People complain about plastic in guns.

Status
Not open for further replies.
W

W L Johnson

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Messages
1,250
Location
Kentucky
I see were in many posts where people complain about certain parts in guns being made of plastic such as triggers and triggers guards, but how often do those parts actually break because of being made of plastic?
just curious.
 
Interesting question. Regarding plastic trigger guards on rifles, I would expect them to break if the rifle were dropped or thrown on them. But aluminum alloy can also fracture and steel can bend under such conditions.
 
I think many people are concerned about the plastic's longevity. Most people buy guns & want them to last a lifetime or more. The concern with plastic is that it will become brittle with age or be adversely affected by chemicals.

Just one example is the .22 target rifles CMP sold recently:
http://www.thecmp.org/22targetsurplus.htm
These rifles are over 55 years old, but show little evidence of use. Trigger guards are made of plastic that has shrunk and has become very brittle. Many of the trigger guards are cracked. Those that are not cracked may crack during shipment or later use. Replacement trigger guards are not available through the CMP, but are available from commercial sources. Red / Green plastic safety indicator buttons may be missing.
Click to expand...

Granted, today's plastics are MUCH better than those of 55 years ago, but then again, it may take 55 years to find out that they aren't as great as everyone thought.
 
When I hear of a plastic part breaking, it is usually on a very cheap gun that also is likely to have problems with metal parts. Many complain of the plastic parts on Tikkas, but you don't hear much of them actually being a problem. I think most of the dislike of plastic is personal preference, which is fine so long as it's not presented as proof ofinferior performance.

gary
 
It seems that the plastic framed pistols being made are holding up better than most aluminum alloy framed pistols. The plastic triggerguards have been around for a while on several guns and I am not aware of any serious issues with them and would think they may well be a better option than aluminum.

The only plastic part that I have ever known to fail is the safety button on Mossberg shotguns. A lot of people replace the plastic mag followers on shotguns and lever rifles, but I have never read a report of them actually failing.
 
Granted, today's plastics are MUCH better than those of 55 years ago, but then again, it may take 55 years to find out that they aren't as great as everyone thought.
Click to expand...

How well is the plastic holding up in stocks & hand-guards on original AR-10 and 15's? Many of these are getting up to around 50 years old. Or for that matter AR-7's?
 
The do break, and they do break at a rate more often than good aluminum. Seen it several times. Metal is good; plastic is notsomuch. As for the entire frame, never seen one of those break.
 
I think most of the dislike of plastic is personal preference, which is fine so long as it's not presented as proof ofinferior performance.
Click to expand...

That's kind of why I'm asking, to be clearer, I see many posters dismiss the quality of a gun because it has a plastic trigger guard. It doesn't seem to matter how well it shoots and handles. They can't get over that little bit of plastic.

And really, how much is the company saving by using plastic in something so little as a trigger or trigger guard?
 
If plastic only stopped at the trigger guard...

If plastic parts only stopped at the trigger guard, or the safety, I think the general consensus of the public would be more accepting. However, these days, and I'm using the latest version of the Ruger 10/22 as an example, the entire trigger/lock-work housing is molded from plastic. So is the front barrel band. These parts were previously metal. I joked in a previous post that Ruger is turning their 10/22 into a Nylon 66:)
 
f plastic parts only stopped at the trigger guard, or the safety, I think the general consensus of the public would be more accepting. However, these days, and I'm using the latest version of the Ruger 10/22 as an example, the entire trigger/lock-work housing is molded from plastic. So is the front barrel band. These parts were previously metal. I joked in a previous post that Ruger is turning their 10/22 into a Nylon 66
Click to expand...

But my question is, is this really causing more problems? I am not arguing ether side. Is it really causing real world problems or is it a mental thing?
 
But my question is, is this really causing more problems? I am not arguing ether side. Is it really causing real world problems or is it a mental thing?
Click to expand...

Well, I suppose not, but every time there is a design change (for better or worse), there are always misgivings.

I guess it's my turn to pick on Ruger today, but one problem that may arise is aftermarket parts for the Mini-14 with synthetic stock. The synthetic stock version has the "metal reinforcements" near the magazine well molded into the stock, so if you choose to put on a Butler Creek folding stock (great stock BTW) you'd have to order the metal reinforcement, screw set, and the bushings which is standard on the Mini with the wood stock. Not a real big deal, but if you did not know about it ahead of time, you have to wait until the parts came in to install the stock.

I'm actually on my second 10/22 now, so I'm very familiar with installing after market parts (bigger bolt handle, extended mag release, auto bolt release, trigger shims....), and working on the new molded trigger/lock-work housing "feels wrong" as I'm afraid of marring it up with my metal punches and wood block to get the retaining pins out. In the old metal version, the pins actually could be pushed out by hand.

Lastly, and this is just hearsay, but if you do some research on the XM8 proposed future battle rifle, you're going to read something to the effect that sand and polymers don't mix. BTW, the XM8 did get scrapped.
 
If you do a search in the Rifles forum, you'll see that I've posted about how a hunting partner had his Tikka T3 rendered NMC by dropping it down a ravine and having the trigger guard and trigger smashed.

I doubt that a steel trigger guard would have suffered the same fate.
 
I doubt that a steel trigger guard would have suffered the same fate.
Click to expand...

Maybe kind of an extreme case though, dropping a rifle down ravine may have bent a metal guard to the point where it would need to be replaced. Sounds like it landed right on the guard.
 
Absolutely true. And my usual caveat is that I own and adore a T3, so clearly I'm not lettin' that one event dictate my view of the rifle.
 
I object to plastic parts and frames simply because the only supposed advantage is lighter weight and lower manufacturing cost (which doesn't seem to get passed on to the consumer). In my opinion most of the plastic (polymer) framed handguns are completely unbalanced with a steel stop and lightweight bottom. The recoil impulse is exaggerated compared to an all steel gun. I don't really mind carrying a heavier all steel gun all day and when it comes time to go to the range for some shooting I much prefer the heavier gun.
 
I've felt the opposite was true. At least when comparing my Glock 21 in 45 ACP to my 1911's the Glocks are softer shooting. It may have more to do with the grip angle or the wider grip than the plastic frame, but the Glock seems to have less recoil.
 
Plastics have come quite a way since their inception. Polymer science today is amazing. I personally like the way a weapon WORKS or LASTS, not specifically if it's made of the latest unobtanium alloy or whatever.

Despite my preference for certain pistols over Glocks, I've never seen the plastic (sorry, POLYMER) break, other than the oft cited kB!'s.

Find what works well for you :) And stick with it.
 
I have a Mossberg .22 made in the early 1940s and the only part that failed on this rifle is the plastic trigger gaurd. It shrank over the decades and became useless so I had to make one out of aluminum since there is no replacement available.

I also have a Winchester 190 made in 1974. I have had this rifle since it was new and the only parts that failed on it were the plastic ones. They became brittle over the decades and had to be replaced.

I wouldn't have had these problems if the parts were metal. Metal also can often be repaired with a torch or welder. Once plastic breaks its junk and it breaks a lot easeir than metal.

I have old military rifles from the early 1900s (before plastic) and they seem to hold up well even after a century of storage and handling. So far I still think metal holds up better than plastic but I have to admit that the new plastics are a big improvement over the old and I do own a few plastic pistols.
 
Last edited:
I've felt the opposite was true. At least when comparing my Glock 21 in 45 ACP to my 1911's the Glocks are softer shooting. It may have more to do with the grip angle or the wider grip than the plastic frame, but the Glock seems to have less recoil.
Click to expand...

I feel the same way. Of course, those junk pieces of plastic will never meet the scrutiny of some individuals, and there is no point explaining it. This thread is probably doomed to that fate.
 
Of course, those junk pieces of plastic will never meet the scrutiny of some individuals, and there is no point explaining it. This thread is probably doomed to that fate.
Click to expand...
I don't see this thread being too far gone yet. :) I have polymer pistols and steel pistols and aluminum pistols. They each appeal to me for different reasons, and their materials are appropriate for what they are and do.

I do understand the fascination with steel. Almost every weekend, I sneak out to shoot a case of clays and I use a 1936 Browning semiauto shotgun to do it. It is hard to imagine that, say, the Benelli Vinci will be as functional as the day that it was made, come seventy three years after its birth....

Time will tell. :)
 
I own pastic guns and metal/alloys..
My 3 plastics (XD45, PT111 Millennium, and PT111 Mil Pro) get carried and shot the most...

my only pistols that ever have failed were a J22 and another JA22--

Not a matter of what they are made of, but the quality of their construction...

Matter of fact pistol purchase will probably be one of the first "tupperwares"-- a 2nd gen G17....:)
 
Polymer Housing Torture Test

This is a video from Gunblast.com comparing the original metal trigger housing of the Ruger 10/22 vs. the new plastic one with a torture test that starts about 1:30 minutes into the video.

http://www.gunblast.com/images/Ruger-1022/Ruger-1022-HI.wmv

It speaks for itself, but it does not pursuade my preference for metal parts, and don't get me wrong, I have plastci guns: 2 Glocks, and a Keltec.

Ironically, on my Glock the only part that had a potential to fail was a metal sping under the disassembly bar. The original spring had a tendency to fail, and your slide could go flying forward onto the ground. Glock sent an improved spring free of charge, although it was not deemed an official recall.
 
I have a polymer Sig, and I love it. I've got a new P226, too, but it stays in the safe while the 'cheap' Sig stays on my nightstand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
Plastic/synthetic gun components
Replies
6
Views
596
Slater
S
Y
  • Locked
Guns and ammo on the "Plastic"
2
Replies
26
Views
1K
ScottS
S
L
  • Locked
Is it bad to complain about high prices on guns?
Replies
9
Views
410
Lone_Gunman
L
J
  • Locked
I have no clue.
Replies
14
Views
702
crankshop1000
C
D
  • Locked
  • Poll
Plastic Perversions: Glock, HK SL8-1, ect., , ,
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
DougCxx
D
Back
Top