Huben GK1

thats what ive been hearing. thanks
Don’t listen to this guy except maybe on technical specifications of the actual G/K1, first time since joining that I’m making a comment like this. He’s flat out wrong. The aesthetic part is in the eye of the beholder, to him it might look like garbage, fair. “Just crack and break” he couldn’t be more wrong multiple people have printed accessories some with carbon fiber deposited in the part and they’re extremely strong.


Also I didn’t bother responding but he still hasn’t substantiated his claim about all of them being made at the same time. It runs contrary to modern JIT manufacturing processes.
 
Last edited:
im looking for a 3d printer in NYS to make an adapter for my v3.
Which adapter?

IMG_0980.jpeg


IMG_0978.jpeg
 
Lets make 999 pieces of mixed internals and call them V1, V2 and V3. Lets mix it up some more with some regulated V3 and unregulated V3 and lets make them all at the same time! Lets put $50k in parts and juggle and see which parts get into what version of gun. And if they dont sell lets just sit on them and take the loss. Any investors on and unproven non main stream product? Does it sound chaotic and unreasonable?

I am in manufacturing and just keeping the inventories to each version would break my personnel's patience let alone keeping all the finished products in their respective packaging. Its the recipe for a clusterfcuk both to customer and distributors. Imagine opening an expensive V3 regulated and getting a V1.

Or worse getting a RTI P3 with the old barrel and pissing of the customer until all RTI posts are peppered with the disgruntled buyer dissing the brand cos the seller cannot make it right. Now the only recourse is to get the barrel its suppose to come with at extra cost.

We might just have stumbled onto a new way to do business.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: Bernie7 and BABz58
Don’t listen to this guy except maybe on technical specifications of the actual G/K1, first time since joining that I’m making a comment like this. He’s flat out wrong. The aesthetic part is in the eye of the beholder, to him it might look like garbage, fair. “Just crack and break” he couldn’t be more wrong multiple people have printed accessories some with carbon fiber deposited in the part and they’re extremely strong.


Also I didn’t bother responding but he still hasn’t substantiated his claim about all of them being made at the same time. It runs contrary to modern JIT manufacturing processes.
Like I said, I work closely with Huben and can only tell you what I know to be true.
Don't get me wrong, on the latest batch of V3's there have been a few tweaks like tighter magazine holes in the .25 and a new plastic plug part that sits inside the rear valve spring, but when they first made, the V1, V2 & V3 were all produced at the same time.
If you are really that concerned by all means write to Jackie at Huben in China and ask her or maybe email Huben in Spain for clarification.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BABz58
Don’t listen to this guy except maybe on technical specifications of the actual G/K1, first time since joining that I’m making a comment like this. He’s flat out wrong. The aesthetic part is in the eye of the beholder, to him it might look like garbage, fair. “Just crack and break” he couldn’t be more wrong multiple people have printed accessories some with carbon fiber deposited in the part and they’re extremely strong.


Also I didn’t bother responding but he still hasn’t substantiated his claim about all of them being made at the same time. It runs contrary to modern JIT manufacturing processes.
Metal is always the stronger and better material to use on anything !!! especially high pressurised airguns !!! FACT !!!!!
 
Don’t listen to this guy except maybe on technical specifications of the actual G/K1, first time since joining that I’m making a comment like this. He’s flat out wrong. The aesthetic part is in the eye of the beholder, to him it might look like garbage, fair. “Just crack and break” he couldn’t be more wrong multiple people have printed accessories some with carbon fiber deposited in the part and they’re extremely strong.


Also I didn’t bother responding but he still hasn’t substantiated his claim about all of them being made at the same time. It runs contrary to modern JIT manufacturing processes.
I have had multiple people send me their GK1 for repair when a 3D printed rear adapter had cracked/broke which then caused an issue with some of the internal parts that operate the rear spring/valve part.
So I am only going from experience hence trying to warn people from making the same mistake.
I get 3D printed stuff is cheaper but why risk breaking an expensive pistol and the risk of serious injury ???

It just doesn't make any sense to me but hey ho.
You do you mate and I'll continue to do what I think is right.
 
I have had multiple people send me their GK1 for repair when a 3D printed rear adapter had cracked/broke which then caused an issue with some of the internal parts that operate the rear spring/valve part.
So I am only going from experience hence trying to warn people from making the same mistake.
I get 3D printed stuff is cheaper but why risk breaking an expensive pistol and the risk of serious injury ???

It just doesn't make any sense to me but hey ho.
You do you mate and I'll continue to do what I think is right.
I do agree that where the option exists generally metal is preferable (I was the one to help in developing the RDM RMR mount because I wanted a fully metal one). Especially if it’s something under high stress but the aftermarket accessories were almost entirely 3d printed for what seemed like an entire year after the GK1 release. There were optic mounts, grips, tube adapters for pic rails, barrel devices, etc. maybe I haven’t been paying attention but most seem to be fine as long as people aren’t abusing them.

@Louie4321 I should’ve asked what you’re looking for, DM me.