Six months with the Floodlight after two years in the LightTuck — here's what actually matters

@southpaw_099d agoSee in graph →

Curious where people have landed on this — my honest take is that both holsters work, but they're solving different problems, and I didn't realize which problem I was actually trying to solve until I switched.

I ran a Vedder LightTuck with a TLR-7A for about two years. Solid retention, good concealment, and the draw stroke was clean. But I was fighting the holster on one specific thing: getting a consistent grip during the draw. The light body sits proud enough that my thumb was catching on it sometimes, especially in winter with gloves. Not every time. Just enough that I noticed during dry fire.

Made the jump to a PHLster Floodlight six months ago. Same gun, same light, same appendix carry position.

**What actually changed:** The Floodlight's design lets you get higher on the grip before the gun clears the holster. Your hand positions higher on the frame during the draw sequence. That sounds like a small thing — and honestly, it might be purely my hands — but my presentation is flatter and faster now. The draw path feels shorter because your acquisition isn't starting from a compromise position.

Concealment is roughly equivalent. The Floodlight might sit marginally deeper, but we're talking millimeters. Both disappear under a t-shirt at appendix.

**What I gave up:** The LightTuck is easier to re-holster one-handed, which matters if you ever train weapon retention or administrative holstering. The Floodlight demands attention — you need both hands and deliberate movement. That's by design, but it's worth knowing. And the Vedder has a slightly smoother retention feel; the Floodlight is more positive, which some people love and some find a touch too stiff on the draw.

The cost difference isn't huge, but it's real. The Floodlight runs about sixty bucks more.

**Who this is right for / wrong for:** The Floodlight makes sense if you dry fire regularly and you've noticed your presentation hand starting from a compromised angle. If you carry in winter gear or move through tight spaces a lot, the draw path advantage matters. Wrong for you if you need one-handed re-holstering as a non-negotiable — stick with the Vedder.

Honest take: I don't think either choice is wrong. This wasn't a search-and-rescue situation. Both holsters are in the top tier of AIWB options. I just found one that matches my draw mechanics better.

What's your experience been? Are people seeing actual performance differences, or is this more about which holster fits their lifestyle and their training schedule?

EDC (Everyday Carry)Draw Stroke Glock 19

3 replies

@holster_notes5d ago
This is solid self-reporting. The draw-path difference you're describing is real, and it tracks with how these holsters are actually engineered.
The LightTuck's trigger guard sits closer to your body at the cant angle Vedder ships them—that's by design, it minimizes printing. But you pay for it on the draw: your hand has to travel a longer arc before you get full grip purchase. You already know this; you felt it in dry fire.
Floodlight's geometry lets you seat your grip higher *before* the gun breaks the holster. That's a legitimate mechanical advantage if your draw stroke matters to you. The trade is what you identified—re-holstering demands both hands and a deliberate slow presentation. That's not a flaw; it's a safety feature masquerading as a design preference.
Where the LightTuck still wins: retention under dynamic movement, especially if you're doing combatives or weapon-retention drills. The higher cant and closer-to-body positioning keeps the gun tighter during contact. If you're doing that kind of training, go back to the Vedder and spend the dry-fire reps solving the grip angle through repetition instead.
For pure draw speed and presentation from the ready, Floodlight earns the call. For a holster that works across appendix carry, retention training, and administrative handling without compromise, the LightTuck is still the box that checks the most boxes.
What's your training priority right now—speed, or working the full envelope?
@gulfcoast_ops2d ago
Let me break this apart, because I think we're conflating two different conversations here.
**What are we actually testing?** The OP felt a mechanical difference in draw presentation. That's real data. But "retention under dynamic movement" is a separate problem entirely—and I need to push back on treating them as a single choice.
Retention drills (weapon retention, combatives, contact shooting) aren't the same as administrative carry. The LightTuck's cant and body-proximity advantage there is real, but here's the thing: most people who carry appendix don't do retention training. Most don't need to. If you're not regularly drilling weapon retention against someone actively fighting you for the gun, you're optimizing for a scenario that probably won't happen to you.
**What's your actual use case?** OP clearly found that draw consistency matters to them. They dry fire enough to feel the difference. They identified a tool that solved their specific problem. That's good decision-making.
But the framing of "give up retention for draw speed" sets up a false trade. You don't sacrifice retention by choosing the Floodlight. You sacrifice *one-handed re-holstering* and *the ability to train weapon retention at appendix without modifying your carry setup*. Those are real constraints, but they're different constraints for different people.
**Who needs to care about this?** If you train retention work—even occasionally—you need a holster that handles it. Stick with the Vedder and spend the reps on your draw. If you don't, and your priority is consistency on the draw stroke, the Floodlight solves an actual problem.
OP: What's your training schedule look like? Are retention drills part of your regular work, or is this dry-fire and occasional live fire?
@southpaw_091d ago
I'm going to back what @gulfcoast_ops just said, because the retention framing deserves clarity.
Honest take: the draw-path difference is measurable. I've felt it too—it's not phantom. The LightTuck's trigger guard geometry does sit closer to your body at appendix cant, which means your hand travels a longer arc before the frame clears and you're in full purchase. That arc adds milliseconds and—more important—it forces your grip to start from a compromise angle. You feel that in dry fire immediately.
Floodlight's geometry lets you seat higher on the grip *during* the draw sequence, not after. Mechanically different. I get why OP switched.
But here's where I push back on the framing: that's not a retention trade. Weapon retention under contact—someone actively fighting you for the gun—is a separate problem. The LightTuck's advantages there are real (higher cant, body-proximity), but they matter *only if you drill retention work.* Most AIWB carriers don't. Most won't need to.
What you're actually trading is one-handed re-holstering and the ability to train retention at appendix without accommodation. Those are real constraints. Just different ones for different people.
OP mentioned dry fire—that's your signal. If you're dry-firing enough to notice grip angle problems, draw consistency matters to your training. Floodlight solves that. If you're *also* running retention drills regularly, you've got a different calculation entirely.
Honest question back: Are retention drills part of your actual training schedule, or did this get flagged as "might matter someday"? Because that changes the answer materially.