doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com High contrast brown and white

Keith Kearcher always did the kind of dark brown, no contrast, finish that the previous poster pictured of Kirk Merrington's work. That is not what we're looking for. Is this rocket science or something? Everyone talks a good game, but few can deliver it. Yes, I've been doing this for sixty years, and the story is the same.

More like art than rocket science. High contrast is not what I would call historically correct.

Here is a very high condition Lancaster sporting rifle:



Here is one I did for myself, twist barrel and a bench made sight:

Steve, we're talking about semi modern Parkers, Lindners, Lefevers, which should be black and white.

I thought that Mark was reffering to brown and white, like his title says. I do agree that black and white on American guns should have a high degree of contrast.

No, you’re right Steve. We were talking about brown & white and the poster specifically asked about high contrast brown & white. Eightbore is the ONLY one talking about Parker’s, Lindners, & Lefevers. Off in his own little world in regards to this post. Be careful, we keep taking about guns here he’ll be commenting in no time about whipping out his check book.

Btw.....to the original post about high contrast Brown & White, you might want to give Dan Morgan a call. He does a proper English “chocolaty plum” brown & white. Craig Smith did a set of brown & white for me years ago and they turned out really nice....I don’t think he does that finish anymore.
Buck Hamlin does a really nice finish as well.
On a side note...some W&C Scott’s I’ve seen that were intended for the American market seem to have been finished in black & white as well.

It is absurd to think that contrast or color would remain exactly as it was when it was done a century ago.

Unless it was stored in the dark in a perfect vacuum, further oxidation of the original brown would have ocurred, and the portions that were etched would have also developed some patina.

I know it is somewhat more difficult to get a high contrast brown and white compared to black and white, but I have never myself seen any explanation for that. I would venture an educated guess that the etching step which provides the contrast must work slightly more aggressively on different iron oxides. Brown rust is ferric oxide (hydrate) while the boiling step converts that brown rust to the black ferro-ferric oxide. A highly polished iron or carbon steel surface is more resistant to rust than a rougher finish... one reason many guys doing rust bluing or brown do not polish beyond 320 grit. The etching solution will not only remove oxide, but it will also cause micro-pitting on bare metal. And we know from all of those corrosion tests that even the best state-of-the-art gun oils will eventually permit some corrosion to occur.

That all adds up to the fact that is is probably impossible to know exactly what a century old brown and white finish looked like when it was new.

Trigger warning.....

Fantastic guys, thank you for the suggestions.

I have a W & C Scott from 1870 finished in B & W and quite attractive. But the design is not nearly as well defined as modern trends. And it shows no evidence of the damned acid etching so common today.

Joe,
many barrel finishers use a very strong FECL solution to etch which can attack the metal leaving it slightly pitted. I practiced quite a bit with some of the published formulas for etching and found them way too strong and unmanageable. I reduced them dramatically and neutralize after each etch and have none of the undesirable micro-pitting that you sometime see. As was pointed out to me a by a board member who does excellent damascus work, many people place far to much emphasis the etch. Hopefully Barrel Browner will chime in, his work is the gold standard.
Steve

I believe this to be an original finish on my fairly good condition 1908 Leech FWIW: