The end of the Steel Pistol?

[GB]

Going along with general direction this thread seems to be taking. And being an old guy myself. We have a tendency to resist change. (About the only thing I look forward to changing is my underwear and socks) Those of us that are ex-LEO (and especially if we are male) hated the change from wheelguns to the world of spray and pray semi-autos. The outcry of the masses when guns started to have non-steel parts of any kind, let alone plastic could be heard over the roar of the 440 V8 in our police crusiers and even over the roar of the allnight oldies or country station on the AM radio(if you chief was willing to let you have a radio or air conditioning, But I digress). Barring the advent of some new shooting sport that requires the use of classic firearms made of steel and wood (think SASS but for DA revolvers and classic style semi-autos like 19ll,1/2/3rd generation Smiths and it must become wildly popular like SASS) the all steel and wood firearms that we grew up on will continue to become a smaller part of the shooting sports both because of the cost to build and the lack of popular availability. Example: Winchester 94, a rifle many of use grew up lusting for and many of us have or currently own. Millions sold and then discontinued by Win. when the cost to manufacture became greater than the return to the company. Now it has returned but at a cost of over $1100.00! It ain't going to last long at that price. Smith has ventured into the fray with their classic series of revolvers but at a MSRP that is well above price of a really nice shooter grade of the same model. And with the continuation of atleast one model of 3rd generation Smith Semi-auto, I think that we will see a reintroduction of some type of Smith (Classic) models in the future. But never a return to them as the norm.

Change is sometimes a good thing and sometime it sucks! Depends on you perspective at the time.

I think it must be time to go check my medication as I seem to be in rant mode. GB out.

 

[S. Kelly]

I think in the 1870s, there were shooters who lamented the passing of black powder Colts over the new fangled cartridge Colt revolvers.

 

[VTHokiesDuckHunter]

Wow, there are really some lame analogies being used here.

I'm sure there are a few Luddites that just resist technology for technologies sake, I don't think that's the case of those of us that prefer alloy and steel frames over plastic.

On the other hand, most of us, yes, even us cavemen that prefer metal framed pistols, value better quality contol, aluminum alloy and scandium materials, night sights, Melonite surface hardening, etc. Just because we dont prefer the lighter weight and cheaper feel of a polymer frame doesnt mean we resist change.

I like flying on modern planes. They use a lot more carbon fiber and plastics, But they also use a lot of titanium and aluminum. I haven't yet seen any quality wheels for cars or motorcycles made out of plastic.

I think on this forum, a lot of people that are S&W only oriented folks look at things as "pre Polymer guns" and After Polymer Guns" (or maybe we could date this as Metal Era (ME) and Plastic Era (PE). In the real world, Beretta fans and SIG fans don't see it that way. Because unlike S&W, they give their customers a choice.

 

[BuckeyeChuck]

I would argue that steel frame weapons are not expensive either. In some places,including these parts in South Dakota a Glock 17 and a Beretta 92 are neck and neck for list prices new.Factoring in the lower cost to produce, and its clear Glock is making like a bandit profit wise.Springfield XDm's go for $600 new .

Another excellent point. We shouldn't confuse price with cost. Price is what you pay to acquire the gun. Cost is the money invested in its manufacture. Unless the price and cost of the OEM is known, then the final price is no indication of whether metal guns are as profitable as plastic.

Manufacturers will work hard to reduce the cost of manufacture 1/2 of 1%. This is right and good, and we expect them to learn new methods and materials to reduce the cost of the items we buy from them. Some seem to regard the results of this drive as a necessary reduction of quality, but such a conclusion is too broad to be credible. Quality is a detailed topic and requires detailed thought.

I also think the resistance to polymer frames is partly generational. Simply put, plastic is a modern marvel. It has remarkable structural properties, is inherently corrosion resistant, and can be formed into complex shapes with simple processes whose costs laugh metal working right out of the room.

So why the generational disconnect? I'm 40. I haven't lived in an era where metal was the dominant structural metal for consumer goods. But I understand that when consumer goods were transitioning from all-metal construction to a significant (or predominant) amount of plastic, there were many things which were done very badly and plastic became synonymous with junk. But this simply isn't true for the 40-and-under crowd. I'm grateful for the plastic in my laptop, my car, my phone, and even my trash cans. (Man, I remember those awful metal cans when I was a kid. Gimme plastic, please.) I'll take steel-reinforced vinyl windows any day over metal windows and I'll them twice per day over wood. I don't look at plastic and connect it with junk. I've seen lots of junk, and it's made out of all kinds of materials, including metal. Just ask my about my Chiappa 1911-22. It's all metal, but it's not quality.

I think a good many people have never been able to overcome the stigma once associated with plastic, and I think a lot of them frequent this board.

 

[BuckeyeChuck]

Wow, there are really some lame analogies being used here.

...

I haven't yet seen any quality wheels for cars or motorcycles made out of plastic.

Talk about lame analogies...

Of COURSE there aren't any quality plastic wheels for cars or motorcycles. For the cost, plastic is an inappropriate material for that application. They also aren't made of glass, stone, wood, or concrete.

 

[Silversmok3]

Talk about lame analogies...

Of COURSE there aren't any quality plastic wheels for cars or motorcycles. For the cost, plastic is an inappropriate material for that application. They also aren't made of glass, stone, wood, or concrete.

I think we're getting off topic here a bit.

The point is not whether plastic has a place in society for building materials or car parts.

Focusing on firearms-and only firearms-my point is not that polymer is inferior or superior to metal frames or vice versa, but that metal frame semi-autos are disappearing from the marketplace.

Not everyone is the same,so what works for one shooter may not work for the next. I personally shoot metal guns way better than polymer due to reasons regarding trigger feel and weight of the weapon, but anyone reading this may find shooting a Glock more comfortable. And thats OK.

But there need to be a choice!

A healthy mix of polymer and metal frame weapons on sale would do me just fine. But that's not what I see when I go to the gun store. I see Glocks of all kinds and calibers, XDs, XDms, M&P in various calibers and frame colors,Sigma,Taurus Polymer models, Ruger's SR9/40 and compacts ,Beretta PX4s, and FN's offerings.

The metal frame guns-Sig Models, Beretta 92's and variants,and high end 1911s. The End.

Im hoping there wont be a day when I go to the counter and the teenager working there says "they made frames out of metal?Say What?"

 

[VaRecon]

I agree that steel frames are losing popularity due to the light weight and durability of polymer guns. (Glock, FNP, XD, etc)
While I personally prefer a heavier gun made of durable steel I understand for concealed carry and use in the field a steel frame with less then 12 shots is simply not what today's departments desire.
I for one would like to hear more feedback from retired police officers or military veterans who can give a better opinion of what they need when under fire.

 

[tocohillsguy]

I prefer metal pistols, but when I go to IDPA events what I see most often are polymer pistols, with the most popular being Glocks. The only metal pistols I see are 1911s and a few Berettas and Sigs. I occasionally shoot a CZ, but it's the only one I've seen at an IDPA event. I hear the CZ's are popular at IPSC events, but I've never been to one of those. The Glocks are popular for a number of reasons: cheap, reliable, low maintenance, and a consistent trigger with a short reset. Glock shooters seem to revel in how ugly it is, and how long they can go without cleaning it. For them it's just a tool, and they view it as being the Timex of firearms. Thus far I've managed to avoid its allure, but there is no debating they have certain advantages. Particularly if you are running a large LEO armory. They are easy and cheap to fix, and they stand up well to the firearm abusive LEOs.

 

[quneur]

My dog will eat plastic guns for fun. She will eat the outer layer of golf balls if she can get a hold of one.

I would like to see a manufacturer make a poly gun able to shoot a .44 mag or .454 casull or the little .500 S&W mag.

 

[Silversmok3]

There is a YouTube video of a Glock 17 Gen 4 field stripping itself when an accessory is attached to the rail.That's a problem I can't see a Model 4506 or 659 ever having.

 

[WR Moore]

We went plastic in 2006 with S&W M&Ps replacing a mix of 1006s & 4006s. We did so for two reasons: we couldn't get 10mm ammo in the quantities we needed any longer and we found in T&E that we could get a better combat gun for everyone at less than it would cost to buy enough 4006s to retire the 1006s. FWIW, the average qual score went up, with many 4006 users commenting the new pistol had less apparent recoil.

Back in our T&Es in the early 1990s where we selected the 1006, I found there were some positives about non-metal frames: they don't leach heat out of your hand in the cold, don't transmit heat and they greatly reduce the portion of the weapon you need to worry about rust/corrosion in. Lower bore locations of striker fired weapons can also reduce muzzle rise/recoil reaction despite lower weight.

Going non-metallic also allowed S&W to make a strong comeback in the LE marketplace and, I expect, in the other markets also. I don't follow their stock, but right now it's hard to find any company who's stock is doing well.