AR Sponsor
Posted: 11/1/2024 1:56:57 PM EDT
|
TL;DR Slip 2000 Gun Lube / EWL30 seems to make it much easier to clean off the hardened carbon deposits Nitrided (Aero) and chrome (KAK) were easiest to clean (in that order), followed by DLC (KAK) and then NP3 (Psionics). I'm lazy so I was curious as to which coatings helped make it easier to clean the bolts and BCGs of the AR. I tried my best to run the same number of rounds through each combo but I ended up having to shorten the round count for the NP3 (40 rd) and Chrome (50rd) while the nitrided and DLC had about 100 rd through each. PMC Bronze 55gr FMJ was used. When using a suppressor it was either an AAC Ranger 5 or Ventum 762. The Aero nitrided BCG and KAK hard chrome were easy to clean. The nitrided stuff almost darn near wiped clean but I chalk that up to Slip 2000 because in the past I've had to scrub the bolt tail. The KAK hard chrome was easier to see where I didn't get it clean and then it was a matter of wiping with Boretech C4 in a shop towel. The chrome was a rougher surface but carbon would just flake off when scraped if it was needed, kind of like nitrided steel. The KAK DLC was a rougher finish. I know Ionbond is slicker almost like nitride, but the KAK DLC felt like the DLC Kershaw uses on their knife coatings. I had to use a dental pick and SS brush for some spots. But it was like a hair below chrome in terms of ease of cleaning. I do kind of wonder how much scraping the DLC can take before it starts to wear off. The NP3 was surprisingly harder to clean even with the Slip 2000 being used. The carbon was like sprayed on and baked on in the nasty spots. It wipes off the exterior of the carrier just like any of the other BCGs. But the bolt tail required the SS brush and some minor elbow grease. While NP3 is super slick, the carbon still loved to stick to that bolt. I am going to keep running the nitrided Aero in the 10.5 upper that it came with, and run the KAK Chrome in my 16" upper. The KAK DLC I have is a K-spec with downward vents and the dual-ejector bolt, but I didn't feel those features were all that useful - they were nice and innovative but I wouldn't pay extra for those again. I did run it suppressed for a few dozen rounds during each of the BCG test runs. Hope this helps. |
|
Originally Posted By kingoftheriver: Did you try NiB (nickel boron)? RCA No I did not. I read all the mixed reviews of NiB so I avoided it. The only thing I have that uses NiB is my KNS Discarder. I am assuming the NiB is the shiny part of it, and it does trap a lot of carbon over time. I've tried using regular cleaning methods with it, but the Ultrasonic was the easiest way along with a short soaking of Boretech C4 and turning it through all the settings. |
|
Originally Posted By kingoftheriver: I run a FailZero NiB bolt in my Colt M16a1. To clean, I soak it in a tray with mineral spirits for a while and hit it with a toothbrush. Anything after that just wipes right off with a rag. RCA I've cleaned BCGs by throwing them into an ultrasonic tank for 15-30 minutes. Gets rid of like 90% of the deposits. But I was looking to see which was the easiest to clean manually. NP3 seems like it would clean faster if I soaked it or used an ultrasonic, but that takes a bit too much effort versus the nitride and chrome. |
Joined:
Apr 2024
Posts:
103
EE: 0% (0)
IN, USA
|
I was just about to make a thread about phosphate vs NP3 BCGs. I'm about to get another BCG and it's going to be Sionics. I'm mainly concerned about durability/longevity, not so much about it sticking or not. Does anyone have any long term/high round use out of an NP3 to know if they hold up better than phosphate. I read that a good NP3 will have its dimensions slightly reduced since the coating does add a tiny bit of thickness. My understanding about phosphate is that it's not a coating and is instead a treatment, therefore does not need modification to the dimensions. If all that's true, then my concern is that if the NP3 were to wear off, that it would no longer be within proper tolerance, right? Or should I make a new thread about the durability of NP3 vs Phosphate specifically? I don't mean to highjack this thread. |
|
Originally Posted By Paradoxical-Reality: I was just about to make a thread about phosphate vs NP3 BCGs. I'm about to get another BCG and it's going to be Sionics. I'm mainly concerned about durability/longevity, not so much about it sticking or not. Does anyone have any long term/high round use out of an NP3 to know if they hold up better than phosphate. I read that a good NP3 will have its dimensions slightly reduced since the coating does add a tiny bit of thickness. My understanding about phosphate is that it's not a coating and is instead a treatment, therefore does not need modification to the dimensions. If all that's true, then my concern is that if the NP3 were to wear off, that it would no longer be within proper tolerance, right? Or should I make a new thread about the durability of NP3 vs Phosphate specifically? I don't mean to highjack this thread. You may get better fidelity answers to your questions with a separate thread. However, from what I have gathered you'll probably find a lot of people will recommend the phosphate with chrome lining as its the best value and does the job. The bulk of the fouling is going to be inside the bolt carrier where the bolt tail resides, along with the bolt tail itself. SOTARD seems to highly praise the hard chrome and i do rather like the chrome as its easy to clean and it is easy to see where i missed a spot. |
AR Sponsor