Thanks for comments -- Y'all's comments are reinforcing my thinking.
Thanks! Guide rod and mag release are steel. Only the magazine safety plunger is plastic, but it is not a critical part. It looks to be in fine shape for being 25 years old. I believe it can just be removed and the pistol would function, albeit without the magazine safety feature, but I am going to leave it "as is."
The installation of Novak Low-Mount white-dot front and rear sights, with milling required for the rear, will drive the total cost up to a little over double what I paid for the 915. [Correction, added later: it added $154.20 to the $275 original cost]. Economically, that pushes the envelope on value, and isn't justified by resale prospects -- but it helps that I am paying for it in two increments, and I'll get a pistol I really like. As I get older, I have lost interest in striker-fired guns, good tools that many of them are; the only guns that seem to interest me are older AND accurate ones, like the 915.
To the OP:
While your 915 is there, you ought to ask if they can install an all metal magazine release and a metal guide rod set up, which I think are the only other changes besides sights needed to make the 915 the substantial equivalent of the 5904 in terms of ruggedness.
Oops, upon re-reading your post, I see you have researched the use of polymer parts in the 915. I thought the later ones had the plastic magazine button, and I thought they all had plastic guide rods, but it is likely I am wrong. As to the plunger you mention, I believe it is polymer even in the 5900 Series, isn't it?
In any event, the 915 is a good weapon.
Thanks! Guide rod and mag release are steel. Only the magazine safety plunger is plastic, but it is not a critical part. It looks to be in fine shape for being 25 years old. I believe it can just be removed and the pistol would function, albeit without the magazine safety feature, but I am going to leave it "as is."
The installation of Novak Low-Mount white-dot front and rear sights, with milling required for the rear, will drive the total cost up to a little over double what I paid for the 915. [Correction, added later: it added $154.20 to the $275 original cost]. Economically, that pushes the envelope on value, and isn't justified by resale prospects -- but it helps that I am paying for it in two increments, and I'll get a pistol I really like. As I get older, I have lost interest in striker-fired guns, good tools that many of them are; the only guns that seem to interest me are older AND accurate ones, like the 915.
Last edited: