# Lubricant Discussion



## Etype (Sep 20, 2012)

Since I'm a habitually using the Fitness/Nutrition section to think out loud, I figured I'd let it overflow into here as well.  

So here's a couple things I've noticed about purpose made gun lubes-

Most of them suck.
Their operating range is usually relatively low (160 deg for CLP, for example).
The crusty stuff on high temp parts is a product of burned lubricant and carbon.  Carbon on it's own doesn't cake on and make that nastiness. 

They have a poor viscosity for weapons.  
Rem Oil, for example, seems to be very popular.  I see people with that garbage on the range all the time, and it seems to be only slightly thicker than water.  It's like sewing machine oil with a bit of a caramel tint.

Carbon has lubricating properties of it's own, using solvents to remove it isn't particularly necessary.  If a lubricant is working properly (penetrating and not dropping), you should be able to wipe parts clean.
 
So here's what I've been doing for the last couple years- I've been using Castrol Syntech 5W-50.  

Motor oil is exposed to temperatures in excess of 600 degrees in diesel engines.  
Multi-grade oil perform across a broad spectrum of tolerances and temperatures since they have the properties of both oils.  
I use 5W-50 because it's the broadest range I could find.  
Since the stuff doesn't burn off on high temp parts like gas regulators and bolts, I never have to scrape crispy carbon off.
I also never use any solvents to clean other parts.  Since the stuff maintains a decent film wherever you put it, it wipes clean with an oily rag.  

What's everyone else using?  How about white lithium grease or gear oil?


----------



## fox1371 (Sep 20, 2012)

I've been using FrogLube without any difficulties yet.


----------



## policemedic (Sep 20, 2012)

I was mixing my own bug juice for awhile, then found FrogLube and haven't looked back.  My work rifle and pistols run like scalded dogs.


----------



## DA SWO (Sep 20, 2012)

Froglube.


----------



## Polar Bear (Sep 20, 2012)

Froglube


----------



## Mac_NZ (Sep 20, 2012)

Blood or in some cases tears.

Wait weapon lube...

I too am a big fan of engine oil for everything from Mag 58s to Augs.  I haven't tried Frog lube and don't run anything that runs hot enough to need it now.


----------



## CDG (Sep 20, 2012)

Motor oil.  We are talking about sex, right?


----------



## HoosierAnnie (Sep 20, 2012)

I even use da Frog on my flinters


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Sep 20, 2012)

Frog Lube is damn good stuff...

Motor oil is cheap and works pretty good as well, I've used it over CLP in Iraq on both of my deployments.


----------



## x SF med (Sep 20, 2012)

Frog Lube...  was using Tetragun for a while...  and cleaning is very easy with food grade mineral oil...  but yeah, Froglube now.


----------



## Etype (Sep 21, 2012)

This is also how I've been cleaning lately...


----------



## Red-Dot (Sep 21, 2012)

I use G-96.  It's hard to find but good stuff. I do alot of duck hunting in cold nasty conditions and have never had it gum up.

http://www.g96.com/gun_treatment.html


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Sep 21, 2012)

Etype said:


> This is also how I've been cleaning lately...


 

LOL thats too much work, I just blast mine with a can of carb cleaner, soak it back down with Frog Lube and wipe all the extra off.

I use to put my glocks in the dish washer, but my wife got pissed from all the carbon on the inside...


----------



## Centermass (Sep 21, 2012)

Etype said:


> This is also how I've been cleaning lately...


 
Don't forget the fabric softener......


----------



## Yoshi (Dec 28, 2012)

I just started using Frog Lube and I like it a lot. I suppose it is a tad time consuming if you heat up the metal but that is okay with me.


----------



## amlove21 (Jan 27, 2013)

I am going to put the 100% endorsement on Frog Lube. I will not be using another lube/cleaner any time soon. I love this stuff. Runs really really well hot, too. Great product.


----------



## policemedic (Jan 27, 2013)

I bought the gallon pail of paste a while back and filled up a crockpot with it.  I heat it up, wipe the parts down (that's pretty much all it takes at this point), then 'cook' the parts a bit.  Works like a charm.  My 1911s look dry, but keep running long after other guns have started to malfunction; the same is true of my rifle.


----------



## amlove21 (Jan 27, 2013)

Yep. I put my rifle through the wringer in Africa- hot, humid, right near salt water- ran like a dream and easy to get the moon dust out of it. Can't say enough good things.


----------



## policemedic (Jan 28, 2013)

That's a great endorsement because your guns are challenged more than mine.  Mine live in a Ford and stay relatively clean unless I'm shooting them; yours are much exposed to environmental problems.


----------



## amlove21 (Mar 30, 2013)

AND another update...

I shot the Barrett M107 (.50 caliber designated marksman weapon) all week here in Vegas. I had a brand new weapon with packing grease still on it- and brought some Frog Lube with me. I talked the Security Forces guys into letting me condition my weapon w/ Frog Lube and shoot it all week. I didn't clean it once, and only lubed it lightly when I took it out of the case each day. I didn't even heat treat it- just cleaned the packing grease off and put some liquid Frog Lube on. 

About 500 rounds later through the mild desert heat, intense desert dust, and essentially minimal lube, my weapon was noticeably easier to clean (and cleaner when I finished), shot well all week without a single malfunction, and just generally looked/cycled better than the other guns with standard issue CLP. Yet again, Frog Lube passed the test. 

I won some people over with it also, which is awesome. After cleaning their .50's and getting the standard "CLP/black carbon" all over their hands, I squirted some FL on there and had them rub their hands together- came out nice and clean. This stuff is great. 

I am going to put it through the ringer on some of our automatic weapons- the M240/M249's and see how it goes there. That will be the real challenge, I think. I'll let you know what happens.


----------



## reed11b (Mar 30, 2013)

amlove21 said:


> AND another update...
> 
> I shot the Barrett M107 (.50 caliber designated marksman weapon)


M107 *Long Range Sniper Rifle.* I don't think your typical squad is going to be sporting one of those bad boys on patrol. Just sayin.
Reed

Also, if you want me to recheck your test with the M107, feel free to ship some FL this way.
Reed


----------



## amlove21 (Mar 30, 2013)

reed11b said:


> M107 *Long Range Sniper Rifle.* I don't think your typical squad is going to be sporting one of those bad boys on patrol. Just sayin.
> Reed


Well, since NATO says it's sort of inhumane to actually snipe someone with the round, we (in the AF) aren't allowed to refer to it as a "sniper weapon". Yes, I know that's the actual nomenclature, and yes, that's stupid.

That, and our teams don't have snipers, they have "Designated Marksmen" or "Long Range Anti Personnel (LRAP)" teams. I am a DM and the LRAP team lead at the SQ, so naturally I would NEVER dream of hitting personnel, only vehicles. That's why the qualification used IPSIC and people shaped silhouettes.... wait 



reed11b said:


> Also, if you want me to recheck your test with the M107, feel free to ship some FL this way.
> Reed


Lol, I just re-ordered some more for my bag, I gave away some samples at the course. It's like 30 bucks, man!


----------



## HALO99 (Mar 31, 2013)

Etype said:


> Since I'm a habitually using the Fitness/Nutrition section to think out loud, I figured I'd let it overflow into here as well.
> 
> So here's a couple things I've noticed about purpose made gun lubes-
> 
> ...



For the same reasons, i use Mobil 1 Super 5W-40 (semi-synthetic engine oil).  Easy to find, and works well in humid environments.


----------



## Etype (Mar 31, 2013)

amlove21 said:


> Well, since NATO says it's sort of inhumane to actually snipe someone with the round


Is that actually on the record anywhere?  I've heard people talk about it, mostly on the conventional side (and usually Marines) but have never heard it in an ROE brief.  I've always heard that every weapon in our arsenal from 9mm-120mm is approved for use against personnel or we wouldn't have it.


----------



## amlove21 (Mar 31, 2013)

As far as I know, yes it's written. The terminal ballistics of the .50 cal (even ball) is violent enough to warrant NATO saying that it causes undue casualties.

Ill look it up and see exactly where it's written, but I have always been led to believe that it's not kosher to use the .50 specifically for personnel.


----------



## Etype (Apr 1, 2013)

amlove21 said:


> As fat as I know, yes it's written. The terminal ballistics of the .50 cal (even ball) is violent enough to warrant NATO saying that it causes undue casualties.
> 
> Ill look it up and see exactly where it's written, but I have always been led to believe that it's not kosher to use the .50 specifically for personnel.


A Mk19 causes some pretty awesome casualties as well- 30mm gun runs and Mk84 series bombs are pretty great, too.


----------



## amlove21 (Apr 1, 2013)

Yeah, I've been plugging around all sides (secret and regular) of a bunch of regs, ROE, SRUF's, and can't find much in the way of hard facts. A couple of Internet sites have said that it s somewhat of a military urban legend, which I am starting to believe myself. Still looking for definitive word though.  

I think the idea is that the .50 (when employed by a helo or a hummer, for example) is an area suppression weapon used for vehicles, buildings etc. the only thing I can see is If there is some sort of precise verbiage stating that a single .50 cal round intentionally fired from a sniper platform against personnel is somehow illegal in NATO/GC eyes. But the chance of that are slim at this point. 

Ill look a bit further and see if this isn't BS after all.


----------



## amlove21 (Apr 1, 2013)

amlove21 said:


> _*As far as I know, yes it's written. The terminal ballistics of the .50 cal (even ball) is violent enough to warrant NATO saying that it causes undue casualties.*_


Well if it is written, I didn't find it anywhere. That leads me to believe the OP doesn't know much. The .50 cal ball round is legal as far as NATO is concerned (as long as it isn't one of the incendiary variants not to include the tracer round). The terminal ballistics are indeed the issue, but it deals more not with the effect on the intended target, but the possibility of the round carrying enough force to pass through the target completely and cause other casualties not intended by the shooter. 


The question is still in debate as late as 2010 whether the round violates the "Martic Principle". A simple explanation is here- In case IT-95-11-R61 before the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. Milan Martic, former President of the Republic of Serbian Krajina, was found guilty of reprisals against the Croatian civilian population. Specifically, he was found to have authorized the firing of Orkan rockets into Zagrab on May 2 and 3, 1995, thereby intentionally causing civilian casualties. The Court manufactured a novel new argument for liability. It accepted dubious prosecution testimony that the Orkan was “relatively inaccurate” due to it having a CEP (circular error probable) of 600 meters when fired from 50 kilometers. What the CEP means is that some Orkans might precisely hit their target and others might miss by anywhere up to 600 meters. As a result of this prosecution testimony, the Court set forth a fairly vague standard. It essentially ruled that weapons that are inaccurate, which term is not defined, are weapons of terror and serve no military purpose.

I have a feeling that the ".50 cal isn't legal for use" had it's first legs when this specific issue was discussed, but I can't say for sure. Long story short, even if you are led to believe something, look it up and verify your source. I'll read that again for my own use.


----------



## reed11b (Apr 1, 2013)

amlove21 said:


> Well if it is written, I didn't find it anywhere. That leads me to believe the OP doesn't know much.


This is what I "agreed" with.
Reed


----------



## amlove21 (Apr 1, 2013)

reed11b said:


> This is what I "agreed" with.
> Reed


Hey, can't get mad at the truth, right? The truth be's the TRUTH.


----------



## Marauder06 (Apr 1, 2013)

amlove21 said:


> *Well, since NATO says it's sort of inhumane to actually snipe someone with the round*, ...!


 
I'm pretty sure that's just a rumor.  You can use anything you're issued on any legitimate target.  .50 cal against troops specifically included.


----------



## amlove21 (Apr 1, 2013)

Marauder06 said:


> I'm pretty sure that's just a rumor. You can use anything you're issued on any legitimate target. .50 cal against troops specifically included.


Yup. It looks like it was more a discussion of the Martic Principle, quoted above.


----------



## Marauder06 (Apr 1, 2013)

I did a pretty detailed rebuttal of this rumor here on the site some time back.  AFAIK, you can engage any lawful target with any standard weapon and/or ammo you are issued.


----------



## Etype (Apr 1, 2013)

amlove21 said:


> Well if it is written, I didn't find it anywhere. That leads me to believe the OP doesn't know much. The .50 cal ball round is legal as far as NATO is concerned (as long as it isn't one of the incendiary variants not to include the tracer round).


All we use for AP use is the Mk211 HE/API, that definitely has more ass than an M8 ball round.


----------



## amlove21 (Apr 1, 2013)

Yeah, a lot more ass indeed. I did find many things (completely unrelated to this or the original discussion) today that  I didn't know. Overall, I don't mind being wrong as long as I ended up getting the right info.

It was funny- the 3 Army guys and some of the guys in the shop all said the same thing. "Yeah, I am pretty sure it's supposed to be vehicles only. Isn't it? I've always heard that. Wait- isn't it?!"


----------



## pardus (Apr 2, 2013)

Marauder06 said:


> I'm pretty sure that's just a rumor. You can use anything you're issued on any legitimate target. .50 cal against troops specifically included.


 
I was told that was not only incorrect but that I/we would be in violation of "something" if we used more than the minimum required to do the job while I was deployed. This was said during our pre-mob 'laws of war' lecture. Specifically examples like If I/we used an AT4 to kill one person, then that would be an obvious overkill and therefore in violation blah blah.

Circa Jan-Mar 2012


----------



## policemedic (Apr 2, 2013)

Has any U.S. service member been prosecuted in any forum for using a .50 caliber rifle as a sniper weapon in an antipersonnel role?


----------



## Etype (Apr 2, 2013)

pardus said:


> I was told that was not only incorrect but that I/we would be in violation of "something" if we used more than the minimum required to do the job while I was deployed. This was said during our pre-mob 'laws of war' lecture. Specifically examples like If I/we used an AT4 to kill one person, then that would be an obvious overkill and therefore in violation blah blah.
> 
> Circa Jan-Mar 2012


Each JAG is more or less told how to interpret the ROEs by his commander- since he works for the commander.  You are allowed to use any weapon that fits the bill.  Dropping a 2,000 lb bomb on a single guy emplacing an IED is ok if that's all the aircraft on station has, however, there may be some discussion if he had a 250 pounder on board.  Killing a guy with a Carl Gustav at 50m is not a big deal, if that's what you happen to have in your hands at the time.

As long as there isn't undue collateral damage or CIVCAS, any weapon that we have can be used for anything.  Certain commanders like to add their own bits to the ROEs, but disobeying them would be insubordination to that commander and not a violation of the ROEs.


----------



## x SF med (Apr 2, 2013)

HALO99 said:


> For the same reasons, i use Mobil 1 Super 5W-40 (semi-synthetic engine oil). Easy to find, and works well in humid environments.


 
Actually, the Mobil 1 Super 5w-40 is a fully synthetic, diesel rated oil...


----------



## Cabbage Head (Apr 3, 2013)

Switched from the Frog to SEAL 1.  The history of the product says it all.  The first Bio Based CLP (the FL guy should know as he worked there first).  Better price and a whole lot more product available.  Love it so much we stopped selling FL and now only deal in SEAL 1.

SEAL 1 has a cinnamon smell, a red color and works great. Do your research and let me know if your interested.  I use it on my duty M4, G22, AIAE and all the other toys.  Glad I switched.


----------



## policemedic (Apr 4, 2013)

Interesting.  My HH6 says FL smells like BenGay. The cinnamon may be better for domestic tranquility. :)


----------



## Cabbage Head (Apr 4, 2013)

policemedic said:


> Interesting. My HH6 says FL smells like BenGay. The cinnamon may be better for domestic tranquility. :)


 
Ya, we like the smell better also.  Not as strong as FL.  

When I get back home, I will start a new thread about SEAL 1.


----------



## kscore (Jul 10, 2013)

Fireclean. Won't ever use anything else


----------



## Ladder Guy (Aug 8, 2013)

I have to say that I have been having awesome results with froglube on my personal and work weapons. Using the hair dryer to heat up the metal is weird but never had a jam or issue at all since I started (but keeping the weapons clean is probably the largest contributor)


----------



## Etype (Aug 11, 2013)

I'm still using gear oil, or motor oil in a pinch.  When I run low, I just go over to the motor pool and pump some more out of the 55 gallon drum.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Apr 3, 2016)

Second necropost of the day, but again...why begin a new thread when there is already a topic running?

Assuming most here have seen the debates about Fireclean and that it is really nothing more than cooking oil?  Well they are suing....I guess $25k a month in lost revenue will do that to you.

FireClean Sues Over VuurwapenBlog Articles

Entire Fireclean complaint here:
http://www.vuurwapenblog.com/w...016/03/Complaint.pdf

Doubt they will enter this videos into evidence -


----------



## AWP (Apr 3, 2016)

Ooh-Rah said:


> Second necropost of the day, but again...why begin a new thread when there is already a topic running?
> 
> Assuming most here have seen the debates about Fireclean and that it is really nothing more than cooking oil?  Well they are suing....I guess $25k a month in lost revenue will do that to you.
> 
> ...



They aren't done dropping lawsuits.

Fireclean LLC Sues George Fennell And Steel Shield Technologies In Federal Court Alleging False Advertising - Soldier Systems Daily


----------



## DA SWO (Apr 4, 2016)

FC will have to release is product composition, that'll be ineteresting


----------

