I don't like plastic pistols

[Singer B]

Well, I have a baseline 226 in 9mm also... Here's the gunpile, I think everyone knows everyone...?

Nice grouping!

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[GunnyUSMC]

Well, I have a baseline 226 in 9mm also... Here's the gunpile, I think everyone knows everyone...?

You need more guns.

[browningautorifle]

You need more guns.

I did have... Mostly those have changed hands now.

[Ovidio]

I'd like that revolver...the one up left...with original wooden grips...
Very nice piece!

[GunnyUSMC]

I wouldn't carry a glock for work if they paid me. Great for the nightstand and leave it there. After a friend of mine was shot during a traffic stop when his glock failed, we learned that glocks at that time had a significant flaw - if you draw the slide back slightly (as sometimes happens when you holster your sidearm), it would de-cock the internal firing pin. When removed from holster, the slide would go forward but not far enough to re-cock the weapon. Glock settled out with him for 6 figures and made him sign a non-disclosure agreement. Later as a commander, some of my younger deputies asked why I carried one of "those old sigs." I explained the above story, and as some of you may be doing now, they scoffed at it. They went to the range that day and the next day they were in office asking about my "old sig." Turns out they actually tested their glocks and were able to recreate the failure with all of them. There is a reason a baseline P226 is $1,000 and a baseline glock is $400 and they will give you 30+% off. Thank you to those of you who served in the military. We all owe you a great debt!

What year was that? What Gen. Glock was that? You do know that several changes have been made to Glocks over the years, and the trigger system has gone through four or more changes since the first came out.

[Singer B]

What year was that? What Gen. Glock was that? You do know that several changes have been made to Glocks over the years, and the trigger system has gone through four or more changes since the first came out.

It was quite a few years ago so hopefully they have fixed the problems. I have never liked glocks so I couldn't tell you what generation it was. Personally, I wouldn't carry a sidearm for personal protection manufactured by a company that covers up the problem and doesn't place the safety of its customers over their profit margin. The fact that they have "generations" and made more than a couple of changes indicates there were some problems. It's not a bad pistol, its just not one I would recommend as a work gun that your life, and your partners' lives, depends upon.

[pocketshaver]

standard milspec 1911a1 frame has been proven to be able to survive firing 80,000 mil spec 45 acp loads before major frame destruction, ie cracking where the slide stop goes through the frame renders the gun unusable. The same frame has been tested out at 35-40,000 standard issue .40sw.

Plastic is far weaker. Once almost bought a EAA witness polymer gun in 40sw to carry out and about. Choose a revolver when I could pull the pistol out of the holster at the gun store counter and point it at a target on the store wall, and the same amount of force needed to activate a 1911 grip safety was enough force to CRUSH the plastic grip into the magazine. That crushing put so much force on the magazine it couldn't be removed or inserted. And following year EAA started redesigning their guns for stamped sheet steel reinforcements to deal with that issue.

Sure they have done major testing as far as round count goes with Glock and other plastic guns, but I don't trust them at all. Why? testing standards are meaningless. if they used FULL POWER ammunition that's one thing, but if they do the standard "gun shoots great with .32 wadcutters, so the 10mm auto version should be GREAT with full power hunting loads" crap

[Eaglelord17]

standard milspec 1911a1 frame has been proven to be able to survive firing 80,000 mil spec 45 acp loads before major frame destruction, ie cracking where the slide stop goes through the frame renders the gun unusable. The same frame has been tested out at 35-40,000 standard issue .40sw.

Plastic is far weaker. Once almost bought a EAA witness polymer gun in 40sw to carry out and about. Choose a revolver when I could pull the pistol out of the holster at the gun store counter and point it at a target on the store wall, and the same amount of force needed to activate a 1911 grip safety was enough force to CRUSH the plastic grip into the magazine. That crushing put so much force on the magazine it couldn't be removed or inserted. And following year EAA started redesigning their guns for stamped sheet steel reinforcements to deal with that issue.

Sure they have done major testing as far as round count goes with Glock and other plastic guns, but I don't trust them at all. Why? testing standards are meaningless. if they used FULL POWER ammunition that's one thing, but if they do the standard "gun shoots great with .32 wadcutters, so the 10mm auto version should be GREAT with full power hunting loads" crap

Ok but how many parts needed to be replaced on that 1911 before it reached that point?

You have chosen one example of a poorly designed pistol (if it wasn't poorly designed they wouldn't have redesigned it) to illustrate why you don't like polymer. Simply put a Glock or any other of these modern pistols (by the major brands) last significantly longer with less stoppages than a original 1911. There is a reason they are replacing the 1911s and other metal framed pistols. In fact their design has lineage to the 1911, just done in a smarter way (locking on the chamber instead of rings on the barrel).

I'm still a revolver guy here so I don't need to worry about polymer anytime soon.

[pocketshaver]

Ok but how many parts needed to be replaced on that 1911 before it reached that point?

You have chosen one example of a poorly designed pistol (if it wasn't poorly designed they wouldn't have redesigned it) to illustrate why you don't like polymer. Simply put a Glock or any other of these modern pistols (by the major brands) last significantly longer with less stoppages than a original 1911. There is a reason they are replacing the 1911s and other metal framed pistols. In fact their design has lineage to the 1911, just done in a smarter way (locking on the chamber instead of rings on the barrel).

I'm still a revolver guy here so I don't need to worry about polymer anytime soon.

your logic is rather similar to that of the person who buys a bryco or Jennings or phoenix arms pocket auto made from zinc alloy and puts it in a sock drawer and never uses it for 20 years and then says to everyone at year 21 of sock drawer ownership, that it has been 100% flawless in function.

[emmagee1917]

Well , I got in the recoil assemblies for my Colt / Kimber Defenders in yesterday . Put them in last night . Boy are they harder to pull back and boy , are they snappier . Replaced the firing pin and mainsprings as well . Should be good for 1500-2000 before the outer spring is up for replacement and 5-6,000 for the inner assembly and all the rest . That should be around every 8 months and every two years for my carry gun .
Chris