Seriously Glock?

[FireInCairo]

dupe

 

[FireInCairo]

I think we just need to come to terms with the fact that the tennifer finish process was an excellent process and it's no longer available in Glocks. Springfields, which are made in Eastern Europe, however, are still using the tennifer process.

In the long run, even tennifer will wear off, though, so it's not perfect, just better.

 

[grampajack]

I think we just need to come to terms with the fact that the tennifer finish process was an excellent process and it's no longer available in Glocks. Springfields, which are made in Eastern Europe, however, are still using the tennifer process.

In the long run, even tennifer will wear off, though, so it's not perfect, just better.

Sad but true. As time goes on, it's almost certain that Tenifer will all but cease to exist, save for backwoods corners of the third world. The frustrating part is that I've never seen any evidence that it's really all that bad, yet the EPA seems to think it's on par with nuclear waste or something. I'm no environmental scientist, but my guess is it got banned just because it has cyanide in the name. In any case, it has that feeling of being more of a political decision than one based in reality.

 

[Warp]

How did you gleam that bit of info?
It still sucks!

I followed the timeline of you posts and followed your logic.

I would have posted the whole thing out to show you but I've gotten in trouble for being too detailed in my posts, it's easier and safer just to give you the bottom line.

 

[yugorpk]

I don't know where this comes from. Cyanide is ( still) a widely used industrial chemical and is still used in salt bath carbon nitriding (Tennifer/Melonite etc. TRADE NAMES ) . My first job out of college was as an engineer for American Cyanamide and we had no issues with cyanide processes.

 

[grampajack]

I don't know where this comes from. Cyanide is ( still) a widely used industrial chemical and is still used in salt bath carbon nitriding (Tennifer/Melonite etc. TRADE NAMES ) . My first job out of college was as an engineer for American Cyanamide and we had no issues with cyanide processes.

As far as I've heard, Tenifer isn't "technically" outlawed in the US, but the EPA has effectively made it cost prohibitive. I don't know about Austria, though. I remember the official line was that they switched to Melonite due to environmental regulations about Tenifer, but I have no idea if that was a voluntary decision or if the Austrian government made them do it. Considering that environmental laws are a global phenomenon I would put my money on the latter. Or for all I know, Austrian Glocks are still Tenifer and it's just the ones made here that are Melonite.

I'm also not certain if the cyanide alone was the problem. I may be imagining this, but I remember reading years ago that the issue with Tenifer was a byproduct of the process, so it may be more what happens to the chemicals during the treatment than the raw ingredients themselves. I'm almost positive that the disposal of the used up bath was the issue.

Are Tenifer and Melonite the exact same thing or are they different? Probably both are true at the same time. I agree that Tenifer and Melonite are apples to apples, but I suspect that one is a Fuji apple and one is a Red Delicious. Considering that Tenifer and Melonite are both registered trade names, I think there would have to be at least some difference for that to be the case, especially since Tenifer is patented. I'm not an expert on international patent laws, but I don't think Melonite could legally register a trade name for a product that's patented in the EU. As far as which is better, if either, I honestly don't know. Tenifer was a big selling point for Glock, so I suspect it's superior. On the other hand, people always want what they can't have, so the current allure of Tenifer might just be a consequence of not being able to get it. It's like Cuban cigars. Everyone is all crazy about them here in the US, but when I actually got to try one I couldn't figure out what all the hype was about.

Here's a quote from some industrial forum. Don't know who the guy is, but this is probably as close as we'll ever get to hearing it from the horse's mouth.

From what I understand - Tenifer can't be applied in the US because the EPA won't allow it.

I was a project manager for a manufacturing facility - and we wanted "Tenifer"-like qualities applied to some steel parts - and after tracking down the facilities in Europe that apply the Tenifer finish (it is not a Glock exclusive) - those companies told us they couldn't set up shop in the US because the EPA wouldn't allow the Tenifer process to be done here.

So - that would make the "Melonite" process different - as it can be done in the US. How different - I have no idea. More importantly - if there is any *practical* difference between the finishes? That is the $64,000 dollar question...that I don't know the answer to.

Here's the link to the whole thing: http://www.finishing.com/324/69.shtml

 

[Jim Watson]

The problem with all this dogmatic debate is that Tennifer, Melonite, (and Tufftride in some places) are trade names.
There are a variety of processes under each trade name. All of which are owned by the same parent company. All are nitride surface hardening processes, differing only in detail.

 

[grampajack]

The problem with all this dogmatic debate is that Tennifer, Melonite, (and Tufftride in some places) are trade names.
There are a variety of processes under each trade name. All of which are owned by the same parent company. All are nitride surface hardening processes, differing only in detail.

That's probably true, but small differences in a process can produce very big ones in the results. Fine details mean everything.

 

[dpadams6]

I think we just need to come to terms with the fact that the tennifer finish process was an excellent process and it's no longer available in Glocks. Springfields, which are made in Eastern Europe, however, are still using the tennifer process.

In the long run, even tennifer will wear off, though, so it's not perfect, just better.

Do you know of any other makes that use tennifer?

 

[Spats McGee]

I'm not FireInCairo, but I did notice that this model says it uses Tennifer.

 

[M-Cameron]

all this hubbub about the finish on Glocks.....but honestly, does anyone really care?.......

if your glock finish wears a bit, are you going to care?........its not like its a good looking pistol to begin with, its a hard use, no frills, duty gun.......its a tool........

do you guys complain when the finish wears off your wrenches and hammers?....

 

[Tirod]

First, complaining about using MIM parts on a gun that was designed from the ground up with a polymer frame to eliminate machining the frame out of metal whatsoever?

As for makers of MIM guns, I remember a reknown metal machining manufactory who bid a government contract for 1911's - and failed miserably at it. Singer AKA the sewing machine people. It's NOT the process, it's the experience level and QC necessary to make them right. And in direct contrast, another reknown metal manufactory had a huge success with the 1911 - Remington Rand, the typewriter people - who cheaply stamped out parts with as few machined ones as possible to get higher quality and reliability for their main product.

That directly relates to the whole Pre-64 Winchester debacle. Winchester was going broke producing junk parts on aging machinery that required hand fitting to even get a working gun out the door. Labor was eating profit and the Doom of Going Broke was haunting their hallways. They turned to STAMPED parts to survive, and it worked for more than 30 years. Had MIM existed they would have jumped in both feet. It makes a better part and it takes less gunsmithing to fit. The ultimate goal is drop in parts across the board for any years production. Not "handfitted" because the process won't even hold to blueprint.

Let's take the examination to another part - barrels. It's apparently not common knowledge the vast majority of barrels in American rifles and pistols are all cold hammer forged, and have been for some time. No, diligent workers are not setting up button rifling or scratching grooves in drilled blanks to make your gun. One guy loads a pallet of short fat tubes and the machine pounds the snot out of it forcing the lands and grooves into it. How Kahr still found someone to make button rifled barrels fore the CW series is more a testimony to old shops and aging machines having lower overhead for contract bid.

Complaining about fit and finish, or how the gun fits compared to a much older model which may not have even been made in the USA. Glock didn't have a plant in the US until 2012, Gen 3 and up are US made. So, is it a US made gun and is the complaint US workers can't do a good job? Does Made in Smyrna GA mean you are buying junk?

BTW, they are putting up another 4 buildings on 18 acres there. Business is good.

 

[danez71]

The problem with all this dogmatic debate is that Tennifer, Melonite, (and Tufftride in some places) are trade names.
There are a variety of processes under each trade name. All of which are owned by the same parent company. All are nitride surface hardening processes, differing only in detail.

On the note.....

Durferrit is the parent.

http://www.durferrit.de/media/pdf/Tenifer_QPQ_eng.pdf

https://www.fsb.unizg.hr/atlantis/upload/newsboard/03_12_2007__8124_Nitriranje.pdf

http://www.hefusa.net/_pdfs/Tufftride-QPQ-Process.pdf


Some good tech info in those.

The TUFFTRIDE® process is known in English-speaking
and Asian countries under that name, in Europe and
German-speaking countries as TENIFER® and in the
USA as MELONITE®. TUFFTRIDE®, QPQ®, TENIFER®
and MELONITE® are registered trademarks of Durferrit
GmbH.

grampajack said:

As far as I've heard, Tenifer isn't "technically" outlawed in the US, but the EPA has effectively made it cost prohibitive. I don't know about Austria, though. I remember the official line was that they switched to Melonite due to environmental regulations about Tenifer, but I have no idea if that was a voluntary decision or if the Austrian government made them do it. Considering that environmental laws are a global phenomenon I would put my money on the latter. Or for all I know, Austrian Glocks are still Tenifer and it's just the ones made here that are Melonite.

Thats pretty much right.

The Tenifer and Melonite etc differ slightly in the chemical salts solution and some temperature/time etc tweaking but they all fall under the same patent.


Melonite has a lot less bad waste in the end. The amount of waste the Tenifer process generate would limit production as compared to Melonite because of EPA rules.


I remember reading a long time ago that the melonite process was slightly better for stainless steel but I cant find where I read that.



The EU is pretty tough on environmental stuff coming in. They have a program called REACH and a several others.

Let me tell you.... it certainly 'reaches'. They track the suppliers' supplier down to the raw earth materials to make sure that gold isn't coming from any of the African (or other) countries that use strip mining (for ex)

REACH is a regulation of the European Union, adopted to improve the protection of human health and the environment from the risks that can be posed by chemicals, while enhancing the competitiveness of the EU chemicals industry. It also promotes alternative methods for the hazard assessment of substances in order to reduce the number of tests on animals.

I do know that if a company in the EU is bound by REACH, they flat out wont buy your product if you don't provide them the needed certified info.


Between the U.S and the E.U.,.... so it goes

 

[grampajack]

Thats pretty much right.

The Tenifer and Melonite etc differ slightly in the chemical salts solution and some temperature/time etc tweaking but they all fall under the same patent.

Melonite has a lot less bad waste in the end. The amount of waste the Tenifer process generate would limit production as compared to Melonite because of EPA rules.

I remember reading a long time ago that the melonite process was slightly better for stainless steel but I cant find where I read that.

Very interesting. Sounds like Tenifer involves higher temperatures, which would explain why Melonite works better on stainless. There's actually a special Melonite process specifically for stainless that works at lower temps. The standard Melonite bath for carbon steel is about 1000 degrees and will pretty much ruin a stainless barrel. Now I'm speculating here of course, but if it were true that Tenifer uses higher temps, then that would help explain why it's tougher than Melonite, if that is indeed the case.

There's a guy on another forum I talk to a lot who does R&D work for a barrel manufacturer and I was asking him one day about having a stainless barrel nitrided to increase its lifespan. He told me it had been tried many times, but that the low temp Melonite baths required for stainless produced subpar results, so the juice just wasn't worth the squeeze.

 

[yugorpk]

Ive never seen so much innuendo and baseless assumptions about a manufacturing process and why it is or isnt used. You can tell Glock is good at keeping its secrets secret.

 

[danez71]

Very interesting. Sounds like Tenifer involves higher temperatures, which would explain why Melonite works better on stainless. There's actually a special Melonite process specifically for stainless that works at lower temps. The standard Melonite bath for carbon steel is about 1000 degrees and will pretty much ruin a stainless barrel. Now I'm speculating here of course, but if it were true that Tenifer uses higher temps, then that would help explain why it's tougher than Melonite, if that is indeed the case.

There's a guy on another forum I talk to a lot who does R&D work for a barrel manufacturer and I was asking him one day about having a stainless barrel nitrided to increase its lifespan. He told me it had been tried many times, but that the low temp Melonite baths required for stainless produced subpar results, so the juice just wasn't worth the squeeze.

There is some temperature info in the links including how deep it penetrates at various temp and type of metal

 

[dogtown tom]

grampajack Quote:

Originally Posted by dogtown tom View Post
Good grief.
Glock only stopped using the Tenifer BRANDED process.
They continue to use a nitrocarburizing process that hardens the metal EXACTLY as did the Tenifer process.

All gelatin desserts are not Jello.
All paper snot rags aren't Kleenex.
All artificial sport surfaces aren't AstroTurf.

Tenifer and Melonite aren't exactly the same thing, which is why the EPA allows Melonite to be used here in the states. I'm not saying that Melonite isn't great, but I've read that Tenifer is more wear and corrosion resistant. I know everyone bragged about Tenifer for years, then suddenly Melonite became just as good when the environmentalists went after Tenifer, so something isn't adding up. I really don't know the details of how harmful the cyanide is to the environment or how it effects longevity, but I've found that "green" alternatives usually turn out to be inferior. Like I said, I'm not condemning Melonite, but I would vote for Tenifer on my Glocks if given the choice. YMMV.

It just gets better and better.:banghead:
Glock doesn't use Melonite either, so why are you bringing it into this discussion?

 

[dogtown tom]

FireInCairo I think we just need to come to terms with the fact that the tennifer finish process was an excellent process and it's no longer available in Glocks. Springfields, which are made in Eastern Europe, however, are still using the tennifer process.

Come to terms with what?
Glock still provides a nitrocarburizing process to harden their slides to the same hardness as the Tenifer process.............there is no loss of quality.
For goodness sakes Google nitrocarburizing.

In the long run, even tennifer will wear off, though, so it's not perfect, just better.

Tenifer won't wear off because it LIKE EVERY OTHER nitrocarburizing process is a metal treatment, not a finish that is sprayed on like paint.
Good grief people it isn't a secret.:banghead:

 

[FireInCairo]

Everyone knows the finishes on Glocks are not what they used to be, I've experienced it myself. Arguing the technical aspects behind the process is pointless because the fact remains: Glock changed their process and do not have as good a finish as they used to.

Springfield still uses the process, which is why their finishes are more durable.

 

[Warp]

Everyone knows the finishes on Glocks are not what they used to be

How so?

Are you referring to the colored surface treatment showing wear more easily with the current matte finish than the old shiny frying pan finish? Because that isn't the metal treatment being discussed in this thread.

 

[danez71]

Either in the links I provided above or on the mfgr website, the mfgr states that the finished Tennifer and Melonite treated products will be a different color.

They stated it was due to the difference of the chemical salt bath make up and process.


It's like Chevy truck vs GMC truck.

 

[dogtown tom]

FireInCairo Everyone knows the finishes on Glocks are not what they used to be, I've experienced it myself.

No argument there.........but what you think is the "Tenifer finish" ISN'T the Tenifer finish.

Arguing the technical aspects behind the process is pointless because the fact remains: Glock changed their process and do not have as good a finish as they used to.

It's only pointless if someone cannot grasp the difference between a nitrocarburizing process (Tenifer, Melonite or generic) and spray paint.

Springfield still uses the process, which is why their finishes are more durable.

This tells us you don't know the difference between epoxy paint and Tenifer. (hint you don't see the Tenifer)

 

[Spats McGee]

This one has gone around and around long enough.