Yup, and that seems to be the advertising MO for Militec!  

Actually, I don’t know that I’m making much of a point!!  [:D]

I just wanted to bring this quote to your attention for whatever you might feel it tells you about the writer’s expertise with AR’s.

I didn’t want to be hypercritical of the writer (who obviously put a lot of work into the article), so maybe I was a little too vague in my previous post.

It seems to me that the writer and/or the other folks he was dealing with should have had a little better understanding of AR’s and primer indentations and slamfires.

This in turn makes me wonder if maybe this article wasn’t put together with quite the care that it should have been.

Anyway, I use Militec-1 myself on my CCW handgun (a rust prone Sig).  CLP is just too messy and Militec-1 does seem to be an excellent lubricant.  However, I also wipe the Sig down with a Sentry Tuf-Cloth for protection.

Just my 2 cents, of course.  We all seem to have our own favorite way of doing things!!

-------

I was refering to misfires from primer strikes, not primer strikes themselves.

All cartridges seated in the chamber have been lightly struck by the firing pin which has no spring or mechanism to prevent this.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'Blackwater', or conspiracy theories. I am aware the Militec company used this information on their website as a testament to the effectiveness of their product. It is non-classified matter of public record.

Are you suggesting we not learn the lessons of our soldiers?

This material was taken from the official report.

Here you can find an unbiased review of this lubricant.

[url]http://hunting.about.com/library/weekly/aa090899.htm[/url]

--------

I don't remember where anyone stated that CLP was responsible for primer dents and misfires?

Is this speculation on your part?

As for someone stating that CLP is causing the deaths of soldiers, this is coming from military personel themselves. Who have stated on many different occasions that CLP is failing to lubricate weapons which is causing malfunctions, failures to extract and cycle, and gummed up actions due to its tendency to attract grit and dirt. And guess when these malfunctions are occuring, yes during combat.

That is why many have sought lubrication from other sources for the M-16 and other small arms. And some have started using no lubrication at all.

As far as I'm concerned, I'm not a Militec fanboy as some of you seem to be about your favorite lubricant. Heck, any midweight machine oil will perform in a pinch.

However, currently Militec is as good as anything on the market for lubrication purposes at the moment. And CLP works great in the lab. Especially the old formula which was superior to the new version in my opinion.

As I use a chainsaw daily in my work, you will just have to trust me on that one. I need lubrication far in excess of what the average rifleman does.

As a former Marine, I have used all of these products. And they all work within their limitations. What's important is to understand their limitations rather than just the hype of the uninitiated.

Militec does what it says it does. It lubricates as well as anything you will find on the market. It also contains an anti-corrosion component. Beyond that you're on your own.

Oh yeah, one more thing. It might hurt your feelings to think that the product the Army is using is killing soldiers and Marines, but this has happened before. It happened in the middle 1960's in Vietnam with this same rifle. It happened because Robert Mcnamara was too cheap to authorize $1.25 per rifle to chrome plate the bores and chambers of the M-16, as well as the Army's decision to switch to ball powder because it was less expensive, etc.....

No matter what you use, use something and make sure it's effective and is on the weapon when you need it. Don't rely on a M-16 with a dry bolt to function. Especially one that you thought you lubricated according to some deskbound Washington politicians itinerary.

Don't you be the next casualty, or the next rifleman that suddenly finds himself with a muzzleloader when the chips or down.

[url]http://www.jouster.com/articles30m1/[/url]

---------

I understand 199.

I'm aware the military doesn't currently consider primer indents to be a problem with the M-16 although they are aware of it. It is not lubricant related, my understanding it is only related to the firing pin being out of spec on the particular weapon. However they are starting to look at this with concern due to the fact that misfires are being reported in Iraq while the weapon is on safe.

Nothing like having to lock and load inside an Amtrac or Bradley and having the weapon suddenly discharge to get your attention.

Maybe you guys misread the article.

They didn't blaim CLP for the misfires, they only stated that in Iraq, CLP was failing to properly lubricate the weapon and was attracting too much of the fine dust and dirt into the weapons for them to function effectively. This was causing malfunctions, not misfires due to primer strikes.

Yes, I also use Militec on my P series Ruger. The problem I had with CLP was that if you cleaned your weapon and lubricated the slide rails with CLP and put it away for a few weeks or months, when you took it back out all the lubrication had evaporated away and malfunctions and short strokes were a regularity. Since switching to Militec I have not had a malfunction in any of my weapons.

It's just common sense that any machine or weapon needs proper lubrication, whether it is Militec or one of the other fine machine oils, etc... on the market.

I think it's important to understand that there is no one thing does it all, all the time. The M-16 was initially introduced as a thouroughly tested, self cleaning weapons system that required minimal lubrication.

It was soon learned in Vietnam in '65 that this was not true.

This lesson came at quite a price.

Dead Marines in combat with broken down weapons and cleaning rods stuck down the bore trying to remove stuck cases.

It's my hope we don't have to learn the next lesson the same way.

In that respect I would be very wary of what those that sit at comfortable and safe desks in Washington say or recommend.

Like I said, proper lubrication is important and it doesn't matter what you use. Just use it and make sure it's there when you need it. If it aint, you may find yourself in a world of shyt. And wont anybody be able to save you.

Especially not some desk bound General or politician that relies upon data from a sterilized local laboratory, and who's azz aint on the line.

I think the tuff cloth, Militec routine is a great idea. As well, I'm sure the products these other guys recommend work well. Although, at present I'm not looking to switch.

What I use now has taken many years to wade through the hype of other products, and it works well for me.

In that regard Militec and other products are no different. They all have pushers trying to make a sale, that always seem to be as far away from where the action is as possible.

My post was in response to the above,not speculation on my part.I dont see that I mentioned clp in any form when talking about the primer dents.Sorry for the confusion.
I might also add that I do not use clp on my AR,but rather use TW-25B and the MC-25 cleaner.
Reason one for the change to TW-25B was much better lubrication and two,extreme extended protection from wear and corrosion.
For my other weapons I use FP-10 clp with great satisfaction.
Does clp work?Yes I think so after 15 years of using Break Free clp on my private weapons and professionally as a L.E.O. S.W.A.T. with great success.
I did the Militec-1 thing for a short time and will not make any further comments about it.
Raymond

-------

Perhaps I misunderstood this part of your comments;

"As for the articles throwing blame at clp,I would say its a good militec advertisement.But I will not buy into it."

The soldiers simply stated that CLP attracted dust and dirt and wasn't an effective lubricant in this environment. Many of us have known this for quite sometime and certainly didn't need the current misadventure in Iraq to prove this point. It also seems that you are insinuating our soldiers would have a vested interest in promoting Militec. I'm not sure why they would do so if the product was inferior to their experiences with CLP.

That's fine, to each his own. Like I said there are many fine lubricants on the market. CLP just happens to be my least favorite because of personal experiences that I detailed above.

I have never used Milcomm, but have little reason to switch at this point.

I prefered the old CLP formula to the new one, but realize its limitations also.

Since you state you are a former user of Militec, it would be of help for you to share your experience and why you decided to switch.

Was it something objective you noticed concerning its lubricating qualities, etc.... that we should be aware of?

Or was it just a case of personal preference?

This topic has seemed to spin out of controll a bit.

Here's the gig.
There is NOTHING that will stop rust except controlling the storage environment AND coating the weapon with an oxygen excluding agent.
The agent in question will break down with time,and there is the issue.
"How long,and under what environmental conditions?"

Good old Cosmoline does a great job.Just gotta refresh it every few years or so just like the arsenals do.

The topic has somehow spun off to yet another topic.
Lubricant/preservatives.

In that realm I have to add that several of the most often mentioned products are more hype than reality.

CLP in it's current form is nowhere near it's old self.
It's an all in one that is neither fish nor fowl when it comes to lube or protection.

It is however better at all three jobs than any other.

Miltec as anything other than a lube is farcial.

Even as a lubricant it only does "OK".

I ran a Beta test with the stuff on one of my rifles in the field.
It came in rusting after 4 days.

Breakfree CLP in the old form was the standard.

The stuff works but has it's limitations,as does every other product sold or issued.

In the last 2 years I have had EVERY major lube/preservative come through my hands,and have tinkered with each of them.

Some were just LOUSY for our needs,others held promise,but did not meet our needs of flexibility.

Miltec did not stop rust one bit it seemed.
The new CLP wasn't much better.
Then again,in the field a religious grunt will be cleaning the rifle at least twice per day and it wouldn't matter.

FP-10 as a lube is better than some,but not all that and a bag of chips.The stuff runs,and does little when a rifle is both hot and gummy from firing residue.

One of my test Mules went 7 Months in the field before signs of rust showed using TW25B.

That's carried every day,in the rain,heat,snow,-10 degrees to 90 degrees,and back in a continious cycle.

The stuff applied at a level one application,does not hold sand,dust,or Doughnut sprinkles to the point it causes a malfunction.

Applied at level one,and then Wiped dry to the touch,the stuff provides lubrication as well as if not BETTER than Miltec dry application.

In defense of Miltec,the stuff is economical in comparison.
It just STINKS as a preservative.

At the organizational level the TW25B can be applied as an EP spray mixed in the shop,and it penetrates,dries quickly,and provides fast and complete coverage.
Time saved is obvious when you combine many weapons into the maint. cycle time hack.

Last note.
The folks at Miltec have been using dead AMERICAN grunts and soldiers as advertising evidence that their product should be used.

This is distastefull beyond description.

Do what ya gotta do.
Just bear in mind that the stuff with the NSN has been run through the Aberdeen wringer,and those without have to hype whatever they can for sales.

Find one you trust,follow the instructions,check it often,and keep an open mind.

The advertising claims are NEVER made by grunts in the field,but by advertising weenies that seldom if have ever stood in the rain with a rifle.

Oil and lubes are like religion.
Pick one that fits,and apply it with conviction!

S-28

It was not my intention to insinuate that the soliers had a vested interest in the promotion or use of Militec.I only have praise for the troops and if they want militec then let them have it.Whatever they want they should have is the way I feel.
Its these reports that seem to be posted on every gun forum and some websites that make the subject seem pasted and false.
Militec also has a report posted about the 507th investigation that clearly states that what happened was not a clp or weapons issue.But thats another one of those posted reports.
As for me commenting on militec I will have to decline,due to a past conflict I had with militec's president about some posts I made.
Its just not worth me fighting about anymore and I said I would not do it.Enough said.
I think S-28 said all there needs to be said about it.
If a product makes you happy then go with it.
Afterall thats what counts in the end.
For me TW-25B is used on the carry guns,hard use firearms(like my AR and Beretta's) and for storage as it is extreme and long lasting.
Otherwise FP-10 does all I need.
As a consumer thats my favorite products and money well spent.
Raymond

Thanks for sharing your experience, I will check out the products you mention.

I'm not sure I can agree that Militec has exploited the deaths of our soldiers. They have only used public record to raise the alarm. Perhaps you should just consider them the Paul Revere of lubrication practices.

Remember that the problems in the 1960's concerning ball powder and the lack of chrome bores and chambers in M-16's also killed many a Soldier and Marine in combat. Some tried to warn those making these decisions then to no avail.

I feel that unless we identify the problem and demand accountability, the military and government have proven an unwillingness to take action in the past. They simply make blanket statements and blaim the soldier for improper weapons maintenance.

Whether this action involves replacing CLP with Militec or another superior product like TW-25, FP-10, etc.... is beside the point. They need to do something.

The bottom line is CLP is inadequate in this environment. It seems as though everyone understands this except for a few political types in Washington D.C. far removed from the combat zone.

In this regard nothing has changed for our soldiers in the field. It's up to us to demand accountability from those making these decisions. And ensure we don't have anymore unnecessary deaths due to untested or inadequate weapons or maintenance practices.

The 507th's experience was indicative of a problem. These weapons should not have malfunctioned. Barring an obvious mechanical problem, CLP is the obvious culprit, due to its tendancy to attract dust and dirt and failure to provide adequate long term lubrication.

In my view, we owe our soldiers and Marines as much. Certainly more than just waving the flag and appearing patriotic and supportive from the comfort of our living rooms thousands of miles away.

........most feel it was improper weapons maintanence, regardless of clp.  Hey, it attracts dirt.  So does militec if you ever hope to put enough on to preserve the weapon.  In a dry environment rust isnt a problem so in Iraq it's a mute point basically.  Don't flood your weapon bathing it in lube.  They run fine dry if need be when kept clean.

-------

Your opinion is appreciated.

Its important to remember that the problems in the mid '60's concerning ball powder and lack of chrome bores, chambers and the lack of a forward assist in the M-16 was also initially reported by the powers that be as improper weapons maintenance.

This was proven not be the case.

I think preserving the weapon is a misnomer. The M-16 and most military quality AR's have chrome lined barrels as well as phosphate treated steel surfaces. With a little oil and maintenance these surfaces do not corrode like untreated barrel steel unless they are unmaintained.

A good example of this is the fact that the Columian army currently uses Militec in the jungles of South America. As Militec contains a anti corrosion ingredient. I think this is a good testimant to its effectiveness in such climates.

But by all means use what you feel most comfortable with. Just don't expect 100% reliability without a properly lubricated weapon or a dry bolt. If you choose cleaning or preservation qualities over lubrication, or a 3 in 1 product that doesn't seem to do any of the above well, you may have a rude awakening.

The same is true of any machine.

This is why I choose to use seperate products form cleaning, lubricating and preserving depending upon the intended use of the firearm. This is just personal preference on my part. I am no longer in the military and no longer have to be limited 'at or for the convenience of the government'.

I hope someone here can use my experience like I have theirs. Of course I understand, it may not be for everybody.