Polymer vs steel

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CoffeeShooter

New member
I’m relatively new to semiautos but something in back of mind keeps having an aversion to polymer and wish steel frame was the status quo and majority. I can get over the aesthetics if I’m proven wrong about performance and durability and very much considering Glock 17 but still have doubts. Even googling classics like cz75s I mostly see polymer versions for sale. They just look so cheap but I can suppose I’ll buy if proven othereuse. Polymer vs steel?
 
One is lighter (better for carrying). One is heavier (better for felt recoil management). Both are durable.

Which do you want?

wish steel frame was the status quo and majority.
Click to expand...

Why must either be the status quo? Choices are a good thing. Be thankful you have them.
 
If you plan to carry the gun you will see the advantages of poly over metal. In my heart I love steel guns, but on my hip I see the advantage of poly.
 
I plan to carry so poly but I would go steel if if less prone to damage. I’m on limited budget and can’t afford to buy guns constantly so I want something that can withstand a beating and last a long time. Right now I’m either getting Glock 17 or 19 once background check clears but still cringing and second guessing
 
Even googling classics like cz75s I mostly see polymer versions for sale.
Click to expand...

No one else sees that on the CZ website.

But that's kinda beside the point.

Polymer framed guns have been around for over 30 years. They are old school.

They have been used by law enforcement and various armies. Millions of shooters own a few. They have proven their durability. Many even look good.

Go get a Glock, a CZ, Walter, HK, one of the S&W M&P series. You will need a couple of those. Just choose. Also get a couple of steel framed guns. You don't have to do it all at once, take a year. Or more. No rush. Make up your mind and start someplace.

Get one and learn it. Then get another and learn that.

I have a nephew who can't decide whether he favors short or long pants. So he wears neither. Don't be like him.

tipoc
 
Polymer guns are the result of cheaper manufacturing processes (mostly from the curtain rod Mfg., though they are not the first). Yea, poly is durable. More than steel? In your dreams.

Striker is a simpler design with less parts (possibly better reliability), and cheaper to Mfg.

Actually get a real gun-belt, and you'll find that a few Oz.s don't make that much of a difference. Most poly pistols have stagger mags that hold more cartridges. Cartridges weigh something too. That's an advantage (esp w/9mm) but don't hang your hat on weight if you're carrying a bunch more ammo.

Nothing is for free. It's always a tradeoff and a compromise, but if plastic pistols cost more than steel ones there would be very few of them. I think I paid $300 for a G17 in 1987 (and took hella crap for it). I replaced the old spring (which wore out) with a captured one sometime in the 1990s. It's still running.

I'm just a mean old man. I loved them when everyone thought they were crap, and now I absolutely hate them because everyone thinks they're "perfection".
 
I prefer to own and shoot steel framed guns, but will admit that poly is pretty darned durable. I don't know how it'll hold up in 100 years, but about the only way to do any damage would be to leave it in the desert sun for years (maybe decades) on end. Even then, the polymer has UV inhibitor added.

Still, with a good belt and holster even a heavier gun isn't bad to carry. I used to carry an aluminum framed P938, now it's a steel framed SP101.
 
If a poly pistol like the Glock is good enough for the FBI, SEALs, Army Rangers, etc, then I suspect it should be reliable and durable enough for the average gun owner.
 
I must disagree with the recoil statement.

It sounds right that a heavier steel frame gun will recoil less, but the ergonomics of the poly frames makes the felt recoil lower. Big advantage.

My USP 45 frame weighs next to nothing yet it recoils less than my buddy's 1911 with the same ammo (more accurate too).

I've owned 1911s, a CZ75B, even a S&W 952, but I'll take an HK or a Glock over any of them.
 
Polymer isn't durable? Somebody better tell the US Army as they're in the process of switching over to the polymer Sig.
 
Yea, poly is durable. More than steel? In your dreams.
Click to expand...

Both are durable, but in different ways.

  • Let a steel-framed pistol sit in a moist environment (and covered in human sweat) for a while and report back to me on what holds up best.
  • Google "Delta Elite frame cracking" vs "Glock 20 frame cracking" and see how many hits you get.

Everything is a trade-off.
 
There are some Glocks out there with over 300,000 rounds documented through them with no major parts breakages. They have had small parts wear out and the springs replaced, but the plastic guns will last at least as long as steel.

Maybe longer. I've never seen anyone document much over 100,000 rounds through a steel pistol. Not saying it can't be done, I just haven't found any documentation to prove it.

The expected life of the aluminum alloy guns is around 30,000-50,000 rounds. Still more than most people will shoot through them.

I don't expect to see many, if any new pistol designs made from metal. Plastic is so much better than aluminum that most of the aluminum guns are being phased out. Smith and Ruger have both stopped making them. I don't expect to see the aluminum framed Beretta or Sig models in production much longer after the military fully transitions to plastic.

The classic steel guns like the 1911, BHP and clones, CZ's and clones will probably be around for a while. But I just don't see manufacturers going back to a new steel frame pistol design. For the same reason we won't see any more new boats designed with wooden hull's.

Recoil, yea plastic is more comfortable. I have 1911's in 45 as well as Glock and a Smith M&P in 45. The 1911 recoils noticeably more. Even my Glocks in 10mm are very mild shooting with even the hottest loads. Much more so than a 1911 in 45 with standard loads.

Realistically the only reason to choose a metal framed pistol anymore is purely nostalgic. Not that there is anything wrong with that. My 1911's aren't for sale. But they aren't the gun I'll reach for if things go bad.
 
If I shoot my HK45 alongside my Dan Wesson Valor, it’s like comparing apples to oranges and I like fruit salad anyway. Both are very enjoyable firearms to take to the range!
 
There is nothing wrong with poly guns -- except esthetically, and I won't ever buy one. I understand the attraction...and the price issue....but I still don't want anything to do with them. I have fired most of the Glock, HK, Springfield, etc poly models ...and I have recommended them to some of my grandkids or the young adults in my family as solid guns / the new Gen 5 Glock is a pretty nice gun as an example.

I know I'm in the minority wanting nothing to do with poly guns ...but that doesn't matter either. I'm in my late 60's ...and its a generational thing partly ...some of my buddies agree with me / some have gone to Glock, HK, etc..for their primary guns. 1911's are the gun of my generation ...and I shoot my Wilson Combat, 5", 1911 in 9mm...most every week in my "buddy" competition Tactictal shoots...and I hold my own / in fact in last 2 yrs, I have led the way at an average of around 95%, so I'm sticking with my 1911's in all stainless.

In terms of weight - for the most part we are talking about less than a pound...between most of the poly guns and an all steel gun like a 5" 1911. 1 lb is not enough to make a difference on my belt....so I choose to carry a full sized 5" 1911 in 9mm ( 10 + 1 rds is plenty ) and I carry an extra mag...not because of capacity, because the mags are the least reliable part in a semi-auto.

A solid belt, a good IWB horsehide holster..and a 5" 1911 is easy to carry. I will once in a while carry an N frame, S&W revolver, a model 627, 2 5/8" barrel, 8 shot, .357 mag...( all stainless )...and a speed strip in my pocket for reloads. No poly needed / or wanted here. :D
 
My first handgun back in 1993 was a Glock 17 so I never had to adjust my tastes to polymer. Polymer seems normal to me for a semi pistol.
 
If a poly pistol like the Glock is good enough for the FBI, SEALs, Army Rangers, etc, then I suspect it should be reliable and durable enough for the average gun owner.
Click to expand...

I agree that poly pistols are probably durable and reliable enough for the average gun owner. But I would like to point out that Governments make mistakes all the time. I don't think government purchases are any exception. I wouldn't use them as a data point to say "if it's good enough for them, it's good enough for me." Remember Obama's healthcare.gov fiasco?

I suspect that there are a lot of variables that go into these purchasing decisions that probably shouldn't.
 
I will give my opinion, but you can discount accordingly...

Glocks are the gold standard of reliability and durability. I have a G20, A G22, The wife carries a G19. I carried a G22 in the Navy. My G22 has over 10k rounds through it. I have replaced the striker and recoil springs as per Glocks recommendations in the 22. The 19 I just changed recoil spring at 2500 rounds.

My 1911 10mm recoil less than my G20 with full power loads, due to weight.

I would bet every some I have that most people cannot ever wear out a glock. Also, they are relatively low maintenance. 1,000 rounds and no cleaning? No problem for a glock. 1,000 rounds and no cleaning in a 1911, or run it dry? Issues could arise.

Accuracy: Due to trigger designs and generous chambers, Blocks in OEM configuration are less accurate than a decent 1911 or Revolver. But, they were not meant to be bullseye pistols.

If I had to get rid of all my pistols and could keep only 1? It would probably be a glock because I KNOW I can count on it.
 
croberts said:
I agree that poly pistols are probably durable and reliable enough for the average gun owner. But I would like to point out that Governments make mistakes all the time. I don't think government purchases are any exception. I wouldn't use them as a data point to say "if it's good enough for them, it's good enough for me." Remember Obama's healthcare.gov fiasco?



I suspect that there are a lot of variables that go into these purchasing decisions that probably shouldn't.
Click to expand...


I think you have a point, but a number of units that use Glocks, such as Delta or the SEALs, have mostly carte blanche when it comes to choosing their equipment. That they explicitly chose something other than the standard service pistol and that the something was a Glock means something. Does it mean everything? Nope.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
There is nothing wrong with poly guns -- except esthetically, and I won't ever buy one
Click to expand...

I find it humorous that folks still complain about the aesthetics of polymer-framed pistols as if all of them are as blocky and ungainly-looking as the Glock.

There are quite a few polymer-framed pistols out there that are quite aesthetically pleasing (first generation Walther P99s and several of the CZ models immediately spring to mind).

There have definitely been some ugly ducking steel-framed pistols through the years as well (Mars pistol, Frommer Stop, Type 94, etc.).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top