What's Wrong With Polymer Framed And Striker Fired Guns
- Thread starter kokapelli
- Start date
- Status
tangomike706
Member
I own a bunch of each , and believe in there being a right gun for every occasion , sometimes it's a Glock 19 , and sometimes it's a 1911, to each his(her) own.
RussB
Member
I like guns 
I have some of each, and luv them all
I have some of each, and luv them all
mljdeckard
Member
I am a 1911 guy. But it's not because there is anything at all wrong with polymer-framed guns. My wife carries an XD-9.
MyGreenGuns
Member
^Best answer yet. I agree 100%
I love my poly gun, it goes everywhere with me. It has a higher capacity than a metal version of it, and there is no hammer to snag on my clothes.
My only autoloader is poly. My revolvers are metal.
huntsman
Member
I carry an LCP because I'm too poor to buy a Seecamp, life is about compromise and that's as far as I'm willing to go with plastic.
It's my belief the plastic gun market is a big rip-off perpetuated by the gun industry on gullible buyers.
$500. should get a new all metal pistol not a pile of plastic. You asked, I answered.
Last edited:
Ah, so there is a place for polymer guns.
I can assure from personal,experience the LCP is far more pleasant to shoot than the Seecamp.
danez71
Member
IMO, the worse thing is that they all seem top heavy.
bikemutt
Member
Try one loaded.
MyGreenGuns
Member
I've been reading the responses. And talking to the screen. So, I'll post some thoughts. (Not trying to be a jerk, but its been a long week and my brain is in a weird mood.)
re: Joan Holloway
Very beautiful, but could never get into a girl with real short hair. You -DO- know that women still come in all shapes and sizes, right?
"Weight is a sign of reliability. Besides, if it does not work, you can always hit him with it!" -Boris the Blade (from the movie "Snatch")
Reload.
When you were a kid, plastic was a relatively NEW technology. It has come a long way since then.
re: Joan Holloway
Very beautiful, but could never get into a girl with real short hair. You -DO- know that women still come in all shapes and sizes, right?
(Hey that rhymes!)
"Weight is a sign of reliability. Besides, if it does not work, you can always hit him with it!" -Boris the Blade (from the movie "Snatch")
I had to look up "svelte". It means slender and elegant. It applies to people only, not things. Metal guns are heavy and chunky, so that is probably not the right word.
You are out of ammo.
Reload.
danez71
Member
Are you two making assumptions or trying to be funny.
I have had the MP9c with the 12 rnd mags for 4 yrs and is my primary. Ive also had a BHP since 94.
As compared to a metal framed gun.... polymer guns are more top heavy.
ugaarguy
Member
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2006
- Messages
- 13,828
If you dislike polymer so much why wouldn't you buy an NAA Guardian instead of the LCP?
There are still quite a few all metal handguns available for $500 or less. Your belief that plastic frames are a rip off is completely unfounded though. If your fellow gun owners are as gullible as you think they are, then they're in the vast majority. Do you really think the American gun buying market is that foolish?
Magnuumpwr
Member
If all steel frame guns were that great there would not be any polymer ones. The same goes the other way, if polymer frames were all that great there would not be any new steel ones. Personally, I have no preference, steel or poly, striker or hammer fired. Does anyone make a steel, striker fired gun? I own a poly/ hammer fired, poly/striker fired, and the venerable steel/hammer fired. Never mind, looked through my log book, Jennings and Lorcin make all metal, striker fired guns.
Last edited:
MedWheeler
Member
I don't get the poll. You ask "what's wrong with them?", but only include choices related to whether or not we "like" them.
That being said, I like the heft of a good, all-steel gun, but like the lightness of a polymer-framed concealed-carry piece.
I have little experience with centerfire striker-fired guns, and the only one I own is a Hi-Point, which I have not yet fired. I shot a friend's Glock 17 a bit, but the gun just "didn't fit", and I don't think it had anything to do with either its trigger or striker mechanism.
My Ruger P95 runs quite well in my hand, better than I thought it would, but the SR9 is, to me, certainly handsome. Probably would have gotten one of them instead if the price difference were smaller.
I guess I just haven't developed a preference yet.
That being said, I like the heft of a good, all-steel gun, but like the lightness of a polymer-framed concealed-carry piece.
I have little experience with centerfire striker-fired guns, and the only one I own is a Hi-Point, which I have not yet fired. I shot a friend's Glock 17 a bit, but the gun just "didn't fit", and I don't think it had anything to do with either its trigger or striker mechanism.
My Ruger P95 runs quite well in my hand, better than I thought it would, but the SR9 is, to me, certainly handsome. Probably would have gotten one of them instead if the price difference were smaller.
I guess I just haven't developed a preference yet.
Blue Brick
Member
The hair is shoulder length and pined back for office. And yes I know, but it’s the whole zaftig not chunky package.
….And now back to your regular scheduled thread….
The first one that comes to mind is the H&K P7
I was trained on the 1911, and carried a M9 on duty. I purchased a Glock 19C, and a LCP. I sold them both in the last 30 days. Now I have a SIG P938.
Polymer vs metal: polymer can't rust, corrode, or wear down to a base layer. Metal guns these days have excellent finishes that are highly resistant, too. Polymer can assume complex shapes that are difficult to machine, and can achieve a singularly organic look. Metal guns are somewhat limited by the machining process and always have a machine like appearance. It's very difficult to modify a cast polymer part, it's easy to modify a metal part or even refinish it. A polymer gun that has aged from long use is basically a melt job with the external details worn, the metal gun aged from long use is said to have a patina, and collectors may even pay extra for it.
Strikers vs ? Must be hammers. Strikers are spring loaded firing pins held captive and released with a sear mechanism. They take up length in the slide and because of that are not compact. Strikers can be partially cocked with the trigger pull finishing the complete retraction before release. But, like bolt guns, they could be held fully back, cocked and locked like a bolt gun. Nobody is doing that, however. Hammer guns use a similar spring, but it's located vertically in the grip to actuate a hammer, which rotates the motion 90 degrees to a much shorter firing pin. The overall length of the apparatus can be the same, however, the hammer allows it to be much shorter at the slide, making the gun potentially lighter - or adding to the barrel length. A hammer fired gun can be cocked separately from the slide cycling, or uncocked, too. The length of the trigger pull is opposite, a striker requiring more travel to finish loading the spring, the pull of the hammer fired gun only that which is needed to trip the sear.
In the realm of battle pistols, a case could be made for polymer/striker guns overall superiority in harsh conditions against a plentiful enemy. The reality is that auto pistols are often more a symbol of authority, and their role is really limited to being a personal defense weapon - when a rifle isn't allowed to be chosen. In America, that means the pistol will likely be used at close range, in a very short timespan, with three shots or less fired. That puts the polymer, striker, double stack pistol at a disadvantage because of it's bulk, long trigger pull, and the unnecessary amount of ammo it contains. The metal pistol, hammer actuated, and traditionally single stack, then shows it's advantages as having the higher social ranking, a lighter weight, and easier trigger pull, enhanced with the safety of a trigger locking lever.
As a duty gun in a belt holster, the polymer gun has advantages. The metal gun with hammer works well as a small personal defense weapon with more variety of manipulating the firing mechanism's states of readiness. Or, at least, that's the way I see it this week.
Polymer vs metal: polymer can't rust, corrode, or wear down to a base layer. Metal guns these days have excellent finishes that are highly resistant, too. Polymer can assume complex shapes that are difficult to machine, and can achieve a singularly organic look. Metal guns are somewhat limited by the machining process and always have a machine like appearance. It's very difficult to modify a cast polymer part, it's easy to modify a metal part or even refinish it. A polymer gun that has aged from long use is basically a melt job with the external details worn, the metal gun aged from long use is said to have a patina, and collectors may even pay extra for it.
Strikers vs ? Must be hammers. Strikers are spring loaded firing pins held captive and released with a sear mechanism. They take up length in the slide and because of that are not compact. Strikers can be partially cocked with the trigger pull finishing the complete retraction before release. But, like bolt guns, they could be held fully back, cocked and locked like a bolt gun. Nobody is doing that, however. Hammer guns use a similar spring, but it's located vertically in the grip to actuate a hammer, which rotates the motion 90 degrees to a much shorter firing pin. The overall length of the apparatus can be the same, however, the hammer allows it to be much shorter at the slide, making the gun potentially lighter - or adding to the barrel length. A hammer fired gun can be cocked separately from the slide cycling, or uncocked, too. The length of the trigger pull is opposite, a striker requiring more travel to finish loading the spring, the pull of the hammer fired gun only that which is needed to trip the sear.
In the realm of battle pistols, a case could be made for polymer/striker guns overall superiority in harsh conditions against a plentiful enemy. The reality is that auto pistols are often more a symbol of authority, and their role is really limited to being a personal defense weapon - when a rifle isn't allowed to be chosen. In America, that means the pistol will likely be used at close range, in a very short timespan, with three shots or less fired. That puts the polymer, striker, double stack pistol at a disadvantage because of it's bulk, long trigger pull, and the unnecessary amount of ammo it contains. The metal pistol, hammer actuated, and traditionally single stack, then shows it's advantages as having the higher social ranking, a lighter weight, and easier trigger pull, enhanced with the safety of a trigger locking lever.
As a duty gun in a belt holster, the polymer gun has advantages. The metal gun with hammer works well as a small personal defense weapon with more variety of manipulating the firing mechanism's states of readiness. Or, at least, that's the way I see it this week.
frankiestoys
Member
Not really a fan of polymer don't mind the striker fired as much I don't tend to keep them all to long I've tried several they tend to feel great in the hand ,shoot fine and be a little cheaper @ least it is to make...Most of what's in my collection these days are hunks of steal and wood . I still own a SR9c and use to carry it a lot but prefer my CZ 75c or my Smith 442 to it. I think what turns me off with the ploy guns is when it's cleaning time ,and Im holding In my hand 600+$ of Plastic Wondering what I just spent my money on ...
To me they are just mediocre guns. horrible triggers, "combat" accurate, pathetic sights, etc. etc. There is a reason there is such a huge aftermarket for these guns....
Ive owned poly guns from SW, Sig, HK, Glock and while most functioned well enough.. There is nothing spectacular about them. Nothing at all that makes me say, Wow I like this gun..
Ive owned poly guns from SW, Sig, HK, Glock and while most functioned well enough.. There is nothing spectacular about them. Nothing at all that makes me say, Wow I like this gun..
I have a wooden boat I built myself. Gets lots of "oohs" and "aahs" at the boat ramp, get stopped a lot in the rivers and creeks by folks wanting a look-see. But when everyone starts paddling out through the ICW toward open water or across rock shoals and oyster beds, I just have to hang back and "wish I were there."
What Sam said!
What Sam said!
savanahsdad
Member
108 votes and only 49 posts .....and the best rating of OK is winning , yet most the post I have read seem to lean the other way , , nothing wrong with them , other than the one that bounces brass off my head ,
.....and the best rating of OK is winning , yet most the post I have read seem to lean the other way , , nothing wrong with them , other than the one that bounces brass off my head ,- Status
Similar threads
