Is the death of fine machining, high polish, and quality metal treatments upon us?

[RKBABob]

It used to be that the average firearm was a revolver, and it was machined to perfection. Two pieces of metal can come together in such a way that even complex joints appear to be one solid piece of metal, and all of it buffed to perfection then blued so deep that it appears to be liquid coal.

It used to be that semi-automatics were made of steel, by hand, in the days before computer controlled machining. Parts were hand fitted, adjusted, and tested on the factory floor.

Now-a-days companies can throw a piece of metal into a machine and a gun will pop out the other end. No skill is required to machine a gun out of metal these days, and a laborer can be trained to operate the equipment. Accurate machining is now cheap....

So why the heck are guns now made of plastic, slides now powder-coated black, and all parts made as cheap as they can be made while still functioning?

It seems like every company is jumping on the bandwagon. Make it out of plastic, and pocket the profit from selling it at full price alongside the metal guns that are soon to be phased out.

I'm talking to you, Sig... and you, Ruger, with your stupid plastic revolver.

 

[jimmyraythomason]

Accurate machining is now cheap....

You answered your own question. If you want a firearm like one you described you can have it....for a price...a VERY HIGH price.

 

[harmon rabb]

Polymer has proven to be as durable as metal, reduces weight, reduces cost, and reduces felt recoil because it flexes. What in the world is wrong with polymer?

Or are you one of the guys who completely ignores Glock's proven record of durability and claims that if you drop a polymer gun, or fall down while wearing one, the frame will crack?

 

[jimmyraythomason]

That isn't what the OP said at all. As I read it he is lamenting the demise of fine craftsmanship.

 

[Phoenix 6.0]

my GP100 has seams that i can barely even see where the trigger assembly and the frame meet. if i didn't know that it was supposed to be there id almost think it was a scratch. but it did have some burrs on the inside of the crane.

 

[RKBABob]

Polymer has proven to be as durable as metal, reduces weight, reduces cost, and reduces felt recoil because it flexes. What in the world is wrong with polymer?

Or are you one of the guys who completely ignores Glock's proven record of durability and claims that if you drop a polymer gun, or fall down while wearing one, the frame will crack?

I don't doubt that Glocks (and 90% of all new, plasticy firearms) are fine tools. I just don't see the big savings one would expect from buying a firearms that pops out of a mold every 3 minutes. Its kind of sad that every manufacturer ig going the plastic route, and the fine craftsmanship is becomming a thing of the past. With modern machining equipment they should be able to churn out accurately made guns from lightweight alloy, but plastic is cheaper.

 

[Sam1911]

1) Gun companies have a vested interest in making things that people will buy. Polymer guns have a lot of great qualities and reflect those values desired by most of the buying public (light weight, ease of service, durability, ease of maintenance) -- and have proved to be both exceptionally reliable and more accurate that 99.7% of gun buyers need them to be.

2) Labor used to be very cheap in relation to materials. Now the opposite is very, very true. CNC machines can do many things better, faster, more accurately, and more efficiently than a human -- but the processes involved with making a firearm are still fairly involved. Adding the steps and tooling required to the machine process line to add details like high polish (which isn't desirable on service/duty pistols any more) and extremely precise shaping of non-critical parts (which guns are designed not to require these days) just adds cost. And some processes like the old-time bluing methods are not industrially viable anymore in the age of not poisoning the land, the rivers, and the workers. Colt and S&W haven't abandoned those mile-deep bluing jobs because they weren't beautiful ... they cost too much in labor time, worker safety, and material handling/waste-recovery to justify the handful of buyers who'd shell out that kind of money.

3) All parts aren't made as cheap as they can be while still functioning. They are made as cheaply as they can be and still exceed the service life (number of operations) required by almost every user. That's kind of how business works. Get your costs down while keeping your product acceptable to the buyer -- make money & stay in business. When that balance is off, companies either can't sell their product (not acceptable to the customer and/or price is too far above competitors) or they can't make enough profit to keep going (price not high enough for labor & costs required to produce it).

4) Some companies still do make things like you're describing -- some by hand the old fashioned way, some with very high precision machinery, some with a mix of both. But those companies are producing a niche product for the relatively small market with both the top-shelf taste and the disposable income to purchase such things.

5) "We" don't pay nearly as much for our guns as our grandparents did, in general. If you look at the old ads for S&W 27s and Colt Pythons, and see the prices listed, they are absurdly low. Of course inflation has a lot to do with that, but when you research what those costs really tell us, someone who wanted a quality gun, back a generation or three, was willing to pay a WHOLE lot more than we are now. Folks didn't often have a "stable" full of handguns, for example. One revolver might cost several months' pay -- whereas now, even a top of the line new wheelgun doesn't cost more than, what? Around half-a-paycheck? Maybe a whole paycheck for a really nice one?

 

[Old Fuff]

The government has saddled manufacturers with all kinds of taxes and regulations (such as ordering that they pay for employee health care, out-of-pocket). Then there are labor costs in-and-of-themselves. Put bluntly, these overhead costs dictate that manufactured goods produced in the United States must be made using as few human bodies as possible.

The manufacturing/economic environment today is far different then it was in 1910 or 1950. So to answer the question, guns made as they were made then would have to sell for prices far above what most buyers would be willing to pay. The result is that the focus is to make something that is simply functional, and forget about other considerations - unless price doesn't matter. So yes, what was is gone - gone with the wind.

However for those that want something more then something that's simply functional, the marketplace offering those older guns in various degrees of condition is always available.

 

[Just One Shot]

While you may not like polymer guns there are many that do. I see some of the newer ones as works of art in their own right. There are still plenty of metal guns out there for those that prefer them. I am a person that can appreciate a good metal gun and I actually own/owned a number of them. But, as a person that carries a gun every day I much rather carry a polymer gun, not only for the weight savings but also for the ease of maintenance.

 

[Jolly Rogers]

Or are you one of the guys who completely ignores Glock's proven record of durability and claims that if you drop a polymer gun, or fall down while wearing one, the frame will crack?

Are you so thin skinned about Glock criticism that you see it in a post that doesn't mention it?

OP never mentioned Bl... err Glock in his post.
Joe

 

[CraigC]

So why the heck are guns now made of plastic, slides now powder-coated black, and all parts made as cheap as they can be made while still functioning?

Because it's what people want and what they're willing to pay for. Unfortunately, the merits of fine fit and finish, polished and blued steel, lovely walnut and hand-checkering are all lost on your average shooter. Most shooters don't care about such things and are certainly unwilling to pay extra for it. Evidenced by the overwhelming and condescending use of words like "pretty" and phrases like "too nice to shoot". Nowadays, folks tend to scour the internet for the absolute lowest price and buy from places like Walmart, rather than actually building a relationship with their local dealer. Greed.

 

[Sam1911]

Greed.

Greed? I don't think you meant to say greed. Greed is covetousness, and carries a very judgmental tone. Frugality is probably the word you're looking for.

If someone wants or needs an item, and is satisfied with whatever item they can find at the lowest possible price point, that's wonderful for them.

If the manufacturers tend then to make more of the products that fulfill those more simple needs, that's great.

If I want something that fulfills a more extensive set of needs, especially purely aesthetic desires like beautiful finishes and invisible parts seams, the market also will meet my desires -- just at a higher price point.

It isn't greedy for folks to want a gun that meets their very simple goals for no more money than it has to cost.

It might indeed be greedy for someone to say that all guns should meet the aesthetic standards that they personally desire and that everyone else should have to pay the price that they themselves are willing to pay for that level of "quality."

 

[oneounceload]

Folks want cheap - all one has to do is read the threads here and elsewhere about wanting everything as cheap as possible - whether it is guns, cleaning supplies, ammo/components, etc. Since the majority have spoken, the companies have responded. Since the majority are buying cheap imports, the companies have responded. If you want high-quality guns with that fine, old-world craftsmanship, you will have to pony up the money - something most folks don't seem to want to do.....(but they expect the gun to last forever with no maintenance and be built like grandpa's was)........

 

[jmr40]

Lots of guys want the 1950's craftsmanship. Most of them don't want to pay any more than 1950's prices for them however.

I read and hear a lot of complaints about the costs of todays quality guns. They think it is outrageous for someone to charge $1,000 for something that could have been purchased for less than $200 way back in the day. That don't consider that with inflation that $1,000 gun today is probably cheaper than the $200 gun their father bought.

Those guys probably only had 1 shotgun, 1 handgun, and maybe a centerfire rifle depending on where they lived. They found a way to scrape together the money to buy quality and made it last a lifetime.

Today most guys would rather have a safe full of junk rather than 1 good gun.

 

[Sam1911]

.....(but they expect the gun to last forever with no maintenance and be built like grandpa's was)........

And the real irony here is that, for all the old-world craftsmanship and beautiful finishes that we don't see much anymore, there are a lot of refinements in design, materials engineering, surface treatments, etc, that we benefit from tremendously with these cheap new guns.

When you really boil it down, most of these "cheap" new guns will last just about forever with very little maintenance -- and they are on average more accurate, more durable, lighter, easier to maintain and repair, WAAAAY more ergonomic, less fragile, etc., than the guns of yesteryear.

Just don't look for a mirror polish job and a mile-deep blue from a gun that only costs you a few days' pay.

 

[Old Fuff]

I don't think people are looking for cheap, but inexpensive - yes.

In terms of present day manufacturing economics, if Smith & Wesson was to make a true duplicate of their 1930's .357 Magnum the retail price would eliminate all but a handful of buyers. It could be argued that their current lime of M&P pistols (not to be confused with Military & Police revolvers) offer a weapon that is more reliable under harsh environmetal conditions and easier to service - for a far, far lower price. This relates to inexpensive, but not to cheap, and there is a difference.

Now if they would sell me the Magnum for a M&P pistol price...

 

[jimmyraythomason]

Just don't look for a mirror polish job and a mile-deep blue from a gun that only costs you a few days' pay.

Which is why I am very glad I own my own polishing equipment and hot bluing equipment AND have the knowledge to use them. I can buy(or build) a lower cost firearm and add the high polish blue later if I so desire.

 

[CraigC]

Greed?

Yes, greed. On the surface, it is just hard working folks "saving money and living better". Underneath, it is far more ominous. It is greed that has made Walmart the biggest retailer in the world. Greed on their part and greed on 'our' part. Folks want their cheap Chinese junk at the lowest prices possible, so they can have more of it. The consequences of such behaviour are not a consideration. Meanwhile, China has more of our cash than we do. China is an environmental disaster, every day. The US operates under stringent environmental regulations but it does little global good because all our junk is made in China and India. Nations with ZERO environmental regulations. As a nation we produce nothing and nowhere is where we are going. Why? Because of the greedy American consumer, for whom the bottom line is the only factor considered.

 

[Sam1911]

But I thought Walmart didn't even sell handguns...

Well, sorry to have asked as I don't think we should get off on a Walmart, global economy, debt, etc. tangent.

 

[grimjaw]

So why the heck are guns now made of plastic, slides now powder-coated black, and all parts made as cheap as they can be made while still functioning?

Why do you complain of this about guns when it applies to just about everything mass-produced today? (except for the powder coating)

jm

 

[Sam1911]

Why do you complain of this about guns when it applies to just about everything mass-produced today?

The cabinet of my new radio isn't even made of REAL wood anymore! I'm beginning to suspect that the naugahyde on my car seats isn't even genuine nauga.

 

[RKBABob]

Today most guys would rather have a safe full of junk rather than 1 good gun.

That's the typical modern attitude about anything these days.

Everything built as cheap as can be so the American consumer can buy more, more, and more, throw it in a landfill, then buy it again. Quality is way down and the typical electronic device now lasts an average of 5 years... just long enough for the latest, greatest device to hit the market. "Durable" goods that used to last 30 - 50 years (like refrigerators) last 7 - 10, but cost only 1 week's pay. :banghead:

Oh, NO! I just realized that I'm an "old timer!"

 

[Sam1911]

Quality is way down

Again, it depends on how you look at it. There were plenty of less expensive guns "back then." Look at an old Sears catalog. Full of cheap single shot 12 gauges and .22s.,etc. Mostly from generic or no-name makers. I can't imagine anyone holding out the belief that they were of greater quality than, say, a $200 Mossberg 500 from Walmart today. And certainly no where near the performance and "quality" to be expected from a $400 Glock or M&P pistol costing similar relative amounts.

If you spent the 3 month's pay that a Registered Magnum might have cost in the late '30s on a gun today, it would be pretty darned spectacular! What, maybe an Accuracy International bolt-action with suppressor, in a caliber capable of making hits at over a 1/4 mile? You could buy several Korth revolvers for that much.

 

[CraigC]

Well, sorry to have asked as I don't think we should get off on a Walmart, global economy, debt, etc. tangent.

It's not tangent, it's the core of the issue. The discussion is not really about manufacturing, but about buying habits. It's about the will and mindset of the consumer. It's not just Walmart, Walmart is just the best, biggest, most well known example. People are cheap, most are unwilling to pay for quality. As a result, gunmakers like Freedom Arms, USFA, Cooper, Dakota Arms, etc. will always be small niche makers. Most folks are satisfied with brushed finishes full of flaws and rubber grips. This is a world where "good enough", is good enough for most.

Everything built as cheap as can be so the American consumer can buy more, more, and more, throw it in a landfill, then buy it again.

Exactly!!!

 

[Old Fuff]

Actually I shouldn't have used Smith & Wesson's original .357 Magnum, because at the time it was considered to be a custom build gun, made to the customers' specifications - at least within limits.

Let's say I have two guns on the table. One is a S&W .38 Military & Police revolver, made during the 1930's with the fit, polish, and hand workmanship used at the time. The other is a current M&P polymer pistol as currently made. Both are in brand new, unfired condition. In terms of the two, both are about equal in price during the respective time they were made.

If your desire was to own an example of high-quality, classic gunmaking which would you buy? On the other hand would you make the same choice if you needed a defensive weapon?

On the other hand, while it is, in the current market, less expensive to make the pistol using today's materials and manufacturing methods, the cost of the pistol is easily enough to buy a like-new 1930's M&P .38 revolver from within the collector's market.