I've seen posters say that HK/Glock are more durable than Sigs. Are these just opinions, or are there tests that prove this?
The reason I ask is that I don't trust the polymer frame design. I bought a USP 45c and promptly got rid of it. The back right frame rail did not completely cover it's mating surface. It had either broken, or came from the factory like that. The exposed mating surface was very rough, causing the slide action to be un-smooth.
In contrast, my newly acquired SIG P229 .357 has steel frame rails (obviously part of the frame - not glued on) that extend all the way forward. It seems to me that the glued-on frame inserts would be an inherent flaw in the HK design.
Is this incorrect? I haven't inspected the internals of any Glocks. Are the Glocks similar? Thanks, CJ
The reason I ask is that I don't trust the polymer frame design. I bought a USP 45c and promptly got rid of it. The back right frame rail did not completely cover it's mating surface. It had either broken, or came from the factory like that. The exposed mating surface was very rough, causing the slide action to be un-smooth.
In contrast, my newly acquired SIG P229 .357 has steel frame rails (obviously part of the frame - not glued on) that extend all the way forward. It seems to me that the glued-on frame inserts would be an inherent flaw in the HK design.
Is this incorrect? I haven't inspected the internals of any Glocks. Are the Glocks similar? Thanks, CJ