Which SHTF Pistol: Glock or 1911?

[Borachon]

I was going to vote Glock until I had a stovepipe jam with my G19 at the range yesterday.

One stovepipe jam, eh?
[soapbox] How can a company continue to foist this poorly designed death trap of a firearm onto an unsuspecting public? [/soapbox]

Well it seems clear to me now that ALL Glocks ever made til now, or which will ever be made in the future are clearly CRAP.


(Now those of you who've said I've called a Glock crap have some justification.)

Edit:
There are some really good reasons for having a Glock. As has already been mentioned. Cost, light weight, ammo capacity. And I'm not trying to down anybody's gun. I'm just trying to make people think about some things that can happen to them in an emergency that they may not have thought of before. Some of these things I've experienced, and some of them I've heard about happening to other people.

 

[PaladinX13]

And I'm not trying to down anybody's gun.

Whoa, huge back pedalling there on par with Slick Willie or Flip-Flop Kerry. You out and out said you considered Glock's inferior and that it was your task to talk people out of 'em. Don't try and pretend to be reasonable now, you've already outed yourself as on a crusade.

I think most of us stopped taking you seriously with the BBQ gun stuff, but your earlier post was the nail in the coffin:

I'm actually moving away from the idea of trying to convince people to change out their Glocks. Given that I feel they won't last when put under SEVERE conditions of stress the same way steel would, it makes sense for me to encourage you to go with what I consider to be an inferior gun. In a SHTF situation, I'll have a working firearm and you won't....sounds like a good situation to me.

Post 174

I suspect most of the folks still engaging you are humoring you to allow you enough rope to hang yourself.

I'm just trying to make people think about some things that can happen to them in an emergency that they may not have thought of before. Some of these things I've experienced, and some of them I've heard about happening to other people.

Meanwhile you seem to refuse to acknowledge that the cases are largely unlikely to unplausible (I'm not sure how often a pistol on my hip is going to be striking concrete at terminal velocity, you?) and narrowly viewed. You talk of cases where your secondary arm survives frost and flame... what about the immediate need for an arm insulated from extreme temps? For every contrived case of a secondary safe gun surviving hot or cold, I can come up with an equally contrived case where a gun is needed immediately and a plastic frame dramatically out-performs and dangerously cold/hot frame against human flesh.

There are highly specialized cases both ways to highlight their benefits, but only a crusader would use such contrivances as the basis of superiority or inferiority.

 

[Borachon]

You out and out said you considered Glock's inferior

Any gun with a plastic frame will be inferior....to me. Now take my opinion...and a quarter....and go to the coffee shop and see which one buys you more coffee.

you've already outed yourself as on a crusade.

True. My crusade is to make people think about their firearm. And what some potential disasters they could face. Now as you and I both know...the only true disaster any of us will face is next weeks invasion from Zeta Reticuli aliens. But I couldn't very well tell the rest of the board about that so I mentioned that highly unlikely "fire thing".

I think most of us stopped taking you seriously with the BBQ gun stuff, but your earlier post was the nail in the coffin:

If you change your judgment about your own personal self defense based on ME...a faceless stranger who you have NO idea about in terms of qualifications...then you would DESERVE to die. Judge your own personal self defense yourSELF. SELFdefense....YourSELF....see how I did a little play on words there? I'm not going to convince anyone to change their gun. (At least I doubt I will.) But there may be a few people who went out and bought firesafes...or vacuum seal their firearm for storage...or started asking Glock Corp about the Stress Rating on their polymer frames...or a dozen other things that might help them keep their firearm for when they need it.

You don't actually BELIEVE that people are going to change the gun they own based on this, do you? They aren't. I'm not even going to say that they are wrong to keep their gun. I'd probably lose some respect for them if they did.

If light weight is the most important thing...then it is the most important thing....TO YOU! So what you can then point out to me is that Glocks make great shipwreck guns....cause they don't corrode, they won't weigh you down while your trying to swim to shore, and you have bullets to spare when shooting coconuts for the meat. You can point this out to counter any points I might make about the overly heavy and clunky 8 round 1911. Tell me how carrying this heavy joker would end up in me being drowned. See how this can work? And you know what...I might never have thought of that before. You might have given me something new to think about. Maybe save my life when I wreck in Madagascar. In a flood...for all I know....maybe your Glock will FLOAT. Do you know if it can float or not? I don't. Truth to tell, I'd appriciate you telling me that info if you know. Cause I can see where that might save my life some day.

Normally I deal with most things with humor. But I'm going to be totally serious for a minute. I just saw this year the effects of what a really bad storm can do to a whole region. I've got friends and some family who are still dealing with it. Thankfully getting better. Gunowners....or hell just people in general....have preconceived ideas about what they think will threaten them. Invasion, US dictatorship, Killer virus, Economic failure, hurricane.....pick any of these or make up a new one. No matter what you think....it won't be like you think. I've spoken with friends recently who constantly remind me of this. They didn't expect their whole house to be washed away. That means no guns. Zip. Nada. They didn't expect to be without water. Or food. Or clothes. They didn't expect the people around them to start acting out of desparation. They didn't expect THEMSELVES to start acting out of desparation. Luckily, none of my friends experienced anything TOO violent (some shots in dark...things like that). But they had their gasoline stolen from out of their lawn in the night. They had to go loot food and water from a local convience store. They were without electricity for a month. They'd thought about disasters before, and even thought they were somewhat prepared. It...wasn't...like...they...planned.

Does that mean they shouldn't have planned at all? I'm not ready to go that far and say that.

I happen to think that firearms can be beneficial tools. I know for a fact they would have provided a couple of my friends with peace of mind, if nothing else, after Katrina passed. Luckily, many of the people I knew were able to go to friends who were less effected. But suppose that hadn't been the case? Suppose the disaster had been so bad that they were totally on their own?

IF...and it's a huge IF....IF I can introduce a new idea that someone NEVER considered before, or point it out to them from a new direction, then they MIGHT take action on it and it MIGHT help them sometime in the future.

But what the conversatin usually devolves into is "Hey! You said something bad about my firearm. You questioned it. You're an idiot for questioning a firearm that *I* own" blah blah blah.

In a SHTF situation, I'll have a working firearm and you won't....sounds like a good situation to me.

Yeah I was PO'd when I wrote that. Ever written something and then regretted it later? I suppose I shouldn't be backstepping on anything I've written though. Some sharks on this forum will sense weakness from me and swoop in for the kill. Contrition being a sign of weakness to many of them.

Meanwhile you seem to refuse to acknowledge that the cases are largely unlikely to unplausible

Having your gun be close to...or even inside of....a fire is hardly unlikely. Fire is one of the most common destructive events that occur in the US. Now then...what MIGHT be unlikely is to assume that fire would occur in concert with some other event.

Fire and economic collapse? Maybe but not necessarily so.
Fire in concert with....a hurricane? No probably not so much. I know they can happen but probably not.
But let's try...Fire in concert with an earthquake? (by the way, I never did find out if Glocks can withstand having houses fall on them...course I never asked) Yeah, fires and earthquakes can go hand in hand.
Fire in concert with riots? yeah. those happen together.
Fires in concert with chemical plant leaks? Yes.
Fires and drought?
Fires and Russian invasions? I've been told they can correlate.

I can come up with an equally contrived case where a gun is needed immediately and a plastic frame dramatically out-performs and dangerously cold/hot frame against human flesh.

Yeah, and not to be critical of you, but I kinda think you are remiss for not doing so. Tell me how I'm wrong. Point out the times when Glocks are better. That's a lot better than appealing to my "reasonableness" and to all this supposed knowledge that tells me plastic is better than steel. Hit me with some facts. Question me. But don't just say, "You're wrong." Or "You're a Glock hater". Back up what you got to say. If it doesn't help ME...it might help someone ELSE. It's too late for me. I had a conversation with someone resently that went something like this.

Friend: Search your feelings, Borachon. You can’t do this. I feel the conflict within you; let go of your hate for Glocks!
Myself: It is too late for me. John Browning will show you the true nature of Shooting. He is my master now.
Friend: Then you are truly dead.

And by the way...has anybody bothered to find out the melting point of Glock frames?

Really though. This is not about whose gun is better. It's about having guns to use when people need them.

 

[PaladinX13]

Any gun with a plastic frame will be inferior....to me. Now take my opinion...and a quarter....and go to the coffee shop and see which one buys you more coffee.

'bout the only sane thing I heard yet and sufficient reason for me not to bother reading that monster block-o-text not worth even two cents by your own figuring.

You're hung up on how a safe gun survives fire, absent ammo, for the SHTF... congrats, you have a heat-weakened, dangerous to shoot, cosmetically better off gun with no ammo to shoot. Any where and any how you're going to store ammo to last through a fire, a Glock will reside just as well.

Meanwhile, a contrived (say, rescue mission going in and outdoors repeatedly during a blizzard) wet polymer gun brought into blistering sub-zero temps will perform better in the human hand than the steel one fusing to flesh and deadening nerves. A polymer gun briefly stowed away in an oven, fire, or pile of ash when the zombies come will be more quickly brought to the ready than a searing hot steel grip in the same situation. As ridiculously contrived as your foolish scenarios. If only for comfort, Glocks get carried in cold conditions and comfort translates to SHTF accuracy a helluva lot more than a safe gun fire. I mention them because, apparently, you lack the imagination to come up with contrived situations for anything but your beloved steel, not because I seriously consider them a measure by which to consider any gun inferior.

 

[PaladinX13]

And by the way...has anybody bothered to find out the melting point of Glock frames?

Again, why you're not taken seriously... such a strong standpoint based entirely on Glock temperature performance, yet completely ignorant of the facts save your "feeling" that they're not going to do well in a highly contrived circumstance.

 

[Borachon]

Any where and any how you're going to store ammo to last through a fire, a Glock will reside just as well.

I don't know. Will a Glock float? If so...then there are some places I don't want to store it.

 

[Borachon]

Again, why you're not taken seriously... such a strong standpoint based entirely on Glock temperature performance, yet completely ignorant of the facts save your "feeling" that they're not going to do well in a highly contrived circumstance.

Exactly.
But at least I'm honest enough to admit ignorance.

And strong standpoints are often needed when dealing with people who are wrapped up in their self-importance, or their arrogence. Unless you make them surprised, or angry, then they won't consider what is being said. Because they already "knew" the "truth".

Regardless of your statements that I'm foolish for having presented these ideas, I'd be willing to bet at least a few people THOUGHT about the melting point of Glocks for the last day or so. Maybe one or two will ask their Glock dealer about it. Maybe Glock will let us know. I'm a believer in truthful information never being a bad thing.

Maybe we can get that guy whose done all the torture tests on his to try melting it? Then we'd know.

 

[Borachon]

I mention them because, apparently, you lack the imagination to come up with contrived situations for anything but your beloved steel, not because I seriously consider them a measure by which to consider any gun inferior.

I don't claim to be imaginative. I only ask that you use yours along with me.

On the steel versus plastic thing...yes, I'm prejudiced. Now...having admitted that...can you point out some contrived situations where steel is inferior? I'm looking to do some new storage work on my guns soon.

Any valid fear will be considered.

 

[Marshall]

1911? How about 1873.............

Maybe I can get it in Glockplastic.

 

[Borachon]

Maybe I can get it in Glockplastic.

 

[Borachon]

Your Glocks frame is made out of a substance called nylon 6. (Trade secret...don't expect a lot of info on it.)

It looks like your Glock won't like temperatures above 120 degrees.

It is subject to some degradation from UV rays if exposed over time. (Alaska and high altitude areas get lots of UV radiation if I'm not mistaken.) Unless you use Carbon Black. Which I'm not familiar with.

It's better than steel when subjected to strong acids and bases.

Melting point is 420 degrees F. Thermal index rating of 284 degrees F (maintains shape and properties up to that point)

http://www.glockfaq.com/generalinfo.htm

I'm not sure if 284 degrees is enough for ammo to kick off or not. Anyone know? But your Glock will start losing it's shape after this point.
Sounds like it would be a better winter gun and not so good in Phoneix or some other hot and sunny area. Given the gun degradation from UV.

 

[Too Many Choices!?]

Cool I win!

All I wanted was for you to admit you are arguing from emotion...Your statement about ,"being mad", when you wrote something, said it all. I, on the other hand, have been simply debunking your outlandish, notions of metal = good, plastic = bad...

Both have redeeming qualities, and no I don't expect to change your mind, but just like you said other people, maybe newbies, need to see both sides of the argument. Especially since you now admitt bias, and arguing with emotion, and not logic. Which explains all your bad examples for the metal gun being superior(surviving in a vacuum?, fire?, your fat cousin falling on it? )....

Man I haven't seen so much back peddling since the summer olympics 100m backstroke...

Oh yeah, by the way, I never used quotation marks when I claimed you said my gun sucks or was crap...I was praphrasing your argument, as any rational person would see. But then again you already said you weren't being rational, but glad to see you came to your senses. I like the new you better, but you lose two cool points for emotional arguing! Damn man it's just a gun

 

[PaladinX13]

I don't claim to be imaginative. I only ask that you use yours along with me.

On the steel versus plastic thing...yes, I'm prejudiced. Now...having admitted that...can you point out some contrived situations where steel is inferior?

I already did (specifically mentioned a blizzard and zombie gestapo). Extreme cold or hot AND you need to HOLD your gun. So far you've spoken ONLY of storage to extreme extremes that break down materials, but I've news for you, the human hand suffers under much lesser conditions found in nature and ridiculous contrived circumstances.

And strong standpoints are often needed when dealing with people who are wrapped up in their self-importance, or their arrogence. Unless you make them surprised, or angry, then they won't consider what is being said. Because they already "knew" the "truth".

This is completely wrong and only adopted by the pig-headed, biased, and self-righteous... which is exactly why polarized groups butt heads. Shock and emotion NEVER makes headway. It's the most foolish of approaches because it polarizes and triggers their defenses and in-grained beliefs. Only actual truth gets past deaf ears, if even that.

The only reason you see people annoyed at your ranting is that you're so aggressively pushing HALF a truth. While in terms of storage under fire, steel might trump plastic, but in CONTEXT, you're still left with a defective gun and no ammo to use, making you SOL when the SHTF and any claims of superiority meaningless.

 

[Borachon]

Cool I win!

Let's both take enjoyment from your victory.

 

[Borachon]

While in terms of storage under fire, steel might trump plastic, but in CONTEXT, you're still left with a defective gun and no ammo to use, making you SOL when the SHTF and any claims of superiority meaningless.

That's a fallacy.

Edit:
In my case in any event. I have ammunition stored in three different locations. It would take a rather large event to destroy all three separate locations. That's why I'm saying it isn't always the best idea to have gun and ammo together. If I had a fire at one location, the ammo would be gone...but I might salvage the firearm. And then load it from stocks of ammunition I have stored elsewhere.

A polymer gun in a fire is ruined. Apparently, it takes a lower tempature to melt Glock polymer than it does to make paper burn. (Fahrenheit 9/11---ah, I mean Fahrenheit 451) A steel framed gun in a fire...that doesn't have any ammo in it....MAY suffer some temper damage....may twist or contort....may lose all the outer metal covering....but unless warped or twisted could still function as a gun. Certainly at lower temperatures it could still survive a fire of short duration that would melt or warp a Glock.

 

[PaladinX13]

Your Glocks frame is made out of a substance called nylon 6. (Trade secret...don't expect a lot of info on it.)

Amen. Most of the info on Glock's plastic is speculative hearsay. Not exactly hard facts... for example:

It looks like your Glock won't like temperatures above 120 degrees.

HYDROLYTIC (in water) temperatures above 120... WHAT? Celsius? Fahrenheit? 120 degree figure is useless. That said, I doubt it's Fahrenheit as a common Glock cleaning method involves hot tap water rinse. Presenting half-truths with an agenda is exactly what hurt your credibility in the first place.

It is subject to some degradation from UV rays if exposed over time.

True, but reinforced with 2% carbon-black, as Glock is suspected to be, you'll only experience .05% degradation under elevated 24/7 UV after 100 years... so the hearsay says, which is to say, no meaningful degradation in the lifetime of most civilizations under normal UV exposure.

Melting point is 420 degrees F. Thermal index rating of 284 degrees F (maintains shape and properties up to that point)

Once again hearsay.

No confirmed stories of Glocks melting in any hot cars. Plenty of Phoenix Glock owners.

 

[Borachon]

420 degree melting point.
Once again hearsay.No confirmed stories of Glocks melting in any hot cars. Plenty of Phoenix Glock owners.

Hmmm...but easily enough proven or disproven.

You've got an oven, right?



Edit:
Good catch on the 120 degree thing. I just got that from the only website I could find. It's probably Celcius...although that website specifically says not to Hot Tub with your Glock, which seems to indicate Fahrenheit. But 120 Celcius would be near that theorectical 240ish degree F. temperature were Glocks supposedly start to lose their shape.
Car temperatures won't get hot enough to melt it appearently. But UV content causes plastic to lose it's integrity over time. No info on when that integrity loss gets to be so bad that the gun might suffer from a drop or other unintended accident.

 

[PaladinX13]

Hmmm...but easily enough proven or disproven.

You've got an oven, right?

So do you, Bubba. Show me yours and I'll show you mine. Might want to take out an insurance policy on your hand first.

 

[Borachon]

Might want to take out an insurance policy on your hand first.

I got oven mitts. I was the best cooker in the Boy Scouts.
And they always told me..."Be prepared...and use oven mitts."

But before we both collectively destroy the finish (if nothing else) on our guns, why don't we approach big Daddy Internet and see if he won't give us some solid info? What say?

Presenting half-truths with an agenda is exactly what hurt your credibility in the first place.

Those weren't MY half truths...not in this case anyway. I lifted those from another site. Two sites actually.

Quoting that information was instead an attempt at quantitfying the honest, and for true qualities of your illustrious firearm. An attempt at honesty that was inglouriously attacked and villified by yourself. I stand offended, sir.

 

[PaladinX13]

Car temperatures won't get hot enough to melt it appearently. But UV content causes plastic to lose it's integrity over time. No info on when that integrity loss gets to be so bad that the gun might suffer from a drop or other unintended accident.

Freakin' A, read your own sources before you start spouting idiotic conclusions. Jeez you're the worst example of a researcher with an agenda I have EVER seen. My God.

As already stated, Glock frames are 2% carbon black which greatly enchance polymer UV durability such that under intense and constant rays for 100 years, there's only .05% degradation. Under realistic UV conditions you're talking centuries upon centuries before any noticable degradation.

 

[JackOfAllTradesMasterAtNone]

I'm not a polymer pistol frame fan. No bash on Glocks at all,

Except, I've never felt a Glock trigger that I liked.

One of my 1911's is from 1937. Has one armory stamp, So, it's been across a bench and smith's eyes at least once. I can only imagine that it may have several thousands of rounds through it. Shoots like the dickens.

I had a 1921 1911 in my hands the other day. Reworked to a match pistol in 1964. Still prints 10's from a randsom rest. Looks and acts like a shooter.

I do wonder, "And I'll keep all emotions reserved", will a Glock or any other polymer (Nylon 6?) framed gun last that long? These 1911's could very well last another 80 years each. As shooters, not safe queens. My vote is for which ever will last. I figure time will tell, the jury's still out on the Glock.

I've seen a few Glocks used in pin shoots. Effective in .45. Also effective in IPSC and IDPA. Not to mention real life situations. (We won't discuss how many 1911's have been in fire fights and come out on top.) But I've never seen a Glock put up against an accurized 1911. Can a Glock be accurised to print a 1.5" group at 50yds? (I honestly don't know). So with a lean toward that which I know, I also lean toward the 1911 as an accurate pistol. My Kimber certainly shoots that well. I'm more of an 'accuracy win's' over a 'spray of bullets' type of guy.

It's amazing at my local gun range. Many of the law enforcement shooting there can't hit the broad side of a barn. (Border patrol, Customs, and local deputies) Much of that is due to inferior equipment. Reliable, But inferior. Most of them shoot some sort of high capacity, (.40 and 9mm), polymer framed pistol.

If shinola really has hit the fan, I'm not leaving. I'm digging in and will hold out until reinforcements arrive or they peal my cold dead fingers from my 1911, or six gun, or long gun, or what ever is in my hand that I'm currently using to defend, family, friends, home and the country that I love.

-Steve

 

[Borachon]

As already stated, Glock frames are 2% carbon black which greatly enchance polymer UV durability such that under intense and constant rays for 100 years, there's only .05% degradation. Under realistic UV conditions you're talking centuries upon centuries before any noticable degradation.

You are correct. I misunderstood that.

Of course, we can still question whether any carbon black is present. As you yourself said...the compostion of Glock plastic is not known outside of the company. We are...after all....only 20 years into Glocks existing. Maybe some of the owners of some really old 1980's Glocks can comment on flaking, or other observed degradation.

I just don't always trust a companies claims of "Lifetime service". It's a suspicious failing of mine. I should be more trusting.

 

[PaladinX13]

But before we both collectively destroy the finish (if nothing else) on our guns, why don't we approach big Daddy Internet and see if he won't give us some solid info? What say?

Your ENTIRE argument is that your steel gun will survive a fire event better in a highly contrived and ill prepared situation. You're betting your life on it and being a dog with a bone about it online... yet unprepared to put your words into deeds?

If your steel gun will significantly and easily survive a fire event, a 500-degree oven is meaningless to it and should be do you. But the truth comes out, you don't believe it... not a word of your own spoutings. Certainly not enough to put it to the test.

OUR position is that it a completely inane situation to begin with, but since you consider it such a dire threat as to signify superiority, then you'd better test it out... else you're just faithing a feeling.

And lack no credibility... as was recognized from the get go.

Those weren't MY half truths

Actually they were. You left out the hydrolytic part and drew a conclusion absent the reference. Likewise now you're claiming the duplicate post in two locations is the same as two references of original research, another half-truth. Earlier you weren't content to post the failed Glock once on the same page, but twice as if anyone would miss it... utterly ignoring the context of the failed gun.

Man o man, you're the the zealous of the worst sort and the only reason I call you out now is because before you were plainly zealous and now you're weakly pretending to be even handed with colored research and "findings" only to reinforce your feelings.

 

[PaladinX13]

Maybe some of the owners of some really old 1980's Glocks can comment on flaking, or other observed degradation.

Maybe this is why your current facade of being rational is a joke... what kind of researcher looks only for the results he wants to see?

 

[Borachon]

Man o man, you're the the zealous of the worst sort and the only reason I call you out now is because before you were plainly zealous and now you're weakly pretending to be even handed with colored research and "findings" only to reinforce your feelings.

Hey...I tried to find info on Glocks. Found what I could. You do better than that..then post it. At the very least I QUESTIONED something. You accuse me of zealousness..when it actually looks like you are the zealous one.

But you're right. This is going nowhere. You "won" your argument. You keep your Glock. I'll keep my steel frame. And nothing else need be said.

Just like I predicted earlier.

But I can show you how little I really care about this and just admit that you've beaten me down. I won't post another comment on this thread. Which thankfully means I won't have to learn anything more about Glocks and can continue on in my "weakly pretending" belief that steel is good.

Good day to you.