|
|
Post by CraigC on Nov 22, 2015 23:27:35 GMT -5
On that Ruger "Target Grey" finish, A friend of mine put a stainless S&W Model 64 in his sand blasting cabinet with the appropriate places blocked off. The finish after an appropriate blast was very, very close to the Ruger finish when each was compared to another. It is my belief that is how the finish is produced. It's not a blasted finish. The texture is all wrong and blasting doesn't darken the steel like that. The target gray finish is done chemically. |
|
Paden
.375 Atomic
Lower Goldstream Creek
Posts: 1,132
|
Post by Paden on Nov 23, 2015 3:26:59 GMT -5
On that Ruger "Target Grey" finish, A friend of mine put a stainless S&W Model 64 in his sand blasting cabinet with the appropriate places blocked off. The finish after an appropriate blast was very, very close to the Ruger finish when each was compared to another. It is my belief that is how the finish is produced. It's not a blasted finish. The texture is all wrong and blasting doesn't darken the steel like that. The target gray finish is done chemically. Agreed. I have a 77/22 in that finish. Don't know for certain what it is, but it definitely is some sort of "coating"; that is to say it's definitely not any type of raw stainless treatment, blasted or otherwise. It's very smooth, almost high polish smooth, and very hard; feels similar to a heavy anodizing. On my gun it has proven extremely durable. My barrel has been shortened and recrowned, and even at the cut edge transition from the raw stainless crown face to the grey finish there has been no wear at all, even tho it has been leaning against the cabin door frame for 15(?) years when not being carried. Neighbor has same finish on a much carried .454 SRH with no appreciable wear as I recall. Speaking to the original question: one thing is for certain; anywhere that finish is cut/machined off, you'll not be able to replace/recreate/replicate it. |
|
|
|
Post by magnumwheelman on Nov 23, 2015 6:57:57 GMT -5
I have the same finish on a 22 Hornet Bolt action... agree, it's some sort of applied finish, rather than a metal prep...
|
|
|
|
Post by whitworth on Nov 23, 2015 9:01:35 GMT -5
Ruger engineers told me the Target Gray finish was from the tumbling process and quite accidental.
|
|
|
|
Post by trueat1stlight on Nov 24, 2015 8:05:16 GMT -5
I literally just had a SRH in .44 Mag cut down and I'm picking it up from the gunsmith this afternoon. Had a DX type front sight base installed and it sounds like it turned out great. Will report back here with photos/first observations.
-John
|
|
|
|
Post by BigBore44 on Nov 24, 2015 13:46:53 GMT -5
I literally just had a SRH in .44 Mag cut down and I'm picking it up from the gunsmith this afternoon. Had a DX type front sight base installed and it sounds like it turned out great. Will report back here with photos/first observations. -John Awesome! That's what I have been thinking of, the DX base. I don't think I'd replace the original and, I definitely want interchangeable blades/sights. Can't wait to see it.... Please do tell me as much (as your willing to share) info about the work you had done... pics to please  Thanks BigBore44 |
|
|
|
Post by Mark Terry on Nov 24, 2015 23:13:12 GMT -5
Like this you mean?  The finish is somewhat problematic. This is a 480. I've also done a 44 Mag. Both are 5 1/2" barrels. I have a 7 1/2" 454 that's scheduled for surgery. I also have the long versions in each caliber with red dots for serious hunting.  Two different 'smiths couldn't remove the barrels so they were cut, filed and crowned. The original sights were reattached. Not too heavy for packing and downright handy. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.... |
|
|
|
Post by BigBore44 on Nov 25, 2015 8:17:18 GMT -5
Like this you mean? The finish is somewhat problematic. This is a 480. I've also done a 44 Mag. Both are 5 1/2" barrels. I have a 7 1/2" 454 that's scheduled for surgery. I also have the long versions in each caliber with red dots for serious hunting. Two different 'smiths couldn't remove the barrels so they were cut, filed and crowned. The original sights were reattached. Not too heavy for packing and downright handy. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.... Yeah Buddy! That's exactly what I was lookin for... That cutdown 480 is Great/Perfect. I will have one of those one of these days. I'm thinkin the 454 version I'm getting might just get that same treatment, or the 44.?.? Your right, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and I LIKE'em.. How do those cutdown guns shoot compared to the original length guns?
Thanks  BigBore44
|
|
|
|
Post by BigBore44 on Nov 25, 2015 12:24:33 GMT -5
Who or What Gunsmithing would you guys recommend to do a chop and front sight swap on a Super Redhawk?
Many thanks
BigBore44
|
|
|
|
Post by trueat1stlight on Nov 25, 2015 21:45:24 GMT -5
CHOPPED!   I had my gunsmith cut the barrel down to 5 inches and install the DX front sight base and tall blade. I need to come up with a better profile since this blade sticks up so high I disengage it from the base when drawing from the holster and it pops out clear of the base. I haven't shot it yet so no idea if I'll even need this much height. Anyone else running this setup and if so, any solutions to this problem? Seems the DX base is a great idea in that you can swap out sights, except that you can also lose a front sight inadvertently. -John |
|
|
|
Post by Mark Terry on Nov 25, 2015 21:56:11 GMT -5
BigBore,
I don't think you lose much in terms of accuracy aside from the fact that you have a shorter sight radius. Most of my longer barrel revolvers have red dots or scopes so it's a more difficult comparison.
The shorter guns pack and carry infinitely better. I really like the balance at the 5 1/2" barrel length.
Any of the 'smiths regularly mentioned here can shorten one of these. I did my own only after two local gunsmiths were unable to remove the barrels. Probably the hardest part (for me) was re-attaching the front sight. Brownell's has the nifty crown tool and it's relatively easy to use.
|
|
|
|
Post by whitworth on Nov 25, 2015 23:18:33 GMT -5
I think 5-inches for an SRH is just about right. While this one isn't cut down, I had it made with a 5-inch barrel. It started life as a .454 and wound up a .500 Linebaugh.  |
|
|
|
Post by BigBore44 on Nov 26, 2015 16:22:15 GMT -5
BigBore, I don't think you lose much in terms of accuracy aside from the fact that you have a shorter sight radius. Most of my longer barrel revolvers have red dots or scopes so it's a more difficult comparison. The shorter guns pack and carry infinitely better. I really like the balance at the 5 1/2" barrel length. Any of the 'smiths regularly mentioned here can shorten one of these. I did my own only after two local gunsmiths were unable to remove the barrels. Probably the hardest part (for me) was re-attaching the front sight. Brownell's has the nifty crown tool and it's relatively easy to use. Mark How did you go about mounting the F sight? I'm more of a do-it-yourself type and if it's not bad I'd be inclined to give it a go. Of course it all depends on how and if I think I can do it. If not I know when to leave it to the pro's I'm not a "Bubba" Smith but I have seen his work before, and it's Ugly!!!! Thanks BigBore44 Whit That's a Fine lookin 500 SRH. How does it shoot & buck? Thanks |
|
|
|
Post by Mark Terry on Nov 28, 2015 22:09:24 GMT -5
I used silver solder that I use for soldering finger guards and hilts to knives. On knives, it's easier (to me). The sight was tedious but I got them mounted and none have disappeared.
I know a fellow who used JB weld on a big bore revolver front sight. His didn't let go either and I can't tell it's actually glued to the barrel.
|
|
|
|
Post by whitworth on Nov 29, 2015 20:19:18 GMT -5
BigBore44, it kicked pretty hard. It weighed 2 ounces less than my 6-inch Model 29. But, it was very accurate and accounted for a number of game animals to include black bear and moose.
|
|
