Melonite and Tenifer are a metal treating process which hardens the steel to a Rockwell Hardness similar to a diamond. Technically, it is not a "finish" although the end result is a finish.

So, the difference betwen the two is a common forum question and is always subject to a lot of debate and conjecture. There is also some bit that always comes up about the process being illegal to do in the U.S.

I asked HEFUSA the difference between the two. They should know since they are the U.S. subsidiary to the company that OWNS THE TRADEMARK to Tenifer and Melonite. This is what they responded (full name, phone #, and email removed):

"Dear remat457-

Tenifer® is a name used most often in other parts of the world; Melonite® is exclusive to North America . However, they are the same. Please let us know if we can help you further.

Michael *****
Manager, Sales & Service
HEF USA"

Don't believe me? Ask them yourself, or email me -- I will email the direct contact info.

Now, how the treatment works on different types of metal (stainless, etc) can be different. The resulting finish you put on can also be different. For example, S&W Melonite can be touched up with bluing pen, while Glock's Tenifer can not (and seems to be more scratch resistant).

Early XD's had a reputed problem of rusting too easily. I asked them when they started their Melonite metal treatment (it hardens the steel). Here is the reply (full name, email and phone removed):

"If the model was produced after Feb 1st 2006, it will have a melonite finish on it.
Thanks, Tom "

Thanks to Caillean for the 2011 Ruger price list!
They added the LCP and LCR for this year.

[attachments size=large title="Documents" titletag=h3 orderby="mime DESC"]

LINK:
NRA_Purchase_Programsm

Sorry for any erratic behavior today. I am trying to upgrade to WP3.1 and a few plugins. It is not going as smoothly as hoped.

UPDATE:
WP3.1 upgrade completed. I didn't realize it required a DB upgrade, which made it difficult to roll back. Luckily, pressing on resolved the issues and it was "successfull."

Also upgraded the contact plugin software, and with some tweaking it now works.

Thanks to emt16711 for sending this to me!

Lots of new stuff on here including Tommy Guns, Desert Eagles, Baby Eagles, and 1911's!

[attachments size=large title="Documents" titletag=h3 orderby="mime DESC"]

LINK BELOW:
KAHR 2011

So, back in July of last year my M&P 9mm old-style (black) striker broke. S&W sent me a new style (silver) replacement that I dropped in. See: link .

I am pleased to say that after 6 months the replacement functions perfectly and the trigger is much improved like the newest versions that you buy off the shelf today.

Woohoo! Kudus to S&W for taking care of this and continuously improving their products! I also own a 9c and will be adding a 40S&W model shortly.

Well, in rebuilding my second 1006 into a 1066 I wanted to put in a 645 hammer because it has a half-cock notch. Why? Because it makes the double-action stroke shorter and reminds me of my Sig P-220.

I was warned that the roll over of the 2nd Gen S&W's was not as good as the 3rd gens (which the 1006 and 1066 are). I was given three sears to attempt to compensate for it: #2, #4, and #6.

The #4 is what the pistol had in it and the DA with the new hammer was HEAVY.
The #6 actually had the best DA and SA pulls BUT the break was HARD.
The #2 was the best compromise but the rollover was still noticeable.

I pulled it out and went back to the original hammer. Interestingly, I also tried my four different sears. The best and worst overall triggers went to the #4's (one was really nice and the other terrible catch on break).

Weird huh?

Sig P-series used to be world renown for quality, function/reliability, fit and finish. They are also far from cheap often called the Cadillac or BMW (use whatever car analogy you like) of firearms. How would you like it if your brand new P-series looked like the pics in this thread?

LINK: SigForum thread with pics - Should my Sig look like this after 400 rds?

Click on pic to enlarge:

Yes, it is cosmetic and the pistol functional, but so what? You pay a premium for a Sig. Sig saw pictures and called this "normal" wear. When asked why previous generations don't "break in" like they responded that they couldn't comment.

I own several Sigs, and many pistols tighter than a Sig without looking like that. "Normal"? If that it is "normal" it will not be normal for me to plunk down my $ on one. Too bad, because a P229 was on the short list.

ETA:
Here are some shots from a brand new P220 SS ELITE (i.e. NOT cheap):
LINK - SigForum Thread

Well,
Did anybody notice that the HiPower chambered for 40S&W is no longer on the Browning.com website?
I was looking at current production ALL STEEL 40S&W's and was disappointed to see that it is gone.

So, what does that leave?
1. CZ75 based pistols (compact discontinued although RAMI still made)
2. Tanfoglio EAA Witness (CZ copies)
3. Surely, somebody makes a 1911 chambered in 40. Perhaps STI
4. Springfield EMP (shrunken 1911)
5. Sig P229 Elite (I think this is still in production)

Used market!
1. S&W 4006 2. Colt Defender
3. Browning/FN HiPower
4. Sig P229 stainless
5. HK P7M10
6. CZ75 Compact

I am sure there are more, but those are the ones that immediately come to mind...

The FNS -- Ah, yet another striker based pistol to join the countless striker pistols (e.g. Glock, S&W, XD, Steyr, Walther, Taurus, Sig, etc).

Haven't seen it yet? Here is a pic...