Alloy Frame Guns Ammo
- Thread starter longshank
- Start date
Walt Sherrill
New member
Ocraknife said:
Not a stupid question.
Most steel frames are alloys (i.e., a mix of two or more materials), but are predominantly steel. The proper term would probably be "steel alloy." Steel is generally a mixture of iron, carbon, and several other metals -- and that is typically called Carbon Steel. Stainless steel is made of Iron, Carbon, and Chromium, and maybe a bit of other metals.
Although we typically think of steel as stiff and unbending, it's actually a more resilient material than many others -- which is why it's used in bridges (where temperature and weight/load changes cause a lot of flexing in the material.)
When you read "alloy" on one of these forums the term is generally short-hand for aluminum alloy. Many guns have alloy frames -- Mosts SIGS, Berettas, some CZ, etc. -- and those weapons are predominantly aluminum, with other materials added to improve durability. The big advantage of aluminum is its lighter weight for similar strength -- but it's less resistant to wear and shock (i.e., the impact of slides slamming back, etc.)
You don't really hear much about ANY frame material failing that often.
.
Last edited:
mikejonestkd
New member
Modern aluminum alloy frames will most likely last a lifetime.
A great example is the Beretta 92- there are tons of them out there with very high round counts, and the frames are still holding up.
A great example is the Beretta 92- there are tons of them out there with very high round counts, and the frames are still holding up.
Lifetime ...is relative...
Thru my primary guns ( all steel 1911's in my case ) ...I'll put an average of 200 boxes a year thru them so around 10,000 rds a year.../ and while I wouldn't expect an alloy frame gun to hold up for 20 yrs...it would probably hold up to 4 or 5 yrs of that usage ( not a lifetime to me / but it may be for some shooters ...).
I do expect my all steel 1911's to easily last 500,000 rds..../ I have one now that is 8 yrs old and over 100,000 rds ...and still going very strong !
If the mfg of your alloy frame gun says +P or +P+ is ok / then it should be ok, expecially on a limited usage bases .../ but I don't see much need for +P+ ammo either like someone else mentioned.
Thru my primary guns ( all steel 1911's in my case ) ...I'll put an average of 200 boxes a year thru them so around 10,000 rds a year.../ and while I wouldn't expect an alloy frame gun to hold up for 20 yrs...it would probably hold up to 4 or 5 yrs of that usage ( not a lifetime to me / but it may be for some shooters ...).
I do expect my all steel 1911's to easily last 500,000 rds..../ I have one now that is 8 yrs old and over 100,000 rds ...and still going very strong !
If the mfg of your alloy frame gun says +P or +P+ is ok / then it should be ok, expecially on a limited usage bases .../ but I don't see much need for +P+ ammo either like someone else mentioned.
Evil Monkey
New member
aluminum framed guns have been proven to be as resilient as steel.
Many aluminum pistols will still have a steel insert for the cam pin anyway.
Many aluminum pistols will still have a steel insert for the cam pin anyway.
Fired untold numbers of 9mm +P rounds through Sigs, Beretta's, and all manner of alloy guns. Never a problem. Most of the +P ammo in the U.S. is similar to NATO/European ammo. Most of the Military style pistols are made for it anyway.
The warning is that it could accelerate the wear on your gun.
Doubt most of us will ever shoot enough to make a difference. And any difference would be slight. +P+ warnings came as I understand it when the 115gr. +P+ rounds became popular in LEO's. Basically it was to let the ammo manufacturers off the hook if the guns blew since they were higher pressure. I've only had problems with the +P+ in a sub-compact. It cracked the locking block. With the good +P rounds like the Gold Dot, HST, and the like you really don't need +P+ IMHO.
The warning is that it could accelerate the wear on your gun.
Doubt most of us will ever shoot enough to make a difference. And any difference would be slight. +P+ warnings came as I understand it when the 115gr. +P+ rounds became popular in LEO's. Basically it was to let the ammo manufacturers off the hook if the guns blew since they were higher pressure. I've only had problems with the +P+ in a sub-compact. It cracked the locking block. With the good +P rounds like the Gold Dot, HST, and the like you really don't need +P+ IMHO.
It was offered until then but the initial changeover to an aluminum alloy frame was circa 1960 and to my understanding was one of the first large scale attempts at an aluminum alloy frame pistol. It may well be that when that was done not enough about aluminum alloy framed pistols was known to properly design a durable enough frame or maybe the engineers simply underestimated the strength required, hence the addition of the hex bolt later (the bolt was done to reduce wear to the locking block, a weak point on both that and the Beretta 92 series as they put more stress on those areas than the standard Browning tilting barrel which uses the barrel as the locking piece). Using such a pistol as the measure by which we judge the strength of all aluminum alloy framed pistols is to me fairly obviously biased. There are cases of SIGs and other pistols going tens of thousands of rounds, some with people right here on these forums. No one is saying steel isn't stronger, but weight is a factor and by the time an aluminum alloy framed pistol fails from the frame you'll likely have spent probably $10000+ on ammo.
By the way, we've discussed the durability of aluminum alloy framed P38s and P1s here before.
https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=432058
Last edited:
Walt Sherrill
New member
Re: aluminum frames.
The CZ P-01, which has a FORGED aluminum frame seems to be pretty bullet proof. (CZ had problems with their original aluminum framed gun, developed for the Police of the Czech Republic, but that was quickly remedied with a redesign and change in the alloy used.) I've never heard of frame problems for ANY of the aluminum-framed CZs, but have heard of a few problems with the steel-framed models, all years ago. And the PCR model -- the commercial version of the gun originally developed for the Police of the Czech Republic -- has never had problems. Many of those guns have had tens of thousands of rounds through them.
As TunnelRat wrote, I don't doubt that steel-framed guns are going to be longer-lived than aluminum framed guns, but some aluminum-framed guns are quite robust, and where weight is an issue, may win out. (I've had a SIG P226 X-Five, which has a steel frame. It was a very nice gun, but I wouldn't want to carry a steel-framed SIG all day long if I were a soldier or LEO.)
.
The CZ P-01, which has a FORGED aluminum frame seems to be pretty bullet proof. (CZ had problems with their original aluminum framed gun, developed for the Police of the Czech Republic, but that was quickly remedied with a redesign and change in the alloy used.) I've never heard of frame problems for ANY of the aluminum-framed CZs, but have heard of a few problems with the steel-framed models, all years ago. And the PCR model -- the commercial version of the gun originally developed for the Police of the Czech Republic -- has never had problems. Many of those guns have had tens of thousands of rounds through them.
As TunnelRat wrote, I don't doubt that steel-framed guns are going to be longer-lived than aluminum framed guns, but some aluminum-framed guns are quite robust, and where weight is an issue, may win out. (I've had a SIG P226 X-Five, which has a steel frame. It was a very nice gun, but I wouldn't want to carry a steel-framed SIG all day long if I were a soldier or LEO.)
.
I agree with aluminum being a weight saving feature, but in my years of gunsmithing, I have also seen Smith 39 frames that cracked, several Star PDs, and an especially vexing Colt Commander that cracked just forward of the bridge, which Colt refused to fix, even if the customer paid for a new frame, either steel or alloy.
I don't have to carry a duty weapon all day, which any LEO will tell you (including my adopted son who is a county sheriff), get pretty heavy by the end of the day.
For my own purposes, I stick to steel guns, the only exception being .22s.
Although I don't find SIGs comfortable for my hands, I am impressed by an all steel insert placed into the frame, which I think will go a long way to protect the aluminum frame from excess battering.
I don't have to carry a duty weapon all day, which any LEO will tell you (including my adopted son who is a county sheriff), get pretty heavy by the end of the day.
For my own purposes, I stick to steel guns, the only exception being .22s.
Although I don't find SIGs comfortable for my hands, I am impressed by an all steel insert placed into the frame, which I think will go a long way to protect the aluminum frame from excess battering.
There will always be examples of pistols that fail for various reasons. Some designs are more robust than others, and as a gunsmith you know that on occasion the gods of tolerances combine to create a pistol that is just marginal. For every pistol that fails, how many didn't fail? People rarely talk about something that doesn't fail, whereas failure is constantly talked about. The S&W Model 39s started production in the mid 1950s. They've been around the block many times. It may also be that time and metal fatigue are a factor when it comes to aluminum alloy frames. But again, this is a recent production pistol the OP bought. This isn't me saying that anything produced now is better than anything produced in the past; I've seen plenty of examples to counter that. My point is merely that the use of metals across the board has changed and aluminum alloys have come a long way. My dad still thinks of aluminum foil when he thinks of aluminum, and yet now we have engine blocks and entire aircraft bodies made of aluminum. Maybe firearm designers have incorporated some of those lessons as well.
Myself I carry polymer pistols. Aesthetically they have little appeal to me, but after 8 hrs or so the weight does make a difference and the polymer seems a bit more long lasting than aluminum in its ability to flex. Again, if I wanted an heirloom or something to last forever it would be all steel (that's what my near NIB Model 19-3 is for). Sometimes I'll still shoot all steel pistols and I enjoy it. My point was simply the vast majority of people won't live to see the frame on their aluminum alloy frame pistol fail. If your point is some will, I can't dispute that. I'm just pointing out the role of likelihoods.
Myself I carry polymer pistols. Aesthetically they have little appeal to me, but after 8 hrs or so the weight does make a difference and the polymer seems a bit more long lasting than aluminum in its ability to flex. Again, if I wanted an heirloom or something to last forever it would be all steel (that's what my near NIB Model 19-3 is for). Sometimes I'll still shoot all steel pistols and I enjoy it. My point was simply the vast majority of people won't live to see the frame on their aluminum alloy frame pistol fail. If your point is some will, I can't dispute that. I'm just pointing out the role of likelihoods.
Agreed!
I am retired now, and only do occasional work for friends and the odd fix for the local pawn shop. In a sense, you might say that I am a dinosaur, for I bemoan the demise of the all steel traditional pistol or revolver.
I guess I was fortunate to have the opportunity to be a gunsmith all those years, and see what was good and what wasn't. Times have changed, however, and I haven't.
I did learn a lot, though.CZ-USA states that the PO1/PCR pistols have an average life expectancy of 15,000 rounds! There is a ton of misinformation out there about the PO1 being the result of this and that torture testing, and an intensive Nato development effort, its all BS! Many disreputable gun writers, and the CZ factory itself, are responsible for fabricating all sorts of flat out dishonest nonsense about the PO1 pistol being designed for eating 30,000 rounds of +P, and all sorts of Nato qualifying nonsense, and its all just that, nonsense!
The factory will tell you straight up if you inquire of them, the aluminum alloy frames are expected to average out at 15,000 rounds of service life. Yes, you'll get more then that, and of course we will instantly hear from folks who cannot supply a jot of substantiation that their personal PCR/PO1 has digested 80,000 rounds and never even jammed, but the fact that the factory will only stand behind them for 15,000 rounds should open some eyes!
http://cz-usa.com/press-release/cz-p-01-gets-nato-approval-the-next-generation-of-perfect-pistols/
I see your claim is that CZ is lying and fabricating information, despite the fact that their own claims don't match what you said (that being 30,000 rds of +P). If so, how did you get the number you quote?
What's interesting is their warranty mentions nothing about specific round counts, only timeframe.
http://cz-usa.com/support/warranty/
Interesting. Where did you hear this?
In fact the factory manual for the Beretta 92 states:
http://www.berettausa.com/assets/39/29/92FS_Series_Manual.pdf
And Glock's FAQ states:
https://us.glock.com/customer-service/faq
Last edited:
Independent George
New member
Er, no.
They fired 15,000 rounds in testing to determine the mean rounds between failure in the NATO evaluation. 15,000 rounds is NOT the maximum round count before the frame fails. I have no idea where you came up with that.