Actions material-stainless or not?

[njc89]

Nearly 4 decades ago in my youth, I had a blued carbon steel rifle rust on a very wet western Washington back country hunt. Since then, I have only considered rifles with stainless actions and barrels. Yes, I know stainless can still rust, but it has given me much better corrosion resistance in these remote situations when gun maintenance is more challenging. With the new rifles usually being cerakoted, how important is stainless now in your opinions? Seems like water can still get into uncoated surfaces.

I was considering one of the new weatherby lightweight rifles (backcountry guide or 307 alpine ct), but didn’t really need/want titanium. The other choice seems to be carbon steel and its pushing me away from an otherwise ideal (for me) rifle. Thoughts?

 

[vonb]

I’d choose stainless every time over carbon steel coated with cerakote. At the end of the day, carbon steel bores are just that, carbon steel.

If I can maintain my rifle after a day in moisture, it’s no big deal.

 

[njc89]

I’d choose stainless every time over carbon steel coated with cerakote. At the end of the day, carbon steel bores are just that, carbon steel.

If I can maintain my rifle after a day in moisture, it’s no big deal.

That’s exactly how I was feeling. Thanks

 

[Choupique]

I don't like stainless. Its soft. If I could do it over again, my "main" rifle would be blued instead of stainless.

Parkerized carbon steel is my #1 choice, but as far as I know not offered on any bolt action rifles from the factory. Cerekote is OK, as long as it's immersion applied and not sprayed on.

Personally, I think the swing to stainless is partly due to it being easier to machine than good carbon steel is. I'm not a gun maker, but i bet the ease of machining and lack of needing a finish results in manufacturing cost savings vs a properly done carbon steel rifle.

My old 1896 mauser which is over 100 years old with little bluing left handles Louisiana hunting seasons just fine with minimal maintenance all year. I used to wax it under the stock line at the beginning of the season. Good steel doesn't rust easily and any "good" rifle will be made with good steel.

The only time stainless excels is in salt water, but it must still be good steel to hold up. A well finished carbon steel gun can hold up too, but the finish is ultra important.

Blued action and bolt, and a stainless barrel would be my preferred combination.

 

[TaperPin]

Nearly 4 decades ago in my youth, I had a blued carbon steel rifle rust on a very wet western Washington back country hunt. Since then, I have only considered rifles with stainless actions and barrels. Yes, I know stainless can still rust, but it has given me much better corrosion resistance in these remote situations when gun maintenance is more challenging. With the new rifles usually being cerakoted, how important is stainless now in your opinions? Seems like water can still get into uncoated surfaces.

I was considering one of the new weatherby lightweight rifles (backcountry guide or 307 alpine ct), but didn’t really need/want titanium. The other choice seems to be carbon steel and it’s pushing me away from an otherwise ideal (for me) rifle. Thoughts?

Back in the 1990s when I was buying and selling a number of used rifles every year, one was used by a guy for close to 20 years without ever taping the muzzle or cleaning. Wyoming isn’t a wet state, but it rains and snows a bit during most hunting seasons. This rifle bore had pitting over 90% of the bore about 1/3 the way down from the muzzle, but shot really good. Other rifles with slightly more pitting didn’t shoot well at all. So, any given blued rifle will last around here about 20 years if the bore isn’t protected at all. Just electrical taping the muzzle has prevented all but a few small blemishes in my blued barrels. At this rate it would take 150 years to start effecting accuracy, so I stopped worrying about pitting.

I’m not a fan of ceracoat - when used on a bolt some gunsmiths ream out the inside of the action to allow the added thickness of the coating, which I’d not be a fan of, or they simply don’t coat the bolt.

I really like industrial hard chrome plating on a blued receiver - it can be applied over steel or aluminum so all the parts match, and looks like a matte nickel finish.

In a wet area I can’t imagine keeping up with exterior surface rust on a blued gun.

 

[rayporter]

it is not hard to care for your rifle and keep the rust off.

 

[Mtndawger]

Nearly 4 decades ago in my youth, I had a blued carbon steel rifle rust on a very wet western Washington back country hunt. Since then, I have only considered rifles with stainless actions and barrels. Yes, I know stainless can still rust, but it has given me much better corrosion resistance in these remote situations when gun maintenance is more challenging. With the new rifles usually being cerakoted, how important is stainless now in your opinions? Seems like water can still get into uncoated surfaces.

I was considering one of the new weatherby lightweight rifles (backcountry guide or 307 alpine ct), but didn’t really need/want titanium. The other choice seems to be carbon steel and its pushing me away from an otherwise ideal (for me) rifle. Thoughts?

I have had similar experience with stainless over blued steel. Just a little easier to maintain in adverse conditions but not foolproof. I have mostly stainless tikkas and am leaning toward buying a blued action and having it Parkerized just see how it compares. I have had a weatherby mark V 6.5 CM and really disliked the ceracote bolt. It gummed up the action IMO. So while an externally cerakoted action may be easier to maintain on the outside any internal cerakote creates some issues. I like to keep things as simple as possible. At the end of the day the weatherby isn’t a bad choice just different. And you may or may not like it. But it will do its job too