Nah, you are just being biased when you go so far as to say "junky."
No, I just have high standards. A double action trigger should be smooth and light through its entire travel, exhibiting no stacking or grittiness. A single action trigger should have minimal, light takeup and no overtravel. Triggers that exhibit the aforementioned flaws are junky, by definition.
Yup, they are probably cheaper to manufacture than the steel variety, but the end result is far from cheap.
Something that is cheap to make is cheap. (Or should be...)
You said "tolerable," if I'm not mistaken, which is certainly less than very decent, and suggests accuracy that is just good enough to not be bad. Huge difference.
It sounds like my idea of "tolerable" and your idea of "very decent" are similar.
I don't believe that. My USP has no such finishing flaws, nor have I heard of others having such flaws.
Again, different levels of expectations. I think Kimbers and Springfields have tons of annoying cosmetic flaws. Other folks don't see them. I guess it's all based on one's viewpoint.
Ok, whatever. Now you are talking about cowboy guns that chamber low-pressure smoke loads.
No, I'm talking about S&W Hand Ejectors that chamber smokeless powder loads. My 64 year-old Radom and 108 year-old Krag-Jorgenson certainly don't shoot low-pressure cowboy loads.
It sounds like you're saying the high-tech polymer that goes into making these frames will start to biodegrade, rendering the gun unstable or shorter-lived than an all-steel gun. This is a ridiculous orthodoxy and is yet again a perfect example of the all-steel snobbery and bias of many of the 1911 shooters.
That's me. "Orthodox 1911 Shooter Woman." Owner of nine Glocks, one USP, two P7's, whose next project gun is going to be a polymer-framed double-stack .38 Super STI. Check with the photography, audiophile, and antique toy-collector hobbyists if you'd like to see how other folks are dealing with long-term longevity of manmade materials. How long will a polymer-framed gun last? Well, we really don't know. We have a fairly decent idea of how long a steel-framed gun will last only from experience (and rust & embrittlement are still factors there.)
My USP, in the course of its life, will fire tens of thousands of rounds before any significant repairs will have to be made to it.
"Tens of thousands of rounds" is chickenfeed in some leagues, you realize. I know serious gamers who are 100k or 200k into an all-steel 1911. There are folks out there with more than that. On their second or third or fifth barrel in the same gun. Guns wear out and break. It is merely my contention that it will happen sooner to a gun that operates with metal parts embedded in a plastic frame. This is assuming that we don't find out that current plastics are subject to the same age-related ills as earlier ones. It would be fatuous to claim a lifespan of 100 years for a polymer firearm frame when the oldest ones are barely a quarter of that age. Again: do I think a polymer framed handgun will have an acceptable service life? Sure, especially when compared to an alloy-framed Beretta, SIG, or 1911. Do I think they'll still be shootable in 100 years? I don't know, but there's no really favorable evidence.
Too bad all of our tennis rackets, skateboard wheels, bicycle frames, compound bows, golf clubs, etc. can't still be made from the almighty metal...
Gee, there you go, assuming an animus against plastics where there is none. Plastic is good for what it's good for: light weight, resilience, ease of manufacture. From what we know thus far, it's not good for dessert toppings, flame-retardant suits, or long-term load-bearing structures that are exposed to extremes of temperature and UV light.
Greg Bell,
Tamara, you like 1911s, we get that.
No, apparently you're missing the point entirely. I'm merely correcting erroneous statements.
To say that "1911's are unreliable out of the box" is an inaccurate statement, considering that it takes in everything from out-of-the-box Auto Ordinances to out-of-the-box Ed Browns in one fell, misinformed, swoop. It is no more accurate than saying "HK's all clog their gas ports if you don't clean them."
"But my HK doesn't
have a gas port!"
"Doesn't matter.
My HK clogged its gas port, therefore
all HK's will..."
She has undoubtedly seen hundreds of USPs of poor quality.
Guess we just have different standards of fit and finish. Me? Mold lines on the frame of a $1,000+ gun piss me off.
back atcha.
I will go to work monday and scan some old gun magazines with articles on how to make 1911s work reliably.
...and I'll scan some on why hollowpoints wont feed in semiautomatics, why Airweight Smiths should never be shot with +P ammo, and why revolvers are better than unreliable jammomatics for self defense, all from the same era. A Wilson CQB/Baer TRS/SIG GSR/
et cetera ain't your father's Oldsmobile.
). But Tamara works at a gun shop. She has undoubtedly seen hundreds of USPs of poor quality.
