AR Sponsor
Posted: 4/7/2008 8:45:19 AM EDT
| I run BF LP for lube on my AR (thanks Quib). I just received a package from LaRue and I got a freebie bottle of Machine Gunners Lube that fits perfectly in my VFG. Is mixing different lubes as detrimental as mixing cleaners? I know I know, mixing lubes has got to be better than running her dry (sounds like something Quagmire would say), but since I run BF LP should I empty out the Machine Gunners Lube and fill the bottle with BF LP? |
Agreed.
I would keep and try the free sample of MGL. But before you use it, degrease the bolt and carrier to ensure it’s free of BF LP. Why waste free lube? And your welcome on the tip regarding BF LP. I really like it as a main lube for the bolt and carrier. Have you noticed a decrease in carbon build up on the tail of the bolt verses using BF CLP? I’m not totally convinced on it yet, but I believe LP leaves less carbon behind. |
Honestly, I've only run BF LP through a couple range trips. There does seem to be slightly less carbon buildup (around 5-10%), but I think that the carbon that is there comes off much easier. |
|
QUIB, I have read that LP actually scores worse in a 4-ball wear test than CLP by just a scant margin. Do you have any idea why this may be? As for lube, I lube all of my rifle with CLP, but the bolt itself gets Slip2000 because I leave the weapon stored for a while and Slip doesn't evaporate like CLP. The cam-pin and the shiny spots on the carrier get RIG+P in SMALL doses. I dunno, I view my rifle like I view my Trans-Am, I wouldn't put 70/80 weight oil in the engine, nor would I put 0-30 in the rear-end, nor would I put either in my T56. All that said, YES, CLP will "do it all", I just like to be picky 
|
I’ve seen you post that response before. Do you have a reputable source for those test results? Not just hear say off of another forum.  I find that info kind of hard to believe when LP was originally designed for automatic cannons.  
|
No, just hearsay. I would really like something more concrete myself. |
I don't care much for hear say. You know how I feel about standing behind the information one posts on these forums.
|
Well, let me go find some support for my statement then, or debunk it, as things may be. |
|
There was indeed a test. It was posted back on the OLD FP10 site. The CLP did in fact do better than the LP according to my memory. There were many products tested, but it was back in the 80's so it really doesn't apply anymore. The only hint I could find of it is here: www.thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=645168&postcount=32 It was thought that the cleaning agents/surfactants in the CLP helped to reduce friction, which is possible according to what I have read. |
|
Am I over looking it, because I don’t even see BF mentioned in that posted link. I do agree with this quote from that individual: “Always test your gear--NEVER rely on someone else to decide your fate if you can help it.” And that’s the direction I was headed the other day with my comment about “putting the lube technology to the side for a moment”. One persons test may produce certain results. And I’ll definitely take those results into consideration. But in the end it’s my personal results that guide my actions. |
|
Ooops...no, you're not missing it. It was not in the post. There were like 30 products tested and BF was not in the top ten. I just wanted to show that there was a test, but I can't find it now. And I agree that one should not change their lube strictly on this test. It is only one of many. |
| I have used BF LP for many years on all my firearms, including the EBR's, and have had nothing but excellent results with it. I frankly do not believe that CLP is better as a lubricant....but it is a good all purpose product, and it does remove stubborn bore fouling very well, IMO. |
AR Sponsor