Whats the difference - the finishes appear very similar.
Thanks for the links - that Wikipedia site looks nifty - I bet people from all over the world will end up hearing about it!
Now, does anyone have experience with one over the other? Is the appearance distinguishable side-by-side? It would seem that Parkerizing is more durable -has that been anyone's experience? And finally, if the same model of handgun were offered in blue or parkerized with a $20 price differential for parkerizing, is it worth it?
Data appreciated, but opinions and personal experience desired.
Parkerizing resists rust and abrasion better, but looks ugly.
Bluing rusts pretty easily, but a good blue job is utterly gorgeous.
I am with Steve on this. I have carried blued pistols most all my life and other than a little holster wear they have always looked good. Take care of your blued pistols and they will look good and take care of you.
+2 on the Blue
I've seen some that just look too goof to shoot..then I slap myself and get some ammo
I've done a little Parkerizing bu It really want to get the stuff to blue. It just looks better.
+1 for parkerized. Compared to blue, it makes more tactical sense. Non reflective and better protection from the elements. Usually greenish or greyish finish. I prefer shotguns with parkerized finish as opposed to any other finish. Only other firearms I've had with parkerized finishes were 1911 pistols.
No question the park'd finish is more protective. i just love the blued guns..Old fashioned I guess
That's the same way I feel Steve. These young'ins of today have to have it Tac-ti-cool or something like that. If you want a desert sand or forest green pistol with Tiger stripping, I guess you can get the paint at Wal-Mart.
I have hunted in all weather conditions with blued guns and never had any problems with rust. It's all in how you take care of your rifle.
~laughs~ Definatly two big glocks up for that one. A new word for the week!Tac-ti-cool