do i want a stainless or blued snubby?

S

SkaerE

New member
honestly, i understand that this is a personal preferance thing (well mostly:))

but,

i like the black look of the blued 650, im not really a stainless guy.

stainless will be more resistant to sweat/rust.

is that a good enough reason to most of you to have a stainless revolver?
 
Stainless

If you plan on carrying this thing extensively (and why else would you want a snubby?), get the stainless model. I can sweat like a pig (Do pigs sweat? I heard they don't.) on my S&W 642 (alloy frame) without harm. Of course, I still clean it, but I don't worry too much about it rusting.
DAL
 
Stainless vis a vis Blue

I like a blue finish better than stainless... BUT my most common carry guns are stainless... I usually carry a stainless Colt's Commander .45 acp that has had some work done on it by my local gun plumber or a S&W M60/357 that has had absolutely nothing done on them.

Both are utterly reliable and require very little maintenance..... but they don't look great to me...

If I want to carry and show off, the revolver of choice is an early Combat Magnum 2.5" with that beautiful old S&W finish or a very early post WWII S&W .357 Magnum revolver (precursor of the M27) with a 3.5" barrel.

Because I'm fairly lazy I don't carry the blue revolvers very often... they need a LOT of TLC when carried.

FWIW

Chuck
 
If you want you can split the difference and get a police trade-in M38 with an alloy frame and a stainless cylinder. KY Imports from Louisville, KY has some from time to time.
Some folks hate the look, I like it.
 
SkaerE

"do i want a stainless or blued snubby?"

Yes. You do. Want both.

Seriously though. I like SS guns myself, but for discreet CCW I prefer something darker which will not stand out quite so much. My Glock 19 and Kahr Mk9 in Black-T meet this requirement. They are also rust-resistant. But I do have some SS guns which I use occasionally for pocket carry.
 
Carried blued guns for over half a century. A bit of attention and no corrosion problems. Salt water, tropics, sub Arctic, desert etc etc.

I tend to keep guns I like for a while....and shoot em.
Only guns I have flat out worn out were stainless.
Only gun I have blown with factory ammo was stainless.

One of my carry guns is over 90 years old and still works well, looks pretty good and has NO internal problems.

Different folks prefer different whatzits.

Sam
 
I like stainless, but it is, like you said a personal matter. I do have several blued guns as well.

From what I've read and seen, stainless guns tend to hold resale value a bit better than blued.

Gunner
 
If you're gonna carry it, I prefer matte stainless. It just doesn't show wear or corrode like a blued gun. I carry IWB, and can rust a well-oiled blued gun in a day. I like the matte SS better than polished SS because if it does rust (and it sure can), you can wipe off the rust and can't see the pitting left behind.
 
Sam . . .

Please tell us about your 90 year old carry weapon.

Thanks, best regards and v/r -- Roy
 
My $0.02

I made the switch about 10 years ago, after some of the initial manufacturing problems with stainless were fixed.

I like the blue look, but ss makes too much sense for reliability. I plan on keeping mu guns for a long time, and I heve never had any problems with revolvers of autos. The only down side is the bright finish, but if I was that worried, I would have the finish bead-blasted.

Never regretted changing to ss.

FWIW

Jamie
 
my smith 442 is blue, actually anodized aluminum which is said to hold up pretty well...much better than blue....as for the cylinder and barrel, they are standard blue but I use soft holsters (uncle mikes, renegade) and they don't cause any wear.....if you go with blue and you have an open backstrap, you might tend to see it wear off from the salt in yor hand sweat....had i been purchasing new...I would have gotten the SS 642...then again, I do like the fact I can have this gun in my hand at night and it doesn't stand out....then again.......
 
When I started out buying handguns, every one had to be stainless. Over time, my likes seemed to have changed, and I really lean towards anodized-black or blued finishes now.

Of the snubbies I've been carrying lately, both are anodized-black(340PD & 342PD), but my most recent purchase was a 3" S&W Model 60, in stainless. Of course, this is not really a 'snubby', and I didn't buy it for concealed carry.

Now, even though the frame on my daily carry gun is scandium alloy, failure to add a drop of oil to the cylinder-release, weekly, results in rust. This is due to the carbon steel construction, of course, and it only occurs on the rear portion of the release because my holster covers the front portion. The half that's exposed to sweat has a brown'ish(rust) tint.

IMO-An anodized-black, aluminum or scandium frame, is the best of both worlds. Zero rust and maximum concealability. If I do stumble across such a thing, I'll be replacing my releases with an alloy or blackened stainless aftermarket product. Then I'll be complaint free.
 
RWK...SIR Sam reporting as requested SIR. :D

Re 90 year oldish carry gun.
Blued I frame Smith n Wesson .32 Hand Ejector, 1903 pattern, mfg circa 1908. .32 S&W Long, six shot, 4¼" barrel. Fixed sights.
Loaded weight bout 20 percent less than loaded Model 36.
Overall size bout 20 percent less than Model 36.
Looks like scale model of 6" K-38.

Size and weight makes it great for ankle carry, pocket holster carry or even cummerbund carry.

Tho tiny, the 4¼" barrel allows the cartridge to get up some steam and pretty good sight radius helps with the hittin.

Blueing: Has a bit of holster wear at muzzle and cylinder edges. Shooting wear on trigger, hammer spur and cyl release.

Timing is good but showing a little wear in the frame windows where the hand and the cylinder stops go through.

Been shot a LOT. Checkering nearly gone on the grips, hammer spur and the cylinder release.

Sam, some of my guns are even older than I.
 
>>3" S&W Model 60, in stainless. Of course, this is not really
>>a 'snubby'

I classify anything less or equal to 3" a snubby. A model 60 in 3" is just about perfect for carry in .357. Just my opinion though.

justinr1
 
I have 7 stainless handguns, one parkerized and one tennifer (Glock) whatever that is. I guess I would want stainless (have 3 J-frames in stainless). But, YOU have to decide what YOU want, we all have our opinions and have to live with the outcomes of our decisions.
 
I think blued and parkerized finishes tend to conceal better. The dark finish just hides in the shadows. Stainless is brighter and can reflect light, but it is a lower maintenance finish. I generally prefer stainless if I am carrying it in a IWB holster. If the gun is not going to be pressed close to sweaty skin and clothing, blued is fine.
 
I have a blued S&W Model 49 that I have carried up close and personal since 1991. It has stood up fine. In summer I clean it (wipe it down) every other day with BreakFree. Other times a year I may wipe it down once a month or so.
 
Sam . . .

Thanks for the information; it's very interesting. I know you must treasure that .32. I have an old (60+ years) MilSpec Colt 1911A1 that my Dad acquired during his FBI service. It is still 100 percent serviceable, but I don't shoot it much. However, I could/would NEVER give it up . . . and some day one of the kids will have it . . . and probably use it as a small boat anchor.

Thanks again and keep in touch -- Roy (curmudgeon jg)
 
1911s may get shiney but they are hard to kill. I gave one away that I had carried off and on over a forty year period. Looked ratty and had no matching parts but was always a shooter.

Sam...(Curmudgeonlyistic wiseass sr.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top