BR central has a very interesting thread on bore solvents and what works and why.
http://www.benchrest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26177
BH
http://www.benchrest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26177
BH
Bore solvents - Interesting thread
- Thread starter BountyHunter
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Mysticplayer
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2001
- Messages
- 1,459
always funny when the ammonia topic comes back around. Used to be considered evil and any barrel touching it would melt or blow up. Ain't so.
Copper fouling requires ammonia to remove (or an abrasive). Cheap and simple solution to our problem.
Since the posts show a preference to the stronger ammonia cleaner, I am surprised they did not use Barnes CR10. Have not come across a commercial product that cleans more agressively.
Personally, I use janitorial grade ammonia. You have to go to a commercial cleaning supply company to buy. This stuff is strong - outside only!!!!!
However, any copper in that bore is gone right now. Wipe it in, wipe it out, an oily patch, dry patch, good to go.
A gallon cost me $20 Cdn and will last several lifetimes.
Jerry
Copper fouling requires ammonia to remove (or an abrasive). Cheap and simple solution to our problem.
Since the posts show a preference to the stronger ammonia cleaner, I am surprised they did not use Barnes CR10. Have not come across a commercial product that cleans more agressively.
Personally, I use janitorial grade ammonia. You have to go to a commercial cleaning supply company to buy. This stuff is strong - outside only!!!!!
However, any copper in that bore is gone right now. Wipe it in, wipe it out, an oily patch, dry patch, good to go.
A gallon cost me $20 Cdn and will last several lifetimes.
Jerry
goodgrouper
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
Since the posts show a preference to the stronger ammonia cleaner, I am surprised they did not use Barnes CR10. Have not come across a commercial product that cleans more agressively.
[/ QUOTE ]
I can see you haven't tried Coppermelt! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif
Since the posts show a preference to the stronger ammonia cleaner, I am surprised they did not use Barnes CR10. Have not come across a commercial product that cleans more agressively.
[/ QUOTE ]
I can see you haven't tried Coppermelt! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif
ricka0
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> always funny when the ammonia topic comes back around. Used to be considered evil and any barrel touching it would melt or blow up. Ain't so. </font>
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually that has never been established. When GG said his pal cleaned his 50 with Ammonia it never shoot good after, I scoffed. Cleaning with high Baume Ammonia is typical in the 50 community.
I designed a test to put the Ammonia debate to rest. Running my design by a couple chemists (one a famous Ammoniacal chemist) quickly exposed the inconclusiveness of my test - and every test I've read so far. The truth is no body really knows. Several good metallurgists claim strong Ammonia (22+ degrees Baume) will degrade your barrel. All I can get the chemists to say is [ QUOTE ]
<font color="red"> Do the tests </font>
[/ QUOTE ]
Unless you have information I and these chemists have been unable to find, I'd reserve comments.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> Since the posts show a preference to the stronger ammonia cleaner, I am surprised they did not use Barnes CR10. Have not come across a commercial product that cleans more aggressively. </font>
[/ QUOTE ]
CR10 may be strong for commercial barrel cleaners, but it's considered horse urine (which contains more ammonia than human urine) compared to Diazo solution.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple">
Personally, I use janitorial grade ammonia. You have to go to a commercial cleaning supply company to buy. This stuff is strong - outside only!!!!! </font>
[/ QUOTE ]
The Janitorial Ammonia I have is only 10%, weaker than CR10 – but you are correct on using in a well ventilated area.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> A gallon cost me $20 Cdn and will last several lifetimes. </font>
[/ QUOTE ]
Are you sure it's that high? I pay that much for 26 degree Baume Ammonia ( Ammonia concentration is measured by specific density (degrees Baume). The Janitorial stuff is about $8/gallon. I get used Diazo fluid which my Baume gage reads at 22+ degrees Baume for free. The Printer shops actually want to pay me to take it, but I don't want homeland security alerted I'm making money on chemicals.
<font color="purple"> always funny when the ammonia topic comes back around. Used to be considered evil and any barrel touching it would melt or blow up. Ain't so. </font>
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually that has never been established. When GG said his pal cleaned his 50 with Ammonia it never shoot good after, I scoffed. Cleaning with high Baume Ammonia is typical in the 50 community.
I designed a test to put the Ammonia debate to rest. Running my design by a couple chemists (one a famous Ammoniacal chemist) quickly exposed the inconclusiveness of my test - and every test I've read so far. The truth is no body really knows. Several good metallurgists claim strong Ammonia (22+ degrees Baume) will degrade your barrel. All I can get the chemists to say is [ QUOTE ]
<font color="red"> Do the tests </font>
[/ QUOTE ]
Unless you have information I and these chemists have been unable to find, I'd reserve comments.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> Since the posts show a preference to the stronger ammonia cleaner, I am surprised they did not use Barnes CR10. Have not come across a commercial product that cleans more aggressively. </font>
[/ QUOTE ]
CR10 may be strong for commercial barrel cleaners, but it's considered horse urine (which contains more ammonia than human urine) compared to Diazo solution.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple">
Personally, I use janitorial grade ammonia. You have to go to a commercial cleaning supply company to buy. This stuff is strong - outside only!!!!! </font>
[/ QUOTE ]
The Janitorial Ammonia I have is only 10%, weaker than CR10 – but you are correct on using in a well ventilated area.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> A gallon cost me $20 Cdn and will last several lifetimes. </font>
[/ QUOTE ]
Are you sure it's that high? I pay that much for 26 degree Baume Ammonia ( Ammonia concentration is measured by specific density (degrees Baume). The Janitorial stuff is about $8/gallon. I get used Diazo fluid which my Baume gage reads at 22+ degrees Baume for free. The Printer shops actually want to pay me to take it, but I don't want homeland security alerted I'm making money on chemicals.
ricka0
Well-Known Member
OK, here are some myths from http://www.benchrest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26177
<ul type="square"> [*] <font color="red"> Take a couple of shot glasses and fill them half full with each product.Put an old worn out brush in each glass and let sit overnight.This will take the mystery out of what works and how well it works but will cost you the price of one bottle of each solvent. </font> </font> Bogus! Ammonia needs oxygen to react with Copper. Not a test . <font color="red"> [*]Actually Mike and Chris, Montana X-treme is absolutely bore safe (Butches is also). </font> Based on what? Advertising? <font color="red"> [*]There is no water in Montana X-treme as there is in every other ammonia based solvent. </font> Now that's a trick that will win someone the noble prize in chemistry /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif Unless they have sophisticated equipment to keep it under high pressure at all times, they don't have anhydrous ammonia. Any ammonia not stored under pressure has a hard limit of about 26 degrees Baume - this is known as Aqueous ammonia for obvious reasons (it contains water). 26 degree Baume' is 29.4% Ammonia (and the rest water). <font color="red"> [*]Montana Extreme is amonia oil not aqeous amonia. The developer Dan Huffman told me you could leave Montana extreme plugged up in a barrel for a year and drain it out and there would be no damage. </font>
Triple bogus. Leaving any ammonia sealed will stop the reaction as soon as the oxygen dissolved in the solution is spent(not long if there is much copper). That is the well know bogus test many have conducted - and bogus for several reasons. You need to do an analysis of the spent ammonia to look for iron (and perhaps other elements) to know if it's doing damage. <font color="red"> [*] loses strength when left open in the sun for several hours. </font> Actually that's correct, but they don't mention why. Ammonia boils off (evaporates) very quickly. I poor out just enough to fill my eye dropper.
[/list]
<ul type="square"> [*] <font color="red"> Take a couple of shot glasses and fill them half full with each product.Put an old worn out brush in each glass and let sit overnight.This will take the mystery out of what works and how well it works but will cost you the price of one bottle of each solvent. </font> </font> Bogus! Ammonia needs oxygen to react with Copper. Not a test . <font color="red"> [*]Actually Mike and Chris, Montana X-treme is absolutely bore safe (Butches is also). </font> Based on what? Advertising? <font color="red"> [*]There is no water in Montana X-treme as there is in every other ammonia based solvent. </font> Now that's a trick that will win someone the noble prize in chemistry /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif Unless they have sophisticated equipment to keep it under high pressure at all times, they don't have anhydrous ammonia. Any ammonia not stored under pressure has a hard limit of about 26 degrees Baume - this is known as Aqueous ammonia for obvious reasons (it contains water). 26 degree Baume' is 29.4% Ammonia (and the rest water). <font color="red"> [*]Montana Extreme is amonia oil not aqeous amonia. The developer Dan Huffman told me you could leave Montana extreme plugged up in a barrel for a year and drain it out and there would be no damage. </font>
Triple bogus. Leaving any ammonia sealed will stop the reaction as soon as the oxygen dissolved in the solution is spent(not long if there is much copper). That is the well know bogus test many have conducted - and bogus for several reasons. You need to do an analysis of the spent ammonia to look for iron (and perhaps other elements) to know if it's doing damage. <font color="red"> [*] loses strength when left open in the sun for several hours. </font> Actually that's correct, but they don't mention why. Ammonia boils off (evaporates) very quickly. I poor out just enough to fill my eye dropper.
[/list]
jkrische
Active Member
b1g b0re,
You keep mentioning degrees Baume. Are you actually referring to Aqueous Ammonium Hydroxide?
You keep mentioning degrees Baume. Are you actually referring to Aqueous Ammonium Hydroxide?
Greg Culpepper
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2005
- Messages
- 3
Big Bore,
I posted a few comments on BR.com which you have identified as "myths". I feel the need to respond. While you appear to have a good understanding of traditional bore solvents and copper removers, the way that ammonia is carried in those products, and the futility of trying to evaluate bore cleaners with something other than a rifle bore, you apparently don't have any experience with or understanding of Montana X-Treme BMG 50. You assume that the only ammonia in solvents would have to be anhydrous (an impossibility as you point out) or aqua ammonia also known as ammonium hydroxide. This isn't true any longer as is demonstrated by the existance of two Montana X-treme bore cleaners, Original, and BMG 50. I stated on the other board that there is no water in BMG 50. Stricktly speaking that is not true. There is a trace of water in BMG 50 just as there is in gasoline. It is not added but rather shows up because of the inclusion of isopropinol and oleic acid (basicaly beef fat/soap). But that isn't what carries the ammonia-oil is.
Hence the component "ammonia oil". Montana X-treme is unique in this use of this material. Now I don't know if ammonia oil is worthy a "Nobel Chemistry Prize" (is there such a thing?, is bore solvent "in the interest of humanity?) as you have suggested, but I think you might agree that its a pretty clever way to make bore solvent. Nobody else seems to have figured it out. I'm sure that one whiff of BMG 50 would convince you that there is plenty of ammonia in it. In fact, have a couple of friends nearby to catch you if you stick your nose down to the bottle when you do the "aroma test". If you want to satisfy yourself that there is no water in there, just try to get a drop to mix in the bottle (its an oil and water thing).
As far as your questions about BMG 50 being bore safe, there have, of course, many and lengthy tests tests by the manufacturer as well as the experience that the many users of this product have accumulated, including Blake Daniels (four current IBS 1K records), Bill Shehane (ten time record holder and 2004 IBS 1K Champion), Rich De Simone (IBS 1K LR group record) James Phillips (IBS 600 LG score , HG group records) me (IBS 600 LG group, HG score) and Tim North, owner of Broughton Barrels among many others. I know these guys credentials but I don't even know your name. Perhaps we could help persuade you.
If we can't, get the July 05 issue of Field and Stream, page 34 and see what they have to say about it.
As for your "triple bogus" response about pluging barrels, Danny was simply illustrating the fact that there is no hazzard in any method of application for BMG 50. He didn't say seal it up, just plug the barrel so it won't run out. This isn't a trick designed to mislead. Besides, as you know, the ammonia will evaporate away long before a year is up, leaving....OIL! This isn't recommended anyway-BMG works fast. Its just a way of framing the answer-BMG will never hurt a bore. For other products- follow the manufacturers instructions!
Bottom line is this; There is no other product that works as fast or as completely or safer than BMG 50. Try some. If you don't like they will even send your money back and no other solvent offers that either.
Best regards,
Greg Culpepper
I posted a few comments on BR.com which you have identified as "myths". I feel the need to respond. While you appear to have a good understanding of traditional bore solvents and copper removers, the way that ammonia is carried in those products, and the futility of trying to evaluate bore cleaners with something other than a rifle bore, you apparently don't have any experience with or understanding of Montana X-Treme BMG 50. You assume that the only ammonia in solvents would have to be anhydrous (an impossibility as you point out) or aqua ammonia also known as ammonium hydroxide. This isn't true any longer as is demonstrated by the existance of two Montana X-treme bore cleaners, Original, and BMG 50. I stated on the other board that there is no water in BMG 50. Stricktly speaking that is not true. There is a trace of water in BMG 50 just as there is in gasoline. It is not added but rather shows up because of the inclusion of isopropinol and oleic acid (basicaly beef fat/soap). But that isn't what carries the ammonia-oil is.
Hence the component "ammonia oil". Montana X-treme is unique in this use of this material. Now I don't know if ammonia oil is worthy a "Nobel Chemistry Prize" (is there such a thing?, is bore solvent "in the interest of humanity?) as you have suggested, but I think you might agree that its a pretty clever way to make bore solvent. Nobody else seems to have figured it out. I'm sure that one whiff of BMG 50 would convince you that there is plenty of ammonia in it. In fact, have a couple of friends nearby to catch you if you stick your nose down to the bottle when you do the "aroma test". If you want to satisfy yourself that there is no water in there, just try to get a drop to mix in the bottle (its an oil and water thing).
As far as your questions about BMG 50 being bore safe, there have, of course, many and lengthy tests tests by the manufacturer as well as the experience that the many users of this product have accumulated, including Blake Daniels (four current IBS 1K records), Bill Shehane (ten time record holder and 2004 IBS 1K Champion), Rich De Simone (IBS 1K LR group record) James Phillips (IBS 600 LG score , HG group records) me (IBS 600 LG group, HG score) and Tim North, owner of Broughton Barrels among many others. I know these guys credentials but I don't even know your name. Perhaps we could help persuade you.
If we can't, get the July 05 issue of Field and Stream, page 34 and see what they have to say about it.
As for your "triple bogus" response about pluging barrels, Danny was simply illustrating the fact that there is no hazzard in any method of application for BMG 50. He didn't say seal it up, just plug the barrel so it won't run out. This isn't a trick designed to mislead. Besides, as you know, the ammonia will evaporate away long before a year is up, leaving....OIL! This isn't recommended anyway-BMG works fast. Its just a way of framing the answer-BMG will never hurt a bore. For other products- follow the manufacturers instructions!
Bottom line is this; There is no other product that works as fast or as completely or safer than BMG 50. Try some. If you don't like they will even send your money back and no other solvent offers that either.
Best regards,
Greg Culpepper
ricka0
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> As far as your questions about BMG 50 being bore safe, there have, of course, many and lengthy tests tests by the manufacturer as well as the experience that the many users of this product have accumulated, including Blake Daniels (four current IBS 1K records), Bill Shehane (ten time record holder and 2004 IBS 1K Champion), Rich De Simone (IBS 1K LR group record) James Phillips (IBS 600 LG score , HG group records) me (IBS 600 LG group, HG score) and Tim North, owner of Broughton Barrels among many others. I know these guys credentials but I don't even know your name. Perhaps we could help persuade you. .</font>
[/ QUOTE ]
All the experts you quote are truly expert when it comes to shooting, but that alone gives them no credentials in chemistry. This is nothing more than the authority fallacy. Their opinion on ammoniacal chemistry is no more valid than anyone else with their chemistry background.
I would like to read the tests conducted by the manufacture.
Ammonia is hygroscopic, gasoline is not. Any exposure to the atmosphere will attract water.
The point is moot however, it's not the water in ammonia that is the potential problem, it's the ammonia.
The triple bogus applies. Either you seal the barrel and stop the reaction or you don't seal it and all the ammonia quickly evaporates. How did he verify that the ammonia caused no damage? Unless he has a sealed test chamber and bubbles oxygen thru the barrel (2" will do nicely), then has atomic absorption spectroscopy on the solution and look for iron (and any other elements used in SS)) you don't have a valid test.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> If we can't, get the July 05 issue of Field and Stream, page 34 and see what they have to say about it. </font>
[/ QUOTE ] you're joking right? What credentials does F&S have? What was their test design?
I'm not saying Montana X-Treme is a bad product, or that it will harm your barrel. Hey, I'm a Montana boy myself. If it's strongly concentrated Ammonia then it will do a good job of removing copper. If it's got GM Top oil or equivalent in it, it will also remove powder. I believe you it's an excellent cleaner. I'm saying there is no valid evidence it will not harm SS.
As I said a couple lines up: Several good metallurgists claim strong Ammonia (22+ degrees Baume) will degrade your barrel. All I can get the chemists to say is [ QUOTE ]
<font color="red"> Do the tests </font>
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm a pal of Lynn - also posting a BRC. He's a firm believer in Ammonia cleaning. I'm undecided. You can always ping me offline.
There is nothing new about ammonia miscible oil.
<font color="purple"> As far as your questions about BMG 50 being bore safe, there have, of course, many and lengthy tests tests by the manufacturer as well as the experience that the many users of this product have accumulated, including Blake Daniels (four current IBS 1K records), Bill Shehane (ten time record holder and 2004 IBS 1K Champion), Rich De Simone (IBS 1K LR group record) James Phillips (IBS 600 LG score , HG group records) me (IBS 600 LG group, HG score) and Tim North, owner of Broughton Barrels among many others. I know these guys credentials but I don't even know your name. Perhaps we could help persuade you. .</font>
[/ QUOTE ]
All the experts you quote are truly expert when it comes to shooting, but that alone gives them no credentials in chemistry. This is nothing more than the authority fallacy. Their opinion on ammoniacal chemistry is no more valid than anyone else with their chemistry background.
I would like to read the tests conducted by the manufacture.
Ammonia is hygroscopic, gasoline is not. Any exposure to the atmosphere will attract water.
The point is moot however, it's not the water in ammonia that is the potential problem, it's the ammonia.
The triple bogus applies. Either you seal the barrel and stop the reaction or you don't seal it and all the ammonia quickly evaporates. How did he verify that the ammonia caused no damage? Unless he has a sealed test chamber and bubbles oxygen thru the barrel (2" will do nicely), then has atomic absorption spectroscopy on the solution and look for iron (and any other elements used in SS)) you don't have a valid test.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> If we can't, get the July 05 issue of Field and Stream, page 34 and see what they have to say about it. </font>
[/ QUOTE ] you're joking right? What credentials does F&S have? What was their test design?
I'm not saying Montana X-Treme is a bad product, or that it will harm your barrel. Hey, I'm a Montana boy myself. If it's strongly concentrated Ammonia then it will do a good job of removing copper. If it's got GM Top oil or equivalent in it, it will also remove powder. I believe you it's an excellent cleaner. I'm saying there is no valid evidence it will not harm SS.
As I said a couple lines up: Several good metallurgists claim strong Ammonia (22+ degrees Baume) will degrade your barrel. All I can get the chemists to say is [ QUOTE ]
<font color="red"> Do the tests </font>
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm a pal of Lynn - also posting a BRC. He's a firm believer in Ammonia cleaning. I'm undecided. You can always ping me offline.
There is nothing new about ammonia miscible oil.
Greg Culpepper
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2005
- Messages
- 3
Big Bore,
I'm confused.
You say that getting ammonia into oil is a myth and would be worthy of the Nobel and then you say ammonia miscible oil is nothing new. Which is it? Is "ammonia oil" a myth or not? You say that ammonia is hygroscopic (thanks for the help with my spelling) but ammonia is a gas, when dissolved in water (ammonium hydroxide) it wants to leave, evaporate, not combine. You say that the point is moot, that ammonia is the problem not water. Try leaving an unbuffered copper remover or aqua ammonia in a gun barrel (stainless or chrome moly) for an hour and check the color of the patch that follows. That brown stuff is rust my friend. What credentials does F&S have? Perhaps more than an anonomous guy on an internet chat board that has no experience with the product he is critiquing. Out of my personal experience, I don't know a single shooter that bubbles oxygen up through rifle bore. But I've got a bore scope and more than a few targets that, in combination with the results of many others, lead me to conclude that BMG 50 is a breakthrough product for rifle bore cleaning. Heck, I knew it was a breakthrough with the first patch! Our results speak. You on the other hand seem to have no exposure to the product. Talk about authority fallacy! I've lost my desire to persuade you of anything, Big bore, but I wish that you wouldn't accuse me of perpetrating a "myth" about gun cleaning and dissuade other folks from trying a breakthrough product that can advance their shooting when you have no experience with it and know nothing about it.
Greg
I'm confused.
You say that getting ammonia into oil is a myth and would be worthy of the Nobel and then you say ammonia miscible oil is nothing new. Which is it? Is "ammonia oil" a myth or not? You say that ammonia is hygroscopic (thanks for the help with my spelling) but ammonia is a gas, when dissolved in water (ammonium hydroxide) it wants to leave, evaporate, not combine. You say that the point is moot, that ammonia is the problem not water. Try leaving an unbuffered copper remover or aqua ammonia in a gun barrel (stainless or chrome moly) for an hour and check the color of the patch that follows. That brown stuff is rust my friend. What credentials does F&S have? Perhaps more than an anonomous guy on an internet chat board that has no experience with the product he is critiquing. Out of my personal experience, I don't know a single shooter that bubbles oxygen up through rifle bore. But I've got a bore scope and more than a few targets that, in combination with the results of many others, lead me to conclude that BMG 50 is a breakthrough product for rifle bore cleaning. Heck, I knew it was a breakthrough with the first patch! Our results speak. You on the other hand seem to have no exposure to the product. Talk about authority fallacy! I've lost my desire to persuade you of anything, Big bore, but I wish that you wouldn't accuse me of perpetrating a "myth" about gun cleaning and dissuade other folks from trying a breakthrough product that can advance their shooting when you have no experience with it and know nothing about it.
Greg
ricka0
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> You say that getting ammonia into oil is a myth and would be worthy of the Nobel and then you say ammonia miscible oil is nothing new. </font>
[/ QUOTE ] Where did I say that? I was rejecting no water in Ammonia under STP.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> But I've got a bore scope and more than a few targets that, in combination with the results of many others, lead me to conclude that BMG 50 is a breakthrough product for rifle bore cleaning. Heck, I knew it was a breakthrough with the first patch! Our results speak. </font>
[/ QUOTE ]
A bore scope cannot tell you if a few million Fe atoms are dissolving.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> has no experience with the product he is critiquing. </font>
[/ QUOTE ] I'm not critiquing the product; I'm presenting evidence for ammonia or showing the lack of evidence of ammonia being safe. I use 22 – 26 degree baume Ammonia solution to clean my 50's. I don't test crack or LSD but I do recommend against using them.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple">
ammonia is a gas, when dissolved in water (ammonium hydroxide) it wants to leave, evaporate, not combine.
</font>
[/ QUOTE ]Why would you think they are mutually exclusive? Why do you think you can get equal volumes of hot and cold water to freeze the hot water faster than the cold water? (Well known freshman physics question). Put an ice cube tray filled with water in a modern frost free freezer and wait a month. The water quickly freezes – all the while it's slowly and continuously evaporating. A month latter it's all gone. Actually that's a pretty good metaphor for ammoniacal bore cleaners – it's possible they are dissolving a few million Fe or far worse Ni atoms each cleaning. Like the proverbial frog in a pan of water on the stove. Most folks don't have a clue that VihtaVuori N series powders can accelerate the wear on their barrel. But GG keeps records and has confirmed what the physics suggest, you don't get a flatter pressure curve for free. Is 50% shorter barrel life worth the velocity advantage? Suppose the laboratory tests show ammoniacal solutions reduce barrel life by 15%? 1%, 50%?
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple">
What credentials does F&S have? Perhaps more than an anonomous guy on an internet chat board that has no experience with the product he is critiquing. </font>
[/ QUOTE ]Your ad-hominem remark does not answer the question. It doesn't matter what my credentials are. I've presented a question on ammoniacal chemistry – an unanswered question. You don't need any credentials to ask a good question -The question can stand on it's own. If the question is ambiguous or non-falsifiable, then show as much. You also suffer from the logic flaw of attacking my credentials to support the F&S credentials. It's moot what my credentials are when asking for F&S. Do you understand the difference between asserting a fact and asking a question?
Now if F&S regularly published in peer reviewed scientific journals, they would have credibility in this arena. I would still want to review their test design.
You have presented no valid evidence to reject my statement – that ammoniacal cleaning of gun barrels has never been proven safe.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> I don't know a single shooter that bubbles oxygen up through rifle bore. </font>
[/ QUOTE ]
That's a good test design, suggested to me by the famous ammoniacal chemist Karl H Dietz. If it's not obvious why ping me offline and I'll explain it.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> I knew it was a breakthrough with the first patch! Our results speak. </font>
[/ QUOTE ]
Breakthrough in cleaning, maybe. I doubt it removes cu faster than the 22+ deg. Baume ammonia solution I get for free. But you have never established safety to barrel steel. All your results speak to is the efficacy of cleaning. You have not established safety.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> Talk about authority fallacy! </font>
[/ QUOTE ]
You've contradicted yourself. The logic flaw authority fallacy occurs when an authority on subject A (shooting in this case) gives authoritative advice on subject B (ammoniacal chemistry) where he is not an authority. By your own words I have no credentials, I'm not an authority in either area. I'm only interested in the truth. My zeal for understanding ammoniacal chemistry started 18 months ago when someone posted on BH (the 50 BMG site) that ammonia attacks barrel steel. Because I'd been using 22+ Baume ammonia solution for some time with amazing results (in efficacy of cu removal), and with my limited chemistry background, I rejected the statement. We decided to settle the question someone fill a 2" barrel stub in 26 degree Baume ammonia solution (sealed) for a month, then check it with a bore scope. After one month he could see no harm. I was a happy ammonia pimp after that. Then something GG wrote got me thinking. I designed some better tests, ran them by a couple PhD chemists and they showed the flaws in my test designs. After a few weeks of working on test designs and working with a laboratory chemists who actually does these measurement – we came up with a good test design that will put the question to rest. The lab would like me at minimum to have four samples: <ul type="square"> [*]virgin 26 degree Baume Ammonia solution [*]virgin popular commercial cu cleaner [*]ammonia solution after 2 week sealed bubble test with 2" barrel stub [*]commercial cleaning solution after 2 week sealed bubble test with 2" barrel stub [/list]
I was hoping to get coppermelt to fund part of the lab costs (They charge $20 for an acid digestion of the sample, then $12.50 per element tested. – we will probably only test for iron) But coppermelt seems to be an underground operation. I was thinking of contacting wipe-out as they are very popular.
In review: <ul type="square"> [*]I have extensive experience using 22+ deg. Baume ammonia to remove cu from my guns (the active ingredient in BH that removes cu) [*]I have never stated that Ammonia attacks SS gun barrels; I've only stated that it has never been proven not to [*]I use 22+ deg. Baume ammonia solution to clean my 50. While I'm guessing 26 deg. Baume ammoina removes cu faster than MX-BH - the BH product almost certainly cleans the gun faster (by combining solvents) I need extra steps of runnng Butches thru my guns. [*]Greg Culpepper is a better shot and more experienced HP shooter than B1g_B0RE [/list]
I'm a flip flopper like Kerry. But unlike Kerry I don't flip flop based on polls – when better evidence is available, I go with objective information. Right now I'm with the chemists who say "We don't know".
<font color="purple"> You say that getting ammonia into oil is a myth and would be worthy of the Nobel and then you say ammonia miscible oil is nothing new. </font>
[/ QUOTE ] Where did I say that? I was rejecting no water in Ammonia under STP.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> But I've got a bore scope and more than a few targets that, in combination with the results of many others, lead me to conclude that BMG 50 is a breakthrough product for rifle bore cleaning. Heck, I knew it was a breakthrough with the first patch! Our results speak. </font>
[/ QUOTE ]
A bore scope cannot tell you if a few million Fe atoms are dissolving.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> has no experience with the product he is critiquing. </font>
[/ QUOTE ] I'm not critiquing the product; I'm presenting evidence for ammonia or showing the lack of evidence of ammonia being safe. I use 22 – 26 degree baume Ammonia solution to clean my 50's. I don't test crack or LSD but I do recommend against using them.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple">
ammonia is a gas, when dissolved in water (ammonium hydroxide) it wants to leave, evaporate, not combine.
</font>
[/ QUOTE ]Why would you think they are mutually exclusive? Why do you think you can get equal volumes of hot and cold water to freeze the hot water faster than the cold water? (Well known freshman physics question). Put an ice cube tray filled with water in a modern frost free freezer and wait a month. The water quickly freezes – all the while it's slowly and continuously evaporating. A month latter it's all gone. Actually that's a pretty good metaphor for ammoniacal bore cleaners – it's possible they are dissolving a few million Fe or far worse Ni atoms each cleaning. Like the proverbial frog in a pan of water on the stove. Most folks don't have a clue that VihtaVuori N series powders can accelerate the wear on their barrel. But GG keeps records and has confirmed what the physics suggest, you don't get a flatter pressure curve for free. Is 50% shorter barrel life worth the velocity advantage? Suppose the laboratory tests show ammoniacal solutions reduce barrel life by 15%? 1%, 50%?
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple">
What credentials does F&S have? Perhaps more than an anonomous guy on an internet chat board that has no experience with the product he is critiquing. </font>
[/ QUOTE ]Your ad-hominem remark does not answer the question. It doesn't matter what my credentials are. I've presented a question on ammoniacal chemistry – an unanswered question. You don't need any credentials to ask a good question -The question can stand on it's own. If the question is ambiguous or non-falsifiable, then show as much. You also suffer from the logic flaw of attacking my credentials to support the F&S credentials. It's moot what my credentials are when asking for F&S. Do you understand the difference between asserting a fact and asking a question?
Now if F&S regularly published in peer reviewed scientific journals, they would have credibility in this arena. I would still want to review their test design.
You have presented no valid evidence to reject my statement – that ammoniacal cleaning of gun barrels has never been proven safe.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> I don't know a single shooter that bubbles oxygen up through rifle bore. </font>
[/ QUOTE ]
That's a good test design, suggested to me by the famous ammoniacal chemist Karl H Dietz. If it's not obvious why ping me offline and I'll explain it.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> I knew it was a breakthrough with the first patch! Our results speak. </font>
[/ QUOTE ]
Breakthrough in cleaning, maybe. I doubt it removes cu faster than the 22+ deg. Baume ammonia solution I get for free. But you have never established safety to barrel steel. All your results speak to is the efficacy of cleaning. You have not established safety.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> Talk about authority fallacy! </font>
[/ QUOTE ]
You've contradicted yourself. The logic flaw authority fallacy occurs when an authority on subject A (shooting in this case) gives authoritative advice on subject B (ammoniacal chemistry) where he is not an authority. By your own words I have no credentials, I'm not an authority in either area. I'm only interested in the truth. My zeal for understanding ammoniacal chemistry started 18 months ago when someone posted on BH (the 50 BMG site) that ammonia attacks barrel steel. Because I'd been using 22+ Baume ammonia solution for some time with amazing results (in efficacy of cu removal), and with my limited chemistry background, I rejected the statement. We decided to settle the question someone fill a 2" barrel stub in 26 degree Baume ammonia solution (sealed) for a month, then check it with a bore scope. After one month he could see no harm. I was a happy ammonia pimp after that. Then something GG wrote got me thinking. I designed some better tests, ran them by a couple PhD chemists and they showed the flaws in my test designs. After a few weeks of working on test designs and working with a laboratory chemists who actually does these measurement – we came up with a good test design that will put the question to rest. The lab would like me at minimum to have four samples: <ul type="square"> [*]virgin 26 degree Baume Ammonia solution [*]virgin popular commercial cu cleaner [*]ammonia solution after 2 week sealed bubble test with 2" barrel stub [*]commercial cleaning solution after 2 week sealed bubble test with 2" barrel stub [/list]
I was hoping to get coppermelt to fund part of the lab costs (They charge $20 for an acid digestion of the sample, then $12.50 per element tested. – we will probably only test for iron) But coppermelt seems to be an underground operation. I was thinking of contacting wipe-out as they are very popular.
In review: <ul type="square"> [*]I have extensive experience using 22+ deg. Baume ammonia to remove cu from my guns (the active ingredient in BH that removes cu) [*]I have never stated that Ammonia attacks SS gun barrels; I've only stated that it has never been proven not to [*]I use 22+ deg. Baume ammonia solution to clean my 50. While I'm guessing 26 deg. Baume ammoina removes cu faster than MX-BH - the BH product almost certainly cleans the gun faster (by combining solvents) I need extra steps of runnng Butches thru my guns. [*]Greg Culpepper is a better shot and more experienced HP shooter than B1g_B0RE [/list]
I'm a flip flopper like Kerry. But unlike Kerry I don't flip flop based on polls – when better evidence is available, I go with objective information. Right now I'm with the chemists who say "We don't know".
Greg Culpepper
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2005
- Messages
- 3
Big Bore,
I wrote that BMG at had ammonia but no water. You wrote that it was a myth, impossible. I wrote that BMG 50 was bore safe regardless of time exposure. You wrote that it was a myth- that it might be possible to bubble oxygen up through it and free some iron or nickle molecules from the bore. Well, running water cut the Grand Canyon but all I'm trying to do is get my gun clean fast (in one lifetime) so it can shoot more accurately. While I'm facinated by your theory that a hot ice tray will freeze faster than a cold one, I can't for the life of me understand how that helps anyone get their gun shooting better. I mean I am on Long Range Hunting, right? How are here-to-fore non-existent peer reviewed scientic ammoniacal chemistry theories going to help anybody shoot a smaller group or wack a deer? When in the world do you find time to shoot? Are you a trial lawyer or just considering a career with the bar? BMG 50 is no myth and neither is its bore safety. You're going to have to have fun without me for awhile. I have to cut the grass.
I wrote that BMG at had ammonia but no water. You wrote that it was a myth, impossible. I wrote that BMG 50 was bore safe regardless of time exposure. You wrote that it was a myth- that it might be possible to bubble oxygen up through it and free some iron or nickle molecules from the bore. Well, running water cut the Grand Canyon but all I'm trying to do is get my gun clean fast (in one lifetime) so it can shoot more accurately. While I'm facinated by your theory that a hot ice tray will freeze faster than a cold one, I can't for the life of me understand how that helps anyone get their gun shooting better. I mean I am on Long Range Hunting, right? How are here-to-fore non-existent peer reviewed scientic ammoniacal chemistry theories going to help anybody shoot a smaller group or wack a deer? When in the world do you find time to shoot? Are you a trial lawyer or just considering a career with the bar? BMG 50 is no myth and neither is its bore safety. You're going to have to have fun without me for awhile. I have to cut the grass.
Tisk tisk!
The facts:
Coppermelt works and is safe.
50 BMG works and is safe.
Conc. ammonia removes Cu from a steel barrel with greater affinity than the steel.
Wipe out works and is safe.
All products quickly and safely clean rifle barrels.
There is no such thing as a nonaqueous source of ammonia outside of a vacuum. (It has HOH molecules in it!)
There are at least two sides to everything.
Did I miss anything?
Stephen
The facts:
Coppermelt works and is safe.
50 BMG works and is safe.
Conc. ammonia removes Cu from a steel barrel with greater affinity than the steel.
Wipe out works and is safe.
All products quickly and safely clean rifle barrels.
There is no such thing as a nonaqueous source of ammonia outside of a vacuum. (It has HOH molecules in it!)
There are at least two sides to everything.
Did I miss anything?
Stephen
ricka0
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> I wrote that BMG 50 was bore safe regardless of time exposure. </font>
[/ QUOTE ]
How do you know that? How do you know it's not causing your barrel to wear 1% faster? 3% faster, 7% faster? Please present evidence.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple">
You wrote that it was a myth- that it might be possible to bubble oxygen up through it and free some iron or nickle molecules from the bore. </font>
[/ QUOTE ] Sorry - you missed the science (as I did the first review with the chemists). The only way you can tell (without spending a million dollars) is to maximize the reactivity of ammonia - and you do this by keeping it oxygen rich. I wasn't suggesting that anyone would do this while cleaning their gun – it's a way to do a worst case test against ammonia in a few days – maybe 30 barrel lifetimes of cleaning in a few days. Suppose I do the worst case test and find no Fe or Ni atoms. That would prove conclusively that ammonia is safe for barrels (as long as you clean it out and apply oil). If the lab finds a few million Fe atoms then we would have to correlate this to real world cleaning and try to figure out the impact on barrel integrity.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> While I'm facinated by your theory that a hot ice tray will freeze faster than a cold one, I can't for the life of me understand how that helps anyone get their gun shooting better. </font>
[/ QUOTE ] It served two purposes. It showed that it's possible for fluid to undergo (simultaneously) phase transitions on both energy spectrum's (evaporate and freeze). You implied it was not possible for Ammonia to be hygroscopic while it is evaporating. In fact it does both, but evaporation at STP is the dominant factor. It also shows that many things in science are counter-intuitive so we can't work from assumptions, intuition and obvious guesses. BTW, the ice cube question comes from Halliday, Resnick & Merrill (the most popular university physics text in the world). I worked for Dr. Merrill as a undergrad.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> theories going to help anybody shoot a smaller group or wack a deer? </font>
[/ QUOTE ]They won't – in fact they could make you shoot larger groups or miss wacking the deer if my research showed ammoniacal cleaning accelerated barrel wear by 3% - so folks over-reacted and skipped cleaning. My best guess is that the effects of Ammonia on gun barrels is minimal, and right now it's worth taking the risk. I'm only interested in finding the truth.
You are a good sport and I'm sure far more knowledgeable about guns, BR & LR shooting than me. My friends tell me I should have been a trial lawyer. I'm 7/8 in traffic court &#61514; I'm worked as a professional mathematician for Boeing where I published research – now I write software and publish computer science. And yes I need to spend more time shooting and less time on the internet. And for hopefully the last time, I'm not saying Montana Xtreme causes damage, I'm just saying as the chemists have said [ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> "no one has proven it's safe or shown it is damaging". </font>
[/ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> I wrote that BMG 50 was bore safe regardless of time exposure. </font>
[/ QUOTE ]
How do you know that? How do you know it's not causing your barrel to wear 1% faster? 3% faster, 7% faster? Please present evidence.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple">
You wrote that it was a myth- that it might be possible to bubble oxygen up through it and free some iron or nickle molecules from the bore. </font>
[/ QUOTE ] Sorry - you missed the science (as I did the first review with the chemists). The only way you can tell (without spending a million dollars) is to maximize the reactivity of ammonia - and you do this by keeping it oxygen rich. I wasn't suggesting that anyone would do this while cleaning their gun – it's a way to do a worst case test against ammonia in a few days – maybe 30 barrel lifetimes of cleaning in a few days. Suppose I do the worst case test and find no Fe or Ni atoms. That would prove conclusively that ammonia is safe for barrels (as long as you clean it out and apply oil). If the lab finds a few million Fe atoms then we would have to correlate this to real world cleaning and try to figure out the impact on barrel integrity.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> While I'm facinated by your theory that a hot ice tray will freeze faster than a cold one, I can't for the life of me understand how that helps anyone get their gun shooting better. </font>
[/ QUOTE ] It served two purposes. It showed that it's possible for fluid to undergo (simultaneously) phase transitions on both energy spectrum's (evaporate and freeze). You implied it was not possible for Ammonia to be hygroscopic while it is evaporating. In fact it does both, but evaporation at STP is the dominant factor. It also shows that many things in science are counter-intuitive so we can't work from assumptions, intuition and obvious guesses. BTW, the ice cube question comes from Halliday, Resnick & Merrill (the most popular university physics text in the world). I worked for Dr. Merrill as a undergrad.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> theories going to help anybody shoot a smaller group or wack a deer? </font>
[/ QUOTE ]They won't – in fact they could make you shoot larger groups or miss wacking the deer if my research showed ammoniacal cleaning accelerated barrel wear by 3% - so folks over-reacted and skipped cleaning. My best guess is that the effects of Ammonia on gun barrels is minimal, and right now it's worth taking the risk. I'm only interested in finding the truth.
You are a good sport and I'm sure far more knowledgeable about guns, BR & LR shooting than me. My friends tell me I should have been a trial lawyer. I'm 7/8 in traffic court &#61514; I'm worked as a professional mathematician for Boeing where I published research – now I write software and publish computer science. And yes I need to spend more time shooting and less time on the internet. And for hopefully the last time, I'm not saying Montana Xtreme causes damage, I'm just saying as the chemists have said [ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> "no one has proven it's safe or shown it is damaging". </font>
[/ QUOTE ]
getsmart
Well-Known Member
It is an interesting thread. Made me think a bit. My gut told me that a caustic like ammonia that removes copper so well could at least cause some corrosion in barrel imperfections.
I just do not let it sit longer than 5mins. What a great research project with a scanning-electron microscope and a microprobe. You would go through a bunch of barrels though having to section one each time to measure the bore surface.
I just do not let it sit longer than 5mins. What a great research project with a scanning-electron microscope and a microprobe. You would go through a bunch of barrels though having to section one each time to measure the bore surface.
