Fair points, though I’d argue the Hudson comparison isn’t quite fair on two counts - First, the H9 was a more original design that needed more development to get all the kinks worked out, whereas this pistol is at its core two halves of the two most popular and highly developed handgun platforms in history welded together. Secondly, Hudson was a fledgling company that was dependent on one single pistol as their sole product line and source of income, which was at least in part responsible for their ultimate failure - This pistol is backed by two well-established juggernaut companies that have the spare resources to develop, produce, and market a new product line that won’t drag them underwater should it not be as successful as they hope.
Not to mention based on the feature set and marketing they’re aiming squarely at the introductory production 2011 market, the closest competitor for which (the STI DVC-L) costs $1,200 more. And that’s before you factor in the cost of spare magazines, which you’ll be able to get for nearly half the price of any decent 2011 platform. As for the compact model, the only other pistol I can think of that is close to the same feature set is the Wilson Combat EDC X9, where there’s a nearly equivalent $1,000 difference in MSRP.
Of course admittedly I’ve never shot a DWX so I can’t say with certainty it is more reliable than a 2011 platform yet, but I’d be willing to bet the $1,200 difference it’s at the very least on par with a well-built 2011 if not better out of the box
