The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: General Handgun Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old September 11, 2017, 08:07 AM   #51
Model12Win
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 20, 2012
Posts: 5,854
I don't think so, but many are discovering the old steelys are a hoot.
Model12Win is offline  
Old September 11, 2017, 04:24 PM   #52
hdwhit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 22, 2017
Posts: 1,011
Quote:
Glenn E. Meyer wrote:
Why don't they make Pontiac 1969 GTO's that I lusted after when I was young?
Maybe because Pontiacs are no longer made at all?

General Motors, Ford and Chrysler all did re-introduce updated versions for their 1960/70s "muscle cars" and they have sold well. I know they're not the same, but then I don't think anyone today would be willing to spend a lot of money on a Dodge Challenger with no air conditioner, an AM radio and vinyl upholstery like the one I used to have when I was in High School.

Similarly, even if there was a market for retro firearms (other than the 1911) the designs would updated to use the latest technologies and safety features so they likewise wouldn't be quite the same.
hdwhit is offline  
Old September 11, 2017, 04:50 PM   #53
hdwhit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 22, 2017
Posts: 1,011
Quote:
Old Marksman wrote:
...but the FN 509, Glock, and others of their ilk could not have been made then.
Why not?

What would have stopped Browning or Bergman from doing an overmould in natural rubber of a pressed steel frame? Apart from the fact:
  • There would be no appreciable weight savings because the materials were not materially lighter?
  • The market was unlikely to accept it?
But, technologically, I'm really not aware of anything lacking from the late 19th Century/early 20th Century firearm maker's toolbox that would have proven fatal to such an attempt.
hdwhit is offline  
Old September 11, 2017, 05:29 PM   #54
tipoc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 11, 2004
Location: Redwood City, Ca.
Posts: 4,114
Quote:
Why not?

What would have stopped Browning or Bergman from doing an overmould in natural rubber of a pressed steel frame?...
Rubber back then is not the rubber of today. Even hard rubber grips made during that period of time were quite susceptible to shrinkage, cracking, etc. The guns would have been heavier and no where near as strong.

What manufacturers were producing in 1900 was state of the art. It was the most advanced that was possible for the time and state of tech and science.

The tech to develop polymer framed handguns was not developed till during the Second World War and in the immediate aftermath. The M16 was the first viable weapon to do it. This was followed by H&Ks efforts and later Glock.

Plastic Injection Molding was not as advanced till after the war.

Even aluminum framed handguns were not possible till the War.

The short answer is the science and tech were not there.

tipoc
tipoc is offline  
Old September 12, 2017, 02:23 AM   #55
Pond, James Pond
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 12, 2011
Location: Top of the Baltic stack
Posts: 6,079
I haven't read the whole thread, largely because I think mot posts will say something similar.

People often bemoan how a 60's S&W is way better built than a modern one. The reason? Cost.

Steel is always going to be more expensive to work than polymer. Polymer has plenty of advantages over steel too. So really it's only the look, feel and sometimes the outright strength that keeps steel in the production process any more than necessary.

For the newer generation of shooters, polymer is the norm. It's weight is the norm. Its resilience is the norm. Its low maintenance is the norm. Many might not even see the point of steel beyond the barrel and a few other parts.

So, no, I don't see it making a comeback in any longterm fashion. But nor do I think it will disappear altogether either. If it manages to stay as relevant as it is today, it will be doing well...
__________________
When the right to effective self-defence is denied, that right to self-defence which remains is essentially symbolic.
Freedom: Please enjoy responsibly.
Pond, James Pond is offline  
Old September 12, 2017, 10:47 AM   #56
tipoc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 11, 2004
Location: Redwood City, Ca.
Posts: 4,114
Right now polymer framed handguns are selling for less than $300. over to CDNN. The manufacturers still make a profit off of that.

https://www.cdnnsports.com/firearms.html

Now some of this is the slump in the gun market right now and the post panic buying let down which the industry still isn't out of. But the other piece of it is that polymer as a material in gun manufacture is no longer a guarantee of extensive profits.

So many polymer framed guns are being produced presently, many of them very good guns, that the rate of return on investment (how much you get back for each dollar invested) has been shrinking. This return is what fuels competition and innovation to begin with it. Glock was able to dominate the market for over two decades, but it's share of that market has been declining the last decade as others adapted and produced comparable products at a lower price or with more features. This has forced Glock to upgrade to compete and their profit margin to fall.

Polymer framed guns are mostly steel. It's steel that comprises the critical internal working parts, slide, barrel, structure of the frame, etc. The real innovation was the use of new materials and production processes that made manufacturer less expensive in time and capital investment. Polymer framed guns are the new norm. They dominate military and law enforcement and will for the foreseeable future.

They also dominate self defense use by the non-military population.

But this leaves us with a question. Why revolvers? Why are they still made?

It's because the majority of handgun use in the U.S. and some other places is not for self-defense. It's for sport shooting. For this reason steel and alloy framed guns will be around for the remainder of this century (barring an unforeseen collapse in the industry).

Is a Beretta 92 a worse gun for home defense than a Glock 17? No it's not. So it will be around.

tipoc
tipoc is offline  
Old September 12, 2017, 10:00 PM   #57
Dano4734
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 6, 2014
Posts: 730
Which begs the question, when will revolvers go plastic.. I know but how abouttthe frames
Dano4734 is offline  
Old September 13, 2017, 06:41 PM   #58
osbornk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 11, 2012
Location: Mountains of Appalachia
Posts: 1,598
Quote:
Which begs the question, when will revolvers go plastic.. I know but how about the frames
I don't think we will see much if any. Most revolver fans are traditionalists and want to stay with the tried and true. Most already frown on alloy frames.
osbornk is offline  
Old October 2, 2017, 01:55 PM   #59
FairWarning
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 9, 2008
Location: GA
Posts: 1,149
Probably no resurgence, but I will continue to have mostly steel guns, just as I will continue to drive my noisy, fast internal combustion engine sports cars a la Mad Max instead of electric cars if need be.
__________________
Mauser Werke, Schmidt-Rubin, Colt, Walther, HK, Weatherby, Sig Sauer, Browning, Ruger, Beretta, etc, etc....a few friends of mine
FairWarning is offline  
Old October 3, 2017, 01:48 AM   #60
SonOfScubaDiver
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 1, 2017
Posts: 391
Resurgence or not, I bought my first steel gun earlier this year--a SP101, 3 inch barrel--and I absolutely love it! I also purchased a Bersa Thunder, also steel, and love it too. I don't have anything against polymer pistols. I own four of them. But there's just something about my two steel guns that makes me like them over the polymer ones. In fact, my gun wish list doesn't include any more polymer guns.
SonOfScubaDiver is offline  
Old October 3, 2017, 10:59 AM   #61
FairWarning
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 9, 2008
Location: GA
Posts: 1,149
By the way, obviously revolvers are "obsolete" relics, but do people still buy them in droves? Likewise for the fundamentally 100+ year old 1911 design.
__________________
Mauser Werke, Schmidt-Rubin, Colt, Walther, HK, Weatherby, Sig Sauer, Browning, Ruger, Beretta, etc, etc....a few friends of mine
FairWarning is offline  
Old October 3, 2017, 11:00 AM   #62
FairWarning
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 9, 2008
Location: GA
Posts: 1,149
Quote:
Originally Posted by osbornk
I don't think we will see much if any. Most revolver fans are traditionalists and want to stay with the tried and true. Most already frown on alloy frames.
Besides, they'd be less effective for "pistol-whipping", wouldn't they? Even if the correct term would be revolver-whipping....
__________________
Mauser Werke, Schmidt-Rubin, Colt, Walther, HK, Weatherby, Sig Sauer, Browning, Ruger, Beretta, etc, etc....a few friends of mine
FairWarning is offline  
Old October 10, 2017, 01:53 PM   #63
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 4,022
Designers of wheels, boilers, mechanical linkages, structural components, blades, and so on have always been limitedly the states of the art of materials and processes of their times.

The stone age gave way to the bronze age. Then came iron and then steel and then other metal alloys.

The predominant methods used for manufacturing parts from things such as rolled steel or steel ingot or bar stock were casting, forging, extrusion, and cutting (metal removal). Each had its advantages and disadvantages. For low cost applications not requiring precision or long wear, sheet stock could be pressed or otherwise formed to shape.

Designers were limited to the materials available; to part shapes that could be made using the aforementioned methods; and to the use of assemblies made by putting together individual components that had been so manufactured.

That was fine. That was what they had. The Colt 1911 was a good design, and so was the J57 engine.

Then some new materials came along. And new methods of making things, far too many to discuss. Individual part designs could be combined into large, complex, integral pieces never before possible.

A designer today is not limited by the materials and factory machines that were available in the Colt factory in 1905.

No, designers today have much, much more latitude in making things mechanical.

Now, if what one wants is a 1911 pistol, a big Hand Ejector revolver, or a Parker shotgun replica, steel forgings and machinings will suffice perfectly.

In fact, that is what one would want, after hashing out a few decisions on MIM parts.

But one wants the best functionality that the designer can provide, it would not be a good idea to tie the designer's hands just for old time's sake.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old October 10, 2017, 04:17 PM   #64
JWT
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 16, 2007
Location: Southern Arizona
Posts: 3,888
Resurgence in steel? I wasn't aware that one was needed. Still a large number of very excellent guns being made in steel to the best of my knowledge.
JWT is offline  
Old October 10, 2017, 04:27 PM   #65
OneFreeTexan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 15, 2002
Location: West, Texas
Posts: 280
Slightly off topic

ShootistPRS mentioned ‘ceramics’ possibly being used in barrel, or whatever.
I think it was 30 yrs ago, give or take, a company made smoking pipes, for real tobacco with a ceramic liner. They were actually pretty smooth, cool smoking pipes. I don’t know whatever happened to them..I know collectors are paying high prices for them now.

Makes me wonder if some form of Bakelite might have applications.??
OneFreeTexan is offline  
Old October 10, 2017, 08:13 PM   #66
bandanabandit1
Member
 
Join Date: April 13, 2013
Posts: 25
Don't think we will ever see a resurgence of steel pistols as the "kings" of the market anymore. Simply because we have better technology (such as polymers) that are more practical to use (cost, weight, etc.). Steel guns will always have a presence however, I just dont think it will be the prevalent choice among shooters.
bandanabandit1 is offline  
Old October 11, 2017, 10:04 AM   #67
johnwilliamson062
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 9,995
There is another similarity with print media. Although some people still prefer print over digital, print media is a business of scale. One of my favorite hobby magazines went digital only a year or two despite the fact I still had a paper subscription.
You can still buy media printed on a hand operated block type press. I know of two place that will print whatever you want on hand operated presses. It is going to cost you though. Actually a quick search shows you can buy a new production press.
In conclusion, some of the best of the old designs are here to stay. There will almost certainly always be small operations making all steel guns and even a new design every once in a while. The large companies making mass market products probably aren't going to put much money into new all steel designs.
johnwilliamson062 is offline  
Old October 11, 2017, 10:30 AM   #68
Glenn E. Meyer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
The way I see it is based on the main purpose of the gun. Is for EDC, SD, etc. as a serious weapon to be used as such. In the case, aesthetics and retro appeal are secondary to whether it is reliable, can I shoot it well and is it efficacious with the round it delivers.

If it is a fun gun, competition gun or the like - then other considerations come into play. I found that polymer, striker guns are what I want for my first usage. I have the other - would they work as a SD gun - probably quite well but I prefer optimal for something that is serious.

Is the F-150 made of aluminum acceptable? Is it a good truck for being a truck that you use? If they make a polymer or carbon fiber one - will it be a better truck for being a truck?

Would folks in the trenches of WWI if give a shipment of modern Glock 17s have some kind of steel hissy fit? Don't think so.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old October 11, 2017, 02:09 PM   #69
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 4,022
Quote:
ShootistPRS mentioned ‘ceramics’ possibly being used in barrel, or whatever.
That;s the real fusion, I think.

There is little reason to expect a "resurgence" in the use of steel for the frames of new-design semiautomatic pistols. Designers have more flexibility working with new materials and processes.

The question really is whether slides and barrels will likely be made from other materials.

I tend to doubt it. Designers have been putting steel to good use in those components, even with different methods for unlocking the slide from the barrel. The Glock works just fine.

One could probably design a slide from something like ceramic matrix composites. But why? We don't really want our slides to be much lighter, do we?

On the other hand, CMCs just might find their way into the integral parts of frames--the durability and fracture resistance is higher than that of fiber-reinforced composite. But it there a need, considering the necessary service lives.

Time will tell. I have been way from the technology of really advanced materials and processes for a little more than a decade now, and I am no longer knowledgeable of the latest developments.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old October 15, 2017, 09:29 PM   #70
johnwilliamson062
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 9,995
Quote:
But why? We don't really want our slides to be much lighter, do we?
For duty pistols that are only fired 60 rounds a year? Police have a lot of musculoskeletal issues from heavy duty belts. For CCWs? Maybe.
Scandium revolvers always seemed like a scam to me, but they have sold a fair number of them.
johnwilliamson062 is offline  
Old October 15, 2017, 10:20 PM   #71
Glenn E. Meyer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
I have a scandium 1911 - a SW Commander 1911Sc. I truly like it and it's recoil isn't troublesome. A scandium J frame - different story.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old October 17, 2017, 09:58 AM   #72
CANIS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 28, 1999
Posts: 308
There is still a thriving luxury wrist watch industry - despite cheap plastic watches that keep perfect time and have a ton of other features. Steel will never go away. Adding options in materials and construction does not necessarily supplant previous iterations of development.

While capitalism is a wonderful thing, it only survives if companies can continue to convince consumers to consume vis a vis, the cell phone business, latest whizbang guns, etc. All of which fundamentally do nothing that much better than their predecessors.
__________________
I'm not tolerant...
CANIS is offline  
Old October 17, 2017, 12:11 PM   #73
otasan
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 17, 2005
Location: Hartford, Vermont
Posts: 519
All five of my handguns are steel. My two Springfield Armory M1911A1s are hard-chromed steel. My Ruger MkII .22LR pistol is stainless steel, as well as my S&W 629. My Glock 17 is mainly steel (by weight).
otasan is offline  
Old October 17, 2017, 03:03 PM   #74
fostereast
Junior Member
 
Join Date: November 29, 2015
Posts: 13
Tupperware vs. Steel

I'm a rookie, but it seems that many new designs are military or police designs or variations on those designs.

Maybe the benefits of the consumer versions are marketing hype, maybe there are real benefits when made available for consumer sales. In general these designs will follow the requirements of the original buyer (military or police) and be weight sensitive, corrosion resistant, etc...

One interesting example of a "newish" metal gun is the S&W TRR8 or R8 327 models with scandium frames. Very nice revolver. I hope to have one someday and set it us as a race gun with a reflex sight and possibly flashlight.

https://www.smith-wesson.com/firearm...model-327-trr8
fostereast is offline  
Old October 21, 2017, 08:52 PM   #75
Doc Holliday 1950
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2014
Location: Bout as south as it gets
Posts: 1,238
Cslinger,
I just got a steel 2” 357 mag revolver.
After shooting the poly or lighter weight
Pistols/revolvers I can honestly say
that steel rules especially in a 2 or 4”
Gun. It absolutely eats up the perceived
Recoil & allows the average shooter the
ability to shoot a heavier load IMHO. I
Went frugal & spent under $300 for my
Revolver. Now that I know what the diff
Is, I am confident to spend $500-$800
For a top of the line steel revolver.
Thanks for your post
__________________
Shoot well and be Accurate,

Doc
Doc Holliday 1950 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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 06:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.10657 seconds with 8 queries