Firearms Talk banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
21 - 40 of 42 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
160 Posts
Yes we are aware. Plastic is stronger than 4140 carbon steel. :confused::D
Pretending to be stupid does not support any cause.

PLASTIC IS in fact "stronger" than steel when it comes to the stress characteristics of polymer frames versus steel.

GLOCKS long ago demonstrated a total round count well above that of any STEEL framed 1911. Only dweebs continue to ignore the obvious.

A pistol frame that FLEXES during recoil has PROVEN to be superior to one that does not...regardless of "steel."

Whether YOU like it or not, Underwood and Buffalo Bore BOTH load ammo specific to "1911 pattern" 10mm pistols...at a LOWER performance point! Their full-house loads are perfectly suitable for use in GLOCK handguns...does this tell you you anything? If not, check your learning curve!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,534 Posts
Here we go make your point with personal attacks rather than facts. When we build highway bridges with plastic supports and bull dozer blade from plastic maybe.
Why are Glocks still using steel barrels and chambers ? The chamber and forcing cones in the 10 MM must with stand pressures exceeding 37,000 PSI. Who would buy a 10 MM with a barrel similar to a drink straw?:D
Why are polymer framed revolvers fitted with steel cylinders and barrels? :confused:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,534 Posts
Show me where polycarb Izoid testing is higher than carbon steel or Air Craft aluminum? Impact testing is used to determine the sheet thickness needed to with stand out side impact or internal pressures
In order for plastics/Polycarb to with stand a sea gull hitting an aircraft would require a very Hugh and heavy fuselage? The cylinder for a 500 S&W would be the size of a gallon bucket.:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,456 Posts
Show me where polycarb Izoid testing is higher than carbon steel or Air Craft aluminum? Impact testing is used to determine the sheet thickness needed to with stand out side impact or internal pressures
In order for plastics/Polycarb to with stand a sea gull hitting an aircraft would require a very Hugh and heavy fuselage? The cylinder for a 500 S&W would be the size of a gallon bucket.:D
The cockpit canopy of the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor jet fighter is made from a piece of high optical quality polycarbonate,
 

Attachments

·
Administrator
Joined
·
34,617 Posts
Allright, stop the fighting and insults.

I say again and again, it is Alright to have a difference of opinions
Discuss, do not insult and be rude. If someone is driving you crazy, ignore them. These people are not in your 'real life'. When I think someone here is saying crazy things, I just shrug and leave the thread. It takes two people to argue. Walk away.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stalkingbear

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,837 Posts
Here we go make your point with personal attacks rather than facts. When we build highway bridges with plastic supports and bull dozer blade from plastic maybe.
Why are Glocks still using steel barrels and chambers ? The chamber and forcing cones in the 10 MM must with stand pressures exceeding 37,000 PSI. Who would buy a 10 MM with a barrel similar to a drink straw?:D
Why are polymer framed revolvers fitted with steel cylinders and barrels? :confused:
My guess would be thermal and friction. The actual life time of a steel barrel is measured in seconds. As far as bridges go they built a lot of them out of wood. Cannons used to be made from brass.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,226 Posts
There is such a thing as graphene infused plastics that are many times stronger than known steel alloys will ever be, but these are also still laboratory materials and no cost-effective methods for mass manufacture are known as of yet.

If anyone is interested in how such a thing is possible, here's some light reading from NASA, circa 1970:

Infinite Periodic Minimal Surfaces Without Self-Intersections

It's also true that there are some types of high grade and very costly plastics that are stronger than certain grades of steel. This does not mean that their mechanical properties make the them suitable replacements for metal alloys in all cases. Some of those high grade plastics can now be found in the jet engines of airliners and they cost significantly more than the lightweight metal alloys they replaced. Anything built to fly will fly better when it's lighter. The less it weighs, the less fuel it consumes, and so the cost is justifiable in that specific use case.

Herr Glock still uses steel alloys in his barrels because flow-formed Cobalt alloy gun barrels are exceptionally expensive and wouldn't improve barrel life at all. Those Cobalt-based alloys are great at operating at elevated temperatures without loss of structural integrity, but barrel erosion at the throat and muzzle is similar to high grade ordnance steels.

Picatinny cobalt alloys show promise for sustained firepower

A Cobalt alloy machine gun barrel might cost $2K to $3K (estimated of course, given mass manufacture of the expected quantity). The old M240B with the steel alloy receiver costs $6.6K. The new M240L with the Titanium alloy receiver costs $9.2K. For all that added cost, the weight of the M240L is 5.3 pounds less than the M240B. For another $2K to $3K, you eliminate the weight of the spare barrel from the machine gunner's kit. The M240's steel barrel only weighs 6.6 pounds, and the Cobalt alloys are marginally lighter than 4150, but that spare barrel bag weighs 12.9 pounds with the spare barrel. A 13 pound weigh savings is significant, whereas the minor difference in actual barrel weight is not.

The TA648MGO / SU-260 (TA648MGO + RMR) adds another 2.6 pounds to the weight of the weapon and costs another $4K. Some foreward thinking individual thought that a $13K machine gun could really use a SureFire suppressor and PEQ-15 for target designation. The can and laser target designator add another 2.3 pounds to the weapon and cost another $4K between them.

The Space Shuttle door gunner edition of the M240L with the super expensive Cobalt alloy barrel and all the latest and greatest gadgets weighs almost exactly the same as the stock M240B and the new "ready to run" weapon will cost about $20K. You can see how every attempt to create a new "super weapon" has serious cost issues associated with it.

It also occurs to me that using modern Lithium-ion battery technology, a 7.62mm chain gun could weigh 20 pounds ready to run. Fixed barrel with simple part geometry, no recoil or gas operating system to fiddle with or the associated weight, straight in and out of the chamber feeding, the bolt can be very light, adjustable cyclic rate, and electric motors run for years on end with no real issues. It'd probably be half the cost of a M240 and chain guns are already more reliable than the M240 will ever be. I'd enlist the expertise of electric chain saw manufacturers. Conceivably, a hybrid super capacitor / battery weapon could enable MG42 cyclic rate burst fire with slower continuous fire. The battery could serve as a power source for optics like Trijicon's CCAS or NV and thermal products using electrified plastic Picatinny rails. I can see the right optics, a built-in stabilization gyro, and appropriate ammunition enabling shoot-downs of small drones and light utility aircraft within 1km or so, although that'd be another example of the ever-increasing cost of modern military weapons that I rail against. A weapon with that sort of technology could easily take over the DMR role, too, so one less specialty weapon in an infantry squad. This might actually be a fun project to tinker with.

If 3D printed Graphene infused plastics were available in mass quantities, then there's an argument to be made for using plastic barrels to reduce machining time and complexity, thus cost.

The most cost-effective thing the US military could possibly do to reduce the burden on individual soldiers would be making ammunition and body armor lighter. Making a 7.62mm caliber machine gun lighter than 20 pounds is a good way to make the weapon uncontrollable, given the typical high cyclic rates. To that end, the US Army is now testing graphene infused plastics for body armor.

Aluminum and steel cased ammo was in the inventory at least as far back as the Viet Nam War. The Al-alloy based casings don't transfer heat away from the gun as effectively as brass, so that was a bit of a problem for steel barreled machine guns. If Cobalt alloy machine gun barrels were in common use, that wouldn't be as much of a problem as it is with steel alloys.

In the end, far too much time and money has been expended trying to create weapons with divergent requirements. The result has been constantly-increasing cost of firearms and ammunition. Still, .44 Magnum from a 1911 or a Glock 21 is pretty cool and I hope everything works according to plan for the OP.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,456 Posts
There is such a thing as graphene infused plastics that are many times stronger than known steel alloys will ever be, but these are also still laboratory materials and no cost-effective methods for mass manufacture are known as of yet.

If anyone is interested in how such a thing is possible, here's some light reading from NASA, circa 1970:

Infinite Periodic Minimal Surfaces Without Self-Intersections

It's also true that there are some types of high grade and very costly plastics that are stronger than certain grades of steel. This does not mean that their mechanical properties make the them suitable replacements for metal alloys in all cases. Some of those high grade plastics can now be found in the jet engines of airliners and they cost significantly more than the lightweight metal alloys they replaced. Anything built to fly will fly better when it's lighter. The less it weighs, the less fuel it consumes, and so the cost is justifiable in that specific use case.

Herr Glock still uses steel alloys in his barrels because flow-formed Cobalt alloy gun barrels are exceptionally expensive and wouldn't improve barrel life at all. Those Cobalt-based alloys are great at operating at elevated temperatures without loss of structural integrity, but barrel erosion at the throat and muzzle is similar to high grade ordnance steels.

Picatinny cobalt alloys show promise for sustained firepower

A Cobalt alloy machine gun barrel might cost $2K to $3K (estimated of course, given mass manufacture of the expected quantity). The old M240B with the steel alloy receiver costs $6.6K. The new M240L with the Titanium alloy receiver costs $9.2K. For all that added cost, the weight of the M240L is 5.3 pounds less than the M240B. For another $2K to $3K, you eliminate the weight of the spare barrel from the machine gunner's kit. The M240's steel barrel only weighs 6.6 pounds, and the Cobalt alloys are marginally lighter than 4150, but that spare barrel bag weighs 12.9 pounds with the spare barrel. A 13 pound weigh savings is significant, whereas the minor difference in actual barrel weight is not.

The TA648MGO / SU-260 (TA648MGO + RMR) adds another 2.6 pounds to the weight of the weapon and costs another $4K. Some foreward thinking individual thought that a $13K machine gun could really use a SureFire suppressor and PEQ-15 for target designation. The can and laser target designator add another 2.3 pounds to the weapon and cost another $4K between them.

The Space Shuttle door gunner edition of the M240L with the super expensive Cobalt alloy barrel and all the latest and greatest gadgets weighs almost exactly the same as the stock M240B and the new "ready to run" weapon will cost about $20K. You can see how every attempt to create a new "super weapon" has serious cost issues associated with it.

It also occurs to me that using modern Lithium-ion battery technology, a 7.62mm chain gun could weigh 20 pounds ready to run. Fixed barrel with simple part geometry, no recoil or gas operating system to fiddle with or the associated weight, straight in and out of the chamber feeding, the bolt can be very light, adjustable cyclic rate, and electric motors run for years on end with no real issues. It'd probably be half the cost of a M240 and chain guns are already more reliable than the M240 will ever be. I'd enlist the expertise of electric chain saw manufacturers. Conceivably, a hybrid super capacitor / battery weapon could enable MG42 cyclic rate burst fire with slower continuous fire. The battery could serve as a power source for optics like Trijicon's CCAS or NV and thermal products using electrified plastic Picatinny rails. I can see the right optics, a built-in stabilization gyro, and appropriate ammunition enabling shoot-downs of small drones and light utility aircraft within 1km or so, although that'd be another example of the ever-increasing cost of modern military weapons that I rail against. A weapon with that sort of technology could easily take over the DMR role, too, so one less specialty weapon in an infantry squad. This might actually be a fun project to tinker with.

If 3D printed Graphene infused plastics were available in mass quantities, then there's an argument to be made for using plastic barrels to reduce machining time and complexity, thus cost.

The most cost-effective thing the US military could possibly do to reduce the burden on individual soldiers would be making ammunition and body armor lighter. Making a 7.62mm caliber machine gun lighter than 20 pounds is a good way to make the weapon uncontrollable, given the typical high cyclic rates. To that end, the US Army is now testing graphene infused plastics for body armor.

Aluminum and steel cased ammo was in the inventory at least as far back as the Viet Nam War. The Al-alloy based casings don't transfer heat away from the gun as effectively as brass, so that was a bit of a problem for steel barreled machine guns. If Cobalt alloy machine gun barrels were in common use, that wouldn't be as much of a problem as it is with steel alloys.

In the end, far too much time and money has been expended trying to create weapons with divergent requirements. The result has been constantly-increasing cost of firearms and ammunition. Still, .44 Magnum from a 1911 or a Glock 21 is pretty cool and I hope everything works according to plan for the OP.
That or Carbon Nanotubes !.................
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
16,851 Posts
duh....this is FACTORY loaded ammo from a nearly SEVEN INCH barrel with a FULLY SUPPORTED chamber....there is no "unsupported" area over the feed ramp.

Again for the hard of reading...this is Underwood's FACTORY loaded ammo fired from a 6.61" barrel with LONG SLIDE.

Not only does it shoot perfectly fine, I have easily made strikes on steel plate out beyond 200 meters standing fire using the "iron" sights.

So, "yeah" I kind of DO "realize" EXACTLY what is coming out of the barrel since I ACTUALLY recorded it with my chronograph.

Hey, if you can't handle the gentle recoil of the .460 Rowland from a Long Slide Glock, don't hate on those who can.

This is a TYPICAL example of an armchair "expert" popping off when they have invested neither money nor time. I paid my money...built MY gun, and have shot it many, many, many times using FACTORY loaded ammo and the numbers I posted are factual. Not made up, not an arm-chair "opinion" as to what is "safe" without ever having held a pistol chambered in .460 Rowland.

How about you contact Underwood and ask THEM why their ammo is so hot?

If you do not own and have ZERO experience with the .460 Rowland, please move on to another topic where the OP does not have direct, first-hand experience with all aspects of the topic presented.
Actually the Lone Wolf barrel , I see a sweet Glock conversion ....! I've seen many Glock conversions 460 Rowland Lone Wolf barrel 22lbs recoil spring in the G 30 , G 21 and the G 20 . Long slide just gotta add sites .
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,837 Posts
Just discovered this thread. I have a G 20 and am satisfied........for now
Always that little caveat, "for now". Lasts as long as the next stop at the gun store or magazine rack. :eek:
 
  • Like
Reactions: ConfusedCaliber

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Do you have any pics of the 460 Rowland Glock? I'm chasing that kind of energy in high-cap with modern engineering also, and would really like to see your setup regarding slide/barrel length/compensator. There's no 6" slide by glock in .45, so I'd likely have to get a custom slide made or get an extra long compensator.
 
21 - 40 of 42 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top