Interesting Ressurection of the George Wilson Match45 Pistol

Found out about the George Wilson pistol in the thread about Wyatt-Luger pistols (https://www.bullseyeforum.net/t8714-wyatt-luger-target-pistol)

Looking for more information, I stumbled across a thread about a pistol that seems to be a revival of the George Wilson design.
http://www.revolarms.com/the-dl45.html

Although the patent (https://www.google.com/patents/WO2014123628A2) linked in the other sites thread seems to be light on new innovation. Seems to describe what is standard on many Euro competition guns.

I'm happy to see the design produced. Disheartened that the class of the George Wilson pistol was lost. Somehow the DL45 look clunky.

Also disappointed that they don't seem to have looked into the state of modern bullseye to evolve the design for sights, optics, and grip.

From the design, I'm curious if calibre changes might be possible with different barrels and magazines.

The Wilson pistol:
http://tonybrong.blogspot.ca/2014/02/wilson-pistol.html

Very cool, thanks for sharing. Its really too bad they did not take bullseye shooters into consideration, i think we are the only crowd that would have bought the gun. There are too many excellent combat/tactical type .45s out there for this ugly contraption to ever break into that market. And the double stack mag is a real turn off for most bullseye shooters, that grip looks really uncomfortable. Has a lot of potential, though.

SmokinNJokin wrote:And the double stack mag is a real turn off for most bullseye shooters, that grip looks really uncomfortable. Has a lot of potential, though.

Found a discussion about it, the anonymous comment that is similar to below is mine.

http://guns.wikia.com/wiki/Revol_Arms_DL45

The problems you see with it SmokinNJokin are the same as those I see. It was designed by George A. Wilson as a bullseye gun.

To modernise an old bullseye gun, the last thing you would do is make it double stack.  And a bullseye shooter is concerned about better fit than simple replaceable backstraps.

Two things IMO you would absolutely do is make it possible to mount a red dot sight and model the grip frame so that it could accept some currently available target grips.

Given the experience and success of Mr. Wilson, I'd be very curious to know what were considered "fiddly" bits and how and why they were eliminated.

If this were simply a direct copy of the original Wilson prototype with good target grips and a rail cut on top for optics it would possibly have a market with current bullseye competitors. As it is, I think it will struggle to find a market.

Comments on the following article are closed:
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/10/02/revol-arms-dl45-handgun/
But a few pointed out the false claims of the maker of it having "completely unique internal slide mechanism".
My FAS607, the Pardinis, and others have "internal slide mechanisms". And something that is based of someone else's prototype isn't exactly "unique". It maybe a completely unique pistol in the land of 45acp. But even so, failing to acknowledge it's history is somehow galling to me.
Congratulations to Dan Love on completing what was surely a difficult project. But patenting standard state-of-the-art and claiming uniqueness for a derivative product? Shame.

And quite embarrassing from a marketing standpoint: There's already a company selling a product called the DL-45. It's a sausage stuffing "gun".

#5 trigger no way, to mount a dot, double stack, ugly, doomed to fail. 

It is like they never even shot a BE match.

Remember the time period when this was designed, late 1950s. Optical sights on handguns were almost unheard of, and form follows function. A double stack magazine isn’t necessarily bad, even in a 45. And trigger pulls can be dealt with. Whether it was doomed or not from conception is difficult to say now. I wish more were available to actually see and shoot.

Wobbley wrote:Remember the time period when this was designed, late 1950s.

The original yes. But this is a new incarnation.

The original Wilson pistol looked like a good concept, not sure how well the tilted locking block works with the .45ACP when it comes to longevity though. Then you have the mass of the slide which might possibly be heavier than a 1911 slide.

This seems like a good place to post this. How about a fixed barrel 1911? Looks interesting.

http://betterfirearmsdesign.com/

LenV wrote:This seems like a good place to post this. How about a fixed barrel 1911? Looks interesting.

http://betterfirearmsdesign.com/

Seems neat. But considering the performance of bullseye guns some of the 1911 negatives BFD list seem to be exagerated.

And that isn`t the only attempt at a gas delayed 1911. Chiappa had the 45DBB shown at the Shot Show back in 2012. Any in the wild since?

Another new design I've been watching videos of is the Hudson H9.

I notice on this one by BFD they go into a lot of detail about how accurate the barrel is but they don't mention that the rear sight is not attached to the same half of the slide as the barrel. That could make for some interesting changes in zero. They have not returned my request for info on the cost and what they planned on doing for 32acp magazines for a 1911. They offer packages in a lot of different calibers that current production magazines don't exist.


Edit: Cliff Benjamin the owner contacted me with a lot of information. The pistol is spendy (5K) but they are looking for a Master class shooter to use one and give a testimonial and they will take 1K off the price. They don't actually have a 32acp version yet but pretty sure they could do both the 32s and 38 special.