Poll: Revolvers: Do you prefer them blued or stainless?

[Mister Bisley]

First and foremost....I LOVE REVOLVERS! (Sorry, I get excited about wheelguns)

I mostly own stainless. I like the look and the piece of mind that I get with SS.

That said, I won't kick a revolver out of bed for being blued.

Also, surprised no one has mentioned Parkerizing

 

[3MTA3]

To me a revolver really shines as a field pistol, so I prefer stainless over blued. Blued, IMO is more attractive when new, but IMO stainless is better suited to the outdoors.

Nitrided stainless would make for a great matt finish field pistol if you didn't want the shine

 

[Joe13]

West side PNW - stainless for everything.

That and I like stainless with black grips probably the most.


I have a couple of nice old blued and wood shotguns so I like both but I'd take a stainless if I had an option.

 

[ob1]

On an EDC, holster wear and drag lines on a blued gun annoy the heck out of me. Real stainless {not alloy} can usually be buffed repeatedly. Cerakote is not forever.

 

[Argonaut]

I just ordered a new Remington TAC-14 Marine. It was over twice the cost of a parkerized one. The web site says it is nickle and stainless......not sure what parts are which but it looks good in the photos and my marine 870s have held up very well, even when firing corrosive flair rounds. That being said, a classic shotgun (like my European guns) requires a traditional finish....Coin, blue, gold, case colored (I forgot probably my favorite engine turned finish mostly used on the interior areas).....but they have always been equal parts function and art.

 

[CountryGent]

All but one of ours are blued. The one that isn't is polished stainless steel.

 

[808hondacrguy]

I vote stainless also, because it's shiny, like me!

 

[BlindedByScience]

Hadn't thought about it, but it turns out every one I have is stainless. Love to say it was intentional, but it just seemed to have turned out that way...

 

[Mikej]

Out of curiosity, do you prefer revolvers to be stainless or blued?

Didn't read everything.

The answer for me is YES. As long as it's Smith & Wesson.

 

[01rednavigator]

I prefer Stainless on all my guns. I am very ocd about scratches and marks on my guns and I can very easily fix marks and scratches on stainless guns.

I also like the look of stainless over blued especially in a revolver.

 

[Mister Bisley]

All this revolver talk has my pocket burning

 

[bbbass]

I was in my gunsmiths shop a couple of weeks ago.....he was cussing a revolver (Ruger) that was on his bench......the guy had sent it somewhere to be Creacoted, nothing fit when it came back. The coating is so thick the revolver froze after 3 rounds. He was hand filing and polishing every part so they would fit and allow it to work again. He thought it would take him 4 hrs total.....400.00 in labor. I have seen similar issues with various coatings in other industries. Thick coatings applied after the original manufacturers fit can be a real problem.

LOL, I had the same result with a lower. At least I didn't have to buy a new one.

 

[bbbass]

I vote stainless also, because it's shiny, like me!

Shiny and purdy???

 

[Argonaut]

I prefer Stainless on all my guns. I am very ocd about scratches and marks on my guns and I can very easily fix marks and scratches on stainless guns.

I also like the look of stainless over blued especially in a revolver.

I have a blued Remington 700BDL 7mm mag that I bought while stationed in Germany in 1976. It has hunted 3 continents with me. I can show you the scratch I put in the butstock sliding down a rockfall in the Alps hunting Chamois sheep in 1978 and the faded spot in the bluing it obtained while hunting Ibex in Iran (from blood) just before the Shaw was deposed. It still looks good and shoots wonderful. I consider its battle marks a part of our (the gun's and my) well earned history. New and pristine are boring. The trend in the last couple decades to Tupperware sporting guns has denied the history we each work to make over our lives. I have never beat a gun up badly but a few blemishes from honest use are attractive to me.

 

[Ura-Ki]

All the above! If you have never looked at or held a origional blued Colt, you wouldn't really understand what an art blueing is, that dark, rich, deep blue that takes your breath away, plus, it's a Colt! I'm finding these days I much prefer a mix of finishes on my pistols, the first Colt 1911 2 tone started me down that dark path, and it came full circle with my Ruger Old Army, Blued and polished brass! My latest Kimber, a two tone stainless and Ceracoat in charcoal with black accents is quite stunning. And my brother has a burnt bronze and grey AR that really catches the eye! I used to be a hard core Blue guy, but I also see Stainless ( and alloys or exotics like titanium) to not only be quite useful and desirable, but also beautiful in their own right!

 

[OldBroad44]

I own both. Blued is much nicer to look at, but stainless is much more care free. I carry stainless nearly exclusively.

On stainless semi autos, it is quite common to give the stainless a blackening treatment that is quite tough. I've often wondered why stainless revolvers are not offered this same treatment.

Isnt stainless better than any possible finish? Is the blackening treatment actually better wearing than the SS, or is it just to change the color, maybe to match the rest of the gun?

 

[808hondacrguy]

I have a blued Remington 700BDL 7mm mag that I bought while stationed in Germany in 1976. It has hunted 3 continents with me. I can show you the scratch I put in the butstock sliding down a rockfall in the Alps hunting Chamois sheep in 1978 and the faded spot in the bluing it obtained while hunting Ibex in Iran (from blood) just before the Shaw was deposed. It still looks good and shoots wonderful. I consider its battle marks a part of our (the gun's and my) well earned history. New and pristine are boring. The trend in the last couple decades to Tupperware sporting guns has denied the history we each work to make over our lives. I have never beat a gun up badly but a few blemishes from honest use are attractive to me.

I agree, I use my guns, use, not abuse, and they all have Character marks to prove it. I think a gun with wear and scuffs looks better, and the scratches and blemishes make them... mine.

 

[UserNameInUse]

The answer for me is YES.

Beat me to it. YES should have been one of the choices in the poll.

 

[Ura-Ki]

Isnt stainless better than any possible finish? Is the blackening treatment actually better wearing than the SS, or is it just to change the color, maybe to match the rest of the gun?

I believe the treatment is sort of like nitriding in that it hardens the surface and changes the color, and can be tweaked a little bit to change the tone of the color!

 

[Argonaut]

Isnt stainless better than any possible finish? Is the blackening treatment actually better wearing than the SS, or is it just to change the color, maybe to match the rest of the gun?

Stainless is not really a finish but a type of steel. (It can come polished, brushed or natural) Pure chrome is harder than stainless (stainless is an alloy of chrome and steel) modern alloys are very good and properly applied are adjusted to the use it is designed for (some harder and some softer) we use a lot of stainless in the marine industry but there are places traditional bronze is a better choice and still used. I don't know about the metal composition of the internals in my Smith stainless revolvers but the triggers are good and don't seem to Gaul and loose there quality over time like early moving parts made of stainless did. My nickle and electroless nickle Colts have better resistance to corrosion on surfaces but can be worn through with heavy use. (I have seen rusted stainless guns and parts)