Polymer can be made into any shape imaginable, is lighter, easier and less expensive to manufacture, totally impervious to corrosion, and just as durable as steel when used properly in guns.

Not sure why everyone gets worked up about polymer guns. Wood - another non-steel material - has been used on guns for centuries. Aluminum has been in wide use in small arms since shortly after the Second World War. Polymer is just another material.

Guns are ultimately about hitting targets, assuming a shooter likes to use his/her guns, not just look at them.

Originally Posted by walter

i dont see any advantage of polymer over stainless steel. i mean, isn't steel what a gun is all about?

Weight, corrosion proof, better grip.. etc...

Weight,rust,and they don't cost as much to make. Almost any quaity made poly gun will last more than a life time of use. The only down side I can see is in the collector market but then again I might be wrong about that. That is a small part of the over all market. In sales they have out sold everything going. If I wasn't on a fixed income I would have more polys for sure.

Metal verse Polymer is all based on preference. I for one would rather carry a polymer framed pistol, and do. They are much lighter than their steel siblings, and just as strong. And as Baldy said, a quality polymer pistol will outlast the life of the user.

All the above mentioned reasons. But for me, the main reason is the weight savings over steel, or even alloys. I can carry a compact or fullsize major caliber high capicity handgun all day and barely notice the weight. When you carry all day every day, that's important - to me anyway.

If you don't like polymer that's cool. Get what you like. Steel and wood are prettier imo but i bought a polymer for the above reasons.