The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Semi-automatic Forum

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old December 31, 2013, 10:44 PM   #26
ritepath
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 22, 2009
Location: Virginia
Posts: 827
I really like my SR45. I've never shot it beyond 35 yards, but it preformed well enough to where I made it my carry coyote gun for this past hunting season. Of all my handguns (that aren't 22) if I want to shoot one that I know I can hit with it will be my SR.

That being said, it's not the quality of my M&P or Glock that I used to own, then again it's a sub 400 buck pistol. My biggest disappointment is the slide and mag release mechanisms. I feel both are poorly designed, but it is what it is, I only took one semester of mechanical engineering.

I can say the trigger is one of my favorites for a striker powered pile of crap.

IMHO my SR45 does carry and feel thinner than my M&P or G20 did is it? I don't know, never pulled out a set of calipers.
__________________
There's only one...
ritepath is offline  
Old December 31, 2013, 11:10 PM   #27
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 17,960
Quote:
John, is the STI-GP6 offered in .45 ACP? I've never looked into the P-250 much because of its DAO trigger and I can't tell much from the pics at the website but it looks to have steel rails imbedded into the frame at least at the rear.
No, only 9mm.
Here's a picture that shows the internal steel unit that runs the length from the front rails to the rear rails.

http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/9nZnW3XIEAg/hqdefault.jpg

Here's a better one showing the steel unit removed from the frame.

http://i455.photobucket.com/albums/q...23/GP6/025.jpg

The SIG P250 is somewhat similar in design in that the internal steel unit including the front and rear rails is a single piece. Here's a picture.

http://www.sigsauer.com/upFiles/cata...y-detail-4.jpg
Quote:
I don't even get excited about my handloads unless they're 1" or less and the SR45 will do that with cast lead or JHP handloads.
1" at 15 yards/meters is pretty good accuracy, but it is not sufficient to state that the SR45 is the most accurate poly-framed pistol on the market. I have a group I shot earlier this year (1 March) from a Glock 20 that went 1" at 15 yards using PPU ammunition, and my records indicate that I shot a group measuring 0.875" from the STI GP6 on 10 October of this year using WWB ammo.

Both of those groups were shot offhand, so there's some potential that the guns are actually more accurate than that if shot from a rest. In addition, both of those groups were shot with what amounts to budget ammo, not tailored handloads or match ammunition. In my very limited experience with shooting a handgun from a rest, it appears to cut about 20% of the size of my best offhand groups shot at the same distance.

I do think that the SR series are more consistently accurate than the old Ruger P Series, and certainly more than accurate enough for any practical purpose they would be put to, but I haven't seen anything that suggests that they are without peer in the world of poly-framed guns when it comes to accuracy.
__________________
Did you know that there is a TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old January 1, 2014, 01:10 AM   #28
Venom1956
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 4, 2008
Location: WI
Posts: 2,813
One would think that the Five Seven would probably be one of the more accurate poly framed pistols simply from bullet design no? them aerodynamics and whatsits.

Granted my SR9 was one of the earlier ones post trigger change prior D release so I believe the newer ones have a quite a bit better triggers.

While i think the SR series are fine guns Ruger makes good stuff for the price. I just dont think they are some sleeper miracle pistol.
__________________
E-Shock rounds are engineered to expend maximum energy into soft targets, turning the density mass into an expanding rotational cone of NyTrilium matrix particles, causing neurological collapse to the central nervous system.- Yeah I can do that.
I guarantee you will know it if a bicyclist hits your house going 1000 mph.
Venom1956 is offline  
Old January 1, 2014, 12:33 PM   #29
Omaha-BeenGlockin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2001
Location: U.S.S.A.
Posts: 918
Lots of issues with the SR45's over on the Ruger forums---I'd wait a year or two before even thinking about trying one out --Ruger needs to get the bugs worked out first
__________________
I take the leech that's bleeding me
Can't stop to save my soul
I take the leash that's leading me
-------Metallica
Omaha-BeenGlockin is offline  
Old January 1, 2014, 08:52 PM   #30
Fishbed77
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 23, 2010
Posts: 2,432
Quote:
They're the slimmest double-stacks made while being the strongest built of all poly framed pistols.
They are slim, but that "strongest built of all poly framed pistols" claim is utter nonsense.

I wouldn't be surprised if you could hammer an SR45 frame to pieces with an HK Mark 23.
Fishbed77 is offline  
Old January 1, 2014, 11:41 PM   #31
57K
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 2, 2013
Location: Heart of Texas
Posts: 788
Quote:
They are slim, but that "strongest built of all poly framed pistols" claim is utter nonsense.

I wouldn't be surprised if you could hammer an SR45 frame to pieces with an HK Mark 23.
Would that be the big honkin' Mk23 where the SOCOM testers dropped it's Colt's competitor because HK claimed it would be capable of Single Shot firing with the slide locked? And at $2000 a copy? How did that turn out?

Quote:
No, only 9mm.
Here's a picture that shows the internal steel unit that runs the length from the front rails to the rear rails.

http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/9nZnW3XIEAg/hqdefault.jpg

Here's a better one showing the steel unit removed from the frame.

http://i455.photobucket.com/albums/q...23/GP6/025.jpg

The SIG P250 is somewhat similar in design in that the internal steel unit including the front and rear rails is a single piece. Here's a picture.

http://www.sigsauer.com/upFiles/cata...y-detail-4.jpg
Quote:
I don't even get excited about my handloads unless they're 1" or less and the SR45 will do that with cast lead or JHP handloads.

1" at 15 yards/meters is pretty good accuracy, but it is not sufficient to state that the SR45 is the most accurate poly-framed pistol on the market. I have a group I shot earlier this year (1 March) from a Glock 20 that went 1" at 15 yards using PPU ammunition, and my records indicate that I shot a group measuring 0.875" from the STI GP6 on 10 October of this year using WWB ammo.

Both of those groups were shot offhand, so there's some potential that the guns are actually more accurate than that if shot from a rest. In addition, both of those groups were shot with what amounts to budget ammo, not tailored handloads or match ammunition. In my very limited experience with shooting a handgun from a rest, it appears to cut about 20% of the size of my best offhand groups shot at the same distance.

I do think that the SR series are more consistently accurate than the old Ruger P Series, and certainly more than accurate enough for any practical purpose they would be put to, but I haven't seen anything that suggests that they are without peer in the world of poly-framed guns when it comes to accuracy.
So your links are relevant in what way exactly? Ruger was making polymer frames with integral polymer rails going back to the P-95. The reason I didn't mention it is because a very few others have been able to do the same in 9mm! No one but Ruger in .45 ACP. You do understand the differences in recoil/slide geometry between a 9 x 19mm and the .45 ACP, right?

The SIG P-250 is rather disappointing as an example. They use a fairly substantial steel insert but the rails are dinky! The STI GP6 pic clearly shows that the stelel insert runs from rear to MID-FRAME. Where's the provision for locking up the front of the slide?

NO, 1" or less 5 round groups at 50', not 15 yards (45') where I said 15 meters that SIG used for the P-226 (49.2'), is more than pretty good when it's completely repeatable. You Glock guys kill me with your accuracy claims. I notice you didn't happen to mention being able to shoot 1" groups with your G21 using cast lead bullets. One fluke 15 yard group with PPU ammo?

All totally irrelevant. I shoot groups, especially magnum revolver groups for other shooters who want to know what their rounds are truly capable of. I'm not much concerned about my ability to group my handloads. Nor am I much concerned with gun forum brevado. Seems to be one of the criteria for making a member a moderator. The point being that in the real world I very much doubt that I could shoot better groups with Match Grade JHP handloads from an HK45 than I can with the SR45, or, excuse me, the G21. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that I could match any 50' group from either, or do better. Throw cast lead handloads in that will group 1" or less from the SR45? Try to make me believe that you could do that with a G21 or an HK45!

Mind if I ask where you were from before you moved to DFW?

Last edited by JohnKSa; January 2, 2014 at 12:42 AM. Reason: .
57K is offline  
Old January 2, 2014, 12:28 AM   #32
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 3,823
Quote:
All totally irrelevant. I shoot groups, especially magnum revolver groups for other shooters who want to know what their rounds are truly capable of. I'm not much concerned about my ability to group my handloads. Nor am I much concerned with gun forum brevado. Seems to be one of the criteria for making a member a moderator. The point being that in the real world I very much doubt that I could shoot better groups with Match Grade JHP handloads from an HK45 than I can with the SR45, or, excuse me, the G21. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that I could match any 50' group from either, or do better. Throw cast lead handloads in that will group 1" or less from the SR45? Try to make me believe that you could do that with a G21 or an HK45!

Mind if I ask where you were from before you moved to DFW?


Btw, I love that you act like shooting lead out of a Glock or HK will cause either of those models to spontaneously combust. There are plenty of folks that shoot lead in models from both of those manufacturers. Heck, Hickok45 has been doing it for decades in Glocks. All you have to do is clean them every so often.

And before you go the "Not recommended by the manufacturer" route, point me out a single manufacturer that recommends shooting reloaded ammunition in the first place.
__________________
Guns don't kill people. Apes with guns kill people! - Robin Williams
TunnelRat is offline  
Old January 2, 2014, 12:30 AM   #33
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 17,960
Quote:
So your links are relevant in what way exactly?
You asserted that the fact that the frame rails of the SR45 were "a solid block of stainless steel rather than a "U" shaped insert molded into the ploymer" showed that it was stronger than any other polymer framed pistols.

The links show that there are at least two guns in which all the frame rails, not just the rear rails, are part of a solid piece of steel. In short, they show that using your own criteria for strength, their are other poly-framed guns which not only meet but also surpass the SR45's construction methods which you assert are evidence of its superior strength.
Quote:
...15 yards...
I didn't say 15 yards, I said 15 yards/meters because the target wasn't precisely at a measured distance. It was somewhere around 45-50 feet and that's why I wrote my post the way I did.
Quote:
You Glock guys kill me with your accuracy claims.
I included accuracy results from 2 different brands of gun, not just from a Glock. For what it's worth, I currently own handguns from 14 different makers (including, by the way, about a dozen made by Ruger--I own twice as many Rugers as Glocks) so your characterization of me as a "Glock guy" misses the mark somewhat.

As far as my "accuracy claims", I took you at your word in terms of what you have achieved with your SR45, it seems eminently reasonable/fair/polite for you reciprocate.
Quote:
I notice you didn't happen to mention being able to shoot 1" groups with your G21...
I didn't "happen to mention" that for two very important reasons.

1. I don't own a G21.
2. I haven't shot any groups with polymer-framed guns using cast lead bullets in many years.
Quote:
One fluke 15 yard group with PPU ammo?
I listed two groups from my recent shooting records, with two different guns and two different types of ammunition.

Since the discussion is about polymer framed guns, the groups were selected only from among those I shot with polymer framed guns in the last year or so AND at the general distance you specified. It wasn't a long list to choose from after those criteria were applied, especially considering that I do most of my careful group shooting at a different distance than you do.

As far as the group being a fluke, I do nearly all my shooting offhand, and I don't mind admitting that not every group I shoot for record at 45-50 feet is 1" or less. But I do manage it often enough that I feel comfortable saying that they're not not flukes. Even if I can't do it every time shooting offhand, the fact that I can manage it with a reasonable level of consistency seems to be reasonable proof that the gun is consistently capable of that type of accuracy or better, even if I'm not always.

Getting back to the heart of the matter, your accuracy results don't provide sufficient evidence to support the assertion that the SR-45 is "without peer" when it comes to accuracy from polymer pistols. I have at least two polymer pistols that will shoot as well as you state your SR-45 will shoot.
__________________
Did you know that there is a TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old January 2, 2014, 02:36 AM   #34
DannyB1954
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2013
Location: Pahrump Nv USA
Posts: 352
I would think that one design would be better than another only if the other one was lacking. If you have 2 designs, and they both work well, you do not have one that is better than the other.
I think this my dog is bigger than your dog thread accomplishes nothing but create discontent.

Besides if you didn't buy the same brand as me, your probably an idiot. (just kidding).
DannyB1954 is offline  
Old January 2, 2014, 09:32 AM   #35
Uncle Malice
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 11, 2009
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 3,337
Quote:
Nor am I much concerned with gun forum brevado[sic].
Of course not.

In all seriousness, if you're looking for an editor(I would strongly recommend it) for perhaps releasing a second edition of your book - or any other books in the future - my wife is a full time editor and very good. Feel free to message me if you're interested.
__________________
Glock 19 G4 | Glock 21 G4 | S&W M&P 9 Pro | S&W M&P 22 | Sig P220 Elite Dark | Sig P226 MK25 | HK P30L | HK45 | HK USP 9 | HK USP Compact 9 | HK USP 45 TACTICAL
Daniel Defense DDM4 V4 | Arsenal SGL 21 | ASA SBR w/ Side Charger | Savage Mark II FV-SR
Mossberg 590A1 20" SP | Mossberg 500 Cruiser
Uncle Malice is offline  
Old January 2, 2014, 05:46 PM   #36
57K
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 2, 2013
Location: Heart of Texas
Posts: 788
Quote:
You asserted that the fact that the frame rails of the SR45 were "a solid block of stainless steel rather than a "U" shaped insert molded into the ploymer" showed that it was stronger than any other polymer framed pistols.

The links show that there are at least two guns in which all the frame rails, not just the rear rails, are part of a solid piece of steel. In short, they show that using your own criteria for strength, their are other poly-framed guns which not only meet but also surpass the SR45's construction methods which you assert are evidence of its superior strength.
NO, I did not. I clearly stated that the mid rails are incorporated into the camblock at mid frame. The solid stainless insert at the rear provides the rear rails. My point has been all along that only Ruger has ever made a polymer frame where the slide rails were molded with the frame in .45 ACP unless Tanfoglio does that with the Witness. First with the P-95 in 9mm that I didn't mention because CZ did the same later with the introduction of the CZ-100. BUT in .45 ACP, starting in 1997 with the introduction of the P-97 and later, the P-345, the frame rails were entirely polymer. That is a testament to the confidence Ruger had/has in their Glass-Reinforced polymer compound.

Unfortunately, you don't seem to have a pic of an SR9/40/45 with the slide removed. While the STI-GP6 uses a monoblock that provides front and mid rails, there is no provision for attachment of the slide to the frame at the front of the pistol. The SIG system is similar but with much smaller rails. Then again, since SIG/Sauer bought Mauser, they started advertising that the frame's slide rails are replaceable with the M2 and it wouldn't surprise me if they stated something similar for the P-250. The thing that's common to both is that the monoblocks are pinned to the frame in just 2 places, 1 each front and back. Ruger uses their takedown pin assembly like Sigarms does with a heavy pin going through the frame and the monoblock where Ruger uses 3 additional pins just in attaching the camblock, 1 in the front top of the trigger guard and 2 rearward of the takedown pin as can be seen in the exploded drawing here: http://www.ruger.com/products/sr45/extras.html So, arguably, Ruger's camblock is more rigidly affixed to the frame than the monoblocks of the P-250 or the STI-GP6. All 3 systems should aid in keeping the slide from being vulnerable to frame flexing compared to Glock and HK using U shaped inserts with rails only at the mid and rear position imbedded into the polymer frame as they are molded. Then further, the Ruger provides forward polymer rails that run from the front of the frame back to the camblock. So what is this all about? Better alignment of the slide to frame throughout the slides movement in recoil and I consider Ruger's system superior because the slide affixes to the frame in 3 locations, Front, Mid and Rear where other designs affix slide to frame at mid and rear locations only. Now look at the bottom of the barrels feedramp and the shelf on the top of the Ruger's camblock and you should be able to see that as the Ruger slide goes into battery, the lug that provides the feed-ramp and is machined flat at the bottom, lifts up and onto the shelf at the top rear of the camblock creating and even tighter lock-up of the barrel's chamber-block into the ejection window in the slide.

I was shooting handguns well before the Glock 17 was introduced and had never heard the term "limp-wristing" previous to the widespread use of Glock pistols. Since Glocks are perfect, all feed/ejection problems must be shooter induced, right? Frame flexing is never mentioned or considered by the Glock faithful in admonishing shooters that experience feed/ejection issues because they simply "limp-wristed." Now try to "limp-wrist" a Ruger SR9/40/45. My shooting partner put his SR9c to the test when he bought it by intentionally "limp-wristing" throughout 360 degrees at 90 degree intervals. Right side up, in a 90 degree plane right, upside down, and 90 degree plane left. Not even a hint of malfunction.

BTW, I'm glad you guys can spell at least. I was admonished for my last post while clearly 2 of you are trying to insinuate that my novel might be in need of editing. I don't run spell check on my posts or write them with a word program then copy and paste to my post. I knew I had mispelled Bravado and left it that way intentionally while knowing it would probably be pointed out by posters who obviously know more about spelling than they do gun design. So I called one poster a kindergartener because of a ridiculous comparison while 2 of you are being entirely insulting if not slanderous. I'd tell you to read the novel yourselves and see if you can find a single misspelled word or incorrect grammer where it wasn't entirely intentional, but you probably wouldn't understand a concept like American counter-terrorists carrying an American designed and manufactured pistol. I did write the HK45 Tactical in on a limited basis because it's set up for a suppressor. But in the case of our military using foreign branded pistols and agencies like the FBI and DEA using Glocks while never having conducted competitive pistol trials . . . well let's just say that America now has a pistol that will compete and I'd prefer to see an American pistol in American Military holsters. Naturally, the military mandates DA/SA pistols to keep HK and FN in contention. One thing I'll say for Glock is that they have proven the striker fired pistols can be just as reliable for ignition as their hammer-fired counterparts. In HK's defense, they've always understood the necessity for providing complete support of the casehead which Gaston Glock did not when he drilled 9mm barrels to .40 caliber and we've seen cases right here on this forum where there have been case-head failures with Glocks in .45 ACP. Ruger has the striker system down and totally reliable. They've never made a barrel that didn't give complete support of the case-head and overall, I do consider the Ruger's slide to frame fit superior in locking at all 3 points rather than just 2 while no one can truly dispute that Ruger has one of the strongest if not the strongest polymer compounds used in making their frames.

Last edited by 57K; January 2, 2014 at 06:43 PM.
57K is offline  
Old January 2, 2014, 07:57 PM   #37
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 3,823
Quote:
All 3 systems should aid in keeping the slide from being vulnerable to frame flexing compared to Glock and HK using U shaped inserts with rails only at the mid and rear position imbedded into the polymer frame as they are molded.
And you have documented proof that the issues from frame flexing are related to those rail inserts? I've never heard of someone limpwristing an HK, and in Glocks the cases I've seen have been pretty obviously shooter related. I've tried to limpwrist mine too.

Quote:
But in the case of our military using foreign branded pistols and agencies like the FBI and DEA using Glocks while never having conducted competitive pistol trials . . . well let's just say that America now has a pistol that will compete and I'd prefer to see an American pistol in American Military holsters.
While we're on that, can you refer me to a trial the Ruger SR series of pistols has been in? Or for that matter an agency or police department that uses them as issues weapons? If they're so great, at such a great price, why don't they see large adoption?

As for those non-American pistols, at least Glocks have passed military trials. And those Beretta in US military holsters were made in this country, it's a requirement of their contract.

Quote:
Naturally, the military mandates DA/SA pistols to keep HK and FN in contention.
LMAO, do you seriously believe that? That they contort all the trials just to appease two companies. What about Beretta? Are you glossing over the fact that S&W also competed in the trial that lead to the adoption of the M9? What about the SIGs that SEAL team members use, which are made in Exeter, NH? What about the recent order by MARSOC for those special 1911s from Colt, an American company? There's no way you can believe this.

Let's also not forget that Ruger, until very recently, made some decent DA/SA pistols. The P85 came out too late for the US pistol trials but was motivated by those trials. The P95 was purchased by U.S. Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command, Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois to the tune of 5000 pistols, not a ton but some.

Why do they use DA/SA pistols? Because they work, there's no real advantage to them to update a sidearm when faced with 1 trillion in budget cuts over 10 years, and there's plenty of diehards that will balk at a non-hammer fired gun. There are better guns, IMO, than the 1911 for MARSOC to use but what is more Marine than a 1911? Also keep in mind that in a military that sees limited training, safety is more important to them than speed into action. DA pull, manual safety, the M9 is great for those troops that will need them, at least from a safety standpoint.
__________________
Guns don't kill people. Apes with guns kill people! - Robin Williams

Last edited by TunnelRat; January 2, 2014 at 08:52 PM.
TunnelRat is offline  
Old January 2, 2014, 08:26 PM   #38
ritepath
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 22, 2009
Location: Virginia
Posts: 827
I just wish I could find a P90 at an ok price. Cheapest I've found is 400.
__________________
There's only one...
ritepath is offline  
Old January 2, 2014, 09:46 PM   #39
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 17,960
Quote:
NO, I did not. I clearly stated that the mid rails are incorporated into the camblock at mid frame.
I included a direct quote from your post in my reply. I don't think there's really any question about what you did or didn't say.

In addition to the comment about the rear rails, you ALSO made some comments about the mid frame area of the gun, and if you look at the GP6 front/mid-frame rails, you will see that they are part of the same solid block of steel that makes up the rear rails.
Quote:
While the STI-GP6 uses a monoblock that provides front and mid rails, there is no provision for attachment of the slide to the frame at the front of the pistol.
There are pictures out there, and I'm aware of the SR provision for the front of the slide to mate with the polymer dustcover.

If you are going to claim that the extra mating surface at the front of the gun is proof of the strength of the SR series, then you should look at the Kahr polymer pistols. They have rear steel rails, front steel rails running the entire inside length of the dustcover that mate with the steel slide and they also have midframe polymer rails. So unlike the SR series where the front slide/frame engagement is steel/polymer, the Kahr provides steel/steel engagement at both the front and rear of the frame.

Furthermore, if we are to make the case that frame/slide engagement is a major criteria for strength, I think it's pretty clear that the GP6 design not only provides a good deal more slide/frame engagement surface area than the SR design; but also that the entire engagement surface area is steel/steel engagement, unlike the SR design which uses polymer/steel engagement at the front of the slide and more abbreviated steel rails than the GP6 design at the mid and rear of the gun.

The point is that if you want to make frame rail strength/length a driving criterion for the strength of a pistol, then the SR-45 isn't the front runner in that area. Which gets us back to the claim that the SR-45 is strongest built of any poly-frame pistol. Using your own initially stated criteria as a basis, it is apparent that there are other polymer-framed pistols out there that surpass the SR-45.

Just to be clear, I'm NOT trying to demonstrate that the SR-45 isn't strong--I'm sure it's plenty strong. What I'm trying to demonstrate is that the criteria you have rather arbitrarily selected as proof of the unique strength of the SR-45 aren't unique to the SR-45.

What's even more pertinent is that frame to slide mating, while generally important to accuracy, isn't really a major factor in determining the overall strength of a gun design. The strength of a locked breech gun is really more dependent on the way the slide locks to the barrel. There's not a lot of stress due to the firing impulse that would cause the frame and the slide to separate. The stress is primarily on the locking surfaces between the barrel and slide.
Quote:
The thing that's common to both is that the monoblocks are pinned to the frame in just 2 places, 1 each front and back.
In the SIG P250 guns, the frame is merely a handle/grip. The Ruger Super Red Hawk .454 Casull grip is attached to the frame with only a single screw, but no one would consider that evidence that the gun isn't a strong design.

I'll admit that you have gone over the SR-45 very carefully and cataloged a number of its features, but your determination of what makes a gun strong or weak appears to be based on your own speculation about whether a particular feature makes the design strong or weak. The lack of multiple pins in one are makes one gun weak, the addition of slide/frame mating at the front of the gun makes this gun strong, etc.

You have listed a number of things that demonstrate that the SR45 is a well thought out design. That it appears to be strong and is likely to be accurate and durable. I don't think that anyone would disagree with those things.

Where you went astray is in stating that it is the strongest and most accurate design in the poly-frame gun world. Even if those things were true, and it doesn't appear likely that they are, you've set a herculean task for yourself in terms of backing it up. Starting off that task with statements like: "The data comes from my eyeballs." is only going to make the work harder.

You might have a ghost of a chance if you started by just trying to prove that the SR series are stronger and more accurate than one particular model of polymer-frame handgun, but trying to take on the entire world of polymer handguns in one fell swoop is hardly reasonable.

I seriously doubt there is anyone, anywhere on the planet who has a sufficient knowledge/experience base to allow them to make authoritative statements that apply accurately to every polymer-framed handgun ever made. The few people who come closest to having that ability are almost certainly gainfully employed and highly sought after in the firearms industry.
__________________
Did you know that there is a TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old January 2, 2014, 10:32 PM   #40
57K
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 2, 2013
Location: Heart of Texas
Posts: 788
Quote:

I included a direct quote from your post in my reply. I don't think there's really any question about what you did or didn't say.

In addition to the comment about the rear rails, you ALSO made some comments about the mid frame area of the gun, and if you look at the GP6 front/mid-frame rails, you will see that they are part of the same solid block of steel that makes up the rear rails.
Quote:
While the STI-GP6 uses a monoblock that provides front and mid rails, there is no provision for attachment of the slide to the frame at the front of the pistol.
Quote:
There are pictures out there, and I'm aware of the SR provision for the front of the slide to mate with the polymer dustcover.

If you are going to claim that the extra mating surface at the front of the gun is proof of the strength of the SR series, then you should look at the Kahr polymer pistols. They have rear steel rails, front steel rails running the entire inside length of the dustcover that mate with the steel slide and they also have midframe polymer rails. So unlike the SR series where the front slide/frame engagement is steel/polymer, the Kahr provides steel/steel engagement at both the front and rear of the frame.

Furthermore, if we are to make the case that frame/slide engagement is a major criteria for strength, I think it's pretty clear that the GP6 design not only provides a good deal more slide/frame engagement surface area than the SR design; but also that the entire engagement surface area is steel/steel engagement, unlike the SR design which uses polymer/steel engagement at the front of the slide and more abbreviated steel rails than the GP6 design at the mid and rear of the gun.

The point is that if you want to make frame rail strength/length a driving criterion for the strength of a pistol, then the SR-45 isn't the front runner in that area. Which gets us back to the claim that the SR-45 is strongest built of any poly-frame pistol. Using your own initially stated criteria as a basis, it is apparent that there are other polymer-framed pistols out there that surpass the SR-45.

Just to be clear, I'm NOT trying to demonstrate that the SR-45 isn't strong--I'm sure it's plenty strong. What I'm trying to demonstrate is that the criteria you have rather arbitrarily selected as proof of the unique strength of the SR-45 aren't unique to the SR-45.

What's even more pertinent is that frame to slide mating, while generally important to accuracy, isn't really a major factor in determining the overall strength of a gun design. The strength of a locked breech gun is really more dependent on the way the slide locks to the barrel. There's not a lot of stress due to the firing impulse that would cause the frame and the slide to separate. The stress is primarily on the locking surfaces between the barrel and slide.
The thing that's common to both is that the monoblocks are pinned to the frame in just 2 places, 1 each front and back.

Quote:
In the SIG P250 guns, the frame is merely a handle/grip. The Ruger Super Red Hawk .454 Casull grip is attached to the frame with only a single screw, but no one would consider that evidence that the gun isn't a strong design.

I'll admit that you have gone over the SR-45 very carefully and cataloged a number of its features, but your determination of what makes a gun strong or weak appears to be based on your own speculation about whether a particular feature makes the design strong or weak. The lack of a pin here makes one gun weak, the addition of slide/frame mating at the front of the gun makes this gun strong, etc.

You have listed a number of things that demonstrate that the SR45 is a well thought out design. That it appears to be strong and is likely to be accurate and durable. I don't think that anyone would disagree with those things.

Where you went astray is in stating that it is the strongest and most accurate design in the poly-frame gun world. Even if those things were true, and it doesn't appear likely that they are, you've set a herculean task for yourself in terms of backing it up. Starting off that task with statements like: "The data comes from my eyeballs." is only going to make the work harder.

You might have a ghost of a chance if you started by just trying to prove that the SR series are stronger and more accurate than one particular brand, but trying to take on the entire world of polymer handguns in one fell swoop is not remotely possible.

I seriously doubt there is anyone on the planet who has a sufficient knowledge/experience base to allow them to make authoritative statements that apply accurately to every polymer-framed handgun ever made.


Well, I think the question is in how you interpret. I clearly stated that the rear rails were part of a solid stainless block imbedded into the frame. To differintiate, I described the P-250 and GP6 systems as monoblocks, so what do you think I meant that was contrary to that.

Neither the GP6 nor the P-250 have slide engagement forward of the mid rails.

Have you ever examined a polymer framed Kahr? I watched as the thin forward rails became unimbbedded from a P9 frame with under 500 rounds of 9mm fired from the pistol. Give me a frickin' break. Is that the summit of your structural knowledge? Ruger's forward rails are polymer. The same polymer that's been used in all their autopistols including those that used NO STEEL for the rails.

Honestly, in your demonstrated state of confusion, there's not much point in continuing. Just go back to the part where I described how the P-250 and the GP6 being pinned to the frame in only 2 places, one at the front and one at the rear and somehow that equates to the screw that holds the grips to the frame on a Super Redhawk?

TunnelRat, if you ever were an actual tunnel rat, your post is full of the same old cliches. We already know that Glock is the almighty pistol of choice with LE, at giveaway prices, bought and resold to consumers at not much less than the price for new. Like P.T. Barnum said, "there's a sucker born every minute."

Glock has never passed a single military trial in this country and the FBI felt themselves above any federal mandate regarding competitive bid or US manufacturing. Beretta was required to build pistols in the US. If it's good enough for our military, how is the FBI any different than in their own perception that they are above the law. Glock, Beretta and SIG/Sauer ARE foreign owned, get it? Thier profits go to foreign shareholders. And BTW, when the SEALs adopted the P-226 it was made in W. Germany, then Germany and then Exeter, NH.

And if you don't believe that HK and FN know how to keep their finger in the pie through wining, dining and favors to our buyers and those with influence in the process of selection . . .
57K is offline  
Old January 2, 2014, 11:16 PM   #41
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 3,823
Quote:
TunnelRat, if you ever were an actual tunnel rat, your post is full of the same old cliches. We already know that Glock is the almighty pistol of choice with LE, at giveaway prices, bought and resold to consumers at not much less than the price for new. Like P.T. Barnum said, "there's a sucker born every minute."
What cliches exactly? You love to do that, make statements and then proceed to provide little to no proof supporting them other than your own vaunted opinion. This entire thread is full of that.

What cliches did I use? That limpwristing can happen on a Glock? Sure I admit it. I fail to see how the Ruger SR series is immune to this if a very loose grip is held. Simply because you know a guy that said he could limpwrist a Glock and you haven't seen a SR limpwristed? That's your proof?

Quote:
Glock has never passed a single military trial in this country and the FBI felt themselves above any federal mandate regarding competitive bid or US manufacturing. Beretta was required to build pistols in the US. If it's good enough for our military, how is the FBI any different than in their own perception that they are above the law.
No but they did pass the Austrian military trials. Again, as I asked, point to me a single publicized trial that the SR has passed. Point me to a law enforcement agency or department that has seen the merits of the Ruger SR pistol and adopted it. And correct me if I'm wrong, but the Glock was adopted by the FBI long before the Ruger SR series was even in production. How exactly could they have competed? If there had been a competition it wouldn't have been in it, maybe some of the P series pistols.

And how do you explain the success of the M&P pistols? If Glock already had everyone bought, how was the M&P able to get into the market? Ruger has previous experience in the LE market with the Service, Security, and Speed Six revolvers that were like tanks (I love my Security Six). If the M&P was able to be successful in LE, than there is no reason the SR shouldn't be.

Quote:
Glock, Beretta and SIG/Sauer ARE foreign owned, get it? Thier profits go to foreign shareholders. And BTW, when the SEALs adopted the P-226 it was made in W. Germany, then Germany and then Exeter, NH.
Lol, I could care less if the shareholders make profits, as long as Americans are being put to work making the firearms. What do you think will have more of an impact on the American economy? The tax revenue from the corporations, or putting thousands of people to work?

Quote:
And if you don't believe that HK and FN know how to keep their finger in the pie through wining, dining and favors to our buyers and those with influence in the process of selection . . .
Again you continue to gloss over points I brought up. What about the sales of the Ruger P95? What about the sales of Colt 1911s? Heck it took decades of M16/M4 production until Colt was no longer the main supplier, they had a monopoly for a long, long time. The idea that the procurement process is sided against American based companies is beyond ludicrous, it's insane. And to pinpoint those two companies and not point out SIG or Beretta, which is the main pistol supplier to the US military and last I checked we are in the semiautomatic pistol forum, is just bizarre. FN is very successful with the US military, but frankly besides weapons for specialty units with much higher budgets than standard infantry units HK isn't a massive player and they've been having some trouble in the US market. I'm left believing you are bringing up those brands simply because you know I like them and feel it somehow "hurts" my opinion of them. That or you're ignorant of the weapons and manufacturers are military forces are actually using.

I think you have technical knowledge, and I think you could be a productive member of this forum. But quite frankly I have never in my years on this forum encountered anyone as brand myopic as you are and it taints any opinion you bring forth. There's nothing wrong with being a fan. But this is beyond that and it's beyond fanatic. I also find it frankly disappointing that you feel the need to resort to personal insults as much as you do. I have never insulted you personally, yet you constantly feel the need to insult my intelligence or knowledge without knowing anything about me. It's a terrible example for this forum.
__________________
Guns don't kill people. Apes with guns kill people! - Robin Williams

Last edited by TunnelRat; January 2, 2014 at 11:39 PM.
TunnelRat is offline  
Old January 2, 2014, 11:30 PM   #42
Venom1956
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 4, 2008
Location: WI
Posts: 2,813
This is fast becoming my favorite thread.
__________________
E-Shock rounds are engineered to expend maximum energy into soft targets, turning the density mass into an expanding rotational cone of NyTrilium matrix particles, causing neurological collapse to the central nervous system.- Yeah I can do that.
I guarantee you will know it if a bicyclist hits your house going 1000 mph.
Venom1956 is offline  
Old January 3, 2014, 12:16 AM   #43
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 17,960
Quote:
The thing that's common to both is that the monoblocks are pinned to the frame in just 2 places, 1 each front and back.
I addressed that already in the next section you quoted. Both of those guns use the polymer frame merely as a grip. The parts that need robust attachment are attached directly to the steel monoblock. As I stated, the grip attachment method need not be overly robust in such a case. It is common for even supermagnum revolvers to have their grips attached with only one screw yet no one uses that as evidence of their lack of strength.
Quote:
Just go back to the part where I described how the P-250 and the GP6 being pinned to the frame in only 2 places, one at the front and one at the rear and somehow that equates to the screw that holds the grips to the frame on a Super Redhawk?
The monoblocks constitute the functional receiver/frame in the two guns you mentioned. The polymer "frame" is merely a grip. You can even buy entirely different sized grips for the P250 to demonstrate that this is true. The old polymer grip/frame can be removed and the new one installed. In a situation like this how much structural robustness is required for the attachment of the polymer shell to the internal monoblock/receiver? Not much. The revolver example was intended to make the concept easier to grasp.
Quote:
Neither the GP6 nor the P-250 have slide engagement forward of the mid rails.
This is the kind of thing I was referring to when I stated that your strength criteria are arbitrary.

You seem to be arguing that a gun with a forward, mid and rear rail (i.e. Kahr or SR series) is automatically stronger than a gun with only a mid and rear rail? Even if the second gun has more engagement surface area and ALL of the engagement is steel to steel compared to less engagement area, some of which is polymer to steel engagement in the first design?

That doesn't make any sense. Not even from a common sense standpoint, let along a materials analysis/statics standpoint. Using engagement points ALONE as the criteria for strength without taking the materials involved into account, or the engagement surface area into account may garner points for creativity, but that's about it.
Quote:
Have you ever examined a polymer framed Kahr?
I own one.
Quote:
I watched as the thin forward rails became unimbbedded from a P9 frame with under 500 rounds of 9mm fired from the pistol.
I can believe it. However, given that there aren't widespread reports of this type of failure even though the design is popular, the observation doesn't impugn the entire design, only the particular defective gun you observed.
Quote:
Is that the summit of your structural knowledge?
Again, this gets back to your arbitrary criteria. You want to give the SR9 points for 3 engagement surfaces without getting into details like materials involved or engagement surface area, but then you want to evaluate a competing design at a more critical level.

If the presence of 3 engagement points is evidence of superior strength in the SR series guns, then it's evidence of superior strength in other similar designs such as the Kahr.

HOWEVER, when competing designs are brought up, suddenly you want to get into the nitty gritty of the materials/engagement/attachment issues. That is an excellent approach in terms of critical thinking, but only if you take the same approach to the SR series design.
Quote:
Ruger's forward rails are polymer. The same polymer that's been used in all their autopistols including those that used NO STEEL for the rails.
I own several such Ruger autopistols, and have owned others like it in the past. I'm well aware of the polymer they use and how they have used it.

What's interesting is that because of your preconceived notions, you have missed the point of the polymer rails in some of the P series guns. You should have realized that the fact that the rails can be made of polymer is evidence of the fact that they are not highly stressed parts. Instead, you ignore that fact and try to define the strength of the SR series design based largely on the fact that it has multiple points of engagement on an engagement that is not highly stressed.

This gets back to my earlier point about this slide/frame engagement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnKSa
What's even more pertinent is that frame to slide mating, while generally important to accuracy, isn't really a major factor in determining the overall strength of a gun design. The strength of a locked breech gun is really more dependent on the way the slide locks to the barrel. There's not a lot of stress due to the firing impulse that would cause the frame and the slide to separate. The stress is primarily on the locking surfaces between the barrel and slide.
In other words, you've built your theory of SR series strength nearly entirely on a misconception about the basic stresses on the guns in question.
Quote:
...the FBI felt themselves above any federal mandate regarding competitive bid or US manufacturing.
There is no federal mandate that I am aware of requiring federal law enforcement to issue only U.S. manufactured firearms. There is such a requirement for the U.S. military.
__________________
Did you know that there is a TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old January 3, 2014, 02:00 AM   #44
Fishbed77
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 23, 2010
Posts: 2,432
Quote:
This is fast becoming my favorite thread.
For real!

Unsubstantiated claims full of hyperbole often turn out this way.
Fishbed77 is offline  
Old January 3, 2014, 08:13 AM   #45
Uncle Malice
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 11, 2009
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 3,337
Quote:
I think you have technical knowledge, and I think you could be a productive member of this forum. But quite frankly I have never in my years on this forum encountered anyone as brand myopic as you are and it taints any opinion you bring forth. There's nothing wrong with being a fan. But this is beyond that and it's beyond fanatic. I also find it frankly disappointing that you feel the need to resort to personal insults as much as you do. I have never insulted you personally, yet you constantly feel the need to insult my intelligence or knowledge without knowing anything about me. It's a terrible example for this forum.
This. Very, very much this.

I think all anyone here is asking - as I have stated in the past - is that you simply recognize that your opinions are opinions rather than vehemently exclaim them as fact without empirical evidence. Then, when confronted about your 'facts', you get all butt hurt and start calling people names. Seriously man, tone down the ego. We all try to be friends here.
__________________
Glock 19 G4 | Glock 21 G4 | S&W M&P 9 Pro | S&W M&P 22 | Sig P220 Elite Dark | Sig P226 MK25 | HK P30L | HK45 | HK USP 9 | HK USP Compact 9 | HK USP 45 TACTICAL
Daniel Defense DDM4 V4 | Arsenal SGL 21 | ASA SBR w/ Side Charger | Savage Mark II FV-SR
Mossberg 590A1 20" SP | Mossberg 500 Cruiser
Uncle Malice is offline  
Old January 3, 2014, 12:12 PM   #46
Guv
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 24, 2012
Location: South Texas
Posts: 713
57k,

Personal attacks aren't cool, what possible way could you have expected this thread to have gone? Everyone has their favorite and the right to tell all, but don't expect everyone else to agree 100% with you. I personally have quite a few Ruger pistols and long guns, they offer great value for the price along with very good durability at the expense of some bulk, usually. You really seem to like your Ruger 45 and that's great, that's your choice.
Guv is offline  
Old January 3, 2014, 03:17 PM   #47
57K
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 2, 2013
Location: Heart of Texas
Posts: 788
TunnelRat, this will be the last time I address your posts on this thread. You have no problem with federal agencies using foreign branded pistols. You have no problem with foreign shareholders profiting as a result. BUT, what about the American jobs that were lost when the FBI contracted with Glock without so much as a competitive bid process? Those jobs went to Austrians. It's true, Ruger did not have a pistols that would have competed with the Glock at that time. But who had the FBI contract before Glock? There was an interim period where several pistols/calibers were approved for use including S&W and SIG/Sauer, but their last contract prior to awarding the current Glock contract belonged to S&W for the 1076 that was one of the heaviest DA autoloaders of it's day. The FBI's relationship with S&W went back to the early days of J. Edgar Hoover. In fact, the first S&W in .357 Magnum was presented to J. Edgar Hoover. When the FBI decided to adopt the .40 S&W cartridge, why not award the company directly responsible for it's development. Weight? didn't seem to be an issue with the 1076. A 4006 weighs no more. And if weight had been their major concern, S&W could have supplied them the alloy version 4003.

I will not dispute the simplicity of the Glock. IMO, that's exactly why the FBI adopted it. For their agents where the majority are not active shooters, the Glock was simpler to teach, especially to those who only shoot enough to pass their mandatory qualifications. There was a major issue though that went overlooked. Poor support of the casehead with Glock 40 caliber pistols, especially gen 1 & 2 G22s & G23s. Meanwhile the S&W .40s provided complete support of the casehead. So if there have been any Ka-Boom events among FBI agents, how likely would we have been to have heard of them? Obviously, the FBI is not accountable to American citizens. It seems these days that they are only accountable to the justice dept led by an attorney general that should have been indicted for "Fast and Furious." What would be the public perception if our president, senators and congressman were ferried around in Mercedes Benz limousines? I don't honestly know how federal law read when the FBI adopted the Glock, but I do know that the FBI was the first federal agency to contract for a foreign made pistol. The Secret Service followed suit later with their adoption of SIG/Sauer pistols chambered in .357 SIG. So, Glock guys will tell you that Ka-Boom events are directly attributable to irresponsible handloaders, yet I know of a first hand case where that just isn't true. The former owner of our local gun range bought a G22 and within his first box of factory ammo, he had a Ka-Boom event. And no, I wasn't there when it happened, but I did know that older gentleman and don't believe he fabricated the story. So, through Gen 1, 2 and even 3, the FBI carried a pistol of questionable safety while sending American jobs to Austria. Do I really need to say more?


JohnKSa, if you want to consider a polymer frame as simply a grip, that's fine by me because I believe you still miss the point.

One thing I believe we can agree on is the strength of Ruger's polymer frames, so let me present a hypothetical. First off, I'm just not familiar enough with the Tanfoglio polymer frame pistols to know if they use steel inserts or not. Since they're a CZ clone, they have full length rails from front to back of the frame to mate with the slide. The Ruger's (P-97 and P-345) did not. There were polymer rails at the rear, mid and front of the pistols. So discounting Tanfoglio, Ruger is the only company that's had enough confidence in their polymer compound to make the rail system free of any steel in .45 ACP. If Tanfoglio does this and someone has firsthand knowledge with them then feel free to correct me.

Accidents happen, double-charges, all too often. In my own 28 years of handloading experience I can tell you that the most catastrophic mistake I've made with the number of rounds I've made and fired along with my shooting partner of 20 years who also shoots my handloads is well past 100,000 rounds. About 18 years ago, I failed to charge a case with powder. It's the first and only time that's ever occurred and later my subconcious caused me to question the possibility that I had done that. At my next shoot with a Hi-Power in .40 S&W, CLICK, NO BOOM. Because of my premonition I immediately disassembled the pistol to find a bullet lodged in the bore. I removed it and went on with my shooting.

Now let's consider the less fortunate, those who have had experiences with gun failure due to a double-charge and while it is very unlikely to occur with factory ammo, it's certainly not out of the realm of possibility. So if you were firing a polymer framed pistol and had a catastrophic case failure, rupture or case-head blowout, whatever, whose polymer do you want protecting your hand? One that's been proven strong enough to provide integral polymer rails, or something that hasn't or maybe constructed even thinner?

Now let's look at your theory that the frame is merely a handle. With the 2 examples you provided, that is the case, but it is NOT the case with the Ruger. Let's consider a catastrophic case failure again. With the STI-GP6 only pinning the monoblock, chassis or whatever you want to call it in 2 places, say that case failure managed to break those pins holding the monoblock in 2 posistions only. Do you want to be at the rear of that slide in that event? Now look at the P-250. At the front of its monoblock the disassembly pin is about 3 times the diameter of the front pin in the GP6, so your odds are slightly better, but what if it did break? Now lets look at the Ruger camblock system. It has a disasseembly pin about the same size as the SIG's. But say it breaks as well. You still have 3 additional pins holding the camblock within the frame. Okay, so lets consider that it's more likely that a catastrophic failure breaks the front pin only. With the GP6 design, the chassis and slide would still be able to pivot about the rear pin with nothing else holding it in place since it's just a handle as you put it. Same with the P-250 except that the front pin is much larger in diameter than the GP6's pin. Still possible for the monoblock/chassis to pivot around the rear pin with nothing to prevent it. Now let's look at the Ruger design and I'll make it a tougher case. Say the case failure not only broke the heavy disassembly pin, but the 3 other pins as well. At the rear of the frame there is that solid stainless block that provides the rear slide rails and up front there are proven polymer rails so the pistol would still be affixed to the frame at the front and rear of the pistol. So which one would be the least likely to A. lose the slide completely B. have the slide and chassis pivot on the rear pin and possibly hit the shooter in the face?


Guv, this isn't about personal attacks. There is an established track record of anyone disagreeing that HKs or Glocks being the ultimate pistol coming under attack from multiple sides. So yeah, I'll bite back. I know all of these pistols inside and out. I know the designers at Ruger have put more thought into these pistols than most can even imagine. This is an entirely new Ruger platform except for the pre-existing polymer compound and investment cast stainless steel that's proven itself for decades now. Does the Ruger have the strongest polymer frame? IMO they do and the quality of design can be seen throughout the pistol coupled with excellent adjustable sights, triggers that become excellent merely through firing enough rounds to break the pistol in and then there's that accuracy thing. Many arguing against it have never even fired one, or fired it very little if they did. Do a search and see if there are any posters who don't praise the accuracy of the SR45. the 9 and the 40 as well including the compacts. Yeah, there have been issues I'm sure and grossly exagerated IMO. like one poster said, check the Ruger Forum. I'm a member of RugerForum.com, so I know the reports are exagerrated. Secondly, the SR45 was announced one year ago. I bought mine in early April and have yet to have any problem of any kind. So, by all means check the Ruger forum. While you're at it, check GlockTalk and see how many problem there have been with Gen 3 & 4 G21s, or do a search for a recent event where a G21 shooter right here on this forum experienced a Ka-Boom event with a G21. He loaded on a progressive press that auto-indexes with safety features to insure the powder charge was correct. With each stroke of the handle, the case goes to another reloading station and combined with the safety features a double-charge would have been next to impossible. Check the HK forums as well. When I read 2 reports of HK customer service, one is great and the other guy has experienced the same kind of superior attitude made famous in their advertising propoganda.

I kinda have a history of protecting America and American things going back to my enlistment in the US Navy at 17 during the Vietnam era. So I do have a bias about the Rugers being American made. I also have the technical background and competence to know that the quality of the SR9/40/45 design merit my bias. As a handloader, I shoot a lot of cast lead bullets in .45 ACP and my loads are Match Accurate. While some do shoot cast lead through polygonal bores, all anyone need do if they want the truth is to start a thread in the handloading section and see how experienced handloaders deal with the issue. Not some gun rag expert, but real shooters and handloaders. The overwhelming majority, especially those expecting accuracy are using conventionally rifled aftermarket barrels. So, if I bought an HK or a Glock, I'd have to buy an aftermarket barrel as well to satisfy my standards for accuracy. Fortuneatly, there's no need. My SR45 handles JHPs and cast lead handloads equally well.

Not all of my firearms are Ruger. In fact I was considering the purchase of the new Ruger American rifle, right up to the point that I learned that it has cold hammer rifling similar to what's used by Glock and HK for their polygonal rifling. The Ruger's rifling is conventional but Ruger has previously cold hammer forged barrels for the M77 and the M77 MkII. Generally considered the least accurate rifles among the major brands. Simple solution? A Savage in the same caliber that has button rifling and known for out-of-the-box accuarcy. And, still American made quality. If the old wives tale about polygonal rifling offering better accuracy held, just check with the world's various militaries and see who uses polygonal bores in their sniper rifles. The Army, Marines and Navy SEALs have more sniping experience than any military on the planet, check and see how many of their rifles are polygonally bored. Even while 2 of our largest military contractors, HK and FN make sniper rifles with polygonal bores.

Last edited by 57K; January 3, 2014 at 03:45 PM.
57K is offline  
Old January 3, 2014, 03:50 PM   #48
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 3,823
Quote:
TunnelRat, this will be the last time I address your posts on this thread. You have no problem with federal agencies using foreign branded pistols. You have no problem with foreign shareholders profiting as a result.
It's the last time why exactly? Because you don't like what I'm saying?

Would I prefer federal agencies used American pistols? Sure. A lot of law enforcement agencies are now using S&W M&Ps, a pistol which time and again you seem to almost ignore it's very existence acting as if the Ruger SR series of pistols is the only American built striker fired pistol when that's simply not true. I also have no problem if agencies want to use the Ruger SR, that'd be great. But right now they aren't.

American jobs are one thing I will agree with you about. But the shareholders? Last time I checked we can buy stock in those companies too.

Quote:
BUT, what about the American jobs that were lost when the FBI contracted with Glock without so much as a competitive bid process? Those jobs went to Austrians. It's true, Ruger did not have a pistols that would have competed with the Glock at that time. But who had the FBI contract before Glock? There was an interim period where several pistols/calibers were approved for use including S&W and SIG/Sauer, but their last contract prior to awarding the current Glock contract belonged to S&W for the 1076 that was one of the heaviest DA autoloaders of it's day. The FBI's relationship with S&W went back to the early days of J. Edgar Hoover. In fact, the first S&W in .357 Magnum was presented to J. Edgar Hoover. When the FBI decided to adopt the .40 S&W cartridge, why not award the company directly responsible for it's development. Weight? didn't seem to be an issue with the 1076. A 4006 weighs no more. And if weight had been their major concern, S&W could have supplied them the alloy version 4003.
That is a legitimate point that I will concede. I have owned a few S&W 3rd Gen autos and they are very nice pistols and would have done well with the FBI. I don't profess to know all the reasons the FBI adopted the Glock, nor do I believe you do either. Neither of us was in the procurement process.

Quote:
I don't honestly know how federal law read when the FBI adopted the Glock, but I do know that the FBI was the first federal agency to contract for a foreign made pistol. The Secret Service followed suit later with their adoption of SIG/Sauer pistols chambered in .357 SIG
Again, you understand that those pistols were at least assembled in the US and not long afterwards were made and have been made in the US for a long time? The P229 and any SIG offering you get these days is made in the US, it is putting Americans to work. I know. How? I know the people that work at the factory. Glock also is now making pistols in the US as well, in GA. HK is making the frames for the HK45/45c in NH, though the barrels and slides are only imported.

Quote:
Guv, this isn't about personal attacks.
That's misleading and you know it. You've personally attacked numerous people in this thread, backpedaling now won't save you.

Quote:
There is an established track record of anyone disagreeing that HKs or Glocks being the ultimate pistol coming under attack from multiple sides.
Point to me a single posting in this thread where someone said HKs or Glocks are the "ultimate" pistol. It didn't happen. When folks disagree with your assertion that the SR is the strongest polymer pistol out there they expect you to back up that claim with something other than word of mouth, as any rational person would. People aren't arguing that their brands are better. They're arguing that their brands are just as good, something that you seem to disagree with.

You are the person claiming it is the best, that means you put yourself on the defensive from the get go. In mathematics, when it comes to a proof showing that something is true in all cases is essentially impossible.

Quote:
IMO they do and the quality of design can be seen throughout the pistol coupled with excellent adjustable sights, triggers that become excellent merely through firing enough rounds to break the pistol in and then there's that accuracy thing.
No one here is calling the SR pistol trash. All they are doing is merely arguing that it might not unequivocally be the best or other pistols are as good.

Quote:
While you're at it, check GlockTalk and see how many problem there have been with Gen 3 & 4 G21s
There's no denying that, I even have threads on this forum talking about it.

Quote:
do a search for a recent event where a G21 shooter right here on this forum experienced a Ka-Boom event with a G21. He loaded on a progressive press that auto-indexes with safety features to insure the powder charge was correct. With each stroke of the handle, the case goes to another reloading station and combined with the safety features a double-charge would have been next to impossible.
Next to impossible is not the same as impossible. Mistakes can still happen with progressive presses. Case support for 45 ACP Glocks has never really been an issue. I'm not saying it couldn't have been the Glock, maybe it was. But it could have been a bad pour. It could have been brass that had been reloaded too much. If your definition of proof of a poor design is one man on a forum having a kaboom when that particular model has been sold to thousands if not millions then I can't help you. Just like my bad example with the SR pistol is not proof of a bad design, something I openly admitted but you seem unwilling to do so.

Quote:
I kinda have a history of protecting American and American things going back to my enlistment in the US Navy at 17 during the Vietnam era. So I do have a bias about the Rugers being American made.
No one here has a problem with American made products. At all. I don't know why you keep insinuating this. Almost all my long guns are US made, but that doesn't mean I don't appreciate foreign made ones as well.

Quote:
While some do shoot cast lead through polygonal bores, all anyone need do if they want the truth is to start a thread in the handloading section and see how experienced handloaders deal with the issue. Not some gun rag expert, but real shooters and handloaders. The overwhelming majority, especially those expecting accuracy are using conventionally rifled aftermarket barrels. So, if I bought an HK or a Glock, I'd have to buy an aftermarket barrel as well to satisfy my standards for accuracy. Fortuneatly, there's no need. My SR45 handles JHPs and cast lead handloads equally well.
You love to bring up polygonal rifling, and frankly I don't know why. There are plenty of folks shooting lead in polygonal rifled pistols, they just have to be diligent about cleaning (just like folks that reload have to be diligent about watching what they do). You wouldn't "have to" buy an aftermarket barrel. But if you don't want to buy a Glock or HK for those reasons that's perfectly fine with everyone here. So again, why keep bringing it up? It seems to solely be so that you can asset that those of us that don't reload aren't "real shooters". Again, personal insults based on your own notions. All we are saying is that for some people polygonal rifling isn't the issue it is for you.

Quote:
In fact I was considering the purchase of the new Ruger American rifle, right up to the point that I learned that it has cold hammer rifling similar to what's used by Glock and HK for their polygonal rifling. The Ruger's rifling is conventional but Ruger has previously cold hammer forged barrels for the M77 and the M77 MkII. Generally considered the least accurate rifles among the major brands.
What's funny about this is that cold hammer forging itself, not polygonal rifling (they're not one in the same we've been over this remember?) is generally considered a good thing for accuracy by most folks. Plenty of rifles that are cold hammer forged, including some excellent ARs. And guess what? They don't have the polygonal rifling you dislike either.

Quote:
And, still American made quality. If the old wives tale about polygonal rifling offering better accuracy held, just check with the world's various militaries and see who uses polygonal bores in their sniper rifles. The Army, Marines and Navy SEALs have more sniping experience than any military on the planet, check and see how many of their rifles are polygonally bored. Even while 2 of our largest military contractors, HK and FN make sniper rifles with polygonal bores.
Who here has claimed that polygonal rifling is more accurate? Name the guy and I'll punch him for you, cause I sure didn't. So who exactly are you arguing with? The CEOs of Glock and HK? Their weapon designers? Or are you simply arguing for the sake of it?
__________________
Guns don't kill people. Apes with guns kill people! - Robin Williams

Last edited by TunnelRat; January 3, 2014 at 04:05 PM.
TunnelRat is offline  
Old January 3, 2014, 04:18 PM   #49
LockedBreech
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 6, 2009
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 2,848
Quote:
Originally Posted by 57K
So yeah, I'll bite back
The problem is that nobody bit you in the first place. People have questioned your arguments and in return you have questioned their personal qualifications and character.
__________________
Beretta PX4 .40 S&W - Beretta 92FS 9x19 Para - Rock Island Armory GI 1911 .45 ACP - Colt 1968 Detective Special .38 Spc. - Ruger LCP .380 ACP - Daniel Defense M4V1 Carbine 5.56x45 - Alpine Industries M1 Carbine .30 - Steyr-Mannlicher M1895 8x56 - Ruger 10/22 .22LR - Remington 870 Express Tactical 12GA - 1943 Izhevsk Mosin-Nagant M91/30 7.62x54R
LockedBreech is offline  
Old January 3, 2014, 04:19 PM   #50
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 4,717
On that note, it's time for this thread to go the way of the dodo.
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman
Spats McGee is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2013 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.18865 seconds with 10 queries