The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Skunkworks > Gear and Accessories

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old July 16, 2016, 08:37 AM   #1
Gabe1972
Member
 
Join Date: July 29, 2014
Location: Western New York
Posts: 39
Pointed or "Parker Hale" style jags?

I finally broke the piece of junk three piece cleaning rod I had, so I purchased a Tipton 36" carbon fiber rod. While at it, I purchased a couple of brass jags and nylon brushes, but I wasn't sure if I should get the pointed kind or the "Hale Parker" wraparound kind. In the end I decided to go with what I know, being the pointed kind, but what do you think of the wraparound type? Are there any better or worse, or is it simply personal preference and neither is really better or worse than the other?

Thanks.

Last edited by Gabe1972; July 19, 2016 at 02:38 AM.
Gabe1972 is offline  
Old July 16, 2016, 01:19 PM   #2
T. O'Heir
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 12,453
Really doesn't make much difference. I suppose there is an argument that says a wrap around has a greater risk of leaving a patch in the barrel, but it'd be a really silly argument. Always opted for whatever's cheap or on sale myself.
__________________
Spelling and grammar count!
T. O'Heir is offline  
Old July 16, 2016, 01:28 PM   #3
Gabe1972
Member
 
Join Date: July 29, 2014
Location: Western New York
Posts: 39
Although I saw some reviews where people said it cleaned more thoroughly, I'd be a little afraid that, even though it's held in place by force, the patch may come off of the jag and then you've got brass against the rifling. I realize it's only brass, but still. I'd rather know for sure that the patch is in place. That's the one thing that made me go the way I did.

I appreciate the reply.
Gabe1972 is offline  
Old July 17, 2016, 10:57 AM   #4
g.willikers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 28, 2008
Posts: 10,442
How about wrapping the cleaning patch around a brush for best effect.
That way it can't get loose and it also has good pressure on the bore surface.
__________________
Walt Kelly, alias Pogo, sez:
“Don't take life so serious, son, it ain't nohow permanent.”
g.willikers is offline  
Old July 17, 2016, 01:58 PM   #5
Gabe1972
Member
 
Join Date: July 29, 2014
Location: Western New York
Posts: 39
Quote:
How about wrapping the cleaning patch around a brush for best effect.
That's actually a fantastic idea. I'll give that a try to see how well it works. Thanks.
Gabe1972 is offline  
Old July 18, 2016, 12:17 PM   #6
smarquez
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 8, 2011
Posts: 135
Lately I've been using these. They seem to get a lot of crap out of the barrel and it is definitely wet when I does. I have not run any kind of side by side test with it and a patch.
I clean as normal and then pull this through.
http://www.basspro.com/Remington-Squ...3030606063515/
smarquez is offline  
Old July 19, 2016, 02:43 AM   #7
Gabe1972
Member
 
Join Date: July 29, 2014
Location: Western New York
Posts: 39
smarquez,

Now that's an interesting looking thing. I've always had decent results with traditional methods, but that looks like it might be something that is at least worth a try. Maybe next time I get some supplies I will get one of these. I locked the page in my favorites. Thanks.
Gabe1972 is offline  
Old July 31, 2016, 03:45 AM   #8
RSKENT
Member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2004
Location: Land of Blue Sky and Sunshine
Posts: 38
Pointed for general cleaning.

Parker Hale for bore paste.
RSKENT is offline  
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.05310 seconds with 8 queries