There’s no doubt that the Hudson H9 made a huge splash when it was unveiled at SHOT Show 2017, and our own Jeremy S absolutely loved it when he finally had a chance to take a production version out on the range. In our review of the Hudson H9 he said “Few guns shoot nicer than the Hudson H9. Everybody who tried it instantly loved it, as it shoots as flat and as soft as a pancake and it’s faster than a greased Usain Bolt. The H9 points naturally, moves quickly, has great sights for self-defense and timed competition, and rewards with a truly 1911-like trigger.” There was some strong competition during the vote from SilencerCo’s long awaited Maxim 9, but in the end the Hudson H9 was the clear winner for the 2017 TTAG Reader’s Choice Award for Best New Handgun of 2017.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

39 COMMENTS

    • It didn’t get as many votes. I think because the gun has been on the market for so long it lost the new, shiny, wow factor. It was on the list of options! Y’all just didn’t vote for it as much.

      • I think not. It’s a conspiracy, and the proof is how my previous comment disappeared, as did the one you and I both responded to, as this one will too!

        P R O O F!!!!! You can’t deny it ! ! ! ! !

        • I think I can deny it, actually. Here’s an admin console screen shot of the comments for this thread. There are zero in spam or trash or pending: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/comment-screen-shot.jpg

          Nick has the raw poll system data if you’re actually serious here and think some sort of proof is justified. People simply didn’t vote for the P-10.

          In fact, I just texted Nick and he said it came in 7th!

          The H9 has received orders of magnitude more interest on the site here in terms of views on articles related to it and on the review (for its relative age). Same when I post pics on Instagram and such. H9 stuff gets 10x the likes and comments of P-10 C stuff.

          I realize “Best New Handgun” shouldn’t be a popularity contest, but my vote only counts for one just like yours and I believe this category had like 8,000 or some number of that sort votes.

  3. That’s funny. Click on the Hudson 9 link in the article and you are directed to a Chippa 22 single action revolver for 180. You could have at least linked to the one that comes with the additional cylinder to shoot 22 mag for $30 more

  5. 4 star rating for an $1100+ gun that doesn’t put the bullets where you want em to go; I quote your own review: “Accuracy * * Disappointing. A tighter barrel-slide lockup could drastically improve the H9’s accuracy, which needs drastic improvement.”

    Huh.

    • 3 Stars is average. So 4 Stars is a little above average. That sounds right for a gun that shoots unusually flat, has been 100% reliable, has an excellent trigger and is actually a fresh design. I mean really, did we need another duty sized polymer stirker fried pistol? Sure it’s accuracy is below average escoaially for its price. However it is a very fresh design. I won’t be buying one anytime soon but I do like seeing fresh ideas in our industry.

      • I love the fresh design aspect as well, but in the same vein I don’t have a Boberg. And for the record I don’t own any Glocks either.

        I was just saying I wouldn’t rate an $1100 gun that’s not what is generally accepted as “accurate” for a handgun is worth A.) $1100+ background check processing and tax, and B.) worth an above average rating or C.) gun of the year. Regardless of design (new or not), if an object (say a firearm) is generally bad at fulfilling it’s intended purpose (shooting accurately), it’s not a good design or an “above average” example of an object.

        To be frank, $1100 will get you a lot of gun at any other competitor. At Hudson it gets you sub par accuracy, blisters after extended shooting sessions, and concerns about the magwell.

        • I find it barely accurate enough for its intended purpose, which I believe is self defense based in a big part on the sights they’ve chosen to use.

          But barely accurate enough is accurate enough, so it didn’t kill the gun’s rating like accuracy that actually wasn’t enough for its intended purpose would have.

          Again though, the rating is, ultimately, pretty subjective and will vary greatly depending on each person’s expectations of accuracy, fit, finish, price, ergonomics, size/weight, etc.

          From where I type, if I’ve provided you with all of the information you need to make an informed decision about the gun then it’s a good review.

          I don’t think you’ll find any surprises should you go to the range and rent an H9. I think you’ll feel familiar and your expectations based on reading the review will be met. No surprises = I’ve done my job.

          Arguing about whether it’s prettier or uglier than some other gun or too heavy to carry or not accurate enough for my needs vs. yours is not productive. I have zero expectations that opinions should align on these sorts of subjective matters.

          BTW, as for “Handgun of the Year” I hope it’s clear that this is awarded from the reader poll where many thousands of our readers voted for these things. Most votes = winner. It has nothing to do with the ratings in TTAG reviews. We’ll be publishing an editors’ choice article soon, which will highlight some of the TTAG staff’s choices.

        • Jeremy S.,

          Firstly, yes.
          I do read TTAG daily and you’re one of the few places I even bother reading gun reviews; let alone trust those reviews. I do appreciate the subjective nature of gun reviewing; and appreciate the nuance involved when trying to reduce something abstract into an easily digestible form. You’ve done your job.

          Secondly, my comments on the H9 being voted gun of the year by readers were meant to focus that I think it’s mostly hype and desire, rather than real world experience driving the votes. I’ve handled one, but not shot it, and I wasn’t $1100 impressed.

          Further review on the internet has indeed shown accuracy concerns, as well as continued failures to feed well after a 500 round “break-in” and a disturbing lack of Customer Service from Hudson. Again highlighting and corroborating your due diligence in your review of the H9; as well as adding in a whole new dimension of problems that go along with buying a pistol from the new manufacturer in town.

          I wish Hudson well, but they have to remember they’re trying to make it in a world where you can get a Glock from any LGS for around $500. Rent-and-then-some amounts of money for “just okay” probably isn’t going to cut it in the long haul, was my major theme.

          Keep up the good work.

        • Thanks. I agree with you on the voting.

          I have just shy of 1,000 rounds of mixed ammo through my H9 and it has been flawless (outside of the sand and mud torture testing). At the TTAG reader meet-up there were two H9s there and each of them was screaming hot from having rounds dumped through them non-stop for a couple hours and I don’t believe there were any stoppages. Speaking with Karl from InRange a few weeks ago, his H9 had about as many rounds through it as mine and he had also experienced perfect function. Corroborated the low point of impact — he started lollipop-ing the front dot on the top of the rear sight during competition stages. Hicock45’s video also noted this same thing. IMHO the gun needs a taller rear sight. But I definitely believe them to be reliable.

          On the customer service front, I think it’s better than what internet rumors make it out to be. Anyone can call their number and see how responsive they are. …to flesh this out a little, and I apologize that I’m not at liberty to be specific here, I will say that some people who say negative things on the internet are making them up. I will not confirm or deny any specific knowledge of Hudson’s dealings with this stuff, but I will tell you that a handful of other firearm-related companies have shown me their internal customer service logs where they’re taking very good, responsive care of a person who is simultaneously making comments online saying that the company is ignoring them and worse, or they’ve shown me that the company has never been contacted by a person who’s online claiming to own their product and claiming to have warranty issues but is being ignored, etc etc. I also encountered this sort of thing myself when I was running my own, internet-based retail company. People are weird. Especially when it’s something new, something expensive, something different.

  7. One gun no one really needs and a gun with an integrated silencer which is hearing safe, what gets ‘elected’? The one no one really needs…mmmhhh

    • I get your point, but it’s not what people voted for. The Maxim 9 is very innovative but I don’t think it’s all that popular because people decide to just buy a traditional can because they can use it on more than one weapon. I have shot a Maxim 9 and it’s pretty cool but I would prefer a traditional can.

      • If I could get the Maxim without all the BS…it would get my vote.
        Eventually I want the Maxim AND the H9…because…why not?

    • ‘Need’ is a strong word in the gun industry. Do I need a full-sized handgun? Do I need a suppressor? Do I need a Desert Eagle? Heck no but I sure as hell want one.

    • Best new gun, my azz. More like over engineered junk.

      I love it! Can’t hit jack shite, but I love it! Missing the target never felt better!

  9. And this is the kind of content one of ttags self annointed “experts” wants readers to pay for. Maybe Hudson put some money in ttags go fund me page or whatever that scam is.

    • Horace,

      Relax. TTAG gave it only 2/5 stars for accuracy, but like a lot due to the innovative design. People voted for it, and it won.

  11. P10C was the best handgun, the most innovative one was the Arsenal Stryk B that actually got the low bore axis thing right (even if the made in germany models are still in importing jail…).

    • That’ll be a 2018 gun, assuming they actually start selling them in 2018. I think for the purposes of voting on “best ___ of X year” we’ve historically gone by the year in which a gun first started shipping, not the year in which it was announced (examples of why would include the Desert Tech MDR, which was announced like 3+ years before the first production one hit anyone’s hands, and lots of others).

  12. Here’s my review of the Hudson H9:

    The Hudson H9 is a pistol that shoots bullets and has a 1911 style grip, but is striker fired. The Hudson H9 is made by Hudson and is a 9mm. It does not use Glock magazines, holds 15 rounds, and costs money to buy.

    • If I remember correctly it doesn’t use glock mags because it’s bore axis is so low they needed a proprietary mag to feed reliably.

      • Almost. It uses a common magazine body (S&W 6906) but the magazine catch must be much lower because of that low bore axis.

  13. I’m not 100% sure the H9 even exists. How many readers have actually even seen one? I’ve seen the occasional legendary Kel-Tec product, so I know THEY exist. But where is the mythical H9?

      • Mcbrides in Austin had some in stock last week. Below Msrp! Need a keltec product? Google it they really are not hard to find.

    • I have shot it, and the range where I usually shoot has one in the rental case. I didn’t like it. And the trigger is nothing like my 1911 pistols at all. I wouldn’t buy it for Hi Point money. It has a strange safety trigger that didn’t feel good in my hand. It’s very bulky to handle, and basically has no redeeming features, in my opinion.

  14. LOL. TTAG Readers Choice for best new handgun of 2017==a handgun whose release barely made it into 2017, a gun that probalby next to none have shot, and that is still having supply issues in 2018 (never mind the QC issuse).

    Who exactly voted on this anyway? The H in H9 stands for “hype”

    • They started shipping 3 months before the year ended. Currently gunbroker has 9 up for sale.

  15. Just a thought… Has anyone hit an H9’s slide with a mallet yet? Seems like an important test for new striker guns these days…

Comments are closed.