Here is my objection to all of this. They're not going to polymer trigger groups because they're "better", or "stronger". Even though in some cases that my be true to some extent. They're doing it because, it's cheaper, period. They then turn around and try to qualify their misconception with these cute little, "destruction tests". When in fact they never changed the material or construction for that reason. It's a by product of it. Nothing more.
In the long run it's far cheaper to produce plastic components than metal. Die cast molds don't last as long as plastic injection molds do. They are also far more expensive to run. The die cast product usually requires more machining, deburring, and fitting than the same component cast in a precision plastic injection mold. There are fewer places in this country that manufacture die cast products today, because of environmental issues concerning the EPA. Die casting is either disappearing, or else production is being shifted to foreign countries.
I know the above to be true because I built die cast and plastic molds for over 35 years. The die cast mold industry is fast being reduced in this country. Cost is the reason why. I understand companies going to cheaper, more cost effective production methods. The problem is they never say that. They pawn off Aluminum, (i.e. recycled beer cans), as "Stronger Light Weight Space Age Alloy", and other such nonsense. Look at Ford's advertising of their new F-150. They claim the body is manufactured from, "Military Grade High Strength Aluminum". What exactly is the composition of.... "Military Grade High Strength Aluminum"? The fact is there is no such thing. The military uses most every grade of Aluminum that is currently being made, just as commercial applications do. Over 90% of that is recycled in some way, shape, or form. None of it is any stronger than any other form of Aluminum that's being sold under the same numerical composition.
They use these cute little word games to misinform the buying public. Today's consumers buy into it just like they do the whole "Plastic trigger guards are better" routine. We've seen this develop over the last several decades in the firearm industry. I'm not talking about Glock and H&K Polymer pistols, but rather the substitution of plastic over metal for most any kind of cost cutting measure they can get away with.
Just like most arms makers have gone from steel receiver guns to Aluminum. (The 870 and 1100 series of Remington shotguns being one of the few exceptions)...... So far. Many can no longer afford to make them out of steel any longer. This in spite of high speed machining centers, and coated carbide tooling that can be run at much higher surface speeds. Aluminum cuts like butter. Again they tell you it's because the "Lightweight Space Age Alloy" is stronger. The problem is that's not why they made the change. The current Browning Auto 5 is a perfect example. I bought a steel receiver Auto 5 back in the 90's, right before they discontinued them. The workmanship is superb. I paid $560.00 for it new in the box. They reintroduced it with an all Aluminum receiver a few years back, and now it retails for well over $1K. Browning advertises it as, "Not Your Fathers Auto 5!" Too bad, most wish it was.
Again, I understand the reason of them doing it. Just don't keep telling me the reason is "better", when in fact it's CHEAPER. Honesty and trustworthiness is fast disappearing in manufacturing today, just as it is in politics. I give you the "new" Remington 870, and Ruger 10/22 plastic trigger groups, and Hillary Clinton as 2 excellent examples. I don't like or want either. As always YMMV.
