View Single Post
Old 11-07-2012, 09:15   #35
jbglock
Senior Member
 
jbglock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkfast View Post
As was mentioned, the intricate machining of high-grade aluminum is the main cost difference. The lockwork of the double action/decocker is a lot more intricate than the glock trigger design, too. I've also heard it said that traditional cut rifling like Sig barrels have is more expensive to cut than Glock's polygonal rifling. And it seems like there are more Sigs on dealer shelves wearing night sights than Glocks.
Have you ever run a CNC milling machine? It is actually pretty cheap to get set up to run aluminum frames vs. the mold required to do a polymer frame. Ongoing costs also favor CNC milling.

Traditional cut rifling (a broach) is more expensive than hammer forged polygonal rifling? You need to research that a bit more.

Even with both having night sights the cost of one vs. the other is more than can be accounted for unless you think of the economies of scale.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkfast View Post
Next thing you know you're 250.00-300.00 more than Glock. But if you drop 150.00 on an aftermarket Glock barrel so you can shoot lead bullets, and throw on a set of Trijicons for 100-ish, the gap starts to narrow quickly.
I spent years shooting lead through a 23 and 23C barrel and other than some extra cleaning never had a problem. Same for a Sig with lead bullets. No problems other than extra cleaning.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkfast View Post
It's so easy to tinker with and "upgrade" Glocks that it can be cheaper to buy a Sig!
Let's really think about that. If you leave your Sig stock and spend a ton upgrading a Sig then in the end the Sig will be cheaper? Did you really think about that before writing it? Lets say the Glock is left stock. Now what?

Last edited by jbglock; 11-07-2012 at 09:16..
jbglock is offline   Reply With Quote