Cerakote, Duracoat, Kimpro, it's all junk ....

[chucklenut]

i feel like a cerakote or duracoat job is just a way of "spiffing up" a really used gun

i dont bother with them

 

[KORNBREAD]

I'm not talking about signs of wear I'm talking about the first time you kydex holster a scorpion it looks like you scraped half the finish off the trigger guard or the first time something metal bumps it it leaves a big dig mark in the side of it the length of the contact. I understand that with honest work comes honest wear but one touch or contact shouldn't leave it looking like it went through a battle.

As for the way stainless wears ... if you buy high polished stainless sure it shows but a satin stainless gun stays looking new for a long time.

As for the parkerizing where the dust cover slaps on your ar .... that isn't parkerized .... it's anodized aluminum.

You are right it is anodized, duh. What was I thinkin?

Still any appiled coating is gonna wear, scratch or whatever. Just leave it in the box it came and it will be pretty forever.

 

[jclem02]

While I understand what you are saying my experience is with every gun that I've ever had with these coatings on three renditions of sig scorpions, two LWRC rifles and several kimbers. If what you're saying is true every gun maker on earth that is using these coatings are applying them wrong.

I had a brown factory cerekoted LWRC ar15 and the area where the dust cover flips open and makes contact on the lower receiver scratched off after maybe 5-10 uses of the gun.

I still maintain that these coatings aren't worth their weight or cost.



If the coating was applied properly, the gun was blasted to begin with. As a matter of fact, I'm betting most of your issues with the aftermarket coatings are due to applicator error. It is a process putting any of that stuff on, and the biggest part of it is metal preparation. Everything should be degreased and blasted, and at least with cerakote should be heated and allowed to cool PRIOR to the application of cerakote. As far as blasting goes, you don't want to do it enough to create pitting the coating has to fill as it is not designed for that. If the process is done properly, cerakote should be standing up to a lot of wear. The only other things I could think of with that is if the applicator is not using enough hardening substance in the mix, or if they are using the wrong grade of cerakote for their firearms refinishing, or if they are not curing at the right temps for the right amount of time...or some combination of all that! Hope this helps!

[/QUOTE]

Actually, if you'll look at my original post, I wasn't talking about gunmakers. I was simply talking about aftermarket coatings. Was just offering my thoughts on the subject based on my own experience. Sorry you think all coatings are not worth a flip.

 

[Laxguy59]

I'll add that my experience with two different Nickel Boron coated guns was no better.

I don't know about wear and tear, but the up against salt water it seems to be pretty amazing, you got pics of the finish, the ones I felt were great.

 

[tywest]

Ive not had any issues with any products........i sand blast, clean like OCD, use K-phos on sandblasted metal, clean OCD, warm metal and go at it. I really think its prep issues.......alot of products want a phosphate layer to adhere to.....sand blast only they say actually smoothes the metal and can prevent proper adhesion, I.E. not rough enough. The sand blast is really to clean IMHO

 

[Clarke123]

My experience: Kydex is Great ... at removing the finishes on firearms ... unless they are SS.

 

[Tony2X]

i feel like a cerakote or duracoat job is just a way of "spiffing up" a really used gun

i dont bother with them

I love the look of a "well used" gun myself...gives it character.
Aint no sense in havin something look brand new all the time...it is just a tool anyway.
Before ppl. start blasting me..I totally understand why "SOME" guns should be left pristine but IMO that is only like 1% off all guns made.