View Single Post
Old June 15, 2013, 09:17 PM   #61
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 20,570

I read the article that the table came from some years ago and it's very interesting.

There's only one problem. Some lubricants, including those with molybdenum disulfide--a common component of firearms lubricants--can provide coefficients of friction considerably lower than the 0.11 value that the author assumes is "Probably not possible." Some charts indicate that moly lubes can actually provide coefficients of friction as low as 0.035 under some circumstances. More than 3 times lower than what the author thinks is probably impossible.

It's a very good analysis in terms of the mathematical simulations, but the author made an assumption that placed an unrealistically high lower limit on the level of friction attainable. Since his assumption is not consistent with reality, his conclusions must be viewed with some level of skepticism.

Using linear interpolation (admittedly not a particularly elegant method) to estimate the bolt thrust provided by a 0.035 coefficient of friction provides an estimate of 6939lbs. That's a 50% increase in bolt thrust over the 600 grit finished chamber. As I said in an earlier post, maybe that's safe and maybe it's not--I don't have a way to say for sure. I can say I won't be trying it myself nor recommending the practice to others.

All of which is neither here nor there in terms of the actual question asked by the OP. The answer to that question is that proper lubrication of a modern gas-operated firearm does not include putting lubricant in the chamber.
Did you know that there is a TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Page generated in 0.03185 seconds with 7 queries