There is just something about steel.
- Thread starter C/O
- Start date
- Status
Mainsail
Member
Weird you mention the 5906. My dad just gave me his. Prior police gun and he bought it from the officer but he never shot it.
Weird you mention the 5906. My dad just gave me his. Prior police gun and he bought it from the officer but he never shot it.
Well, that's a cool gift.
Wreck-n-Crew
Member
What have you been waiting on!
Your going to love the recoil. 
Robbins290
Member
i sold my 5906, i miss it. but i still have a 3906 and a 3913
Mainsail
Member
I'm hoping to take it out this weekend. I got it oiled and greased and it feels very smooth now. I got three magazines with it; one 14 round, one 14 round marked RESTRICTED, and one 15 round.What have you been waiting on!
Wreck-n-Crew
Member
Oh one of those mags from the restricted states for LE use only. Let me know how she shoots!
orionengnr
Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2005
- Messages
- 5,712
Not in my experience.
Steel framed 5" 1911...43 oz.
Alloy framed 5" 1911...33-36 oz.
Steel framed Commander sized 1911...36 oz.
Alloy framed Commander sized 1911...28 oz.
Steel framed 3" 1911..28 oz.
Alloy framed 3" 1911...24 oz.
Shall we continue with S&W revolvers in steel/alloy/Scandium frames?
I cannot see how any steel framed handgun can weigh less than a similarly-sized alloy handgun.
Nom de Forum
Member
"Point being, steel framed full sized pistols can easily weigh less full size alloy framed guns." - RX-79G
I have been waiting to see if the poster (RX-79G) of the comment you quoted would fully take the hint in my earlier post. With your post I now feel I can further comment without appearing to be a pedant, a nuisance, or argumentative. So here goes.
What is the definition of a “full sized pistol” and more specifically for a semiautomatic? That would be the first thing to establish a parameter for to determine if it is possible for a steel framed “full sized pistol” to be lighter than an alloy framed pistol. Barrel length would appear to be the best indicator of determining size since that is what gun makers typically use. So lets consider some barrel lengths. You already listed two old classic examples of full size and less than full size, 1911 5” and Commander 4.25”. Some additional classic pistols usually considered full size are the P-08 4”, P-38 4.9”, BHP 4.75”, and TT-33 4.5” Here are just a few modern classic examples of full size and less than full size: Beretta 92 4.9” and 92C 4.3”, Glock G17 4.49” and G19 4”. Some additional not so classic modern pistols usually considered full size are the H&K P9S 4”, H&K and P7 4.13”. After looking at these examples and others I think it would be hard to dispute that full size means a barrel length of at least 4” and more realistically 4.5”. What all these numbers mean is, if you are willing to consider a 4” barreled semiautomatic as full size, you can find examples of steel framed “full sized pistols” that are lighter than alloy framed “full size” pistols of a different design. Those lighter steel frame designs achieve this with much shorter barrels, and/or smaller caliber and capacity. When you consider that for most of the history of semiautomatics a full size military service pistol was at least the size of a TT-33 4.5” 29oz, there realistically are very few full size steel framed semiautomatics that “can easily weigh less than full size alloy framed guns”. What and how many “full size” steel framed semiautomatics of same caliber and similar capacity are lighter than a Commander 9mm 4.25” 27oz? Heres a hint for everyone: neither the P210, P9S, FN HP-DA, Steyr GB, or H&K P7 is one of them.
I have been waiting to see if the poster (RX-79G) of the comment you quoted would fully take the hint in my earlier post. With your post I now feel I can further comment without appearing to be a pedant, a nuisance, or argumentative. So here goes.
What is the definition of a “full sized pistol” and more specifically for a semiautomatic? That would be the first thing to establish a parameter for to determine if it is possible for a steel framed “full sized pistol” to be lighter than an alloy framed pistol. Barrel length would appear to be the best indicator of determining size since that is what gun makers typically use. So lets consider some barrel lengths. You already listed two old classic examples of full size and less than full size, 1911 5” and Commander 4.25”. Some additional classic pistols usually considered full size are the P-08 4”, P-38 4.9”, BHP 4.75”, and TT-33 4.5” Here are just a few modern classic examples of full size and less than full size: Beretta 92 4.9” and 92C 4.3”, Glock G17 4.49” and G19 4”. Some additional not so classic modern pistols usually considered full size are the H&K P9S 4”, H&K and P7 4.13”. After looking at these examples and others I think it would be hard to dispute that full size means a barrel length of at least 4” and more realistically 4.5”. What all these numbers mean is, if you are willing to consider a 4” barreled semiautomatic as full size, you can find examples of steel framed “full sized pistols” that are lighter than alloy framed “full size” pistols of a different design. Those lighter steel frame designs achieve this with much shorter barrels, and/or smaller caliber and capacity. When you consider that for most of the history of semiautomatics a full size military service pistol was at least the size of a TT-33 4.5” 29oz, there realistically are very few full size steel framed semiautomatics that “can easily weigh less than full size alloy framed guns”. What and how many “full size” steel framed semiautomatics of same caliber and similar capacity are lighter than a Commander 9mm 4.25” 27oz? Heres a hint for everyone: neither the P210, P9S, FN HP-DA, Steyr GB, or H&K P7 is one of them.
Last edited:
ForumSurfer
Member
I like polymer guns. I carried a g19 as my daily carry for several years. I'm not sure how many, but it was long enough that my tritium vials went dead.
That being said, the feel and heft of steel is a great feeling. I like aluminum too. Something about steel or alloy with nice wooden grips is just right feeling for target or carry (for me anyway)
Plus I'm old school. I love beautifully, naturally, rich colored woods and exotic woods. Notice the cocobolo keychain in one of these pics. That's natural with no finish or treatment. My 10 year old son made that for me on the wood lathe Santa brought him for Christmas. Pure awesome if you ask me!
Nothing wrong with plastic though...the Glock 19 will always be in my personal top 10 handguns list
A few of my favorite steel or aluminum and wood handguns I own/owned:
That being said, the feel and heft of steel is a great feeling. I like aluminum too. Something about steel or alloy with nice wooden grips is just right feeling for target or carry (for me anyway)
Plus I'm old school. I love beautifully, naturally, rich colored woods and exotic woods. Notice the cocobolo keychain in one of these pics. That's natural with no finish or treatment. My 10 year old son made that for me on the wood lathe Santa brought him for Christmas. Pure awesome if you ask me!
Nothing wrong with plastic though...the Glock 19 will always be in my personal top 10 handguns list
A few of my favorite steel or aluminum and wood handguns I own/owned:
ForumSurfer
Member
Over the years I've also found that weight for a carry gun just doesn't matter to me. That's just ME. We're all different.
I carried a g19 for many years. Currently I carry that colt rail gun. It's overall longer. It weighs as much as two g19s. But it's also thinner. It also isn't noticeable from a weight standpoint with a great belt. My belt is a standard wilderness style belt. I don't need a rigid leather belt, they're uncomfortable to me. Shoot, I don't even need an instructor belt with the stiff Kydex strip seen in. I carry that all steel beast under a snug fitting tshirt with a reload just fine with a double stitched TDU style belt comfortably all day long and I'm not having to pull my pants up throughout the day.
I understand some folks have hip, neck or back issues. For those folks I understand that ounces are very important but I'm youngish (36), healthy and active. I'll go ahead and carry what I shoot well with.
I carried a g19 for many years. Currently I carry that colt rail gun. It's overall longer. It weighs as much as two g19s. But it's also thinner. It also isn't noticeable from a weight standpoint with a great belt. My belt is a standard wilderness style belt. I don't need a rigid leather belt, they're uncomfortable to me. Shoot, I don't even need an instructor belt with the stiff Kydex strip seen in. I carry that all steel beast under a snug fitting tshirt with a reload just fine with a double stitched TDU style belt comfortably all day long and I'm not having to pull my pants up throughout the day.
I understand some folks have hip, neck or back issues. For those folks I understand that ounces are very important but I'm youngish (36), healthy and active. I'll go ahead and carry what I shoot well with.
doubleh
Member
I can't argue with you, C/O. I have a couple of the plastic fantastics that I have never learned to love. Tried to trade one of them off on a 1911 yesterday and my dealer wouldn't do it. He said my S&W would just lay there with the other one that's been laying there for months and he will sell the 1911 pretty quick. Can't really blame him.
Mainsail
Member
OK, I feel dumb. My 14 round magazines hold 15 rounds....because they're all 15 round magazines. I never turned it over- 14 is the last number on one side, but 15 is on the other. Sorry, never owned a S&W auto before.
Anyway, it ate 150 rounds of ball ammo without a single hiccup and another 20 rounds of 147gr HSTs as well. The heavy steel frame made the recoil pretty light.
Attachments
Last edited:
Is a Beretta 92 or Sig P226 suddenly not alloy framed pistols because some other alloy guns are much lighter?
My point was simple - an all steel FN HP-DA has almost identical specs to a P226, but is 2 oz. lighter despite the steel frame. And the P226 is a very common design.
There are heavy polymer guns and light steel guns. Steel frames do not have to be heavy. But if you want to compare only guns that are steel frame designs made out of aluminum, of course they're lighter. They are also much less durable than a dedicated alloy frame design.
My point was simple - an all steel FN HP-DA has almost identical specs to a P226, but is 2 oz. lighter despite the steel frame. And the P226 is a very common design.
There are heavy polymer guns and light steel guns. Steel frames do not have to be heavy. But if you want to compare only guns that are steel frame designs made out of aluminum, of course they're lighter. They are also much less durable than a dedicated alloy frame design.
Nom de Forum
Member
"Point being, steel framed full sized pistols can easily weigh less full size alloy framed guns." - RX-79G
All this steel versus alloy (aluminum alloy) weight debate is rather pointless as neither material is the future of frame design.
All this steel versus alloy (aluminum alloy) weight debate is rather pointless as neither material is the future of frame design.
Nom de Forum
Member
After seeing so many new "wonder pistols" over the decades that were going to be the greatest thing since sliced bread, I would not bet your paycheck on them winning any police or military contracts, etc. Besides don't you know the new R51 will be offered with a lighter, more durable, comfortable polymer frame as soon as it becomes economically viable.
Going with alloy was probably as much a marketing department decision for the historical reference PR as an engineering decision for making a safe bet in using what is already known to work with a pistol of this design.Nom de Forum
Member
I wonder how extensive it would really have to be in the R51 and if the weight would not remain about the same at worse while achieving the advantages of polymer over metal. What "Striker" pistol? Are you referring to the new SIG 320? It has a polymer frame with steel subframe. It weighs about 26 ounces. How do you think that would compare to a scaled up R51? I think probably very favorably. For Big Green making the R51 in metal may be cheaper initially because of company infrastructure but I still think my original speculation about why they chose a metal frame is likely on target.
The Arsenal Strike-One.
Hey, if the "sub frame" is a huge chunk of metal with the plastic only providing a mag well and trigger guard, how much is it worth claiming that it is a polymer pistol frame? A P9S is pretty close to that, but no one would call it a polymer frame.
Hey, if the "sub frame" is a huge chunk of metal with the plastic only providing a mag well and trigger guard, how much is it worth claiming that it is a polymer pistol frame? A P9S is pretty close to that, but no one would call it a polymer frame.
Nom de Forum
Member
You don't expect gun makers to use accurate nomenclature after three centuries of inconsistency do you? Think about it. Ever shot a .40 caliber bullet in a gun chambered in .38-40? Ever heard of a "Safety Automatic" pistol that is only semiautomatic in action and not particularly safe? Why do we refer to a Beretta 92 as a DA/SA pistol but don't refer to a S&W 10 as a DA/SA revolver? Look at the video on the new SIG 320. SIG refers to it as a polymer pistol then shows you how you can remove "a huge chunk of metal" to put it into two other polymer frame sizes.
I don't expect anything from gun companies but for them to claim whatever they can get away with that sells guns. If steel frames were in vogue, they'd call it that with a "polymer overgrip". The public believes nylon is a wonder material called "polymer", so that is what they call it.
We don't call revolvers "DA/SA" because they are not. Successive shots are not automatically SA with a standard revolver, or on the "revolver mode" of the Browning BDM pistol - which was DA shot to shot, but could be manually cocked.
Non-automatic revolvers are DA, SA or DAO. Autos are DA/SA, DAO, DA, HDA, HDA/SA, SA or SAO (if you want to designate a converted DA/SA platform).
We don't call revolvers "DA/SA" because they are not. Successive shots are not automatically SA with a standard revolver, or on the "revolver mode" of the Browning BDM pistol - which was DA shot to shot, but could be manually cocked.
Non-automatic revolvers are DA, SA or DAO. Autos are DA/SA, DAO, DA, HDA, HDA/SA, SA or SAO (if you want to designate a converted DA/SA platform).
Nom de Forum
Member
Nylon is a very specific formulation so I don't think disparagingly referring to the polymer used in a Glock as nylon is an accurate comment. Plastic is not just Plastic. There is a big difference between chicken and beef even if both are meat.
Ok, I agree DA revolvers don't automatically become SA with successive shots but they do return to the capability of being SA with successive shots. How's that for being pedantic?
Nylon isn't disparaging. It is accurate. "Polymer" is a word that you don't understand, and have come to believe it defines something that it does not.
Glocks are made of nylon (Nylon 60?) with some coloring agent and fiberglass. Pretty much what all the "polymer" pistols also use to one degree or another, which the exception of Ruger, who used a glass reinforced polyurethane product from Dupont for the P95 frame and others.
And since you are into definitions, the material "plastic" is defined as a moldable material made of organic polymers.
"Polymers" are just complex molecules, like proteins and hydrocarbons. They can be used to make plastics, or eggs. "Polymer" does not mean much of anything when it comes to guns, since snot is just as much a polymer as epoxy is.
Lycra is a brand and type of polyurethane.
Polyurethane, polystyrene and nylon are types of plastic.
Plastic is composed of polymers.
Polymers are made of monomers.
Monomers are molecules composed of atoms.
Why don't we just call the Glock frame "Atomic"? It's just as descriptive as "polymer".
Glocks are made of nylon (Nylon 60?) with some coloring agent and fiberglass. Pretty much what all the "polymer" pistols also use to one degree or another, which the exception of Ruger, who used a glass reinforced polyurethane product from Dupont for the P95 frame and others.
And since you are into definitions, the material "plastic" is defined as a moldable material made of organic polymers.
"Polymers" are just complex molecules, like proteins and hydrocarbons. They can be used to make plastics, or eggs. "Polymer" does not mean much of anything when it comes to guns, since snot is just as much a polymer as epoxy is.
Lycra is a brand and type of polyurethane.
Polyurethane, polystyrene and nylon are types of plastic.
Plastic is composed of polymers.
Polymers are made of monomers.
Monomers are molecules composed of atoms.
Why don't we just call the Glock frame "Atomic"? It's just as descriptive as "polymer".
Mastodon
Member
Steel and a hammer for me.
- Status
