Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 51

Thread: Robar NP3+ on Action Parts

  1. #31
    Member fpnunes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Tampa
    Quote Originally Posted by JTQ View Post
    I wonder if this will affect the Langdon Beretta projects?
    Ugh, I am wondering the same thing as well. I really wanted to order a Mod 5 PX4CC. Sounds like that won’t be possible for now.

  2. #32
    Site Supporter Paul D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Scottsdale, AZ
    This is a shame about Robar. Robbie gave me a tour one day and they had a ton of Apache helicopter parts getting NP3'd. Honeywell who makes the Apache is headquartered in Phoenix and has a big plant a few blocks away. I hope this part of their business is still going strong.

  3. #33
    Member Sauer Koch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    New Orleans
    The other two companies I've been looking into are Cummings Custom Refinishing, and WMD Guns.

    CCR has CPII, which is EN Boron Nitride, and WMD has NiB-X, and also a EN (Electroless Nickel) w/Teflon, but say that the NiB-X is superior.

    Does anyone have any experience with EN Boron, enough to recommend it? I've heard of Cummings before, but haven't heard anything about their reputation, just doing some research.
    @beenalongtime
    Last edited by Sauer Koch; 08-31-2019 at 12:49 PM.

  4. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by Sauer Koch View Post
    The other two companies I've been looking into are Cummings Custom Refinishing, and WMD Guns.

    CCR has CPII, which is EN Boron Nitride, and WMD has NiB-X, and also a EN (Electroless Nickel) w/Teflon, but say that the NiB-X is superior.

    Does anyone have any experience with EN Boron, enough to recommend it? I've heard of Cummings before, but haven't heard anything about their reputation, just doing some research.
    @beenalongtime

    I have had the barrels, locking blocks, and magazines done on most of my PX4's. One one, after watching one of EL's videos, where I saw his fire control group was not the competition one but coated, and after reading both another member (of this and the Beretta forum) and the instructions on trigger polishing, I had the TCG coated in my range PX4.
    My preference is for the CPII over the competition group and I am thinking of sending in the one for my subcompact PX4.

    On several of them, I have both NP3 parts, and CPII parts (EL's bobbed hammers, and on one, his reduced ambi slide stops). From a NON LEO use standpoint, I can't tell the difference for my needs. Look wise, I think the NP3 polished up to look more like polished stainless or chrome, where the CPII looks more like matte stainless. (neither matches exactly, the my Inox slide), if that makes any difference. I have read where NP3, eventually gets a more gold tone, which is why on my Inox 92, I had the G levers NP3'd as the other parts on the gun (factory parts) have an NP3 coating, and uniformity was a want, there.

    CPII verses Dusk,
    I wanted a durable pistol as possible, and from feel, my Inox PX4, feels a bit lighter and smoother, then the Bruniton one (different caliber, so ease of ID was also a factor/emergency grab situation). So I found a factory demo'd Inox, that I had coated in Dusk (darker cuts glare against glasses), and that is my range pistol. I had the barrel, locking block, tcg, trigger bar, pins, low profile decockers, and magazines done in CPII. I had the slide, new G levers and EL black bobbed hammer (at one point different from factory one) done in dusk. I also sent in my (ground on my Tormek) ambi low profile slide levers to be done in the bruniton matching black (don't remember which it was). I see more wear on the finish of the Dusk, verses either the factory finish, or on CPII or NP3 parts (scratch on the slide, finish wearing off the hammer). The ambi slide levers are getting wear, around the trigger opening, from the holster (but the holster was designed for wider levers, so none on the outside of the lever part). Not a big enough sample size, just personal opinion is CPII and NP3 seem a bit thicker/more durable then Dusk.

    https://berettaforum.net/vb/showpost...postcount=7019

    https://berettaforum.net/vb/showpost...postcount=6623

  5. #35
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Upper Michigan
    I've used CPII and was pleased. Will probably be going that route for a few guns interals I'd planned on sending to Robar.

  6. #36
    Site Supporter OlongJohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    "carbine-infested rural (and suburban) areas"
    Quote Originally Posted by Sauer Koch View Post
    I have one of the Sig M11 A-1's with...
    Does yours have the nickel sear? I seem to think you've had other Sigs. How does the smoothness of this one compare to others?

    Quote Originally Posted by JAD View Post
    Robar made my LWC full auto by NP3ing the sear.

    Fixed it at the range with a stone in three minutes, but it was exciting.
    Interesting. Robar has specifically said they wouldn't apply NP3 to certain sensitive SA sear/hammer combos, such as 1911s and classic Sigs.

    ---

    Just for where I'm going... My M11-A1 has the nickel sear and has broken in to have a ridiculously nice trigger. My other Sigs are good, but feel like there's something wrong with them when compared to the M11-A1.

    So I'm thinking about picking one and sending sear, hammer and hammer strut to wmdguns.com for NiB. There sure seem to be a lot of AR triggers around in NiB without problems, as well as Glock stuff. Anyone have experience with NiB on just action parts on a hammer-fired pistol?

    BTW, I don't intend to run it dry. To me, the debate about whether NiB or NP3 is better when run dry is kinda silly; add a good oil to both and then see what happens. My plan is smooth and deburr + NiB + polish + a good oil; basically run the same program I run without NiB.
    .
    -----------------------------------------
    Not another dime.

  7. #37
    Member Sauer Koch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    New Orleans
    Quote Originally Posted by Up1911Fan View Post
    I've used CPII and was pleased. Will probably be going that route for a few guns interals I'd planned on sending to Robar.
    Good to hear, thanks.
    Last edited by Sauer Koch; 09-01-2019 at 09:57 AM.

  8. #38
    Member Sauer Koch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    New Orleans
    Quote Originally Posted by OlongJohnson View Post
    Does yours have the nickel sear? I seem to think you've had other Sigs. How does the smoothness of this one compare to others?



    Interesting. Robar has specifically said they wouldn't apply NP3 to certain sensitive SA sear/hammer combos, such as 1911s and classic Sigs.

    ---

    Just for where I'm going... My M11-A1 has the nickel sear and has broken in to have a ridiculously nice trigger. My other Sigs are good, but feel like there's something wrong with them when compared to the M11-A1.

    So I'm thinking about picking one and sending sear, hammer and hammer strut to wmdguns.com for NiB. There sure seem to be a lot of AR triggers around in NiB without problems, as well as Glock stuff. Anyone have experience with NiB on just action parts on a hammer-fired pistol?

    BTW, I don't intend to run it dry. To me, the debate about whether NiB or NP3 is better when run dry is kinda silly; add a good oil to both and then see what happens. My plan is smooth and deburr + NiB + polish + a good oil; basically run the same program I run without NiB.
    Nickel sear?? I've never heard of that on a Sig. Maybe you're thinking of my 226 that went to Grayguns, where they replaced my hammer & sear with their tool steel kit, and did a full in house action job?? It's super smooth now, with a DA pull of 9# and a single of 4#. In SA mode, it easily rivals a quality 1911 trigger job.

    Both of our M11 A-1's went back to Sig for the AEP, since they were VERY gritty & heavy, due to the phosphate coating on the internal parts. The AEP was well worth it, IMO. Some say, just shoot 1-2k rounds through it, and you'll get the same result; that may be true, but I didn't want to wait.

  9. #39
    Member Sauer Koch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    New Orleans
    Quote Originally Posted by beenalongtime View Post
    I have had the barrels, locking blocks, and magazines done on most of my PX4's. One one, after watching one of EL's videos, where I saw his fire control group was not the competition one but coated, and after reading both another member (of this and the Beretta forum) and the instructions on trigger polishing, I had the TCG coated in my range PX4.
    My preference is for the CPII over the competition group and I am thinking of sending in the one for my subcompact PX4.

    On several of them, I have both NP3 parts, and CPII parts (EL's bobbed hammers, and on one, his reduced ambi slide stops). From a NON LEO use standpoint, I can't tell the difference for my needs. Look wise, I think the NP3 polished up to look more like polished stainless or chrome, where the CPII looks more like matte stainless. (neither matches exactly, the my Inox slide), if that makes any difference. I have read where NP3, eventually gets a more gold tone, which is why on my Inox 92, I had the G levers NP3'd as the other parts on the gun (factory parts) have an NP3 coating, and uniformity was a want, there.

    CPII verses Dusk,
    I wanted a durable pistol as possible, and from feel, my Inox PX4, feels a bit lighter and smoother, then the Bruniton one (different caliber, so ease of ID was also a factor/emergency grab situation). So I found a factory demo'd Inox, that I had coated in Dusk (darker cuts glare against glasses), and that is my range pistol. I had the barrel, locking block, tcg, trigger bar, pins, low profile decockers, and magazines done in CPII. I had the slide, new G levers and EL black bobbed hammer (at one point different from factory one) done in dusk. I also sent in my (ground on my Tormek) ambi low profile slide levers to be done in the bruniton matching black (don't remember which it was). I see more wear on the finish of the Dusk, verses either the factory finish, or on CPII or NP3 parts (scratch on the slide, finish wearing off the hammer). The ambi slide levers are getting wear, around the trigger opening, from the holster (but the holster was designed for wider levers, so none on the outside of the lever part). Not a big enough sample size, just personal opinion is CPII and NP3 seem a bit thicker/more durable then Dusk.

    https://berettaforum.net/vb/showpost...postcount=7019

    https://berettaforum.net/vb/showpost...postcount=6623
    Thanks for the info. I think I'd prefer the matte appearance of the CPII, to a more polished look.

    At this point, my question is more about Nickel Boron Nitride, which is what CCR told me the CPII was. On WMD's site, they have both EN Teflon, and EN Boron. My only frame of reference is that NP3+ was EN Teflon, and was considered the gold standard, but WMD says their NiB-X (Nickel Boron) is better than their Teflon.

    Any thoughts on this?

  10. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by Sauer Koch View Post
    Thanks for the info. I think I'd prefer the matte appearance of the CPII, to a more polished look.

    At this point, my question is more about Nickel Boron Nitride, which is what CCR told me the CPII was. On WMD's site, they have both EN Teflon, and EN Boron. My only frame of reference is that NP3+ was EN Teflon, and was considered the gold standard BY THEM, but WMD says their NiB-X (Nickel Boron) is better than their Teflon.

    Any thoughts on this?

    CPII and Dusk are both Nickle Boron. Dusk is just blackened, which I think makes it a bit thinner of a coating based on my one sample.
    I can only tell my CPII magazines, from my NP3 Robar/EL magazines, by the cut/curve that EL made to them. If I was a LEO or shot something like Langdon's 50K a year (a guy can dream of that budget, right?), I personally would probably want the teflon, for any possible lubrication advantage, as I expect I would see wear on both at that rate.
    As someone who isn't going to shoot anywhere close to that, has a separate training gun, and expect better protection from wear, verses amount of use, I choose Nickle Boron.
    I view it less as one better then the other, and just different objectives (51 to 49%, verses 49 TO 51%), but both achieve them to a certain extent.

    Now CCR has on their website, prices for a undescribed finish: Electroless Nickel. What is it, I don't know, but I see that used to describe elsewhere on the web both Nickel Boron and Nickel Teflon. You might ask them if that interests you.

    As to the companies, I have seen different ones, recommended, used, by different forums. I view it as Penzoil to Quaker State. Both have similar products, with slightly different additives and that is personal preference/experience.

    Happy with my choices and I hope this helps.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •