Handguns - Plastic or Steel?

[Combloc]

Steel

 

[AlpineDude67]

I bought a couple of modern, "high capacity" polymer pistols before October 1.

They are the state of the art - they work reliably, they are easy to clean, you can put an amazing number of rounds down range quickly while still maintaining accuracy. That is why one of those modern, polymer wonders is sitting in the pistol safe under the bed, ready for action. If you have to actually defend yourself with a pistol, it is hard to argue against them.

But when I am going to the range and just want to enjoy the act of shooting, heavy steel gets the nod. Weight is good if you don't have to carry it. It just feels right in a way the plastic guns don't.

 

[Marauder]

I don't own any plastic guns.

 

[clarkcondor]

for most in this great state it's all range so why polymer?

 

[DD55]

Both, but if I had to choose one or the other I say plastic

 

[Bob A]

Personal preference is for steel, blued.

I can understand the appeal of stainless, and of plastic. For reasons I don't understand, I really dislike nickel plating. (Probably has something to do with how shabby they look after 80-90 yrs).

 

[dreadpirate]

I like both. I have a Glock 21 that I love, but I also have various 9mm semi's that are all old school steel. I say, don't choose, just get both!!

 

[python]

I've got my only and last 2 plastic guns for sale in the for sale section. a Glock 30 and a Kahr PM45. Both are excellent guns, but I've never been able to warm up to them. The Glock is one of the softest shooting .45's I've ever owned and the Kahr is an excellent pocket .45, but neither one is for me.

 

[smores]

Well, currently I have:

- 3 steel 1911s (steel aside from grips)
- 3 GLOCK pistols
- a Beretta 92G-SD thing and a S&W 442 which are aluminum & steel...

None of these guns have fallen apart. Guess which ones I shoot the best, and are also the ones I'd throw down a flight of steps without blinking and still trust?

 

[WheelHead]

Thank everyone for keeping it civilized.
I'm not saying anything negative about guns that aren't all steel or metal of some kind. I just wanted to see what the general pistol shooters felt. I have owned a few but no longer have them. Maybe it was just an ergonomics thing. The ones I have tried so fare just felt odd and I felt did not point well in my hand. Before the Oct 1 crunch I was in the major dilemma about pistol purchases. I has picked a few some of them poly and some steel. I ultimately decided and the metal ones I had picked. I still feel I could add a poly to the collection but I need to try a lot of others before I can make that decision.
I guess at some time i will have to get my HQL....

 

[samcolt45]

If our great state on MD would allow me to carry a pistol around all day it would be a plastic compact one. For one to last me for my lifetime it would be a full size steel one. They are both great guns, they just have dirrerent advantages.

 

[OrbitalEllipses]

Each has their benefit.

I can see why for carry one would want a polymer framed, high-capacity pistol. It's lighter for less fatigue when carrying, less exertion when actually unholstering it, and you get more rounds when you really need them.

I will say plainly that as a new shooter I simply shoot better with a steel framed pistol like the 1911 vs. something like a modern plastic semi (Glock, M&P). Were I in a free state, I don't think I'd be carrying a steel framed pistol; I'm not a particularly large fellow and a shoulder injury limits my ability to use a steel framed pistol for very long.

At the end of the day I think steel framed pistols ooze class (most, anyway) and there's reassurance in their heft. The polymer framed pistols are going to be more customize-able by the end user for less than a steel framed pistol.

 

[NickZac]

My favorites are the USP/P30 and the 226/229. So I like both. Users may take a liking to one over the other for various reasons, but these reasons are generally more along the line of personal preference than physical ranking that can be used to definitively say one is factually better.

 

[Armadillofz1]

I bought a couple of modern, "high capacity" polymer pistols before October 1.

They are the state of the art - they work reliably, they are easy to clean, you can put an amazing number of rounds down range quickly while still maintaining accuracy. That is why one of those modern, polymer wonders is sitting in the pistol safe under the bed, ready for action. If you have to actually defend yourself with a pistol, it is hard to argue against them.

But when I am going to the range and just want to enjoy the act of shooting, heavy steel gets the nod. Weight is good if you don't have to carry it. It just feels right in a way the plastic guns don't.

http://youtu.be/lX0MB7pJtKs

 

[Augie]

Much prefer steel and wood,no plastic if possible although 2 of my milsurp pistols have plastic grips.

 

[Jambone]

I find that steel guns are much more comfortable to shoot, probably because of the mass over polymer guns. I think that if I could carry, I would take a polymer pistol just for the weight savings and ignore how comfortable they are to shoot. Although, there are some light weight metal pistols that are just awesome too, e.g. feather weight S&W .375s.

 

[Magnumite]

Cool thread.

Metal, especially steel, for me. They track better shooting fast in same caliber pistols, and dampen sight movement some. Had and have polymer and it is not my favorite. This M&P shoots well but it not like a steel or aluminum pistol.

Carrying a steel 1911 would not be a problem here.

 

[rcorrelli]

+1 for plastic

 

[Goose Guy]

Carry gun- plastic

Fungun- steel

This. Each one has its purpose. Steel is better and much more durable to time, IMO, but it's hard to beat a plastic carry gun. Less worry about sweat related issues and far lighter.

 

[AssMan]

I like big revolvers, so steel. But I have plastic guns too.