Well I finally got back to the forum after a couple of weeks and see nothing has changed with the "how much a finish should wear argument and how it is advertised."
First, I apologize as I have had little time to work the forum as my other full-time job has been pretty busy with about two or three hours overtime every night. and lately I start off with this.
Email stinks as communication many times it becomes miscommunication. What one says meant as informative and instructive, is taken as demeaning and insulting to another.
No offense is intended so please do not take any.
I do not want to get a picture posting contest here or what wears to what point or a numbers of guns with rounds and wear or amount of guns with all of the wonder finishers that pass through my retail operation. Of about 600 custom 1911's (my operation) and about 8000 production guns of all kinds (the guy I work for here in Texas) that have been the customers comments.
From all of the finishes out there this is from customers and plenty of them with all of the teflon poly wonder finishs out there.
Almost none to include the armor tuff report the excessive wear as described.
Those few that have reported what the owner SHOWED was excessive wear to the coating agency when the gun was sent back to the refinisher the gun was redone/refinished or whatever. Without a question. This applied to all of the finishes.
Hence the problem if there was one with the finish in the first place was taken car of in the refinish.
This applies to Wilson's Armortuff, Baercoat, Birdsong's Black T, Rogard, NP3, Kimber's Kimpro and SIG's K-Kote.
If the arguement or problem is the advertising please read the Robar catalog, or the Baer Catalog or any of the others. All say basically the same. Best stuff on earth in so many words bar none.
That has been my customers retail experience.
The below is from an old post drawn from the buyers talking to me and I believe still applies. (I edited slightly) I cut and paste it as I am lazy, and also have another full time job to go to and any of you that know me can relate.
Begin of cut and paste:
First forget any of the magazine hype on any of these so called "wonder" finishes.
All of these finishes are trade off between slickness and toughness.
The finishes are a teflon/polymer mix. (One of you chemists out there jump in here and say what it really is)
Teflon is the slick
Polymer is the tough.
Of all of the finishes the Armortuff is the hardest and softest is the first version of Bearcoat.
This oberservation is drawn from seeing and listening to how the guns wear from use.
Remember this observation is from the guns that have passed through my retail operation over about 9 years when this stuff first started to get to the gun buying public and what I have owned and used.
I am no expert and do not claim to be.
Softest and slickest to hardest and less slick. (forgive the lack of technical terminalogy)
Bearcoat (new formula kicks it up one)
Rogard
Black T
Armortuff
Now remember the tougher the less forgiving when the "shooter" is lazy and doesn't clean and lubricate for function.
I owned Les Baer Tactical Defense Pistol with the Bearcoat and used to shoot it regular with my dirty cast bullet reloads and rarely if ever cleaned it. This was part of demo to sell Baer (demo for 18 months). I would put my finger in the ramp and I would come out black for the potential buyer. The finish was worn off the slide, barrel hood, and the bushing contact point on the barrel.
The Wilson armortuff CQB I have (had now) for a demo (lasted 12 months until bought from my holster) was the same way. Both guns look worn but both did extremely well with the lack of attention on my part.
The Black T Novak Spec Ops Highpower I took in trade was used the same way for a year until it was bought out from my holster. Gun looked like a well used gun but function was without a doubt great.
Baer originally used Black T than change to Bob Ford from Rocky Mountain for Bearcoat
Wilson originally used Bearcoat and some guns were Black T's I think and than changed to whatever version of armortuff they use now and continue to modify.
Bearcoat is its own company and does the stuff on its own. Bob Ford is great to deal with if you ever decide to get something else done. I have the number if you want it ask off line
None and I repeat NONE of the guns that have passed through with wear rust were the finish
was worn off mand not below the surface of the metal. Something in the coating bonds with the surface metal to prevent it. I sold a lot of guns in humid climates like Houston and Beaumont (add salt from the coast there) and get no gripe from rust but the usual complaint that the finish will wear with use.
Well, all finishes, IF the gun is carried and used, will wear. I have rubbed through the metal NP3 on my SIG228. This is a metal finish with teflon. Some finishes are more prone to it than others.
I add this two small JPEG's on my WORN through back up SIG P228. Yes, that is rust where there is wear below the surface not at the surface. I have a high salt and acid content in my system and can corrode paint.
I used an email feature to save band width and space as this post is long.
I hope this helps to understand the limits of the so called "wonderfinishes."
The finishes on Glock and H&K are metal treatment and not coatings. Therefore the were will be different. That is a subject for another thread
Be safe and keep the brass flying
Terry Peters
http://www.pt-partners.com
End of cut and paste
I hope this helps in the overall "perspective" of things and keeps all at at least twenty paces.
Be safe guys and the crazies are out there.
_________________
Be safe and keep the brass flying,
Terry Peters formerly known as PT-Partners
http://www.pt-partners.com
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Terry Peters on 2001-08-18 21:51 ]</font>