Reblued or not?
Hi all-
I have a model 70 .264 win mag anda 300 H&H both manufactured in the late 50's. The bluing on the 264 looks darker and, well, "bluer" than the one on the 300. I was checking for obvious signs of a reblue, but all the lettering is really crisp and I couldn't find any buffed out areas or pitted areas that were sanded smooth.
My question is why do these bluings differ? It's not by a lot, but placing the guns side to side, one can notice a difference.
I have a model 70 .264 win mag anda 300 H&H both manufactured in the late 50's. The bluing on the 264 looks darker and, well, "bluer" than the one on the 300. I was checking for obvious signs of a reblue, but all the lettering is really crisp and I couldn't find any buffed out areas or pitted areas that were sanded smooth.
My question is why do these bluings differ? It's not by a lot, but placing the guns side to side, one can notice a difference.
0
-
could be the age of the salts, how long in the tanks, type of salts used and last, the quality of the polishing. 0 -
Bluing exposed to sunlight weather and use will fade just like paint on a car one that never comes out of a safe will be darker then one that has been used 0 -
Upon closer inspection, it looks as if the 264 has a matte finish. I did a search of previous posts on here and found out that it could be a function of the barrel's material and the bluing process used... 0 -
Open question: did the folks at New Haven have stainless barrels? At least as an option? If so, could the OP have one of his rifles barrelled in stainless? Thanks, Joe 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
4 comments