Polymer pistols.......how long.

[xXxplosive]

My Colt Gov't 1911 ia 92 years old and my Colt Combat Commander is 35 years old and they both run like watches.......my question is, what could someone expect the longevity to be on the new polymer guns. I believe over a period of time plastics / polymers break down due to factors such as continued use of solvents, UV rays, chemicals found in powder residues, cracking, etc. Could someone expect to see the years of longevity from these new pistols like we have witnessed from the steel frames of yesteryear.........?

[kmrtnsn]

Age is less a determining factor than round count and maintenance.

[superr.stu]

I would think that this would be more of a treatment of the gun issue, than can the plastic last. A lot of people I know that have "grandpa's 1911" take it out and shoot 10-20 rounds through it a couple times a year. Then take it home and give it a super detail cleaning before putting it to bed in a pillow lined case.

Where a lot of these same people have taken on the mindset of; "shoot it till it breaks" with a plastic gun. They'll take out their glock or m&p run 10-15k+ rounds a year, drop it in the dirt and mud, clean it once or twice a year, toss it in a range bag with a bottle of Gatorade and be happy with it.

[bmg]

I've been wondering the same thing as the original poster. Even well cared for plastic that's protected from direct sunlight seems to change and get brittle over time. I know that the plastic used for guns is likely of high quality and durability, but having had some ordinary plastics basically fall apart after 15 years or so, I'm finding it hard to believe that our polymer framed guns will still be going strong in 100 years. I'm sure a company like Glock has a pretty good idea of how long their guns will last, anyone have a good contact there who might be able to get that info?

This should probably be in the general handguns forum rather than 1911.

[jwperry]

I was wondering this and had my question, pseudo answered last weekend. At least with a sample size of one.
I met a gentleman from another board that I post on who had a Gen1 Glock 17. He is a LEO and a range instructor. That was his issued duty weapon from 1989. He carried it, on duty until until he moved to FL in the mid 90's. He still uses that Gen1 Glock at his range during instruction periods. By his estimates, he has over through 100k rounds through it. He does do proper maintenance on it and changes the springs out every 15k rounds.
My surprise came at the fact that is still held on the pins in tight, has rifling left in the original barrel and the frame had no visible cracking or degradation that I expected from a 21 year old piece of plastic. The grip area had been worn pretty smooth though and there was plenty of holster wear on the slide, but all in all, I was rather impressed with the condition it was in.

[Mjolnir]

Chuck Taylor has a Gen I Model 17 that has over 250,000 rounds through. I JUST read an article on it in one of the current magazines. That pistol is 20 yrs old.

Should last 20 to 30 yrs or more...

[xXxplosive]

Hmmmmm........gues I just see this polymer thing as a "Planned Obsolence" situation by the gun manufactures as well as making a product with less production costs as well.

[Mjolnir]

Hmmmmm........gues I just see this polymer thing as a "Planned Obsolence" situation by the gun manufactures as well as making a product with less production costs as well.

Nah, much more to it than that. The polymer is a product of OIL. OIL is the driver of the world economy. It also doesn't rust; absorbs recoil well if engineered properly, is lightweight, strong and despite the high cost of molds it's cheap to make.

SHOT Show 2009 a friend was speaking with Gaston Glock and Gaston made no secret of his cost to manufacture a Glock pistol: I forget the exact numbers but it was like $26 for the slide and barrel and $26 for the frame assembly. The biggest savings recently was the magazine followers. IIRC he said that they were once machined (which I find difficult to imagine - but I could be just wrong on this detail) now molded, too.

[bkb0000]

glocks are not heirlooms. but if you'd been shooting that 92 year old 1911 this whole time, it'd be a piece of scrap metal by now too.

[jh9]

Yeah, it seems silly. But there's some validity to the question. The political situation in the US changes with disturbing regularity. It very well may be that you're allowed to own a pistol 50 years from now, but don't have the plethora of opportunities we have now WRT to shooting (lead bans, range closures, etc). In that case, it'd be nice to know that a relatively well-maintained poly-framed gun-- that you've practiced with for years-- is still functional.

I've shot my grandpa's .32 regulation police that was made in the early 1900s (at the latest). Would it stand up to a 1k weekend class? Almost certainly not. Hell, I'm not sure it'd stand up to a 75-round indoor IDPA match. But I can practically guarantee that it'll stand up to another six rounds. In a world of increasingly available alternative means of training (airsoft, etc) that might just have to do. It'd be nice to know for certain if a Glock can manage what we know some older designs are capable of. (Beyond, of course, one 275k+ gun that's almost defied logic in how it seemingly hasn't needed regular maintenance-- such as trigger return springs, recoil springs, etc-- that guns of much, much lower round counts require.)

[xXxplosive]

Uhhhh.................my Gov't Model 1911 US Army is 92 yrs. old and runs like a watch. Just beautiful........

[mkmckinley]

Hmmmmm........gues I just see this polymer thing as a "Planned Obsolence" situation by the gun manufactures as well as making a product with less production costs as well.

It's also lighter and remains pretty durable. I can get a Glock for $425 that weighs 19 ounces, won't rust, holds 15 rounds, and can shoot 250,000 times quickly an accurately. I don't really see a downside other than aesthetics.

[Bolt_Overide]

Ive got a 20 year old glock 17 as well, unsure of the round count, but its no where near 250k, probably more like 20k at most, damn thing still functions flawlessly. I cannot recall a single function issue that wasnt bad ammo.

[BillSWPA]

Around 85,000 rounds, the Glock 19 in the rental case of a range I used to use had the slide crack. The frame was still in good condition.

Plastic has the ability to deform elastically under recoil, unlike metal. It will flex and return to its original shape repeatedly, aiding its longevity.

Plastic does lack the ability of steel to resist catastrophic failure.

[jh9]

Plastic has the ability to deform elastically under recoil, unlike metal.

If that were true then metal springs wouldn't work.

It's a known quantity how time and use effect a steel frame gun, especially something like a 1911 where we have plenty of old samples (and plenty of heavily used samples). With a poly framed gun, we have the latter, but not the former.

It's all well and good to theorize about the long term performance of the polymer-framed guns, but until I see a 90 year old Glock that's still functional I'm going to remain skeptical. Especially since the prevailing attitude by manufacturers is "just send it back" if there's trouble. That's no good to me if Glock is only servicing Government agencies on official letterhead 15 years from now.

I remain open to being convinced otherwise, and I have no intention of giving up my plastic guns. But this is an issue that's worth some consideration. Exactly how much depends on the user. I don't expect any gun, regardless of composition, to hold up to 50 years worth of heavy training or competition. But there is something to be said for having multiples, and that's diluted if they all have a shelf life.

[BillSWPA]

If that were true then metal springs wouldn't work.

I understood the subject of discussion to be frames, not springs.

The different deformation properties of metal and plastic are well known to any material scientist. Metal (unless specifically designed for use as a spring) deforms elastically under more slowly applied forces and more permanently under rapidly applied forces. When a load is applied and maintained over time, deformation is not a function of time. Polymers, on the other hand, tend to deform permanently under more slowly applied forces, and more elastically under rapidly applied forces. When a force is maintained over a period of time, inelastic deformation will be a function of time.

A recoil impulse is applied rapidly, and ends rapidly.

If solvents are a concern, use of polymers with a heavier molecular weight and cross linking the polymers will solve the problem.

Since we are looking at items other than pistol frames, consider the current use of polymer in military helmets.

[Ian111]

This is a topic I've researched as best I could on the internet. Various chemical engineers with different backgrounds have weighed in on various gun boards and they all seem to say polymer frames used by Glock should at the very least outlast you. Basically what I got from them and FWIW....... The "plastic" or at least the type of nylon polymer Glock uses is not the same plastic used in most common items like a plastic fork or the dashboard of your car. To make that comparison would be like comparing the steel utensils in your kitchen to steel used for firearms. They are different animals. (Even modern plastic dashboards are much more heat/UV resistant than dashboards from the 1970/1980's.) The polymer used by Glock is a high tech polymer with UV stabilizers and "secret ingredients" which seem to be a trade secret. Modern polymers are not affected by extreme heat, cold, moisture and most harsh chemicals. The true enemy of polymer is UV light and slow "gassing off" which eventually will cause the polymer to break down and become brittle over time, a very long time. Theoretically any danger of weakening of the structural integrity will not happen at the very least for hundreds of years (some engineers claim thousands but I'll say hundreds) from either constant exposure to UV and "gassing off". Of course no one can actually prove this since these modern polymers haven't actually been around like the 92 year old steel 1911. If you're the kind of person who won't feel satisfied until they can actually hold and shoot a 92 year old Glock, you'll have to wait at least 70 years or so.

[jh9]

I understood the subject of discussion to be frames, not springs.

The different deformation properties of metal and plastic are well known to any material scientist. Metal (unless specifically designed for use as a spring) deforms elastically under more slowly applied forces and more permanently under rapidly applied forces. When a load is applied and maintained over time, deformation is not a function of time. Polymers, on the other hand, tend to deform permanently under more slowly applied forces, and more elastically under rapidly applied forces. When a force is maintained over a period of time, inelastic deformation will be a function of time.

A recoil impulse is applied rapidly, and ends rapidly.

If solvents are a concern, use of polymers with a heavier molecular weight and cross linking the polymers will solve the problem.

Since we are looking at items other than pistol frames, consider the current use of polymer in military helmets.

Frames, springs, swords or bows. Your original statement was simplified to the point of inaccuracy. Much like someone saying "steel or alloy."

But this is largely tangential, as I'm not arguing the viability of polymer frames. I'm merely questioning their longevity over time periods which haven't yet been tested. As the next poster mentioned, the frame material should almost certainly remain viable for as long as a steel framed pistol. Without observation data, though, "should be" isn't as close to "is" as perhaps some people would like.

[300WM]

These polymers (and carbon fibers) have taken the place of metals in the most extremes of motor racing, avionics, and the space shuttle due to strength, weight, and the ability to produce. These polymers are not going get brittle or fade. They are synthetic, not plastic. They are put through more stringent and accelerated tests than the common man can even think of, which includes me. To find out how long a polymer frame would last, you would have to be Methusalah.