[wambli_7]

What are the pro and cons to stainless vs. blued? Getting ready to get a ruger revolver and trying to decide which one is better blued or stainless?

[MountainBear]

determine its use. If you're just going to take it out and shoot it then bring it home and clean it, blued is just fine. If your going to carry it in a hot or wet environment for extended periods of time (i.e. hunting, hiking, etc.) then spring for the stainless...

[Jackal]

There is no disadvantage to stainless, other than its higher price. For most folks, it comes down to aesthetics. Some people love blue, some love shiny.

[Leadhead]

Unless you don't like the look of stainless or want to save a few bucks...I'd get the stainless.
The front of the cylinder will get blackend if you don't scrub it down well after shooting... but I don't worry about a little soot on the cylinder of my stainless guns.
If you plan on using the gun the stainless will look better when you pass it on to your kids!

[Zebraranger]

Stainless will definitely hold up better. Bluing is a little more suseptable to rust and pitting, not a problem if kept oiled, especially if use is mostly outdoors and will also eventually show holster and wear marks.

[Jim March]

Blue is just a BIT stronger, even when we're talking about Rugers.

If you're going to reload near the ragged edge, or are the type that might consider a caliber conversion "out near the edge", blue may be for you.

For example: my NewVaq in 357 is blue (well, that and "fake case" but it's the same for our purposes). It's possible to re-chamber a NewVaq as a 41Magnum or the somewhat related 356GNR (41Mag case necked down to .357). Either is "pushing the envelope" somewhat. As I'm considering these, esp. 356GNR in a second cylinder, I'm glad my gun is blue.

The difference used to be greater...'70s-era S&W stainless guns had issues. Ruger's stainless metallurgy of that period was better than S&W.

[TBT]

The stainless is more durable, especially if neglected. IMHO for the most part if you take good care of your guns either finish is good though. Me, I'm presonally not a shinny guy and would rather blued over stainless. That's just an aesthetic preference though on my part. In the case of most new revolvers from Smith and Wesson blue isn't much of an option any more. They are all pretty much stainless. I would love nothing more than a 619 in black. Actually, I'm thinking about picking up one of those in the near future and having it refinished in black T or something.

[wambli_7]

thank you... just checking... I put my cylinders in a glass with pure vinigar for an hour and then use a tooth brush.. the vinigar is great for cleaning burnt marks on stainless... used to be a cook. I bought a used stainless 44 mag ruger and the ejector rod came off... it was glued on... I got lucky the gun shop would take it back. so I was wondering before I bought it new wether or not I should invest in the stainless.. I like the look, but did not know if it was as tough on wear as blue.. but I don't like the wear marks from a holster on the blue ones...

[TBT]

Wear marks on blue is "all character and class" lol.

[jad0110]

Wear marks on blue is "all character and class" lol.

Yeah, I agree. Except both my blued guns are pretty much flawless. I'd like to add a "working" blued gun one day with some character.

Ruger's blueing is not as deep and lustrous as that found on a classic Colt or S&W. It's not really what I'd call "blue". But it is attractive in its own utilitarian way, nonetheless, and appears to be quite durable. Either would be fine, blueing just needs to be wiped with a silicone or oil impregnated rag more often.

I prefer blue myself, but stainless is nice too.