View Full Version : Gun lubricants - again

February 4, 2001, 01:44 AM
I searched an old thread on good gun lubricants. Proper lubrication of firearms has always been a pet peeve of mine, considering that this or that hi-tech grease or mystery oil or dry-powder space age formulas cost more than gold. A few posters in that old thread said they used fully-synthetic motor oil and synthetic automotive grease. My question, which differs in kind from that old post, is: any reason for discouraging the use of a fully synthetic motor oil, formulated from a decent base, in firearms? Same question for the greases.

Other than staining clothes in CC mode...

February 4, 2001, 06:10 PM
I have a question too about lubricants. Now my old Mossberg 500, I use Hoppes to clean, and 3 in 1 to lube, or Hoppes oil. However, I have a new AR-15 (oh yeah!) that I haven't fully assembled yet. I keep reading about CLP in the Gov. manuals, and in other forums. Is CLP the only lube and cleaner that can or should be used on an AR? Or will good old No. 9 and some 3 in 1 be adequate? I need to know so I don't screw up my new toy.


Lance Gothic
February 4, 2001, 08:13 PM
Brothers & Sisters-in-Arms,
Please to view the following:
By your leave.
Lance Gothic

February 9, 2001, 10:32 AM
3 in 1 ?!!!! anybody that would use that stuff on a gun would use WD40 too! Save that junk for squeeky door hinges and the like and get a good high quality lubricant especially made for firearms.

February 9, 2001, 12:05 PM
Perhaps the simplest way to pin this question down is that NO Major firearms mfg. uses or recomends any Motor oil synthetic or otherwise. Nor does the Military use same. There are a number of synthetics, etc. that are used by both and most have MSN #'s. Mobil does not recomend its syn oil for use on firearms if you care to conctact them. FWIW, personally have settled on TW25B grease, actually a "creme" {Used in-house by Glock, *&*, FN USA, Sig, etc.} and Militec-1 syn oil a ca. 10 wt. that is actualy a metal treatment that is reactive to the heat produced by the pistol. Even when "wet" the stuff does not attract &/or hold firing "soot", etc. Tetra grease is also a "stand-by" for the newer lubes. Good info @: http://www.mil-comm.com {TW25B} usually best $ @ http://www.bestdefense.com http://www.militec-1.com and http://www.tetraproducts.com

February 10, 2001, 05:47 PM
Why is Mil-Comm claiming credit for TW25B when TW25B is a Kleen-Bore product?

February 11, 2001, 01:57 AM
It's the other way around. Kleen-Bore is licensed to package & sell TW25B with their own label so long as they acknowledge that it IS TW25B. Check Kleen-Bore's prices against http://www.bestdefense.com and you will see why!

February 11, 2001, 08:33 PM
Thanks for all your input. However a gallon of Break-Free CLP at fifty bucks was too good to pass up, it will give me plenty cover. It was on sale at http://www.cheaperthandirt.com Meanwhile, I'll still look for "the best" lubricant...

Thanks again, folks

Al Thompson
February 11, 2001, 09:17 PM
Romulus - make sure you shake it up before either using or putting it in a smaller container. The Teflon particles tend to sink to the bottom.


February 11, 2001, 10:00 PM
Good point, Giz, thanks. I actually came across the "teflon suspension thing" while doing some web-based research...but no one mentioned the "teflon precipitation thing," as you seem to imply...so thanks

February 12, 2001, 02:04 AM
Interesting test for the various CLPs and lubes done last fall at;
I use Breakfee on most of my firearms except for the Garand and M1A, which used mil spec grease. MWT

February 17, 2001, 02:07 AM
I hope to post an "authoritative" response soon to this marvelous mystery...

February 21, 2001, 04:42 PM
I find it hard to believe that a motor oil (Mobil 1 15-50) that can protect a $500,000 Indy car engine that revs at 15,000rpms+ is not good enough for my handguns. And a $4.00 quart will last me a lifetime.
Somebody prove me wrong. :D

February 22, 2001, 03:07 AM
Brief update:

I am turning over samples of CLP, ProShot Gold, and Shooter's Choice to a chemical engineer who will bench test and give some empirical results. Having just bought a gallon of CLP I find the excersise academic, but it's good to have and spread knowledge if only for its own sake...

February 22, 2001, 05:20 PM
Motor oil is meant for motors. And it doesn't have corrosion protection or other properties for firearms built in.

CLP is old technology being replaced as we speak by the US tri-services with Mil-Comm's tw-25b.

The TW-25B oil, like any synthetic oil formulation, will separate. Extensive US tri-service tests have proven that such separation can be remedied by a quick shake, even though amazingly, the performance of the product is not hindered. The TW-25B sister, MC-3000, used on the F-16, stirs itself once those birds leave the ground.

After initial application, TW-25B coats the surface for long term protection. Bestdefense.com sells i think all of the packagings of tw-25b.

February 22, 2001, 08:31 PM
When you say "separate" what do you mean? I think simply to say motor oil "is for motors" is a reductive statement that doesn't really answer the question of why the application of Mobil 1 is inappropriate for a firearm - it may in fact be such, but on what physico-chemical grounds? The answer would have to include information on the film properties of Mobil 1 versus those of the more "high-tech" gun-specific lubricants.

Corrosion prevention is a distinct subject...more about that later.

Thanks for your input

February 23, 2001, 10:36 PM
Man, is there a lot of crap flying around in this thread. Someone please backup their answers with some real research other than "my Uncle Hans uses XPH35 in his underwear and it works great." I myself am a chemical engineer and know enough to call BS on some statements.

First, Mobil 1 contains some EXCELLENT corrosion inhibitors in the form of long-chain amines (oxygen scavengers). Second, what special "corrosion protection needs" do firearms have that my engine doesn't. In particular, except for temperature differences and alloy differences, and the fact that firearms are coated and therefore the "metal bonding" crap is overated.

Why would Mobil 1 recommend motor oil for firearms? To sell a few more quarts, while taking on some major liability since they don't have a clue what you are doing with the oil. Forget about it...manufacturers rarely if ever recommend a product for use on an "unapproved" application. Don't take it as a blessing or curse that they do not approve of this use...

Why would I care if Sig or any other manufacturer uses an oil or grease in house? Their guns see a few rounds and go in a box for shipment. They use whatever is satisfactory and can be bought cheap, even if they get a better discount for telling us that they use it. Do you think car manufacturers put top notch synthetic in a car before selling it to you? No way, they buy the cheapest crap they can that meets specs.

I gotta tell you that if you believe some snake oil "is reactive to metal" I want to sell you some property I got in Love Canal. Give me a break. This snake oil is probably a good blend of synthetic oils (bought from a large OIL COMPANY), and some other corrosion inhibitors - it is probably good stuff, just don't have a 'gasm over some fiction a fantasy writer came up with over a cup of coffee..."Let's see, 'This specially formulated lubricant took years of R&D and hundreds of thousands of dollars to develop. It actually bonds with the metal in a highly reactive, tramsmographic retrotransformation whereby the neutrinos in the upper micron of the metal surface are transmogrified into the slickest substance known to man...even slicker than SLICK 50."

The fact that some military bureacracy buys the stuff is of no comfort to me...they probably are paying good tax dollars for something they could replace with, say, Mobil 1 from Wal-Mart. Give it a rest.

February 23, 2001, 10:46 PM
Thank yew, Curuzer...now I wish I hadn't bought that CLP! And you've chased away any thought I had of researching the "corrosion prevention" thing...Your argument rings true and authoritative.

Back to my initial post, does your argument hold true for automotive greases as well?


February 23, 2001, 11:02 PM
I can think of one problem with motor oil.....it's too thick. I'm NOT a chemical engineer, but I do spend a lot of time working on firearms. Gun oil tends to be lighter than motor oil for a reason. Different flow characteristics are required. Imagine shooting a weapon full of Cosmoline (saw the results of it).

There are different types of motor oils for different applications. You don't use 5W30 in an engine designed for 10W40. Why not stick with a product designed for the purpose you have in mind?

Last, what 'coatings' are you talking about? Blueing (a controlled rust), Parking(a controlled reaction that etches the metal)? Even an NP3 coating wears. You know those shiny spots on your weapon? THE COATING WORE OFF.....and the metal needs to be protected. I doubt you can re-blue or park your guns as frequently as I do. That means you have to protect your guns from wear. By the way, an interesting effect to parking is that the finish itself tends to hold oil. when a parked finish is dry, it can rust because water can get into the finish. Some oils do stay on metal longer (better wear properties). If I'm not mistaken, engines are designed under the 'oil bath' concept, where oil is continually pumped throughout the engine (hence 'oil pressure) during operation. Engine internals will begine to rust if the engine is not run for a while (my experience as little as one month). Firearm mehanicals tend to be less tolerant of rust (functioning) than my favorite 350 small block.....

February 24, 2001, 12:58 AM
Whoa. Hold on.

Romulus, CLP is a fine lubricant and will protect your gun. Keep your weapon lubricated (not too wet, not too dry) and it will give you many years of enjoyment. Many gun makers recommend against using grease on your gun (other than for storage). Grease generally attracts dirt and provides marginally better protection than a good liquid lubricant. If you must use grease, I have no reason to believe that Tetra or any other "white grease" would provide significantly different protection. Some people use Slick 50 PTFE grease, others say that it is "gritty" and will damage your gun. I honestly don't know, other than to say that if your manufacturer says "use oil" I would use oil.

By the way, Mobil 1 sells a spray synthetic lubricant you can use for guns (Castrol/Hoppes and Pennzoil also make synthetic gun lubes). I like and use the Castrol/Hoppes brand.

George, the main reason engine lubricants are viscous at room temperature is a function of the package of polymeric additives needed to maintain a low viscosity at low temperatures (ie. winter cold starts) and stable viscosity at operating temperature (eg. hot engine). My educated guess is that, while gun lubricants are not purposely made viscous (because it is of no operating benefit), it is likely also of no detriment (it won't hurt the gun, because it doesn't really affect lubricity whether or not it is thick...to a limit). Having said that, I favor using Castrol/Hoppes or some other similar sythetic GUN oil (synthetics DO provide a small advantage over distillates, again in my educated opinion).

Now regarding blueing, parkerizing, and other coatings: so called "miracle lubricants" that "bond" to the metal depend on adhesion directly to metal surfaces - and only steel and iron for that matter. If 95% of the surface has been blued or parkerized, then you get absolutely no advantage from the "miracle lubricant" (the additive sits on the coating surface, and the carrier oil does all the work). While lubricant that soaks into the pores of the metal will protect from corrosion, it provides absolutely no extra "bonding protection" on the surface, which is largely parkerized/blued. Now, you are right that some surfaces will become worn and the metal will become exposed. How will the "miracle lubricant" help in that case? Well, in order for the active ingredient to work, it needs heat, friction, and significant time to properly bond. In a car engine, this happens quite naturally. On a gun, when do significant heat, friction, and time come together...NEVER. The gun only really operates for a few minutes during an hour at the range. That is not enough time for bonding to occur. For those who decide to bake or use a hair blower, they risk exposure to strong acid vapors, and cannot nearly create the conditions created inside an engine (which is where the d**n additives were meant for in the first place). Now teflon enriched gun oils are a different matter...I have no real problem with those. Take my advice, the reason all those "miracle lubes" lose their law suits is that they are stretching the truth beyond its scientific limits. Pick up a good gun lubricant at the gun shop and avoid all the "mop and glow" products.

February 24, 2001, 03:21 AM
I can only base my opinion from what I've seen and experienced. If, say, EEZOX doesn't 'bond' to the metal and give any added protection, Then how come other oils bead up when applied to the EEZOX-treated metal (blued in this case), and continued to do so after a cleaning with Sweet's solvent? I tend to believe what I see with my own eyes, and I've seen the improvement more than once. Besides, we aren't talking car treatments here....but if we were:

If it's a given that synthetics are better than the natural oils, then why is it so hard to accept that one synthetic is better than another for a specific purpose?

Last, I hate to disabuse your faith in the teflon enriched stuff, but anyone who has used it can tell you that it is only as good as its carrier oil. The teflon, if not balled up in the bottom of your bottle and completely useless, is NOT aiding in the lubrication of your weapon past first shot---the only thing left is the carrier oil.Remember, the teflon is not bonding to the metal, and will move away from the bearing surfaces like a greased marble pinched between two fingers. In fact, the teflon particles tend to lump up in out-of-the-way nooks and crannies of your weapon and help to form crud deposits that can cause malfs. Remember also that most auto manufacturers recommended discontinuing teflon treatments due to particles clogging up everything, including the filters. Same thing happens with firearms.

February 24, 2001, 11:53 AM
Eezox is a good product. Based on their description (ie. synthetic, not petroleum based; creates a dry thin-film; repels water and oils) it must be a silcone based lubricant (e.g. silicone, siloxanes, polyorganosiloxanes). Now these products, as you have experienced, are SUPERB at corrosion resistance. They are also excellent lubricants AT TEMPERATURE AND PRESSURE EXTREMES. At room temperature, mineral oils and particularly synthetics are better lubricants. In addition, silicone based lubricants have poor surface tension and adsorption - meaning that under heavy friction, they rub off and no longer provide good lubrication. If you later decide to discontinue use, silicone based lubricants tend to interfere with your new oil, and they are difficult to remove with other chemicals (I hope you like it). In principle, if you value corrosion resistance a lot and lubrication a little less, Eezox is your best bet.

Now regarding teflon, under extreme temperature and pressure, yes - teflon will do some nasty stuff like evaporate and create bad fumes, and also clump up. Now, on your handguns/rifles I don't think you get extreme temperatures and pressures. As you note, it is very important for dispersion that the teflon is shaken before application. The fact that it can settle is not problematic in and of itself.

In addition, as the parts move around, the teflon will tend to move around and may not be as effective if it is dry (it is better with a good carrier lubricant). Finally, if you clean relatively frequently I don't think there is any major chance for clumping up or any other "engine-like" phenomenon. The reason teflon is bad when it clumps in an engine is primarily that it plugs the filter (very bad). Solids in the engine are also not a good thing.

Gun oils are not a scientific breakthrough area. Most of the "miracle gun oils" are old technology brought to a small, new market. You can bet that new technologies are going into the big markets first. Teflon, siloxanes, chlorinated paraffins, synthetic organics: they are ALL old technology packaged and marketed under flashy names. In addition, they all have unique problems in use with weapons (some which you don't know about). For example, chlorinated paraffins tend to create hydrochloric acid and eat away at the very metal it is supposed to protect - and some people think this stuff is great, and bake/blow dry them onto their weapons! Don't be impressed - pickup something your gunmaker recommends and lube away.

February 25, 2001, 01:52 PM

I'm curious what you think regarding Sentry Solutions products. I have used their stuff for a couple of years and like the dry film (i.e. no oil on my clothes etc). They are a major PITA to apply but once set up have done the job for me. My guns usually run fine on this stuff once they have been repeat treated a couple of times. I am particularly interested in your opinions regarding their reported surface bonding to metals.

Very interesting and informed commentary, thank you gentlemen.



February 25, 2001, 11:27 PM

I am going to go out on a limb since I have never used Sentry Solutions and am not familiar with their chemistry. Their wording places a lot of emphasis on: dry-film, great rust protection, not silicone, can rub off under lots of shear. These are all properties of SILOXANES (which technically are NOT silicone, although they are related). Again, if rust protection and easy cleaning are your primary concerns, these are great products. I would just make sure to renew the coatings on the high friction areas regularly, since these products do rub off and do not "flow back" into the dry areas to replenish themselves (like oil). I may actually look into these and try them on one of my guns.

By the way, siloxanes will "bond" (more like stick to) most metalic materials (and I believe to the coatings too). This is a different mechanism than that claimed by other new age lubricants that will react only with ferric metals (iron/steel) directly.


February 26, 2001, 11:22 AM
My experience with using the Sentry products is pretty good. I run a couple of Sigs on it no problem. I had difficulty getting my wife's Beretta to run on it. I emailed Mike Mrozek and he indicated that firearms that have prev been lubricated with teflon containing products are more difficult to treat as the SmoothKote doesn't easily bond because of the teflon. I had used CLP w/teflon for years on that gun.

My Sig239 OTOH was Sentry'd right out of the box and required 3 repeated cycles of application, heating, and then shooting, then clean and reapply. After the 3rd application I have not had to reapply since. I've run around 5000 rounds through the gun since. I have touched up two small areas on the barrel with a qtip saturated with SmoothKote on 2 different occasions (took about 90 nanoseconds). My 228 which I bought used required 3 full cycles of application and then a subsequent full repeat after about 500 rounds, then none since (about 1000 rounds). I gave up on the Beretta and went back to oil.

I currently have 2 BHPs that I am in the process of applying/shooting. I'm on the 3rd full application with one gun running 100% and the other having an occasional stoppage. I suspect that after another application this will disappear.

I have a couple of bolt action rifles that I'm currently in the process of doing and will try to report back when I have results.

My sense is that these are good products IFFF you are willing to do the up front application and thorough degreasing that proper application requires. It is a PITA and timeconsuming initially, but it's awful nice now to go shoot an hour or two and basically run a brush down the barrel and shake off/brush off the rest for 2 min total cleaning and then back in the holster. Plus, no stains on my white dress shirts.

I'd be very interested in hearing how you make out Curuzer. Thanks for the information and once again for a very nicely presented discussion on lubricant properties.



February 26, 2001, 07:36 PM
ANY oil, as opposed to grease, inherently attracts material - sand, dust, dirt, salt, copper buildup, etc. - you don't want that on or in your gun.

TW-25B lubricant protectant does an amazing job at repelling material. The US military has tested it and selected for quite a few weapons programs, and its used by quite a few firearm manufacturers.

Bestdefense.com sells it, as well as it's oil version under the Kleen-Bore label on the site.

MOBIL-1 is great for cars. Not small arms with very different performance requirements.

February 26, 2001, 08:09 PM
Curuzer and George, thank you both for your enlightened dialogue. The interesting thing about this subject is that some of us clean and lubricate our guns more than others following a round of shooting. For instance, when at the range, I shoot 300 rounds minimum at one sitting from any one gun (revolver or pistol except for the .454 Casull). Shooting that many rounds in one given time period tends to heat things up pretty well. I have been using a combination of Militech synthetic and 20 wt. motor oil in one to one concentration; and this only because an IPSC competitor and gunsmith friend recommended it. It seems to work very well. I usually remove the side plate of the revolvers after every other shooting session, thoroughly clean with WD-40 (I know, I know), and blow it dry with compressed air. Then I re-lube with the combo above and reassemble. It seems to have worked swimmingly and no malfs. What say you gentlemen regarding this regimen? More importantly, is there any harm in following it?

February 27, 2001, 10:29 AM

I'll tell you one thing, what the gun industry needs are lubricant standards like the SAE has for cars. That way we keep wackos from making claims they cannot substantiate.

PKAY (or is it butter),

Why do you choose to mix 25w oil with your Militec? Interesting regimen. Any particularly important 25w oil brand?

[Edited by Curuzer on 02-28-2001 at 10:01 AM]

February 27, 2001, 11:05 AM
I've never seen a weapon fail because it was too clean. If a lube works for you, and you acknowledge any quirks in the product you use (I use Tetra grease at high friction points on top of the EEZOX over the whole gun), then go with what you want. For those who carry ALL THE TIME in all kinds of weather, a better corrosion protection package is more important than lubricity. A comp shooter who shoots a great deal indoors or in nice weather only may not need as much corrosion protection, but need greater lubricity.

Go with what fits your needs. Yeah, I love EEZOX. It cleans well, and since I started using it, no trunk gun has picked up a speck of rust. Corrosion protection is critical to me (a rusty gun is NOT a happy gun),so I go with what is best in that area. Some people just like the 'wet look', so they use greasy oils. Just look at what you need, then focus on products that fit that need. Try more than one.......you never know what you might find around the corner.

February 27, 2001, 11:29 AM
Curuzer, I think the mix has something to do with the heat generated after "n" number of rounds, but it could be my friend is "stretching" the Militech. Don't know. Anyway, it's cheap and it works. The Militech is expensive, $20 for a small bottle.

As for "is it butter," would margarine work as a gun lube? It's synthetic.

February 27, 2001, 08:16 PM
check out this thread.


As an engineer, I just don't see particularly difficult requirements for a lube in semi-autos. Just my opinion. See the thread for more discussion.

February 27, 2001, 10:19 PM

Thanks for the link, good stuff. I would [minimally] disagree on only two points, first, unlike engines, guns are not continuously lubricated and their oil is not continuously filtered. As such, the lubricant used should have better initial adsorption so it hangs on better and maintains a good film as it is sheered by the slide going back and forth. Second, there are a ton of wackos trying to sell snake oil into this market - some of that snake oil is actually harmful to weapons. In principal, then, I think you and I agree that "keep it simple" should be the approach - use well accepted lubricants and stay away from the "new age" stuff from low/no reputation guys (particularly if their message is shrill).

PKAY, I am not a believer in using chlorinated paraffins (e.g. Militec) for lubrication. The automotive market has generally phased them out in favor of newer technologies. That is not to say that they are necessarily bad either. I am experimenting with synthetics and siloxanes, and generally believe that a good synthetic (perhaps with Teflon) is all it takes. Good luck.

February 28, 2001, 09:59 AM

I was actually supercharged by your post and did some research on synthetics. Mobil 1 a polyalphaolefin synthetic (PAO), while Amsoil and Castrol are based on synthetic esters. Amsoil is THE original synthetic brand, Mobil 1 was the first PAO, while Castrol has done very well in developing their own proprietary synthetic esters.

Synthetic lubricant molecules can be designed to have polarity to bond with the base metal (so that they form the elusive thin film on metal and don't flow away). They also don't REACT with the metal and don't create nasty byproducts. They are superb lubricants compared to other chemistries out there.

There are a ton of studies done on the differences between polyalphaolefins and synthetic esters. In general, I believe there is a very tiny advantage in PAOs over synthetic esters, but not enough in my opinion to give one up over another.

Now, which should we use? First, if you are already using Mobil 1, Amsoil, Castrol, or another synthetic, and like it, DON'T CHANGE based on my comments. Second, there are some great GUN SPECIFIC products on the market that are synthetic (e.g. Castrol/Hoppes - syn-ester; Break-free - PAO). I like Castrol/Hoppes, but have not tried Break-free. I also like Castrol/Hoppes because it has a very good corrosion protectant (a napthalene sulfonate). Engine oils contain all sorts of stabilizers and additives which, in principle, don't harm your gun. If you like, I would recommend Mobil 1 because it uses PAO chemistry. Which viscosity? Heck if I know. Find a viscosity that stays put. Many people recommend a 15w-30. BTW, I wish Mobil1 would offer a gun specific product.

Finally, both Mobil 1 and Amsoil are producing synthetic ester/PAO blends in order to get the best of both worlds. I'm not ready to discuss whether these are any better than one or the other.

What about other lubricants out there? They may be good products. I would favor synthetic over petroleum based, and am not a proponent of any other new-fangled chemistries. Regarding siloxanes (Eezox? for example), I think they are superb anti-corrosives, and pretty good lubricants. Great stuff if you frequently leave your guns in storage for long periods of time.

PS: Hope this stuff is helpful, I have other things I could be doing :)

[Edited by Curuzer on 02-28-2001 at 11:13 AM]

Master Blaster
March 1, 2001, 03:21 PM
Here is my two cents from my limited personal experience.
I use Castrol synthetic. I use it on my model 41 .22 and on my Kimber Custom Target. I shoot once per week 1-200 rounds. Some times its a couple of weeks between sessions.
I clean after about every 100-200 rounds. The Castrol synthetic stays put between range sessions while the gun is stored (after cleaning) and it stays put while I am shooting. I used to use hoppes oil and it would runn off the slide rails while the gun was stored for a couple of weeks necessitating a relube before shooting. Castrol or Mobil synthetic are tested on a wide range of metal aloys remember engines can have a block made out of aluminum alloy and a piston made from steel alloy. Engines have much closer tollerances than firearms and wider operating temperatures.

In my OPINION Grease of any kind is not a good firearm lubricant, it holds dirt and creates a grinding compound. You will note that grease is usually used in sealed assemblies, like wheel bearings, contamination with water or dirt require the replacement of the grease so the joint or bearing is not destroyed by the contaminant. I used grease on my glock 26 and it collected alot of lint and dirt while riding in a holster. I replace with Castrol and the problem is much less than it was.

Put some grease on you car door hinge or garagedoor track and check out all of the crap that gets attracted to it and stuck in it. Never use grease on a firearm.

Oil flows and contaminants are not held against the bearing surfaces.

JUST My opinion

John Forsyth
March 1, 2001, 04:18 PM
OK, I am going to throw anothr lubricant into the fray. I use dextron type automatic transmission fluid. My guns are stainless and have had no problems at all. I know another shooter that uses STP oil additive mixed with graphite. Its his home brew. It is slicker than you know what.

May 19, 2001, 12:40 AM
Cruzier e-mail me about yoru comment on hkpro and miltec.

Anyone heard of http://www.slip2000.com/

May 20, 2001, 09:25 AM
From earlier in the thread I was relaying the in-progress work with using Sentry Solutions stuff with 2 BHPs. I have one still running 100% on the Sentry, but my wife's gun I have abandoned and am now using Mobil1 5W30 based on the above comments. The gun ran fine for me on the Sentry but she limpwrists ever so slightly and it was being problematic. With the Mobil 1 she's (both gun and wife) flawless. I suspect that the Sentry stuff is adequate but not phenomenal lubrication and that it makes the gun more sensitive to limpwristing induced failures.

The other BHP is now a few thousand rounds without a hiccup on Sentry stuff.

FWIW, more data points for all.

Cruzer: have you ever tried out the Sentry stuff?



Clayton Hufford
May 20, 2001, 01:00 PM
The Sentry line of lubricants are molybdenum disulfide, and provide almost no corrosion protection. Dri-Slide, a mil-spec dry lube which is also moly, contains rust inhibitors and is less expensive, although it doesn't dry quite as fast as Smooth-Kote. Dry lubricants do not attract dirt or dust like wet lubes, but they do not lubricate or protect as well, which is why Sentry recommends a grease for high wear areas, and a rust preventative where needed.
The thing with using motor oil is, they were designed to be used in a closed assembly i.e. an engine, so they attract dirt and debris like mad. No problem for a gun in the closet, but big trouble for a gun that is carried daily.If you are using motor oil on your carry gun, check it daily for excess dust/debris.
I have also heard that Mobil 1 and several other brands marketing "Full Synthetic" are not actually %100 synthetic. Apparantly there is a difference. Pennzoil markets a %100 synthetic oil which is just that. Diffrences between the two names "full" and "%100"?
Several new companies, like Mpro7, are marketing nothing more than a hospital grade machine oil as the end-all solution to all our lubricant needs.
The bottom line is any oil will work-it's not what you use, but how often you use it. I've got a whole box full of wonder lubes that I have tested over the last 5 years, and I cannot tell much difference between most of them as far as lubricity. Most notable is the fact that the majority of these new products do not protect well from corrosion. Break-Free CLP, which has been around for over twenty years, is the best do-all product, and rust preventative that I have ever tested. Another excellent product is Corrosion X, which is a better lubricant than Break-Free CLP, and almost as good at preventing rust.
http://www.midsouthshooterssupply.com (best price on Break-Free)
Russack Chemicals(Dri-Slide)

May 20, 2001, 06:11 PM
Funny. You guys mention every recipe under the sun except the stuff that is getting spec'd in to a long list of US military weapons programs - TW25B - which is replacing the old incumbant, CLP - LSAT, whatever. find it, try it, you'll see... and none of those formulas prevents rust and saltwater corrosion like 25. They don't.

Clayton Hufford
May 20, 2001, 08:55 PM
I can tell you without a doubt that CLP will never be replaced by MIL COMM TW-25B. It is spec'd on some weapons systems, most notably the GAU-2B/A(M134) GE minigun, but it will not be used by artillery, armor, or infantry for all weapons. Try punching tubes with TW-25B! CLP is a multi-purpose product, TW-25B is not. The U.S. Military uses many different lubricants, for different purposes. There are also different contractors. The main contractor for lubricants is Royal Lubricants(ROYCO), and has been since the Vietnam war. The military looks for a product that meets the needs at hand, and a company that can deliver it for the lowest price, i.e. "made by the lowest bidder."

Master Blaster
May 21, 2001, 08:06 AM

Do you have any interest besides tw25B? It seems every time there is a thread remotely related to lubrication you show up with a big plug for tw-25b.

Do you own the company?

May 21, 2001, 09:08 AM
When I ran my tests (http://communities.prodigy.net/sportsrec/gz-rust.html), TW-25B was simply not as good a rust preventative as other products, including Break Free and Eezox. It was clearly good, and better than several others, but not the best.

That said, I still like TW-25B for certain applications. But I *know* drcohen is incorrect in asserting that nothing prevents rust and saltwater corrosion like TW-25B.

And as for replacing CLP, I agree that TW-25B is unlikely to replace it for most military applications. For one thing, TW-25B is not a proper solvent, where as CLP is an excellent powder solvent.

May 21, 2001, 10:21 AM
For pocket carry I use TW-25B because the dry finish doesn't attract lint and grit. But then the gun is finished in hard chrome so rust prevention isn't an issue. And I don't sell the stuff on the web.


May 21, 2001, 12:19 PM
What about using Militec-1

May 21, 2001, 01:28 PM
Char923, I've used Militech and a combo of Militech and 20 wt. motor oil (recommended by an IPSC member and gunsmith). It works fine. However, after following a number of threads and discussions on this BB and others (1911), I have come to the conclusion that you should use whatever works for you. If you clean and lube your guns often, you can use just about any good gun lube or Mobil 1. If you store your guns away without benefit of dessicant and don't shoot them often, you may want to use something that is a proven corrosion prentative. That's why I just made up my own brew mentioned above in an earlier post. Boy, is it slick!

Matt VDW
May 21, 2001, 04:10 PM
It's nice to get some information on the actual chemistry of these lubes for a change.

I'd like to get some information on the following products:

Marvel Mystery Oil

Wilson's Ultimalube


May 22, 2001, 08:51 AM
johnbt, I agree with the reason why you like TW-25B. That was one of the applications I was speaking about above. I particularly like it for lubing pistol magazines, as it can be wiped dry and still provide excellent lubrication and good corrosion resistance, while not attracting/holding lint, grit, powder residue, etc.

Clayton Hufford
May 22, 2001, 11:36 AM
I just tested three motor oils lastnight in the rain, Pennzoil Synthetic 10W-30, Castrol Syntec 5W-30, and Mobil 1 15W-50. All three failed to protect bare 1095 and 4140 steel in moderate rainfall for more than three hours. Marine Tuf-Cloth and Corrosion X protected until this morning when the rain stoppped. I highly recommend that you test what you use, and find out for yourself what works. Manufacturer's lab tests and far-fetched claims are far from the real world.

May 22, 2001, 12:31 PM
If we're talking corrosion protection, even petroleum jelly would work - a main ingredient in Cosmoline. But as far as lubrication is concerned, Curuzer has made a solid case for polyalphaolefin synthetics. And thanks for the heads-up on Militech, Curuzer...

Now I'll have to slog through that gallon of CLP before switching to Mobil 1

May 23, 2001, 10:55 PM
Matt VDW,

Here is some info on Kroil. Real nasty stuff. Contains ethylene glycol monobutyl ether (quite a mouthful) which is pretty nasty stuff. Here is an MSDS (note that you should be using a respirator, and goggles, and gloves when your using this stuff (why??).



I trust you have been reading my posts both on hkpro and here and most of your questions on Militec have been answered. As you can tell, I ma not a Militec fan. Slip2000 sounds like a silicone/siloxane chemistry. Not bad if you favor corrosion resistance over lubrication. Generally, synthetics have better lubrication properties and wear resistance.

[Edited by Cruzer on 05-24-2001 at 12:29 AM]

May 23, 2001, 11:06 PM
"Ultima-Lube™ virtually eliminates metal to metal friction through the use of high quality conventional lubricants as a carrier and electrochemical ionization utilizing anti-friction metal treatment technology."

Sounds a lot like Militec-1. No MSDS on file anywhere I could find. Your guess is as good as mine...Wilson Combat has an outstanding reputation, but its not for their lubricants :(

May 23, 2001, 11:15 PM
Marvel Mystery Oil


"Mixture of mineral spirits, napthenic hydrocarbons, and chlorinated hydrocarbons"

"Complex mixture of petroleum distillates"

Doesn't sound like anything newfangled. Chlorinated hydrocarbons range from those in something like Militec to those in brake cleaner fluids. Either way, I would keep them away from my guns.

Clayton Hufford
May 23, 2001, 11:45 PM
Wilson Combat actually does not manufacture anything, at least no more than does Cold Steel. I live just a few miles from the Wilson shop. A very large manufacturer of lubricants for other companies is Muscle Products, manufacturer of FP-10, i.e. Shooter's Choice FP-10. http://www.mpc-home.com

May 24, 2001, 12:12 AM

Very interesting link. MPC is more likely a blender/repackaging company rather than a manufacturer. I really enjoyed their technical link and their technical papers. Again, very similar to Militec. There is a lot of handwaving that they do in their "technical papers" - saying a lot, but not saying anything.

The fact is that FP-10, and MT-10 contain halogenated hydrocarbons. Halogens are (Fluorine, Chlorine, Bromine, and Iodine). The one thing that these have in common is that they form acids when they decompose (strong acids that attack metal). MPC addresses this directly by saying that they have special scavenger metals and inhibitors to protect the metal. My personal/professional opinion is that this is a stretch (same as Militec). I see no advantage to these chemicals over standard lubricants, and lots of potential downsides. If you are happy with them, fine...

Clayton Hufford
May 24, 2001, 12:31 AM
Cruzer,I have used and tested FP-10, and found it to be a lousy protectant, and an average lubricant-it evaporates rather quickly. It boasts the same "Cation exchange" claim as Ultima-lube. I do have test data from the Falex Corp. on over 40 lubricants, and FP-10 is rated the best. Militec-1 and motor oil were not tested. The one thing I will give credit to MPC for is their customer service. When you contact them, you get to talk to the actual owner and inventor of the product, not some office clerk that's never even used the product.

May 24, 2001, 01:02 AM
Cruzer, I just cleaned my 1911 barrel in Marvel Mystery Oil - it really gets out those repulsive carbon deposits that come from shooting Sellier&Bellot ammo. Am I to worry that this barrel will corrode? Should I resoak it in Hoppes or K-1 kerosene? And what about Birchwood Casey Gun Scrubber, it contains tetrachlorosomething...is this a precursor to some hydrochloric type acid? Have I been unwittingly damaging my babies with the "acid thing?

PS: I don't suppose you are member Curuzer...

Many thanks

Sling Shot
May 24, 2001, 02:40 AM
How about the Royco product 634 that is being marketed by Remington under Nitro CLP. I thought that the military went to this stuff. It says it is a synthetic on the label.
Anybody using it? Sling Shot

Sling Shot
May 24, 2001, 02:55 AM
Here is the link that I needed on the Royco 634.

It tells what milspec specification that it meets and specifications. Sling Shot

Clayton Hufford
May 24, 2001, 06:39 AM
ROYCO CLP is indeed current issue, and although it boasts better lab results than Break Free CLP, I have found it to be a lousy lubricant and protectant. You're not missing anything.

May 24, 2001, 10:36 AM

Yes I am Curuzer/Cruzer, just a typo when I first registered :)

I don't have a problem with Marvel as a cleaner. I suspect that the chlorinated hydrocarbons it contains are similar to Gun Scrubber. Both products should be great for cleaning, but don't let them get on plastic parts. To answer your question, tetrachloroethylene and similar chemicals are solvents which will NOT release acid. Chlorinated alkanes/paraffins and such will tend to release acid under high temperature and/or pressure.

With respect to FP10 and other "lab tests", I would have to see what testing methods/protocols and which lubricants were tested. For example, on the MPC site, they provide tests under "extreme pressure and temperature" of a bunch of automotive lubricants. Not exactly a relevant test for firearms applications.

In general, all of the "halogenated hydrocarbon" lubricants (Ultimalube, Militec, FP10, MT10) are activated by high temperatures and friction. Guns under normal operating conditions will never reach the conditions necessary to really achieve the benefits from these lubricants. I would also not recommend the alternate approach which is baking your guns or heating the lubricants. Both will expose you to safety and health hazards I just couldn't recommend.

May 24, 2001, 11:19 AM
Gee Cruzer, you're scarin' the begeezuz outa me! My home brew is likely to kill me!! Yipes! Will disposable masks and exam gloves along with safety glasses afford the appropriate protection or do I need a HAZMAT suit and SCUBA gear? And if I do, how can they market Kroil and Marvel Mystery Oil so cavalierly? What about STP type substances? Just as toxic?
I've downloaded the spec sheets you directed us to and want you to know how much I for one appreciate your excellent posts. Thanks!!

May 24, 2001, 02:12 PM

I for one don't want to be seen as an alarmist, but I am urging prudence in handling any chemicals (as you should always have). The labels should have general warnings on them, but it is your responsibility to read the MSDS and make sure you know what you are using. I was surprised by the nastiness of Kroil in particular, but, in addition Gun Scrubber and other halogenated hydrocarbons are also pretty nasty. I will state for the last time that a simple synthetic lubricant ought to do the job just fine, everything else has tradeoffs I'm not willing to make at the age of 33.

May 24, 2001, 08:32 PM

I keep forgetting all the brand names flying around.

Let me propose some situations and please advise what you would use.

A gun sitting in the safe.
A gun sitting in my bed stand in a non-leather holster.
My non-SS USP at the range.
My S&W 686 at the range.
A shotgun in the dove field.
A shotgun in the salt marsh.

Ok I was just some situations I face. I use Outers Tri-Lube on just about everything except when I use Tetra grease on most metal-to-metal slide action. I use Hoppes No. 9 and Bench Rest-9 Copper Solvent to clean my bores.

Anything better for these situations?


So what about Slip2000? They advertise it as an environmental friendly cleaning product.


Sling Shot
May 24, 2001, 08:44 PM
Clayton Hufford, yes I thought the ROYCO 634 was current CLP issue. Are you basing your opinions about the 634 on personal results? It would seem odd that the military would drop Breakfree CLP in favor of ROYCO 634 if it did not perform better. I much prefer the smell of the old Breakfree or the newer version with different smell than the Remington Nitro(ROYCO 634). It really stinks.
Sling Shot

May 24, 2001, 09:11 PM

Slip2000 is most likely based on siloxane chemistry - great at rust resistance, not as good as synthetic oils as a lubricant. Eezox is also based on siloxanes and is the best rust preventer I've come across. The problem is that siloxanes are incompatible with oils so you can use one or the other, not both.

What about all the situations you put before me? I would go for a single, good synthetic with superior corrosion protection. I have no experience with Breakfree CLP, but it did very well on some corrosion tests I read about, and it is a synthetic (PAO) lubricant. I use Castrol/Hoppes synthetic, but I have never tested how corrosion resistant it is. Using a light coat of Tetra grease on aluminum rails is fine, but usually not necessary on an all steel pistol. I wipe down my guns at least weekly (it gives me an excuse to bring them out). If you are particularly concerned about corrosion protection, try Eezox or slip2000. Let us know how it works out for you. Fortunately, we have lots of people on the board with good experiences to work from. Thanks.

May 24, 2001, 09:45 PM
Oh Cruzer I found something else too...


Sounds interesting too...

I kinda belive in this stuff a little and think one day they will truly develop a wonder lube and oil. I had a few classes on metals and I remember aluminium forms a VERY hard oxide coating on the metal giving it a good protection.

Sorry to keep asking you questions but I find this very interesting. If you ever have a question about PC's let me know.

I just read your above post.

Wow one or the other? I was just about to said I would use Eezox or 2000 while the gun is in storage but then use rem oil or tri-lube when I am in the field but I guess not...

Looks like I'll keep using my oils and I might get one of those silicates that you put in a safe to take out moisture.

Thanks again.

May 24, 2001, 10:06 PM

No prob on the questions as long as nobody else gets annoyed at me. Sentry Cloths are also silicone based. You will notice if you use Tuf-cloth, Eezox, and slip2000 that if you apply oil, the oil will bead-up. Not that it will hurt the weapons, but the silicone bonds to the metal and prevents the oil from doing any good. The effect isn't permanent, so you can switch from one to another over time.

Clayton Hufford
May 24, 2001, 10:43 PM
Cruzer, Sentry Solutions products, specifically Tuf-Cloth, contains no silicone, according to the product packaging/literature.
I have used Break Free CLP for the last 15 years, both in the Army and as a civilian. I have used it on everything from M60 machineguns to 8 inch artillery. It is the best product, overall, that I have ever used, and I've tried just about everything available. The current product, made by Royal Lubricants, does not perform as well as the Break Free product in the real world. As I stated earlier, it shows better lab test results, both as a lubricant and a protectant, but in my personal experience it does not live up to it's claims. I tested it against Break Free CLP on bare carbon steel rifle barrels exposed to rainfall, and it didn't protect near as long as the Break Free product. Also, ROYCO CLP tends to leave a dry surface, good because it doesn't attract dirt and dust, but bad because it is impossible to monitor your weapon's needs.
ROYCO won the contract because of a lower bid, and a supposedly more user friendly(idiot proof) product, i.e. you do not have to shake it before use. IMHO if you do not have sense enough to shake a freakin bottle of CLP, you should not be issued a weapon.

Sling Shot
May 24, 2001, 11:03 PM
Hey Clayton. That was an interesting post. I use the Breakfree CLP myself. I might also try the Eezox. It sounds like it will be a good product.

Ladies and gentlman, concerning the Sentry Solutions Tuff Cloth. I am a member of http://www.bladeforums.com There are a lot of people, as you would imagine, that are interested in taking care of their knives. The topic comes up a lot on bladeforums about rust preventatives. There are some people that are not happy with the way that the Tuff Cloth prevents rust. These are people that are users of the Tuff Cloth, and they have had unsatisfactory results of it being used as a rust preventative. Also, mind you, that there are also people that are happy with the results of using the Tuff Cloth. I am in the first category of users, and I am not happy with the Tuff Cloth's rust prevention qualities. I had a very expensive automatic that was rust speckling using the Tuff Cloth. I no longer use the Tuff Cloth, and went back to using the Breakfree CLP, and now I no longer have rust problems. Sling Shot

Sling Shot
May 24, 2001, 11:10 PM
I am sold on the qualities of Eezox. I would like to compare it to Breakfree CLP. Who has it on the net at the cheapest price including shipping? The gun shops I frequent do not have it in stock, so that is why I am asking.
Sling Shot

Clayton Hufford
May 24, 2001, 11:18 PM
I have had mixed results with Tuf-Cloth, and I think that it is due to the way it works. Tuf-Cloth uses mineral spirits as a carrier to deliver what they refer to as a "micro-bonding crystal structure" to the metal. All dry lubes and protectants are mixed blessings IMHO. I only use them when in an extremely dusty/sandy environment.
BTW, I contacted both Mobil and Pennzoil a few weeks ago, and a rep. from Pennzoil actually called me! No response from Mobil. Anyways, the Pennzoil rep. said that while motor oil will work on most weapons, it will not provide a good level of protection from the elements, because motor oils are designed for use in a closed assembly. They will attract dirt and dust like a magnet for the same reasons. He did state that his biggest worry would be that the additives in motor oil may not be compatible with certain finishes. He stated an example of synthetic motor oil causing damage to chrome-plated parts in an experimental engine being tested. Check for compatibility, or use a product which is safe to use on any surface finish/metal treatment, such as Break-Free CLP.

Clayton Hufford
May 24, 2001, 11:35 PM
Buy it direct. Eezox Inc. PO BOX 772 Waterford, CT 06385 1-800-462-3331 A 7 ounce can costs $8.70. They do have great customer service. If you aren't happy with it, you can send it back for a refund.
Eezox is another product that dries to the touch. You also have to use it several times to get the full effect. It is a bit difficult to use, although not as bad as the Sentry line, or TW25B and Militec-1, which must be heated,etc.
I've tried them all, and I prefer the ease of use and cost effectiveness of Break Free CLP.
With all of these fancy high tech lubes, I have noticed that they often work well on some weapons, while not so well on others.

Clayton Hufford
May 24, 2001, 11:51 PM
Another product which makes the same claim as FP-10 and Ultima Lube(chemical ionization/cation exchange) is Protec. It is showing up here on local gun store shelves, and is quite expensive. http://www.proteclubricants.com 1-800-843-5649 The grease looks and smells the same as the Ultima lube grease. Overall, it looks good, with good test results. Way too expensive, though.

May 25, 2001, 08:51 AM

Tuf-Cloth says it contains no silicones but it doesn't say it doesn't contain siloxanes. Very subtle point... or as they say where I'm from - Same -CENSORED--CENSORED--CENSORED--CENSORED--CENSORED- Different Day (SSDD).

Siloxanes are technically dry, they are excellent corrosion inhibitors. On the other hand, they aren't the best lubricants because they stay put and don't flow when two metal parts rub together. Make sure you test them with your favorite oil (or just keep it away from the rails/internals) so the oil will work. I can't test every chemical out there, so I am bound to be wrong about some of my thoughts. Make sure you guys test and let us know what you think...I'll make sure the theory behind the practice makes sense and we all stay safe.

Drundel, I also believe some cool lubricants are around the corner. Unfortunately, we are all vulnerable to snake oil claims. If something is unique and patentable, the manufacturer can tell us what it is because he is protected. When someone tells us it's "pixie dust" or "miracle lube" the likelihood is that the stuff is a blend of easily available chemicals and they are "remarketing" with all sorts of claims because they can't back it up with fact. That is my experience with most of the new lubes out there.

Matt VDW
May 25, 2001, 09:40 AM
Thanks for all the info, Cruzer.

Can you tell us anything about testing protocols for lubricants? I wish there were some simple way to quantify a given lube's "slickness" under the conditions typically encountered in a firearm. Is there anything analogous to the Rockwell scale for metal hardness?

May 25, 2001, 11:14 AM

The Amsoil site has some very interesting info about testing protocols. The main issue is that most tests are done at very high pressures and sometimes high temperatures. This is so different from firearms uses that I deem them useless extrapolation. The reading is interesting though and you can learn a lot about synthetics. Amsoil has outstanding technology in synthetics and they are the real thing - not a blender or a wannabe.


Breakfree also has a new product called Breakfree Collector which is a blend of synthetic PAO oils and corrosion inhibitors. Drundel, you may consider using this instead of CLP or Eezox for safe and salt marsh guns.

Sgoeing, "snakeoil" means:

snake oil (snk oil)
1) A worthless preparation fraudulently peddled as a cure for many ills.
2) Speech or writing intended to deceive; humbug

[Edited by Cruzer on 05-25-2001 at 01:57 PM]

May 25, 2001, 12:46 PM
Can someone please explain to me the reference to snake oil. I know I am just missing something, but I can't figure it out.

May 25, 2001, 01:02 PM
Sgoeing, look at post above yours. Not trying to be a smartass. I didn't know there was a lubricant on the market called "Snakeoil". :)

[Edited by Cruzer on 05-27-2001 at 10:59 AM]

May 25, 2001, 03:50 PM
I use a blend of extra virgin olive oil, banana peel extract, a smidgen of bees wax, eye of newt, and a secret ingredient that I am not allowed to disclose.

May 25, 2001, 06:05 PM
I thought you were possibly referring to the gun oil called Snake oil. Thew one Dillon Sells.

May 27, 2001, 09:29 AM
Im not trying to start a war here... FWIW supposedly Slip 2000 has a synthetic blend of oils, at least that is what the rep told me I have not had the chance to use it yet. I have heard pretty good things about their product from alot of shotgunners' but thats about it...

May 27, 2001, 09:50 AM
SFS, from the Slip 2000 site:

"SLIP 2000™ and it's unique formulation provides a long lasting barrier on all metal parts and does not attract dirt or other abrasive contaminants. Displaces moisture and prevents rusting. Proprietary formulation was developed to Clean/Lubricate/Protect and out last any other product on the market today! We have done this without adding any oils, petroleum distillates or harmful PTFE type ingredients. SLIP 2000™ was developed with our health, safety and the environment in mind."

How can it be a blend of synthetic oils if it contains no oils? If it doesn't contain oils, it could be made of synthetic esters (which are biodegradeable, etc. etc.) or it could be made of siloxanes. Synthetic esters are good, siloxanes are OK but there are better technologies. There is no useful information on their site, just a lot of "magic" and "miracles." Sorry, can't tell you what it is, so I ain't using it. If, per chance, it is a synthetic blend of esters, just buy a quart of Amsoil instead. No flames here either.

Hey griz, if you used extra virgin olive oil on your firearms, make sure to use avocado on the rails, the olive oil runs off while the avocado stays put and provides better lubrication (and makes a great salad after the range trip too!). :)

May 27, 2001, 10:02 AM
Well as for know I will continue useing Break-Free.. It seems to be a whole lot of snake oils on the market as you well know...
Do you know anything about the Tetra line?
I have only gotten into serious shooting within the last year so alot of this is new to me..
Thanks for your advice..

May 27, 2001, 10:28 AM

I found an MSDS for Tetra Gun Lube (it is dated 1998, so it may be old). I don't think it's synthetic, and it contains some nasty solvents (trichloroethylene). You may want to email them and get a more current MSDS.


I have heard good things about Tetra grease.

I bought some Breakfree CLP a few days ago. So far, I really like it. It provides lubrication similar to the Castrol/Hoppes synthetic I was using before, but I am sure it provides much better corrosion protection. The smell is characteristic of synthetic esters (somewhat fruity; all fruit odors come from esters in the fruit). The other characteristic of esters is that a tiny amount (parts per million) can be hard to stomach. It doesn't bother me, and definitely should not affect your health, but use it in a ventilated area.

I am also new to shooting (about 1 year now also). This lubricant topic can be obsessive for me, particularly since some of the claims are outrageous LIES. Right now it comes down to some very simple rules for me...use a synthetic, make sure it has good corrosion inhibitors, PTFE is OK particularly if it has very small particles.

Clayton Hufford
May 27, 2001, 12:31 PM
Cruzer, you be well pleased with Break Free CLP. As I stated earlier, I have a vast amount of experience with it an I recommend it over all others. It is available in a 12 ounce aerosol can for $6.15 from http://www.midsouthshooterssuply.com
A few other products to read about:

You can reach Break Free by e mail at [email protected]
or you can write to BREAK-FREE INC.
1035 South Lindwood Ave.
Santa Ana CA 92705-4396

May 27, 2001, 12:32 PM
Thanks Cruzer for your info...
I know that Tetra changed there formula not to long ago, cause there oil use to smell like shi* and I truly mean that....LOL and it no longer does..

May 27, 2001, 12:50 PM
The Break-free company was sold several years ago and they are now located at.
Break-Free Inc.
13386 International Prky.
Jacksonville FL. 32218
(904)-741-5400 http://www.Break-Free.com
I also heard something to the affect that the formula was changed slightly about 2yrs ago. Supposedly the odor was a little harsh at one time, I really don't know what kind of change cause I have only been using it for a short time myself and I am very well pleased with it...
Have you ever used the LP version, if so is it actually better than CLP for lubrication?

Clayton Hufford
May 27, 2001, 06:44 PM
Just noticed that Break-Free was sold to Duracell Corp. The contact info. I posted was from 1998/1999.
Break-Free LP actually fares worse than CLP in the Falex lubricant wear tests. It is now called Greased Lightning, and is available from the link I posted for CLP.
One great thing about Break-Free is they don't feed you full of **** making false claims. They are very open as a company, most of the execs back in '98 were shooters, and they had no problem sending me a boxful of test data.
Break-Free also has excellent quality control, due to the numerous foreign and domestic government contracts.
I have a can of Break-Free CLP from 1989, and it smells and performs the same as a can I purchased a few months ago.

May 27, 2001, 07:45 PM
Thanks Clayton on the info about Break-free LP. At least I know that Im not missing out on anything by not getting the it..
What exactly is the Falex lubrication wear tests you mentioned?

Clayton Hufford
May 27, 2001, 10:56 PM
The test I mentioned was conducted by the Falex Corp., a lubricant testing firm. The American Society of Testing Methods sets specific guidlines for testing products like lubricants.
In the test I mentioned, 30 popular lubricants were tested a number of years ago, by Falex using a F-1599-1A Lubricity Tester. The top three products in this specific test were as follows:
1. Shooter's Choice(MPC) FP-10
2. Tetra Gun Grease
3. Eezox
Obviously this is just one specific test, and should not be used alone to choose a lubricant.
ASTMD-4172 and ASTMD-2266 are popular wear scar tests similar to the one above. The lower the number(wear scar measurement), the better the lubricant performance in this specific test.
Break-Free CLP has a wear scar of .8mm, the max allowable by military spec. MIL-L-63460.
Corrosion X has a wear scar of .58mm.
MILCOMM TW-25B has a wear scar of .42mm
Keep in mind that #1 this is a laboratory test and may not predict real world performance, and #2 it is only one of many tests conducted on lubricants. I have found that several products claiming excellent test results often evaporate quickly, and/or provide very little corrosion protection, as well as a host of other problems. There is no free lunch-one test is still only one test
Four of the best products that I have tested, evaluated, and used in the real world are Break-Free CLP, Corrosion X, Eezox, and FP-10.
Another line of products from a long-standing and well known company: http://www.kgproducts.net

May 31, 2001, 07:00 PM
I thoroughly read that Falex lab test. it is flawed and scewed towards the winner.

1) They used 1 cent nails, which, without even having to look under a microscope, have freckles you can feel. That is not (i hope not) what the inside of a barrel is like.

Rust freckling was found on the TW-25B sample and others. That happened because the peaks of those freckles (which arent realistic to y'all) weren't covered with the lube.

2) The lubes were applied heavily. TW-25B clearly instructs people to rub in a thin film. thats the beauty of it. a lil goes a long way.

The applications of the product must match the individual product instructions.

IN SUMMARY, if applied correctly, TW-25B and others, would have faired better. That test was a knockoff of the US Navy FTM-4001 test (saline fog - 500 hours - plate of steel) which TW-25B passed with flying colors, in a US Navy lab.

Try it for yourself.

Clayton Hufford
May 31, 2001, 11:09 PM
The Falex wear test I mentioned at the beginning of my last post was just that, a wear test-not a corrosion test. You are referring to ASTMB-117 and ASTMD-1748, which are salt spray and humidity cabinet testing procedures. The Falex Corp. conducts LUBRICANT WEAR TESTS. They use several types of machines which use ball bearings and large rollers, for instance the Shell 4-ball wear test(ASTMD-4172) which I mentioned earlier. Milcomm TW25B does well in this test, with a wear scar of .42mm.
drcohen, I have no idea what you are talking about, but rest assured that the companies that perform corrosion and wear tests do not use nails.
I've never doubted the quality or effectiveness of Milcomm TW25B or MC2500. How's Gordon doing ;) ? They are great lubricants, and decent protectants. However, they are difficult to apply, especially in the field. This is where Break Free CLP stands above the rest- EASE OF USE AND COST EFFECTIVENESS.
Break Free CLP is a multi purpose product which is safe, easy, and effective to use on all weapons. It has been researched, tested, and issued to police officers and troops worldwide for over 20 years.

June 1, 2001, 07:28 PM
I have been using Gibbs in the small engine repair shop where I work, and have read on their web site glowing reports of use on guns.
So, what do you guys think about Gibbs?
Lance, in Michigan

June 1, 2001, 07:38 PM
Got to shopping in Natchez today, found a few more.

KG Systems
Break-Free Collector Long Term Storage, I am gonna try this one
"Powdered DuPont Teflon" by Hoppes, says its .5 micron

June 2, 2001, 01:44 AM

I use CLP for basic lubrication and find that it works great for rust resistance (I occasionally also use Sentry Tuff Cloth for a dry rust protection and it works great on the outside of things).

But, I use Pro Shot brand Pro Gold grease for heavier wear points, and it works GREAT! I mean, I have used every gun grease on the market, and Pro Gold just makes everything butter smooth. There is a real difference with this grease.
But, I have no idea what it is. There are gold (copper?) particles suspended in the grease, and I have no idea if it is a synthetic lube or what.
I was wondering if you could tell me what this stuff is, and why it works so well? It is marketed (made?) by Pro Shot products who makes a lot of gun products. I bought it on the shelf at a gun store and ever since, every other gun grease I have tried just does not even compare to the butter smooth operation that Pro Gold gives my guns.


June 2, 2001, 07:48 AM
Does Proshot have a website you are aware of? I am interested in it. Thanks

June 2, 2001, 04:58 PM
I have searched and have not found a website for Pro Shot. In the gun stores I frequent, Pro-Shot brand products are common but their Pro-Gold grease is not that common.

Here is the info I have for them:

Pro-Shot Products
PO Box 763
Taylorville IL 62568

Believe me, I have used every gun grease on the market and every lube and this stuff really makes my gun cycle buttery smooth. There is a remarkable difference in sound and feel. I live in a hot climate where oil tends to run off more during carry as well as get thin, so I use grease on some parts. I use Pro-Gold on the heavy contact areas, and use oil for other general lubing.

Pro-Gold grease comes in a short fat glass jar with a gold side label and a white top label atop a black lid. There is enough in the jar to last a very long time, and it runs about $3.50. The grease iteself is clearish with a gold tint, with tiny golden flecks suspended all throughout it making it kinda sparkly. I think the gold (copper?) flakes prevent galling and make things run really smooth, but all I know is that it works great!

June 2, 2001, 05:11 PM
Thanks for the info,
I am currently using Break Free CLP and it does tend to either evaporate or soak into the metal, Im not sure which but it does leave a nice slick film on everything even after extensive shooting.. I have both Tetra gun oil and also Slip 2000 and have not used either of them yet.

Does anyone know if G-96 is a synthetic base oil?

June 2, 2001, 05:38 PM
Is this the Pro-Gold you guys are talking about? Someone confirm, and I'll start looking into it. Thanks.


June 2, 2001, 06:09 PM
I have 2 questions,
Do you know what type of oil base is the G-96 Gun treatment?
Also in your opinion as a CLP user what does Break-free CLP actually do evaporate or soak in to the metal?
Thank you much,

Clayton Hufford
June 2, 2001, 06:09 PM
As far as I know, Pro Shot has no website. They are quite popular at the local gunshops here in Arkansas and Texas. Good stuff at a good price.
I have used G96 quite a bit, and it doesn't work as well as Break Free CLP as a lubricant or protectant, unless we're talking about cold temps. Below zero, G96 Gun Treatment is excellent. It is also more expensive than Break Free CLP, at $8.05 for a twelve ounce can. http://www.g96products.com 973-684-3848

June 3, 2001, 11:46 PM

June 18, 2001, 12:32 AM
I've read most all of this spool (can't call it a thread - too long;) ) and now I wonder "Should I ask this?". Okay, I will - if I'm wrong, let me know.

I have a Charles Daly EFS (Enhanced) in Stainless with just under a hundred rounds fired in two sessions (time constraints) - using Hoppes gun oil. I'm looking for the best (1) break-in lube, (2) follow-on lube, and (3) what considerations/procedures to use for Stainless.

Thanks in advance.


June 18, 2001, 03:12 AM

April 15, 2002, 11:44 PM
Mr. "Cruzer"

Very interesting link. MPC is more likely a blender/repackaging company rather than a manufacturer. I really enjoyed their technical link and their technical papers. Again, very similar to Militec. There is a lot of handwaving that they do in their "technical papers" - saying a lot, but not saying anything.

First off, I don't know where to begin on your "errors' or shall we say, "just how wrong you are".
It appears that even without knowing your credentials, you seem to be an egocentric, pontificating, self-appointed "know it all", when actually you don't know very much at all about that of which you speak, particularly Firepower FP-10 CLP and a few others.

Freedom of speech is a wonderful thing, but you must be held accountable for what you say, and if that which you publicly perpetuate is false and damaging to others, then there are liability issures at hand that can involve malice & punative damages. No, I am not a lawyer (thank God), but I can assure you I have taken others to task on such biased, untrue, and damaging statements, as you have here on this forum, and won.

MPC (Muscle Products Corporation ["the Strength in Lubrication", ergo the name]) was founded in 1985 and incorporated in 1986.
We are indeed Manufacturers and NOT just marketers and/or repackagers that you so cavalierly state as your main assumption.

As for the technical papers you so casually call "...a lot of handwaving" and " - saying a lot, but not saying anything" is just downright Ignorance (now don't take that the wrong way...it by definition means "LACK OF KNOWLEDGE"), which you seem to abound in.
I have written all of those papers over the years and have published them within professional circles, all being received well and with prestigeous acceptance in those professional organizations. If you, for a moment, had any undersatanding of boundary film, hydrodynamic, elasto-hydrodynamic, and mixed regimes of lubrication and tribologic theory and fact, you would be intrigued, rather than disgruntled that you "didn't understand the material".
I have always stated and still do, that there is nothing new in the form of " amazing new discoveries " or new elements on the periodic table, but it is how we can recombine and rework chemical compounds in order to achieve new advances in chemistries and catalytic techniques that bring old methods and knowledge into new-found fields and give us the ability to do things today that were not even dreamed of years ago with the same raw materials. According to your implications, the entire technological field must just be "smoke and mirrors".

The fact is that FP-10, and MT-10 contain halogenated hydrocarbons. Halogens are (Fluorine, Chlorine, Bromine, and Iodine). The one thing that these have in common is that they form acids when they decompose (strong acids that attack metal). MPC addresses this directly by saying that they have special scavenger metals and inhibitors to protect the metal. My personal/professional opinion is that this is a stretch (same as Militec). I see no advantage to these chemicals over standard lubricants, and lots of potential downsides. If you are happy with them, fine...

If you want to know, who "primarily" wrote the book on corrosion-controlled, modern day halogenation techniques....then it may come as a real shock to you that you are reading the authors words, right now.
Everything you see, by Militec, Ultra Lube, Pro Long, Pro Blend, Power-Up, Motor-Up, Dura Lube, and the rest, was in one form or another, adapted from or literally copied from my work and publications.
You know NOTHING about Oxirane acid scavengengers (epoxidized oils), organo-metallic surface reacting reagents and chemistries, or just plain hydrocarbon chemical engineering.
You "cry wolf", mimicing the sounds of the left wing environmental extremists and oil company/OEM manufacturing coalitionists who for decades have been trying to repress the truth about improved lubrication and extreme pressure performance, citing "acidic corrosion" and "ozone depletion" to hide the fact that by improving the status quo it would jeapordize their carfully engineerd "planned obselescence" programs, that gets them through their warranty period and THEN places the burden of parts replacements on the consumers.
Let me inform you, Cruzer, that the reality of the situation is not at all as you seem to see it.
In 1987-1989, I worked closely with Occidental Chemical, a major producer of halogenated hydrocarbons, and specifically with Dr. Robert Roberti, their chief chemist in this department, to develop the techniques that you so casually dismiss as a "stretch".
I can tell you one thing for certain; whatever your profession is, according to your "personal/professional opinion" as stated above, is certainly NOT in the field of present day Lubrication Engineering, Tribology, or Chemistry....if it is, then YOU, by all means, need to do some catching up and "re-schooling", as you are grossly out of touch with its current phases.

Firepower FP-10 has been through the complete preliminary compliance testing for the Military Specification and Standard, MIL-L-63460D, CLP for weapons and weapons systems at "Southwest Research Institute" and has met and Exceeded those standards. It is now in full testing phase with the DOD at Picatinny Arsenal, NJ, for the same and "official testing".
Aside from that, we have been selling FP-10 to the United States Military and Special Forces/Navy SEALs, FN Manufacturing, US Repeating Arms, and others too numerous to mention here, for YEARS. We sell it to "Shooters Choice" (Ventco Industries) in bulk 55 gallons of which THEY repackage and use our name "FP-10" by license agreement. They have NO EXCLUSIVE on the FP-10 and are one of our marketing arms. I am sure Joe and Frank Ventimiglia would be delighted to hear your comments on the FP-10 as well.
And another thing you just plain "don't know"...Kimber Mfg. Inc. has re-written their manuals on ALL handguns and rifles to stipulate the importance of using FP-10 on their fine firearms. Dennis Madonia and Winslow Potter of the Kimber Custom shop have been using FP-10 since 1992, when I introduced it to Dennis at Rich Davis' "Second Chance Shoot" along with my representative Joe Gayan.
There are other Firearms manufacturers that do much the same, such as "Barrett Firearms Mfg., Caspian Arms, Wesson Arms, Sig USA, Detonics, Bar-Sto, etc.
And let's not forget about the top Pistolsmiths of the country (whose opinion obviously means nothing to you) like "Ed Brown, Jim Garthwaite, Alan Marvel, Steve Woods, Dave Lauck, etc.".

For the viewing public:

You really want to know what fumes me Cruzer? I don't care if you do or don't, but I'm going to give it to you anyhow.
The folks on this form are being given false and misleading information by YOU, who some apparently look up to as a reliable source of information. Your impetus and opinionated pontifications do nothing but cause more disinformation to be spread, injuring reputations and masking the truth about issues that you claim to have knowledge of but certainly don't.
These people deserve more than that. They certainly do not deserve the false statements and inaccuracies that I have read here.
I am a member of many forums in the shooting industry/sports, including pistolsmith.com, 1911.com, eliteshooters.com, and EVEN Bill Wilson's Combat Discussion forum. When one of my fellow industry professionals told me about your "dis-information" postings, I came to see and read them. You might be able to imagine my chagrin after reading them TWICE, just to make sure I was reading what you said correctly.

My advice to you, and I would take it if I were you; stick to what you "KNOW", not what you "THINK".
When you start to negatively and falsly accuse products in the industry of "making false claims" or "stretches", you best have done your homework prior to it. Obviously, you didn't, nor did you even bother to open a book.

You can rest assured....I'll be in touch, one way or another.
My identity is well known and always available to the public.
Very Sincerely,

April 16, 2002, 11:36 AM
Cruzer Wrote:

In general, all of the "halogenated hydrocarbon" lubricants (Ultimalube, Militec, FP10, MT10) are activated by high temperatures and friction. Guns under normal operating conditions will never reach the conditions necessary to really achieve the benefits from these lubricants. I would also not recommend the alternate approach which is baking your guns or heating the lubricants. Both will expose you to safety and health hazards I just couldn't recommend.

This is a statement made out of an incomplete and "general" understanding of how halogens affect metal surfaces.

Halogenation of the metal will occur even in sub-zero temperatures, providing that the metal surfaces are contacting each othe under boundary conditions, which cause the surface asparities to "rub together", even through the oil film, and generate instantaneous high temperatures (well over 210 deg F, which is the point of molecular disassociation of the halogen itself) that cool as quickly as they are formed. This is much like rubbing your hands together when cold and generating heat through frictional contacts of "skin on skin". This same affect will cause a halogen to react to the metal surfaces even in cold ambient conditions.
"Heating the guns" as you say would be not only silly, but pointless, as the process requires more than just heat (being only a catalyst) to work properly. It requires the use of other chemical reagents to properly address the metal surfaces in order to produce the desired transitional effects of asparity roll-out, surface spread characteristics, and the desired inhibition of runaway proteonic reactions. This is where all of that so called "hundreds of thousands of dollars research" that you referred to in another post about synthetic lubricants, comes in.
It is NOT just a simple "breaking of the chain" to form HCl and then the HCl attaching to the Ferrous molecules to form FeCl2. That process has been so heavily modified today that the acids you refer to are inherently "locked up" by the additional chemistries provided to the Halo-Carbons upon the release of the chlorine, fluorine, or bromine. The transitional reagents are THEN reacted to the surface in a more efficient and non-corrosive manner, using organo-metallic reagents similar to olefins and others of the same nature.

To correct your "other statement"....
Guns under normal conditions of operation CONSTANTLY achieve the necessary conditions to activate the necessary conditions to invoke the boundary film formation. Every time the reciever mechanism engages; everytime a slide cycles, every time a bolt is operated, everytime parts move against another is that time that the conditions are met, to their fullest capacity.

Here's one for you:
In 1992 I was contacted by Ed Holda, Smith & Wessons head engineer for their auto-pistols division to invite me to the Springfield, Mass facility to meet with their engineers.
At the meeting, it was explained to me that in their final production process, the pistols must fire 2 magazines flawlessly before being certified and shipped. If they misfed or cycled improperly, causing any type of feed/extraction problem, they were sent to the custom shop for re-fitting until the functionality met the standard. Their current state of successful "off the line firings" was at that time prox 68%. That was considered normal and accepted by S&W, requiring 32% of all autopistols to go back to the pistolsmiths for "tweaking" before being sold. The lubricant that was being used was the big "CLP", without mentioning names.
They then tried the FP-10 in place of it after ordering several cases and 5 gallon pails directly from MPC. To their astonishment, their success rate of 68% INCREASED to 98%. This was so unbelievable to the engineers, that they switched back to using the old CLP to see if what was happening was indeed so.
As anticipated, the success ration dropped back down to between 65 to 70%. They then replaced the old CLP with FP-10 and the rates of successful feeding and extraction went back up to 95-98%. Ironically, even tho their marketing department bought the rights to a PTFE product called "Action Block" and renamed it "S&W Friction Block" (of which they sell to the public), they still order and uses FP-10 in the manufacture and production of every autopistol that goes out.

Now you're probably thinking how can FP-10 cause such a radical change in feed and extraction performance, aren't you?
Here's where that 'ol halogenation without corrosion comes in...
Every auto (or semi-auto) is designed for the spring tensions and tolerances to be "ideally" perfect, or to function under the aspects of perfect surface alignments and low frictional contacts, which is rarely ever the case in actuality. There are always "rough areas", unseen burrs, irregular tolerances and sporadic tight spots that deviate the frictional coefficients high enough to cause the springs to be insufficient in overcoming these. These then, are the occasionally "disfunctional" ones that will have a stovepipe or jam on a regular or sometimes sporadic basis.
The FP-10 IMMEDIATELY addresses these areas of concern by:
1. lapping and rolling out surface irregularities and asparity contact points (these are those "rough spot" and "burrs" that I mentioned previously.
2. Establishing a boundary film (prox 3 microns thick) on each contacting surface.
3. Reducing the coefficient of friction on these surfaces so dramatically, that the springs function as they were designed to, in cycling the weapon to cause precice extraction/ejection and return to full battery conditions.

There are always a few other problems not related to this that make up the remaining 2-3% failures, such as improper barrel fit and/or ramp/hood defects, which have to be addressed mechanically or by hand.

One last point...as I could cite dozens from your posts but really don't have the time:

You also state about "Slip 2000":

How can it be a blend of synthetic oils if it contains no oils? If it doesn't contain oils, it could be made of synthetic esters (which are biodegradeable, etc. etc.) or it could be made of siloxanes. Synthetic esters are good, siloxanes are OK but there are better technologies. There is no useful information on their site, just a lot of "magic" and "miracles." Sorry, can't tell you what it is, so I ain't using it. If, per chance, it is a synthetic blend of esters, just buy a quart of Amsoil instead. No flames here either.

Synthetic Oils and fluids are based on many more chemistries than you mention.
There are the glycol groups or esters (in part) which are oil-less. These include the di-ethylene and tri-ethylene glycols, tri-ethanolamines, Poly-glycol esters (POE's), phosphate esters and others. They contain NO non-polar hydrocarbon oils but are in reality still oxygen linked hydrogen-carbon groups that in essence will hydrolize in time and form ...."water". They are ALSO water soluble...meaning they will wash off in the elements. If not washed off, they can provide a significant self-imposed source of oxidation, which is of course, hydrolized water.
SHC's (synthetic hydrocarbons) of which POA (Poly Alpha Olefins) are part of are different from petroleum based HC's inasmuch as they contain a double carbon bond (C=C). They can be constructed to any length molecular chain but their big advantage is in temperature. They can achieve temperatures prox 50-75 degrees higher than petroleum HC's before breaking down. The difference is in the strength of the bond, meaning that once that upper limit is reached, hydrocarbon chain breakdown or failure is catastrophic and much like an avalanche...fast and brutal, leaving low viscosity and low film strength as a testament.
Siloxanes are great for reloading as they wont affect primers and powder (Hornaday One Shot, a mix of Hexane as a carrier and poly di-ethylsiloxane, as the lube). Just done smoke or have any fires light nearby when spraying (and a NIOSH approved respirator is recommended for health reasons). Other than that, they are poor, at best, as standard lubricants, having no load carrying capacity and viscosities that are so low that it violates the surface roughness to viscosity ratio necessary to prevent wear from moving parts.
Also, there are synthetics made from highly refined and severely treated naphthenics that have all the aeromatic benzenes and impurities removed to the point of a food grade quality base-stock. The list goes on, and on.
Bottom line...."oils" and "fluids" are often misused in termanology, but essentially "oils" are ment to imply a "lubricant". Technically, today there are many "oilless oils" on the market, understanding that it may sound like an oxy-moron.

Thats it for now...but I'll be back, I'm sure.

Dean Speir
April 16, 2002, 12:28 PM
Giv'em hell, George!

But what took you so long?

April 16, 2002, 02:01 PM
Heya DEAN aka Waldo Lydecker !:)
My gosh, it's good to hear from you.
Your post gave me the biggest smile of the day.
Give me a call when you have time.
The number is on the site but it's certainly no secret.
(800) 227-7049
I'll look forward to a good conversation, as always.
Best to you and yours...

April 16, 2002, 02:12 PM
WOW looks like the BIG DOGS came to the fight.GRRRRR

April 16, 2002, 06:35 PM
I think I'm pretty safe in saying that we have heard the final word! Perhaps there will be more words, but I think I can see the guy holding the stone tablets. :D

BTW George, thanks for a lot of very interesting and valuable information on dry lubricants! I'm not an expert, so I hang around and wait for those that are to show me the light. That light appears to be burning brightly from your direction, thanks for setting us straight. :)

September 6, 2009, 06:56 PM
Firepower, would you care to comment on this test? http://www.6mmbr.com/corrosiontest.html .... I have used fp-10 and like it for its lubrication properties. As far as corrosion goes I was disappointed when I saw this test. I can see a few things wrong with the test itself but it still seems relevant. I realize the conditions are extreme but what if I found myself in an extreme saltwater or humid situation? I feel more inclined to trust your expertise than one test, that's why I am asking, just want your opinions or knowledge. I have three other questions if you would... Can I use a product like eezox with fp-10? Are any of MPC's grease lubricants designed for firearms or work great with firearms? If so, care to comment on MPC's grease vs tw-25b? Thanks in advance, I appreciate it.

September 12, 2009, 09:04 PM
Sidewinder, why are we dredging up a thread that is seven and a half years old?
Do your homework and you will find that Firepower is only quoting posts by George Fennel, who is in business selling his own products.
There is no chance of finding unbiased information here. Or for that matter, recent information.

September 16, 2009, 09:05 AM
If I put motor oil in the bore, and then start shooting, it will not shoot as well as if I patch the bore bare before shooting.

If I put motor oil on the mill, so it will not rust when the temperature is rising and 100% humidity, that oil will not last a season. It seems to evaporate. I don't know that the vapor pressure is for motor oil, but a thin coat can evaporate in 3 months. I find the mill will not rust, if I put an old sheet over it, to prevent air circulation being faster than the thermal time constant of the big casting.

I have dozens of military Mausers that came with grease in the bolt. If I clean out the grease and put in motor oil, it does not seem to evaporate from inside the bolt.

I have a case of Break Free CLP from 15 years ago, before they changed the formula.
I have synthetic motor oil. That seems to be a CLP too, cleaner, lubricant, protectant.

I don't think it makes much difference which one I use for moving parts in a gun.

The barrel threads get motor oil, moly grease, anti-seize, or Loctite.

October 26, 2009, 03:02 PM
Gibbs Brand Lubricant (http://www.gibbsbrand.net/)