Author Topic: Advantages of Stainless over Traditional Blued (Read 4677 times)

Braden · « **on:** May 10, 2004, 01:51:07 PM »

Hey guys. I'm looking into purchasing a new Tikka T3 Lite in either the Stainless model or the Blued version. I hunt in Central Texas (Albany, near Abilene if anyone knows where I'm talking about), mainly for whitetails. I do plan on doing other, bigger game hunting (elk, caribou, bear) and can't decide what to buy. I'm pretty set with the T3, so the only problem is what model. Both prices are good, but I'm wondering if the Stainless is over the top for the conditions I will be hunting in most. The point is, are the Stainless models worth the extra money, or should I stick to the Blued? Also, what caliber can I get the most variety out of? I'm really interested in the 270WSM, because its got a good degree of versatility. Should I buy that or maybe a normal .270 or an 30.06? A 7mm WSM? The ballistics of the 270WSM are the best, but I'm worried about availability. What is the most versatile caliber i can get?

Shorty · « **Reply #1 on:** May 10, 2004, 02:29:36 PM »

Braden,
I don't believe that anyone needs stainless in an arid, barren, wasteland like Abilene, Texas! :wink: No, really, the heat and dryness and dust is harder on stainless. As for caliber, you can't beat the .30/06 for versatility and availability, but something faster and flatter may be more suitable to your vast expanses of nothingness!

longwinters · « **Reply #2 on:** May 10, 2004, 02:30:00 PM »

Hands down the 30-06 and probably 300 win mag have the greatest variety of factory ammo. Looks wise I prefer a stainless barrel with a syn stock more than blue and syn. But of course that is just my taste. As far as blue vs. stainless, I doubt if the normal hunter could tell the difference in anything that one material will do over the other. I do think that stainless will have less chance of rust spots, but otherwise get what floats your boat. :grin:

long

schunter1128 · « **Reply #3 on:** May 10, 2004, 02:58:53 PM »

If you're a reloader the 270wsm would be interesting. If not I'd go with the 30.06 since you intend on hunting elk, caribou and bear. I know many folk have taken these big game species with a 270 150grn. But the 30.06 provides a greater availability of such bullet weights. As for stainless vs blued, I can't atest to the quality of Tikka's bluing but I've had a blued 700BDL for 28 yrs of hunting deer in the humid southeast and have never had any issues with rust. A little field maintenance at the end of each day is all it takes.

Zachary · « **Reply #4 on:** May 11, 2004, 04:13:05 AM »

Another thing to consider about getting stainless is that you don't have to worry about the blueing coming off. With a "blue" rifle, you may have to have it reblued - depending on use.

Zachary

Daniel · « **Reply #5 on:** May 11, 2004, 05:10:26 AM »

I think a nice bead blasted stainless finish looks really nice. The only disadvantage I know of to stainless is that it tends to be more brittle in extremely cold conditions. We're talking well below zero degrees, so that shouldn't be a problem for you at all. One of the advantages of stainless barrels is that the throat erodes more slowly and, of course, since it's stainless, it won't rust as easily.

I don't own a Tikka myself, but I do own a couple of Sakos (one stainless, one blued). If the stainless Tikka is anything like its big brother, it should look really nice. But then again, the blued version should look really nice also.

Yukon Jack · « **Reply #6 on:** May 11, 2004, 07:21:48 AM »

I can't really make any argument, but I prefer blued/walnut rifles & shotguns. I like the way the look, they way the feel. If you will wipe them down at night, maybe run a cleaning jag down the barrel, properly treat the wood for water resistance, you'll never have a problem with blue/walnut rifle. My rifles aren't babied at all, I hunt in tough country in tough weather, but none are in less than 95% condition (except one Remington shotgun that rusted on the 1st day out). Even a 338 that I've toted hither and yon all over Alaska in every type of weather imagineable for about the last 20 years is at least 95%. There's a little blue wear at the muzzle, some light dings in the stock, but still in top notch condition.

I think most of us appreciate the rifles we have and try to take care of them. If you do that with a blued/walnut rifle, it'll last you a lifetime or longer. The blue might wear thin, the stock may need to be re-sealed once every 4 or 5 years, but I don't mind that at all. It's easy and relaxing.

Rmouleart · « **Reply #7 on:** May 11, 2004, 09:10:13 AM »

If your hunting a area with allot of foul weather, like Alaska you better off with a all weather rifle, this entails a stainless barrel and a synthetic stock, as mentioned a bead blast to the stainless makes it better for hunting situations,less glare, as we know animals react to glare, or you can use beartooths camo covers, they fit like a glove to your barrel/stock and scopes. I prefer the Hogue rubber over molded stocks full bedding, really nice feel to them, good grip also. Plus with a all weather if you scratch the stock ageist a tree or rock you don't have to feel bad like if was a fancy wood finish, or you scratch the blued finish, stainless is resistant to rust, yes, I said resistant, it will rust, just not as quick as blued steel. Aim small hit small. RAMbo.

Yukon Jack · « **Reply #8 on:** May 11, 2004, 09:22:59 AM »

Well, I live and hunt in Alaska and I just don't think that you really need stainless synthetic, unless you don't take care of your rifles at all in camp, or leave the rifle laying in water in the bottom of a boat or raft.

Before hunting season, I usually apply a car wax to exposed metal areas and pack along a bore snake and some gun oil. I treat the barrel channel and action areas of the stock with a good waterproofing treatment. It's just not that hard or that much work to keep a blued/walnut gun in top shape. Sure, you'll get a ding or two in the wood stock, personally, I don't mind that, it gives the rifle a little character and I can't tell you where and when and what the hunt was for every ding. Little momentos.

You won't carelessly bang an s/s against rocks or anything like any more than you would a b/w rifle. The scope is the most fragile thing in the makeup and more care is taken to avoid knocking it around than dinging up your stock.

Each to his own, but just because you are going to hunt in Alaska doesn't mean you need a s/s type rifle. It's true that you don't have to pay as much attention to a s/s type rifle, but what is wipe down and a couple of pulls with a bore snake in the evenings?

I don't mean to be argumentative, but hunting Alaska doesn't mean s/s only. If you like blued steel and walnut stocks, use them. They'll work fine for you.

Braden · « **Reply #9 on:** May 11, 2004, 01:01:34 PM »

Thanks guys. If i do get a stainless, it'll be for looks, as their not that much more than the blued versions. Ill probably get a blued though. what is the 270wsm comparable to in standard cartridges? Meaning in power, and usability on big game.

Another question: The Leupold VXIIs are amazing optics, but ive heard that the new Rifleman (leupold) is good too. Theyre cheaper, which is a bonus, but id hate to sacrifice quality for a little price difference. What important differences make the VXII stand out from the rifleman?

bigjeepman · « **Reply #10 on:** May 11, 2004, 01:18:49 PM »

Whatever choice you make in caliber, finish, and scope, I am sure it will all work for you. Just have fun with it while you are deciding as you will get all kinds of opinions.... including mine.

I like the idea of a Tika in a .300wsm because of all the choices in bullets you will have if you reload. You will have enough punch to hunt the whitetails you mentioned very effectively and much more if you ever intend to hunt larger game. Top this rifle off with a Bushnell Elite 4200 scope in 6-24x40mm AO with a sunshade. Oh my ... that would be awesome.

Good luck and enjoy ...

Lawdog · « **Reply #11 on:** May 11, 2004, 02:14:58 PM »

Braden,

Personally I don't see any advantage to a stainless rifle. I can tell you one of the disadvantages to having one, all the code flashes you will be sending out to all passenger airliners flying overhead. I got rid of the only Ruger M77 stainless I bought just for the reason of the flash it put out AND the Â‘toy drumÂ’ sound that the plastic stock gave off every time you bumped it against something. As far as calibers go your choice of a .270 WSM is a good one I believe. I just bought one in a Savage that is accurate as the newer Savages are being known for. Mounted on it a new Burris scope and it makes one sweet combination. Something on these lines should make for a great open country deer rifle as well as being able to handle any Elk, Moose or Black Bear you will ever run across.

Boil it down to this - get the .270 WSM but make the rifle blue/wood not plastic and all that shine. Keep us informed on what you get. Small groups and tight lines to you. Lawdog

wallynut · « **Reply #12 on:** May 11, 2004, 02:27:36 PM »

SS versus blue is mostly personal. SS will still rust, can even get spotted up some, but it will take longer before it does start to rust. Some barrel makers will even tell you that accuracy is better with blued chrome moly and so is longevity. But for most of us hunting, it still comes down to personal likes.

Braden · « **Reply #13 on:** May 11, 2004, 03:09:28 PM »

Wallynut... I did not know that blued barrels are more accurate than stainless. How much so? I'll probably get a blued t3. Lawdog: thanks for your input. i think wood stocks are a lot prettier than synthetics, but i like the aesthetic advantages of the "plastic" stocks-- for example, they dont warp in any weather conditions. i know wood stocks work fine, and last, too. i just like the t3 lite. i've never picked up a hunter, but ive held a lite, and theyre smooth-working and light. THats another factor i like about synthetics: reduced weight. anyways, how tight of groups does your 270wsm shoot? i was looking into savages for a while, but the lack of a drop-plate/magazine turned me off a little. Have you evr hunted large game with your short mag?

wallynut · « **Reply #14 on:** May 12, 2004, 01:37:33 AM »

I've never had the chance to pit side by side for accuracy. I've bought some barrels from Badger Barrels in Wisconsin, we got to discussing the materials he uses and the why's. Opinions are like arse's, everyone has them, but when a fellow that makes one of the best custom barrels (and that shoots very well in long range competion) suggests staying with cm barrels, theres some validity to his point of view. Most guns will outshoot the monkey pulling the trigger reguardless of barrel material. For hunting, having the best accuracy is great for confidence at long/difficult shots, but in reality lots of game are taken with arms that are far from bench rest rifles. If SS and synt stocks turn you on, go for it, and don't look back, don't doubt your choice. Life is too short, so is the hunting season.

Lawdog · « **Reply #15 on:** May 12, 2004, 10:15:04 AM »

Braden,

Quote

THats another factor i like about synthetics: reduced weight. anyways, how tight of groups does your 270wsm shoot? i was looking into savages for a while, but the lack of a drop-plate/magazine turned me off a little. Have you evr hunted large game with your short mag?

For a hunting rifle in a magnum caliber(like my new .270 WSM) I prefer mine to weight at least 8 pounds complete. My new Savage M10 weights under 9 pounds complete. Recoil goes up as the weight goes down. Recoil in a 9.5 lb. .338 Win. Mag.(or any other caliber with recoil in the same class) rifle is tolerable - in a 7 lb. rifle it HURTS. My M10 Savage grouped break in loads just over .5Â”. Now I am working on different hunting loads using premium bullets to find the most accurate hunting load that I can. I havenÂ’t hunted with it yet but intend to use it this fall for Mule Deer, Black Bear and any other critter I can pull a tag for. Right now Savage rifles are showing to be the most accurate, factory produced, out of the box rifle you can buy today. A hinged floor plate system for a Savage can be purchased as an after market item(same as for the Rem. M700 ADL) and they are not that expensive. I wouldnÂ’t let that keep me from buying a rifle if it was accurate and Savages are accurate. Small groups and tight lines to you. Lawdog

Braden · « **Reply #16 on:** May 12, 2004, 12:45:08 PM »

Im beginning to worrry about that recoil... im not recoil sensitive, but i dont want an aching shoulder after a day at th bench,. should i consider getting a pachmayr decelerator, or maybe a hiviz recoil pad? Or do i even need it for a 270wsm? I've never shot one. Has anyone here had that chance?

Lawdog · « **Reply #17 on:** May 13, 2004, 12:35:23 PM »

Braden,

If you are going to include Elk, Moose and such then get the .270 WSM over the .270 Winchester. As far as recoil pad go I install Pachmyar Decelerators on all my rifles if they don't come equipped with them. I have heard good things about Kick-Ezz but have never tried them. The .270 WSMÂ’s recoil isnÂ’t bad enough to worry about. Small groups and tight lines to you. Lawdog

Braden · « **Reply #18 on:** May 13, 2004, 01:48:49 PM »

Thanks. Question: What does everyone think about the plastic magazine of the t3? Are there any advantages in having the plastic over a metal or aluminum magazine? Weight? How well do they work?

jvs · « **Reply #19 on:** May 14, 2004, 05:03:36 AM »

Stainless Steel doesn't mean it doesn't oxidize. Any steel oxidizes. Carbon Steel oxidizes in a redish color or 'rust'. Stainless Steel oxidizes in a white powdery form due to the additives such as Chrome. Maybe not as fast as Carbon Steel but it oxidizes all the same.

What you may want to find out is the Grade of Stainless they use because the steel composition is what will give you longer life. The first thing you may want to know is if the Stainless is Magnetic becase some of the cheaper grades of Stainless are.

I never see any ads from manufacturers as to what grade of Stainless they use for firearms, then again I never bothered to research it either.

Braden · « **Reply #20 on:** May 17, 2004, 12:21:10 PM »

I ought to research that. Thanks. Question: What does everyone think about the plastic magazine of the t3? Are there any advantages in having the plastic over a metal or aluminum magazine? Weight? How well do they work? I know many people prefer the traditional bottom-metal, and this is new, so what ddo you all think?

longwinters · « **Reply #21 on:** May 17, 2004, 03:48:52 PM »

I have the Tikka whitetail and it has the plastic/poly clip. I really like it. My other rifles are Sako with metal clips, but the Tikka works just as good as anything out there.

long

Yukon Jack · « **Reply #22 on:** May 17, 2004, 05:49:58 PM »

There's a pretty good article in Successful Hunter this last issue about SS vs. Blued. I think Phil Shoemacker wrote it. He compared 2 rifles exposed to the elements here in Alaska at the same time. One thing he noticed was the blued rifle gave much earlier signs of corrosion, but when he applied some oil and steel wool to it, it was still a very useable piece. When he inspected the SS that really didn't show much corrosion, it was beginning to pit so bad that it affected the operation of the firearm.

pc · « **Reply #23 on:** May 18, 2004, 02:33:42 AM »

Stainless does have more chance of galling than chrome moly actions I have heard/read...wether there is much truth to this I am not sure.

crazyjjk · « **Reply #24 on:** May 18, 2004, 02:38:44 AM »

Quote from: Yukon Jack

There's a pretty good article in Successful Hunter this last issue about SS vs. Blued. I think Phil Shoemacker wrote it. He compared 2 rifles exposed to the elements here in Alaska at the same time. One thing he noticed was the blued rifle gave much earlier signs of corrosion, but when he applied some oil and steel wool to it, it was still a very useable piece. When he inspected the SS that really didn't show much corrosion, it was beginning to pit so bad that it affected the operation of the firearm.

The reason for the pitting is the chrome in stainless. Chrome is a part of the makeup of stainless. It is one of the things that makes it stainless. The problem is that chrome is very susceptible to corrosion from chlorides such as in salt. So if you're in a wet area with chlorides such as near the ocean or from your hands or the ground your hunting containing chlorides or many other places chlorides lurk. The combination of moisture and chlorides will attack the chrome in the stainless and pit the areas where the chrome is which is usually grain boundaries. This means corrosion that is more like deep pitting. It is a very big misconception about stainless. The only thing stainless means is it doesn't really discolor when it oxidizes it doesn't mean it is corrosion proof. In many cases such as living near the ocean it is a worse choice because it corrodes down deep into the grain boundaries, where a carbon steel gets a light surface corrosion. Why do you think bridges and other metal structures in the rustbelt of the country are made of carbon steel. It is because that the deep inconsistent corrosion of stainless gives way to unseen catastrophic failure where carbon steel rusts more uniformly thus being detected and taken care of. Stainless is great in many situations but I think the consumer is being lied to when it is called the all weather rifle. Also it is said carbon steel barrels are more accurate because carbon steel is easier to machine and gives a better finish than stainless.

oldelkhunter · « **Reply #25 on:** May 18, 2004, 02:39:24 AM »

I prefer stainless over CM for most weather conditions. Moisture still has to be wiped off Stainless to prevent corrosion and yes rust on stainless looks like rust on CM it all depends on the grade of stainless . Most guns use 416R some barrel and action manufacturers uses 17-4. HS precision and Blackstar/Lothar Walter are the only 2 that come to mind that use this alloy. It is about as rustproof an alloy one can find , it also handles erosion much better then normal 416 stainless when shooting overbore magnum cartridges . I too have heard the controversy of blue vs SS for accuracy. I think the manufacturing process used by the barrel maker has a bigger effect on accuracy then actual alloy but a heck of a lot of fine barrels are made and used in SS.

Coyote Hunter · « **Reply #26 on:** May 18, 2004, 03:41:42 AM »

Braden Â–

Near Abilene, huh? I was stationed at Dyess AFB for 2 years and Daughter #1 is currently at Goodfellow AFB in San Angelo. Not much need for stainless down there! Here in Colorado the weather can be anything during elk season but my hunting rifles are all blued and IÂ’ve never had a problem Â– the solution is called Â“oilÂ” or Â“waxÂ”.

As to Â“most versatile caliberÂ”, thatÂ’s a matter of opinion. A lot of people say that if you have a .30-06 you donÂ’t need anything else Â– a very good reason not to have one, IMHO! IÂ’ve been hunting elk for 20+ years with a 7mm Rem Mag and Speer 160g Grand Slam bullets, never lost an animal or had one wander more than 50 yards after being hit, (My buddy neck shot one with that combo, and it went a little over 100 yards. WasnÂ’t the fault of the bullet or the cartridge, though.) In all those years, I have recovered exactly ONE Grand Slam, meaning penetration has been complete on all the others Â– whether at 100 yards or 350. I have also used the 7mm Mag for mule deer, antelope, coyote and even prairie dogs. With a 175g premium bullet, it should handle moose, but for big bears I would prefer a .300 or .338. Many people consider a .300 or .338 to be the best caliber for elk. If it were to do over with the knowledge and experience I have now, IÂ’d probably choose a .300 instead of a 7mm Mag. That said, a .270 with 150g bullets would have taken any elk IÂ’ve ever shot.

If you donÂ’t reload, IÂ’d suggest staying away from the WSMÂ’s. I think they will be around years from now, but ammunition costs are much higher than more established cartridges and they wonÂ’t do anything that the Â“standardÂ” cartridges canÂ’t do equally well. Most people are better off with less expensive ammo and more practice, IMHO.

Braden · « **Reply #27 on:** May 18, 2004, 10:13:26 AM »

I did not know that about stainless barrels. what does "pitting" mean? Also... Ive been thinking about what COyote Hunter said... Stay away from the Winchester Short Mags? I dunno. I too, believe that theyll be around for a while, but i also believe that they wont be as epensive in the future. They do have better ballistics than the standard cartridges, and more knockdown power... i dunno. Standard 270 or 30-6 would probably do fine, but the ballistcs... we'll see. Do you think that the T3 in 270wsm is worth the little extra $$$ more than the standard 270? They have longer barrels, which i like, but the cost.... i think itts worth it. I do appreciate your input and will reconsider my caliber selection, though. I do like the WSMs though. Does anyone else have any suggestions?

Lawdog · « **Reply #28 on:** May 18, 2004, 11:17:48 AM »

As for as the cost of WSM cartridges being so expensive do not worry. The complete line of WSM cartridges are gaining in popularity everyday. As they gain more popularity the ammo manufactures will make more ammo in more load combinations thus resulting in lower cost. Whether some like it or not the WSM line-up is here to stay and have their place in the field. I like my .270 WSM and think itÂ’s a great cartridge. If you like the way it looks and believe it would work for you, get it and donÂ’t look back. Small groups and tight lines to you. Lawdog

Rmouleart · « **Reply #29 on:** May 18, 2004, 01:22:03 PM »

The only thing I hear about the shortmags is that there barrel life is much shorter than full size carts and head spacing can be a problem when reloading, components are costly if reloading as well, I don't see much of a advantage other than a lighter rifle and of course a shorter action. Aim small hit small. RAMbo.