HANDGUNS overbuilt for the caliber they fire?

[cleetus03]

I was always told that the Beretta 92 and pretty much all of Ruger's revolvers were overbuilt/over engineered for the caliber they fired. Some think a platform like this is overkill and unnecessary from a practical standpoint. I always thought it was impressive and loved the concept of a overbuilt gun, even if the added girth is unnecessary.


So naturally this got me to thinking and I wanted to ask.........What other particular handguns models are recognized as being overbuilt for the caliber they fire?

Appreciate all the help and info yall can give me!


EDIT;

The following article conveys what I'm trying to say quite nice;

Over-engineering as a design solution
Posted on February 16, 2009 by Caleb
​

Going to Purdue University, a lot of my friends during the latter half of my collegiate years were engineers (in fact, I started college as an engineering major). As engineers, they did and still do have a deep and abiding passion for building things that are “disaster-proof”, or as my roommate called it “over-engineered to the point of ridiculousness”. You can see that same school thought is populated into the design philosophy of some firearms companies, with Ruger being the most prominent example. Now, when I’m saying “over-engineered”, I do not mean that in the pejorative sense as it’s sometime used. What I’m saying is when something is properly over-engineered, it extends the service life of Item X well past the failure point of Item X’s market competitors.

 

[General Geoff]

Smith & Wesson 617 .22lr Revolver. Built on an L-frame, which is way overkill for a .22.

Supposedly, Smith & Wesson 10mm autoloaders are also built like tanks.

 

[CWL]

Handguns are overbuilt because they are meant to be carried into war zones and last for decades. Designers and military procurers also know that firearms will be issued to 18-19 year olds who don't know how to take care of property.

Civilian owners often over-pamper and worry too much about their handguns.

 

[Z-Michigan]

Virtually all Rugers, none more so than the P90 which was originally designed for 10mm, then changed to .45 ACP (before its introduction to the market) as 10mm went out of favor. The 9mm Ruger P-series (not SR9) would also be heavily overbuilt.

The Beretta 92 is not overbuilt, judging from the predictable and relatively short-term failure of both locking block and frame at certain round counts. (No, I'm not talking about the early frame failures either, a problem which I understand to be fixed.) It is, however, an extremely large, bulky, and heavy pistol for the caliber it shoots.

The Glock 17 is quite solid for 9mm, with a life of over 100,000 rounds being reasonable and documented in many cases. The G21 also is apparently quite solid, and like the Ruger P90 it's a .45 built on a frame intended for 10mm (though a G21 frame and slide are not identical to a G20 frame/slide).

A 1911 in 9mm is of course overbuilt for its task.

 

[BattleChimp Potemkin]

9mm HK USPs. Supposedly they were BUILT and DESIGNED for .40, instead of the other way round.

The Beretta locking block thing has been LONG debated. They are saying improperly heat treated, so the ones today are MUCH better and should not wear out (within reason). I like how if you have the 96, you can get a 92 slide/barrel/mags and fire both .40 and 9mm. Let's not forget the 92 Millenium: All steel monster (no alloy frame) that weighs a ton and has practically no recoil with 9mm!

The Ruger Blackhawk series gets a nod. We had a guy double charge a .44 with Bullseye. Comploded during a pin shoot. Left the headstamp imprinted into the breachface. Kept shooting with no appreciatable accuracy loss. Pretty durable stuff.

Walther PPK would be in my list too. Blowback .380 in an all steel gun that weighs like a brick and could probably handle MUCH more than what it was designed for.
They could have skimped on some things and still made a lighter pistol.

 

[Eightball]

I'd say the S&W 10. Maybe not for the metallurgy of the day and age it was introduced, but nowadays.

 

[bradfromearth]

Glocks-

Many are definitely overbuilt.

G 30 is same build as G 29
G 26 is same build as G 27
G 19 is same build as G 23

I allways tell new glock buyers to buy the bigger caliber and then get a conversion barrel. Get a glock 27 and a conversion and some glock 26 mags and you have two guns for a little extra. a 40 and a 9.

Funny thing too is you can put a g 36 slide on a g30 and it shoots just fine and makes the big fat g 30 much slimmer and packable.

 

[Special_K]

The Ruger sp101 comes to mind....

 

[LeonCarr]

+1 for any Ruger P-Series auto...they are tanks.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

 

[Wishoot]

Just pick up a Ruger GP-100. It's built for uber-abuse.

 

[freakshow10mm]

The 9mm pressure is higher than the 40 S&W pressure.

The G20 and G21 share the same frame and slide. There are slight differences in the breechface and hood of the slide. Other than that, they are identical.

 

[EHL]

A 1911 in 9mm is of course overbuilt for its task.

Agreed!

 

[Mike J]

The Ruger P-series were the first thing that came to my mind.

 

[kdstrick]

The Ruger sp101 comes to mind....

In 38 Special and 9mm, specifically, I agree completely.

However, in 357 mag the weight is your friend.

 

[TRguy]

S&W 4506: bigger than a 1911 and weighs more too

 

[1911Tuner]

I'll cast a vote for the .357 Magnum Ruger New Model Blackhawk as one of the most over-enginered handguns on the planet.

 

[Morgo]

This one in .357 Mag could be a little lighter and thinner

 

[Old Fuff]

I'll cast a vote for the .357 Magnum Ruger New Model Blackhawk as one of the most over-enginered handguns on the planet.

It wasn't exactly engineered....

When they came out with the "New" Model revolvers with the transfer bar safety the bean-counters decided that substantial bucks could be saved if they made all Blackhawks on the same frame. Thus rather then make a smaller frame for the .357 they moved it over to the .44 frame, and thereafter everything from .30 M1 Carbine to .44 Magnum and .45 Colt were on that one frame. More recently they brought out a smaller (actually shorter) frame because the substantial cowboy action shooting market did not like the heavy frame, and the sport called for lighter, not heavier loads.

Be that as it may, if you are inclined toward HEAVY .357 loads the Bisley version of the Blackhawk is hard to beat.

 

[steve s]

Overbuilt is better in the long run.

 

[frankiestoys]

Rugers

I have several Ruger's they are built to last.

My p 85 mII looks brand new, with over 5000 rounds through it.
My black hawk is wonderful, My mini, (with some mods) has been
a great rifle and my ss gp100 will shoot anything i feed it.
There's alot of good guns on the market but this thread is on guns that
are overbuilt not all of them can say that as good as a Ruger can.

 

[mesinge2]

If you think the Beretta 92 is bad check out the new Beretta Polymer Framed 90-two.

Now that is a big 9mm.

https://www.berettausa.com/e2wProdu...k=2100000084:3100001364:3100001368:4100001486

 

[JCisHe]

+3 for the Ruger P-series

 

[Sport45]

Somebody needs to post a picture of a .357mag Redhawk cylinder.

Found one. HogRider posted it here in 2005.

 

[planetmobius]

Dan Wesson 22 (built on the same frame as the .357), colt python (built on a .41 frame), any Smith K-22 and any Ruger #1 rifle chambered for anything less than .600 Nitro Express.

 

[belus]

CZ's, especially the steel framed ones, are way over built for 9mm. The Springfield P9 (a clone) was used as the base for the first 9mm major guns.