17 August, 2026

Comparison: Springfield Armory Prodigy 4.25″ and Daniel H9.

Posted by blackcampbell under Firearms | Tags: , |
Leave a Comment 

Curiosity got the better of me today. In the past, I’ve done some comparisons — the Springfield Armory SA-35 vs. the Inglis P-35 made sense. The Springfield Prodigy 4.25” vs. the Alpha Foxtrot 1911-S15. I hit the range to see how the Daniel H9, a handgun with a checkered reputation, but which for me has been an excellent firearm, would perform against the Prodigy, one of my favorite pistols. My gut was solidly on the side of the Prodigy.

For the experiment, I wanted to be fair, so off came the light from the Prodigy, and both were loaded to 15 rounds for the longest strings. I thought this a pretty even match — the grip length is close to the same, with the Prodigy being .25” longer, but the H9 is also thinner, with a feel closer to that of the Browning High Power. The H9 grip angle is a bit more upright than the Prodigy. I tried to get a decent shot of the difference, but the reflectivity of the surface worked against me. Thankfully, Handgun Hero came through:

Lining the pistols up at the point where the grip and trigger guard are roughly even, you can see the angle is small, but present. The barrel lengths are almost the same — 4.25” to 4.28”, with the slide sitting back over the shooter’s hand, compared to the 2011-styled Springfield. It also shows how much lower the slide rides for the H9 over the Prodigy — the Springfield sits .6” taller than the Daniel. It’s also apparent how much lower the barrel would be when looking at the magazines side-by-side:

This gives them distinctly different feels in the hand, despite the “1911” grip angle and trigger. The Prodigy is ever so slightly heavier, even with two rounds pulled from the magazine, but I didn’t notice it, at all. If anything, the Prodigy feels more planted in the hand, with the H9 feeling a touch nose heavy. In shooting, the recoil impulse of the H9 is definitely more controllable: less muzzle flip and much faster return to point of aim. When firing one handed, the H9 felt much more stable in my hand; while the Prodigy felt like it was trying to squirrel to the right. (I’m a lefty.) Two-handed, the Prodigy is very controllable, but the muzzle flip from the taller slide is stronger. I’ve also seen this in the past when shooting the Prodigy next to the CZ-75 and SA-35, but in that case, the it felt like the Prodigy returned to point of aim faster than those two pistols.

The trigger on the H9 is supposed to feel like a 1911 and the weight on both was almost exactly the same — a hair under 5 pounds. The upside down safety blade throws some people on the H9; I don’t notice it at all. The trigger on the Prodigy has less takeup than the H9, but both hit a nice wall and break clean. The reset on them feels almost exactly the same. That said, I felt like I have a tendency to slap the trigger on the Prodigy more than the H9, and I saw that in some of the groupings over 100 round per pistol.

I would shoot them back to back with even number of rounds, and this also showed how the grip angle affected my point of impact. With the same point of aim, the Prodigy would hit high; if I followed with the H9, it would hit low. Start with the H9, I’d be right about on target, then the same with the Prodigy. Put that down to shooter error and the different height sights (the Prodigy have taller sights) but the picture is almost the same — U-notch with serrations on the back with a green fibre optic front. The Daniel, however, has a flat top to the slide and I find I tend to shoot a pistol better with a flat slide, as I tend to use perspective for quicker and more accurate shots even without getting as good a sign picture.

Over the course of shooting at 15 yards, unsupported, the tightest group for the H9 was three round triangle with about 0.76-.78” between them; the Prodigy produced a pair at 0.79” with a flyer that expanded that to 1.9”. On average, the groups were between two and two and a half inches, not really taking my time. Mozambiques at five yards from low port produced 2-3 inches between the initial double tap for both, and a clean center head hit for the Daniel, with the Prodigy scalping the target every time. Slow strings of six at seven yards gave sub two inch groups for both pistols, again with a slightly high point of impact for the Prodigy, slightly low for the H9.

Reliability: again, pretty equal. Using Fiocchi 115 grain ammo, the pistols were pretty dirty after the century mark, and yet functioned flawlessly. The Prodigy kicked out empties slightly forward and with a good six inch toss; the H9 pitches them slightly backward and aggressively. They tended to hit the bolster on the right side of my shooting lane and bounce into my shoulder and head. I’ve yet to shoot the H9 outside, but my guess is it will chuck shells a good couple of feet. In it’s defense, however, the Prodigy and H9 both have about 2500 vs. 2000 rounds through them. The Prodigy has never malfunctioned. The H9 has had light primer strikes if the firing pin channel gets too dirty.

So, which one “won”? If we’re talking speed of shooting and consistent accuracy at longer ranges — the H9 takes this one. Groups were consistent with one two flyers over 100 rounds and I could shoot it faster than the Prodigy. The Prodigy, however, wins hands down on reliability; it has never left me down. The H9 has suffered light primer strikes from time to time that seem to be tied to the firing pin channel getting dirty, but that’s the only issue I’ve run across. It happens rarely enough I wouldn’t be terribly concerned carrying it, but …

It really is almost too close to call, but I think the reduced felt recoil of the H9 wins this one from a shooting perspective. From a reliability standpoint, the Prodigy has it. It might be interesting to see how the H9 stacks up against the Inglis P-35, seeing as how they feel so similar in the grip. My gut is the H9 wins, but I kinda hope the P-35 smokes it.

Got a question on the grips for the H9 — they’ve VZ Grips G-10s. I thought the all black silhouette was a bit boring. — BC.

 

29 July, 2026

Light Primer Strikes? Try this first.

Posted by blackcampbell under Firearms | Tags: , |
Leave a Comment 

After 2000 rounds, I started experiencing the occasional light primer strike on my Daniel H9. I’ve had this happen from time to time on certain pistol designs, including the Glock 20, the Walther P99 and PPQ, and the Walther PPK. All of these designs have an open striker or firing pin channel.

In the case of the H9, to test it’s reliability after all the horror stories of the first generation from Daniel Defense, I ran a 500 round test with everything I could lay my hands on from high-end Underwood 90 grain +P Xtreme Penetrators through green & white box Remington 115 grain, Fiochhi, 124 grain (it likes this bullet weight best), Scorpion 124 grain, and the bargain basement 124 grain from Patriot. The latter had really hard primers that only the new Inglis Hi-Power from SDS could set off reliably; every other pistol I had experiences light primer strikes. And the Daniel only had them on this crap ammo…until about 14-1500 rounds in. I was getting a light primer striker every few boxes — usually in the first two mags. About a 1% fail rate. 

So I tried an old trick I’ve used for getting into trigger mechanisms and dirty firing pins: blow out that firing pin channel. Squirt a bunch of cleaner into the channel, let it sit for a few minutes, then used compressed air or one of these new battery-powered “turbofans” you can get off Amazon, and blow the crap out. It’s going to come out of every nook and cranny it can, so doing this first is generally a good idea. Once I’m done with cleaning everything else, I’ll give it one more blast to make sure I’ve got everything.

No more light primer strikes.

 

27 February, 2026

Daniel H9 (Gen 2)…Did They Fix It?

Posted by blackcampbell under Firearms | Tags: |
Leave a Comment 

The first H9 pistol was from a short-lived company called Hudson. Tiwas a cool, space-age looking pistol — like something out of Blade Runner. The company died off from money issues, but Daniel Defense, known for the AR platforms, quietly picked up the IP and reengineered the pistol to get it to work better. Except, apparently, for a small number of the guns, it really didn’t work better.

Complaints of failure to go into battery, keyholing from the polygonal barreling, uncomfortable spots in the grip — there was a litany of complaints that hit the internet. And for a pistol coming in at $1300 MSRP, that’s not good. Worse, the initial response had that “You’re holding your iPhone the wrong way quality”. That said — they made good on their lifetime warranty and repaired/replaced the damaged units, then went back to testing and reworked the barrel, recoil spring, grip, and while the changes are subtle, they are there. I’d handled the original and the newer generation (?), and I liked it. But not $1300 liked it.

Then they did the smart thing a few months back: they lowered the price to $999.

We had some gun grabbing stupid happening here in my state, so I decided to jump on one of these before they tried to turn us into East California. I got mine ordered in by the excellent folks at Workhorse Armory here in Albuquerque, New Mexico. $980 with tax and shipping.

When I got it in, I decided to do a combination of function test and accuracy comparison with my current favorite carry, the Alpha Foxtrot 1911-S15, and my old reliable, the CZ-85 (an ambi CZ-75.) They are all roughly the same size, with the CZ-85 being the longest by half an inch on the H9, a quarter inch taller, and a touch wider and six ounces heavier. The S15 is a touch shorter in length and grip and an ounce lighter than the H9’s 29.6 oz. empty.

The H9 has an 7075 aluminum frame and G-10 grips, a stainless steel slide with DLC coating, and a cold hammer forged barrel with a 1:10 twist in standard lands/grooves. It’s optics ready, has a short pic-rail on the dust cover, ambi slide releases and an external extractor. Workmanship is top notch. I’m not much on the anodized finish on the receiver, but it does seem to hold up well. The DLC coating on the slide is robust — as it is on the Alpha Foxtrot. After 500 rounds, there was no appreciable wear on the slide surfaces, and the barrel was perfect. A bit of wear on the finish was seen on the ramp where the barrel meets the frame, but well within what you see with most modern handguns. You actually get three magazines with it, so kudos to DD for that — they are 15 rounds if you’re not in a crap state.

I had time to test it out that weekend, so the daughter and I went and put it through its paces. It’s a metal gun — clean it and lube it properly before you hit the range.

The sights are a green fiber optic front and U-notch rear, which I like. At the usual seven yard mark, the H9 drilled a single inch-ish big ragged hole for me — full magazine — with about a two inch drop. That drop would go away, once I got used to the grip angle about two mags in. My daughter did a group of about the same size with a few flyers, but still inside two inches in the nine ring. By comparison, the S15 and CZ-85, both of which I have loads of trigger time on, both shot slightly larger groups, with the CZ pulling to the support hand about a half inch.

It is supposedly zeroed for 25 yards, and with 124 grain ball, it was printing just a hair under point of aim at that range. At that range, taking her time, my teenage girl was able to get a 2” group, free-standing. (I did not do as well…) 

Taking my time, I got ridiculously good groups out to 15 yards. Going fast — and it does like to run fast — I could still keep it all in the ten-ring. There’s complaints about the “upside down” Glock-style trigger safety. Once you’re shooting, you don’t notice it, at all. It has a bit of take-up, breaks clean, and resets with a very short travel. It feels like a standard quality 1911 trigger. It was about on par with the S15, and much better than the old CZ. Weirdly, after about six rounds, I felt like I slowed down when trying a mag dump — not the gun, me. 

Recoil impulse is as good as advertised. Both the daughter and I noted the strongest muzzle flip with the CZ-85, not the S15 (which was what I thought would pop most). Recoil impulse is straight back, then up. The barrel does sit closer to the hand than the S15, and maybe just a touch lower than the CZ. This is supposedly due to the geometry of the bore axis and spring set-up, but I suspect it’s just as much that the weight of the pistol is slighter toward the nose. Double taps were fast, and strings up to six or seven rounds, as well…then that weird slow down for me, not much, but noticeable. Pretty certain I’m compensating for a change in the weight balance or how the grip is sitting in the hand. She did not notice this at all.

We shot 300 rounds of STV’s Scorpion 124 grain ball (solidly good practice ammo), 100 rounds of STV’s Patriot 2A 124 grain ball (cheap…and hard primers mean the occasional failure to fire), 50 rounds of decent Remington 115 gr,, and 50 rounds of Underwood 125 gr. XTP. Zero issues with extraction, accuracy, no keyholing, no failures to feed or go into battery. The only issue was with the Patriot ammo, but that also had a failure to fire on the first strike with the S15, but also the CZ…and that thing has never malfunctioned on me. So I’m discounting the three no fires on those rounds.

So, is it worth it? At $1300? Maybe, maybe not. At $999 or a touch lower? Absolutely! The grip is comfortable and points naturally, like an old Browning Hi-Power. Recoil is reduced from other 9mm pistols in the size range. It bloody shoots! Fast, accurate, light enough to carry concealed (and if I can find a damned lefty holster for it, I just might…) 500 rounds, starting with +P hollow points, and working down to the 115 Remington — no problems, and at clean up we found the Patriot left the pistol absolutely filthy, but still…it had run flawlessly.

They fixed it, and it is an excellent choice for self-defense and probably would kick ass for competition. If there’s one place I might expect failure after high round counts, it’s going to be the ledge for the recoil assembly, but honestly — I think this thing will go for some time.