Steel actually stronger then polymer?

M

mini15

Regular
Rating - 100%
11   0   0
Location
Toronto, ON
This is mostly aimed at modern auto pistols.

Seems every manufacturer that makes a polymer gun says that it is constructed out of "### High grade polymer" which is "30-100% stronger then steel by weight".


I don't know if this is common knowledge but it just hit me. BY WEIGHT

A 40oz all steel gun is probably around 30oz of STEEL. A 24oz (Using my unloaded G17 on a scale for example) is probably 10-12oz polymer minus the slide.

While I did stop taking math at tenth grade logic would tell me that even if the polymer was stronger then steel by 70+ % (very unlikely) the steel gun still has more then double the steel so it's stronger... Right?


At the end of the day it seems trivial because either options are more then adequate to deal with whatever caliber they are chambered in so why not go with the lighter option... HOWEVER I'm talking odd ball situations like double/triple loaded bad reloads.

So is steel technically stronger then polymer when used in modern autoloaders? Is it something one should care about and look into as an advantage?
 
Last edited:
Aren't you the guy that took out your firing pin safety on your Glock?

Steel, and plastic have different properties, Plastic flexes, while steel doesn't this changes a lot in the recoil properties.
 
I've probably seen more damaged steel/aluminum guns than I have polymer guns. Part of that is simply because there's a lot more metal out there, but it doesn't change the fact that anything will break eventually.

Each has their own merits. I wouldn't hesitate to use a polymer frame gun like a Glock. The pressure containing parts are still steel.

Colt41 has a nice thread about his adventures in trying to make an all-polymer 3D printed rifle, that is where you start seeing "weakness" in polymer, as you need barrels that are several times thicker than normal and still crack in only a few rounds.

img00129_20101226_1008-tfb.jpg


exploding%20marlin.jpg
 
Dumantepe said:
Aren't you the guy that took out your firing pin safety on your Glock?

Steel, and plastic have different properties, Plastic flexes, while steel doesn't this changes a lot in the recoil properties.
Click to expand...

Just talking strength not anything else.

And yea I'm that guy. I did a run at the range without it, nothing catastrophic happened but the advantage of running without it wasn't enough to outweigh the liability so I put it back in.

And no ####, of course steel guns blow up all the time.

I'm just saying if you ran really bad ammo or did something else that produced inconceivable stresses on the gun, which would likely fail first.
 
mini15 said:
This is mostly aimed at modern auto pistols.

When I was having sights installed on my G17, a Glock armorer that works for a Canadian distributor that procures Glocks for many LEO departments showed me a Glock that was cracked in half after the shooter put a bad reloads through it. It was pretty scary to see. I feel like if it was an all steel gun that might not have happened.
Click to expand...

Wrong. Bad ammunition can destroy ANY gun.





 
illumined said:
This I'd love to see...

Shall we assign probabilities for winning and losing such a bet?
Click to expand...

I'd hate to see this turn into some 1911 vs Glock pissing contest.

I'm talking about the physical properties of STEEL vs Polymer and at the end of the day which is simply stronger.

FAQMAT said:
Wrong. Bad ammunition can destroy ANY gun.
Click to expand...

Of course, but if you had two identical guns, one made of steel and the other of polymer, which would be strongest?
 
what are you trying to prove asking such a scientific question on a forum? you will get what you have gotten this far, lots of biased information because that is how it goes, you have people that swear by either or.

Last IDPA match, this old guy was bragging all morning how he had loaded 45 with rifle primers, because the 1911 is SO STRONG that the firing pin can hit anything and this and that. 1 hour later he was on his way home with a bleeding hand and a destroyed gun...

So who cares which ones is stronger. Both are proven designs and they exist for different reasons, and purposes that might have to do with the time in history they were developed or with the purpose to serve. This question will prove nothing and no one has the right answer because both go BANG every time. If you want to see numbers, you will find that polymer is more durable and it seems to hold up better when thousands of rounds are fired. Wanna see numbers? google GLOCK endurance test, HK p30 endurance test and you will see. No metal gun has reached those numbers yet.
Now, if you put your metal gun in the over it will not melt.
so there is that.
If you want a shooter, go polymer. If you want something to pass down to grandchildren a metal gun is your best bet.
 
new age marketing? you mean, the last 30+ years of proven reliability of some polymer guns?

I think you are trolling. I am out.
 
mini15 said:
This is mostly aimed at modern auto pistols.

Seems every manufacturer that makes a polymer gun says that it is constructed out of "### High grade polymer" which is "30-100% stronger then steel by weight".


I don't know if this is common knowledge but it just hit me. BY WEIGHT

A 40oz all steel gun is probably around 30oz of STEEL. A 24oz (Using my unloaded G17 on a scale for example) is probably 10-12oz polymer minus the slide.

While I did stop taking math at tenth grade logic would tell me that even if the polymer was stronger then steel by 70+ % (very unlikely) the steel gun still has more then double the steel so it's stronger... Right?


At the end of the day it seems trivial because either options are more then adequate to deal with whatever caliber they are chambered in so why not go with the lighter option... HOWEVER I'm talking odd ball situations like double/triple loaded bad reloads.

So is steel technically stronger then polymer when used in modern autoloaders? Is it something one should care about and look into as an advantage?
Click to expand...

mini15 said:
I'd hate to see this turn into some 1911 vs Glock pissing contest.

I'm talking about the physical properties of STEEL vs Polymer and at the end of the day which is simply stronger.



Of course, but if you had two identical guns, one made of steel and the other of polymer, which would be strongest?
Click to expand...

Was your own question not answered by yourself in your first post?
 
I've already made a rough calculation, unless someone can dismiss it, which I'm very well open too. It would seem that ON PAPER steel is stronger then polymer. Unless somebody wants to debunk that, we should be on that page.

redddogg69 said:
Was your own question not answered by yourself in your first post?
Click to expand...

So if you had two identical guns one plastic one steel the steel one would be stronger. What I am asking here is the relevance of this added strength in regards to unconventional issues such as double reloads, etc...


Some people have some serious problem, I'm here criticizing and trying to find flaws in the very product I own. Some people can't even look at this objectively without getting their panties in a bunch.
 
mini15 said:
This is mostly aimed at modern auto pistols.

Seems every manufacturer that makes a polymer gun says that it is constructed out of "### High grade polymer" which is "30-100% stronger then steel by weight".


I don't know if this is common knowledge but it just hit me. BY WEIGHT

A 40oz all steel gun is probably around 30oz of STEEL. A 24oz (Using my unloaded G17 on a scale for example) is probably 10-12oz polymer minus the slide.

While I did stop taking math at tenth grade logic would tell me that even if the polymer was stronger then steel by 70+ % (very unlikely) the steel gun still has more then double the steel so it's stronger... Right?


At the end of the day it seems trivial because either options are more then adequate to deal with whatever caliber they are chambered in so why not go with the lighter option... HOWEVER I'm talking odd ball situations like double/triple loaded bad reloads.

So is steel technically stronger then polymer when used in modern autoloaders? Is it something one should care about and look into as an advantage?
Click to expand...

mini15 said:
I've already made a rough calculation, unless someone can dismiss it, which I'm very well open too. It would seem that ON PAPER steel is stronger then polymer. Unless somebody wants to debunk that, we should be on that page.



So if you had two identical guns one plastic one steel the steel one would be stronger. What I am asking here is the relevance of this added strength in regards to unconventional issues such as double reloads, etc...


Some people have some serious problem, I'm here criticizing and trying to find flaws in the very product I own. Some people can't even look at this objectively without getting their panties in a bunch.
Click to expand...

Your looking at the details wrong, yes the steel gun weighs more than the polymer one, however if the polymer gun was made to the same weight or vice versa, the polymer gun would be 30-100% stronger. The use of polymer allows you to make a lighter gun while still retaining most of the strength of a steel gun.
 
As for double loads, both firearms have metal slides and barrels. So both would react the same in that respect. If your worried about being able to rebuild a blown up gun on the existing frame don't, it would be cheaper to just buy a whole new gun.
 
The objective criteria for the "strength" of a material is the examination of its "yield" or "ultimate" strength.

The yield strength of steel used in firearms (say 4140) is 415 MPa (655 MPa Ultimate)
The yield strength of polymer used in firearms is 45 MPa (75MPa Ultimate)

Therefore: steel is stronger than polymer.

The question should be: is the plastic polymer strong enough for a frame? The answer is "yes." (For a barrel, not so much...)
 
redddogg69 said:
Your looking at the details wrong, yes the steel gun weighs more than the polymer one, however if the polymer gun was made to the same weight or vice versa, the polymer gun would be 30-100% stronger. The use of polymer allows you to make a lighter gun while still retaining most of the strength of a steel gun.
Click to expand...

That's the thing though. Polymer still takes up the same amount of space as steel plus or minus a bit. So a 40oz polymer copy of a 40oz steel gun could be north of 60% larger in overall volume.

In that situation the weight would be the same, the strength would be higher but the gun would be ridiculously larger and couldn't be used conventionally. Especially talking handguns.


So it would seem that there is a strength advantage (with a weight downside) to using all metal construction in handguns.
 
1riot1ranger said:
The objective criteria for the "strength" of a material is the examination of its "yield" or "ultimate" strength.

The yield strength of steel used in firearms (say 4140) is 415 MPa (655 MPa Ultimate)
The yield strength of polymer used in firearms is 45 MPa (75MPa Ultimate)

Therefore: steel is stronger than polymer.

The question should be: is the plastic polymer strong enough for a frame? The answer is "yes." (For a barrel, not so much...)
Click to expand...

Not exactly true. http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=2307&page=109
Two objects of the exact same weight, one steel and one polymer the polymer will be stronger (both will have different physical dimensions and volumes). Your comparing two objects of different weights but similar volumes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom