Blackhawk Stainless or Blued?

Stainless isn't easier to clean.

It shows cylinder end burns far worse then blue.
It scratches way easier then blue from normal handling.
The actions are generally rougher feeling then blue.


It's only claim to fame is, it doesn't rust as easily.
But it can still corrode if you don't take care of it with occasional proper cleaning & lube..

And it is flashy like a new dime if you like that sort of thing.

rc

Stainless all the way dog.

Honestly, I'd just go with the one that "does it" for you most. I'm a blued revolver junkie, so that's what I'd go with, even if it didn't cost $80 less. Stainless is fine, but it just doesn't have the warmth and character of a blued gun, particularly if that blued revolver is sporting a nice set of wood stocks. But that's just me.

I too find blued finishes easier to clean most of the time.

My .357 Blackhawk was made in 1976. It still looks excellent. With proper care it will continue to look that way.



Colt Officers model made in 1930 also still looks good:

I went the blued route. Stainless just doesn't do it for me.

Both

I have and like both. I am a bit more partial to stainless.......some days?

It shows cylinder end burns far worse then blue.

Click to expand...

You can purchase gun wipes that will remove the stains rc was talking about. I've been satisfied with this one and I'm sure there are others that will also work.

Don't stress over which one to get. Just get both.

Seedtick

Try buffing light scratches out of bluing.

"The actions are generally rougher feeling then [sic] blue."

I have not heard this before, nor has it been my experience.

Is there something I am missing here?

gd

Try case colors on stainless

....Stainless....
I have both and prefer stainless
Blue will eventually show holster wear much worse.
My ejector rod shroud (aluminum) doesn't match the blue on the gun (steel).

I have had both and overall prefer the blued guns because the alloy grip frame and ejector rod housing make the guns lighter to carry and (for me) change the balance for the better. I think for a dedicated hunting gun and shooting heavy loads, the added weight of all steel would be a plus, but for general purposes, I like the blued better. Everything I just wrote goes double for the 357 version.

Stainless costs ~$80 more

Click to expand...

The stainless Blackhawk 357 is an all steel revolver. The blued is not. The aluminum on the blued models make it a much less expensive gun to produce. The gripframes on the blued Blackhawks I've owned never matched up well to the blued steel frame. I finally settled on a 1976 stainless model.

Now the blued flat top 357 and blued Bisley are all steel.

They both benefit from the same care. If you like a more worn used look go with blued, stainless takes a while to develop character.

a stainless .357 BH is a heavy gun...I'll say that.

The stainless Blackhawk 357 is an all steel revolver. The blued is not. The aluminum on the blued models make it a much less expensive gun to produce. The gripframes on the blued Blackhawks I've owned never matched up well to the blued steel frame. I finally settled on a 1976 stainless model.

Click to expand...

This is why I'd never own a blue one again. No matter how hard you try, you will eventually get scratches on the painted aluminum parts. They will never match the rest of the gun.

Rob47 asked

So in this case the blued blackhawk is actually not as strong as the stainless version?

Click to expand...

Both guns are equally strong as regards to shooting. The aluminum grip frame on the blued version is not a stressed part. The actual frame and the cylinder are steel on both versions. Only the grip frame and ejector rod housing are aluminum on the blued version. I suppose in terms of severe drop tests, the stainless grip frame is "stronger" but there is no difference in regards to shooting. There would be some difference in regards to recoil. I believe the original .44 Magnum Blackhawks had aluminum grip frames also and were strong enough but they were quickly changed over to steel to provide more recoil absorbing weight, not because the aluminum grip frame was not strong enough.

I've got aluminum wheels on my Wrangler and they work just fine.

As far as scratches go, I'm accumulating scratches and wear faster than my guns so I'm not going to worry about it.

I have both. My stainless is a 4 5/8" .45 Colt. My blued is a 6.5" Blackhawk. After 20 years, they both look good, but I don't carry either all that much except when outdoors or hunting with them. Both are supremely accurate and quite strong/powerful.

Blued is lighter due to the anodized aluminum grip frame, which will fad and look a little off color to the rest of the gun, and the aluminum ejector shroud. Stainless is all steel and a few insignificant ounces heavier. I prefer stainless, the look of it and the corrosion resistance of it, but it's not a biggy. I carry stainless guns AND blued. The blued just get all worn looking, but they still shoot straight and that's what counts.

I liked my stainless .45 so much I put stags on it (sanbar, the best) and had some quality engraving done. It still looks sharp and it's an outdoor working gun. I just wanted to personalize it a bit as I know I'd never trade or sell it, shoots too danged good.

Anyway, six of one, half dozen of the other. All these stainless haters are more than likely conservative in nature and purists. Stainless guns have been around for 40 years, but some refuse to acknowledge the material's strengths as it flies in the face of tradition to them. Well, now days, there's titanium and scandium and polymer and all sorts of irritants to the traditionalists. Me, I see the strengths in 'em all and won't close my mind to the possibilities of other materials of construction than blued steel. I'm sure if these traditionalists were born in 7000 BC and suddenly transported to the present, they'd probably prefer atlatls and stone spear points to a .460 Weatherby. There are lots of these types around and this sort of thinking has its place if you're buying a black powder gun for reenactments or something. If you just wanna look at the gun, choose what suits your eye. But, new materials have their place with working guns, depending on the job at hand. A single action revolver isn't a pocket gun, of course, but neither is it traditional. A Blackhawk is a modern firearm, not a '73 Colt clone. It has legitimate uses afield, not that the '73 Colt is useless, but I like the strength and accuracy of my blackhawks for hunting and hiking. IMHO, material of construction between blued and stainless is just a matter of personal tastes as either will work in the field. It ain't like the blued gun is going to corrode to dust while you're out on a week long backpacking trip or something. It's just a matter of personal taste. Feed your own desires, either will work for you.

BTW, Highpower, what are those grips? I bought a pair of grips very similar to that and out of the same type of wood at a gun show out of a box of assorted used stuff. I have no idea who made 'em, but they sure feel good to me. I kept 'em on my .357 for hunting. They don't really look right to a traditional eye, but they work.

Do the blued 44 mag Blackhawks use aluminum too?

Click to expand...

No. The very earliest ones did, but not for a long time since. Steel is more recoil-damping.

I like both. If you go blued, remember waxing your revolver with Johnson's paste wax or another non-abrasive wax works well.