Is it normal to lose bluing on the "leading edge" of each charging hole on my new 29-10? There is also some loss in the shape of the screw hole in the top strap. I've run 94 rounds of Magtech 44 mag (240 gr. @ 1180 fps).

It started happening to mine last week. In total I have about 500 rounds thorugh it I think. Prior to last week there was zero finish damage. I reload and had shot a few hundred rounds of 200gr plated over about 7.5gr of a medium burn rate shotgun flake. Those produced no finish damage. Then last week I shot 200 rounds of the 200gr plated over about 9gr of 231. That's when the finish errosion began to appear. If that happened with mild ammo, I can only imagine what actual mangum ammo will do.

You and I are not the only folks on this forum to notice what you are describing. There was a thread a few months back about it as well.

Just to be clear to others reading this, I'm talking about the finish being blasted away, not powder fouling ontop of the finish. On this particular gun, I don't really care because I bought it LNIB at well under what they go for on GB. I figure I will shoot the tar out of this revolver until it's so ugly a refinish is warranted. At that time I'll have an actual blue finish applied by someone other than S&W.

This is a problem that the factory is quit aware of,yet offer no solution for .Simple solution would be to offer screw plugs to fill in the hole on the top strap above the forcing cone.

Post some photo's of this , would like to see what's going on.
Gary

If you are using Hoppes #9 for cleaning your gun, your finish loss may be due to the use of an ammoniated cleaner. Smith warns against this in the owner's manual - which I know everyone reads.

Adios,

Pizza Bob

__________________
NRA Benefactor Member

The screw and the hole is actually not the problem. The leading edge of the cylinder exhibits finish errosion, which has nothing to do with gas flow dynamics around the front screw boss in the top strap. The finish is simply to thin and flimsy for high pressure & high temp application. My gun is from 2010. Maybe current production is better. I plan to keep shooting until the blast pattern in the white then reblue or hard chrome the whole thing.

I do use #9, and have never had it remove finish on any gun. It may be harmful to the new finishes...I don't know. However, the erosion was there before I ever reached for the cleaning kit.

You may actually get to cleaning it, and find that it's not so much bluing loss... it could just be lead that needs a little extra attention in cleaning it off. I have switched to shooting FMJ and its cuts way down in cleaning the spot left in that area you talk about from the hole in the topstrap. Not sure how much scrubbing the modern bluing can take to remove the lead there on a regular basis but sooner or later you will have bluing loss.

__________________
USAF AMMO

There has been threads here showing a vortex that is present inside the hole on all current Smith's which are pre tapped for a scope.This problem does not show up on a 586 or model 10 that is not.The feeble bluing process today is another issue all by itself.

Completely agree. My point is merely that the leading edge will still have the blueing blasted off it.

Gunar,
When this first came up on this forum, I too thought it was a cleaning issue. Now that I have experienced it, I can attest it is not a cleaning issue. The blue is litterally being blasted off the cylinder. This is my only new polished blued finish Smith. None of my older guns have ever exhibited finish damage like this from regular use. I have 60 year old HP's, 27's, and 29's with much higher round counts that dont have the leading edge if the cylinders' finish blasted off.

On an interesting note I have a 29-10 Bounty Hunter with matte blue finish that has no such problems.

Its a shame that after so many years the factory once again has found a way to do a high polish,but use an inferior bluing process.

Here are some pics. Hard to see, but the erosion is there.

Attached Images

	IMG_1118.jpg (74.0 KB, 179 views)
	IMG_1119.jpg (100.6 KB, 175 views)

...and for the record, I clean my guns religiously, starting with my first .22/.410, back in 1967, if I shoot it, I clean it. Heck, if I touch a gun, I'll wipe it down before locking it up.

On most guns including my own that I've seen that on, it proves to be fouling and not finish loss. The fix proved to be a patch with solvent and a LOT of elbow grease. It's generally worse with cast bullets as it is vaporized lead which solidifies in that location.

Try soaking the cylinder or even just the affected areas with Kroil overnight before scrubbing. Kroil tends to get under the fouling and loosen it.

Bruce

I contacted Smith and Wesson about the finish loss on my new 29-10. They suggested that I take it to a gunsmith for evaluation. If he felt there was an issue, they would send me a FedEx shipping label. The gunsmith verified that it was finish loss and not lead or copper fouling. He said that I could send it back and have it made to look like new, but that shooting magnum rounds would remove the finish again. That's the nature of today's finishes. I decided to just keep it and keep shooting it. The smith also noticed copper buildup on the muzzle and said only an ammoniated solvent would remove it.
Someday, 20,000 rounds from now, I may send my gun to Turnbull.

Sad when you have to consider sending a lightly used blued gun off to someplace like Turnbull or Fords to have it done right.

So, you are saying S&W now advises buyer to avoid Hoppes no. 9 for cleaning their blued guns? Unbelievable! I suppose it's a sign of our times. Things must be going to Hates in a hand basket at S&W?
Steve

Here is mine with about 5,000 rounds of 44 through it in a year since I bought it. Mostly 240 grain Magnum rounds but some 180, 200 and 255 Magnums and 200, and 240 grain specials. I dont really worry about the wear on the gun as I like the patina on a good shooter and this gun is a great shooter! I never use anything other than Ballistol or Breakfree after each session. I have other safe queens that serve a different purpose.

Attached Images

	unnamed.jpg (31.0 KB, 117 views)
	unnamed-2.jpg (57.3 KB, 112 views)