Printable View
Well, what about those $3k+ 1911s.Quote:
Originally Posted by MLB
FWIW: it's POLYMER not Plastic...Sure it's a type of plastic but it is not the same plastic used in your drinking cups and soda bottles, hence it's called polymer. The molecular structure of a Polymer frame is vastly different than consumer grade plastics.
i am going thru this choice right now for a 45acp
since glocks have proved the reliability of plastic and have been copied by XD and the M&P just to mention two and
since they are not as expensive..
with the economy going the way it is i expect the sales of handguns will continue to grow in the plastic markets
i have a glock 26 and am leaning towards the glock 36 - i don't need a high capacity handgun
I must say, even though I do love my XD's, if I wanted a .45 for CC (when I can carry), I would probably go with that G36. You can't go wrong with any Glock IMO, and I like the slim design :)Quote:
Originally Posted by hideit
-Jeff-
If I wanted a compact .45, I'd use a HK45c. That's just me. I owned a Glock but found I liked the Hk better, I do like the XD though.
Thanks for the lesson. I suppose I should stop calling my P99 "Tactical Tupperware" then. :smt083Quote:
Originally Posted by Dredd
If we're going to be specific though, all plastics are polymers. "Polymer Framed" does sound much better in the advertisement though...
I wonder if my Walther is recyclable :smt033
I prefer the metal because of the weight and absorbing the recoil. I prefer plastic for carry because of the weight.
I got plastic and I got metal..Both of what I have are good examples of their genre of weapons. If I had to take one over the other then I have to go with metal if for no other reason the simple fact is metal has proven itself much longer than any plastic can. you can spew tests till hell froze over but no one can show a test going near the time span of many metals used in gun making.
Sure..You can deep fry a Glock (though I must ask why) but I can pick up a 1911 colt made in 1911 and use it and see if function perfectly. All the tests on "tupperware" can't show but a small fraction of that time. I have watched plastic get better over time but I'd like to see it last as long as some of the old Kentucky Rifles I've had the pleasure of getting to fire. I guess my grandchildren are going to be in a better position to answer this question correctly..lol
For me I really like the feel of an all metal gun for most all my gun needs, I don't see a weight issue in carrying a full size 1911 or 686 Smith. Like I said I have some plastic guns but they are mostly range toys and are not carried all that often. Some good shooters tho.
I prefer metal, steel if possible. I don't have any problems carrying the biggest of hanguns, short of a Desert Eagle, or one of the old SA monster revolvers. I LIKE heavy guns, and prefer them over lightweight ones, every time. I haven't owned a plastic, er um, "polymer" gun yet, I recently passed up a nearly new Taurus 9mm 24/7 Pro that a friend wanted to sell me for a great price. I passed it up mostly for money issues, but the plastic kind of turns me off, to be honest about it. Glocks and the similar guns I really have no interest in at all.
Well there was this oneQuote:
Originally Posted by spacedoggy
http://world.guns.ru/handguns/mp-412-1.jpg
Type: Double Action
Caliber: .357 Magnum
Weight unloaded: 0.9 kg
Length: 232mm (4" barrel)
Barrel length: 102mm (4") or 152mm (6")
Capacity: 6 rounds
The MP-412 revolver has been designed at IZHMECH (State-owned Russian Izhevsk Mechanical Plant, a large factory known as a prime maker of Makarov PM pistols among other things). This revolver was intended for export, as a handgun ownership is generally prohibited for ordinary citizens in Russia. First prototypes of REX (Revolver for EXport) revolver were displayed at IWA-2000 arms exhibition in Nurenberg (Germany). It is not exactly known what killed this rather interesting project, but most possibly it was a lack of market, as the biggest export market, the USA, has been closed for Russian handguns since mid-1990s, because of Clinton / Yeltsyn mutual agreement.
The MP-412 is a double action revolver with break-open frame and simultaneous extraction. The bottom frame is of composite type - it consists of a steel basic frame and a polymer envelope, which forms the grip and trigger guard. Polymer grip / trigger guard unit can be removed from steel frame if necessary. Trigger is of conventional type, double / single action, with exposed hammer. Firing pin is mounted in the frame. Barrel / cylinder group latch is located at the top rear of the frame, and is operated by two buttons that must be pushed inwards to unlock the frame. Cylinder holds 6 rounds and has an automatic ejector that throws the cases out of cylinder once barrel is fully tipped down. If necessary, automatic ejection feature can be manually switched off.
http://world.guns.ru/handguns/mp-412-2.jpg
MP-412 Rex revolver, with barrel tipped down for reloading
...and the LCR...
http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger-LCR.htmQuote:
Originally Posted by sheepdog
Is this the one you are talking about?
http://www.gunblast.com/images/Ruger-LCR/DSC06148.JPG
Ruger’s Radical New Lightweight Compact Revolver .38 Special LCR
by Jeff Quinn
photography by Jeff Quinn & Boge Quinn
January 14h, 2009
A few months ago, rumors were circulating that Ruger was working on something very different for them. Last year, at the 2008 SHOT Show in Las Vegas, they entered the pocket pistol market in a big way, and the .380 LCP auto was an overwhelming success. Ruger has sold many thousands of the little pistols, and the demand is still high. This year at SHOT in Orlando, which opens tomorrow (January 15, 2009), Ruger will again be the talk of the industry with their new LCR .38 Special Plus P five-shot pocket revolver. The lightweight five-shot revolver market is very popular, and Ruger is set to take a huge chunk of that market for themselves. Ruger has produced quality revolvers for decades, and their SP101 compact revolvers are very popular, but most find them too heavy for pocket carry. More citizens everyday are choosing to go heeled in our society, and lightweight revolvers are very popular among those who carry concealed. With the LCR, Ruger is aiming straight at the Smith & Wesson J-frame buyer, not with a copy of that design at all, but with a revolver that is a radical departure from conventional revolver design. The frame of the LCR is made up of two components. The cylinder frame is made of aluminum, which is a pretty conventional material for a lightweight pocket gun. However, the grip frame is made of a high-tech polymer, and extends below and to the rear of the cylinder frame, cradling that unit, and contains all of the fire control parts, such as the hammer, sear, and trigger, along with the necessary springs and pins to contain and provide fulcrums for those moving parts. The cylinder and internal parts are made of stainless steel. The polymer grip frame is not a stressed part. It comes out of the mold ready to assemble, and requires no hand fitting to the cylinder frame nor to the internal parts.
Back in early December, I was invited to the Ruger factory in New Hampshire to have a look at the LCR. While there, I saw some other very interesting future Ruger projects, but for now, we are looking at the LCR. I gave my word and have been sworn to secrecy until today, the day before SHOT, to keep quiet about the LCR. Today is the day that Ruger is introducing the LCR to the outdoor media, and this is the day that I have permission to tell you about this little revolver. I got to shoot the LCR at the factory, and I was expecting to have a gun in for a full review by now, but it has yet to arrive, so I have to go with what I have. Ruger has put a lot of time and money into the design of the LCR, particularly the geometry of the internal parts. Judging from my shooting experience at the factory, they got it right. The trigger pull on the LCR is very smooth, and very light for a pocket revolver. Many pocket revolvers have dreadful trigger pulls, and I get a lot of email from readers who buy a gun for defense, and have a very hard time pulling the trigger. If the production LCRs are like the one that I shot, the trigger pull problem is solved. That gun had what could be called a perfect trigger pull for a pocket revolver; a smooth and light double action. I do not know the pull weight of the LCR, but will measure such things when a production gun arrives.
Accuracy was also very good. The sights are easy to see in good light, but in the Ruger indoor range, I had trouble seeing them against the target that we had. Many of you don’t know it, but I do not see nearly as well as I once did, and in certain conditions, I just cannot see black sights anymore. Thankfully, Ruger is also offering the LCR with a Crimson Trace Lasergrip, and CT was in on this early. The grip of the LCR was designed to take a Lasergrip from the start. Attaching a Lasergrip to the LCR, I was able to punch tight groups on the target, greatly improving my accuracy with the little gun. There were five of us there shooting the LCR, and the Lasergrip improved the practical accuracy of the gun for all of us, even the youngest shooter who still has good eyesight, Eric Poole of Harris Tactical Group. Recoil from the thirteen ounce revolver was easy to handle, maybe due in part to the polymer frame, or maybe just the design of the angles and such. I don’t know, and won’t know until I can get a test gun in here for a full evaluation.
Anyway, for now, this is enough information to pique your interest, if you are interested in pocket guns and revolver design at all. This is certainly something different, and should be the talk of SHOT this year. I am always interested in new firearms design, and so far, I really like this little gem. Whether or not it will replace the J-frame in my pocket remains to be seen, but I am anxious for some more trigger time behind this little LCR.
For more information on the LCR, go to www.ruger.com.
For the location of a Ruger dealer near you, click on the DEALER FINDER at www.lipseys.com.
Look for a full review of the new LCR soon right here on Gunblast.com.
Jeff Quinn
http://www.gunblast.com/images/Ruger-LCR/DSC06146.JPG
Reading the descriptions of both guns it looks like there is very little polymer in them except in the grip. Plus the trigger guard for the REX
I didn't vote because I swing both ways on this one.
My EDC...
http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/5018/pistols0162.jpg
And one or the other at the night stand......
http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/1638/pistols006.jpg
http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/115/pistols010.jpg
http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/5395/pistols014.jpg
I have both and like both but since your asking for a vote put me down for plastic.
My 45 year old Browning service carry is steel. My 28 year old P225 is Al. My 20 year old P228 is also Al. However, my other 5 handguns, purchased within the last two years are all plastic, and I have no problem with that. They are all lighter than if made of metal, and that's the way I like it.
I perfer metal guns, but I do have a Beretta PX4.
Plastic for me.:mrgreen:
Boy, that is a tough one. Certainly those that own both (and have shot them regularly) are more qualified to answer from a real world experience perspective.
I love my plastic Sig P226 9mm and all that it brings to the table.
But...I also love my Sig P220 Combat .45acp with the alloy frame. Sure it's a bit heavier but it feels real good in the hand.
I've been debating this in my mind which do I prefer and it's really impossible because it depends on the context of the question (recoil? rapid fire? CC?).
I can only recommend to everyone to own both and continue this personal debate and always feel free to purchase even more to help you make up your mind!:rolleyes:
Metal....... with Plastic being a close second.
I like both polymer framed pistols and metal framed pistols.
For example, I love my Sig SP2022 but I would take a Sig 226 over it. The polymer framed pistols feel good in hand but for some reason its not the same as a good ole metal framed pistol.
For a conceal carry you won't ever see me using a metal framed gun, only a polymer framed pistol like a Kahr PM9 or a Keltec PF-9.
Each has their benefits and draw backs. I believe both will stay on the market as they each have their place.
I own 20+ guns. 1 of which is a plastic G 17. I don't want anymore plastic.
agreed, Nothing shows wisdom like that of a used leather holster.Quote:
Originally Posted by jimg11
I like to say I outgrew and matured out of the polymer stage of my life a long time ago.
It's finely crafted steel and wood from now on.
Plastic please
Metal, steel preferably, and wood grips.
I have never understood the appeal of plastic guns.
This is most likely a generational issue. What I mean to say is that the more experienced hand gunners, old school, will more likely be attracted to all metal guns because they have history with them and trust them. Recent generations are more susceptible to marketing strategies, the newest & coolest technology ( if it doesn't have the word "technology" in it it ain't cool), what's popular with their peers. Right now they seem to be hypnotized by Rugers sub compact models, LCR & LCP, and it doesn't make sense because .380 ammo is the single most expensive hand gun ammo around IF you can find it. But I understand what attracts them to these guns, heck, you can put it in a wallet holster and shove it in your back pocket. I think these guns will fade in popularity as time goes on the owners decide they want a real gun.
I'm not bashing anyone here it's just the way I see it.