Most Abusable handgun

TDC said:
That would be 1000 rounds rapid in a single session.

TDC
Click to expand...

I've done this or been present in this scenario with the Glock 22 .40S&W (my own), HK USP 9mm, M&P 9mm, Sig 229 9mm, CZ 75 9mm, Beretta 92, Beretta 96, Taurus PT92 (my own), numerous 1911s including 9mm (my own) .40 and .45 from various manufacturers.

I'm not of the opinon that the 1911 is the most abuse friendly but this may be the pistols I have experience with in which case none have been extraordinarily reliable and only the stainless models had finishes worth writing home about. Also, I'm starting to realize that people are attempting to refute the Glock for the sake of talking s**t about the brand. I'm not a fan boy of Glock, in fact it is the pistol I enjoy shooting the least out of the firearms I own. I've also not been super impressed with HKs although they are nice and reliable but I find they don't live up to their reputation. Beretta and Taurus are not dependable but Glock and Sig never cease to astound me. They hold up really well and perform extraordinarly well hot, neglected and dirty.

Tim.
 
My Sig P229 has about 40,000 rounds through it.

The main spring has been changed twice.
I've had a broken firing pin.
The spring that forces the slide catch down has been replaced.

Every firearm will need occasional parts replacement and minor repair - this is fairly typical - but is still a positive testament to the durability of Sigs. This is no safe queen either, over the last 15 years it has been taken apart with the parts thrown in sand and sand kicked over them, reassembled and shot. Its had trees growing out of it (tongue in cheek) and been in multiple rainshowers. It has been dropped, it has been shot with snow plugging the barrel at -30 or colder. Many either cases of minor abuse.

As I've said earlier, most of the top five firearms are probably capable of this routine abuse (routine for me anyway) but a solid vote of confidence goes to the Sig for me.
 
timothydgordon said:
I've done this or been present in this scenario with the Glock 22 .40S&W (my own), HK USP 9mm, M&P 9mm, Sig 229 9mm, CZ 75 9mm, Beretta 92, Beretta 96, Taurus PT92 (my own), numerous 1911s including 9mm (my own) .40 and .45 from various manufacturers.

I'm not of the opinon that the 1911 is the most abuse friendly but this may be the pistols I have experience with in which case none have been extraordinarily reliable and only the stainless models had finishes worth writing home about. Also, I'm starting to realize that people are attempting to refute the Glock for the sake of talking s**t about the brand. I'm not a fan boy of Glock, in fact it is the pistol I enjoy shooting the least out of the firearms I own. I've also not been super impressed with HKs although they are nice and reliable but I find they don't live up to their reputation. Beretta and Taurus are not dependable but Glock and Sig never cease to astound me. They hold up really well and perform extraordinarly well hot, neglected and dirty.

Tim.
Click to expand...

In my experience I would agree. I quite like SIG pistols.

TDC
 
Clobbersauras said:
I believe the name of the thread is the "Most Abusable Handgun", is it not?;)

Look - range guns IMO are a pretty good measure of overall firearm quality and durability. They get used and abused. If one brand or design consistently outlasts another brand or design then I think that's the best evidence for durability of any post in this thread.

Redleg is offering his opinion based on his findings of guns used extensively on his range. How can anyone claim to have better usable data? Other than their "my gun is best because I read it on the internet" opinions.

I'll take hard data over opinion any day. TDC's dedication to Kool Aid is admirable and Glocks are good handguns, just no the best....:D
Click to expand...

Based on that line of reasoning then we shouldn't buy handguns because they all break. My point is, as was Redlegs, that all guns will have parts break in them eventually. If you don't maintain them or treat them prperly they will break sonner. Range use is an indication but not the definitive test. If you drop a new gun and the sight breaks is it's failure rate now worse than one that last 1,000 rounds and breaks an extractor? Truth be told virtually every popular gun made today will provide excellent service under normal use. If you have plans on burying your gun in sand for a year, then dropping it out of a helicopter by all means only by a Glock. If you don't plan on doing that your options open up.

The Ruger revolver is indeed built like a tank but you bury a revolver in sand and it is likely the cylinder won't rotate. I doubt Steve David is about to sell his Ruger off because he can't bury the gun in sand and still rely on it to shoot immediately.

In short kind of a dumb queston posed don't you think.

Take Care

Bob
 
Beretta M9/ FS 92....... just ask the military.


Also as an honourable mention . I bought the wife a 1911 for mother's day a few years ago. The previouse owner (friend of mine) had modified the front site (he does that) probably the reason it was falling off. The gun is a Caspian frame and a Colt top end (.45acp), when I gave the gun to a gunsmith friend to put on newer style sites during the work he noticed something and got curious. After checking all the markings and such he dated the guns top end as being new in 1917. It still shoots fantastic and although I've just bought a barrell for it it's mainly cause it's shinier and was too good a deal to turn down, my logic being that it might even shoot better.

M.
 
Ice-Pick said:
Beretta M9/ FS 92....... just ask the military.


Also as an honourable mention . I bought the wife a 1911 for mother's day a few years ago. The previouse owner (friend of mine) had modified the front site (he does that) probably the reason it was falling off. The gun is a Caspian frame and a Colt top end (.45acp), when I gave the gun to a gunsmith friend to put on newer style sites during the work he noticed something and got curious. After checking all the markings and such he dated the guns top end as being new in 1917. It still shoots fantastic and although I've just bought a barrell for it it's mainly cause it's shinier and was too good a deal to turn down, my logic being that it might even shoot better.

M.
Click to expand...

Yeah the 92's are great for abusing. Just watch.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeAE9MdcbNU
 
BKP99 said:
Redleg's observation on a steel 1911 being most durable is interesting.

Patrick Sweeney, gunsmith and gun writer has written about how durable a 1911 really can be, he's also tested a Wilson CQB over 30K rounds with very minimal wear.
Click to expand...

Not to nitpick, but in Sweeney's book on the Glock, he admits the 1911 wouldn't survive the torture tests of the Glock and he's definitely biased toward the 1911.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom