PDA

View Full Version : Stainless Steel Handguns


Confederate
March 5, 2008, 05:53 PM
Stainless steel handguns aren't rust proof, but they certainly are rust resistant. And since the days of the beautiful "royal blue" of revolvers and autos are essentially gone, based, I'm told, on the fact that they're environmentally unfriendly, how many people prefer their guns now to be stainless steel, and why?

What are the down sides and benefits of using stainless?

Reflections: Early on, people said that stainless would reflect light in darkness and make their users targets. So in very subdued lighting I had my brother come down the stairs with a stainless handgun in the ready position in one hand and a blued handgun, also in the ready postion in the other. We tried various lighting differences and, as far as either of us could tell, there was not a significant difference. The man-sized silhouette coming down the stairs was many times more obvious than either handgun. And neither handgun stood out from the other in any significant way in our opinion.

Corrosion: Early Navy tests on the S&W Model 60, involving salt spray, showed that while stainless resisted corrosion much greater than regular blued steel, once corrosion did start, it tended to progresss much more rapidly to destruction than standard steel. Even so, it had to really be neglected! And it was exposed to salt spray, something most handguns will not be exposed to. Tip: To those who have posted that they have experienced stainless parts rusting, normally if problem parts are polished to mirror brightness, either by hand polishing (or by a Dremel) and a polishing cream like Semichrome, rusting will stop. The more matte a part is, the more likely it is to corrode. A mirror polish will resist by far the best.

Wear/Gas Cutting: Again, early concerns that stainless would not be able to stand up to the vigors of repeating shooting initially seemed to be well founded. Gauling problems existed between stainless steels of the same types and some of the early steels were too soft. There also were some early forcing cone cracks in some stainless guns, but eventually all those problems were worked out to the extent that the stainless steels eventually at least equalled and in many cases exceeded the performance of regular blued steel.

Actions: Despite all the hype, most of the time, the "grittiness" of stainless actions wasn't a real issue, execpt with the Colt Python, where the blue version was notably better. The Ruger's actions were stainless in both blued and stainless, and S&W used flash-chromed parts in their stainless revolvers. Once a stainless action was smoothed, either by a gunsmith or by use, it tended to remain smooth.

Stainless steels were always harder on the tooling than standard steels, and they lacked the richness of the royal blues offered by Colt and Smith. The bluing by Ruger was never really that great and, oddly, it's only been fairly recently that I've seen a lot of blued Ruger revolvers. All of the ones I saw in the late 70s and during the 80s were stainless.

Despite all the advantages of stainless, some people still like blued handguns. And some people with stainless handguns have had them hard chromed to reduce wear and increase smoothness.

What are your preferences?

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh198/jriler/SW645_1.jpg

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh198/jriler/RugerSS_2.jpg

FLA2760
March 5, 2008, 06:27 PM
I am partial to stainless and it makes sense here in the Florida climate.

Chester32141
March 5, 2008, 06:49 PM
Can't beat a good quality Stainless ... unless it's a great quality blue ...

steelyblue
March 5, 2008, 06:53 PM
I love stailnles. I just don't like the scratches!!!

P97
March 5, 2008, 07:01 PM
I'm partial to stainless because it requires less care. All new guns that I've bought in the last several years have been Stainless.

mpmarty
March 5, 2008, 07:12 PM
I'm nearly seventy years old, have had blued and parkerized weapons all my life and never have had a problem with rust or anything else. Stainless is OK, but I prefer blue. One can always take a blue steel pistol and have it polished and reblued to look as good as the old Colts and Smiths if that's what you want.

CWL
March 5, 2008, 07:16 PM
Unless it is a quality real "blue", I'd rather have my pistols coated with a modern finish. Stainless doesn't appeal to me but I understand the practicality and do have seveal guns in ss.

Hokkmike
March 5, 2008, 07:47 PM
I have had both. It really doesn't matter to me. Currently I have a blued and nickel pistol. I am more concerned about brand/model and caliber. Right now for me that is Beretta in .40 S&W.

Ala Dan
March 5, 2008, 08:02 PM
I'm an oldtimer myself; and therefore I concur with my friend Marty; as
nothing beats the luster of deep bluing or polished nickel, as found on the
old Smith's and Colt's~! :cool: ;) :D

Confederate
March 5, 2008, 08:03 PM
Well, mpmarty, there was a time I probably would have agreed with you. Probably still would in a dry climate if I could care for the gun from day 1, but I had a very good friend sell me a Beretta 70S .22LR for a mere $100. Wonderful gun, but it had a light surface rust that I could never quite rid myself of. It finally moved inside the trigger guard and though I tried an old leather rag and repeated applications of BreakFree, it always seemed to return when the CLP dried.

I finally sent the gun to have it hard chromed and can hardly wait to get it back. What a great little pistol it is. Too bad that Beretta only included one magazine with it and decided to make only extremely limited runs of extra ones, but that's another thread.

If I had a nice Smith & Wesson 17, 19, or 29 in the old blue, I'd make sure rust never got a foothold.

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh198/jriler/SW629_2b.jpg

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh198/jriler/RugerSS_1.jpg

sm
March 6, 2008, 12:03 AM
mpmarty,

I agree with your post.

I prefer blue

Among the best natural resource we have, are our elders.

*smile*

32winspl
March 6, 2008, 12:37 AM
I go with stainless nowadays (handguns). Something about my sweat or skin oil seems to disagree with blued finishes, which is a shame, as the prettiest pistol I ever owned was a 70 series Colt Gold Cup.

hanno
March 6, 2008, 01:27 AM
I like the looks of the old blued S&W revolvers but when I buy a handgun, I tend to buy stainless.

KodeFore
March 6, 2008, 01:29 AM
I Prefer stainless. Easier to care for. Actually I think think stainless looks better on revolvers more than for autos. Just me. I have a ss gp100 and taurus m63 the m63 has sat on the rack unfired for months and shows no sign of corrosion though i am sure to clean and oil any firearm after any significant use.

Feanaro
March 6, 2008, 04:33 AM
I don't have a problem keeping rust off my blued firearms. And if you want corrosion resistance, hard chrome and finishes like NP3 are the way to go.

Mac45
March 6, 2008, 01:12 PM
I like 'em both.
The only time it would make a big difference to me, would be if I was in a corrosive environment. Have a cousin in TX right on the coast. He tells me things can rust away pretty quick down there in the salt air.

WSUZJer
March 6, 2008, 02:54 PM
I like them. ;)

http://www.pnwzj.com/images/6hks.jpg

Confederate
March 6, 2008, 04:27 PM
Why is it, I wonder, that stainless steel has to be silvery all the way through? Doesn't it stand to reason that there would be a way for manufacturers to blacken a stainless gun through and through? (Or for that matter, make it any designer color they'd want?) Imagine having a beautiful blue revolver that you could buff and polish and that it would be the same color throughout all the metal? No rings in cylinders. Dings could just be polished out. No cold blues. Better yet, one could have a gold colored gun, or a deep bronze. It would be great.

Lucky Strike
March 6, 2008, 05:14 PM
I prefer the look of a blued gun but like the easier care of a stainless.

I've only got 3 handguns but i have one blued (single six), one stainless (Gp100) and one modern rustproof finish (XD). Single six looks the best IMO

12many
March 6, 2008, 05:24 PM
depends on the gun for me but I don't use them hard. Range use mostly.

Walther ppk/S I like in SS, but the Sig P232 I like in black/blued.

32winspl
March 8, 2008, 01:19 AM
wsujer, I just gotta ask. What's the difference between all those guns? Looks like the left half has a hook in the trigger guard, and the right side doesn't. I'm not making fun of you. What is the difference please.

birdbustr
March 8, 2008, 01:26 AM
Stainless for me also. Pistols: Model 66 4" barrel, H&K .40cal Compact, Bersa .380 Duel Tone, Rem Sendero SF, Rem LVSF.

The Wiry Irishman
March 9, 2008, 11:57 PM
wsujer, I just gotta ask. What's the difference between all those guns? Looks like the left half has a hook in the trigger guard, and the right side doesn't. I'm not making fun of you. What is the difference please.

The ones on the left are USP compacts, ones on the right are plain old USPs. If you have a decent monitor and you get close enough to the screen, you can make out the writing on the slides.

BigGunsMoreFun
March 10, 2008, 01:03 AM
I never cared much for blued guns or nickel plated ones. They just don't hold up well in humid climates especially if you live near the ocean. Unless of course you're one of them guys that sits around and polishes his guns daily.

Don't get me wrong, I like the look of the blued finish if done properly. I've never cared for nickel plate on anything. If I lived in a dry climate, I'd have more blued guns.

For me I'll take a good parkerized finish or the satin finish stainless steel over blue or nickel anyday. They last longer, look better and require less care in the good old South Florida climate.

My 2 cents. I'm sure everyone has their preference.

Joe
:o

WSUZJer
March 10, 2008, 03:03 PM
wsuzjer, I just gotta ask. What's the difference between all those guns? Looks like the left half has a hook in the trigger guard, and the right side doesn't. I'm not making fun of you. What is the difference please.

Left side is USP compacts, right side is USPs. One each in 9mm, .40, and .45.

MachIVshooter
March 11, 2008, 12:00 AM
Depends largely on the gun. For lever and bolt rifles, I prefer wood and blue steel. For most auto pistols, stainless appeals to my tastes. Revolvers are a mixed bag; I like my Stainless M65, and also my blue & wood M19. Same with 1911's.

I guess it just depends on my mood the day I'm buying the gun.

Guitargod1985
March 11, 2008, 01:41 AM
I am partial to stainless and it makes sense here in the Florida climate.


Same here. It's tough in Florida. When I move out west after school I'm going to have a crap load of blued guns.

Kind of Blued
March 11, 2008, 01:57 AM
It depends completely on the "mojo" of the gun.

S&W Model 29 - I much prefer blued.
S&W Model 36 - Much prefer nickel.

When it comes to 1911s, I prefer stainless, but the prettiest 1911 I ever saw was a polished blued gun.

Lever-action rifles MUST be blued & walnut.

Usually I like them both, so I just make it a point to own one of each before I die.