Metal used in production of today's fireams question.

bluelynx

bluelynx

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Location
whereabouts unknown
I have been told that the metal required to produce today's firearms using the CNC process requires a softer block of steel. This softer block of steel is supposedly inferior to the old style of machining in the yesteryears. The result is that you create an inferior product.

Is the above statement true, or is this just another gun shop B.S. statement that is being sold to customers all over the world in magazines and other media?

I am sure we can dig up one or two experts on current steel production and processing that could direct myself and my fellow CGN members in the correct direction.

Help.
 
I'm no metallurgist but to me, it's obvious that the metal used today seem to be of lower quality than what yesteryear firearms were made of. Even "quality" brands seems to use what I call pot metal nowadays.
 
Any steel or stainless that could be machined in a conventional mill or lathe can also be machined in a cnc machine. The only reason i can see for using softer steel would be to keep cost down as the original material may be cheaper than a better alloy, and also machining cycle times could be improved by increasing speeds and feeds.
 
Learn a little about metallurgy and machining, and you will rapidly find that the folks that shared the wisdom in the OP, know pretty much nothing about that which they spoke so authoritatively.

Which is to say, you have been getting your information from one or more idiots.
 
We have stronger alloy steel and more precise manufacturing than ever.
Whether a cheap knock-off manufacturer uses the best available material and methods is the question.
Whether a buyer is willing to pay for best work rather than cheap is also in question.
 
bluelynx said:
Is the above statement true, or is this just another gun shop B.S. statement that is being sold to customers all over the world in magazines and other media?
Click to expand...

This statement pretty well covers it. While some inferior materials might be used in some cases, it is not being done to ease machining; it is being done to save material costs. If anything, machinery and tooling in use today is capable of working with harder and tougher material than in years past.
 
trevj said:
Learn a little about metallurgy and machining, and you will rapidly find that the folks that shared the wisdom in the OP, know pretty much nothing about that which they spoke so authoritatively.

Which is to say, you have been getting your information from one or more idiots.
Click to expand...

I too was thinking the same, but was unable to articulate so eloquently.
Rob
 
handofzeus said:
I bet my Norc frame and slide will be going strong when the cockroaches are ruling the earth! And no, when I say cockroaches I am not refering to the TURD-o clan! (This time)
Click to expand...

Not that such may be the case for some other guns, but you are correct about the Norinco (steel) pistols. With their hand-guns, they are among the very last manufactures to forge frames, slides and other components. People often comment on the "rough machining" some if this is due to the toughness of the steel. Other manufacturers are either using investment casting or machining from billets. Forging improves the quality of steel too; it compresses the grain, and reforms the orientation of the metal to the shape. They have been forging wrenches, sockets screwdrivers pliers, cutters scissors since almost the very beginning for just that reason.

A lot of manufacturers are now using investment casting (Ruger was the pioneer with guns), and that can be good or bad. Again, if the the metal alloys are good, they are sintered and reformed in a "forging" press, the quality can be almost as good as forged parts made of the same steel; finish is often better; machining costs are less.

Generally though, good gun manufacturers, to stay competitive, have found innovative processes to do so. If Norinco's cost of labor was comparable to ours, they would not be selling for $350.00; finished as they are, likely 500; polish them up before finishing, 700.
 
I'm gonna argue today's steels are better than ever. :) In the old days formulating and working metals was an inexact science that depended heavily on the experience of the person doing the formulating, we're way past that with modern technology. Take stainless, only practical for the last 50 years or so. Investment casting? Who would have thought of that, prior to WWll ?

Grizz
 
CNC is only the method of controlling the machine, hardness or toughness of the material makes no difference. Arguably steel alloys have progressed over the last 50-100 years and the ability of machines to utilize this as kept pace. Most manufacturers of almost anything today are constantly striving to lower production costs to make their products more competitive and most of their "improvements, updates, revisions, advances, new models, etc" are actually efforts to lower production costs, not to improve quality or function of the product. Lower the quality of materials and you cut material costs and may also lower machining costs by reducing machine time and wear as a bonus, and nickles count. This is the main reason for the trend to synthetics in pistol frames, rifle stocks and various other parts, it enables the firearm to be manufactured more economically, not because it's better, stronger, will last longer.
 
Ask your self this how many old guns can not shoot modern loads, without the risk of damage to the firearm or the shooter. Question answers itself.
 
well...I always go by the observable Evidence,...I had a Stainless 1911 & was very disappointed. It was Soft. It scratched very easy as well. I paid good money for it. !
 
trebor2880 said:
Except QC.
Click to expand...

Bull!

The maker's refusal to implement a proper QC program, is in no way a reflection on the availability of methods and accuracies which would make the manufacturers of yore, water at the mouth. If you were to spend any time wandering the halls at a manufacturing technology show, you would see amazing things done, at speeds beyond the capability of the human eye to follow, measuring parts accurately as they roll by in a blur.

That the folks running Marlin, etc., chose not to spend any money or manpower on the like of a QC program, is a reflection of the way they look at saving costs in their manufacturing, rather than that the stuff is not available.

lone ranger said:
well...I always go by the observable Evidence,...I had a Stainless 1911 & was very disappointed. It was Soft. It scratched very easy as well. I paid good money for it. !
Click to expand...

Did it rust? If not, then you have no reason to complain, as it then accomplished what was expected of Stainless.

Manufacturing is rife with trade-offs between material capabilities. Price, hardness, toughness, machineability, wear on machine tools, etc.

There is NO on magic material that does it all well.

The High Nickel, High Chromium content steels that encompass most of the so called stainless alloys, tend towards a softer state, and are usually a PITA to machine, compared to most of the 'normal' steels. The alloying components are expensive too. The stainless alloys that are heat treatable, which would give them that harder surface, are also generally even more costly, plus incur the added cost of the heat treatment process, so the makers (who are looking to sell for the least amount possible, in a competetive industry) are not keen to use those alloys.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom