OzFclass

Hi All,
Is there any scientific evidence that carbon should "harden" when cooling?
I would have thought once it had formed that was it?

Tim - it would be an interesting process to study. Evidence is pretty anecdotal at this stage as far as I can see. I am not sure whether it hardens or whether the chemicals work better at the higher temperatures????? Certainly if you read the literature on ultrasonic cleaning most of these chemical surfactants work better at 70-80 degrees C (just can't hold hand on steel at 65-70).

But try this - next shot you have - wipe the carbon off the neck of your brass immediately after firing - it comes off easily with fingers. Then leave for a few hours and try again........

In all my many years of shooting - and that includes my wife's rifles as well, I have never experienced this carbon fouling that everyone talks about. I don't use paste -- just a good bronze brush and a good solvent ( short scrub )
I think a lot of you blokes see too much with your borescopes which causes you to worry unnecessarily and use cleaning methods which ultimately destroy your otherwise good barrel.
Alternatively your cleaning methods are next to useless allowing your barrel to foul, necessitating harsh remedies which have the same result.

Barry - to quote several (well respected and experienced) gunsmiths I have been talking to recently - "carbon fouling is the most common cause of loss of accuracy they are seeing lately"- whether it is different additives in the powder or some of the newer cleaning systems simply not working. There is also a trend to let barrels go for 200 rounds between cleans.

One gunsmith stated a 308 barrel was returned to him as a "dud" that was that bad that when he slugged it the slug measured 0.303 - now imagine that wobbling down the rest of the bore. After scrubbing and pasting it returned to full size.

I don't disagree with you on technique. Somehow I think the old bronze brush and Hoppes (tried and tested system) is better than many "modern day miracles" that only require nylon or patches. A pasting every few hundred rounds seems to work with this and gives proven long barrel life and effective results. After trialling most of these new carbon removers I also believe many of the other cleaners will work with the bronze brush (as you say - short scrub) as well.....just hard to get it out with a patch or nylon.

ps I also believe it is exagerated by "overbored cases". I originally faced a problem with the 6.5*284 and 2213 and a few guys up here with 243AI were seeing the same. The 7mm magnum seems worse than the 284 which in turn seems worse than the 308. I imagine the extra heat concentrated in the first few inches is the cause.

No doubt bore scopes come to play here and it appears as maybe more barrels are indeed being lost to overcleaning as much as carbon fouling causing accuracy issues.....???

Yep

DaveMc wrote: - to quote several (well respected and experienced) gunsmiths I have been talking to recently - "carbon fouling is the most common cause of loss of accuracy they are seeing lately"-

I'm certainly no gunsmith, but from what I have seen with my own barrels and even more so with a few friends I have helped out lately is that carbon is the biggest killer out there. A few friends have had super accurate barrels which started spraying shots and showing early pressure signs. They all guaranteed their barrels were clean as the patches were coming out clean, but the bore scope showed heavy carbon build up. With a heavy Iosso or KG session and lots of foulers the barrel was back to shooting great again. my thoughts are too many people concentrate on copper as it is easy to see at the muzzle and on patches and don't worry about the carbon which they cant see. I have also found, though accident at the worst time is that moly and HBN may have stopped copper fouling in my barrels, but only reduced, not stopped carbon build up.
As far as powders, I found some of the Vihta Vouri powders appear to cause much less carbon build up than the ADI powders, 2209,2213sc and 2217 which I use. I also love the old Hoppes solvent (mine is mixed with Kroil) which stays soaking in my barrels for months at a time, compared to the newer wonder solvents.

I've always been amazed at the usage that British TR shooters claim for their barrels - over 10,000 rounds being claimed regularly by some of my correspondents. Because they shoot squadded in groups of three, they have better access to immediate cleaning than we do - once they've shot, their scoring duties are finished, whereas morally, if not legally, we are expected to take over scoring duties immediately we remove our kit from the range.

One consistent element of their cleaning regeime seems to be to remove general fouling daily at least & apply JB or the like every couple of hundred rounds or so. Previous contributors to this thread have expressed opinions on the effectiveness of the latter to delay, or more likely "repair" its effect by "patching" the voids in the firecracking. This practice is not unknown locally. Unless I misunderstand his process, KHGS uses a similar technique & might like to comment further on this. For myself, I ran a barrel as a TR & FS tool for the best part of 6000 rounds (pre-ICFRA target, I must admit) using a similar cleanout technique & only changed it out to attend the first FS teams event at Bendigo.

Barry- I wish to know what this "short scrub" is. The only short scrub I ever tried had a marble in the bottle that was used to shake up and get the abrasive material in suspension. Ive heard people say this stuff isnt abrasive, but shake it for a while pour some on your fingers and rub them together... hey presto, theres grit in there!

If it is indeed the same stuff you use, then on a bronze brush and pushed down a barrel this would definitely be similar in cleaning action to iosso/jb paste.

After running around trying to see just what does the best job of carbon, I may have to retract my methods and go back to the bronze brush and hoppes method. Certainly much more user friendly than the harsh engine cleaner chemicals. More frequent cleanings are also my plan, any chance there is to remove carbon (lunch or end of days shooting) I will do it. Saves getting caught out with layers upon layers of fouling and needing more savage abrasive cleans at the end of it.

Brad,

I've been using Short Scrub for many years now. Its an all-purpose solvent invented by the late Tom Lowndes who was a leading F-Std shooter (he won the first ever F-Std No 1 Queens badge in 2002 plus another 4). I would describe Short Scrub as a stronger version of Shooters Choice. You can leave it in the barrel for days, and it removes both carbon and copper, although I find Sweets is much quicker for copper removal. I apply it with a bronze brush ASAP after shooting at the end of the day. Then if shooting again the next day, leave the Sweets till the morning when the barrel is cold (using nylon brush).

Currently Short Scrub is available from the VRA and SARA shops, but I have heard recently that production has ceased.

Alan

johnk wrote:I've always been amazed at the usage that British TR shooters claim for their barrels - over 10,000 rounds being claimed regularly by some of my correspondents. Because they shoot squadded in groups of three, they have better access to immediate cleaning than we do - once they've shot, their scoring duties are finished, whereas morally, if not legally, we are expected to take over scoring duties immediately we remove our kit from the range.

One consistent element of their cleaning regeime seems to be to remove general fouling daily at least & apply JB or the like every couple of hundred rounds or so. Previous contributors to this thread have expressed opinions on the effectiveness of the latter to delay, or more likely "repair" its effect by "patching" the voids in the firecracking. This practice is not unknown locally. Unless I misunderstand his process, KHGS uses a similar technique & might like to comment further on this. For myself, I ran a barrel as a TR & FS tool for the best part of 6000 rounds (pre-ICFRA target, I must admit) using a similar cleanout technique & only changed it out to attend the first FS teams event at Bendigo.

John, I use moly in all my barrels which as I have previously said makes the removal of carbon effortless as the carbon does not seem to "stick". I do not use abrasives until firecracking appears, I then use abrasives regularly & reduce the use of "solvents" . My theory is to not have solvents working in the cracks which I believe causes a barrel to take several shots to settle after cleaning as does the presence of unremoved carbon on the bore surface. The abrasive cleans off the surface & leaves carbon in the cracks.
The most important thing to remember when using abrasives is that ALL traces of abrasive must be removed prior to shooting. I believe this is where abrasive use has got a bad name, also use only straight cleaning rods & always try to clean with the rifle at waist height & do not use a bore guide!!
Keith H.
P.S. I know some of you will ask why? Think about it before you ask!!

Brad Y wrote: After running around trying to see just what does the best job of carbon, I may have to retract my methods and go back to the bronze brush and hoppes method. Certainly much more user friendly than the harsh engine cleaner chemicals. More frequent cleanings are also my plan, any chance there is to remove carbon (lunch or end of days shooting) I will do it. Saves getting caught out with layers upon layers of fouling and needing more savage abrasive cleans at the end of it.

Although one particular method might remove carbon better than another, how much carbon can an individual barrel tolerate while maintaining accuracy and velocity expectations. Same question applies, how clean does out brass have to be to be accurate?

If we all knew how each barrel was going to react there would be standard method(s) we would start with and stick with throughout a barrel's life cycle.

A clean barrel is one thing, an accurate barrel is another. It has to be a compromise. Imagine the consequences of finding a BR barrel that you could shoot and hold to less than 0.0010" but you had to clean it back to bare metal between every shot.

Shorter cleaning frequency with a less powerful carbon remover might work well for one barrel. Longer cleaning frequency with a more powerful carbon remover might work well for another.

If I'm taking anything out of this discussion, it's that I have to adapt my cleaning techniques (carbon & copper removal) to suit my barrel and shooting requirements. If I'm not achieving what I want, there are techniques and products that will remove carbon & copper at different rates.

aaronraad wrote:

Brad Y wrote: After running around trying to see just what does the best job of carbon, I may have to retract my methods and go back to the bronze brush and hoppes method. Certainly much more user friendly than the harsh engine cleaner chemicals. More frequent cleanings are also my plan, any chance there is to remove carbon (lunch or end of days shooting) I will do it. Saves getting caught out with layers upon layers of fouling and needing more savage abrasive cleans at the end of it.

Although one particular method might remove carbon better than another, how much carbon can an individual barrel tolerate while maintaining accuracy and velocity expectations. Same question applies, how clean does out brass have to be to be accurate?

If we all knew how each barrel was going to react there would be standard method(s) we would start with and stick with throughout a barrel's life cycle.

A clean barrel is one thing, an accurate barrel is another. It has to be a compromise. Imagine the consequences of finding a BR barrel that you could shoot and hold to less than 0.0010" but you had to clean it back to bare metal between every shot.

Shorter cleaning frequency with a less powerful carbon remover might work well for one barrel. Longer cleaning frequency with a more powerful carbon remover might work well for another.

If I'm taking anything out of this discussion, it's that I have to adapt my cleaning techniques (carbon & copper removal) to suit my barrel and shooting requirements. If I'm not achieving what I want, there are techniques and products that will remove carbon & copper at different rates.

One thing we must remember is that barrels are "female" & that we all have to contend with "Murphy's Law" as well!!
Keith H.

Brad Y wrote:Barry- I wish to know what this "short scrub" is. The only short scrub I ever tried had a marble in the bottle that was used to shake up and get the abrasive material in suspension. Ive heard people say this stuff isnt abrasive, but shake it for a while pour some on your fingers and rub them together... hey presto, theres grit in there!

If it is indeed the same stuff you use, then on a bronze brush and pushed down a barrel this would definitely be similar in cleaning action to iosso/jb paste.

After running around trying to see just what does the best job of carbon, I may have to retract my methods and go back to the bronze brush and hoppes method. Certainly much more user friendly than the harsh engine cleaner chemicals. More frequent cleanings are also my plan, any chance there is to remove carbon (lunch or end of days shooting) I will do it. Saves getting caught out with layers upon layers of fouling and needing more savage abrasive cleans at the end of it.

Brad,
That stuff you had with the ball in the bottle,was a short scrub product,it was an abrasive product as you thought. The short scrub others mention,is Short Scrub Solvent.
Mike.

Thanks Mike for clearing that up. Yes it was abrasive and a good carbon cleaner. As for the other stuff that Alan and Barry are using, Ive never had the opportunity to see it.

Hi Brad,
Yes, what Alan and Mike say is correct-- it's the " Solvent " short scrub not the abrasive mix that you have. The abrasive mix I think had the name " Powder Out "

Alan,
As far as I know Ellie Lowndes is still producing the solvent and will continue to do so. ( as of last Easter )