Someone with metallurgy and manufacturing experience please weight in. Is one truly better than the other? If so, why and how much?

Seems almost an axiom among gun people that cast is bad, forged is good.

Modern castings that include inspection will be fine for the vast majority of pistols. Think about all those cast aluminum classic SIG and Beretta frames out there.

A good casting is good. A good forging is good. Either is well suited to the task.

Forged or billet is better than a casting, stronger and far less likely to have internal imperfections. Generally though, you're not really going to wear out a cast frame faster than a forged one.

Most 1911's you'll run in to have forged frames.

Are you looking to build one?

The cast vs. forged issue mattered more in the past, technology has made castings very reliable. This same issue runs across a variety of firearms, like M14 receivers where I was first remotely concerned in knowing the true differences.

As far as which is better, a forged frame would be in order for a custom or high end gun. Meanwhile, something that doesn't need or won't benefit from tight tolerances will do fine with a casting.

Considering that there is a lot of machining between either a casting or a forging and the finished product, they are difficult to tell apart by casual observation.

When it's said that forging is better and stronger etc., it's not by say, a factor of two or some huge difference. Both frames are strong, and will last a long time. The important part comes down to how precisely one can be machined.

I do have metallurgy and manufacturing experience, just not quite the type you meant .

What are you doing with/to a 1911 that caused you to be concerned about cast/forged?

The cast vs forged is something that just keeps coming up with 1911s especially. But also with other guns and parts , the emphasis is on “forged or machined from a dolid billet of steel”. You hear it so much, I wondered just how much was true and how true it was.

In evaluating some 1911s I own it can up over and over. I thought I’d do a reality check.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: SIGWolf,

Forged is generally stronger and a lot less likely to have imperfections (weak spot). Some cast can be just as strong, but there's a little more margin for error in getting a bad casting. Forged you can weld if something breaks or you screw something up building it, cast not so much.

As stated earlier, the issue of forged vs investment casting frames has pretty much died down, now the bogey man is MIM, metal injection molded firearm parts. Ruger made investment cast firearms acceptable. I presume their 1911 frames are investment cast. Investment castings are typically higher quality castings, lots of precision aerospace parts have been cast this way. Forging does typically impart improved strength and other metallurgical properties. Given proper metallurgy, investment cast alloys should be as weldable as a similar forged item.

One thing both investment casting and forging provide is forming to the near net shape prior to machining. That’s the reason AR receivers were forged as much as the other positives forging provided.

Freedom Arms revolvers, the strongest and most precision made production handguns in the country and possible the world... have investment cast frames.

What's the difference between forged and billet or do both of those terms mean the same thing?

Billet typically means bar or other stock shape or form, as opposed to the forging process partially forming the frame shape(as being discussed).

The advances in CNC machine tools have contributed to feasibility and availability of fully machined “billet” firearm components we see.

The only time I've read about real [to me] concerns in the 'cast vs forged' part discussion was with slides.

RIA used to cast their slide before something like 2009-ish. Then they went to forged for durability.

Caspian makes excellent cast frames, if I recall accurately. I know their slides are forged though. Ruger really leads the way with their castings.

The Ruger Super Blackhawk [and SUper Redhawk] have reputations as one of the most durable .44mag revolvers out there, due to their design and the metallurgy.

I love FA revolvers, but prefer Ruger prices.

As long as it isn't a barrel, or a breech block/bolt, I am ok with cast parts- if done right and machined/finished properly.

"Seems almost an axiom among gun people that cast is bad, forged is good." I would never say that.

It just not that simple having spent 39 years in the aerospace and defense industry as a machinist. Ive seen plenty of fucked up certified forgings. Especially through the late 1980s early 1990s. The dies do wear out over time is one example. There are other problems that can happen to forged steel parts such as the annealing process after forging on some parts can go wrong. By its very nature a forging induces stress to a part. Forging have a grain structure, investment cast parts do not. One needs to understand that metal and for that matter cutting tool technology is always changing and has generally gotten much better with each passing decade.

Did you know the orginal 1911 had a forged frame and slide but were not heat treated and had an expected service life of 5000 rounds. Part of that metal technology is always changing, I was talking about.

It was not until either just before WWII or at the start of WWII Colt started hardening the slide only in the area of the slide stop. Rest of the slide and frame still were not heat treated though WWII.

Today there are more than a few forged and investment casting 1911 that have gone over 80,000 rounds out there. One of the problems with investment castings is not every shop is good at it 100% of the time. People like Ruger and others do have it down good because of lots of experience and the processes down. Controlling the material temperature, locations of the poor gates on the molds and of course the alloy selection all being critical.

One thing that stands out with a good investment casting is that they are generally very stable dimensionally before and after machining and over time. A forging tends not to be generally.

What many people do not understand with metal is the processes during and after machining can greatly effect service life.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Jelly,

To give a little more background, although I've heard this over and over with regard to 1911s, I recently found out that Dan Wesson went from forged to cast frames on their flagship Patriot sometime before 2004 and before the CZ purchase.

CZ apparently continued to use cast frame to manufacture Dan Wesson 1911s until around 2009/2010 when all their frames going forward were then forged frames.

I have a DW RZ-10 (successor to the Razorback) dated April 2005 (shell casing) which also has a plastic MSH and I expect at least one MIM part. I also have a DW Classic CBOB which was likely after the CZ purchase as it has a CZ suffix to the serial number but not the current serial number pattern CZ/DW uses. I know it had some custom work done in 2008 but don't know when it was manufactured. Likely 2006 or so. Both of these are 10mm.

In light of the stainless Patriots being cast frames with some shortcuts in parts in early 2004, I started wondering about a couple of other 1911s I own, two other Patriots, both blued. Supposedly the first guns had forged frames, they were introduced in September of 2002 and one of mine is December of 2002. The other is September 2003 and I'm wondering now if the frame is cast. I assume you can cast carbon steel as well as stainless steel.

Although the whole cast vs forged has sort of died down, you still see "higher end" 1911 manufacturers boosting "forged" frames like it was something special and important speaking to the care and quality of their product.

Given that CZ/DW didn't go all forged until 2009/2010, I'm also wondering about a 2008 Valor I have. I had assumed it had a forged frame as it was the flagship of CZ/DW at the time, but now I'm not so sure.

Perhaps it doesn't matter, but it seems to speak, to some extent, to the quality of the gun.

DP

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Jelly,

Thanks for the insight.

Turns out the 2008 Valor has a forged frame for what it's worth.

quote:

One thing that stands out with a good investment casting is that they are generally very stable dimensionally before and after machining and over time. A forging tends not to be generally.

From a strictly novice point of view, how are steel billets made? I assume molten metal is poured into a mold of some sort. With the casing molten metal is poured into a mold. So, how are the two "pourings" different. You mention one having a grain and the other not.

It seems one is poured into a complex shape and the other into a simple shape, but both are poured into a mold? I see that the billet is poured and rolled perhaps over and over.

"A billet is a length of metal that has a round or square cross-section, with an area less than 36 in2 (230 cm2). Billets are created directly via continuous casting or extrusion or indirectly via hot rolling an ingot or bloom. ... In copper production, a billet is a 30' long, about 8" diameter, of pure copper."

Not a 1911, but the cast FN/Browning High Power frames were supposed to be stronger than the older forged type.

Bear in mind that FN went to cast frames for greater strength when they brought out the HP in .40.

While MIM is the current ersatz bogeyman, I remember when cast was uncultured and stamped was just plain awful. Got a lot of that stuff now... but not in a GOOD 1911.

quote:

Originally posted by Jim Watson:
Bear in mind that FN went to cast frames for greater strength when they brought out the HP in .40.

While MIM is the current ersatz bogeyman, I remember when cast was uncultured and stamped was just plain awful. Got a lot of that stuff now... but not in a GOOD 1911.

That stuff being MIM or cast and stamped? What is in a GOOD 1911?

quote:

Originally posted by Jim Watson:
Bear in mind that FN went to cast frames for greater strength when they brought out the HP in .40.

While MIM is the current ersatz bogeyman, I remember when cast was uncultured and stamped was just plain awful. Got a lot of that stuff now... but not in a GOOD 1911.

The cast frames have thicker metal in areas to beef them up and that is what makes them stronger in regards to the BHP. They are not stronger simply because they are cast instead of forged.

I had a MIM slide stop sheer off at 200 rounds in a new 1911 and don't trust the MIM stuff personally. But generally things are cast and MIM to save money over forged. The quality and consistency of castings has also gotten better over time as well though.