bleeohio
I was told that this would not work out to well with a coating on it. I have no experience with the cryogenic(freezing) process , but do know a few that swear by it.
I have a couple of Knights that have gone through the 'cryogenic' process. I really can not say that there is a whole lot of benefit to it... I have read the +++'es but again I can hear, see, or feel the benefits. I slide back to my centerfire days - how many of those were 'cryogenically' treated and of course I am referring to hunting rifles.
[quoted]There is quite a difference in price from the blued to the coated, just not sure it's worth the cost.[/quote]
There is no difference in the metal of the gun that has the Weather Shield applied to it or the metal of the gun that is blued. Blueing is much less expensive than applying the weather shield. The difference is 'suppose' to be that the Weather Shield offers a higher standard of protection to the outside of the gun than does Blueing. But right after that statement how many rifles weapons have you had that you have worn the blueing off. I certainly have a couple that are sure showing the signs of blueing wearing off. And the hope is that the Weather Shield might last longer.
If it came down to - to many dollars difference I would have no problem with a blued model. And it I were to go with the weather as I did - i would certainly go with the Weather Shield that appears to be a dark matte blue... because I could easily touch it up with 'cold blue' however if you go with the camo, or stainless look you might have a problem.
As others have said, i would be happier knowing the inside has the goodies>>>
The inside is pretty easy it is regular ordinance grade steel as any other blued gun. You just take care of it the same way you would any blued metal gun. Even it were stainless you still would have to take care of it. The bore has nothing to do with the Weather Shield application or if it were blued.
Do you have any sidelock ML's actually any blued guns? Same difference.