I received the “SOC†holster from G-Code in late spring of 2003, and have run it though its paces for many months. I also did a comparison of it against some of the other holsters that it is destined to ‘go up against’.
First of all, an explanation of what this holster is, and what it is not. This holster is not a level III security holster. That means this holster lacks any additional type of “theft retention device†except one thumb actuated ‘button’. This button operates a spring loaded “hood†that keeps the handgun from falling out. This simple thumb device also allows wickedly fast presentations. But since it is not a level III holster, it has no additional mechanism to stop someone else from doing a wickedly fast presentation of your handgun from your holster.
So what is this holster primarily for? As its name implies – it is “Special Operations Capableâ€. In other words, it is for “Offensive†use. SWAT Teams and others that knowingly go out to do battle against armed bad guys. And for this application, the SOC holster excels.
O.K. – now we know what this holster is for, but what about its performance? Well, we will get to that in a minute. First lets find out what makes this holster different. G-Code went about designing this holster from ‘outside the box’. Almost nothing is conventional about it. The ‘frame’ as they call it, is CNC machined out of solid ‘Delrin’. It basically covers the slide of the handgun. At the bottom of the Delrin frame is a Delrin ‘stud’ that fits up inside the bore of the handgun. At the top of the frame is a spring loaded ‘thumb actuator’ that controls the retention hood. Once the thumb pushes down with approximately 10 lbs of pressure, the hood ‘springs’ out of the way into the down position. Since the handgun is now just held into place with gravity (there are no ‘friction’ devices) the handgun is now free to be presented as quickly as the operator can bring it to bear. There are two different styles of ‘release actuators’ – low and high. The low actuator is more ‘secure’ and will probably offer better ‘security’. The high model is up near the top of the hood, and is the faster of the two for most people. I ordered the ‘high’ thumb model.
The second component of the holster is the ‘cowling’. It is made from Kydex, and is removable. This allows the owner to switch out cowlings for different mission requirements, while maintaining the exact same ‘frame’. This is a great idea, as all the ‘controls’ are kept the exact same. The cowling merely covers the dustcover/trigger guard of the handgun, or handgun/flashlight, or handgun/laser, or handgun/flashlight/laser combination. And with the rate at which new flashlights and other accessories change these days, one is able to keep the same holster rig and just upgrade the cowling to keep up with the new accessories that one acquires.
The holster comes with a ‘drop leg’ attachment, and two straps that fit around the thigh like most every other ‘drop leg’ holster. However, I ordered one of Gene’s of High Speed Gear drop leg holsters that he makes specifically for the G-Code SOC. For those of you that don’t know, Gene makes the very best drop leg holster for ‘field wear’ in the world right now. It is the only holster I have found that does not chaff the thigh region after extended wear. ( http://www.highspeedgearinc.com ) (He also makes some of the best ‘chest rigs’ for carrying magazines on the planet too!) Another thing I like about the HSG holster is that it provides a strap that goes over the grip portion of the handgun for “field security†– when one knows one will not need the handgun one can secure it so it can’t inadvertently be released from the holster. The web portion that comes "stock" with the G-Code holster lacks that extra bit of security.
O.K. – now onto the performance. When I decided to test this rig for speed, I came up with the following criteria. I would pit it against the Safariland 3004 (the “old school†state of the art drop leg holster for CQB/CQB) and I would also test it against one of my personal ‘behind the hip’ holsters that I use for IDPA competition. Please note that the Safariland holster was a “thumb-break†ONLY – it did not require that the user ‘rotate’ a hood out of the way like the newer Safariland 6004. So the times with the 6004 would be slower than the ‘thumb break’ only model.
I conducted ‘Phase I’ of the test at 5 meters. At the start signal I would draw and place one round on a ‘pie plate’ that was placed at approximately 5’ from the ground (or about the spot and size that most adults Center Of Mass would be). My hands were ‘clasped’ near my belt buckle prior to the start signal.
I was using my stock Glock 22. I fired ten rounds from each holster. Any ‘flubs’ or ‘fumbles’ I had were included in the times – because I felt that even in real life there will be ‘flubs’ and so those times should be taken into account.
The times for Phase I are recorded below, with the IDPA rig on the top row, the Safariland second and the SOC holster on the third row.
1.26; 1.31; 1.28; 1.32; 1.18; 1.29; 1.20; 1.21; 1.34; 1.21
1.68; 1.72; 1.69; 1.94; 1.67; 2.10; 1.70; 1.82; 1.53; 1.56
1.50; 1.93; 1.42; 1.43; 1.38; 1.44; 1.42; 1.40; 1.39; 1.60
So – in the first row we have a low of 1.18 and a high of 1.34 with an average of 1.26. (As you can see, I am not the fastest guy in the world – but neither am I the slowest.)
In the second row (with the Safariland rig) we have a low of 1.53 and a high of 2.10 (a ‘flub’ shot – where I fumbled the retention device) with an average of 1.74 seconds or – dang near a half second slower than my IDPA rig (.48 seconds slower).
In the third row (the G-Code SOC rig) we have a low of 1.38 and a high of 1.93 (my ‘flub’ with this rig) and an average of 1.49 (or 0.25 seconds faster than the Safariland and 0.23 seconds slower than the IDPA rig.) This puts is squarely between the two holsters in terms of speed.
Even if I throw out the ‘flubbed’ shots – the SOC does a little better, with the average for the Safariland at 1.70 seconds and the G-Code SOC at 1.44 seconds. This puts the SOC at 0.26 seconds faster than the Safariland and within 0.18 seconds of the IDPA rig! What this translates to is the SOC is more ‘forgiving’ of a fumble than the Safariland. It is faster to recover from a fumble with the SOC holster. This is an important achievement, because since we are human, we WILL make mistakes – so I like the way this holster is more forgiving when I do make a mistake.
Phase II of the testing was drawing while moving. Lets face it, if we have to transition to our sidearm, it is not going to be under the ‘best of circumstances’. We have to be able to get our secondary into action while on the move – cause if we ‘plant’ ourselves we become a bullet magnet.
So to test this part I used only the Safariland and the SOC holster. I started at 7 meters from the target, and as I started to walk forward I hit the start button. While it counted down before the beep, my hands were simulating holding a long gun and engaging targets. (The reason I did not use a real long gun is I wanted to keep the variables to a minimum. By ‘simulating’ holding a long-gun I avoided all the variables that different long guns and slings may have brought into the equation.) When the buzzer sounded, I dropped my simulated long gun and ‘transitioned’ to the handgun, and then I delivered one shot on the pie plate. I then recorded the time. I did this ten times with each holster. Please note that I had one ‘flub’ with each of the two holsters again.
The first row is the Safariland holster, and the second row is the G-Code SOC.
1.61; 1.53; 1.56; 1.83; 1.69; 1.49; 1.66; 1.86; 2.64; 1.78
1.52; 1.49; 1.56; 1.58; 1.52; 2.02; 1.68; 1.63; 1.63; 1.55
In Phase II the low for the Safariland was 1.49 and the high was 2.64, with an average of 1.76 seconds.
With the SOC holster, the low was 1.49 and the high was 2.02 with the average being 1.61 seconds, or 0.15 seconds faster than the Safariland.
Well, in the cold light of day, is 0.15 seconds really that big of difference? One way to look at it is this – if you KNEW you were going to get in a gunfight – and your opponent was the same skill level as you are – which holster would you want him to use, and which holster would YOU want to use? That puts the issue in the proper perspective – doesn’t it?
In the fast rough and tumble of CQB/CQC, when one’s primary goes down, one needs to transition to ones secondary (handgun) –RIGHT NOW! The SOC holster accommodates that in spades.
It is my preferred CQB holster by a WIDE margin.
G-Code
From top with hood in 'retention' mode
From top after hood has 'sprung' out of the way - ready to grab and shoot
Safariland 3004
Top view with Thumb strap snaped
cheers
tire iron
First of all, an explanation of what this holster is, and what it is not. This holster is not a level III security holster. That means this holster lacks any additional type of “theft retention device†except one thumb actuated ‘button’. This button operates a spring loaded “hood†that keeps the handgun from falling out. This simple thumb device also allows wickedly fast presentations. But since it is not a level III holster, it has no additional mechanism to stop someone else from doing a wickedly fast presentation of your handgun from your holster.
So what is this holster primarily for? As its name implies – it is “Special Operations Capableâ€. In other words, it is for “Offensive†use. SWAT Teams and others that knowingly go out to do battle against armed bad guys. And for this application, the SOC holster excels.
O.K. – now we know what this holster is for, but what about its performance? Well, we will get to that in a minute. First lets find out what makes this holster different. G-Code went about designing this holster from ‘outside the box’. Almost nothing is conventional about it. The ‘frame’ as they call it, is CNC machined out of solid ‘Delrin’. It basically covers the slide of the handgun. At the bottom of the Delrin frame is a Delrin ‘stud’ that fits up inside the bore of the handgun. At the top of the frame is a spring loaded ‘thumb actuator’ that controls the retention hood. Once the thumb pushes down with approximately 10 lbs of pressure, the hood ‘springs’ out of the way into the down position. Since the handgun is now just held into place with gravity (there are no ‘friction’ devices) the handgun is now free to be presented as quickly as the operator can bring it to bear. There are two different styles of ‘release actuators’ – low and high. The low actuator is more ‘secure’ and will probably offer better ‘security’. The high model is up near the top of the hood, and is the faster of the two for most people. I ordered the ‘high’ thumb model.
The second component of the holster is the ‘cowling’. It is made from Kydex, and is removable. This allows the owner to switch out cowlings for different mission requirements, while maintaining the exact same ‘frame’. This is a great idea, as all the ‘controls’ are kept the exact same. The cowling merely covers the dustcover/trigger guard of the handgun, or handgun/flashlight, or handgun/laser, or handgun/flashlight/laser combination. And with the rate at which new flashlights and other accessories change these days, one is able to keep the same holster rig and just upgrade the cowling to keep up with the new accessories that one acquires.
The holster comes with a ‘drop leg’ attachment, and two straps that fit around the thigh like most every other ‘drop leg’ holster. However, I ordered one of Gene’s of High Speed Gear drop leg holsters that he makes specifically for the G-Code SOC. For those of you that don’t know, Gene makes the very best drop leg holster for ‘field wear’ in the world right now. It is the only holster I have found that does not chaff the thigh region after extended wear. ( http://www.highspeedgearinc.com ) (He also makes some of the best ‘chest rigs’ for carrying magazines on the planet too!) Another thing I like about the HSG holster is that it provides a strap that goes over the grip portion of the handgun for “field security†– when one knows one will not need the handgun one can secure it so it can’t inadvertently be released from the holster. The web portion that comes "stock" with the G-Code holster lacks that extra bit of security.
O.K. – now onto the performance. When I decided to test this rig for speed, I came up with the following criteria. I would pit it against the Safariland 3004 (the “old school†state of the art drop leg holster for CQB/CQB) and I would also test it against one of my personal ‘behind the hip’ holsters that I use for IDPA competition. Please note that the Safariland holster was a “thumb-break†ONLY – it did not require that the user ‘rotate’ a hood out of the way like the newer Safariland 6004. So the times with the 6004 would be slower than the ‘thumb break’ only model.
I conducted ‘Phase I’ of the test at 5 meters. At the start signal I would draw and place one round on a ‘pie plate’ that was placed at approximately 5’ from the ground (or about the spot and size that most adults Center Of Mass would be). My hands were ‘clasped’ near my belt buckle prior to the start signal.
I was using my stock Glock 22. I fired ten rounds from each holster. Any ‘flubs’ or ‘fumbles’ I had were included in the times – because I felt that even in real life there will be ‘flubs’ and so those times should be taken into account.
The times for Phase I are recorded below, with the IDPA rig on the top row, the Safariland second and the SOC holster on the third row.
1.26; 1.31; 1.28; 1.32; 1.18; 1.29; 1.20; 1.21; 1.34; 1.21
1.68; 1.72; 1.69; 1.94; 1.67; 2.10; 1.70; 1.82; 1.53; 1.56
1.50; 1.93; 1.42; 1.43; 1.38; 1.44; 1.42; 1.40; 1.39; 1.60
So – in the first row we have a low of 1.18 and a high of 1.34 with an average of 1.26. (As you can see, I am not the fastest guy in the world – but neither am I the slowest.)
In the second row (with the Safariland rig) we have a low of 1.53 and a high of 2.10 (a ‘flub’ shot – where I fumbled the retention device) with an average of 1.74 seconds or – dang near a half second slower than my IDPA rig (.48 seconds slower).
In the third row (the G-Code SOC rig) we have a low of 1.38 and a high of 1.93 (my ‘flub’ with this rig) and an average of 1.49 (or 0.25 seconds faster than the Safariland and 0.23 seconds slower than the IDPA rig.) This puts is squarely between the two holsters in terms of speed.
Even if I throw out the ‘flubbed’ shots – the SOC does a little better, with the average for the Safariland at 1.70 seconds and the G-Code SOC at 1.44 seconds. This puts the SOC at 0.26 seconds faster than the Safariland and within 0.18 seconds of the IDPA rig! What this translates to is the SOC is more ‘forgiving’ of a fumble than the Safariland. It is faster to recover from a fumble with the SOC holster. This is an important achievement, because since we are human, we WILL make mistakes – so I like the way this holster is more forgiving when I do make a mistake.
Phase II of the testing was drawing while moving. Lets face it, if we have to transition to our sidearm, it is not going to be under the ‘best of circumstances’. We have to be able to get our secondary into action while on the move – cause if we ‘plant’ ourselves we become a bullet magnet.
So to test this part I used only the Safariland and the SOC holster. I started at 7 meters from the target, and as I started to walk forward I hit the start button. While it counted down before the beep, my hands were simulating holding a long gun and engaging targets. (The reason I did not use a real long gun is I wanted to keep the variables to a minimum. By ‘simulating’ holding a long-gun I avoided all the variables that different long guns and slings may have brought into the equation.) When the buzzer sounded, I dropped my simulated long gun and ‘transitioned’ to the handgun, and then I delivered one shot on the pie plate. I then recorded the time. I did this ten times with each holster. Please note that I had one ‘flub’ with each of the two holsters again.
The first row is the Safariland holster, and the second row is the G-Code SOC.
1.61; 1.53; 1.56; 1.83; 1.69; 1.49; 1.66; 1.86; 2.64; 1.78
1.52; 1.49; 1.56; 1.58; 1.52; 2.02; 1.68; 1.63; 1.63; 1.55
In Phase II the low for the Safariland was 1.49 and the high was 2.64, with an average of 1.76 seconds.
With the SOC holster, the low was 1.49 and the high was 2.02 with the average being 1.61 seconds, or 0.15 seconds faster than the Safariland.
Well, in the cold light of day, is 0.15 seconds really that big of difference? One way to look at it is this – if you KNEW you were going to get in a gunfight – and your opponent was the same skill level as you are – which holster would you want him to use, and which holster would YOU want to use? That puts the issue in the proper perspective – doesn’t it?
In the fast rough and tumble of CQB/CQC, when one’s primary goes down, one needs to transition to ones secondary (handgun) –RIGHT NOW! The SOC holster accommodates that in spades.
It is my preferred CQB holster by a WIDE margin.
G-Code
From top with hood in 'retention' mode
From top after hood has 'sprung' out of the way - ready to grab and shoot
Safariland 3004
Top view with Thumb strap snaped
cheers
tire iron