I've been shooting and carrying a first generation Glock 17 since 1988. The pistol has 30,000+ rounds through it. The slide has lost a lot of it's finish due to holster wear and the frame has a fair amount of wear as well but overall it looks pretty good and mechanically sound for it's age.

The condition of ANY gun that's been carried and used for that amount of time is going to be rough. Some of the wear on steel framed guns that have been daily carried is remarkable to say the least but they still function.

V.

 

All metal guns were doing just fine, LONG before the plastic craze. I havent seen one polymer gun that could function without metal, however. I'll stick with steel and aluminum.

 

This subject intrigues me. The general consensus across the board is that aluminum will be the first one to fail. And I don't disagree necessarily...but there are a lot of factors involved.
The type of alloyed aluminum used in popular handguns, including P226 and 92FS pistols, is 7075 aircraft grade and type III hard anodized. The anodizing and the alloying of other metals definitely changes the dynamics.

It seems that 1911s with aluminum frames aren't going to hold up as well as guns designed to be made out of aluminum like the Sig & Beretta. I have exchanged messages with an armorer of Sig Sauers who tell me they have seen P226 pistols exceed 100,000 rounds of +P ammunition with the frame still being in good shape, but the pistol would fire out of battery due to other worn parts and failed inspection.

The venerable Glock is the benchmark for durability and it's made out of polymer. Nobody can deny polymer's strength, BUT for practical purposes, Glocks do eventually fail and while many have exceeded 100,000 + rounds of firing, the same can be said with aluminum framed guns.

Steel is another material where durability seems almost guaranteed, but I don't think it's true across the board. Look at the HiPower; an all-steel gun that does not stand up to hot ammunition and had to be cast instead of forged to ensure durability with the .40 round. It seems that the alloy p226 holds up better than the steel hipower in this regard.

Then again, accounts of the 92FS running forever are rampant, but then the 96FS, same gun in .40, seems to be comparatively weaker. This might be attributed to Beretta failing to design the thing to take .40 from the getgo.

Beretta has recently begun to supply newer alloy-framed pistols with a recoil buffer.

I understand that 99.999% of gun owners will never take their guns to the limit of using up their frame's service life, and that even if they did, the cost would allow them to purchase many new pistols, but it's still interesting to discuss which material will fail first, and why.

Also worth mentioning that the Mossberg 500/90 series of shotgun is considered very robust, but has an aluminum alloy receiver whereas the 870 has a milled steel one. The parts that lock up on the Mossberg are all steel though, allowing for similar levels of durability. I wonder if that's true for alloy pistols? The only thing is that the alloy pistols have alloy frame rails incorporated into the one-piece frame and cannot be replaced.

 

Stainless Steel will out last....

 

Interesting thread. arclight610, please elaborate more upon your theory of thermal degradation. Thanks.

Break out a book on Materials Science & Engineering from your local public library. It ain't a new thang, this thermal/UV degradation of plastics.

 

There are steel guns that are like 500-years-old...

 

Stainless Steel will out last....

That would depend on the stainless.

 

There are steel guns that are like 500-years-old...

Very true

 

When you factor in the cost of ammunition it would take to "wear out" any of these type of guns, it far exceeds even a whole departments cost of outfitting their officers with the guns. So the point is, is that it really doesn't matter which would last longer. They all last WAY longer than they even need to.

 

Not thrilled with our issue Glocks holding up. Various points on the frame have gotten worn on guns with higher than normal shooting schedules tht we have had malfunctions with them. Pin holes get loose too.

Let me get this straight; you know actual LEOs that shoot their issued GLOCK pistols so much that they malfunction from worn frames, and that "pin holes get loose"?

This is one of those "pics or it didn't happen" moments.

 

Not thrilled with our issue Glocks holding up. Various points on the frame have gotten worn on guns with higher than normal shooting schedules tht we have had malfunctions with them. Pin holes get loose too. I think it might have to do with .40 Glocks being designed from 9mm guns and Gaston not putting too many changes into them. Browning added a third locking lug, made the slide thick, and went to a cast frame that is a stronger frame than the original design. HK started their USP series as .40 first.

I tend to look at Glocks as disposable guns to be honest. Which is fine because they are cheap at least for LE. I don't know if they are worth retail price at non LE pricing. Or just don't get bent if your gun doesn't last as long as you would like.

I agree. I'm not sure you can wear a steel-framed CZ75 out with decent care.

 

Let me get this straight; you know actual LEOs that shoot their issued GLOCK pistols so much that they malfunction from worn frames, and that "pin holes get loose"?

This is one of those "pics or it didn't happen" moments.

If they were earlier-generation .40 cals, I wouldn't be surprised. Haven't heard of this issue with newer guns, though.

 

Stainless Steel will out last....

SS is very susceptible to galling if inadequately lubed or any time you have SS to SS moving contact. I seriously doubt if SS will outlast polymer in real use.

 

Not thrilled with our issue Glocks holding up. Various points on the frame have gotten worn on guns with higher than normal shooting schedules tht we have had malfunctions with them. Pin holes get loose too. I think it might have to do with .40 Glocks being designed from 9mm guns and Gaston not putting too many changes into them. Browning added a third locking lug, made the slide thick, and went to a cast frame that is a stronger frame than the original design. HK started their USP series as .40 first.

I tend to look at Glocks as disposable guns to be honest. Which is fine because they are cheap at least for LE. I don't know if they are worth retail price at non LE pricing. Or just don't get bent if your gun doesn't last as long as you would like.

I absolutely agree. The Glock is designed as a disposable gun. It's a great design, and it could easily be transformed into a much more robust product, but longevity is not part of the Glock program.

 

My guess is that for a similar design with the same cartridge that an aluminum frame would be the first to fail. My other guess is that one would spend many times the cost of the gun in ammunition to cause any of the types of frames to fail.

I think you're right, except that I have seen aluminum crack pretty quickly, but possibly mainly due to bad design. All the engineering books say that aluminum develops eventual metal fatigue issues steel does not have at low loads, (with enough repetition of that load).

Though I've never tested the idea to know for sure, I strongly suspect that plastic - the right kinds - would do best at resisting wear inside holes where the metal pins get driven in and out lots of times for cleaning & disassembly, because plastics like Nylon (pronounced Glock Polymer here on GT) can actually stretch a little bit instead of wearing off some of the surface each time the pins are moved - as eventually happens with holes in a metal frame.

 

Change out your (steel :supergrin recoil spring with some regularity and your family can compete with the gun for generations.

As for me, I'll take steel.

 

I absolutely agree. The Glock is designed as a disposable gun. It's a great design, and it could easily be transformed into a much more robust product, but longevity is not part of the Glock program.

Tell that to Chuck Taylor (the man, not the shoe), or just about every serious competitive shooter not using a 1911.

 

The Glock is not a disposable gun - they have held up impeccably to high round counts.

Aluminum by textbook definition has a relatively short service life but the guns that use it are often anodized and alloyed with other metals, which complicates things, no?

 

The Glock is not a disposable gun - they have held up impeccably to high round counts.

Aluminum by textbook definition has a relatively short service life but the guns that use it are often anodized and alloyed with other metals, which complicates things, no?

Aluminum is no different than steel. There are so many grades and quality of treatments to make a blanket statement. Aircraft probably flex aluminum more than any other application and you know how long some commercial aircraft have been in the air. I do consider Glocks(and many other poly guns) to be disposable in nature. That does not negate their usefulness that comes from their light weight; corrosion resistance; and simple design. I've seen several examples of CZ75 steel frame guns that came from the elite Israeli black-op training schools. They were shot hundreds of rounds a day for 25yrs and other than putting new springs in them they had no issues. They got lube on a regular basis but were run hard.

 

I read an article not long ago on explosive welding as it pertains to firearms. Blast hard enough and you can weld aluminum to steel. Expensive as all get-out, but an interesting concept to have an aluminum grip and lower frame with all of the contact points being steel.

:dunno:

 

SS is very susceptible to galling if inadequately lubed or any time you have SS to SS moving contact. I seriously doubt if SS will outlast polymer in real use.

All things being equal, which would last longer in real world use:

A 3rd gen S&W or same vintage Glock?

 

If you go by wear on the slide and frame the polymer frame and steel slide would last longer. I read once that aluminum on steel would wear the steel faster. So a gun with aluminum frame and steel would wear faster than a steel frame and steel slide. Polymer on steel would wear the least. So a polymer frame and steel slide would last longer.

 

Has anybody ever heard of a Ruger P89 with an aluminum frame being worn out? What does Ruger do to those things? Cast aluminum frame, robust as any gun.

 

Has anybody ever heard of a Ruger P89 with an aluminum frame being worn out? What does Ruger do to those things? Cast aluminum frame, robust as any gun.

Exactly. Aluminum can be made as tough as anything. The key to aluminum with a steel frame is keeping them lubed correctly. If one is not inclined to keep their gun lubed:shocked: it may be best if they purchased a polymer gun.

 

The CZ P-01 has an aluminum frame and carbon steel slide.

Service life: (pulled off the CZ NATO approval test page)
The service life requirement from the Czech police was 15,000 rounds of +P ammo!
The pistol will exceed 30,000 rounds with ball 9mm.

I would say, not to bad for an aluminum frame gun.

full wright up here:
http://www.cz-usa.com/press-releases/102/