just,.... as in 4 years ago
and its a stainless steel barrel and cylinder. and steel internals
Steel actually stronger then polymer?
- Thread starter mini15
- Start date
just,.... as in 4 years ago
and its a stainless steel barrel and cylinder. and steel internals
r34skyline
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
For starters it's mil spec not mill spec. Mil spec is short for military specification.
Secondly 1911s are #### compared to any modern rivals from any objective point of view be it les baer or norinco, get over it. 1911s are now owned for the most part for their beauty and the immense amount of customization that can be done with them. There will be the few that will try and argue that the 1911 still holds a place in a practical role, and being in a mostly free country they have every right to be wrong.
I would take a twigmaster over norinco. Again why don't you point to one documented test where the norinco performed on par with anything other than utter garbage like NEA DPMS or any of that lot of substandard no name rifles. You can get a colt for less than 1500 same with dd, and I'm talking new, and a spikes or bcm you can get from 1100-1400. Palmetto State Armory also puts out good ars for 900, STAG makes decent AR for less than 1500, NOT 2K+. A smith & wesson M&P 15 is roughly the same price as the norc, and I am willing to bet you the price of a new M&P that it would outperform the norc in any hard test. And you said in your previous post that "Norinco is crap you need (insert X $2000 brand gun) yet tests by people using micrometers find that Norinco guns have superior tolerances then some "Murcian" gun manufactures." and now you are saying of course it does not compare, which is it? You said that you were debunking status quo or something, when in reality, you were providing a fair amount of entertainment for the rest of us.
I generally don't post on threads like this but really man you need to re-educate yourself, and till then not spread misinformation everywhere.
Last edited:
Does he ever!
Reading his posts is a lot of fun though. It's almost like listening to a baby trying to talk, lots of random noises but absolutely nothing that makes any sense at all.
lol, you have clearly never seen or handled a Norinco or Springfield 1911 IRL!This thread is hillarious
Human bones are 6 times stronger than steel by weight, but you know how light they are...it's kind of the same thing. Personaly I'd bet on steel unless I want something light. Heavier weight helps for recoil too.
I didnt read this whole thread. I don't understand why people have to get so personal about a simply question.
As I read it, the OP is asking that, if you took 2 rounds... both exactly the same calibre, load, bullet etc and they BOTH went bang at the wrong time, which gun would suffer the least amount of damage. I think scientifically you'd have to accept the all metal gun is LESS likely to explode into tiny bits than the polymer gun. Even the pictures posted thus far have shown that many of the metal guns (most are 1911's) tend to crack or blow out a small piece of metal (still dangerous, not arguing that at all) whereas the polymer guns seem to really blow the frame apart.
Now, many of you are on rampages about "durability". That was not at all what the OP was asking. I don't know or care whats more durable, a 1911 or a Glock. Doesnt matter to me and I wont argue it either way. But, in terms of failure damage resistance, what would you rather be holding when it goes boom... a Glock 21 or a 1911? I know id take the 1911 for sure. Not because its a better gun, longer lasting, ###ier, more accurate, more "durable" or whatever many of you get all up tight about. My reasoning, in this instance alone, would be simply due to the fact that my hand is wrapped around steel... not plastic. When the explosion exits out the bottom of the grip all thats likely to come apart are the grip panels. But, in the case of a polymer gun, the entire frame could come apart...
I think that addresses what the OP is asking... maybe I'm wrong, at least I TRIED to answer his actual question.
As I read it, the OP is asking that, if you took 2 rounds... both exactly the same calibre, load, bullet etc and they BOTH went bang at the wrong time, which gun would suffer the least amount of damage. I think scientifically you'd have to accept the all metal gun is LESS likely to explode into tiny bits than the polymer gun. Even the pictures posted thus far have shown that many of the metal guns (most are 1911's) tend to crack or blow out a small piece of metal (still dangerous, not arguing that at all) whereas the polymer guns seem to really blow the frame apart.
Now, many of you are on rampages about "durability". That was not at all what the OP was asking. I don't know or care whats more durable, a 1911 or a Glock. Doesnt matter to me and I wont argue it either way. But, in terms of failure damage resistance, what would you rather be holding when it goes boom... a Glock 21 or a 1911? I know id take the 1911 for sure. Not because its a better gun, longer lasting, ###ier, more accurate, more "durable" or whatever many of you get all up tight about. My reasoning, in this instance alone, would be simply due to the fact that my hand is wrapped around steel... not plastic. When the explosion exits out the bottom of the grip all thats likely to come apart are the grip panels. But, in the case of a polymer gun, the entire frame could come apart...
I think that addresses what the OP is asking... maybe I'm wrong, at least I TRIED to answer his actual question.
When things explode, they usually tend to explode through the weakest link/point/area. In the case of a polymer frame, the frame would be the weakest, so they tend to fracture badly.
I am no expert, but I think that if you hand me both 'explosion ready' and you say 'as soon as you pull the trigger they will explode', I would choose a plastic frame, the explosion has more places to go whereas in the metal frame it will be uncertain, because whatever path the explosion takes, will have to be the weakest with the weakest being in most cases your GRIP (the only plastic portion of a metal gun) blowing you hand/fingers/palm off.
In the cases metal part blow off, I think the chances of a piece of metal going through safety glasses are higher than plastic through plastic?
Perhaps we should search for some youtube videos?
I am no expert, but I think that if you hand me both 'explosion ready' and you say 'as soon as you pull the trigger they will explode', I would choose a plastic frame, the explosion has more places to go whereas in the metal frame it will be uncertain, because whatever path the explosion takes, will have to be the weakest with the weakest being in most cases your GRIP (the only plastic portion of a metal gun) blowing you hand/fingers/palm off.
In the cases metal part blow off, I think the chances of a piece of metal going through safety glasses are higher than plastic through plastic?
Perhaps we should search for some youtube videos?
BattleRife
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- of No Fixed Address
As someone with a degree in materials sciences this thread hurts to read.
I don't know if I read it wrong, but it seems to me that the question was not especially vague. It was actually quite concise:
The answer is not just yes, it's hell yes. By about a factor of 10. And it doesn't matter if you are using it in a pistol or an axe handle or a child's toy, steel is always stronger than any plastic.
To everyone who made statements about human bones and polymers and whatever else being stronger than steel, give your heads a shake. Steel is the strongest metallic solid, and only ceramics are stronger. And possibly spider webs.
It might help some of you to understand that the definition of "strength" is the capacity to bear load per area of cross-section. Weight or mass of the solid is not a factor in determining strength.
I don't know if I read it wrong, but it seems to me that the question was not especially vague. It was actually quite concise:
The answer is not just yes, it's hell yes. By about a factor of 10. And it doesn't matter if you are using it in a pistol or an axe handle or a child's toy, steel is always stronger than any plastic.
To everyone who made statements about human bones and polymers and whatever else being stronger than steel, give your heads a shake. Steel is the strongest metallic solid, and only ceramics are stronger. And possibly spider webs.
It might help some of you to understand that the definition of "strength" is the capacity to bear load per area of cross-section. Weight or mass of the solid is not a factor in determining strength.
r34skyline
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Composites are non metallic solids. I thought the yield strength of carbon fiber was higher per square inch than any metal? At least at room temperature that is. Correct me if I am wrong.
