I think the "I don't trust plastic because its a toy that can't take abuse" is a bit of a strawman that is often used by poly framer gun shooters themselves. The durability of modern plastics, high grade, is well known and respected. I don't see people refusing to buy modern power tools because they are plastic housed, and any such concerns about poly framed handguns has abated since they were the new kid on the block. I think its an easy way to dodge the entire range of issues.

If you don't mind carrying extra weight, weight is the best thing you can have in a gun, it steadies itself and reduces recoil absolutely, instead of just changing the way the recoil affects you. I'd rather have a PPK for a small auto loader than a new poly any day of the week, and not just because of hammer/striker issues. You can brag about how little your gun ways, then pay the price every time you fire it. Yes, there are some who shoot their airweight every weekend, but you are more likely to shoot 10,000 rounds a year out of a N, L, or steel K frame than you will the other.

Steel, like the hammer/striker issue comes down total feel. I don't like the way plastic guns feel, or how they recoil, its awful, and the heavy slide and light frame make the gun unbalanced. The steel feels better, and so does the way the sear and trigger all work with the traditional hammers. No matter how they can put their superiority on paper, in the hand and in its function, the steel frame hammer gun has a synergy and a function that can't be described in simple metrics, and the more I shoot modern strikers the more their advantages feel supposed than real.

I like hitting a wall in my trigger, form my military Mausers, to my high end Mauser action CZ, to my HK delayed roller locks, and down to my hammer long guns, and in my auto loaders and revolvers. The trigger pull on my Tommy gun is, in theory, poor, but in practice exquisite and wonderful A smooth, beautiful wall break on these guns is the best trigger pull I can hope for, personally. The way they resist, they way they work, the way it breaks. Every striker I've aver touched is an abomination.

I don't like the way the trigger resists, or how it breaks, or anything at all about it. Shooting one is a miserable experience compared to the old fashioned hammer. I've shot very well with a standard Glock, and one my friend had with a good trigger job and light trigger pull, I did very well with them. But I would not own one unless I was forced to.

I might buy a HK Mk23 some day, but i hate spending that kinda money. I might buy a striker fired steel frame auto loader, if they ever make a high end one that is well respected and earned its marks, and is full weight and size. But after firing striker poly frames, I have no intent whatsoever to buy one.

They can say all they want about fiberglass hammers absorbing shock better, I think they ring my hands worse than hickory. They can say all they want about how much better the striker is than the hammer, and I'll agree on the internal aspects with them 100%, but the way they actually function in my hand, I have no interest in them for the time being. I'm going to keep my 1911, Hi Power, and right now I'm still considering a PPK/S for collection and ballistic test purposes before I would even put a minor thought into buying a newer one.

it ain't always about improvement, at some point they don't improve things, they just change things. The new change might be better in some ways, but consider it could also be worse. Yeah, smokeless>blackpowder might be a valid argument, but striker>hammer has yet to prove itself absolutely.