Lawman Leather Won't Sell Me Another Holster. Here's Why

THERE'S NO 'SPRING' INSIDE THEIR 'SPRING SHOULDER HOLSTER', that's why!

The original Clark design of the 1960s retains the revolvers and autos within their spring enclosures, and the Lawman is an evolution of them. All my examples pass the Bianchi 'snap' test. So does the modified version of it that was by Bucheimer-Clark and made for the original Lawman Leather of the 1970s. Then went out of business.

This Lawman, above and below, is vintage and was not made by that company but instead as a 'private label' by its designer/maker in the mid/late 1970s that was Bucheimer-Clark. Retention of my 6-1/2" N frame gun (DA) casting is superb despite the holster having been cut for a 7-1/4" barrel length (w/b SA). At a one-inch opening for the sprung 'mouth' of the holster, the spring tests at 10# clamping force.

All the holsters tested here have strong, true springs that exert worthwhile spring clamping pressures; and for the revolvers, have cylinder recesses (originally placed to make the holster lay flatter; nothing to do with retention by design but they do help). I'd recommend them as the equal to the industry standard that is the Bianchi X-15 of the 1960s onwards.

Above and below, the original Clark design of the 1930s stayed in the product line of the successor company that was Bucheimer-Clark into the 1960s and even the early 1970s; until it was replaced with another version (see following). This one is for the USAF and tested at 8# clamping pressure. It is adequate with the big cylinder combined with the cylinder recesses. Inside are two springs vs. one.

Below, 'what is a spring'?

Above and below, the Bucheimer-Clark of post 1975-ish that the Lawman people state was developed in-house at B-C by Ed Clark who was one of the several sons of E.E. Clark who founded the company in 1919 (so a hundred years ago). Again, 10# of clamping pressure that is adequate for the task (but the Bianchi X-15's is much higher).

But not today's Lawman Leather shoulder holster. It may look like a duck and quack like a duck, but it doesn't walk like a duck -- it CAN'T retain a big revolver because that's not really a spring inside it.

Could I have been wrong about that? The Lawman people have certainly taken that attitude. So I bought another one from them. Oh I didn't 'try', I actually paid their so-called 'dealer' nearly A$600 for one. And their 'dealer' (who instead is one of the family members) cancelled my order! Why? Because they were afraid. Afraid I would test their holster 'spring' again. Afraid it would fail again. Which of course it would have BECAUSE IT'S NOT A SPRING! Below my eBay transaction with the grand daughter / "dealer":

It's just a bent wire that, not being stress-relieved after bending (impossible to do with the wireform inside the leather layers), can't exert enough spring pressure AND can't maintain what little it does exert. That's the nature of spring making: a spring, having been formed, will deflect within its limits then return to its original form UNCHANGED. Otherwise your ICE car's valve springs would collapse when you twisted the key: the starter motor would cycle all the springs in the cylinder head and the valves would not ever close again. No workee.

DON'T BUY A SPRING SHOULDER HOLSTER FROM A SUIT SALESMAN. AND DON'T BELIEVE A WORD OF THEIR ONLINE PUSHBACK AGAINST MY BOOK 'HOLSTORY -- GUNLEATHER OF THE 20TH CENTURY'. They are angry at being 'outed', are unwilling to make a safe holster, and use 'gaslighting' as a counter tactic. But you're smarter than that, right?

Read more in my book titled "Holstory -- Gunleather of the Twentieth Century -- the Second Edition" that is available at www.holstory.com and printed for you/shipped to you in USA.