|
|
Post by bigbrowndog on Oct 25, 2021 10:01:58 GMT -5
Some discussion was started on Parallaxbills topic about his choice for hunting this year, and I didn’t want to hijack his thread.
I have a SRH 454 in target gray and also really like it, however I’d like to have the snout removed and turned into what Bowen calls a GP44 style. I know he refuses to work in the target Gray guns, and I assume it’s due to the inability to reproduce the finish and make the gun look good. Is there any other reason??? Are the TG guns different in any other way that would preclude their use as a base gun for custom work???
I personally do not care if the new barrel and frame do not match, but wouldn’t have a problem with black nitride as a replacement all over finish either.
I agree the finish is terrific as a practical subdued field use one,
Trapr
|
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on Oct 25, 2021 10:36:28 GMT -5
Trapr.... as a coating, the Ruger Target Gray finish is subject to wear. Whatever the reason Ruger discontinued Target Gray, it is bound to show wear. Brushed stainless offers the simplest surface to restore. Coated finishes involve time, labor, and often chemicals to remove. It may be that the tougher the finish, the harder it is to remove. I’ve always thought of my guns as INSTRUMENTS. To play and perform. Not museum objects. Even so, when I wore sidearm continuously, it got wiped with Silicote cloth or lightly oiled rag each day. If you’re worried about holster wear, ad powdered graphite to your leather treatment, rub on contact areas inside holster.
Were the Target Gray Super Redhawk mine, I’d have the barrel trimmed, and make sure to incorporate the original Redhawk sight.
I’m known to spray paint guns as a hedge against the elements. When it wears or scratches, so what? A little HOBO ELEGANCE never hurt a good shooting’ iron. When you tire of it, acetone does the trick.
David Bradshaw
|
|
|
|
Post by parallaxbill on Oct 25, 2021 12:25:26 GMT -5
Is it true that Ruger more or less accidentally discovered the target gray finish as part of a bead blasting process rather than a coating? I read that in either Ruger's book or in one of two other Ruger books.
Any thoughts?
As a 43 years experienced machinist I've bead blasted many different materials but cannot recall bead blasting any Carpenter 465(?)
|
|
|
|
Post by tdbarton on Oct 25, 2021 12:28:26 GMT -5
I said it in the other thread and I’ll say it again - I really like the target gray. Would have been cool to see a Blackhawk done with it.
I plan on getting one parkerized and that should be interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by bigbrowndog on Oct 25, 2021 13:49:23 GMT -5
I said it in the other thread and I’ll say it again - I really like the target gray. Would have been cool to see a Blackhawk done with it. I plan on getting one parkerized and that should be interesting. Parkerizing is also available in colors or shades,....back before the advent of our current batch of wonder coatings, I had two rifles built and parkerized. One, a 338 was done in the traditional gray/green color and one a 300 win mag is matte black, I believe the two are called manganese and magnesium parkerizing, but not positive. This was in the early to mid 80’s, they are still rust free and damn durable. Trapr |
|
|
|
Post by CraigC on Oct 26, 2021 13:36:42 GMT -5
If I remember right, there was an issue with galling, trying to remove the factory barrels. There will also be an issue with the scope mount cuts in the frame. Might want to give him a call to confirm.
I also love the target gray finish and wish there was a way to duplicate it without resorting to a coating. As I recall, it was a chemically induced finish during a tumbling process. Not bead blasting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sawfish on Oct 26, 2021 13:52:21 GMT -5
Contact Ken Kelley at MagNaport re: removing or modifying the Target Gray finish on the SRH.
|
|
|
|
Post by boolitdesigner on Oct 26, 2021 14:57:24 GMT -5
Is it true that Ruger more or less accidentally discovered the target gray finish as part of a bead blasting process rather than a coating? I read that in either Ruger's book or in one of two other Ruger books. Any thoughts? As a 43 years experienced machinist I've bead blasted many different materials but cannot recall bead blasting any Carpenter 465(?) I've always heard it was a coating............. However, I've seen the results of sand blasting a GP100 stainless and it is a little grainier than what a Target Gray finish is. There are several grades of blasting sand, some a lot harder than others. Blasting sand wears and breaks down with use and produces a less grainey surface after it's about used up. Somewhere between the really hard sand and backing soda for blast materials should get you where you want. |
|
nicholst55
.375 Atomic
Retired, twice.
Posts: 1,137
|
Post by nicholst55 on Oct 26, 2021 16:46:23 GMT -5
I believe the two are called manganese and magnesium parkerizing, but not positive. This was in the early to mid 80’s, they are still rust free and damn durable. Trapr There are two types of Parkerizing - Zinc Phosphate (gray), and Manganese Phosphate (black). Not aware of any additional colors. |
|
|
|
Post by bigbrowndog on Oct 26, 2021 17:53:12 GMT -5
I said I wasn’t positive,....I knew one was manganese and took a swing at the other.
Trapr
|
|
|
|
Post by CraigC on Oct 26, 2021 23:19:17 GMT -5
Is it true that Ruger more or less accidentally discovered the target gray finish as part of a bead blasting process rather than a coating? I read that in either Ruger's book or in one of two other Ruger books. Any thoughts? As a 43 years experienced machinist I've bead blasted many different materials but cannot recall bead blasting any Carpenter 465(?) I've always heard it was a coating............. However, I've seen the results of sand blasting a GP100 stainless and it is a little grainier than what a Target Gray finish is. There are several grades of blasting sand, some a lot harder than others. Blasting sand wears and breaks down with use and produces a less grainey surface after it's about used up. Somewhere between the really hard sand and backing soda for blast materials should get you where you want. It's not a coating and you can't get there with abrasive blasting media. You can tell by the surface it's not a blasted finish. The finish was rendered chemically as they were being tumble polished. |
|
|
|
Post by drdougrx on Oct 27, 2021 7:00:20 GMT -5
I thought I heard the finish was the result of accidental blueing of stainless….probably hearsay….
|
|
|
|
Post by magnumwheelman on Oct 27, 2021 7:37:06 GMT -5
I wish I knew more of my neighbors in the industrial park... Kleen Tech ( next door )... they use large vibratory bowls with different sorts & sizes of media and at varying frequencies to deburr & finish a wide variety of metal parts... ( not seen any Ruger trucks or Ruger branded boxes on freight trucks coming out of there though...
I'm wondering if some sort of sacrificial polishing media ( just to pull a stupid but easy to picture example... graphite balls ) are used to polish metal surfaces, which leave traces / a coating, over the base metal being polished
any thoughts on a polishing media that could leave a coating on the parts being cleaned, that would be similar to the Target Grey finish??? could be a metal, or even a plastic, like a teflon ball, or a mineral... could even be hard balls of powder coating media
BTW... I had a Target Grey model 77 in 22 Hornet at 1 time... liked everything about the gun, except that I couldn't match the finish, when it was rebarreled with a 1 in 9" twist barrel I put on it... plain stainless was close enough
|
|
|
|
Post by richard on Oct 27, 2021 9:43:47 GMT -5
I said it in the other thread and I’ll say it again - I really like the target gray. Would have been cool to see a Blackhawk done with it. I plan on getting one parkerized and that should be interesting. I used the suggestion page on Ruger’s website years ago to suggest they make a Blackhawk sized gun with the Target Gray finish, dovetailed “fixed” rear sight, button removable front sight and call it a Grayhawk. |
|
|
|
Post by parallaxbill on Oct 28, 2021 10:02:01 GMT -5
I found the reference that I was referring to about the Target Gray color and it was not bead blasting as I had recalled in error.
From, Gun Digest Book of Ruger Revolvers, The Definitive History
Max Prasac
"The finish just happened during the parts tumbling process, and the powers that be at Ruger decided to run with it."
|
|
