SUCCESS at Last - Carbon in throat removal

[calgarycanada]

Has anyone tried slip2000 carbon killer?
A local shop employee talks highly about it.

 

[Martin52]

...Ed's recipe made with white mineral oil rather than Dexron and acetone mixture you see in picture.

By white mineral oil - the same as paraffin ? What does the change do ?

If I swap Dexron in my Ed's Red mix for white mineral oil the rest of the mix would be 25% Kerosene 25% Mineral Spirits and 25% acetone. Sound right ?

 

[Longrange57]

By white mineral oil - the same as paraffin ? What does the change do ?

If I swap Dexron in my Ed's Red mix for white mineral oil the rest of the mix would be 25% Kerosene 25% Mineral Spirits and 25% acetone. Sound right ?

Correct! I often substitute the kerosene with Toluene. Makes it a much more powerful solvent. White mineral oil does not have the dye in it and lets you see what you are getting out a bit better. It also has slightly better lubricity for brushing. Dexron has lots of alcohol.
You can pick up white mineral oil many places....industrial from hardware stores and even food grade. Its readily available.

 

[Longrange57]

Years ago I had friends shooting PD's and would run 200-300 rounds through barrels without cleaning. Unbelievable baked on garbage. We would patch with my version of Ed's Red and let soak for a bit, brush a few strokes and then patch several times with Drano gel followed by several patches of Citranox which is basically citric acid similar to One Shot sonic cleaner. After doing this several times and brushing, we could finally get a fairly clean barrel. The Drano and Citranox will slightly react and foam due to detergents. In all honesty we could probably have cleaned them up faster with abrasives. This is not necessarily a recommendation....its simply what we did at the time. I've seen many products used in my time and there's other good threads on this forum addressing carbon removal.

 

[urbanrifleman]

Years ago I had friends shooting PD's and would run 200-300 rounds through barrels without cleaning. Unbelievable baked on garbage. We would patch with my version of Ed's Red and let soak for a bit, brush a few strokes and then patch several times with Drano gel followed by several patches of Citranox which is basically citric acid similar to One Shot sonic cleaner. After doing this several times and brushing, we could finally get a fairly clean barrel. The Drano and Citranox will slightly react and foam due to detergents. In all honesty we could probably have cleaned them up faster with abrasives. This is not necessarily a recommendation....its simply what we did at the time. I've seen many products used in my time and there's other good threads on this forum addressing carbon removal.

Also, a solution of Lemishine would be very similar to Citranox.

If someone wanted an acid solution just make a solution of Dawn, water and Lemishine. Same thing we use on brass in wet tumbling. it does remove carbon (although that is not hard carbon). That should foam up really niclely when brushing.

Of course, you could just use Bore Tech Eliminator (which has yet to be outdone in my tests).

But I still think Flitz/Iosso on a patch might just be so much faster.

I use spray Gun Cleaner/Shotgun Cleaner as my final wash of the barrel after all the cleaning products. I have used several brands, they are all the same and will not strip finishes. Just shoot iint othe bore and through the bore guide and patch and repeat.

 

[dstoenner]

I have some new observations about this taking of the hard carbon out of the barrel. Good or bad I don't know.

This 223 1:7 I have been working with is a new barrel with 458 rounds on it and I have been working up new loads for it. At first I tried some of my old go to loads that have always worked in my 1:8 AR and bolt barrels. They weren't too good so I have been doing load ladders on the 5 bullets I use in 223.

This weekend it was the 77 Berger OTM's turn in the barrel for a load ladder. When I got through just on the surface 24.0 made a one hole group of .236 with an SD of 11 and average of 2756. This morning as I was inputting all of the data into GR Tools to get chamber pressure, I thought that the velocity was low. So I went back in my early records and looked at 24.0 and sure enough the older chrono results were 2895. HMMM!

Then I looked at chamber pressure and saw the old load was running 54015 PSI in this barrel with carbon while the cleaned barrel load development at 24.0 was now running 47638. That is a 12% decrease in pressure and hence the reason for the lower velocity.

But,my understanding is that throat erosion is a combination of pressure, temperature and time. I know there are some metallurgists out there who might be able to tell us if this means longer barrel life (less throat erosion) or not. My gut says it is longer barrel life. BTW, the powder is Varget.

I know this is a group of one so now I am going to load up my 3 bullets and do 5x5 shot groups to see if it can hold over a longer test. This also says that if I am cleaning down to bare steel after each range session then I will have to do that for this barrel for its life. I cannot let the carbon build up or things will go south on accuracy.

Your thoughts everyone.

David

 

[BoydAllen]

From what I have seen helping others with severe hard carbon issues, the main incentive for staying on top of this is the nightmare you have to deal with if you do not. If you don't believe me, get a hold of a barrel that has hard carbon everywhere in the last few inches of the bore, and take it all out without harming the bore. I have a friend who bought a Teslong that has such a barrel and believe me, you do not want to go there, unless it is with a minute of buck at close range rifle.

 

[Gil P.]

From what I have seen helping others with severe hard carbon issues, the main incentive for staying on top of this is the nightmare you have to deal with if you do not. If you don't believe me, get a hold of a barrel that has hard carbon everywhere in the last few inches of the bore, and take it all out without harming the bore. I have a friend who bought a Teslong that has such a barrel and believe me, you do not want to go there, unless it is with a minute of buck at close range rifle.

I had a Bartlein 308 barrel a while back. I shot it out, but wanted to see how much more life I could get out of it, so I had it set back.

The gunsmith I was using had to use a steel brush to get the carbon out that was caked on in the throat area.

I cleaned my rifle regularly, but I never knew I had so much carbon in there. I always used a Lucas bore guide. I wonder, could using a bore guide prevent you from touching the carbon ring in your barrel?

 

[Ccrider]

I had a Bartlein 308 barrel a while back. I shot it out, but wanted to see how much more life I could get out of it, so I had it set back.

The gunsmith I was using had to use a steel brush to get the carbon out that was caked on in the throat area.

I cleaned my rifle regularly, but I never knew I had so much carbon in there. I always used a Lucas bore guide. I wonder, could using a bore guide prevent you from touching the carbon ring in your barrel?

Nope.

 

[BoydAllen]

I had a Bartlein 308 barrel a while back. I shot it out, but wanted to see how much more life I could get out of it, so I had it set back.

The gunsmith I was using had to use a steel brush to get the carbon out that was caked on in the throat area.

I cleaned my rifle regularly, but I never knew I had so much carbon in there. I always used a Lucas bore guide. I wonder, could using a bore guide prevent you from touching the carbon ring in your barrel?

You need to buy one of the Teslong Bore scopes. They are crazy inexpensive and when properly focused give sharp images that are viewed on a screen as stills or videos. Previously, bore scopes were way too expensive more most shooters. Now these are quite good and easily affordable.

No, your bore guide had absolutely nothing to do with your carbon problem.

 

[jelenko]

I've been using the Teslong for ~ 4 months now. I've been using it to check the difference in the barrel for cleaning action/step.
This is what I've discovered:

Background: I go through ~ 300 rounds a week [practicing for 'cross the course'; about half of the rounds are strings of 10 that are shot in ~ 1 minute with two of these 10 shot strings within 5 minutes.​

The rifle is 223; the load is MR2000 with H75's/S77's.​

Typically, I go through ~ 50 -100 shots in a range session.​

Cleaning is done within two hours of leaving the range.​

​

Regular cleaning [bore solvent, brushing, patches] leaves a LOT of carbon behind.​

Cleaning with Boretech carbon remover until the patches come out clean is almost as good as scrubbing with a bronze brush.​

Brushing with a bronze brush after cleaning with Boretech carbon remover until the patches come out clean does bring out some more carbon - but you would never be able to tell by looking at the bore. In the first few inches, it still has lots of carbon in the 'corners' where the grooves meet the bottom of the lands. This carbon extends ~ 1/4 of the way into the groove from each side. You can see patches of carbon on the lands. After the first few [3-4 inches], the bore is much cleaner.​

Soaking with CLR after cleaning with Boretech and patches so only clean patches come out has no effect.​

Using Iosso/JB on a patch wrapped around a Parker Hale jag misses the carbon in the corners of the grooves/lands; doing the same but with a worn bronze brush gets the carbon in the corners much, much faster.​

Iosso seems to work ~ twice as fast as JB.​

Flitz bore cleaner seemed to work about the same as Iosso, but with limited experience with Flitz.​

​

I have not correlated the appearance of the bore with accuracy on the target.

Before I started using the borescope, I was cleaning with JB or Iosso on a patch wrapped around a Parker Hale jag every 300 - 500 rounds. When I first looked at the bore on these barrels [one for matches, one for practice], the first few inches were completely covered in carbon; there was a 'ring' around the beginning of the throat. Don't know how thick the ring was and don't keep a chrono record. But, based on this observation and the results in checking the effect of the various cleaning steps, I've started using Iosso on a patch on a worn bronze brush every 100 - 150 rounds - just enough to keep the carbon in the corners to just the corner itself - i.e., so the carbon doesn't extend into the grove. Two passes of 10 'cycles' each pass is working so far.

​

 

[Gil P.]

I've been using the Teslong for ~ 4 months now. I've been using it to check the difference in the barrel for cleaning action/step.
This is what I've discovered:

Background: I go through ~ 300 rounds a week [practicing for 'cross the course'; about half of the rounds are strings of 10 that are shot in ~ 1 minute with two of these 10 shot strings within 5 minutes.​

The rifle is 223; the load is MR2000 with H75's/S77's.​

Typically, I go through ~ 50 -100 shots in a range session.​

Cleaning is done within two hours of leaving the range.​

​

Regular cleaning [bore solvent, brushing, patches] leaves a LOT of carbon behind.​

Cleaning with Boretech carbon remover until the patches come out clean is almost as good as scrubbing with a bronze brush.​

Brushing with a bronze brush after cleaning with Boretech carbon remover until the patches come out clean does bring out some more carbon - but you would never be able to tell by looking at the bore. In the first few inches, it still has lots of carbon in the 'corners' where the grooves meet the bottom of the lands. This carbon extends ~ 1/4 of the way into the groove from each side. You can see patches of carbon on the lands. After the first few [3-4 inches], the bore is much cleaner.​

Soaking with CLR after cleaning with Boretech and patches so only clean patches come out has no effect.​

Using Iosso/JB on a patch wrapped around a Parker Hale jag misses the carbon in the corners of the grooves/lands; doing the same but with a worn bronze brush gets the carbon in the corners much, much faster.​

Iosso seems to work ~ twice as fast as JB.​

Flitz bore cleaner seemed to work about the same as Iosso, but with limited experience with Flitz.​

​

I have not correlated the appearance of the bore with accuracy on the target.

Before I started using the borescope, I was cleaning with JB or Iosso on a patch wrapped around a Parker Hale jag every 300 - 500 rounds. When I first looked at the bore on these barrels [one for matches, one for practice], the first few inches were completely covered in carbon; there was a 'ring' around the beginning of the throat. Don't know how thick the ring was and don't keep a chrono record. But, based on this observation and the results in checking the effect of the various cleaning steps, I've started using Iosso on a patch on a worn bronze brush every 100 - 150 rounds - just enough to keep the carbon in the corners to just the corner itself - i.e., so the carbon doesn't extend into the grove. Two passes of 10 'cycles' each pass is working so far.

​

What do you mean when you say two passes of 10 cycles?


Are you moving the bronze brush w/ iosso patch back and forth in the throat 10 times, then pushing the patch all the way out of the muzzle and doing this 2 times?

 

[BoydAllen]

I've been using the Teslong for ~ 4 months now. I've been using it to check the difference in the barrel for cleaning action/step.
This is what I've discovered:

Background: I go through ~ 300 rounds a week [practicing for 'cross the course'; about half of the rounds are strings of 10 that are shot in ~ 1 minute with two of these 10 shot strings within 5 minutes.​

The rifle is 223; the load is MR2000 with H75's/S77's.​

Typically, I go through ~ 50 -100 shots in a range session.​

Cleaning is done within two hours of leaving the range.​

​

Regular cleaning [bore solvent, brushing, patches] leaves a LOT of carbon behind.​

Cleaning with Boretech carbon remover until the patches come out clean is almost as good as scrubbing with a bronze brush.​

Brushing with a bronze brush after cleaning with Boretech carbon remover until the patches come out clean does bring out some more carbon - but you would never be able to tell by looking at the bore. In the first few inches, it still has lots of carbon in the 'corners' where the grooves meet the bottom of the lands. This carbon extends ~ 1/4 of the way into the groove from each side. You can see patches of carbon on the lands. After the first few [3-4 inches], the bore is much cleaner.​

Soaking with CLR after cleaning with Boretech and patches so only clean patches come out has no effect.​

Using Iosso/JB on a patch wrapped around a Parker Hale jag misses the carbon in the corners of the grooves/lands; doing the same but with a worn bronze brush gets the carbon in the corners much, much faster.​

Iosso seems to work ~ twice as fast as JB.​

Flitz bore cleaner seemed to work about the same as Iosso, but with limited experience with Flitz.​

​

I have not correlated the appearance of the bore with accuracy on the target.

Before I started using the borescope, I was cleaning with JB or Iosso on a patch wrapped around a Parker Hale jag every 300 - 500 rounds. When I first looked at the bore on these barrels [one for matches, one for practice], the first few inches were completely covered in carbon; there was a 'ring' around the beginning of the throat. Don't know how thick the ring was and don't keep a chrono record. But, based on this observation and the results in checking the effect of the various cleaning steps, I've started using Iosso on a patch on a worn bronze brush every 100 - 150 rounds - just enough to keep the carbon in the corners to just the corner itself - i.e., so the carbon doesn't extend into the grove. Two passes of 10 'cycles' each pass is working so far.

​

Great post! Thanks for the detail.

 

[HTSmith]

I have not correlated the appearance of the bore with accuracy on the target.

Thanks for taking the time to share your techniques and results. I'm curious about this statement. So now that you are cleaning "better", your accuracy is no better?

 

[dstoenner]

I've been using the Teslong for ~ 4 months now. I've been using it to check the difference in the barrel for cleaning action/step.
This is what I've discovered:

Background: I go through ~ 300 rounds a week [practicing for 'cross the course'; about half of the rounds are strings of 10 that are shot in ~ 1 minute with two of these 10 shot strings within 5 minutes.​

The rifle is 223; the load is MR2000 with H75's/S77's.​

Typically, I go through ~ 50 -100 shots in a range session.​

Cleaning is done within two hours of leaving the range.​

​

Regular cleaning [bore solvent, brushing, patches] leaves a LOT of carbon behind.​

Cleaning with Boretech carbon remover until the patches come out clean is almost as good as scrubbing with a bronze brush.​

Brushing with a bronze brush after cleaning with Boretech carbon remover until the patches come out clean does bring out some more carbon - but you would never be able to tell by looking at the bore. In the first few inches, it still has lots of carbon in the 'corners' where the grooves meet the bottom of the lands. This carbon extends ~ 1/4 of the way into the groove from each side. You can see patches of carbon on the lands. After the first few [3-4 inches], the bore is much cleaner.​

Soaking with CLR after cleaning with Boretech and patches so only clean patches come out has no effect.​

Using Iosso/JB on a patch wrapped around a Parker Hale jag misses the carbon in the corners of the grooves/lands; doing the same but with a worn bronze brush gets the carbon in the corners much, much faster.​

Iosso seems to work ~ twice as fast as JB.​

Flitz bore cleaner seemed to work about the same as Iosso, but with limited experience with Flitz.​

​

I have not correlated the appearance of the bore with accuracy on the target.

Before I started using the borescope, I was cleaning with JB or Iosso on a patch wrapped around a Parker Hale jag every 300 - 500 rounds. When I first looked at the bore on these barrels [one for matches, one for practice], the first few inches were completely covered in carbon; there was a 'ring' around the beginning of the throat. Don't know how thick the ring was and don't keep a chrono record. But, based on this observation and the results in checking the effect of the various cleaning steps, I've started using Iosso on a patch on a worn bronze brush every 100 - 150 rounds - just enough to keep the carbon in the corners to just the corner itself - i.e., so the carbon doesn't extend into the grove. Two passes of 10 'cycles' each pass is working so far.

​

Thanks for your observations. Great post. That is what is so great about this web forum. A lot of knowledgeable people trying to help us with less knowledge.

Iosso is going to be on my next order. I have used JB for years but with your comments and Urbanrifleman I am definitely looking for fewer passes in the bore with a bronze brush.

Were you using Kroil with JB or Iosso

David

 

[jelenko]

What do you mean when you say two passes of 10 cycles?


Are you moving the bronze brush w/ iosso patch back and forth in the throat 10 times, then pushing the patch all the way out of the muzzle and doing this 2 times?

Essentially, yes. But, pulling the brush out the bore guide, not out the muzzle.
To confirm, the total number of strokes for each pass is 20 [two strokes for each cycle] . If I were less lazy, I'd do only 5 cycles for each pass and do 4 cycles.

 

[jelenko]

Thanks for taking the time to share your techniques and results. I'm curious about this statement. So now that you are cleaning "better", your accuracy is no better?

The answer is yes and don't know.

The key factor here is my 'accuracy' shooting is from prone with a sling on a target with a 3/4 MOA X ring and 1.8 MOA 10 ring. I can often 'clean' the target with > 10 X's. But, the groups are not small enough and consistent enough to meaningfully compare over time - it's me driving the group size, not the barrel/ammo.
And, with the component shortages, the powder used has changed. My load development is also done from prone with a sling. If I get 1 or 2 groups .6 moa or less, I call it a day - recognizing that a bunch of the groups are going to be > .6 MOA

When a carbon ring forms, I can tell because the group size grows to ~ 3" and almost every shot is off call. Removing the carbon ring usually restores accuracy, but not always.

 

[jelenko]

Thanks for your observations. Great post. That is what is so great about this web forum. A lot of knowledgeable people trying to help us with less knowledge.

Iosso is going to be on my next order. I have used JB for years but with your comments and Urbanrifleman I am definitely looking for fewer passes in the bore with a bronze brush.

Were you using Kroil with JB or Iosso

David

With JB, nothing. With Iosso, I'm not seeing the difference between with a lubricant or not. Using a lubricant with Iosso does make it easier to reverse the brush.

 

[BDman]

Last year, I borescoped a barrel for a friend of mine. He had borescoped it at a match and decided the throat and first 4" of barrel was fire cracked and the barrel was basically shot out. His accuracy had gone from .2's to over moa. He never used a brush or abrasive - only "brushless" cleaners. It certainly looked like fire cracking (Alligator back) but it was Carbon with a Carbon ring. He trusted me to short stroke that 4" and ring with KG 2 on VFG pellets 30 times and then 10 passes through the length of the barrel. It pretty much looked like new. Accuracy came back and he's still shooting that barrel in the .2's. He bought some brushes, KG 2 and JB and quit his "brushless" routine.

 

[dogdude]

Freeze Off, penetrating oil, it's Kroil on Steroids.
$10 @ Amazon.