Brass Blackening with Permablue

[SgtErv]

I wanted to darken a bright, shiny Brad's buckle on my shooting bag. So I researched a little and found that Birchwood Casey PermaBlue will "blacken" brass.

Well, it does. Sorta. It blues it, at least, giving it a decent antiqued look. Pictures will follow tomorrow when the sun is out.

Another kind of cool method I've found that does well is black powder fouling.

What other methods do you folks use to blacken brass or give it an antiqued patina? (Besides time)

 

[Cowboy]

I wanted to darken a bright, shiny Brad's buckle on my shooting bag. So I researched a little and found that Birchwood Casey PermaBlue will "blacken" brass.



What other methods do you folks use to blacken brass or give it an antiqued patina? (Besides time)

They had a topic not to long ago in the Gun Builder's Bench Area about using BC Brass Black. The topic was created around the middle of last month. Maybe March 19th or 20th. Was looking at it yesterday.

flehto uses a product called44/40 cold blue on his brass that showed amazing results. He posted pictures of engravings in the brass that he used the stuff on. It darkened all the little nooks and crannies and the seam area's where to brass flat surfaces meet like on trigger guards.

He did a great job with it, and it looked very sharp!

I need to learn how to post old topics in my topics or replies. Otherwise I would post it for you to look at. Learning how to post old topic's is next on my agenda. Sorry about that!

Anyway, go back to the Gun Builder's Bench area and you will find the topic. It was created around the middle portion of last month.

Respectfully, Cowboy

BTW: I was wrong! It was created on 3/27/2016.

 

[LRB]

I also use the 44-40 cold blue, but nearly all the common cold blues will blacken brass.

 

[SgtErv]

This is my shooting bag buckle after knocking it down a little bit with steel wool. Not bad, just got some of the brightness off, which is what I was aiming for.

Regards the post in gun builder's bench...any time I get to see flehto's handiwork is awesome!

 

[omarick1948]

Fuming brass in a plastic bag with a piece of cloth dampened with household ammonia works great too!

 

[SgtErv]

THAT's the household chemical I was trying to think of. Thanks!

 

[Artificer]

Pardon me if you already realize this from having to shine G.I. brass in the past, but many if not most modern made brass buckles are coated with shellac or something else so they don't dull or turn green while waiting to be sold. Trying to put cold blue over that surface coating would not be as effective as over cleaned brass.

I know it would be a PITA, but you might consider taking that buckle off the strap, stripping the coating off it, cold bluing or "ammonizing" it and then stitching it back onto the strap; IF you want a really aged look for the buckle.

Gus

 

[SgtErv]

I actually used rust and blue remover prior to trying to blacken it. There was a significant coating on it, which is part of the reason it didnt dull a bit over numerous range trips. I am considering just replacing it with an iron buckle, something more PC anyway. Good tip!

 

[LRB]

Actually, brass buckles were more common than iron, which would have to have been forged, whereas brass buckles were cheaper, cast, and imported in great numbers.

 

[Obi-Wan Cannoli]

I have been a little obsessed with the rapid patina on metal thing...but then I just thought to myself that if you wanted to make your rifles, knives, buckles, etc...look period correct: wouldn't you want blindingly shiny brass? The low levels apprentices probably spent half their day polishing brass so that things would sell faster? We see patina on antiques, but for items that were new two hundred years ago, those people probably wanted to flaunt what they had? :idunno:

 

[Artificer]

I have been a little obsessed with the rapid patina on metal thing...but then I just thought to myself that if you wanted to make your rifles, knives, buckles, etc...look period correct: wouldn't you want blindingly shiny brass? The low levels apprentices probably spent half their day polishing brass so that things would sell faster? We see patina on antiques, but for items that were new two hundred years ago, those people probably wanted to flaunt what they had? :idunno:

Period civilians in towns/cities who could afford the more expensive items made of brass (rather than cheaper Iron items) would have kept their brass shiny or had their servants/slaves shine them, much as they had their silver cleaned/polished at regular intervals. The 18th century British soldier spent a great deal of time polishing his brass, not only on buckles or fewer cases of brass buttons, but also the brass parts of his musket and other gear.

When someone in the 18th century purchased something as "new," they (like most of us in our daily lives) wanted those things to LOOK new. Some things wore out faster than others throughout a person's life, so they would have had new or replacement items along with items that were older and more used.

What a modern person wishes to do with reproduction items is completely up to them, but an 18th century person generally would have thought it crazy to artificially age something that was new, with some few exceptions like for those who faked currency or coinage.

Gus

 

[Crewdawg445]

The best technique for aging brass, let it age... period.

When left out in the elements and used, it won't take long for it to show.

Problem with artificially aging brass is it looks artificial. If you must do it, BP in my experience is great at tarnishing brass quickly.

Still, nothing beats good use. :thumbsup:

Gus is spot on, most think back in the day everything looked aged! Wrong, with my brass hardware I just periodically buff the surfaces with a soft cloth and let it naturally shine and age. You certainly have the right to do as you wish, forced finishes can look very good if done properly, however I've seen allot were things definitely look forced.

 

[SgtErv]

All superb points here. As usual!

I think there was a finish on these particular items that kept them looking new. I took some steel wool to them, however, and should have fixe that. Now they'll age a bit more naturally. I ended up knocking enough of the blue off with steel wool so that it looks just a bit more dull than before. That'll do!

 

[Crewdawg445]

Yes modern brass hardware from stores usually has a shellac coating. As you did, buff with steel wool and good to go.

 

[Artificer]

You can almost drive yourself crazy attempting to authentically emulate cleaning and polishing with 18th century materials. Some of us have tried it. :rotf:

Different kinds of Emory Powder and "Brick Dust" are commonly mentioned items used by the 18th century Military to polish both the Iron and Brass of their muskets and other accoutrements.

OK, so if you REALLY want to be "authentic" then you want original 18th century period brick/s to powder, right? Actually, that was not as difficult here in Virginia as one might think. I talked to a friend who sold bricks and over the course of a few weeks, he got various pieces of original 18th century bricks that were being replaced at various historic places. (You can imagine his surprise that I requested such a thing and yes, it took some explaining.) :haha:

HOWEVER, not all 18th century bricks had/have the same amount of abrasive quality, due to how the bricks were made. I found out that bricks toward the center of the kiln were harder and used for fireplaces or structural uses and the bricks at the outside edges of the kiln were softer and used for "fill" or outside walls. So the dust from structural bricks are better for polishing Iron/Steel Barrels and Locks, while the softer bricks from the edges of the kiln are better for finer polishing of brass.

Where else can you get such "useful" information than a forum like this? :haha: :rotf: :haha:

Gus

 

[Artificer]

Actually, brass buckles were more common than iron, which would have to have been forged, whereas brass buckles were cheaper, cast, and imported in great numbers.

Wick,

With respect, brass buckles and other items made from brass were always more expensive than the same items made from Iron or Steel in the 18th century, as long as the brass items were acceptable for the intended use. There were two reasons for this.

I agree that labor costs were less to cast brass into buckles than forging iron into a buckle in the 18th century, but the brass alloy itself cost so much more than Iron because of the cost of obtaining the materials to make it and the cementation process to make the brass alloy. So Iron buckles were the cheapest, then steel more expensive, then brass more expensive yet.

The other reason brass buckles were more expensive was because people would pay more for Brass than Iron or Steel Buckles. IOW, they were willing to pay more for the "golden look" of Brass over Iron/Steel.

Of course the higher cost of Brass buckles over Iron or Steel buckles did not rule out Brass buckles from being used on period Shot Pouches, for those who could afford it. However, many frontiersmen were not affluent enough to afford brass buckles, though they could more readily afford an Iron Buckle from England or Europe - where most buckles were made prior to the AWI.

So the degree of HC/PC "correctness" of the material the buckle is made from, is more in the economic standing of the person one is wishing to emulate/interpret.

Gus

 

[Crewdawg445]

Thank you for sharing! That's why this forum just rocks!

 

[Capt. Jas.]

Actually, brass buckles were more common than iron, which would have to have been forged, whereas brass buckles were cheaper, cast, and imported in great numbers.

Wick,

With respect, brass buckles and other items made from brass were always more expensive than the same items made from Iron or Steel in the 18th century, as long as the brass items were acceptable for the intended use. There were two reasons for this.

I agree that labor costs were less to cast brass into buckles than forging iron into a buckle in the 18th century, but the brass alloy itself cost so much more than Iron because of the cost of obtaining the materials to make it and the cementation process to make the brass alloy. So Iron buckles were the cheapest, then steel more expensive, then brass more expensive yet.

The other reason brass buckles were more expensive was because people would pay more for Brass than Iron or Steel Buckles. IOW, they were willing to pay more for the "golden look" of Brass over Iron/Steel.

Of course the higher cost of Brass buckles over Iron or Steel buckles did not rule out Brass buckles from being used on period Shot Pouches, for those who could afford it. However, many frontiersmen were not affluent enough to afford brass buckles, though they could more readily afford an Iron Buckle from England or Europe - where most buckles were made prior to the AWI.

So the degree of HC/PC "correctness" of the material the buckle is made from, is more in the economic standing of the person one is wishing to emulate/interpret.

Gus

:thumbsup:
I think the most economical were die forged iron and cast bronzy brass. Hand cut steel was more expensive IIRC and I think may have rivaled or gavesome cast silver and gilt a run for their money at times?
I have seen some lead patterns for sand casting buckles that were dug at Williamsburg.

 

[Artificer]

Speaking of excavations at Williamsburg, am I mistaken they dug up at least one or more of these buckles there in the Pre-AWI context? The reason I ask is because the British Museum has this type dated 1800-1900.
https://finds.org.uk/database/artefacts/record/id/755318

Gus

 

[Capt. Jas.]

Gus,
That simple shape spans quite a bit of time from what I know.
I expect the one in that link has relational data and context to suggest their date.