What are the pro's and cons of each for handgun frames.

Is the weight difference that much.

Concerning 1911's I know most manuf offer both.  Is this just a marketing ploy or are the aluminum frames just as durable.

Anyone own the same make and model in both materials.  What do you think.

Modern aluminum seems to be almost as strong as steel. Look at Beretta's frames, it was their steel slides that were breaking on their 92s.

S&W has been doing alloy frames for years & now do them in .357 & .44mag, hardly 9mm recoil.

Remember: there's no free lunch, what you lose in carry weight comes back around in felt recoil when you shoot it.

You can put Sig in there to. Even the P226 in 357 Sig has an aluminium frame.

I've had a 3rd generation S&W .40 with an alloy frame for about 10 years, and Bob's right about felt recoil. It kicks harder than a .45 but it's not unmanageable.

A pefect example would be my 5903 Vs. my 5906.
Same gun, one aluminum frame, one in Stainless steel.
The aluminum framed 5903 does recoil a bit more but not so much to matter that much.
The 5906 is more rock solid when firing but is noticably heavier.
I think it's 37.5 oz. in SS compared to 28 oz. in aluminum.
Depending on the design, aluminum can fare well under hard use.
To me, the 1911 frame in aluminum can't outlast its steel counterpart because the barrel link is attached to the slide stop through the aluminum hole in the frame...and that's where the "up & down" movement happens.
Egging or even cracking would show at that point.
Of course it don't happen overnight, don't panic.
P-38 frames made in aluminum failed until they added a steel reinforcement...and the feed ramp was pecked away by bullet tips upon chambering.
Ruger makes an all "plastic" frame and it holds up well and thats with no metal in the rails.