plastic pistols

M

Metric

New member
I like the plastic pistols I own for their highly-useful, tool-like character. They get the usual job done, and they don't complain. There is a very real sense in which it's never been easier to get a reliable, working pistol. That's the "up" side.

Yet, for this exact reason, I don't feel any need for more than about 2 of them in my collection. In a sense, they are all the same -- or, to be more careful, they aspire to be the same. A useful, reliable (if somewhat expendable) tool.

The guns that are more interesting to me are typically all-metal, show some evidence of craftsmanship, and do some particular thing with a degree of excellence that might not be strictly necessary in a generic self-defense situation (e.g. a particularly nice trigger pull, or high accuracy).

However, plastic pistols now dominate the market, displacing nearly everything else. Putting two and two together, this means that for me, the present-day market seems really quite bland. There are always a few exceptions, of course -- if you are a 1911 buff, now is your golden age. The Bond Bullpup is very interesting and new.

I suppose I can summarize my feelings like this: There is a very nice market in desirable, high-quality used pistols out there. My last three purchased pistols were from the 40's, 70's and 80's. All three have seen at least some concealed carry time since my purchase, and there is nothing quite like them currently being made. However, fast-forward a couple decades from now and I can't imagine much niche desirability for the various Glock-HK-S&W-Springfield-Sig-Sauer-Walther-Ruger-Taurus-etc. plastic pistols being made in 2017. I can't escape the feeling that the entire market from 2017 will be viewed roughly the same way that we look at a 1990's vintage Sigma today. What is there to find uniquely capable about any of them?
 
From my perspective my biggest concern when it comes to a firearm is reliability. Now all steel and aluminum framed pistols can certainly do that. But they do so at a weight that is heavier than polymer framed pistols and typically an additional cost and frankly I don't find them to really have any significant advantages. So I carry and use for home defense polymer pistols. I can appreciate the feel of all metal, but in all honestly whether a pistol frame is molded out of polymer or cut out from a block of metal by a CNC machine I'm not sure there's a lot of "craftsmanship" happening. Certainly there are pistols with a higher degree of hand fitting out there, but honestly I don't really have the interest in spending that kind of a money for one such pistol when frankly I can get capable performance out of something significantly less expensive. And of course in the past there was also more hand fitting, but even then there's always the use of machinery for both speed and consistency in making the product. You start getting into the question of what really defines craftsmanship for firearms.

Now do I regard my 2012 Glock as "collectible"? No, not really and frankly I feel the same about my 1911 and SIG P226 since there are nearly endless examples out there. As you said it's a tool. But for me outside of my Model 19 and some WWI-WWII era firearms nothing really newer than that is what I would consider to be "collectible", and as always YMMV. To me collectibility has been a marketing domain for decades now. Does that mean we've "lost" something? Maybe. I'd argue the semiautomatic pistol has really gone as far as it might go for some time and that the next big advents will likely be in ammunition. In a world of Browning tilting barrel striker fired pistols I look at them as I do my current car. It's reliable and works every day. Will I ever "miss" it? Probably not, but in the grand scheme of things maybe that doesn't matter.
 
Plastic pistols are mostly steel. It's just the frame that is polymer.
The real upside is their weight. Most hand guns are carried more than shot. Even a few ounces makes a huge difference.
Mind you, a Glock 21 weighs very close to or slightly more than a 1911A1. 38.4 ounces for the 21. Bit over 2 pounds. Vs a 1911A1's 39 ounces.
 
Mind you, a Glock 21 weighs very close to or slightly more than a 1911A1. 38.4 ounces for the 21. Bit over 2 pounds. Vs a 1911A1's 39 ounces.
Click to expand...

You're comparing a Glock 21 loaded with 13 rds of 45 ACP to an unloaded 1911.
 
But, suppose that you want a relatively low-profile 9mm of particularly high accuracy, with a nice SA trigger? If it was 15 years ago, you could get a HK P7 or perhaps a Star Firestar (off the top of my head). Today, you'd have to go to the used market. None of the poly-pistols meet that description -- they are too busy trying to be exactly the same pistol.

Suppose that you want an accurate .22 with a nice SA-style trigger, that is just a step or two bigger than a pocket pistol? You have to go used.

Today's market has lots of options, except that they all happen to be the same option. Am I wrong?
 
But, suppose that you want a relatively low-profile 9mm of particularly high accuracy, with a nice SA trigger? If it was 15 years ago, you could get a HK P7 or perhaps a Star Firestar (off the top of my head). Today, you'd have to go to the used market. None of the poly-pistols meet that description -- they are too busy trying to be exactly the same pistol.
Click to expand...

With some mods certain striker fired pistols can have pretty good triggers. Now are they P7s? No I suppose not, but I'm not a huge fan of a squeeze cocker and that was a fairly heavy pistol for the capacity. If all you wanted was a 9mm target pistol there are still nice SA triggers in CZs Shadow line, or again strikers with modded triggers are pretty good. To be fair I find I get good hits with stock Glock triggers, i.e. an inch and a half at 10 yds or so and headshots at 25 yds without much difficulty. To a point I think people worry about triggers more than it really warrants. I've never had to fire a shot in defense of my own life, but in the force on force I've done I was using P226s with at least 10 lb. DA pulls and SA pulls just a bit less than many striker pistols. Honestly I remember nothing about those trigger pulls. If I was lucky and quick enough I got a good sight picture and I slightly remember those, but the trigger was an afterthought. Revolvers were well regarded for a long time in the era of craftsmanship you mention and people could get hits with those. Now all else being equal I'd rather a great trigger too, but again we get into definitions of how good does it need to be to get good hits?

Suppose that you want an accurate .22 with a nice SA-style trigger, that is just a step or two bigger than a pocket pistol? You have to go used.
Click to expand...

I personally have no real need of a pocket 22 with a SA trigger. There are already pocket 380s out there that are fairly well regarded and single stack 9mms that are pretty small too. I'd rather one of those.

I completely agree that the market is very similar today, as is true of automobiles. But I'll also say that those that tried to hold out like Beretta, SIG, HK, and CZ found that they in time finally had to offer a striker fired polymer pistol option (though Beretta's is somehow still a picture at this point). I think companies produce what the market wants, and frankly I think some of the things you mentioned are more niche products than you might realize.

You might look up the Hudson H9 if you're looking for something that is at least a slight change of pace.
 
Last edited:
Of course I'm not saying that the generic poly-pistols are BAD. I have some, and they do a good all-around job. It's just that I find it interesting that my collection is becoming more heavily populated with some very nice and surprisingly capable pistols that I would have zero chance of finding made new these days.
 
I think that's pretty common to be honest. Boredom when it comes to firearms is a thing and looking at different designs can help with that. My point is I think the manufacturers make what the market wants and that's why some of those designs fell by the wayside. Cost is always a factor and labor isn't cheap. More labor intensive designs mean a higher cost and with the number of reliable and cheap pistols out there it becomes a hard sell. Many engineers will tell you that certain designs from the early to mid twentieth century aren't feasible to make today as the cost is something that wouldn't appeal to enough of the market to see a return. Couple that with many used pistols of those different designs available, with many in good shape, and it removes even more incentive to make those designs new.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
...pistols that I would have zero chance of finding made new these days.
Click to expand...

Because they don't sell in large enough quantities to keep a company in business.

Imagine a company bringing back the buggy-whip and hoping to sell enough to stay afloat. :D
 
Metric: I wouldn't call them plastic pistols. You don't sound like you are very knowledgeable, or have much experience.
 
Now do I regard my 2012 Glock as "collectible"? No, not really
Click to expand...

Although I do think of my 1989 gen 1 glock 17 as collectible as they are getting harder to come by, and are now bringing a higher price than current models.
Yet it still functions as my nightstand weapon.
 
I think that's pretty common to be honest. Boredom when it comes to firearms is a thing and looking at different designs can help with that. My point is I think the manufacturers make what the market wants and that's why some of those designs fell by the wayside. Cost is always a factor and labor isn't cheap. More labor intensive designs mean a higher cost and with the number of reliable and cheap pistols out there it becomes a hard sell. Many engineers will tell you that certain designs from the early to mid twentieth century aren't feasible to make today as the cost is something that wouldn't appeal to enough of the market to see a return. Couple that with many used pistols of those different designs available, with many in good shape, and it removes even more incentive to make those designs new.
Click to expand...

There is some truth to the boredom factor -- but I think you'd have to agree that it's particularly easy to be bored by what is currently produced. They are all virtually interchangeable.

And of course you're right that cost of manufacture is the driving force -- how great it must have been for the bottom line to suddenly be able to injection mold your frames? And from our perspective, it's probably the reason why average pistol prices have stayed pretty stable over 25 years, while e.g. the price of a DA revolver went nuts.

I suppose my prediction is that the market-price for certain types of used pistols will increase to the point that a small market for new types (at a relatively high price) will be born. I don't know how long it will take, but I can't imagine today's homogeneous market is the end of the story.
 
I saw a S&W 5946 DAO at a Cabelas yesterday for $799.00 in beautiful condition, this was at the regular gun counter, not the Gun Library where you might expect to see such a nice 3rd Gen S&W. I can't say that the trigger was heavy but the break took forever. I'll argue that a 3rd Gen S&W is collectible and they were nice to own & shoot back in the day & I'd jump at a 5903 or a 5906 in the same condition with spare mags, but at a reasonable price. Well somebody at Cabelas is convinced that this gun is collectible or desirable to price it out at 8 bills but at that price you can just keep it where it sits on the gun shelf!
 
Metric said:
There is some truth to the boredom factor -- but I think you'd have to agree that it's particularly easy to be bored by what is currently produced. They are all virtually interchangeable.



And of course you're right that cost of manufacture is the driving force -- how great it must have been for the bottom line to suddenly be able to injection mold your frames? And from our perspective, it's probably the reason why average pistol prices have stayed pretty stable over 25 years, while e.g. the price of a DA revolver went nuts.



I suppose my prediction is that the market-price for certain types of used pistols will increase to the point that a small market for new types (at a relatively high price) will be born. I don't know how long it will take, but I can't imagine today's homogeneous market is the end of the story.
Click to expand...



That's the big question really, where do we go from here? I agree that you have a number of different manufacturers making what is essentially the same pistol with some slight design differences between them and of course cosmetic changes and some operational changes (how the safeties are performed). My guess is manufacturers are simply following what they see as the overall market trend, but I'm honestly curious if all these manufacturers can survive making copies of each other. Couple the sameness of it all with what is already shaping up to be relatively flat demand compared to previous years and I think some of these manufacturers are in for hard times. I do think we'll see manufacturers diversifying their product lines to an extent to get a piece of as many pies as possible to maybe not put all their eggs in one basket (SIG, S&W, and Ruger certainly seem to do that). And maybe we will have new manufacturers spring up to cater to smaller markets. I admit to being pretty bored myself these days.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
That's the big question really, where do we go from here? I agree that you have a number of different manufacturers making what is essentially the same pistol with some slight design differences between them and of course cosmetic changes and some operational changes (how the safeties are performed). My guess is manufacturers are simply following what they see as the overall market trend, but I'm honestly curious if all these manufacturers can survive making copies of each other. Couple the sameness of it all with what is already shaping up to be relatively flat demand compared to previous years and I think some of these manufacturers are in for hard times. I do think we'll see manufacturers diversifying their product lines to an extent to get a piece of as many pies as possible to maybe not put all their eggs in one basket (SIG, S&W, and Ruger certainly seem to do that). And maybe we will have new manufacturers spring up to cater to smaller markets. I admit to being pretty bored myself these days.
Click to expand...

You touch on an interesting point regarding the market. I think the last 8 years have seen record sales every single year (or close to it), for political reasons. That kind of demand makes certain things easy -- innovation does not need to be at a premium. But as you point out, the political driving force is now gone (in the short-term). So what happens now, when every product is the same? Hopefully something new, at least from my point of view.
 
Polymer plastic pistols can be useful tools.
Polymer guns MIGHT last for years without degradation- no one really knows.
Steel and aluminum guns WILL last centuries if properly maintained.
 
Polymer plastic pistols can be useful tools.
Polymer guns MIGHT last for years without degradation- no one really knows.
Steel and aluminum guns WILL last centuries if properly maintained.
Click to expand...

On my prospective short list for next pistol is a ~100 year old Colt 1903 in .32 acp. Sure, it's soundly beaten in a dedicated "pocket pistol" role by the likes of a Kel-Tec p32 (due to size and weight). But what if you would like to be able to hit stuff with efficiency beyond a few meters away? Is there anything currently made in that caliber that comes close to matching the trigger pull and accuracy of a well-maintained example?

In reality, there is a kind of perverse pleasure that comes from using a century-old pistol that can outperform anything currently made, in certain important respects.
 
Yeah, I waiting for a .380 polymer version of the Colt 1903 to come into existence!
I would buy that in a heartbeat!
Click to expand...

The fact that Colt recently licensed out their name and design for a limited production run of the pistol should say something. Of course I get your point -- why would anyone want a plastic version of such a classic?
 
LOL, I am serious. I would want one.
Same reason that I hated the Ruger LCR for being so ugly as it's resemblance in any way to a real revolver.
Until I got one, an LCRx because I wanted one with a hammer.
And got beyond the polymer and really grew to appreciated what a wonder it was.
And today I'm picking up a .357 LCR.

So yes, I would buy a polymer Colt 1903!:eek:

edit note:
Yeah, the OP even got me calling them plastic!!:D
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top