OzFclass

This is a FWIW for anyone who hasn’t had too much discussion and online reading about barrel cleaning. I’m one of ‘us’ in that regard – I’ve taken on board many views, but have also kept experimenting until now. I’ve drawn some conclusions that may be interesting to others who aren’t welded to their current preferred methods. As I mentioned a few weeks ago on a related post, I am confident that none of the dedicated carbon removing solvents do much. Over the past 8 or ten cleanings, which I do after anywhere after 50-120 rounds of build-up, I’ve found that anything that serves to lubricate efforts with either bronze brush or patch wrapped undersize nylon brush (for 308 I use 7mm nylon brush with 2 ¼” patch 'stabbed' in the middle) pretty much works the same: a substantial layer/coating of black stuff comes out seemingly with the same wonderful ease, whether I lube patches with dish detergent, any of several carbon specializing products (Helmars, CLR, Bore Tech and KG), or the generalist compounds (Butch’s, Bore Tech Copper), or even dedicated copper removers (Sweets, Bore Tech Copper removal, Pro Shot). In all instances, additional soaking does just about nothing with patches alone. Leaving carbon dedicated products overnight doesn’t make a difference. It’s not until serious bronze brushing, or application of abrasive to patches (my nylon brush with patch method gets a firm pressure in chamber, presumably conforming to a degree with lands and groves topography) that additional carbon is removed as evidenced with bore scope. Overnight soaking with copper dissolving compounds on the other hand, do glean the touted results.

So here’s what I have found works best for me. I’ve tried mixing IOOSO (and less successfully J&B products) into various solvents and products in about a one in 20 volume ratio (I haven't yet experimented with ratio). Short story is that with very little IOOSO mixed into an application bottle of Sweet’s (which is essentially ammonia and detergent) my barrel cleaning is contracted to a very short effort. I’m all in with Sweets now – it has a great consistency for the initial removal of ‘carbon’ (or whatever that initially easy-to-wipe out black stuff is) is done with undersized nylon-brush-with-patch and straight Sweets. One advantage of using Sweets is that it is incidentally going after the copper at muzzle end of barrel from the get-go. Then I apply the Sweets/IOOSO blend to the patch/brush combo through the bore guide port. I then run the patch up and down the length of the barrel four or five times. Without removing the remnant gunk, I then run a newish bronze brush up and down 8 or ten times, thinking that this will attend to corners of lands and grooves. I clean the bronze brush with metho to extend its life. I then patch out the gunk with patch/nylon brush combo using small amount of Ballistol - though anything thicker than water will work as well. I then clean chamber/carbon ring using a method that I’ll post later if this one has interest – it is also short and sweet. Then the action, then one more light run of Ballistol to finish the process. Total time less than five minutes. I have measured the difference between POI of first post-clean sighter with barrel left at bare metal vs addition of a thin coat of Ballistol. The former causes about a one MOA drop on target, the later brings first sighter pretty much up to ensuing group. On inspecting with borescope, that little bit of cleaning appears to remove all but a ghost of grey remnant/stain (almost undetectable – I’d bet most shooters would declare it carbon-free), and no remaining copper. The unknown for me is: a) does that abrasive cleaning method shorten barrel life, and b) is ‘back to bare metal’ necessarily a good thing. I have not yet experienced a barrel that shoots noticeably better clean vs not clean, but I haven’t had the amount of experience of many others have had, some of whom argue one way – others going the other. So far as a) above goes, it's another one that appears to divide the big boys into two camps. I feel that it is only abrasion, be it a kazillion passes with bronze brush, or short-cutted with the use of abrasive pastes (either home brewed or commercial (J&B, IOOSO)) that budges baked-on carbon. I believe that the solvents don’t work. PS: the approx 1:20 mix of abrasive paste to Sweet's (or perhaps any thicker-than-water agent) must be shaken before use - the IOOSO falls out of solution overnight.

Interesting read/method John.
I have found pretty much the same as you regarding solvents, they don't work. or it takes a massive amount of effort to get a poor result. I am now using JB paste with fair results again a lot of work but at least the barrel comes out clean. I'll try the mix you suggest and see how it goes.

G'day All,
I clean after every day of shooting with moly bullets, usually no more than 50-70rds. The first shot will be low but the second shot will be fine, and the wind drift is useable from the first shot.
I use Butches and about 3 patches to get the loose stuff out, then butches with a bronze brush to remove as much a s possible, it also rough's up the carbon to increase the surface area so the solvent can work more effectively.....IMHO.
After soaking I use a P-H style jag with Chux cut to wrap around the jag for a tight fit, then smear a small blob of Iosso onto it and use Butches as a lubricant so the tight fitting Chux can move easily.
you know you have the right fit when the cleaning rod turns with the rifling.
Because most of the fouling is near the chamber end, I push the rod in about 4"/100mm, then 8"/200mm extending about 4"/100 per stroke.
DO NOT push the patch out of the barrel, stop it when the tip is level with the muzzle and repeat 2-3 times with the same patch of Chux.
Patch out with Butches, then dry patch the barrel for borescoping
This method concentrates the effort at the front half of the barrel and using a borescope you can quickly find the point of when you have removed the carbon.
I've used this method for many years on many different benchrest and f class barrels and calibres with no loss of accuracy. BRT taught me this method in 2007 on one of their training courses and that was with JB, Iosso is much more effective. I wouldn't add Iosso to a solvent as you dont know what it does to the solvent, That's why I add the solvent to be a lubricant for the patch and it also helps to remove the carbon/copper when used with Iosso.
Clean barrels are accurate barrels and you can trust them!
Hope this helps
Cheers Geoff

John Weigel wrote: I am confident that none of the dedicated carbon removing solvents do much.

.............

So here’s what I have found works best for me. I’ve tried mixing IOOSO (and less successfully J&B products) into various solvents and products in about a one in 20 volume ratio (I haven't yet experimented with ratio). Short story is that with very little IOOSO mixed into an application bottle of Sweet’s

John a couple of observations:
1. The reason that carbon "solvents" don't do much is that there is no way that they are going to dissolve carbon. The job of solvents is to dissolve, but carbon is essentially insoluble with normally available chemicals, so no, they aren't going to work.
To dissolve carbon you will need concentrated sulfuric acid and nitric acid preferably hot or possibly carbon tetrachloride. The acids are dangerous and carbon tetrachloride is a known cancer causing chemical.

2. Mixing chemistry together of unknown composition can have unforeseen consequences. Mixing Sweets and Iosso may be perfectly safe but then again it may not, and could be bad for barrel steel. I wouldn't leave it there for any extended time.

I use JB or Iosso as written on the tube/jar, every 150~200 rounds or so, i.e. 10 or so times in the life of a barrel. It removes carbon and it not going to leave pits or deposits in my barrel or affect its surface metallurgy.

The lands in a .284 barrel are only 3.5 thou high and I like to keep it that way.
Pete

Thanks for the helpful info and suggestions Pete. For my own sense of confidence, I have taken a mediocre barrel with about 1000 rounds through it to experiment with regarding corrosiveness question. I have plugged the muzzle and filled the barrel with the described solution. Will wait a week or so before inspecting, and shooting to determine any deleterious outcome of the soak. Will report back to this thread with a report.

John
my question then, is how will you determine if there is an effect? It may not be visible and may only become an issue over time.
-----------
I did a bit of research on reactivity and hardness of the materials in question.
Barrel steel (416) has a Moh's hardness of 5~6.5 depending on heat treatment.
I suspect that the abrasive in Iosso and JB is talc or calcite, hardness of 1 and 3 respectively, so safe to use, but not with ammonia as both of these react with ammonia to produce a precipitate of unknown? hardness and residual chemicals of unknown reactivity.
Montana make a solvent - ammonia based with added abrasive, the abrasive is ultra fine silicon dioxide ( aka quartz) and is unreactive. Problem here is on Moh's scale quartz is 7 so it will wear away barrel steel.
----------
I'm one of those dinosaurs that still moly coats projectiles. I don't think it makes a barrel shoot any better, it costs an extra grain of powder on every shot and its a pain because it's always on fingers and then everything I touch.
But it does make cleaning considerably easier because a fair percent of the fouling has moly between it and the barrel steel, so the fouling doesn't stick as hard.
Moly will rust barrel steel because of the sulphides reacting with atmospheric oxygen to produce sulphuric acid but only if left for an extended period. I patch out with Ballistol after shooting to prevent this
Pete

Pete,
If the barrel shoots as accurately after a week of soaking as it did pre test I will be more than confident that my five-minute cleaning routine is not causing a chemically unpredicted problem due to the innovative approach. The system works too well for me to get any more theoretical than that about it.

PS: that's very interesting stuff, especially re hardness of abrasives. Glad I didn't experiment with commercial grade abrasives!

G'day All,
as I remember from high school chemistry in the '80s, chemicals have only so much reactive qualities depending on their dilution, so 10% has far less than 100%. So depending on the "amount" of the main reactive ingredients, that would dictate how aggressive that solvent would work, without risking damage to the barrel.
I'd always worked on giving any solvent about 10-15 minutes of soaking time then patch out and re-apply. I figured any more time was wasted as the chemical reaction of dissolving carbon or copper had reduced the chemical effectiveness of the solvent to basically nothing. A fresh application did more work and sped up the cleaning process.
FWIW of course.
hope this helps.
Cheerio Geoff

Geoff, yes I’ve reached the same conclusion. Most people believe the story about soakin barrel, but my testing has me convinced that any soaking is a waste of time, unless it’s copper only that is targeted, in which case very long soak using one of an assortment of solvents can help. But why do that when such a few runs with diluted abrasive incidentally wipes out copper while carbon removal is principal aim? Truly only five minutes gets done what used to take me 20 minutes AFTER an hour or more of soaking for copper. Thought I should share that, as an addendum to the very exhaustive discussions of the past. Pete raises very good points though, and I now better understand the mechanics of it.

I tried your method John and it works a treat. and that was with JB so will have to get some Iooso and see if it goes even better.