Practical Snobbery: The Case Against Stainless Steel

[Hand_Rifle_Guy]

I was inspired by this post. But by the time I was done with this reply, my head was so swollen I had to start a new thread.

I present the best case ever for the return of Blued Steel to the position of The Standard Finish for most, if not all firearms. I hereby contend that Stainless Steel has had it's day. It's fine for foodservice, but Guns shall be Blued.

Once upon a time, Smith & Wes---I mean, Sellout & Worthless (I have not forgotten that 'agreement' with the Klinton administration they have as yet to repudiate.) decreed that they were out of the blued gun business. They decided to consolidate their line along the practical, non-rusting side of ther material debate, much to the grumbling of many who find the white stuff lacking in style. This isn't about S&W, though, this is about that shiny silver steel.

Sure, stainless is wunnerful stuff. It's not a panacea, however.

Stainless, depending on the alloy, is pretty ordinary steel with a higher chromium and nickel content. For knives, the higher-nickel alloys will NOT take an edge. Sharpening scrapes the iron away, leaving a wire-edge of comparitively soft nickel that rapidly fails. First-generation Leatherman tools are a good example of this. They came with an elegantly-ground clip-point knife blade that simply could not hold a decent edge. As far as guns go, that's probably a moot point though.

Some things to consider:

Stainless isn't stainPROOF. It CAN rust, some alloys being more vulnerable to it than others. Salts can attack it, particularly over time. Seawater can pit it, although not like it can attack carbon steel. Just so you know, stainless alloys are not absolute protection against corrosion, so you CAN pull red smears off of your stainless guns. (I've seen a Delorean with etched panels apparently from road salt, but it certainly wasn't the catastrophic iron-munching you see on regular cars.

Stainless is harder than carbon steel, requiring harder tools that wear out of tolerance faster than tools for carbon steels. Most machining cutters for stainless are made out of tungsten carbide rather than high-speed-steel. Stainless also requires smaller cuts, slower speeds and slower feedrates. This can raise production costs, and helps explain why stainless guns cost a bit more than their carbon steel counterparts.Stainless can also be quite springy. It is therefore more prone to warping when exposed to enough heat. Stainless forgings are well-known for their "personality" after forming, and usually require stress-relieving prior to final machining to maintain tolerances.

Stainless is quite prone to work-hardening. Under severe duty, stainless can become brittle and crack. The most egregious example of this in the gun industry was S&W's debacle with the Model 66, which repeatedly broke down when subjected to large amounts of high-pressure, high-temperature, 1450-fps 125-grain hollowpoints. Cracked forcing cones, and alarmingly swift erosion of barrel-ends and rifling, along with other mechanical problems, caused S&W no end of embarassment during the early days of M-66 production. Adopted by many LE departments, some armorers had a constant struggle to maintain enough working guns to supply their departments, while juggling a constant rotation of a significant percentage of their "new" revolvers back to the factory for major overhauls. This work-hardening tendency also effectivly precludes stainless steel springs, so the on-board energy-storage system of all guns still remains prone to quick rust damage if not properly maintained.

One of stainless's WORST habits, a major contributor to the teething troubles of many early-production stainless guns, and very probably the reason that SIGArms uses carbon-steel barrels with their stainless slides, is galling. Stainless, when rubbed against itself, or a piece of alloy that's close enough in composition, is "sticky", even through coats of lubricant. This galling can pit, gouge, and scratch machined parts VERY quickly, destroying smooth operation, close tolerances, and fine finishes. The relative smoothness of the surfaces involved is immaterial. A rolled-thread 316 stainless capscrew coated with molybdenum anti-sieze lube can be screwed into a swaged-thread bolthole in a 304 stainless vacuum flange and tightened all of ONCE, and become stuck like it welded itself in place. Far too often, the bolt-head will strip, or can even be twisted off without the grip on the threads releasing. At this point the bolt must be cut and drilled out.

This can be problematical for gun design. A stainless slide or frame is only worth so much when most of the rest of the mechanism must be made of rust-prone carbon steel. S&W revolver hammers and triggers, as well as some other internal parts, are case-hardened high-carbon steel. At least two (I can't remember WHICH two, so don't call me on it.) major gunmakers had issues with galling between the slide and frame of their stainless-framed autos. A stop-gap solution that allowed use of parts in inventory was to plasma-spray a hard coating over the contact points on the frame, but one final fix was a drastically different alloy for the frame forgings in one case, and hard-chomed carbon steel in another. (For the life of me I cannot remember the principals in this story. I think S&W was one, but I could be confusing them because of their revolver debacle. I read it a long time ago. Perhaps someone else remembers who had to do what?)

This is enough to give me pause in rushing right out to purchase a stainless replacement barrel for a given gun. The barrel of my AMT Automag V has galled stripes across the top of the barrel hood from rubbing on the underside of the slide during cycling. I polished both surfaces back to a mirror finish, and coated them with a thin layer of high-pressure lubricant, but the stripes returned almost instantly. The Automag V, no doubt due to the high-level stresses and loads developed as the lightest autopistol available for the powerful .50 A.E. cartridge, demonstrates galling in a number of the contact points of the parts that touch during the gun's admittedly violent cycling. AMT's other quality issues aside, I suspect one of the contributing factors to the swift demise of the Automag V was AMT's wish to use TOO MUCH stainless in the construction of their guns. Galling can cause hard-to-diagnose, intermittent "funny" problems in finely-tuned mechanisms that are sensitive to friction. Repairing such subtle damage can be a hit-or-miss proposition, as it can return quickly or slowly, depending on what level of ammo is used, heat buildup, rapidity and repetition of firing, or any number of other variables.

Modern technology like plasma-applied surface coatings such as titanium nitride, and advances in metallurgy, as well as a lot of painful teething, and trial and error have solved the difficulties that stainless steel brings into gun manufacture. Carbon-steel barrels and firing pins in stainless slides, aluminum trigger assemblies, scandium-aluminum frames, titanium as a structural material, Stainless barrels and pins in carbon steel slides with advanced coatings, and the ubiquitous polymer frame, all have proved effective work-arounds for the properties of stainless steel. Whereupon, for a time, S&W ceased production on blued-steel guns.

One must not forget, however, one important, fundamental thing: Springs, a most vital part of ANY gun's mechanism, are still made out of ONE material. High-carbon spring steel, which is just as rust-prone and vulnerable as it's always been.

In this context:

Stainless guns are the answer to the Lazy Man's Prayers. Stainless steel pistol frames or aluminum, combined with stainless steel barrels, require less dedication to proper gun care and substantially reduce the risk of surface damage from corrosion.

Stainless steel is not neccessarily a boon. Corrosion of the surface finish of the major components of a gun has little effect on it's function, but it does serve as a graphic reminder of the fact that guns are pieces of iron we routinely carry hidden in tight spaces about our salt, moisture, heat, and electrolyte-producing bodies. By removing the most obvious indicators of poor maintenance, care-free finishes discourage proper gun care. That can carry a potentially heavy price. If it's unkempt on the outside, is it rusted solid on the inside?

We count on these machines to save our lives with little or no warning. Like any machine, if a gun is not properly serviced, cleaned and maintained on a regular basis, it can fall into disrepair and fail at a critical moment. Perhaps the more elegant-but-fragile traditional finishes can be forgiven their vulnerability if they encourage one to be more attentive to the upkeep of a machine we rely on to be a lifesaver.

"Fine machinery has no place with The Lazy Man. He does not respect it, and in his care (Or lack thereof, perhaps.) soon it will cease to be fine machinery. Scorned by indifference, a precision mechanism becomes dilapidated, and swiftly becomes junk, an irritant to the conscientious, an insult to the crafstman, and a potentially fatal mistake."---H_R_G.


Now if you like stainless, and you don't buy into the lazyman's argument, and therefore you scrupulously maintain your equipage, why then I'll just have to accuse you of having bad taste. Personally, I prefer Blued Steel and Polished Walnut. This is America, however, and everyone is allowed to have their own opinion. It's just that I find disagreement with my inflated importance to be such frightfully bad form. How DO you manage to keep your name on the Social Register for the entire Season?...

[nralife]

Stainless isn't stainPROOF. It CAN rust, some alloys being more vulnerable to it than others.

You're darn right it can rust! A couple of years ago my brand new 1911 Springfield Loaded was put into a fireproof safe for a few weeks. When I took it out, it had rusted up BIG time. I never was able to remove all of the pitting. A blued 1911 that had been sitting right next to it looked fine.

This safe has those little encapsulated water pellets as insulation, that melt open during a fire to help keep the temperature down inside.

It was a bonehead stunt on my part, but who would have thunk it with a stainless pistol?

I hear the less prone stainless steel is toward galling, the less rust resistant it is. Galling or rust? It seems that we are stuck with one or the other. Either that, or keep your babies out of fireproof boxes.... lol

[twoblink]

But it depends... if you are after asthetics or science.

What you say is just fine, but take a look at most knives in the kitchen.. I personally have a high carbon kitchen knife... SHARP, sharper than any stainless will be, but it's a pain maintaining it.

I have not had a problem (yet) with my blued guns, as far as losing bluing, but my stainless remains as shiny as the first day I got it (probably shinier).. I have some friends who's bluing has gone to the dogs...

The stainless is softer, but it's like the guy at the gun shop who was trying to convince me of the longevity of a glock vs a Sig... "I know a gun range that has over 100,000 rounds through a glock before it broke, compared to 70,000 rounds with the Sig)... Look, if I can afford 70,000 rounds, I can afford a new gun. Second, I've seen how ranges treat their guns, and it's a wonder there aren't any Kb!''s.. So all in all, the argument would be true if I were in combat, but for recreational shootin', I doubt I'll ever give it a second though.

And go ahead and tell me how many round of 357Mag it would take before I shoot a Stainless Steel Ruger GP100 to death.. Go ahead.... Chances are, you probably don't know someone who has shot a GP100 to death. Neither do I... So design is probably a bigger influence than material.

[Mike Irwin]

I simply don't like how stainless looks. It has no soul--soulless steel.

[Double Naught Spy]

I don't get it. Why do people think STAINLESS steel can't rust? It is not now, nor has it ever been called RUSTLESS steel.

Carbon steel definitely will stain and it seems to rust a whole lot easier than stainless steel.

There is no rules, laws, or standards that say all gun parts must be carbon steel. While springs still tend to be made of carbon steel, it doesn't mean the rest of the gun needs to be carbon steel. I think you will find that not all springs are just carbon springs. ISMI is a classic example, but there are several others.

[PATH]

I have one rifle with stainless and it is noot my favorite. I much prefer blued steel than stainless. Stainless can and does rust. I clean my firearms on a regular basis and thus blued steel has never been a problem!

[MicroBalrog]

*smirks as he gets a Glock*

[Mike Irwin]

Probably because a lot of material made from stainless steel is made overseas, and comes in stamped "Rostfrei."

That's apparently German, and literally translated means "rust free."

[Tamara]

*smirks as he gets a Glock*

Ever shot one? Exposed it to the elements? What'd you think of its performance?

[Citori]

Yes, yes, bring back bluing. Preferably rust bluing. A man has to buy a 50 year old gun, or spend $5,000, to get a good rust blue these days.

You even ask about it and people look at you like you are stupid. "Why would you want a rusted gun?" they ask.

On the Glock side I have carried an M27 in a IWB holster against my skin for two years and I have never seen any problem with rust or corrosion. As far as I know Glock slides are carbon steel but are Tenifer treated to keep away rust, which in my experience works as well as going with a stainless.

Of course I have a rust blued Superposed that is 70 years old and has no sign of finish damage. Never carried it IWB but it has seen some use.

[mete]

Tennifer is a trade name for a gas carbonitriding process that adds carbon and nitrogen to the surface (case hardening) ,it is not done for corrosion resistance . However other treatments can be added that will make the steel rust resistant.

[Citori]

I left out the hardness improvement as I didn't think it was germaine to the topic, but Tennifer certainly does increase hardness.

It improves corrosion and rust resistance primarily by reducing porosity. Much like a rust blue it penetrates the surface of the metal by a few microns and 'fills' the pores in the steel. I think it hasn't caught on with other manufacturers due to the fact the process involves cyanide, although similar treatments (plasma nitrocarburising or plasma nitriding to name two common ones) can offer almost identical benefits without the hazards.

[mete]

Citori, you're talking to a metallurgist , there are no "pores" in steel.And it you think case hardening improves rust resistance then why is the HK P7 ,which is also case hardened , noted for not being very rust resistant ?

[VaughnT]

Well, mete, enlighten us. What is the purpose of gas carbonitriding if not to seal the surface?

Pores? Maybe not in the sense that skin has pores, but rather in that the manufacturing process leaves microscopic irregularities in the surface of the metal, both scratches and pits, that can attract and hold moisture and dirt, thereby creating a healthier environment for oxidation.

Also, if there are other options similar to the "tenifer" process but which don't include the use of dangerous or poisonous or hazardous substances like cyanide, why aren't they being used? Or, maybe more importantly, why aren't they being advertised as being used on firearms?

I'm a huge fan of blueing, and think it's the only way to go on a rifle. But, and that's a big 'but', I like a stainless pistol for duty use. I want the other guy to see that pistol sitting there all shiny and ready-like. No soul? I would argue that the soul of the weapon can only be seen once you've have spent time with the weapon and learned her ways. Only after you have shown her your sincerity will she open up to you.

Still, all said and done, I'd kill for a Colt 1911 with that beautiful carbona blueing!

[Standing Wolf]

All my favorite guns are blued. Always have been. Always will be.

[mete]

Carbonitriding adds carbon and nitrogen to the surface to depths of up to about 1/8". So you can take a soft, tough low carbon steel (low cost ,easy to machine) and make the surface hard and wear resistant. I'm not a Glock owner but if I remember either they do add another process for corrosion resistance or at least they can. Case hardening has been around for a long time with guns and it's always been used to provide a wear resistant surface .In the 'old days' they used organic matter such a leather for a source of carbon which gave a attractive "color case hardening" About the best example of that is on my Rolling Block reproduction ,it's very beautiful.

[Quartus]

So you take a relatively soft steel (no problems with brittleness) and harden it so that it presents less friction?

If it penetrates to a depth of 1/8", wouldn't that effectively harden a slide all the way through? (since I'm assuming it's applied to inside and out) If so, doesn't that negate the benefit of starting with a soft steel?


More education needed, mete! Stand and deliver!

[Chip Dixon]

I prefer blued steel guns, too. However, I'm not about to carry any blued steel gun that still has a nice finish on it IWB daily. Only a stainless gun can take that kind of abuse, being covered in sweat for hours daily every summer, taking lots of holster wear at the same time, without getting ugly fast. That's when a good stainless gun, or a beater blued gun, is nice. I keep one of both for summer carry.

[mete]

Quartus, I said "up to about 1/8" .You can control it , make it any depth you want. When I checkered the backstrap of my P7 I first had to first grind off the case hardening, maybe .010" ?? But that thin layer makes a big difference . After 10'000 rounds I carefully inspected the pistol and found no wear , only some polishing of the surfaces !

[Quartus]

"Ah!", he said as the light came on! Gotcha!

Thanks!

[Citori]

Yes, no pores in steel. Sure.

I really don't know much about the HK you refer to and I do not know the process used to harden it. Or course you are aware that a number of various processes can be lumped under the term 'case hardening' (not really, but in the way you are using the term they can, probably more properly called surface hardening).

I doubt I need to point out to you that the HK could be thermally hardened, which would just convert existing components to martensite. And martensite has never been anything to cheer about. Or maybe something that doesn't particularly impart any corrosion resistance is added, like carbon, in a carburising process. Given that the gun isn't known for resisting rust I doubt any nitrogen is added to its steel, which would combine with something in the steel (I like chromium myself) to form a fairly hard nitride. A fairly hard nitride that can reduce intragranular corrosion by acting like a Noble Metal.

Of course the Tennifer process may well add oxygen at the end, I don't know. In comparison to a nitride-only process we'd see something like INIT OX offers (note the salt spray results):



and under a scope:



So I don't know about the HK. Maybe it doesn't even use carbon steel.

[mete]

The HK P7 is definitely case hardened. Don't confuse the different processes. Carburizing and nitriding have been around a long time they are used for wear resistance. The IONIT OX process adds another factor and that adds in addition to wear resistance, corrosion protection.

[VaughnT]

Does anyone else see a science war getting started here? As an ignorant blue-collar joe, I'm gonna sit back and watch this one....and hope something sinks in to my thick cranium (that's a big science word, for ya'll).

Mete, be advised that under Marquess of Queensbury Rules, you have been challenged by Citori with graphs and charts that look mighty confusing, and the failure to respond in kind could be construed as compitulation.

Cool beans, indeed.

[UnforgivenII]

U folks dun uzd 2 minny 5 doler werds fer mi tew unnrstand

[Quartus]

Graphs and charts and statistics - oh my!




Yep. Pullin' up a chair. Who knows? I just might learn sumthin!