brass jags vs. plastic/alum

[Benjerman08]

I have pondered something for years about barrel cleaning. Given that most of us use brass jags, most of us use great care to keep from dragging the brass across the crown and down the barrel. I have always seen the plastic and nylon jags, but used them only for my pistols. Is there a major reason more of us don't use the plastic? Bending, breaking? Just wondering. The new aluminum deweys may be the ticket.

 

[RonAKA]

I don't use brass because I use Barnes CR-10 cleaner which contains ammonia. The brass gives a false positive for copper. I have tried plastic jags, but what I like best is a nylon brush with a patch wrapped around it. You select a brush that is one size smaller than normal for the caliber.

 

[spclark]

I've been wondering the same thing, never having used off-the-rack plastic tips. Last summer there was a post on the Bulletin here for a guy selling what look to be really nice, custom polymer jags.

http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2010/06/protect-your-barrels-with-new-polymer-jags-and-brush-guides/

I just sent him an e-mail yesterday & haven't yet heard if he's still offering them or if the prices are higher now. They look to be of much higher quality (than the more commonly available plastic items) in the photos.

K&M makes stainless steel jags but warns of potential for bore damage as they need to be covered at all times when inside a bore. I've heard of nickel-plated brass jags too; this bulletin article includes both:

http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2010/09/solvent-resistant-cleaning-jags/

 

[fdshuster]

I've just strated using the Bore Tech Proof Positive stab jags, Sinclair 2010-B catalog, page 126. They are a bit oversize, compared to my older brass jags in 22 & 6mm, so I must either use the next smaller sized patch or stab it off center. No more false positive copper indications though. As verified with the borescope, when the patch's come out white, the bore is copper free.

 

[LHSmith]

I posted on this before...and just redid my experiment again. When using a brass jag with a clean patch soaked in butches and rubbed for several seconds, I have to look real hard for the faintest hint of blue. I believe this is valid since the patch is only contacting the jag for mere seconds when it is in the bore. When I rub a BBS patch over a phosphur bronze brush it quickly stains the patch blue.
While I was already inhaling these solvents indoors, I did some other tests:
Hoppes did not give any hint of blue on the jag, but the No. 9 on ph. brz brush caused black patches.
Shooters Choice cut with Kroil mimicked the Hoppes results.
I believe this mirrors the results of published tests that both are inferior to BBS on copper.
I also took a BBS soaked patch and rubbed an aluminum cleaning rod....it turned black..... so these new aluminum Dewey jags will give a false positive for carbon.
If I was using a stronger solvent I would opt for those Delrin jags mentioned above. However, the Iosso/ BBS regimen has worked well for me.

 

[LHSmith]

And one more observation on this false positive subject. You can usually tell from the patch whether the blue is on the bore side vs. the jag side (assuming one uses wrap-around style jags). It is more clearly defined (after the initial wet patch) on the subsequent dry patches.

 

[LHSmith]

To the op's question. aluminum and brass are pretty much the same in hardness....so no advantage there. The self- lubricating properties of an acetal (Delrin) jag would offer the least wear to the crown. However I believe it is prudent to recrown after several hundred rounds anyway.