Somtimes I feel that the 15-22 gets a bad rap because it's polymer...

[kilo6echo]

It seems like when I see folks comparing the 15-22 to another .22 tactical rifle platform, I hear a lot of, "It's all plastic and light", or "It feels like a toy".

To me I like the light weight design. I like having kick on a .22 rifle, for me it is part of the fun. People also forget that there are are several well made polymer based handguns out there too.

[~tc~]

Last week, we went shooting up in the mountains with some friends - my M&P15-22 and 22A, the friends had 4 "real" AR's (a SMW M&P15, Rock River Arms, DPMS, and Bushmaster), GSG, Glock 19 & 26, Springfield XD45, two Ruger 10-22's, SKS, and a Remington 870 ... yes, enough to take over some smaller countries ... anyways ...

Everyone wanted to shoot it. I lost count of how much ammo we went through, at least 500 rds. Not a single complaint about feeling "too light" or "like a toy", as a matter of fact, quite the opposite.Everyone was talking about my gun, and wanted to shoot it. One guy asked a lot of questions about buying one.

[cazador505]

When i was looking at which to buy I took issue with the polymer also. After researching the Ruger and the Colt along with the 15-22 it was no question which one to get. One of my favorite handguns is the glock 21 so I got over the polymer. I carried the M16 in the Corps and having added optics and accessorifying the 15-22 is still lighter. I have taken this bad boy rabbit hunting in the New Mexico desert and it was never uncomfortable to carry.

[ChattanoogaPhil]

Many have been giving Glock a 'bad rap' since day one. And those who do will likely continue to do so. Meanwhile, the market has spoken.

I consider the light weight of the 15-22 a plus. As well, the polymer finish has stayed in perfect shape after a great deal of use and abuse. The metal quad rail on my Sig522 already has slight nicks and mars from accessories.

[DasFriek]

Anyone who has seen and held and shot my gun at the range has never commented on the polymer being an issue, All of them just loved the gun. Tons of questions and attention while shooting and to be honest id rather be left alone at the range so i can shoot in peace.

Ive actually heard more complaints about the pot metal used in the Colt/Umerex which i personally have no issue with either.

My only issue with polymer is what will it be like in 60 years when it possibly gets old and brittle? Hopefully we will see what first Gen Glocks are like before our rifles start cracking and breaking.

[rodent .22]

The Colt/Umarex .22's ARE NOT comprised of ''pot metal''. The upper and lower receivers are cast ALUMINUM, CNC machined. The innards are NOT ''pot metal'', they are a zinc alloy, very hard and extremely wear resistant. The bolt is steel faced and trouble free. Most folks running these arms down don't own one. They are actually a very good rifle. I can run 500 rounds thru mine at a time, NO ISSUES. The big complaint has been the 180 degree safety. I mean really- get over it. If you think I'm anti-polymer I have a 15-22 pistol en route from Bud's. Due here tommorow on UPS. I'm almost 60, I won't be around long enough to find out if the polymers will become brittle...LOL I know this Smith pistol is going to be fun!!!

[gotime]

I was torn between the SR22 and and the 15-22, but decided on the S&W for the price and the light weight. Someone made a very good point that once you start to accessorize, the weight savings will be quite noticeable.

[Brett248Vista]

Originally Posted by rodent .22

The Colt/Umarex .22's ARE NOT comprised of ''pot metal''. The upper and lower receivers are cast ALUMINUM, CNC machined. The innards are NOT ''pot metal'', they are a zinc alloy, very hard and extremely wear resistant. The bolt is steel faced and trouble free. Most folks running these arms down don't own one. They are actually a very good rifle. I can run 500 rounds thru mine at a time, NO ISSUES. The big complaint has been the 180 degree safety. I mean really- get over it. If you think I'm anti-polymer I have a 15-22 pistol en route from Bud's. Due here tommorow on UPS. I'm almost 60, I won't be around long enough to find out if the polymers will become brittle...LOL I know this Smith pistol is going to be fun!!!

CNC machined aluminum body.. HAH

More like... Airsoft Aluminum M4 bodies, with custom fitted pot metal innards..

Feel free to take your M4 apart and photo the body, and I will show you photos of my $75.00 aluminum airsoft M4 body and we can compare.

Nothing CNC machined about it.. And I call a spade a spade, it's zinc pot metal guts.. Hey that's not the end of the world, so are the innards of my GSG 5PK. But I bought the S&W because it felt like a better built AR than the Colt M4.

[cazador505]

Originally Posted by Brett248Vista

CNC machined aluminum body.. HAH

More like... Airsoft Aluminum M4 bodies, with custom fitted pot metal innards..

Feel free to take your M4 apart and photo the body, and I will show you photos of my $75.00 aluminum airsoft M4 body and we can compare.

Nothing CNC machined about it.. And I call a spade a spade, it's zinc pot metal guts.. Hey that's not the end of the world, so are the innards of my GSG 5PK. But I bought the S&W because it felt like a better built AR than the Colt M4.

Well put. Another factor when I was deciding was the tear down. Twist the barrel to loosen and don't remove any of the innards? I like the Smiths similarity to its Bigger AR cousins.

[Brett248Vista]

Woops, not $75.00 airsoft body, just checked my receipts, I paid $150 for my metal body

But my point is still the same.

[Brett248Vista]

I'm not parroting anyone.. I've had the Colt M4 IN MY HANDS...

My observations are my own, based on handling and breaking down the M4 Ops.

I chose the S&W because to me, it felt like a better made rifle, using better made parts. That's my perception from studying the guts of both.. The M4 Ops looks the part, but it doesn't work like an AR and I would be willing to bet that if you stripped the guts out of your Ops and compared it's "shell" to my airsoft shell, you would be enlightened.

I am fully willing to document with high res photos and a dial caliper all sorts of measurements, wanna compare and if I'm wrong, I'll gladly say I'm wrong.

[Monstercastle]

I'll grab some popcorn and learn something watching this thread play out.

[Brett248Vista]

There's nothing to play out... If he is happy with his Colt M4 that's all that matters. I compared both and I made the right decision for me.

There are lots of happy Colt M4 guys out there.

I'm just saying call a spade a spade. The internals are pot metal, that's not up for debate, that's what they are. Good, bad or indifferent.

[~tc~]

Originally Posted by rodent .22

they are a zinc alloy, very hard and extremely wear resistant.

As a metallurgist, I can guarantee you that no such thing exists.

Zinc alloy = pot metal

Maybe they are using a higher grade of pot metal, but if it's zinc, it's still pot metal.

[ChattanoogaPhil]

I have heard the term 'pot metal' used many times over the years but really never understood exactly what it means. In simple terms, what does it mean?

[Brett248Vista]

Originally Posted by ChattanoogaPhil

I have heard the term 'pot metal' used many times over the years but really never understood exactly what it means. In simple terms, what does it mean?

Pot metal
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit
Jump to: navigation, search

Pot metal is a slang term that refers to alloys that consist of inexpensive, low-melting point metals used to make fast, inexpensive castings. There is no scientific metallurgical standard for pot metal; common metals in pot metal include zinc, lead, copper, tin, magnesium, aluminium, iron, and cadmium. The primary advantage of pot metal is that it is quick and easy to cast. Due to its low melting temperature no sophisticated foundry equipment is needed and specialized molds are not necessary. It is sometimes used to experiment with molds and ideas before using metals of higher quality. It is sometime referred to as white metal, die-cast zinc, or monkey metal.[1] Examples of items created from pot metal include toys, furniture fittings, tool parts, electronics components, and automotive parts.[citation needed]

Pot metal can be prone to instability over time, as it has a tendency to bend, distort, crack, shatter, and pit with age.[1] The low boiling point of zinc and the fast cooling of the newly-cast part often allow air bubbles to remain within the cast part, weakening the metal.[1] Many of the components of pot metal are susceptible to corrosion from airborne acids and other contaminants, and the internal corrosion of the metal often causes the decorative plating to flake off.[citation needed] Pot metal is not easily glued, soldered or welded.[1]

At one time, "pot metal" referred to a copper alloy that was primarily alloyed with lead. 67% Cu, 29% Pb & 4% Sb and 80 Cu, 20% Pb were common formulations.[2]

The primary component of pot metal is zinc, but often the caster adds other metals to the mix to strengthen the cast part, improve the flow of the molten metal, or to reduce cost.[dubious – discuss] With a low melting point of 419 °C (786 °F), zinc is often alloyed with other metals including lead, tin, aluminium and copper.
[edit] See also

* Babbitt metal
* White metal
* Zamak
* Zinc aluminium

[~tc~]

Since everyone already posted the wikipedia link, let me say I agree with that wiki entry COMPLETELY.

The "white metal" nomenclature comes from the shiny, white appearance of the fracture surface since it usually fails in a brittle mode, cleaving/splitting along one of the crystal planes.

[ledman]

I love polymer weapons. My M&P 15-22 and my Glock 19 are my favorite weapons I own. Gotta love em! And I also own what some would call, "real" AR's and handguns...metal...the polymer ones will kill something just as well as the non-polymer weapons. So, for on the go movement(hunting, running from zombies), I will take the lighter weapons.

[ChattanoogaPhil]

Thanks guys. I think the term pot metal sounds a bit derogatory when describing someones rifle. Perhaps "Monkey Metal" (as in the link) would be a more palatable substitute?

[BELT_FED]

we have a 4 letter word for this kind of metal... if you ever have to try and weld it this word will be the most common word said

[DasFriek]

I didn't want to argue the term "pot metal" but any zinc alloy can be called pot metal.
It doesn't make it a bad thing, Ask anyone who owns a Highpoint.
I think Colt used it to put weight into an area of the gun where high strength isn't necessary but extra weight is desirable.

the thing is, Is to not get hung up on "names" and look at how it works and feels. I know there are alot of Highpoint owners who are very happy with their whole gun even tho its made of pot metal, Frame and slide anyhow.

Last time i checked plastic cost alot less than any pot metal does.
So if anything the S&W guys like me should be mad we bought Super Soaker squirt guns with metal internals.

[Brett248Vista]

Plastics are cheaper than metal? Not really.. Depends a lot on the plastic.. There are lots of composite materials that cost more than steel, pound for pound.

[Jswiney9]

the glocks at our local police academy are used every year for training, thousands and thousands and thousands of rounds have been through them with no problems. I love hi-points, they are cheap and shoot great. there is nothing wrong with polymer unless it explodes in your face and causes people to start hating one of the best gun companies in the world.

[Brett248Vista]

For the record.... NONE of the 15-22's have "Exploded" there may have been Out Of Battery discharges, which have dislodged the extractors, but there have been no sort of exploding guns, the polymer has held up, and I can and have shown you similar Out Of Battery discharges in everything from AR 22 Conversion kits to the Ruger 10/22 to the Mark II.

[ChattanoogaPhil]

For as many OOB as these 15-22s are reported to have (which seems to be a great deal more than other .22s) I think we would have had reports on the Forum by now if the polymer failed. And I really can't imagine that a .22 OOB would ever be capable of doing so. Though, there have been a few reports of the polymer "chipping" around the ejection port for whatever reason, and that really sucks.

As far as 'explosion' - The casing explodes and that's the issue. There's pics in this forum of a girl catching a frag in her arm.

[Brett248Vista]

Yep Polymer is pretty tough stuff.. Tough enough to make cars out of...

Add some fibers to the plastic and you get a material that can have more torsional rigidity than steel.

[Jswiney9]

Originally Posted by Brett248Vista

For the record.... NONE of the 15-22's have "Exploded" there may have been Out Of Battery discharges, which have dislodged the extractors, but there have been no sort of exploding guns, the polymer has held up, and I can and have shown you similar Out Of Battery discharges in everything from AR 22 Conversion kits to the Ruger 10/22 to the Mark II.

im pretty sure that most people would find the sarcasm in that post brett, i would hope that nobody would think that the gun itself exploded on somebody. if anyone that comes here wants to hate polymer, look up a company called MOOG, they make hydraulic actuators and bearings using this stuff.

[Brett248Vista]

JS,

It's all good! As I've said before, I don't think these rifles should fire OOB, but I can say the same about the Ceiner conversion kits, the 10/22, the Mark II and Mark III, the 22 Glock conversion kits and the Beretta 22 conversion kits, all of which I found examples of OOB on the net.

It's sad that these items were manufacturer and sent out to us, to Beta test!

[whoppo]

...and for all these years I thought "pot metal" was some kinda hard rock music the kids listened to while gettin' high... silly me.

I for one welcome our new Polymer overlords!! (and love my poly guns!)

[M4J0R T0M]

Originally Posted by kilo6echo

It seems like when I see folks comparing the 15-22 to another .22 tactical rifle platform, I hear a lot of, "It's all plastic and light", or "It feels like a toy".

To me I like the light weight design. I like having kick on a .22 rifle, for me it is part of the fun. People also forget that there are are several well made polymer based handguns out there too.

Polymer is a proven platform - "see Glock". It proven for it's durability, longevity, and lack of corrosion. Despite all the benefits people will hate on them because they may be old fashioned or they just don't understand the benefits. There are also a lot fanboys out there who will taut what they own and downplay what they don't.

For me it was simple, I basically had four choices.

.22lr conversion kit for my AR15
Dedicated upper for my AR15
Colt .22 AR15
S&W 15-22

I went with the 15-22 largely because it was polymer. I appreciate the benefits, especially the absence of the additional weight. Last time I checked this was a desirable feature in a firearm. I also liked the fact that the manual of arms closely imitates my real AR.

I think most of the people that knock would sing a different tune if they were able to put about 500 rounds through the bad boy, that's only my opinion of course.

[KaiDoi]

I own 6 Glock handguns. One of which is the first gen G17. That particular G17 has shown no wear for the worst after some 17,000+ rounds. It was retired to the safe a few years ago for sentimental reasons. I'm sure that the polymer frame could go another 17,000 rounds without issue.

[DasFriek]

Ill make my opinions on polymer used in guns in 60 years which would make me 99 years old.
Plastic does become brittle with age, But iirc Glock has been around 25+ years and no signs of brittleness has showed up yet.

The only proven gun material that has been known to handle 100 years and still be usable is steel. But even then the advances in ammo many times made those steels too weak to contain them.

So no material is future proof and its all safe, Some just have more and different benefits and downsides than others.

The big test will not be if you gun will still work in 100 years it will be do they still make ammo to shoot in that gun anymore.

[Brett248Vista]

Well, there are two materials that are sure fire, safe..

Titanium and 316l Stainless Steel.

[HalfSwiss]

I just hope the big test isn't that you won't even be allowed to have a gun in 100 years.

[whoppo]

Originally Posted by HalfSwiss

I just hope the big test isn't that you won't even be allowed to have a gun in 100 years.

By that time we'll be mounting our red dots and green lasers to Type-II Phasers ... great for heating up rocks on those cold, remote planets.

[TurboniumOxide]

ooo. Nice Star Trek reference.

+1

When I pick up the 15-22, it doesn't feel like a cheap piece of plastic to me. I think that the polymer will still be just like new in 100 years time. That is part of the problem with the material, if it ends up in a landfill. I could see intense UV damaging it on the surface, maybe. Most composites are UV resistant nowadays.

Composites are more tolerant of flex and strain than are metals and might actually survive more damage than machined metal parts.

This is not your daddys plastic anymore.

I want a 17HMR upper!

[lonejacklarry]

Much of the fuselage of the new Boeing 787 Dreamliner and Airbus A350 XWB will be composed of CFRP (carbon fiber reinforced polymer) according to my buddy, Pilot Mike. He flies a 330 Airbus and ought to know about which he speaks.

Both airplane manufacturers claim that the CFPR is both lighter and stronger than aluminum. I think, then, it ought to be strong enough for a firearm.

I like the 15-22--I don't particularly like S&W anymore.

[Jswiney9]

just for the record i went out and bought a new hi-point C9. cleaned off the excess oil and went and shot it. felt good. nothing wrong with polymer

[Shock&Awe]

Déjà vu comments from the 1960's when the U.S. Air Force sent some "plastic" M-16 rifles to Vietnam for field testing against the Viet Cong & NVR.

Burt Rutan proved the reliability of composites in aircraft components decades ago. The OLD F-16 Fighter had a composite tail in the 1970's.

Now we have polymer upper & lower receivers from S&W.

Anyone except me remember the Remington Nylon 22 Rifle in the 1970's, that K-Mart use to give away for FREE every-time you purchased 5K rounds of Remington .22LR ammo?

[VMaxSplat]

Personally, I love the polymer construction. Besides the advantage of being lightweight, it is durable and corrosion proof. What's not to like?

[Brett248Vista]

Originally Posted by Shock&Awe

Déjà vu comments from the 1960's when the U.S. Air Force sent some "plastic" M-16 rifles to Vietnam for field testing against the Viet Cong & NVR.

Burt Rutan proved the reliability of composites in aircraft components decades ago. The OLD F-16 Fighter had a composite tail in the 1970's.

Now we have polymer upper & lower receivers from S&W.

Anyone except me remember the Remington Nylon 22 Rifle in the 1970's, that K-Mart use to give away for FREE every-time you purchased 5K rounds of Remington .22LR ammo?

Of course... I just sold mine



There were 10's of 10's of thousands of rounds through this rifle. Sold it for $150 no questions asked... And the bolt didn't ride on no fancy steel rails like the 15-22, nope, the bolt rode and wore directly on the nylon...

[Shock&Awe]

Originally Posted by Brett248Vista

There were 10's of 10's of thousands of rounds through this rifle. Sold it for $150 no questions asked... And the bolt didn't ride on no fancy steel rails like the 15-22, nope, the bolt rode and wore directly on the nylon...

Mine had a brown nylon stock & 10 round clip, but your deal beats mine. While my Remington Nylon 22 Rifle was FREE from Remington, you basically got paid $150 for shooting it these past 30+ years!

30-40 years from now, I wonder if S&W Forum members will be posting about their OLD S&W M&P 15-22 rifles

[ladder13]

Originally Posted by Shock&Awe

30-40 years from now, I wonder if S&W Forum members will be posting about their OLD S&W M&P 15-22 rifles

Guess it depends on the electorate.

[BELT_FED]

ask a 1911 own and they will tell you... " them poly guns wont last a week in real combat, kids!!" lol....

[Brett248Vista]

Originally Posted by BELT_FED

ask a 1911 own and they will tell you... " them poly guns wont last a week in real combat, kids!!" lol....

They also said a 9mm wouldn't do it's job, when the M9 replaced the 1911. People fear what they don't understand

[Shock&Awe]

Originally Posted by BELT_FED

ask a 1911 own and they will tell you... " them poly guns wont last a week in real combat, kids!!" lol....

I still have the M1911 that my Grandfather carried as a Lt. in Europe during the Great War in 1918. He may be gone, but his M1911 still kills it's share of paper enemies.

[mag318]

I bought a Colt/Umarex M4 when they first came out, because I liked the way it looked. This was before S&W came out with the M&P15-22. What a mistake, this was one of the worst rifles I've ever owned. Trying to take it down was a nightmare, I was shocked at how poorly designed it was. I like to be able to field strip my rifles for a thorough cleaning, something you can't do with the Colt. The first time to the range the safety fell out after about 50 rounds and the trigger was awful. To say I was disappointed is a huge understatement.
The M&P15-22 was a totally opposite experience, the rifle is a vastly superior design and takes down just like any centerfire AR. The trigger was great compared to the Colt and I never had a jam with it. This was an early version with Gen I magazines. When S&W came out with the A1 version with the factory installed flash hider I bought one because I thought it looked a little more complete. This rifle came with Gen II magazines and has been just as reliable as my earlier one. I went to the range yesterday with some friends and we put 550 rounds of Federal bulk thru it followed by another 250 of Federal 710s, not one single malfunction. We were firing as fast as we could and still could not get it to malfunction. I just posted a U-Tube video last night to show people what a reliable rifle this is. Smith & Wesson hit a home run with this series of rifles.

[Jswiney9]

Originally Posted by mag318

I bought a Colt/Umarex M4 when they first came out, because I liked the way it looked. This was before S&W came out with the M&P15-22. What a mistake, this was one of the worst rifles I've ever owned. Trying to take it down was a nightmare, I was shocked at how poorly designed it was. I like to be able to field strip my rifles for a thorough cleaning, something you can't do with the Colt. The first time to the range the safety fell out after about 50 rounds and the trigger was awful. To say I was disappointed is a huge understatement.
The M&P15-22 was a totally opposite experience, the rifle is a vastly superior design and takes down just like any centerfire AR. The trigger was great compared to the Colt and I never had a jam with it. This was an early version with Gen I magazines. When S&W came out with the A1 version with the factory installed flash hider I bought one because I thought it looked a little more complete. This rifle came with Gen II magazines and has been just as reliable as my earlier one. I went to the range yesterday with some friends and we put 550 rounds of Federal bulk thru it followed by another 250 of Federal 710s, not one single malfunction. We were firing as fast as we could and still could not get it to malfunction. I just posted a U-Tube video last night to show people what a reliable rifle this is. Smith & Wesson hit a home run with this series of rifles.

too bad not as many people feel the same way. Every time i change my mind and go to buy one there is one sitting in the shop having problems. im glad tha you are having fun with yours though.

[Brett248Vista]

I feel the same way as Mag does.. The only reason mine went back was for the broken mag release. They changed the springs while it was there for the mag release but I never had any firing issues from day 1.

*shrugs*

[~tc~]

Went shooting again today.

I am beginning to see there are 2 problems with this rifle:
- too much rail space for accessories
- everyone wants to talk to you about it and shoot it