Cerekote and Pic Rail

[Hillbilly Hunter]

I am considering Cerekoting a 7RM rifle. Will be installing a Murphy Precision stainless picatinny rail, Nightforce 6 screw rings, and NXS 3.5-15. I was wondering if anyone had ever had a problem, or heard of a problem of Cerekote being an issue for scope mounting. Specifically, is there any higher risk of rail movement on a Cerekoted action, or ring movement on a Cerekoted rail? I have never heard of any such problem.....so assume it's not an issue....but this is a rifle I want to be absolutely movement free. On the other hand, I wonder if Cerekote is slightly more "slick" than bare stainless steel receiver? And for the rings, is the Cerekote less durable or maybe microscopically less stable than bare metal ring mounting surface, on a bare metal rail? Thanks in advance for any insight!

 

[Wapiti1]

For the rail to action connection, Cerakote, properly applied, doesn't really change anything. You should be bedding the rail if you want the best connection regardless of whether the action and/or rail is coated or not.

Best scenario is to bed and mount the rail prior to coating and coat it as a unit. Use JB weld or another temp resistant bedding compound.

It makes zero difference anywhere else in the system. I would only suggest it not be applied to the inner surface of the rings since those are machined surfaces that you want to keep concentric. Even if it's only a tiny difference. Otherwise, just seat the ring recoil shoulders forward on the rail abutments and torque it down. It'll never move.

Jeremy

 

[WeiserBucks]

For the rail to action connection, Cerakote, properly applied, doesn't really change anything. You should be bedding the rail if you want the best connection regardless of whether the action and/or rail is coated or not.

Best scenario is to bed and mount the rail prior to coating and coat it as a unit. Use JB weld or another temp resistant bedding compound.

It makes zero difference anywhere else in the system. I would only suggest it not be applied to the inner surface of the rings since those are machined surfaces that you want to keep concentric. Even if it's only a tiny difference. Otherwise, just seat the ring recoil shoulders forward on the rail abutments and torque it down. It'll never move.

Jeremy

All of the above is correct, and cerakote sucks

 

[Wrench]

I've done plenty both ways and it really doesn't matter. You shift your point of aim .001" away from the fixed side of the ring....bite seems to not matter. If you bed the rail and clean it up wet with wd40 before coating it'll look seamless but you are maried to it.

 

[Hillbilly Hunter]

Thanks for your replies. That is about what I thought, but I value others experience., and I want this one to be "right." In this case, my concern was barrel glare on a stainless barrel. Unfortunately, I don't know of anyone close who does bead blasting. But, odd as it may be, I do have someone who does extensive Cerekoting, and can get that done quick and easy. He sand blasts those surfaces during the Cerekote process, but does not have a capturing system for beads, etc. I do most of my own gun work, so decided to just get a blasting cabinet myself. Just put it all together.

For what it may be worth to anyone, I had a rifle Duracoated years ago. That coating didn't make it through its first hunt....bear hunt in Ontario. Had a few places where is just seemed to rub off...albeit it was a ''vigerous" trip. Got the same rifle (wife's 308) Cerekoted and it has lasted for about 15 years now, to include two trips to Ontario, a trip to Africa, a few antelope hunts in WY, and a lot of Whitetail. That is only a sample of one each, and I don't have any way to know if the Duracote was applied properly, but in my case at least, the Cerekote worked much better than Duracote. Either way, I have spent the last ten years or so converting to bead blasted stainless, and am very satisfied with that. Best Wishes as always, and thanks again.