45_auto
Member
nuclear said:
That is just so wrong that it is actually funny!
Steel vs Alloy Frames: Whats the diff in longevity?
- Thread starter azrocks
- Start date
- Status
That is just so wrong that it is actually funny!
Nuclear wrote:
Please explain what you mean by this. When you speak of "losing strength" what property or properties of the material are you referring to?
I ask because you then say:
Are you suggesting that firing an aluminum frame pistol does exceed the yield strength of the material?
Please explain what you mean by this. When you speak of "losing strength" what property or properties of the material are you referring to?
I ask because you then say:
Are you suggesting that firing an aluminum frame pistol does exceed the yield strength of the material?
He does actually have a bit of point, aluminum does start degradation early in the wear cycle process but it does taper off. The trick is to design the wear into the overall stress points. Sig redesigned the 220 and 226 frames in the early 90's to accommodate for more stress caused by P+ ammo. As a general rule though frames don't see any kind of stress compared to a slide. That's why you don't see very many slides made out of aluminum but you do frames.
I'm sure someone can pull out the engineering books and talk about ductility, yield, plastic deformation, work hardening, toughness, etc.
But it is simply true that aluminum makes a crummy material for a spring. Compared to other hardened metals, it is more like a ceramic or glass in that it can bend, but it doesn't like it. The best uses of aluminum are where you can keep flex to an absolute minimum and use aluminums high strength to weight ratio. And that's how good alloy framed pistols are built.
Steel, on the other hand, can be used to make a slide and frame out of stamped sheet metal.
But it is simply true that aluminum makes a crummy material for a spring. Compared to other hardened metals, it is more like a ceramic or glass in that it can bend, but it doesn't like it. The best uses of aluminum are where you can keep flex to an absolute minimum and use aluminums high strength to weight ratio. And that's how good alloy framed pistols are built.
Steel, on the other hand, can be used to make a slide and frame out of stamped sheet metal.
DaisyCutter
Member
People tend to only consider "round count" in terms of aluminum longevity vs steel, and typical conclusion is that either will handle more rounds than the shooter will load.
What people FORGET to consider is handling wear. If the gun will be carried daily, holstered, drawn, safety off/on/off/on, reholstered, banged on door frames (vehicle and home), etc, then aluminim (and polymer) will begin to show more wear than a steel frame. Beyond surface finish wear, no, actual wearing away of the base metal.
About a decade ago, I came out of the academy with a guy who carries an alloy 1911, and I carried a Glock. Both guns show a lot of wear now. The texture on the grips is worn down pretty good in a few areas. Both have had parts replaced, like magazine catches, caused more from handling use than round count. I've seen old Glocks with mag wells chipped away.
Steel will have an advantage when it comes to long term durability, when carried every day.
I retired my old Glock after a decade plus of daily service. It's still totally serviceable, but I wanted something different. However, if it had "worn out", after all that use, I wouldn't be crying. It was a $500 pistol, and I've spent almost double that in boots over the same period.
What people FORGET to consider is handling wear. If the gun will be carried daily, holstered, drawn, safety off/on/off/on, reholstered, banged on door frames (vehicle and home), etc, then aluminim (and polymer) will begin to show more wear than a steel frame. Beyond surface finish wear, no, actual wearing away of the base metal.
About a decade ago, I came out of the academy with a guy who carries an alloy 1911, and I carried a Glock. Both guns show a lot of wear now. The texture on the grips is worn down pretty good in a few areas. Both have had parts replaced, like magazine catches, caused more from handling use than round count. I've seen old Glocks with mag wells chipped away.
Steel will have an advantage when it comes to long term durability, when carried every day.
I retired my old Glock after a decade plus of daily service. It's still totally serviceable, but I wanted something different. However, if it had "worn out", after all that use, I wouldn't be crying. It was a $500 pistol, and I've spent almost double that in boots over the same period.
jgh4445
Member
S&W is experiencing some issues with the Scandium frames. I read accounts of frame cracking especially with the .357 and 44 mags using full house loads. One revolver cracked from being dropped from the dinner table onto a tile floor. My 1911SC's frame cracked from being dropped in a parking lot.
Gtscotty
Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2007
- Messages
- 3,635
It's not yield strength that's really the issue here, but fatigue limit. Steel has a fatigue limit for cyclical stress bellow which the cyclic lifespan is more or less infinite. Aluminum has no defined fatigue limit and even relatively small stress cycles will eventually lead to failure, however a good design will account for this and ensure that the number of cycles to failure is well beyond what the part will ever see. As long as the design is good, it shouldn't be an issue you'll run into (that's not always a given though, the history of the Comet aircraft is an interesting read).
arspeukinen
Member
my 92Stock is past 20000 rounds. The trigger spring is now starting to be weak. I have changed recoil spring every 5000 rounds. Locking block is fine.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Status
