Gyro wrote:Tell me this please : is there a solvent on the planet that will get under that "ceramic carbon layer" and make it let go so I don't need to cut it away with abrasives ?
Gyro I use CLR for carbon. It's cheap and wont hurt your barrel and it actually works. I know a lot here don't like Eric Cortina much but seeing is believing. Watch the video https://youtu.be/xte_pf3ZhsA Pete
The internet is a stupidity distribution system designed to replace facts with opinions, so that idiots don't have to think.
Gyro wrote:Tell me this please : is there a solvent on the planet that will get under that "ceramic carbon layer" and make it let go so I don't need to cut it away with abrasives ?
Gyro I use CLR for carbon. It's cheap and wont hurt your barrel and it actually works. I know a lot here don't like Eric Cortina much but seeing is believing. Watch the video https://youtu.be/xte_pf3ZhsA Pete
I actually tried CLR for the first time when putting my open guns away for Christmas. I did 1 with CLR and one with Helmar. Then I did the CLR barrel with Helmar and vice versa. Helmar patches came out dirty, CLR came out clean. Take that as you will.
Carbon is what is in the barrel and that is indestructible....nothing will dissolve it, but there are some solvents that will agitate the molecules and loosen then to enable removal.....the best one is elbow grease, and one might find some on a shelf alongside a unicorn horn
Audax wrote:Carbon is what is in the barrel and that is indestructible....nothing will dissolve it, but there are some solvents that will agitate the molecules and loosen then to enable removal.....the best one is elbow grease, and one might find some on a shelf alongside a unicorn horn
I think most people understand that we can't break carbon down easily. I think the bit that many miss is that we arent trying to. What we are attacking with cleaning solvents are the compounds that stick the carbon together. It's not a sheet of carbon but rather a multitude of particles (a lot of which IS carbon) all stuck together. (Molly help prevent it sticking to the barrel.) Melt the glue and it comes out,,,,, with a bit of elbow grease.
I have used moly for near on 30 years now and I will keep using it. As Keith stated it makes cleaning easier and reduces the amount of fouling. I have also found that it can extend the life of the barrel if used from the start. I currently successfully run moly coated projectiles through a 204, 223, 6.5x47, 260 and 308s all shoot extremely well with a properly tuned round.
How does it extend the life of the barrel as it won't prevent throat erosion, the main killer.
I have one rifle still on a diet of moly mainly because I still have several hundred projectiles still coated for it. Once they are gone the barrel will most likely be at the end of its life and that will be the end of moly for me. Have also tried HBN in the same rifle.
[quote="6.5x55ai"]How does it extend the life of the barrel as it won't prevent throat erosion, the main killer.
Exactly....you need more powder with moly and we know or should know hotter loads burn barrel throats quicker than lighter loads...can't see how moly or any other coating that requires more powder will stop or minimise firecracking, and throat degradation in any way.
And yet some studies, flawed or not have shown just that, (possibly only showing nothing really) the theory involved says the the peak pressure happens further down the barrel thus spreading the heat over a larger area, not saying I agree either way as it’s if no interest to me, but the mechanical thinking seems sound
Audax wrote:...you need more powder with moly and we know or should know hotter loads burn barrel throats quicker than lighter loads...can't see how moly or any other coating that requires more powder will stop or minimise firecracking, and throat degradation in any way.
There is a theory about moly that the main reason it drops velocity is because it has fire retardent properties that lower the burn temperature. If true, then that may mitigate the extra erosion from more powder.
6.5x55ai wrote:How does it extend the life of the barrel as it won't prevent throat erosion, the main killer.
Exactly....you need more powder with moly and we know or should know hotter loads burn barrel throats quicker than lighter loads...can't see how moly or any other coating that requires more powder will stop or minimise firecracking, and throat degradation in any way.
I think you need to carefully define "hotter loads". It may be more powder but only to get back up to original velocities, ie similar pressures (which may occur later and therefore further down the barrel.. Whether that's due to reduced friction or, as Alan suggests, a slower burn, it is essentially "the same" load. We can also examine what moly does about fire cracking. A naked bullet will fill those cracks with carbon. You are then pushing a bullet over steel and carbon. With molly filling the cracks, and coating the barrel the bullet continues to run on molly all the way. All just theory and I've only ever mollied 308 so can't really comment on extended barrel life. All I can say is it certainly doesn't shorten it
Last edited by Tim L on Mon Jan 11, 2021 5:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
All very interesting theories.....moly lubricity certainly works at a molecular level, but firecracking voids are huge by comparison and subjected to huge gas velocities, heat and pressure that I suspect may strip the moly thus voidng any lubricity benefits.......my comments reflect some experience with WS-2 on 7mm projectiles. A SAUM has a burnt out throat using 2209 after 563 rounds (starting to produce vert flyers) , 284's using 2217 after ~800. The new 5R SAUM is displaying serious firecracking after 50 rounds...the 308W naked with 300 rounds still like new obviously nothing to do with coatings, but chamber conditions.
Smokeless powder has graphite content anyway, but it appears that WS-2 had no benefit in prolonging my barrel life....what is interesting using 2209 the barrel erosion did not extend as far as with 2217, so re-chambering was feasible, but not with 2217....erosion and wear appears to be more related to powder and charge weights than anything else, and it will do what it wants regardless of what we decide...
G'day All, I still use moly, its about how long you can go before cleaning. I'll keep using it. Barrels are consumables and nothing will stop the blow torch effect on the barrel steel with every shot......hotter loads will accelerate the erosion. I was once told that eroded barrels should never be totally clean and moving to iosso paste (or similar) will leave the crap in the heat cracking where it belongs and just remove the fouling we dont want. Think of it as spakfilla for barrels. Just my 2 cents... Cheerio geoff
Menu
Newest members