Steel, aluminum or polymer?

Q

Quincy

New member
Tell me your thoughts on these frame materials in practical terms. Obviously weight, but beyond that, what are the pros and cons. It seems like poly and alum. are similar in weight, given similar pistols. H&K focuses on poly whilst Sig uses primarily aluminum. Not sure what any of the three gains you practically. Your thoughts or experience?

Q
 
I too prefer a metal frame. Aluminum is fine, and often preferable for the weight savings. A steel frame does feel great on a 1911 or good target pistol, though.

I have Polymer firearms, but they don't excite me. I would take a CZ75 P-01 over a CZ P-09 any day of the week. Polymer can be quite durable, as Glock and many other manufacturers have proven... but metal it isn't, and there's a reason why polymer is commonly thought of as a cost saving measure. Because it is.
 
For carry, I prefer polymer. I carry a Glock 43. For competition where weight isn't a big issue, I enjoy shooting my full size all steel 1911s. I have a Sig P229 but it is too big to carry (for me) and I don't care for the DA/SA trigger for carry. The single action trigger pull is pretty good, but not compared to my higher 1911s. Funny enough, the P229 is my bedside pistol that sits in this safe.
 
Metal frame is most durable. It mitigates recoil because of weights.

Polymer is most practical for concealment and EDC. It has some degree of flexibility. Many have double captured springs helpful with recoil.

Aluminum is fine for EDC and it can be anodized. Doesn't hold up as well with +P in a 442. My friend's 442 had a lot of issues after just 10,000 rounds. He was given the option to buy another.

I carry a Glock 19 MOS (polymer) with an RMR plus a 640 357 Magnum(steel).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
For what it's worth polymer frames are likely much more durable then alloy frames in the short terms since the slide is essentially running on steel with the great majority of poly frames. Steel to alloy contact wears faster.
 
For me? Poly for carry e.g..my CM9, M&P9c and previous Glock26. Steel for range fun e.g...my Beretta M9, Colt 1991.
 
A quick google suggests that depending on the particular alloy or composition, that steel is around 8 g/cm, that aluminum is around 2.7 g/cm, and that nylon is around 1.15 g/cm. Granted, that doesn't translate 1:1 in pistol frames since polymer tends to be used with steel rails or a subframe, but it's a start.

I'm kind of curious how aluminum pistols wear over time. Hard anodizing is much harder than steel, but as it wears off, the aluminum metal underneath is super soft. I wonder how the slide and frame abrade either other over the long term, or if it turns out to be insignificant in a well designed and maintained pistol.

It's interesting that Sig loves aluminum so much. I suspect it's an artifact from the 1980's that turned out to translate well to modern CNC production. They make a relatively wide variety of pistols, so maybe it's more efficient for smaller production runs.

H&K has a small lineup, so maybe polymer frames are more efficient for larger runs. Or maybe not; I'm just spitballing here. I don't know anything about aluminum vs polymer, really. But I am curious.

What I can tell you is that polymer saves a tremendous amount of weight over steel. I notice this most comparing my VP9 and my Kahr MK9.

Both are striker fired Browning tilt barrels that weigh about the same with an empty magazine.

The VP9 measures 7.34" x 5.41" x 1.32" with a 4.09" barrel.
The MK9 measures 5.3" x 4.0" x 0.9" with a 3.0" barrel.
 
For carry, I prefer aluminum framed guns like the CZ-75D PCR. For range, and home defense, I prefer all steel. I have no polymer guns anymore. Nothing wrong with them, just not my preference.
 
Polymer and aluminum are lighter and thus easier to carry.

Steel has more weight, meaning less recoil, meaning easier to shoot.

Thus I prefer polymer or aluminum for carry, and steel for the target range, plinking, and HD.
 
So the results of the OP's question finds some people prefer each of the three materials, it certainly does not touch on which is better for handguns other than saying "all three". The average shooter is not going to fire enough ammo through a given pistol to wear it out ( excluding competitive shooters) so i woukd pick the pistol that most meets your needs no matter what the construction materials.
I prefer steel, have many aluminum and some polymere, alll are shot but some to a lesser degree than others. None are showing excessive wear, and i shoot a lot of ammo.
 
I own all three as well. Steel frame works well as a range gun for me but is just too heavy for all day carry here on our farm. Where the extra weight shines is for use in high round count shooting games: IDPA et. al. In this category, I rank my 1911's, both full length and Commander size.

For my own CC use, the aluminum frames make the most sense. I carry and shoot nearly every day and that puts my round counts up around 1000+ per year on the guns that I really like: Sigs and a lt. weight Commander primarily. I've found no discernible wear or diminished accuracy with that level of use.

I use poly frames only in a very small, easily concealed auto: the S&W Bodyguard 380. Accurate, exceptionally light, and 100% reliable to date, it's small size/weight makes it disappear in a pocket or in an OWB holster. It's my wife's #1 choice for her walks on our farm access road. It goes when her Glock 23 gets left behind. While the Glock is light weight, I'm not a fan of the trigger nor the feel in the hand...for those that like them, more power to you. I will say that both my wife and I shoot the G23 well, but neither of us is enamored with it's feel.

HTH's Rod
 
Metal frame is most durable.
Click to expand...

That can be debated. Polymer (at least the type used on firearms) doesn't typically corrode.

All three materials have their place, and if the firearm is properly designed around the material, all three will do the job.
 
Steel

For me personally I get on better with metal guns. That said, I appreciate polymer guns for what they are, it's just metal feels better in my paws. I think it would be foolish of me to say steel is supreme with no actual evidence to back that claim up, it just works better for me.

Plus, metal guns are just more appealing to the eyes for me. I can't think of a single polymer gun that looks better than a 1911 IMHO. I'm currently after a Beretta 92 and a Dan Wesson...as well as many many other guns too :D
 
Here are my philosophical reasonings:

Home Defense - for this use, accuracy is the #1 consideration. For me, I can deliver very accurate and quick shots with large, heavy guns. My choice is the all steel CZ SP-01.

Concealed Carry - for this use, comfort is tied with usability as the most important considerations. For me, lighter pistols are easier to carry. So, I choose a small-ish poly gun. Right now, an M&P Shield.

All Around - I can't call this a "combat" gun because I've never been in combat and don't expect to, but I have a rig all set up in case I ever feel like our home is at an increased threat level and I need to be prepared. In this case, the gun must be carry-able, but a little more weight is permitted. For this use, I prefer the alloy framed CZ P-01.

They all have their place.
 
I look at the materials in a gun with the knowledge of a metal smith. Steel can be made to never fail. When you design something from steel you make it to take a given load with the knowledge that it takes about a 30% overload to cause wear.
If you design something from aluminum you do so knowing that it begins to fail the first time any load is placed on it and knowing that it will fatigue and crack. You design it to work for a given number of cycles and the replace it before failure occurs.
I am only slightly familiar with the glass and carbon reinforced plastic. I don't trust them yet but I may change my attitude when they are proven to be as good as steel. Most plastics (the resins are plastic) degrade with exposure to UV and ozone. Both of which are common in everyday life. As far as I can tell plastics don't fatigue as fast as aluminum so one could expect them to be better than aluminum frames. There just isn't enough history to prove that it is a good material for gun frames yet.

Any gun should last generations. Steel guns do. The aluminum guns don't - most won't last one generation especially the revolvers. You don't see many plastic framed revolvers. There is probably a strength issue there for a reason. Threads cut into plastic are not as strong as those same threads in steel or even aluminum. I tend to demand a lot from a gun and maybe too much but I have guns I inherited from my dad that shoot well as I near passing them on to the next generation. I have guns that I bought when I was 21 that are as good today as the day I bought them and others that I have added that shoot as well today as when I got them. I expect that from a gun. My latest acquisition is an AR and I doubt that it will last as well as my other guns. It is the first gun I bought with a list of replacement parts to keep it working. It has an aluminum lower that will eventually have to be repaired or replaced due to wear and fatigue. I bought it for one reason - it is an expendable toy for 3 gun play.
 
Last edited:
Most plastics (the resins are plastic) degrade with exposure to UV and ozone. Both of which are common in everyday life. As far as I can tell plastics don't fatigue as fast as aluminum so one could expect them to be better than aluminum frames. There just isn't enough history to prove that it is a good material for gun frames yet.
Click to expand...

I think there is ample evidence firearm polymer frames make superior gun frames in the short term 25-35 years to either alloy or steel. They have shown absolutely stellar durability and being plastic have the benefits of being both light weight and much less susceptible to abuse or lack of maintainence.

Where polymer falls down vs steel is in the long term. Like you said polymer starts to decompose if you will right out of the mold. So where I am confident my Ruger GP100/1911/whatever all steel gun could be a useable museum artifact hundreds of years in the future given a modicum of care, I am not convinced that will be the case with a Glock/HK/whatever. I think there will be a point where the frames crumble into dust if you will. I don't think I will see it in my lifetime however barring heavily used/abused/exposed to elements guns.

Honestly the big "loser" if you will is aluminum since although it should last forever if not used (with a modicum of care) you will likely shoot an alloy gun to failure far before a quality steel or polymer pistol. (Yes there are always exceptions and anomalies but I am speaking in general. Don't go throw your SIG or Beretta away either as in practical terms for normal people they are hell for stout).
 
As an aside I doubt that AR lower will cause issue as the lower really doesn't see much abuse. All the main cycling parts are steel on steel. We know for a fact there are perfectly shootable 50ish year old ARs today.
 
I'm kind of curious how aluminum pistols wear over time. Hard anodizing is much harder than steel, but as it wears off, the aluminum metal underneath is super soft. I wonder how the slide and frame abrade either other over the long term, or if it turns out to be insignificant in a well designed and maintained pistol.
Click to expand...

SIG aluminum alloy frames are very durable. Reports ftom multiple sources, including Todd Green, of 9MM P226s and P228s lasting well over 100,000 rounds fired when maintained well.

A lot of us SIG owners use grease on the frame rails for lubrication which I believe is SIG's current recomendation. Keeping the frame rails well lubricated and changing recoil spring about ever 5000 rounds will be very beneficial for long frame life. For older German made SIGs with the folded steel slides the breech block pins should also be changed about every 5000 rounds so that they do not wear to the point that the breech block becomes loose in the slide putting extreme stress on the frame during firing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top