 is a '00 (AA), and my new USP45 is a '01 (AB). The 45 has a nicer trigger pull, but so far I shoot them equally in terms of accuracy.
I definitely think a USP is worth the money, but Glocks are definitely a top contender for concealed carry.
The AB-coded guns have smoother trigger pulls (not lighter, but much smoother). My USP9 is a '00 (AA), and my new USP45 is a '01 (AB). The 45 has a nicer trigger pull, but so far I shoot them equally in terms of accuracy.
I definitely think a USP is worth the money, but Glocks are definitely a top contender for concealed carry.
USP 40c definitely worth it. If you can find a dealer who has the LEM (INS contract), then jump on it. It has the night sites already and comes with 3 magazines. ( my dealer switched out the 12 rounders for 10 rounders 
)
My price was $649 for the USP40c - LEM. I ended up buying two of them because my wife, who normally is a glock fan, fell for the LEM trigger. She has one and I have the other.
The LEM trigger is slicker than the LDA and the Glock Safe-action. Once broken in the reset distance is much shorter than the LDA or the Glock.
I have and like to shoot my 1911's, my Glocks, my Para's, but I carry the USP. I have both the compact and full-size USP's and they are my duty weapons.
)My price was $649 for the USP40c - LEM. I ended up buying two of them because my wife, who normally is a glock fan, fell for the LEM trigger. She has one and I have the other.
The LEM trigger is slicker than the LDA and the Glock Safe-action. Once broken in the reset distance is much shorter than the LDA or the Glock.
I have and like to shoot my 1911's, my Glocks, my Para's, but I carry the USP. I have both the compact and full-size USP's and they are my duty weapons.
Archer1440
New member
M1911,
You might consider having your USP's switched to Variant 9 or 10. Then, you would have the 1911-style control, with no decocker, a spurred hammer, and still have a DA second strike if needed, as well as the enormous safety advantage of being able to lock before chambering a round.
All the good stuff of the USP with no pesky decocking for that high-thumbs 1911 hold.
While I get the impression you still would find something you don't like, it might address a few of your issues.
You might consider having your USP's switched to Variant 9 or 10. Then, you would have the 1911-style control, with no decocker, a spurred hammer, and still have a DA second strike if needed, as well as the enormous safety advantage of being able to lock before chambering a round.
All the good stuff of the USP with no pesky decocking for that high-thumbs 1911 hold.
While I get the impression you still would find something you don't like, it might address a few of your issues.
Mo_Zam_Beek
New member
M1911- I know quite well how the safety works. The problem, like I said, is that when lowering the safety of the USP, if you push it down too far, you don't just take it off safe, you also decock.
Once again - safe is up. Decock is down. There is no lowering of the safety at all.
M1911 - Higher capacity? 1 whole round for the USPc .45 versus the Kimber (8+1 versus 7+1), BFD.
The question related to .40's so the answer is as I posted it.
M-1911 -No, it isn't 100ths of an inch, its about .20 in. difference in width. Doesn't sound like much, but hold them up together and look at them.
per the two sights (both .40 and .45s) the difference is exactly .14 - the HK is narrower.
Once again - safe is up. Decock is down. There is no lowering of the safety at all.
M1911 - Higher capacity? 1 whole round for the USPc .45 versus the Kimber (8+1 versus 7+1), BFD.
The question related to .40's so the answer is as I posted it.
M-1911 -No, it isn't 100ths of an inch, its about .20 in. difference in width. Doesn't sound like much, but hold them up together and look at them.
per the two sights (both .40 and .45s) the difference is exactly .14 - the HK is narrower.
Mozambeek said: "Once again - safe is up. Decock is down. There is no lowering of the safety at all."
Mozambeek:
I don't know why we can't understand each other on this. The following is true for a variant 1 USP:
1. to apply the safety on the USP, you push it up, just like on a 1911.
2. To take the gun off safe (i.e., ready to fire), you push it down, just like on a 1911.
3. To decock, you push down farther, beyond the off-safe detent.
If I carried my USPs, I'd carry them cocked and safety on. To fire, I'd put the safety off (push downward to detent) and fire single action. My concern is that I would push beyond the safety off detent, and thus decock the gun. As Archer pointed out, HK has a variant that removes the decocker and only has a manual safety.
Perhaps you are only considering carrying the USP decocked? Or do you perhaps have a variant other than variant 1?
Here's a link to the USPc manual:
http://www.hecklerkoch-usa.com/pages/pdf/uspc_man.pdf
Note on Page 9 where it says:
"variants 1 and 2 allow the user to carry the pistol in a single-action mode (cocked and locked) with the control lever/manual safety engaged. This same pistol, without modification, can be carried in double action mode, with or without the control lever/manual safety engaged."
If you go to page 17, it says:
"To fire the pistol, the front of the control lever is moved down horizontally into the "FIRE" position..."
On page 19, it says:
"Control lever as a decocking lever - On USP Compact Variants 1 and 2, the control lever can be placed in the safe, fire, and decocking positions described earlier. A USP fitted with this control lever can be carried as a single action or double action pistol, with or without the safe position. The control lever also allows the cocked hammer to be decocked when the control lever is fully depressed."
Regarding the 12 round capacity of the .40, are there any pre-ban USPc magazines around? I'm not aware of any, in which case the effective capacity is 10 rounds for us non-leos.
Regarding the thickness of the guns, I was talking about the thickness of the slides. On the 1911s, the thickest part of the gun is the grips, but I don't put the grips in an IWB holster, so the thickness of the grips doesn't bother me. I'll get my micrometer out tonight, but IIRC, the 1911 slide is about 0.90 inches thick and the USPc slide about 1.14 inches thick. Too bad I don't have a digital camera. Put the two side by side and you'll see what I'm talking about.
Regarding the LEM trigger, HK has announced that they will sell LEM models to the public. When I last spoke to HK (either Nov. or Dec. 2001), they were still not offering to retrofit existing civilian guns (LEOs were another story). A friend of mine is a uniformed INS officer. His issue gun is a Beretta 96, but the INS is now issuing HK USPc LEM .40 to plain-clothed officers and is allowing uniformed officers to purchase the USPc LEM .40 at a bargain price. He brought it to the club and we put about 100 rounds through it. Pretty decent trigger. I wish I'd had my variant 1 USPc .40 with me, so that I could have compared the two side by side.
"M1911- I know quite well how the safety works. The problem, like I said, is that when lowering the safety of the USP, if you push it down too far, you don't just take it off safe, you also decock.
Mozambeek: Once again - safe is up. Decock is down. There is no lowering of the safety at all.
"
I disagree. On a Variant 1 or 2 if you are carrying cocked and locked, you push the safety downwards to the off-safe position. Push it farther, and it will decock. The HK manual excerpts that I've cited back me up. If you're near Boston, I'll be glad to meet you at a range and demonstrate it to you.
If you like your HK USPc, great! It's definitely a good gun. Not my favorite, which is why I carry my Kimber instead.
M1911
Mozambeek:
I don't know why we can't understand each other on this. The following is true for a variant 1 USP:
1. to apply the safety on the USP, you push it up, just like on a 1911.
2. To take the gun off safe (i.e., ready to fire), you push it down, just like on a 1911.
3. To decock, you push down farther, beyond the off-safe detent.
If I carried my USPs, I'd carry them cocked and safety on. To fire, I'd put the safety off (push downward to detent) and fire single action. My concern is that I would push beyond the safety off detent, and thus decock the gun. As Archer pointed out, HK has a variant that removes the decocker and only has a manual safety.
Perhaps you are only considering carrying the USP decocked? Or do you perhaps have a variant other than variant 1?
Here's a link to the USPc manual:
http://www.hecklerkoch-usa.com/pages/pdf/uspc_man.pdf
Note on Page 9 where it says:
"variants 1 and 2 allow the user to carry the pistol in a single-action mode (cocked and locked) with the control lever/manual safety engaged. This same pistol, without modification, can be carried in double action mode, with or without the control lever/manual safety engaged."
If you go to page 17, it says:
"To fire the pistol, the front of the control lever is moved down horizontally into the "FIRE" position..."
On page 19, it says:
"Control lever as a decocking lever - On USP Compact Variants 1 and 2, the control lever can be placed in the safe, fire, and decocking positions described earlier. A USP fitted with this control lever can be carried as a single action or double action pistol, with or without the safe position. The control lever also allows the cocked hammer to be decocked when the control lever is fully depressed."
Regarding the 12 round capacity of the .40, are there any pre-ban USPc magazines around? I'm not aware of any, in which case the effective capacity is 10 rounds for us non-leos.
Regarding the thickness of the guns, I was talking about the thickness of the slides. On the 1911s, the thickest part of the gun is the grips, but I don't put the grips in an IWB holster, so the thickness of the grips doesn't bother me. I'll get my micrometer out tonight, but IIRC, the 1911 slide is about 0.90 inches thick and the USPc slide about 1.14 inches thick. Too bad I don't have a digital camera. Put the two side by side and you'll see what I'm talking about.
Regarding the LEM trigger, HK has announced that they will sell LEM models to the public. When I last spoke to HK (either Nov. or Dec. 2001), they were still not offering to retrofit existing civilian guns (LEOs were another story). A friend of mine is a uniformed INS officer. His issue gun is a Beretta 96, but the INS is now issuing HK USPc LEM .40 to plain-clothed officers and is allowing uniformed officers to purchase the USPc LEM .40 at a bargain price. He brought it to the club and we put about 100 rounds through it. Pretty decent trigger. I wish I'd had my variant 1 USPc .40 with me, so that I could have compared the two side by side.
"M1911- I know quite well how the safety works. The problem, like I said, is that when lowering the safety of the USP, if you push it down too far, you don't just take it off safe, you also decock.
Mozambeek: Once again - safe is up. Decock is down. There is no lowering of the safety at all.
"
I disagree. On a Variant 1 or 2 if you are carrying cocked and locked, you push the safety downwards to the off-safe position. Push it farther, and it will decock. The HK manual excerpts that I've cited back me up. If you're near Boston, I'll be glad to meet you at a range and demonstrate it to you.
If you like your HK USPc, great! It's definitely a good gun. Not my favorite, which is why I carry my Kimber instead.
M1911
Archer1440
New member
M1911 says:
This seems to be a touchy subject. I have seen a good supply of unmarked full capacity .40 compact magazines at the Crossroads of the West gun show in Salt Lake City. I can't see how they are pre-ban, as the .40 C was not produced until well after the ban, however, they may have come from some Euro variant, or "may have been produced prior to the ban and prior to introduction of the pistol, in anticipation of the ban", a dealer quote which sets off my BS detector, but a quote nonetheless.
At any rate, they do seem to be widely, if quietly, available, and as they are unmarked, they are probably within the letter (if not spirit) of the law.
This seems to be a touchy subject. I have seen a good supply of unmarked full capacity .40 compact magazines at the Crossroads of the West gun show in Salt Lake City. I can't see how they are pre-ban, as the .40 C was not produced until well after the ban, however, they may have come from some Euro variant, or "may have been produced prior to the ban and prior to introduction of the pistol, in anticipation of the ban", a dealer quote which sets off my BS detector, but a quote nonetheless.
At any rate, they do seem to be widely, if quietly, available, and as they are unmarked, they are probably within the letter (if not spirit) of the law.