Jim PHL
Member
Forgive me, members and moderators, if I maybe should have posted this as a single comment in the "demise" thread instead of starting a new one, but I think it does bring a new question into the mix.
Most of the conversation about ceasing production of the third gen series revolves around the expense in materials and machining of the steel +/or aluminum frames. I guess my question is whether there are engineering considerations around the traditional hammer/trigger system that preclude S+W from making polymer-framed versions of their rightfully popular designs? In other words, they can obviously mass-produce polymer frames at a much lower cost than metal, but would the top-end still push the production costs too high?
I, like many here, personally prefer aluminum or steel framed pistols and a TDA or DAO trigger system (with a hammer), but I'm not dead-set against plastic. (Just haven't found the right one yet!) I'm sure I'd be near the front of the line when a polymer-framed 3953 or CS9D hit the streets. Just as many fans of the 6906 in 9mm would do the same, I'm sure. The 457 has a ton of fans as a .45 carry gun. How about one just a tad lighter with the lower NIB price tag the polymer frame would bring?
Perhaps this has been asked before, or perhaps there is something obvious I am missing regarding the costs of the rest of the gun? The uppers on most modern designs are still steel slides and barrels plus a trigger system and a striker or hammer system. What I don't know is, generally speaking, is a modern striker system more cost effective to produce than a traditional hammer system? Maybe it would be as simple as putting a 3913 slide assembly on a new polymer frame. It is likely much more involved than that, but given S+W's built-in fan base, do you think they would ever look into it (or may have already)?
Most of the conversation about ceasing production of the third gen series revolves around the expense in materials and machining of the steel +/or aluminum frames. I guess my question is whether there are engineering considerations around the traditional hammer/trigger system that preclude S+W from making polymer-framed versions of their rightfully popular designs? In other words, they can obviously mass-produce polymer frames at a much lower cost than metal, but would the top-end still push the production costs too high?
I, like many here, personally prefer aluminum or steel framed pistols and a TDA or DAO trigger system (with a hammer), but I'm not dead-set against plastic. (Just haven't found the right one yet!) I'm sure I'd be near the front of the line when a polymer-framed 3953 or CS9D hit the streets. Just as many fans of the 6906 in 9mm would do the same, I'm sure. The 457 has a ton of fans as a .45 carry gun. How about one just a tad lighter with the lower NIB price tag the polymer frame would bring?
Perhaps this has been asked before, or perhaps there is something obvious I am missing regarding the costs of the rest of the gun? The uppers on most modern designs are still steel slides and barrels plus a trigger system and a striker or hammer system. What I don't know is, generally speaking, is a modern striker system more cost effective to produce than a traditional hammer system? Maybe it would be as simple as putting a 3913 slide assembly on a new polymer frame. It is likely much more involved than that, but given S+W's built-in fan base, do you think they would ever look into it (or may have already)?