Anodized or cerakoted reciever extension?

Rodder

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
86   0   0
Location
Ontario
I'm looking to replace the 3 position receiver extension on my MDT chassis for one with more adjustability. I've narrowed things down to a Strike industries (anodized) and Timber Creek Outdoors (cerakoted) receiver extension. As far as I'm aware the Strike industries extension is not Type 3 anodized.

I know that anodizing is typically the more durable coating for AR parts, but with this extension receiving all of its wear from the buttstock sliding over it, I'm wondering if the natural lubricity of cerakote may be the better option. I was hoping for some feedback from people who have used extensions with either coating. This rifle is going to get a lot of use so long term wear is what I'm interested in.
 
Not all anodizing is created equal. Type III hard anodizing is bomb proof. Many others will show scratches just by looking at it. Cerakote will show scuffing on such a part depending how tight the fit is. Not all Cerakote is equal for that matter and depends somewhat on the individual applicator. As others have said, pick the one that suits you best for features or price and don't worry about the guaranteed inevitable scratches on that part.
 
Back
Top Bottom