The Bushmaster
Member
Aah yes...The tupper ware wars...
Mayhap plastic is not so fantastic?
- Thread starter FireInCairo
- Start date
- Status
USAF_Vet
Member
I work in an industry that supplies plastic parts for automotive interiors, and work regularly with a wide variety of plastics. The junk your bins are made from is probably a mixture of regrind/ reclaim plastics. Most likely polyethylene. Its also either pressed very thin in the mold, or possibly even vacuformed.
Gun frames are probably some sort of PC-ABS, which is extremely durable and rugged. Also, the qualities or the molds and presses themselves are going to be better than the extreme low profit/ high yield molds and presses that produce bins and trash cans and laundry baskets and such.
I think plastic guns will be around for quite some time yet to come. Just think of all the bakelite Gun parts still out there. Or the wood chips and resin parts (like the VZ-58 furniture).
Gun frames are probably some sort of PC-ABS, which is extremely durable and rugged. Also, the qualities or the molds and presses themselves are going to be better than the extreme low profit/ high yield molds and presses that produce bins and trash cans and laundry baskets and such.
I think plastic guns will be around for quite some time yet to come. Just think of all the bakelite Gun parts still out there. Or the wood chips and resin parts (like the VZ-58 furniture).
doubleh
Member
I too have a Remington nylon 66. Guess what? The stock cracked completely in two right across the grip. No warranty, no parts, just a nice little rifle that is now basically junk. It's still in one piece as the mag tube keeps the stock from falling off. 
To be honest, I really don't care if any polymer gun in my collection cracks its frame in 30 years.
I'm a gun guy, but I do not come from a long line of gun people. I have one daughter and she is not into firearms as of yet. I have no one in my immediate family that will give some much as the tiniest of craps about my gun collection should I go on to the Big Shooting Range in the Sky.
At the present, I don't have any firearms that have been purchased for collector or investment purposes. All of my guns are shooters bought because I either had a specific need for them or just liked the way they looked/shot/history, etc. Every gun is for ME, not my grandchildren. If my young daughter takes an interest in guns, then I will get some for HER and she can decide what she would like.
I have polymer and I have metal frames. I love them both. I usually gravitate toward carrying polymer because it's lighter and more forgiving to sweat and rain. I prefer the looks of a metal frame guns, but no matter what I think I will carry regardless of the price and quality of the belt and holster, I simply prefer the mathematical advantage of a 24oz polymer 9mm over a 40oz 1911 for all day carry.
Like I said, I do have some pieces in my collection that will be here for the ages as long as they are not tossed in a landfill. I have several over-built Ruger revolvers, a nice stainless 1911, as well as a chunky Norinco Tok and Nagant revolver that has been kicking around for about a century as it is. There are other guns at the back of the cabinet that will be functional pieces 100 years from now, but I don't really care about that.
I am more concerned with part availability on normal wear and tear items like springs or finding magazines that will fit my gun 5 years from now. Take for example my two favorite 9mm pistols in my collection: My 92fs and my FNX-9.
The polymer frame of my FNX is probably going to have a longer life span than the aluminum the Beretta. The FNX also has modular rails that are replaceable when/if they wear out. It's a modular pistol designed for current military/police applications.
In contrast, my 92fs does not have modular rails, it has wearable items like a locking block and a recoil spring that has a fairly low service life compared to some. Compared to the FNX, it is a heavy and outdated design.
However, I'd bet dollars to donuts that I will be able to walk into any decent gun store and purchase springs, a block, and magazines for the Beretta for under 50 bucks TODAY. I would also wager that the FNH parts would need to be ordered and the cost of a single mag would be between 40 and 50 dollars. On top of that, FN is not a company known for the longevity of their models. Ask anyone with an FNP. The FNX is a upgrade to that model, but the redesigned magazines mean that your FNP is only as viable as your magazines hold out.
So, I have this "clunky" Beretta made out of an inferior material with a supposed shorter refurbished life compared to an upper medium-end polymer pistol with modular capabilities. However, hands down if you made me pick ONE 9mm to carry across creation AND be able to find parts it would be my 92fs. There isn't a gun I shoot better, feels better in my hand, is as accurate for me, etc as the oft degraded Beretta.
At the end of the day, though, the FNX is lighter and easier for me to pack around, so the 92fs usually gets bedside duty.
For me, frame life is a total non-issue regardless of the material.
I'm a gun guy, but I do not come from a long line of gun people. I have one daughter and she is not into firearms as of yet. I have no one in my immediate family that will give some much as the tiniest of craps about my gun collection should I go on to the Big Shooting Range in the Sky.
At the present, I don't have any firearms that have been purchased for collector or investment purposes. All of my guns are shooters bought because I either had a specific need for them or just liked the way they looked/shot/history, etc. Every gun is for ME, not my grandchildren. If my young daughter takes an interest in guns, then I will get some for HER and she can decide what she would like.
I have polymer and I have metal frames. I love them both. I usually gravitate toward carrying polymer because it's lighter and more forgiving to sweat and rain. I prefer the looks of a metal frame guns, but no matter what I think I will carry regardless of the price and quality of the belt and holster, I simply prefer the mathematical advantage of a 24oz polymer 9mm over a 40oz 1911 for all day carry.
Like I said, I do have some pieces in my collection that will be here for the ages as long as they are not tossed in a landfill. I have several over-built Ruger revolvers, a nice stainless 1911, as well as a chunky Norinco Tok and Nagant revolver that has been kicking around for about a century as it is. There are other guns at the back of the cabinet that will be functional pieces 100 years from now, but I don't really care about that.
I am more concerned with part availability on normal wear and tear items like springs or finding magazines that will fit my gun 5 years from now. Take for example my two favorite 9mm pistols in my collection: My 92fs and my FNX-9.
The polymer frame of my FNX is probably going to have a longer life span than the aluminum the Beretta. The FNX also has modular rails that are replaceable when/if they wear out. It's a modular pistol designed for current military/police applications.
In contrast, my 92fs does not have modular rails, it has wearable items like a locking block and a recoil spring that has a fairly low service life compared to some. Compared to the FNX, it is a heavy and outdated design.
However, I'd bet dollars to donuts that I will be able to walk into any decent gun store and purchase springs, a block, and magazines for the Beretta for under 50 bucks TODAY. I would also wager that the FNH parts would need to be ordered and the cost of a single mag would be between 40 and 50 dollars. On top of that, FN is not a company known for the longevity of their models. Ask anyone with an FNP. The FNX is a upgrade to that model, but the redesigned magazines mean that your FNP is only as viable as your magazines hold out.
So, I have this "clunky" Beretta made out of an inferior material with a supposed shorter refurbished life compared to an upper medium-end polymer pistol with modular capabilities. However, hands down if you made me pick ONE 9mm to carry across creation AND be able to find parts it would be my 92fs. There isn't a gun I shoot better, feels better in my hand, is as accurate for me, etc as the oft degraded Beretta.
At the end of the day, though, the FNX is lighter and easier for me to pack around, so the 92fs usually gets bedside duty.
For me, frame life is a total non-issue regardless of the material.
FireInCairo
member
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2009
- Messages
- 710
The point wasn't that the plastic the bins are made of is the same as the plastic the guns are made of. The point is that polymers are so fine-tuned these days that they can make a polymer that's strong at the outset that will consistently degrade beyond a specific time-frame.
In other words, it could very well be that companies could create a polymer that function fine for X number of years and then totally degrade needing to be replaced.
Chocolate Bayou
Member
Buy Springfield, they have a life time guaranty. If 15 0r 20 years down road the polymer becomes brittle or cracked (during normal use, not run over by truck), they will replace gun or parts that hat have worn out. I don't anyone else that has this policy.
FireInCairo
member
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2009
- Messages
- 710
See my "Glock Perfection!" thread:
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=758474&highlight=glock+perfection
Sunray
Member
"...We all consider plastic bins "non-durables"..." You mean the tree huggers have been lying about how long plastics stay in the land fills? A plastic bin is not the same thing as a polymer.
A Remington Nylon 66 is called a Nylon 66 for a reason. Nylon isn't plastic. Don't take the SOB apart either. They're a nightmare to get back together properly.
"...Most likely polyethylene..." Great rope. snicker. Have sandals made out of polyethylene rope. One pair is over 10 years old and just starting to wear through the sole. That's with constant wearing too.
A Remington Nylon 66 is called a Nylon 66 for a reason. Nylon isn't plastic. Don't take the SOB apart either. They're a nightmare to get back together properly.
"...Most likely polyethylene..." Great rope. snicker. Have sandals made out of polyethylene rope. One pair is over 10 years old and just starting to wear through the sole. That's with constant wearing too.
Blue Brick
Member
Hi Point
Zaydok Allen
Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2011
- Messages
- 13,274
Sure it is. Nylon in the Nylon 66 is in fact called Zytel by the Dupont corp., and it most definitely is a type of plastic. True, plastics vary widely in composition, and include fiberglass in some cases, but a difference in composition doesn't make them not plastic. Nowadays we call them polymer, because it sounds more high tech. But the bottom line is that it is still just another type of plastic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remington_Nylon_66
http://www.chuckhawks.com/rem_nylon_rifles.htm
http://www.dupont.com/products-and-services/plastics-polymers-resins/thermoplastics/brands/zytel-nylon.view-all.hlm-usesapplications-usesapplication.html
However, the plastic in a gun is by no means the same as plastic in a cheap storage bin, and if plastic degradation was a major problem, I think we'd be seeing some failures in older GLOCKS and VP70s, and other older polymer guns. Maybe we just aren't there yet.
I sure do agree with you though on not taking a Nylon66 apart thought. Sheesh! What a headache.
Last edited:
george burns
Member
Nothing lasts forever. Metals all get stress cracks, at some point as does just about every material known. Even diamonds can crack, so if you have to repair or replace a part once in a while, it's just part of life. Even we wear out.
Zaydok Allen
Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2011
- Messages
- 13,274
Exactamundo!
Walt Sherrill
Member
And it's not always planned osbsolecense... as sometime we buy the cheapest plastic product we can find, some of which are thin and brittle, because we aren't thinking about long-term usage or using them where temperature extremes might be an issue. Large wheeled garbage carts seem to hold up well to abuse in all sorts of weather, for example.... but some of the cheap plastic storage boxes if it's really cold, won't.
george burns
Member
well living in a warm humid climate, I can assure you that everything breaks in FL given enough time. Air Conditioners, cars anything with rubber plastic or metal parts will rust corrode or dry out. A new house lasts exactly 5 years before you start replacing things that almost never need fixing up north.
Sprinkler pumps, AC units, washer/Dryers, moldings, shingles, paint, and anything else exposed to 100+ degree heat and moisture.
Sprinkler pumps, AC units, washer/Dryers, moldings, shingles, paint, and anything else exposed to 100+ degree heat and moisture.
Walt Sherrill
Member
You'd be surprised what you can do with plastic glue and then a soldering iron... It'll look like crap, but it might become serviceable again. Maybe you can find a junker somewhere with a stock that isn't in pieces?
The same thing can happen with older guns with wood forearms and butts -- and finding stocks for them is just about impossible, or it'll cost you far more than you'll want to spend. I've got two 1903 Winchesters, one needs a forearm.... BIG MONEY if you can find one, and bigger money if you want to have one made. (But the ammo is just as bad...)
(I also have an ANIB Nylon 66 -- I don't think it's ever been fired. Wish I could find an original box for it...)
Last edited:
If plastic doesn't belong on guns because it can get fragile over a half-century, what about wood? We've all broken wood yard implements, especially as the wood ages (and that doesn't take multiple decades), yet I've never heard someone say that wood isn't one appropriate option for buttstocks of longarms.
Walt Sherrill
Member
There are clearly MILLIONS of M-16 and M-16 copies in use around the world, and they (and guns based on the basic design) have a LOT of plastic in them... including buttstocks which really take a beating in infantry weapons. I know the discussion is focused on handguns, but if durability is the issue...
doubleh
Member
Walt, I have repaired a few plastic items with both plastic epoxy, the welding method, and one thing with a special plastic glue. The glue job was expensive and failed in less than a year. Not going to make the mess plastic welding will cause. I think I have a solution with the epoxy if I ever devote the time to figuering out how to remove and replace the magazine tube. Maybe this summer when epoxy will cure.
Wood is a completely different critter than plastic/polymer/all the same basic thing material of course. I can repair some pretty broken up wood parts. If that isn't an option I can make a replacement but you are right about the cost of good wood. Wish I could make a wooden replacement for the 66 but it isn't possible in my thinking.
I've searched the web for a replacement stock for years and just quit looking. It's been many years since I've seen a 66 for sale around this area also.
Wood is a completely different critter than plastic/polymer/all the same basic thing material of course. I can repair some pretty broken up wood parts. If that isn't an option I can make a replacement but you are right about the cost of good wood. Wish I could make a wooden replacement for the 66 but it isn't possible in my thinking.
I've searched the web for a replacement stock for years and just quit looking. It's been many years since I've seen a 66 for sale around this area also.
DammitBoy
Member
I have an HKvp70z made in 1974.
It's 40 year old plastic is doing just fine. It's ugly, but it does the job.
Disclaimer: my EDC is a para P14 stainless
It's 40 year old plastic is doing just fine. It's ugly, but it does the job.
Disclaimer: my EDC is a para P14 stainless
benEzra
Moderator Emeritus
The gun I learned to shoot on was a Nylon 66 made in 1966 (150th anniversary edition). That made it about 47 years old when I sold it last year. The receiver/stock still looked new (scratched here and there, but not degraded at all) and the one time I took it apart, I could not detect any wear at all inside the receiver where the bolt moves.
There is as much difference between glass-reinforced nylon and a cheap polyethylene trash bin as there is between a fine heat treated alloy steel and cheap die-cast zinc.
There are other issues besides fatigue life also. Good steel is great, but it is heavy. My steel-frame S&W 5906 weighs 2 pounds 6.3 ounces empty; a polymer-frame Glock 17 has the same magazine capacity (17+1) and weighs 1 pound 6 ounces empty, despite having a longer barrel than the 5906 (4.5" vs. 4").
Before polymer frames, manufacturers typically avoided the weight penalty of a steel frame by using aluminum alloy, but as has been noted upthread, aluminum is noted for fatigue cracking over time.
There is as much difference between glass-reinforced nylon and a cheap polyethylene trash bin as there is between a fine heat treated alloy steel and cheap die-cast zinc.
There are other issues besides fatigue life also. Good steel is great, but it is heavy. My steel-frame S&W 5906 weighs 2 pounds 6.3 ounces empty; a polymer-frame Glock 17 has the same magazine capacity (17+1) and weighs 1 pound 6 ounces empty, despite having a longer barrel than the 5906 (4.5" vs. 4").
Before polymer frames, manufacturers typically avoided the weight penalty of a steel frame by using aluminum alloy, but as has been noted upthread, aluminum is noted for fatigue cracking over time.
Sig and S&W aluminum frames last a long, long time.
With any frame material, you have to replace the recoil springs when they wear, or you will get frame battering.
The Nylon compositions guns like Glocks are made of don't come anywhere close to rivaling steel for strength.
Funny, how many people whine about how "heavy" steel frames are now, compared to 20 years ago.
I do own 3 articles of Tactical Tupperware.
I like all 3.
Not as much as I like my aluminum or steel framed guns, but I do like them quite a bit.
If your steel plastic or aluminum frames crack, you should have replaced your recoil springs a good while back.
For the most part, anyway, as there have been some designs that just don't translate so well from steel to aluminum.
I own all three: boat anchor, beer can, Tupperware.
I strongly prefer steel as UV/ozone/chemical exposure will never have a detrimental effect on them.
Except for sulfuric acid, and that will make a Nylon frame crumble like a stale cookie.
I carry my SR9 more than most of my other autos. Not because of it being lighter.
I carry it because I can replace it for a lot less money than my steel or aluminum framed autos.
I also carry it when I'm in the mood to carry a 9 wussimeter because it holds 17+1.
The lighter weight may make a difference, but my not-so-great lower back hasn't noticed. I was carrying the SR9, a Smith 4566, Smith 36, and an EAA Big Bore Bounty hunter a couple of weekends ago while woodsloafing/shooting.
Really didn't notice the weight.
A properly designed/made holster and a good, thick, stiff (purpose-designed) CC belt make all the difference between comfortable carry and miserable backache.
I've done both. I'll take the high quality belt/holster combination every time.
All three materials have their places. You can make all parts of a gun from steel.
You cannot make all parts of a gun from plastic, no matter how advanced.
You can make any and all guns from steel. You cannot make any and all guns from plastic.
The gun world would be better off without plastics than it would be without steel.
BTW, "space age polymers". The Space Age was damn near 50 years ago. Nothing modern about that.
With any frame material, you have to replace the recoil springs when they wear, or you will get frame battering.
The Nylon compositions guns like Glocks are made of don't come anywhere close to rivaling steel for strength.
Funny, how many people whine about how "heavy" steel frames are now, compared to 20 years ago.
I do own 3 articles of Tactical Tupperware.
I like all 3.
Not as much as I like my aluminum or steel framed guns, but I do like them quite a bit.
If your steel plastic or aluminum frames crack, you should have replaced your recoil springs a good while back.
For the most part, anyway, as there have been some designs that just don't translate so well from steel to aluminum.
I own all three: boat anchor, beer can, Tupperware.
I strongly prefer steel as UV/ozone/chemical exposure will never have a detrimental effect on them.
Except for sulfuric acid, and that will make a Nylon frame crumble like a stale cookie.
I carry my SR9 more than most of my other autos. Not because of it being lighter.
I carry it because I can replace it for a lot less money than my steel or aluminum framed autos.
I also carry it when I'm in the mood to carry a 9 wussimeter because it holds 17+1.
The lighter weight may make a difference, but my not-so-great lower back hasn't noticed. I was carrying the SR9, a Smith 4566, Smith 36, and an EAA Big Bore Bounty hunter a couple of weekends ago while woodsloafing/shooting.
Really didn't notice the weight.
A properly designed/made holster and a good, thick, stiff (purpose-designed) CC belt make all the difference between comfortable carry and miserable backache.
I've done both. I'll take the high quality belt/holster combination every time.
All three materials have their places. You can make all parts of a gun from steel.
You cannot make all parts of a gun from plastic, no matter how advanced.
You can make any and all guns from steel. You cannot make any and all guns from plastic.
The gun world would be better off without plastics than it would be without steel.
BTW, "space age polymers". The Space Age was damn near 50 years ago. Nothing modern about that.
Styx
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2014
- Messages
- 3,282
Yes metal frames can crack, but are you all saying that a plastic frame that's under the same amount of streat would out last metal?
Me personally, I like metal guns over plastic. They look nicer, IMHO, feel sturdier, and it seems like it fits the family heirloom bill more so than plastic.
I've also had a kydex holster made where the making used screws that were too long. When I holstered the gun, a nice chunk of plastic was gouged out. With a metal gun, you would not have to worry about that. the finish, not the frame, would have been damaged.
To me, the only reason why I buy plastic handguns are because they cost less and weigh less. I would never spend $800-$1000 for a polymer gun.
Me personally, I like metal guns over plastic. They look nicer, IMHO, feel sturdier, and it seems like it fits the family heirloom bill more so than plastic.
I've also had a kydex holster made where the making used screws that were too long. When I holstered the gun, a nice chunk of plastic was gouged out. With a metal gun, you would not have to worry about that. the finish, not the frame, would have been damaged.
To me, the only reason why I buy plastic handguns are because they cost less and weigh less. I would never spend $800-$1000 for a polymer gun.
Last edited:
- Status
