Quote:
Originally Posted by Silversmok3
I own neither pistol.
Glock and M&Ps to my hands feel like some villainous gunsmith changed the trigger to a light switch .Both pistols work well as mass market tools, but seeing as how I must earn my money to buy firearms I refuse to pay one red cent for a firearm that sells with a substandard trigger.
As far as polymer vs metal is concerned the only thing about the material that bothers me is that gunmakers sell polymer frame pistols at prices identical to those of metal frame competitors when they cost a fraction of the metal firearm to manufacture.
More power to those firms to rake in the money, but I will not join the lemmings jumping off the 'Tactical' cliff.
|
$550 dollars for a gun as good as a Glock or M&P is well worth I but for this argument I'm going to reference the Glock, You don't want to "Jump Off The Tactical Cliff" when it's been known for a Glock ( and it seems in your opinion, is inferior to "Steel" ) to have a round count as high and higher than 300,000 Rounds with nothing more than springs replaced! Now I love steel pistols in my opinion there's nothing more beautiful than a deeply blued 1911 but how many 1911s and other steel pistols in that price range reach that high of a round count? None that I know of most high end 1911s have round count life of around 20,000 Rounds and that's on the higher side, now I'm not saying that there isn't any out there I'm sure there is but most don't make it with out a cracked frame or some sort of catastrophic failure and the same goes for Glocks I'm not saying there perfect but for the price it's one hell of a pistol and to be so narrow minded "just because it doesn't cost as much to make as a steel gun but they still charge the same" opinion your losing out but hey you are entitled to your beliefs that's the great thing about America