Durability of other polymer pistols compared to Glock

[Xfire68]

A lot of the lifetime warranties are for original purchaser only, IIRC.

Also, there is the issue of shipping. I heard of one fellow on here paying $90 in shipping to use his "warranty".

I guess it depends on which company you have to deal with?

I sent in my Ruger SR9 for warranty work and they emailed me a UPS label, I sent it in they fixed it and I had it back in less then a week.

CZ and S&W shipped me parts (springs) free of charge so I could fix them myself.

Why it cost $90 to ship a pistol is beyond me?

 

[B!ngo]

As an H&K home boy I'm glad to see that it turned in seemingly the best performance in the lot. But really, other than manufacturing aberrations, any of the top brands of semi-autos will outrun most of their owners. HK, Glock, M&P, Sig, FN, CZ, Beretta (I'm not as sure about Springfield). But others like Taurus, Colt, Kel-Tec, Kahr and a long list of others are fine for the range, but don't strike me as 'bet my life on them' handguns. Price is not a perfect predictor of durability but mostly in reverse. You can buy some very expensive 1911's and not be certain of carrying a life-saver. But it is likely that there is no bargain life-saver either.
For me its exactly in this order:
1. H&K (sometime there is a reason to be a fanboy!)
2. Sig Sauer (I'm left handed and Sig ignores lefties so I must ignore them; but they are a virtual tie with H&K)
3. Glock a 1/2 rung down in durability with 10x the marketing. Their simplicity also makes them a safer gun - for the shooter that is)
4. Beretta - a gun that brings me no joy whatsoever but is tank-like and has proven it.
5-the rest. Not enough data. The longer these companies are around with similar models to test their durability, the better. Compared to these four, there's just not enough data to satisfy my life-risking decisions.
B

 

[benzy2]

If the gun goes down, it'll hurt at least a little to depart with that $50. Money spent on ammo is different because you're getting something for your money. Money spent on parts or repair just gives you back what you already had.

I don't buy that. If you have no issue dropping $30,000 in a hobby or in training, another $50 won't be noticeable. What's that saying about being Penny wise and Pound foolish? Not that shooting $30,000 in ammo is foolish, but debating over $50 is such a small drop in the bucket. Finding a source of ammo that saves you $0.002 per dollar spent is a bigger pay off over that lifetime.

 

[tarosean]

Finally, you can just about buy two Glocks for the price of an HK. It just doesn't make sense to buy the HK.

Why stop there? You could get 3 High Points for the price of a Glock...

No matter what you pay for a gun it will eventually be surpassed in ammo costs. (If you actually shoot it) Even if you rolled your own (reloading) the amount of ammo that Mr. Green went through with the P30 your looking at approximately 14611.00 at 0.16 cents a round.

Guns are machines they are going to break no matter the name on the slide. Really no different than a vehicle trying to get half a million miles with no repairs.. Its not going to happen.

 

[txblackout]

#1 - pick a gun by the fit in your hand. Gen 4 glocks fit me, gen 3 does not because the mag release isnt right for my hand. XDM also was very good. Other guns didnt fit right.

#2 - Glock is so common I expect parts to be around for a *long* time even after particular models get discontinued.

 

[Dave P.]

I have two "carry" guns a Glock 36 and depending on situation a Ruger LCP.
Now I know they were built at two different price points, but the Glock
has been much more durable in terms of finish. The Ruger is newer and gets
carried about 20% of the time in a very similar holster yet has far more wear
and rust issues. It requires way more cleaning and lube.
The Glock now has about 6500-7000 rounds through it and the little Ruger
about 1000, neither have broke anything.
I have a Ruger security six I bought new in 1979 that now has well over 50,000
rounds out of it.....nothing broken yet.
Dave P.

 

[jon_in_wv]

I am calling it a night. Tomorrow I'll do that parts count with you and I don't think we will find that the Glock has more parts, even after not counting the 1911 parts you eliminated from your count.

I at NO TIME said a Glock had more parts than a 1911. Read it again after you get some sleep. I said the parts count was SIMILAR. I could be wrong about the moving parts but it wasn't a statement of fact just an opinion of the simplicity of the 1911s firing mechanism. They are probably similar in that aspect as well. Fair enough?

 

[Kiln]

Torosean:

The obvious difference is that the durability and functionality of the Glock are equal to the HK. There is no reason to spend double the price on the HK unless you want to.

Before anyone says it, I am not a Glock fanboy. I don't even like them.

 

[Nom de Forum]

I at NO TIME said a Glock had more parts than a 1911. Read it again after you get some sleep. I said the parts count was SIMILAR. I could be wrong about the moving parts but it wasn't a statement of fact just an opinion of the simplicity of the 1911s firing mechanism. They are probably similar in that aspect as well. Fair enough?

I agree, you didn't say that. My reply was made in haste and sloppy. Now to what you did say, by my quick mental count the 1911 has more parts that have to move for the primer to be detonated than the Glock. Not many more, but more. Why don’t you do some checking and let me know if I am wrong. Before you ask, I did count the Glock trigger safety separately instead of as part of the trigger/trigger bar assembly. I also counted the firing pin drop safety and firing pin drop safety spring.

 

[Nom de Forum]

Torosean:

The obvious difference is that the durability and functionality of the Glock are equal to the HK. There is no reason to spend double the price on the HK unless you want to.

Before anyone says it, I am not a Glock fanboy. I don't even like them.

I am not a Glock fanboy either, I just use the Glock because in some scenarios it works best for me. I actually like the feel and shoot a little better with a M&P. I am too old and have too many (23) years and dollars invested in multiple Glocks to change unless significant benefit is to be had. If I was now starting my transition from the 1911 instead of 1991, I would go with the M&P. If something truly was significantly better than the Glock, I'd drop the Glock without hesitation. I have been sorely tempted by the M&P. I agree with "There is no reason to spend double the price on the HK unless you want to." HKs are ridiculously over priced for what you get and have no realistic advantages.

 

[tarosean]

The obvious difference is that the durability and functionality of the Glock are equal to the HK. There is no reason to spend double the price on the HK unless you want to.

Really in todays semi auto market its all about preferences and what works best for you and your needs. I would say that all of the major manufactures produce highly reliable guns. Sure they all produce an occasional lemons, but its not the norm.

 

[peacebutready]

As an H&K home boy I'm glad to see that it turned in seemingly the best performance in the lot.


For me its exactly in this order:
1. H&K (sometime there is a reason to be a fanboy!)
2. Sig Sauer (I'm left handed and Sig ignores lefties so I must ignore them; but they are a virtual tie with H&K)
3. Glock a 1/2 rung down in durability with 10x the marketing. Their simplicity also makes them a safer gun - for the shooter that is)
4. Beretta - a gun that brings me no joy whatsoever but is tank-like and has proven it.

Glocks aren't as durable as Sig and H&K?

 

[peacebutready]

Other comments?

Any other comments re durability compared to Glock?

 

[Zerodefect]

Only my 1911's rival my Glock for durability and reliability. The other polymer guns in my collection fall a little short.

Allthough the M&P and XDS are very nice pistols I'd like to try.

Durability and reliability are pretty much shooter dependent. If you do your homework and properly maintain a properly built gun, it'll function fine.

My better built 1911's, a type of pistol normally considered finicky, have been through mud, filth, and sand, that many of my polymer pistols would have failed through.

 

[peacebutready]

My better built 1911's, a type of pistol normally considered finicky, have been through mud, filth, and sand, that many of my polymer pistols would have failed through.

This is really interesting. What brand 1911s can go through "mud, filth, and sand"? Or, how much does a person generally need to spend on a 1911 for that kind of durability/reliability?

 

[JWH321]

I did some "construction" stuff out in the mountains last year. I dropped my M&P 9c in the mud and wet stuff on more than one occasion. I got to where I just held it under some running water to wash the stuff out of it and then sprayed the heck out of it with WD 40 or some other silicone spray (mostly stuff for fishing gear). When I got a chance, I cleaned it, but not much till I got back to Florida. Then I took it completely apart, cleaned it and reassembled and lubricated it. You cannot tell it was ever dirty. During all of this, it probably shot 1500 rounds of my reloads. It has some holster wear on the front of the slide and the color has worn off of the safety levers and mag release (yes I know, but I like safety levers).

Does that count?

 

[JTQ]

What brand 1911s can go through "mud, filth, and sand"?

All the one's that were used in the trenches of WW I, the cold and mud in Europe, and the sand in the Pacific during WW II, the cold and mud in Korea, the rain and mud in Vietnam, etc.

 

[LiveLife]

A lot of the lifetime warranties are for original purchaser only, IIRC.

Taurus has unlimited lifetime repair policy on the gun, not the buyer - http://www.taurususa.com/repair-policy.cfm

So whether you bought the gun new or used, you are covered.

I am a fan of Glock/M&P/Sig 1911 but have 2 Taurus pistols (Mil Pro PT145 SA/DA and 738), both polymer frame and stainless slide models.

PT145 has experienced 1 parts breakage (firing pin block) which was replaced by Taurus around 5000 round count and since day one, it has fed/chambered even sloppy lead SWC reloads without complaints. 738 is going strong and experienced extraction issue that turned out to be gunk build up around the extractor around 1000 rounds. Cleaned the gunk out and it is going strong without feeding/extraction issues.

M&P 40/45 have tens of thousands of rounds shot through without any parts breakage or issues. Like PT145, M&P45 will fed/chamber even sloppy lead SWC reloads without complaints.

 

[Elkins45]

Good info. Maybe the XD is not as robust as the Glock. I thought they were.

Sample size of one. Statistically meaningless.

 

[ritepath]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ENZioGLjMI

Ultimate glock torture test...

 

[Zerodefect]

This is really interesting. What brand 1911s can go through "mud, filth, and sand"? Or, how much does a person generally need to spend on a 1911 for that kind of durability/reliability?

Now, I didn't throw them in mud and run them over with a truck, or any of this stupid "torture" nonsense. Open carry, rain, mud, 4 wheelers. The 1911 was as dirty as I was, functioned fine. A proper 1911 is quite reliable in normal filthy, messy, circumstances. Just don't torture test it in a bucket of concrete dust or something.

Keep in mind, the .mil GI's all had the same ammo and mags. That's half the battle with 1911's, right there. The guns were tuned to the ammo and mags at hand. It wasn't loose slides that made the early 1911's reliable.

Generally: $2000+. Sand can't really get into the slide surfaces, if those surfaces are too tight for sand to fit into. And I use a thicker grease that further fills that void. But a cheap 1911 can also be reliable, if you fix where they cut all the corners cheaply. Mags, springs, extractor, grip safety, thumb safety, sights. Assuming the barrel is set right and the slide is straight.

The 1911 gets a bad rap from improperly built examples, and the millions of ammo and magazine combos available for it. Rough finish barrels, lame mags, odd/weak ammo, doesn't help either.

 

[peacebutready]

Generally: $2000+. Sand can't really get into the slide surfaces, if those surfaces are too tight for sand to fit into. And I use a thicker grease that further fills that void. But a cheap 1911 can also be reliable, if you fix where they cut all the corners cheaply. Mags, springs, extractor, grip safety, thumb safety, sights. Assuming the barrel is set right and the slide is straight.

Ouch, that's a lot of money.

Yes, fix the extractor. If there's one out of the box that uses the correct spring steel, I don't know of it. If I'm not mistaken Cylinder and Slide are the only ones that sell proper spring steel extractors. I thought of having one fitted to my 1911. I guess I should go for a barstock slide-stop while I'm at it.

The 1911 gets a bad rap from improperly built examples, and the millions of ammo and magazine combos available for it. Rough finish barrels, lame mags, odd/weak ammo, doesn't help either.

Too many of them out there were built incorrectly. I had one where the ejector put a small dent in the primer when chambering a round.

 

[peacebutready]

I guess it depends on which company you have to deal with?

Why it cost $90 to ship a pistol is beyond me?

Yeah, this particular manufacturer doesn't issue a shipping label for warranty work. When I was going to ship a pistol a while back, I was quoted $78 by UPS or Fed-Ex. I think that is over-night delivery. If the manufacturer issues a label, I think it is 2-day delivery. That is cheaper. I don't know why the manufacturers that require the owner to pay shipping don't simply issue the label to the customer, then have the customer pay the lower 2-day delivery cost.