Make your best case why todays firearms are better...

[Justin]

Some plastics have been exposed to much harsher radiation levels than we experience on earth. Components in the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) and the International Space Station (ISS) require plastics that can survive the demands of outer space. Fluoropolymers such as FEP and polyimides like Kapton are plastics which have been successfully used for the HST and ISS.

So, if there are polymers that have been made that can withstand the rigors of space travel and the high levels of solar radiation such craft are exposed to, it would stand to reason that it's well within the realm of possibility that a polymer can be fabricated that is able to withstand the much lower levels of UV rays and the like that actually make it to the surface of the earth.

Are Glocks made from the same plastics used for external parts of the International Space Station?

Probably not, however it's just as likely that they're made from something a bit more stout than your average garden rake.

In fact, the article that XxWinxX94 posted goes on to state several methods used to dope polymers to keep them from degrading when exposed to UV radiation.

ow to Avoid UV Degradation
There are several ways of avoiding UV degradation in plastics — by using stabilizers, absorbers or blockers. For many outdoor applications, the simple addition of carbon black at around a 2% level will provide the protection for the structure by the blocking process. Other pigments such as titanium dioxide can also be effective. Organic compounds such as benzophenones and benzotriazoles are typical absorbers which selectively absorb the UV and re-emit at a less harmful wavelength, mainly as heat. The benzotriazole type is good, as it has a low color and can be used at low dose rates below 0.5%.

The other main mechanism for protection is to add a stabilizer, the most common being a HALS (Hindered Amine Light Stabilizer). These absorb the excited groups and prevent the chemical reaction of the radicals.

That said, none of us know what sorts of polymers are used in these pistols, and even if we did, I doubt anyone here has enough of a background in materials science to be able to comment on it with any degree of authority.

However, that doesn't change the fact that those who are making extraordinary claims about plastic guns degrading of breaking due to UV exposure really ought to be able to back up those claims with at least some basic evidence understandable to the average layman.

 

[oldfool]

much as we all cherish the legendary reputation of all the great old stuff
it mostly was not
because there never really were all that many great old gunsmiths to hand fit them at the factory
the "best of the best" that were, really were great, but if you want that, don't bet on the luck of the draw, hire 'Grant Cunningham' (then or now)

but on average luck of the draw, dollar for (equivalent) dollar, bet on modern CNC to beat yesterday's average joe luck of the draw hand fitter, MIM parts or not
plastic or steel is pretty much irrelevant to that discussion
not every yesteryear gun was made of great steel either ('Damascus', anyone ??)

best always did carry a stiff price, part of why it gets labeled "best"

not at all hard to find and buy a one MOA rifle these days, etc., etc
nobody said it was going to be found in the bargain basement rack, but can be had without the expense of Grant Cunningham world class revolver tuning skills
and even an average joe who is willing to put a modest investment of time and dollars into an average rifle can have one MOA today
was not always so

you really think you could pick up a Hi-Point (equivalent) priced centerfire autoloader that would reliably go bang without blowing up in your hand yesteryear ?

you can have what you want these days, provided you are willing to pay for it, and it is a lot easier found now vs. then (it never was a free ride)

PS
my woobies, yeah, 30 year old stuff that cost thrice the price today, you know, like gasoline, bread, milk...
(and happy to pay twice the price when lucky enough to find used but not abused.. guns that is, not gas, milk, and bread)
but I never owned a rimfire rifle 30 years ago like any average off the shelf hummer today that will reliably punch one tiny ragged hole in paper at 60 yards every time
and even 22 rimfire ammo is easy 3 cents a shot in bulk now, not a penny a shot, but it's still the best deal in town, credit that to mass production, like it or not
make mine a horseless carriage, no pitchfork and hay required, but no free ride either
(and my truck can run farther faster than your horse, 300 mile race, no contest, with or without my 7 shot plastic/alloy derringer in my pocket)

 

[earlthegoat2]

I do tend to think that with modern CNC machining you can make parts that are "close enough" to work and in that do not require as much hand fitting. As was noted earlier parts can be made to tighter tolerances but those parts will usually interact with more clearance making for a looser fit in general on the modern CNC made guns. High end 1911s are made on CNC machines too but deliberately oversize to make way for more precise machining operations or hand fitting.

The reason I am so in favor of the older firearms is really limited to S&W revolvers. There is a eye opening difference between the last decade and the 60 years prior if not more. Trigger action is smoother, bluing and nickel is shinier, checkering is sharp, and sights are regulated. Remington is my second beef. They are crunchy with their moving parts. The furniture and finish is horrendous. Apparently, accuracy is still there at least so that is promising.

 

[Pilot]

earthegoat wrote:

I see Colt still makes firearms.....barely.

Really? How about there military sales? Also, they sell every gun they make and are putting out a higher quality 1911 than ever. Colt is a niche player in the civilian market. They make well made, firearms at a fair price point.

I'll take the metalurgy, reliabiltiy, and increased firepower of today's Glocks, Sigs, HK's, CZ's, etc over older pistols that are restricted to lower pressure rounds due to the poorer metalurgy and frame strength.

Yes, some are works of art and I still enjoy and shoot a 70 year ole P-08 Luger, but in general guns are better in a more functional way today. Maybe not as aesthetic or "fitted" as well on average, but better functionally.

 

[earlthegoat2]

How about their military sales? That is what ruined them in my opinion.

They are no better than H und K and their military sales as far as Im concerned.

 

[Bubba613]

Also, they sell every gun they make and are putting out a higher quality 1911 than ever.

This past week I got in a Colt XSE and a Legacy Sports Citadel. They were the same size and almost the exact same configuration. The machining of the slide serrations on the Colt were better. The Citadel's trigger was far superior, its slide to frame fit was virtually the same. The Colt sold at about $865 and the Citadel at $465.

 

[leadcounsel]

There's some discussion about polymer framed guns being subjected to the elements such as UV, salts, etc. and failing. I think it is well settled that polymers used in firearms manufacturing, absent error in manufacturing, are very durable to elements that are common enemies to most machinery - water, abrasive dirts and soiling, sweat/oil, salt and rust, etc. Sure a daily carry polymer gun will be exposed to these and suffer some long term damages. Look at the plastics used in M16s from Vietnam. Still in good shape.

However, what is absent is the same discussion with regard to older metal and wooden guns. A daily carry metal, blued gun with wood accents subjected to the elements, snow, rain, saltwater mists, sweat/oils, sand and grit, etc. is going to require signifcantly more maintenance or have a very short lifespan. Anyone who has had metal machinery around these environments without caring for it properly knows that scratches and rust quickly destroy the equipment.

So, for long term durability, given the exact same rugged conditions, my money is on advanced polymers as found in Glocks. Now if we're talking routinely cared for safe queens, it's a different analysis and they'll both last centuries...

 

[Dr.Rob]

Glocks might be souless and ship in tupperware, but they DO go bang when you want them to and they are tough tough pistols.

One CAN argue I think about the relative strength of USGI 1911 parts made for WW2 vs. the early MIM stuff that was on the market. Those parts were made in a different time and place compared to today and many have argued that to 'make a 1911 the way they used to' would be cost prohibitive. Ditto for the long gone Python.

However, S&W long ago made an action that was less apt to go out of time with serious use, and managed to soldier on through today.

The AR of the early 60's is in NO way the high end commercial rifles of today. You get a lot more gun for your money in the computer age. We are going on what, 50+ years of improvements to the AR?

Pre WW2 military rifles weren't made of stamped parts or aluminum and ploymer. Now most are. Progress and tactics have changed the way we make rifles, doesn't matter if you are in Pershawar or Portland, the rifle has moved on.

All that said, your pocket pistol is still as useful as it ever was. that's a lovely thing about a well cared for tool, it can last you a lifetime.

 

[Zoogster]

I would say modular designs are a nice benefit in many modern designs.


This means your average person can adjust a firearm to suit many needs, or replace sections of the firearm with minimal skill.
A gunsmith might not see it as a good improvement because I am sure it hurts business, but most others benefit from it.


Similarly today with the internet people can offer aftermarket accessories of all sorts that fit existing firearm models. Including firearms that are not numerous enough at any local level to bother making accessories for.
This means a wider range of firearms have internal and external accessories.

Another benefit today is standardization. You can typically rely on a decent aftermarket part fitting because the dimensions it was made to work with are standard for a specific model.





As for polymers, they are good and bad. They were widely adopted because they were less expensive to make, melting plastic into shape is a lot cheaper than machining steel into the right dimensions.
They do have some added benefits. I certainly am in the camp that thinks they will not last anywhere near as long, and I like some.

I had a polymer gun partially melt on me when I overused some REMoil on the metal, planning to soak it and then wipe it clean.
I believe the solvent or propellant, not the oil itself, dissolved the plastic.
I realized it when some of the oil that dripped off of it was black in color, and the gun was clean prior.
I looked for the source.
The surface of the polymer had become tacky and could be shaped by anything that touched it.
This is the polymer responsible for holding the internals in place to specific tolerances.
After it dried it was hard again.
I never considered my gun could melt on me from over oiling it. Lesson learned.

They also don't use exotic space age plastics for polymer guns. They use things like Nylon with various additives to reduce its degradation. Those additives do a good job, but they can only do so much.
It certainly is better than many cheap plastic consumer products that fall apart after a year in the sun, like your typical bucket that will shatter into pieces, but it still degrades more than steel kept from rusting ever would.