Gun Hub Forums banner
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

· Registered
2,627 Posts
Hmmm...might serve okay as an aw-shit BUG, but I can't see any other use for it. Ballistics would probably be pretty crappy out of those short little barrels, and it's definitely a belly gun. As in "stick it in the guys belly and pull the trigger."

IF I were to get it, it would for sure be the cheaper aluminum model without those durned ports.

· Registered
120 Posts
Hmmm...might serve okay as an aw-shit BUG, but I can't see any other use for it. Ballistics would probably be pretty crappy out of those short little barrels, and it's definitely a belly gun. As in "stick it in the guys belly and pull the trigger."
IF I were to get it, it would for sure be the cheaper aluminum model without those durned ports.
so the profit margin on these is about 498?
Best line I've heard on these guns (and I wish it was original to me):
Quote: Finally! The Liberator A1.
A Derringer for the 21st Century!
Sorry, doesn't appeal to me at all. :-?
In my classes, I tell people that with all of the small revolvers being sold these days and the huge number of choices they have when it comes to very concealable pistols, we are living in a truly golden age of firearms for such purposes. But one of the things that disappoints me personally is the general lack of experimentation when it comes to what is being developed for the marketplace today as compared to numerous periods of time since World War II.

I understand why this is the case: corporate profits are perhaps watched more closely these days by outside shareholders and accounting firms; corporate employees might be less likely to speak out and/or champion new ideas than in the past - putting their careers above risking failure; independent inventors and builders are fewer and farther between; innovators seem to gravitate to more trendy or in-vogue industries; and a whole lot more.

And I realize that many of those "experiments" exist only as curiosities or collectables these days: from one extreme to another like the Dardick, the Coonan, and the AutoMag; or minor sellers that were good but imperfect ideas like the STAR PD, the STAR Starfire, and the Smith Escort; or perhaps more applicable to this discussion, things like the COP Pistol, all of those High Standard .22 and .22mag Derringers, and the little Four Shot Derringers once made as a semi-production item by a gunsmith in Illinois.

But in any case, I don't think that we really see such "practical" design efforts being made today (at this point I don't really consider that Side-x-Side 1911 discussed elsewhere on this Forum "practical") like we once did.

Therefore, I am relatively intrigued by this Heizer DoubleTap pistol.

I don't know what the ballistics might be out of the short tubes but it will be interesting to see what a wide range of factory and self-made loads might do with faster burning powders. And even without that consideration, if the velocities don't drop off to a level whereby penetration is so greatly affected that performance becomes so poor that it offsets carryability (something that cannot be determined without actual testing so debating it at this point is somewhat meaningless), one has to remember that you are still punching half inch holes with the .45ACP model. And if I can do that with a relatively blunt nose bullet (even if again, it is too slow in this case to expand), I'd be pleased.

Especially in something that is only 5/8" of an inch thick.

Would I carry it in place of a 5-shot J-Frame if could tote around the revolver in a pants pocket undetected? Probably not. Would I slip one into my waistband instead of a Walther PPS, a Smith 3913/3953 or maybe a Ruger LC9 if any one of them could easily be covered by a shirt, sweater or jacket? Doubtful. But tucked into my back pocket like a wallet or maybe in a body armor holster or even in a typical duty uniform shirt pocket as a hideout gun, something like this could make a lot of sense.

But forgetting street level practicality for the moment, to me, the DoubleTap pistol is also an interesting gun, mechanically.

It is not at all like the Liberator it is wrongly being compared to here. While its outline might be vaguely similar in some people's eyes (to me, its shape looks more like something someone would saw out of wood on a jigsaw as a toy or decoration), I tend to think such interpretations are so subjective as to be hard to press upon others in a literal manner. And while the DoubleTap contains two rounds within a compartment in the butt of the weapon, they are not loose but are fitted to a loading device which is used to recharge this two shot (not single shot) pistol after the chambers have been emptied by opening the gun and not by clearing them with a wooden dowel (all of which are radical differences and not just advancements upon the Liberator).

Furthermore, as explained in the video linked to by Mr. Graham, it is a Double Action gun that does not need to be cocked manually. A fully loaded DoubleTap pistol is fired by pulling the same trigger the same way for each chamber. That too sets it apart from the FP-45. Another obvious difference, besides the two barrels, is that the barrels are rifled. I believe that the single barrel of the Liberator was not. Its operation is a huge departure from the Liberator concept and the rifling would separate it legally were the Liberator made today (and yes, I know it is but the "new" ones are rifled for obvious reasons too).

Another remark to which I take exception is one about profit margin ($498 on a gun quoted in the tape as retailing for $499). Again, if you look and listen to the tape, not only does the DoubleTap not function like a Liberator pistol but it is not constructed like one either.

It is not a simple (some might say crude) sheet metal stamping with (I believe some) zinc components but instead, it is a sophisticated, machined, steel and alloy firearm made by a rather amazing American company. For all the people claiming to be aerospace manufacturers, the folks at Heizer really are. They make a lot of stuff for a lot of the major players who "fly" both within and above the atmosphere.

They were asked by the man in the video we were sent to watch from here (Ray Kohout) to consider designing and building the gun based on ideas he brought to them. While the Heizer operation had to learn what it needed in order to do this (and to set up a separate operation to build it), Mr. Kohout himself, is no newcomer to the industry. One of the reasons that these days we take the advances made in Nylon Gear by firms like Uncle Mike's, BLACKHAWK!, Maxpedition (and more) for granted is because of the handful of companies that started that revolution thirty-some years ago. Companies like John Carver's Eagle Industries and Ray Kohout's Assault Systems. In fact, in many people's lives, it was Assault Systems that first introduced them to the use of such fabrics and designs.

But back to the gun. I am sure that the ever-more-costly-to-mine/obtain-as-a-raw-material Titanium-based guns will sell to the purists who have the money to pay for them but the average guy will (like me) have more interest in the Aluminum versions. I think that the same might (at this point, I am not sure) be true of the barrel porting concept. For while it should reduce muzzle flip (obviously it will not reduce recoil) and that could be helpful on a little and, separately, short-barreled gun like this, I haven't had the time to examine its potential/probable venting patterns to see how they relate to the how the gun might be positioned in regard to the shooter's body when touched off under a variety of defensive postures.

Both the alloy and the steel components will be treated with coatings that the designers feel are optimum for the application. And internally, the Double "Action" components are extremely well machined and finished too. I think that the video mentions roller bearings (as does their website) but I think they might have switched the production guns to even more sophisticated needle bearings if it could be done in a cost effective manner. And that's just it: with all of this work and all of this detailing this "little" handgun is costly no matter how sophisticated an operation they have created to produce it. So as a designer, an engineer (at least a former one), and a marketing person too, I seriously doubt that the profit margin is anywhere near that posted remark. I am sure that it is well within the norms of such things and that the retails were set in a well thought-out manner.

And that's because when it comes to pricing and sales in general, many of the people involved in this project truly understand and appreciate how things need to be sold and distributed in this industry. So this gun will not be hamstrung in that regard, as have many of those other technical efforts I have admired in the past that never quite made it to market as they should have. This gun is and will continue to be a reality.

There is a lot more in terms of detailing and features going on here than I have time to talk about today. I would suggest that you go to Heizer's own website and look at the stuff they have there (and watch their video as well). I am sure that it will probably tell you a lot better than I can that this is NO Liberator Pistol and as a carryable design, it has a lot to offer.

I just want to tell you that in this day and age, I find it remarkable that someone has stepped forward with both a design and an independent means of manufacturing that isn't just another 1911, one more polymer-framed pistol, or a "new" revolver of some sort that is based on something from the late 1800's. Even if for some reason you can't see that there could very well be some uses for it, I am surprised that you guys (on this technically-oriented forum) aren't impressed with what they have accomplished here. I sure am.

Hope things are well with all of you; it has been a while. And I hope my ramblings here, jotted down over breakfast this morning make sense and are taken in the good nature in which they are intended. Enjoy your Sunday.

· Banned
3,647 Posts
to all,

imVho, NONE of these "miniguns" is superior in any way to a S&W Model 42. - the Airweight 42 weighs about a pound LOADED & tucks into small places well, if you need to "deep conceal" it & it carries FIVE .38SPL bullets.
(when i was a provost marshal, mine was ALWAYS in my left pants pocket.)

yours, sw

· Premium Member
1,949 Posts
That's where I was coming from... that, and thinking that I don't want to shoot that small & light of a 45.

However, P. Marlowe's points are valid; I suspect he has more engineer in him than I have in me.

Perhaps I would consider it as a hide-out gun, but my current risk profile doesn't warrant that. If it did, I already have a Seecamp & an Escort... but they aren't 45 ACP.

I agree with him that this is not a cheap gun.

· Registered
28 Posts
Mr. Marlowe makes many valid points. We (as a group) cannot know what the typical performance will be until we have an opportunity to test the firearm with various commercial and hand loaded ammunition.

We need to set up chronographs, mix up some ballistic gelatin, and set up some targets to test for velocity (at distances from about 3 to 15 yards) I know, this gun is not designed to be shot at the "extreme" distance of 15 yards, but it would be good to know, and data collected could be used in various calculations that might have surprising results.

Would I buy one? Maybe, but I really would like to shoot one first. Even then, I might buy one simply as a curiosity. I have done that in the past.
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.