phantomak47
Member
Polymer glock frames cost about $4 to make, end of story and I like Glocks.
Is Plastic An Advantage?
- Thread starter cslinger
- Start date
- Status
DENALI
member
As a matter of fact there old fuff I have minus the gold inlay's. An overzealous Ruger nut at Rugerforum.net has an engraved P-95 and all the (my God) photo's to back it up..............
Now why do you think I put "gold inlayed" in there... 
Gaston really has something going... He can sell a pistol with a $4.00 frame for $400 to $600 give or take.
I don't give a hoot what guns you guys buy, but really... I think you're being taken to the cleaners. Well to each his own.... If they float your boat go for it.
Gaston really has something going... He can sell a pistol with a $4.00 frame for $400 to $600 give or take.
I don't give a hoot what guns you guys buy, but really... I think you're being taken to the cleaners. Well to each his own.... If they float your boat go for it.
Jamie C.
Member
I think plastic/polymer is better, strength and durability-wise, in applications where wood is typically used. Stocks, grips.. that sort of thing.
For uses where steel or other metals have historically been used, I just don't think polymer technology has gotten to the point that the other materials are really in any danger. After all, in the poly guns all the working/wear surfaces are still usually metal on metal. The polymer frame only acts in much the same way as a rifle's stock does, only serving to hold/contain the action.
So, when polymers are developed to the point that a revolver... or an entire semi-auto... can be made from them, then I think it might possibly be argued that they have some advantage over steel or other metallic alloys.
J.C.
For uses where steel or other metals have historically been used, I just don't think polymer technology has gotten to the point that the other materials are really in any danger. After all, in the poly guns all the working/wear surfaces are still usually metal on metal. The polymer frame only acts in much the same way as a rifle's stock does, only serving to hold/contain the action.
So, when polymers are developed to the point that a revolver... or an entire semi-auto... can be made from them, then I think it might possibly be argued that they have some advantage over steel or other metallic alloys.
J.C.
Chris Rhines
Member
I could comment here on some of those "quality" guns that need mechanical work right out of the box...
Frankly, you can keep the engraving, gold inlays, and other bling-bling. I'm only interested in performance, and my polymer pistols perform better.
You know as well as I do that the material cost of a frame has nothing to do with the manufacturing cost. You also know as well as I do how much complex injection molds cost, and how much it costs to maintain them. I can only assume you're being sarcastic for the fun of it.
- Chris
DENALI
member
Why Old Fuff are you implying that the polymer kingpin is making money at our expense? Perhaps you should aquaint yourself with the importation maze navigated by Herr Glock and his polymer pal's. Further I'm fairly certain they have a shop of somekind in Smyrna and actually pay out some wage's and perhaps bene's of somekind. Why I rather imagine aside from some especially spendy R&D (those moulds ain't cheap) Herr Glock's greatest obstacles to lower pricepoints are imposed on HIM not by HIM. Further still both S&W and Ruger are now singing the polymer tune and there correct me if I'm wrong manufactured right here in the USA and as such do not have to contend with goverment imposed tariffs ect...Why what a wicked web we weave.......P.S I draw the line at etch-a-sketching a polymer pistol of any manufacture as it just flies in the face of the original concept anyway................
You might...
In my original post I said:
But then:
I don't look at handguns (or any firearms for that matter) as being "tools" exclusively, with no other purpose. And in a age were cost cutting dictates designs, I don't concede that the latest is necessarily the greatest.
I don't know how long you've been around, but when Gaston Glock first came to this country I was one of the few within the industry that stood up and defended his gun and the concept behind it. I also stuck my neck out and said that any major handgun maker that didn't hire at least one engineer with a background in synthetic materials was going to be left behind. However I didn't say that he'd obsoleted everything else under the sun.
I also posted later,
And so far as I’m concerned you can. But my focus isn’t that narrow, and I’d hate to live in a world where polymer pistols were the only choice. Beyond being utilitarian they don’t have much to offer.
hankdatank1362
Member
I've had a couple of both... polymer and metal frame.
Polymers are nice... they do the job and do it well, and a couple even look good doing it. Downside is, most are striker fired (SIGPRO and Ruger Polymer autos being the only exceptions I know of) and no striker fired pistol has a trigger that can compare with a properly fitted and tuned 1911, SIG P-Series, S&W revolver, etc.
That, plus, when you pick up a big, heavy, metal-framed .45 (1911, S&W 4506, P220, etc...) you get the notion that, forgive me if I sound chauvanistic, you're weilding a real "man's" gun. Something with heft, with character, that you're not afraid to smash if you feel the need to pistol whip someone.
Either polys or metals are, or can be made to be, absolutely reliable, so that's a moot point.
I carry a polymer pistol daily.
If I knew I was going to be engaging hostile targets, I'd want a metal frame. (Not that I'd feel undergunned with a polymer framed pistol by any means... software over hardware any day.)
Polymers are nice... they do the job and do it well, and a couple even look good doing it. Downside is, most are striker fired (SIGPRO and Ruger Polymer autos being the only exceptions I know of) and no striker fired pistol has a trigger that can compare with a properly fitted and tuned 1911, SIG P-Series, S&W revolver, etc.
That, plus, when you pick up a big, heavy, metal-framed .45 (1911, S&W 4506, P220, etc...) you get the notion that, forgive me if I sound chauvanistic, you're weilding a real "man's" gun. Something with heft, with character, that you're not afraid to smash if you feel the need to pistol whip someone.
Either polys or metals are, or can be made to be, absolutely reliable, so that's a moot point.
I carry a polymer pistol daily.
If I knew I was going to be engaging hostile targets, I'd want a metal frame. (Not that I'd feel undergunned with a polymer framed pistol by any means... software over hardware any day.)
Bobo
Member
Plastic can be easily molded rather than machined.
Plastic is lighter.
Plastic can usually flex rather than fracture.
Plastic costs less.
Plastic doesn't oxidize (rust or corrode).
Plastic can be colored completely through the material.
Plastic is lighter.
Plastic can usually flex rather than fracture.
Plastic costs less.
Plastic doesn't oxidize (rust or corrode).
Plastic can be colored completely through the material.
DAVIDSDIVAD
member
One thing is certain, certain polymers are superior to wood.
(well, they might not be as pretty, but they sure are tougher)
(well, they might not be as pretty, but they sure are tougher)
Feanaro
Member
You tell me which one you want a barrel made of.
FMJMIKE
Member
Glock got its entire design right. I was a little doubtful about the "POLYMER" pistols but my G-19 is great. Not everyone would agree. Ever get everyone agree on anything ???
cslinger
Member
Wow now that thar is a statement. Anywhere else those would likely be fight'n words.
- Status
