Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Posted: 2/11/2013 3:47:28 PM EDT
Will this work for installing my barrel?


Valvoline® General Multi-Purpose Grease

Designed for both automotive and industrial uses

•Excellent water resistance
•Lubricates at temperatures ranging from -5°F to 275°F
•NLGI #2 Grade Lithium 12-Hydroxysterate EP Grease
•GM 4733-m; GM 6031-M; Chrysler MS-3701; NLP LB
Link Posted: 2/11/2013 3:52:59 PM EDT
Originally Posted By rookie421:
Will this work for installing my barrel?


Valvoline® General Multi-Purpose Grease

Designed for both automotive and industrial uses

•Excellent water resistance
•Lubricates at temperatures ranging from -5°F to 275°F
•NLGI #2 Grade Lithium 12-Hydroxysterate EP Grease
•GM 4733-m; GM 6031-M; Chrysler MS-3701; NLP LB


It's fine.
Link Posted: 2/11/2013 3:54:42 PM EDT
Any graphite? I was reading graphite was bad. I need to get lube so I was searching that topic.
Link Posted: 2/11/2013 5:21:47 PM EDT
Same stuff I used, it seemed to work.
Link Posted: 2/11/2013 5:25:31 PM EDT
The TM calls for a MIL-G-21164 grease, which is based on a white lithium grease base and has a specific percentage of molybdenum disulfide content. It is designed to handle very high loading pressures at both very high and very low temperatures. Yes, it is an aviation grease (AeroShell 33MS is an example), but aerospace is where lots of aluminum and steel parts are assembled in high pressure, high temperature settings, like aircraft brake systems.

Automotive grease products are not aviation grad lubricants, are designed for steel-on-steel applications, and often contain graphite, whether or not it is listed in the MSDS.

Graphite is BAD because it is hygroscopic (it attracts and holds atmospheric moisture), and with water, it acts as an electrolyte between dissimilar metals (steel and aluminum), and potentially causes galvanic corrosion. In an aluminum-steel galvanic situation, aluminum is a "sacrificial" component; the corrosion actually destroys aluminum. I have never seen this happen in a gun I have owned, but I have seen galvanic corrosion in the real world, between steel panel screws and aluminum rack panels.

Spend a few bucks and get some quality, aviation-grade grease that meets MIL-G-21164 standards. The torque spec for the barrel nut is based on use of that type of grease, it will protect your parts during and after assembly, and it isn't that expensive.
Link Posted: 2/11/2013 5:27:08 PM EDT
I have used the black valvoline semi synthetic. No graphite to my knowledge. Only moly. Works fine.


Download Product Info PDF
MSDS



DuraBlend® Synthetic Blend Grease

Formulated to provide excellent high and low temperature protection

•Provides excellent high- and low-temperature protection (-25°F to 400°F) over conventional greases
•Exceptional resistance to heavy loads
•Moly-Fortified for increased film strength
•Excellent water repellent
•Inhibits rust and oxidation


Link Posted: 2/11/2013 5:58:00 PM EDT
The people who specified the grease could have chosen automotive grease.
The mil-spec grease meets the needs of the weapon, no guesswork involved, proven in military weapons for more than four decades.
It is readily available on the internet.
Link Posted: 2/11/2013 6:24:08 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/12/2013 9:38:26 AM EDT by Direct-Drive]
Originally Posted By PFC:
The people who specified the grease could have chosen automotive grease.
The mil-spec grease meets the needs of the weapon, no guesswork involved, proven in military weapons for more than four decades.
It is readily available on the internet.

I decided to order Aero Shell 33MS which meets the spec.
A short wait.

For those who just can't wait, Valvoline VV632 is close to the mil spec and available locally.
This not the product quoted at the front end of this thread.
Link Posted: 2/11/2013 7:18:48 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/11/2013 7:19:29 PM EDT by headmonkey]
I was in the same position myself, getting ready to assemble AR #1.

Aeroshell 33MS seemed to meet the milspec, but it was $17 + shipping.

Buddy of mine had mentioned "Honda Moly 60" is almost the same, and
I ordered a tube of it off ebay for $11.50 shipped.

http://www.ratherbe.us/Moly60_MSDS.pdf

Supposedly a good high solids high pressure grease, without added metals / graphite.

Others have mentioned it as well.
Link Posted: 2/12/2013 9:24:56 AM EDT
We have board members who have advocated using $8/ounce anti-seize with 10% graphite.
If I recall right the Honda grease has a massive amount of moly in it.
Who knows if this is good, bad, or neutral?

I argue this issue when it comes up because most people who are new at this don’t seem to realize that there are reasons the mil-spec grease is not something a person can pick up at Auto Zone or Wal-Mart and that a substitute may not work satisfactorily under all circumstances.
Although I am inclined to think that the type of grease, within reason, is not a critical issue with civilian weapons I use the mil-spec grease simply because a person cannot go wrong using the correct grease.

Link Posted: 2/12/2013 11:03:05 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/12/2013 11:28:32 AM EDT by headmonkey]
Originally Posted By PFC:
We have board members who have advocated using $8/ounce anti-seize with 10% graphite.
If I recall right the Honda grease has a massive amount of moly in it.
Who knows if this is good, bad, or neutral?

I argue this issue when it comes up because most people who are new at this don’t seem to realize that there are reasons the mil-spec grease is not something a person can pick up at Auto Zone or Wal-Mart and that a substitute may not work satisfactorily under all circumstances.
Although I am inclined to think that the type of grease, within reason, is not a critical issue with civilian weapons I use the mil-spec grease simply because a person cannot go wrong using the correct grease.



The MSDS for the Moly 60 says its "15 to 20% moly by weight"

Someone else mentioned they made their own by mixing white lithium grease with 10% moly powder they had on
hand for bullet lubrication. ( not something I would do, they just said it worked )

The Aeroshell 33ms which supposedly meets the mil-spec for AR assembly MSDS is here
and it says "1 - 5% moly"

Molybdenum disulphide "like graphite, it is widely used as a solid lubricant because of its low friction properties and robustness." "has a low coefficient of friction,"

"Molybdenum disulfide is stable in air (hence its existence as a common mineral) and oxygen at normal conditions, but reacts with oxygen upon heating forming Molybdenum trioxide:"

"MoS2 with particle sizes in the range of 1–100 µm is a common dry lubricant. Few alternatives exist that can confer the high lubricity and stability up to 350 °C in oxidizing environments."

"Examples of some diverse applications of MoS2-based lubricants include two-stroke engines (e.g., motorcycle engines), automotive CV and universal joints, ski waxes,[11] and even some bullets.[12]"
Barrels last longer when using bullets coated with MoS2

Flashpoint of Moly 60 193.3C
Flashpoint of Aeroshell 33MS > 215C

Other than minor differences in each products final coefficient of friction ( and when I say minor, I mean, minor, since MoS2 is already low ) and the small
flashpoint difference ( which isn't going to matter after you smoke a few rounds either ) I'd say these 2 products are remarkably similar.

We really are only putting on a small amount, and the choice of either should not affect the initial barrel to upper torque procedure, and both are compatible
with the materials. If anything it seems like the Moly 60 will retain more solids and burn off less oils than the Aeroshell, resulting in a better long term joint, better
being defined as, holding the torque spec you gave it, or less "wiggle" from thermal expansion / contraction. An aluminum upper has a higher coefficient of thermal
expansion than a steel barrel / barrel nut, so cracking is also not an issue, as the joint should loosen with heat, not tighten. It also apparently has "good thermal
conductivity" so it may transfer slightly more heat from the barrel to the upper, but I would bet the difference between 5% and 20% at the joint is small enough
to barely be measurable.

Given the extremely small difference in performance parameters for all we know the military uses the Aeroshell 33MS ( their equivalent of it ) because they
were already using it on a bunch of other stuff, not because its engineered to be the perfect compound for this particular application.
Link Posted: 2/12/2013 11:24:51 AM EDT
Originally Posted By headmonkey:
Originally Posted By PFC:
We have board members who have advocated using $8/ounce anti-seize with 10% graphite.
If I recall right the Honda grease has a massive amount of moly in it.
Who knows if this is good, bad, or neutral?

I argue this issue when it comes up because most people who are new at this don’t seem to realize that there are reasons the mil-spec grease is not something a person can pick up at Auto Zone or Wal-Mart and that a substitute may not work satisfactorily under all circumstances.
Although I am inclined to think that the type of grease, within reason, is not a critical issue with civilian weapons I use the mil-spec grease simply because a person cannot go wrong using the correct grease.



The MSDS for the Moly 60 says its "15 to 20% moly by weight"

Someone else mentioned they made their own by mixing white lithium grease with 10% moly powder they had on
hand for bullet lubrication. ( not something I would do, they just said it worked )

The Aeroshell 33ms which supposedly meets the mil-spec for AR assembly MSDS is here
and it says "1 - 5% moly"

Molybdenum disulphide "like graphite, it is widely used as a solid lubricant because of its low friction properties and robustness." "has a low coefficient of friction,"

"Molybdenum disulfide is stable in air (hence its existence as a common mineral) and oxygen at normal conditions, but reacts with oxygen upon heating forming Molybdenum trioxide:"

"MoS2 with particle sizes in the range of 1–100 µm is a common dry lubricant. Few alternatives exist that can confer the high lubricity and stability up to 350 °C in oxidizing environments."

"Examples of some diverse applications of MoS2-based lubricants include two-stroke engines (e.g., motorcycle engines), automotive CV and universal joints, ski waxes,[11] and even some bullets.[12]"
Barrels last longer when using bullets coated with MoS2

Flashpoint of Moly 60 193.3C
Flashpoint of Aeroshell 33MS > 215C

Other than minor differences in each products final coefficient of friction ( and when I say minor, I mean, minor, since MoS2 is already low ) and the small
flashpoint difference ( which isn't going to matter after you smoke a few rounds either ) I'd say these 2 products are remarkably similar.

We really are only putting on a small amount, and the choice of either should not affect the initial barrel to upper torque procedure, and both are compatible
with the materials. If anything it seems like the Moly 60 will retain more solids and burn off less oils than the Aeroshell, resulting in a better long term joint, better
being defined as, holding the torque spec you gave it, or less "wiggle" from thermal expansion / contraction.

Given the extremely small difference in performance parameters for all we know the military uses the Aeroshell 33MS ( their equivalent of it ) because they
were already using it on a bunch of other stuff, not because its engineered to be the perfect compound for this particular application.

Someone in the EE is selling small quantities of Aero Shell 33MS.
All you have to do is go get it.....the bitch about price/shipping for the 14 oz tube is over.


Link Posted: 2/12/2013 11:29:24 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/12/2013 11:39:27 AM EDT by headmonkey]
Originally Posted By Direct-Drive:

Someone in the EE is selling small quantities of Aero Shell 33MS.
All you have to do is go get it.....the bitch about price/shipping for the 14 oz tube is over.



Choice is a good thing.

Moly 60 was recommended to me by a friend as he used it on his builds.

After investigating the issue, it would seem the choice between Moly 60 and Aeroshell makes less
of a difference than the amount of either you apply.
Link Posted: 2/12/2013 12:22:40 PM EDT
Originally Posted By rookie421:
Will this work for installing my barrel?


Valvoline® General Multi-Purpose Grease

Designed for both automotive and industrial uses

•Excellent water resistance
•Lubricates at temperatures ranging from -5°F to 275°F
•NLGI #2 Grade Lithium 12-Hydroxysterate EP Grease
•GM 4733-m; GM 6031-M; Chrysler MS-3701; NLP LB


The MSDS for that product makes no mention of moly.

Valvoline SynPower Synthetic Grease, VV986, contains moly and does not contain graphite. The data sheet does not indicate if it meets the proper mil-spec.
Link Posted: 2/12/2013 1:24:05 PM EDT
Originally Posted By headmonkey:
Given the extremely small difference in performance parameters for all we know the military uses the Aeroshell 33MS ( their equivalent of it ) because they
were already using it on a bunch of other stuff, not because its engineered to be the perfect compound for this particular application.

Actually, MIL-G-21164 spec grease was called out because a) it IS perfect for this application, and b) it was already a MIL-G spec grease.

AeroShell 33MS is warranted by Shell to meet MIL-G-21164 standards.. The GI specification for the grease is measured per specific standards listed in the MIL-G- spec I linked, while the content listing in the MSDS is according to MSDS criteria; the two are not at all alike, so the MSDS listing "up to 5%" molybdenum disulfide content is not at odds with the MIL-G-21164 standard calling for (paraphrased) 4.5-5.5% molybdenum disulfide content,

While molybdenum disulfide forms particles that have somewhat similar physical properties to graphite, they are chemically (and on a microscopic level) very different. Graphite forms flat sheets while molybdenum disulfide forms sphereoids. Graphite is hygroscopic, even with the tiniest amount of atmospheric moisture, while MoS2 is completely neutral regarding water, neither attracting it nor retaining it. They are both used in automotive applications, and typically together, while aviation lubricants typically do not use graphite at all.

One reason I have gone to this much effort is to point out something: people on this board often trash other's builds for use of lower cost parts, such as going with Midwest Industries rails instead of Vltor, but these same people will go out of their way to buy and use the cheapest grease they can find (if they bother with it at all) to assemble a gun that cost several thousand dollars in parts. This is insane to my way of thinking. Spend a few bucks and buy an available, safe, and specification-compliant grease and build the rifle correctly. Or don't. But advocating use of the cheapest Wal-Mar branded axle grease to someone else for them to assemble their rifle is just plain bad behavior. There is a small AR parts vendor (I can't find my reference right now) that sells little plastic tubs of about 1/2oz of the stuff for $3; while not a pound for $3, it is at least the right material for the job...
Link Posted: 2/12/2013 3:23:34 PM EDT
Where can one buy the Shell stuff on the EE? I can't find the link anymore. An IM would be appreciated. It was going to be 30 bucks after shipping online...
Link Posted: 2/12/2013 4:03:43 PM EDT
Thanks for all of the info.
a link to the EE ad would be appreciated.
Link Posted: 2/12/2013 5:53:42 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/12/2013 6:05:15 PM EDT by headmonkey]
Originally Posted By GHPorter:
Originally Posted By headmonkey:
Given the extremely small difference in performance parameters for all we know the military uses the Aeroshell 33MS ( their equivalent of it ) because they
were already using it on a bunch of other stuff, not because its engineered to be the perfect compound for this particular application.

Actually, MIL-G-21164 spec grease was called out because a) it IS perfect for this application, and b) it was already a MIL-G spec grease.


You mean Eugene Stoner looked around the shop, found a can of mil-spec grease, and designed every other parameter of the AR rifles to exactly
and perfectly match the parameters of the existing grease ? Forgive me if I don't believe this.

AeroShell 33MS is warranted by Shell to meet MIL-G-21164 standards.. The GI specification for the grease is measured per specific standards listed in the MIL-G- spec I linked, while the content listing in the MSDS is according to MSDS criteria; the two are not at all alike, so the MSDS listing "up to 5%" molybdenum disulfide content is not at odds with the MIL-G-21164 standard calling for (paraphrased) 4.5-5.5% molybdenum disulfide content,


Noone said it was ( at odds with the mil-spec ). The Aeroshell 33MS *IS* the same as the mil-spec AR grease. It costs twice as much as Honda Moly 60.

While molybdenum disulfide forms particles that have somewhat similar physical properties to graphite, they are chemically (and on a microscopic level) very different. Graphite forms flat sheets while molybdenum disulfide forms sphereoids. Graphite is hygroscopic, even with the tiniest amount of atmospheric moisture, while MoS2 is completely neutral regarding water, neither attracting it nor retaining it. They are both used in automotive applications, and typically together, while aviation lubricants typically do not use graphite at all.


Graphite is bad. The thread has established that. There is no graphite in Honda Moly 60.

One reason I have gone to this much effort is to point out something: people on this board often trash other's builds for use of lower cost parts, such as going with Midwest Industries rails instead of Vltor, but these same people will go out of their way to buy and use the cheapest grease they can find (if they bother with it at all) to assemble a gun that cost several thousand dollars in parts. This is insane to my way of thinking. Spend a few bucks and buy an available, safe, and specification-compliant grease and build the rifle correctly. Or don't. But advocating use of the cheapest Wal-Mar branded axle grease to someone else for them to assemble their rifle is just plain bad behavior. There is a small AR parts vendor (I can't find my reference right now) that sells little plastic tubs of about 1/2oz of the stuff for $3; while not a pound for $3, it is at least the right material for the job...


Noone has advocated the use of "the cheapest Wal-Mar axle grease" in this thread that I can see. I certainly didn't.

What has been pointed out, is that Honda Moly 60 and Aeroshell 33MS are so similar that both will work fine, and that the differences are so small, the amount of grease you put on your finger and consequently wipe onto the threads will have more of an impact than which of the 2 types you chose to use.

This is what I have gone to great effort to point out, that has apparently been ignored.

Not everyone buys a $400 barrel. Some people buy a $150 barrel which, although perhaps not as good, still puts lead down range just fine as intended. There is no reason to think everyone has to buy the $20 grease when the $10 grease will put lead down range just fine as intended.

What does need to be understood, is that, the ingredients in the grease do matter, and that graphite ( and other non-moly metal additives ) are bad, and that any grease that has the same ingredients as the mil-spec will work fine, even if the amounts vary by a few percent.

"This shit's chess, it ain't checkers!"

Link Posted: 2/12/2013 6:07:44 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/12/2013 6:07:56 PM EDT by nsz]
I use AeroShell 33MS because it is THE mil-spec grease.
Link Posted: 2/12/2013 6:17:03 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/12/2013 6:20:50 PM EDT by headmonkey]
Originally Posted By nsz:
I use AeroShell 33MS because it is THE mil-spec grease.


And thats fine. It is the more expensive option that takes the least amount of thought.

But odds are, your entire rifle, from buttstock to flash hider, is not 100% mil-spec, and when armed with all information
concerning each part, and the understanding that they will work, there is no reason to blindly adhere to the mil-spec
just because it's a mil-spec.

What is important, is to understand the composition of the mil-spec grease, why the ingredients of the grease matter,
and that the mil-spec grease is not the only grease one can use successfully, but not all greases can be used successfully.

Given the universe of choice in greases, there are some that are not mil-spec, but so close as to be viable alternatives, while
there are others that are not viable alternatives.

I have 2 cans of moly grease from various vendors in my auto-parts cabinet in the garage right now. Neither of them will work,
because they also have graphite in addition to moly, which means they will eventually cause problems.
Link Posted: 2/12/2013 6:55:44 PM EDT
Originally Posted By headmonkey:
I have 2 cans of moly grease from various vendors in my auto-parts cabinet in the garage right now. Neither of them will work,
because they also have graphite in addition to moly, which means they will eventually cause problems.

Just don't jump out of helos into salt water and you'll prolly get away with it.
Damn salt starts workin' literally in minutes and graphite being a conductor probably enhances electrolysis.

It's easy to avoid the graphite and the metals by reaching in the right direction.

Link Posted: 2/12/2013 7:01:40 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Direct-Drive:
Originally Posted By headmonkey:
I have 2 cans of moly grease from various vendors in my auto-parts cabinet in the garage right now. Neither of them will work,
because they also have graphite in addition to moly, which means they will eventually cause problems.

Just don't jump out of helos into salt water and you'll prolly get away with it.
Damn salt starts workin' literally in minutes and graphite being a conductor probably enhances electrolysis.

It's easy to avoid the graphite and the metals by reaching in the right direction.



I agree. Even in the absence of salt, graphite + moisture from the air inside an aluminum to steel joint, is likely going
to cause corrosion over time, which is why anything with graphite in it should be avoided.
Link Posted: 2/13/2013 1:25:00 PM EDT
I spoke with Valvoline today and NONE of their automotive moly greases (Durablend) contain graphite. Specifically- Durablend is safe for aluminum and does not promote electro galvanic corrosion.
Link Posted: 2/13/2013 4:21:00 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/13/2013 4:22:13 PM EDT by Plugged]
I bought my Aeroshell 33MS from Pilot's HQ. It was something like $22 with shipping, and it's enough for a lifetime...
Link Posted: 2/13/2013 5:24:24 PM EDT
Originally Posted By RSM:
I spoke with Valvoline today and NONE of their automotive moly greases (Durablend) contain graphite. Specifically- Durablend is safe for aluminum and does not promote electro galvanic corrosion.


That is very good to know.
Link Posted: 2/13/2013 7:09:27 PM EDT
Has anyone looked at Yamalube-Molybdenum Disulfide Grease? I can't find an msds to get the moly percent.
Link Posted: 2/13/2013 8:00:40 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/13/2013 8:37:46 PM EDT by Ar-Bret]
Ok,

Nott another my grease can smear your grease :)

Having weapons, and airplanes, they have much in common...

So, if there is a mil spec grease, great, if there is an aviation great...

Lube is so cheap, why experiment?

So, it's easier to say, yes colt and he .mil has tested this, I'll use it :)

If you buy one bottle of lube it should last a while.l.

Is there better lube? Maybe?

I'd thier cheaper lube?

I'll leave the testing to others on a super cheap component like this....

Bret
Link Posted: 2/14/2013 12:10:21 AM EDT
I used Krytox grease because that's what I already had and it worked fine
Link Posted: 2/14/2013 2:01:13 PM EDT
Originally Posted By DSB:
Has anyone looked at Yamalube-Molybdenum Disulfide Grease? I can't find an msds to get the moly percent.


I would be a bit cautious because (regardless of the answer) the bike manufacturers switch vendors periodically. what it contains today may not be what it contains tomorrow...

OTOH- Your cyclic rate oughta be faster if you use Yamaha anything!

Link Posted: 2/14/2013 2:08:58 PM EDT
lets see all the pics of trashed upper receiver threads from the non mil-spec grease!

...


exactly


Link Posted: 2/16/2013 12:22:12 PM EDT
Originally Posted By headmonkey:
Originally Posted By PFC:
We have board members who have advocated using $8/ounce anti-seize with 10% graphite.
If I recall right the Honda grease has a massive amount of moly in it.
Who knows if this is good, bad, or neutral?

I argue this issue when it comes up because most people who are new at this don’t seem to realize that there are reasons the mil-spec grease is not something a person can pick up at Auto Zone or Wal-Mart and that a substitute may not work satisfactorily under all circumstances.
Although I am inclined to think that the type of grease, within reason, is not a critical issue with civilian weapons I use the mil-spec grease simply because a person cannot go wrong using the correct grease.



The MSDS for the Moly 60 says its "15 to 20% moly by weight"

Someone else mentioned they made their own by mixing white lithium grease with 10% moly powder they had on
hand for bullet lubrication. ( not something I would do, they just said it worked )

The Aeroshell 33ms which supposedly meets the mil-spec for AR assembly MSDS is here
and it says "1 - 5% moly"

Molybdenum disulphide "like graphite, it is widely used as a solid lubricant because of its low friction properties and robustness." "has a low coefficient of friction,"

"Molybdenum disulfide is stable in air (hence its existence as a common mineral) and oxygen at normal conditions, but reacts with oxygen upon heating forming Molybdenum trioxide:"

"MoS2 with particle sizes in the range of 1–100 µm is a common dry lubricant. Few alternatives exist that can confer the high lubricity and stability up to 350 °C in oxidizing environments."

"Examples of some diverse applications of MoS2-based lubricants include two-stroke engines (e.g., motorcycle engines), automotive CV and universal joints, ski waxes,[11] and even some bullets.[12]"
Barrels last longer when using bullets coated with MoS2

Flashpoint of Moly 60 193.3C
Flashpoint of Aeroshell 33MS > 215C

Other than minor differences in each products final coefficient of friction ( and when I say minor, I mean, minor, since MoS2 is already low ) and the small
flashpoint difference ( which isn't going to matter after you smoke a few rounds either ) I'd say these 2 products are remarkably similar.

We really are only putting on a small amount, and the choice of either should not affect the initial barrel to upper torque procedure, and both are compatible
with the materials. If anything it seems like the Moly 60 will retain more solids and burn off less oils than the Aeroshell, resulting in a better long term joint, better
being defined as, holding the torque spec you gave it, or less "wiggle" from thermal expansion / contraction. An aluminum upper has a higher coefficient of thermal
expansion than a steel barrel / barrel nut, so cracking is also not an issue, as the joint should loosen with heat, not tighten. It also apparently has "good thermal
conductivity" so it may transfer slightly more heat from the barrel to the upper, but I would bet the difference between 5% and 20% at the joint is small enough
to barely be measurable.

Given the extremely small difference in performance parameters for all we know the military uses the Aeroshell 33MS ( their equivalent of it ) because they
were already using it on a bunch of other stuff, not because its engineered to be the perfect compound for this particular application.


IMO the best way to compare a substitute to the mil-spec grease would be to have the ASTM test results called for in the mil-spec for the substitute.
There is far more to the mil-spec than the moly content.
AFAIK no one disputes that the AR design team picked an existing mil-spec grease.
Maybe if that choice were to made today something different would be picked.
Link Posted: 2/16/2013 1:55:27 PM EDT
Originally Posted By apierce918:
lets see all the pics of trashed upper receiver threads from the non mil-spec grease!

...


exactly




But milspec....
Top Top