Bead-blasting a stainless revolver with a titanium cylinder?

[Preacherman]

I'm not sure whether to ask this question in Revolvers or Gunsmithing, so I'll post it here in Revolvers and put a link to it in Gunsmithing.

I've just bought a S&W 646 in .40 S&W caliber. Lovely gun, and nicely balanced. I'm planning on carrying it as part of my CCW rotation. Thanks to Marko Kloos for the picture of his 646 below:

I would prefer a bead-blasted matte finish to the bright stainless finish. However, the cylinder isn't stainless steel, but titanium, in a greyish color. Is it safe to bead-blast the cylinder also, or should this be removed from the gun and the stainless steel bead-blasted on its own? Has anyone had any experience with this process?

 

[sm]

I don't know if "safe" - FWIW my buddy removes the cylinder, bead blasts and re-installs. I'll make a point to ask him later today.

In my limited amount of working with Titanium...that is some weird stuff to work with. I was putting a emery finish on something, hard to explain, just works different.




HTH

 

[JNewell]

After reading the warnings about damage that you can do cleaning the Ti cylinders, I don't think I'd take a chance and bead blast it. Too little upside, too much downside.

Might call S&W on that, though.

 

[Old Fuff]

I wouldn't bead-blast the cylinder. The "gray look" is a finish treatment. If you wanted it could be returned to S&W for refinishing. As for the frame, bead-blasting it is O.K., but if any markings are lasered on rather then stamped you might want to mask them with tape.

If I had that particular gun I might call S&W and inquire if the cylinder could be replaced with a steel one. I am at a loss as to why they would put a Ti. cylinder on an L-frame with a full-underlug barrel.

 

[buzz_knox]

Thanks to Marko Kloos for the picture of his 646 below

Actually, that's my 646 now. Marko's chronic gun traderitis struck again.

 

[Tamara]

buzz_knox,

Oh, you have got to be kidding me!

He is never going to hear the end of this one.

 

[buzz_knox]

When he starts asking about holsters for a Walther P99 .40, you'll know why.

 

[Preacherman]

Fuff, I understand that in order to fit six .40 S&W caliber holes into a 686-size cylinder (the diameters are as near to identical as makes no difference), it was found that "normal" steel would not be thick enough to take the pressure. However, if the cylinder were made in titanium, it would be strong enough. That's why this model alone in the L-frames has a titanium cylinder.

 

[Tamara]

That's why this model alone in the L-frames has a titanium cylinder.

FWIW, the 242, 296, 386, and 396 are also Ti-cylindered L-frames.

 

[Preacherman]

Sorry, Tam - should have thought before posting, with an expert around!

I meant "Six-shot L-frames" - I think the 386 is a 7-shooter, no?

 

[sm]

I did get in contact with my gun buddy. He does NOT bead blast Ti, does not recommend either. Same warnings and advice as Old Fuff...and others.

Aside -

In regard to Marko's affliction...hadn't seen a pic of a Security Six...yet.

 

[WheelMan]

What are the warnings about Ti Cylinder cleaning? (What to avoid, what's okay, etc)

 

[Old Fuff]

Preacherman:

That could be true, but I’d be surprised if it was. The .357 Magnum has a case diameter of .379†– the .40 S&W is .427†– so, .427†- .379†= .048†– which if divided by 2 is .024â€.

The L-frame was designed as a beefed-up .357 Magnum and I don’t think enlarging the chambers by .050†(or .025†per side) would make that much difference. Extra space for rim clearance would be moot. We are after all looking at a .40 S&W, not a 10mm Auto.

Admittedly the Titanium cylinders are more elastic then steel ones, and in that sense, stronger. But look at both a .357 Magnum and .40 S&W cartridge and ask yourself,†shouldn’t there be room?

 

[Wildalaska]

Take the cylinder out, thats what we do, ya cant blast the TI cyls

WildsandyAlaska