Currently still planning my build and am torn between stainless or blued finish. This is not a vote because I am sure there will be a tie. I am considering both for different reasons but mostly aesthetically. I refuse to put a matte scope on a luster blued rifle and refuse to matte blue one because I think it is inferior. I may consider a matte teflon coating but I don't want to confuse this question.

The rifle would be a ruger 77 tang safety, #4 moly or stainless barrel in 338-06.

what advantage or disadvantage does stainless steel offer over luster bluing for corrosion protection?

I already know that stainless comes in various grades with varied corrosion resistant properties so keep it to the point. I have been all over the web looking for this direct comparison. I do not have any SS rifles but do have both matte and luster finish rifles which clearly demonstrates lusters advantages.

I don't think any blued gun will ever have the corrosion resistance a stainless one would. I only have one stainless rifle, a 10/22, and since I don't live in alaska or somewhere wet and don't particularly like them I doubt I'd get another. However, I would never try to claim a blued rifle could be as good at resisting corrosion. it's the surface that is protected, so scratch it deep enough, you're to essentially bare metal, creating a week point. the stainless not only is more resistant on the surface, but is going to have it all the way through, scratch it, leave it if you're inclined, no need to refinish or touch up with a cold blue for instance that won't have the same level of protection as the rest of the gun.

That's my take on it. as to luster versus matte...

what do you consider luster? Hot blue will give it a luster, where you could rust blue it and get good protection and it would have that soft or "eggshell" finish if you will, and has a color that is IMO beautiful. I prefer that finish to the high polish luster finishes of hot blued rifles. I have rust blued rifles that are quite old and don't even look blue any more and still seem to be holding up great.

Red

I don't like a high gloss blue. I prefer a rust blue of a satin blue.

Rust blue.

I prefer rust blue but if it's going to be hot blued I want a high polish finish.

Terry

For the most part if you go stainless it will be 416R. If you treat your rifle with Melonite QPQ it will be corrosion resistant either chromoly or stainless. You can high polish or do a matte.
Butch

Of the two choices, I would go with stainless. If you can choose how the stainless would be finished I would bead blast to an egg shell type finish. I have become fond of stainless and good wood. It doesn't have to be exibition grade, just enough figure to make it interesting. The shades of red that I have seen on Duanes rifles looks good with stainless. DW

I like rust-blue because it's supposed to have very good corrosion resistance and looks great (to me). And a 400 grit polish rust blue doesn't look matte to me. I think of the Black Oxide finishes they put on 870 Expresses when I hear "matte finish". But the matte finished Leuopold scopes I put on the rust blued guns are a little too dull and the gloss are too shiny to match the finish. I have to admit the matte scopes are a closer match, though. T

There's also the issue of stainless losing strength in very cold temperatures. I realize everything is usually overbuilt enough to where this isn't really an issue except maybe with very thin contour barrels, but it makes it easier for me to justify buying rustable, blued chrome moly guns. Not sure how I justify termite-food stocks yet, though.

quote:

Originally posted by Captain Finlander:
Currently still planning my build and am torn between stainless or blued finish...I am considering both for different reasons but mostly aesthetically.

The rifle would be a ruger 77 tang safety, #4 moly or stainless barrel in 338-06.

what advantage or disadvantage does stainless steel offer over luster bluing for corrosion protection?

Let me muddy the water...

My father has a Savage 110 with a blued, stainless barrel.

That's right, a factory STAINLESS barrel that was factory blued - high luster, at that.

Savage did a very limited run of 7mm Rem. Mags this way, shortly after the 7mm Rem. Mag was introduced (1962).

The informal "historian" for Savage (I don't remember his name) worked on the assembly line at that time, and he confirmed, over the phone, this information. Moreover, the conversation unfolded with him asking a series of un-prompted questions, which indicated he was in fact who he said he was, and that he knew both the Savage process and also my father's rifle - in detail!

Long story short, Savage discontinued the process because the Stainless bluing did not match the bluing on their chromoly 110 actions (receivers were non-stainless).

This person also commented that Remington experimented with a similar design in this time period.

Now, would anyone do this today? Hard to say.

My father had the barrel "reblued" by a gunsmith from the Gander Mountain in Brainerd, MN ("Skippy" is his name), who sent the barrel to a Brainerd company, "Acrometal."

For what it's worth, though, the barrel - even after rebluing - scratches very easily. Perhaps this is part of why Savage discontinued their line.

Best of luck!

friar

Remington used stainless in 1962 for the magnum chambering and discontinued it at the end of 1970.
Butch

my last 77 w/ matte blue, built last winter 7x57

I prefer stainless barrels, so that makes it an easy call for me. I find them easier to break in and to clean, and shoot longer better for me....

It's a myth that stainless steel won't rust. All it means is it's suppose to stain less.

Stainless steel does not stain, corrode, or rust as easily as ordinary steel, but it is not stain-proof

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stainless_steel

Point is the best solution is proper care of your firearm. SS has some disadvantages particularly for use in the action that chrome moly doesn't have.