Black marks on cylinder
- Thread starter bspillman
- Start date
The WATER did the eroding of the soil and rocks to form the GC.
Some must of slept thru geology class.
"The general scientific consensus, updated at a 2010 conference, holds that the Colorado River carved the Grand Canyon beginning 5 million to 6 million years ago."
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Bill DeShivs
New member
dgludwig-
How much metal polishing have you done? What qualifications do you have, or are your remarks just your opinion?
How much metal polishing have you done? What qualifications do you have, or are your remarks just your opinion?
jackmoser65
New member
There is a well known 1911 gunsmith who uses Leadaway cloths to polish bead blasted revolvers to a soft sheen. I've used the stuff to antique steel, iron and brass. 
Some are real heavy on theory and real light on experience.
Some are real heavy on theory and real light on experience.
I almost hate to post in this thread, but some added information is useful:
First, to answer the OP's question, get a container of Slip 2000's Carbon Killer product. It will dissolve the carbon off and you can wipe it away with a paper towel. No. Wait. Paper towels are abrasive. Use a soft linen rag. See the cylinder photo on the second page of this brochure. If any of you own an M1A or M14, you know how carbon cakes up in the gas piston. This stuff actually removes it, though I did find it has to soak for awhile to soften it all. Bottom line, though, it works as advertised. The only caution is that it also gradually attacks Parkerizing, so don't leave a Parkerized part in it for more than the directed 15 minutes. I left a Garand op-rod tip in it for several hours one time and the Parkerizing no longer matched above the water line.
I used a lapping ball to put a mirror polished crown on a Garand rife barrel by stepping through abrasive grades down through polishes. It was so sharp, I couldn't push a patch through it from the muzzle without it cutting a .308" disc our of the patch. Then I shot it a few times. I was not longer mirror polished. It had fans of matte surface that started at the edges of every barrel groove, where the gas starts coming out first. The powder's gas and particle products were abrasive enough to undo my polishing. It no longer cut patches. For that matter, the throat of the first barrel I got with my Dan Wesson V.15 has no toolmarks left because using 296 has abraded all that away.
So, if you don't want any dull or rounded corners, don't shoot the gun. Many powders are more abrasive than polishes, though none are as abrasive as coarser grit abrasive materials are.
You can find the patent on lead wipe cloth at uspto.gov. I did that once, but have mislaid the patent number. If you find it, you will learn it uses 400 grit aluminum oxide abrasive embedded in the cloth. That is far coarser than any polish. If you swipe it over a piece of polished aluminum, you see the fine surface scuffing immediately. I can see the same abrasive wipe marks in the cylinder in the photo supplied earlier. That said, aluminum oxide is rounded edge, slow cutting abrasive. It would take awhile to wear much depth away with it. The inventors of the cloth simply decided it made an acceptable degree of appearance change.
Polishing isn't mechanically quite the same as abrading. A lot of studies have been done to show the mechanics change when abrasive gets fine enough, and the surface you are working on flows. They have found particles of jeweler's rouge polish in glass lenses that are actually under the surface of the glass. So the glass was flowed and smeared over top of it, kind of like icing a cake. Removing a significant amount of metal this way would take a very, very long time indeed.
Everyone seems to have forgotten silt. River water contains sand and silt and the river flows these abrasives over rocks constantly, picking them up from tributary streams which have rain carrying dirt into them. Absent that, I'm sure the water would have a hard time wearing down some kinds of rock other than by freeze/thaw cycles. Impact by water will eventually fatigue the rock, but it would be a lot slower than the effects we see from sand and silt.
First, to answer the OP's question, get a container of Slip 2000's Carbon Killer product. It will dissolve the carbon off and you can wipe it away with a paper towel. No. Wait. Paper towels are abrasive. Use a soft linen rag. See the cylinder photo on the second page of this brochure. If any of you own an M1A or M14, you know how carbon cakes up in the gas piston. This stuff actually removes it, though I did find it has to soak for awhile to soften it all. Bottom line, though, it works as advertised. The only caution is that it also gradually attacks Parkerizing, so don't leave a Parkerized part in it for more than the directed 15 minutes. I left a Garand op-rod tip in it for several hours one time and the Parkerizing no longer matched above the water line.
I used a lapping ball to put a mirror polished crown on a Garand rife barrel by stepping through abrasive grades down through polishes. It was so sharp, I couldn't push a patch through it from the muzzle without it cutting a .308" disc our of the patch. Then I shot it a few times. I was not longer mirror polished. It had fans of matte surface that started at the edges of every barrel groove, where the gas starts coming out first. The powder's gas and particle products were abrasive enough to undo my polishing. It no longer cut patches. For that matter, the throat of the first barrel I got with my Dan Wesson V.15 has no toolmarks left because using 296 has abraded all that away.
So, if you don't want any dull or rounded corners, don't shoot the gun. Many powders are more abrasive than polishes, though none are as abrasive as coarser grit abrasive materials are.
You can find the patent on lead wipe cloth at uspto.gov. I did that once, but have mislaid the patent number. If you find it, you will learn it uses 400 grit aluminum oxide abrasive embedded in the cloth. That is far coarser than any polish. If you swipe it over a piece of polished aluminum, you see the fine surface scuffing immediately. I can see the same abrasive wipe marks in the cylinder in the photo supplied earlier. That said, aluminum oxide is rounded edge, slow cutting abrasive. It would take awhile to wear much depth away with it. The inventors of the cloth simply decided it made an acceptable degree of appearance change.
Polishing isn't mechanically quite the same as abrading. A lot of studies have been done to show the mechanics change when abrasive gets fine enough, and the surface you are working on flows. They have found particles of jeweler's rouge polish in glass lenses that are actually under the surface of the glass. So the glass was flowed and smeared over top of it, kind of like icing a cake. Removing a significant amount of metal this way would take a very, very long time indeed.
Everyone seems to have forgotten silt. River water contains sand and silt and the river flows these abrasives over rocks constantly, picking them up from tributary streams which have rain carrying dirt into them. Absent that, I'm sure the water would have a hard time wearing down some kinds of rock other than by freeze/thaw cycles. Impact by water will eventually fatigue the rock, but it would be a lot slower than the effects we see from sand and silt.
Bill DeShivs
New member
Exactly- shooting a gun wears things out. Why wear it out faster?
The "carbon rings" around each chamber have been etched INTO the metal from shooting the gun. The only way to fully remove them is to abrade the surrounding metal away. Should you manage to chemically remove all the black carbon from these rings, they will still be grey where the powder gasses have etched the metal.
Aluminum oxide is used to make grinding wheels for your bench grinder, knife sharpening stones, etc. It's not exactly a "kind and gentle" abrasive.
Again, why is water called the "universal solvent?"
The "carbon rings" around each chamber have been etched INTO the metal from shooting the gun. The only way to fully remove them is to abrade the surrounding metal away. Should you manage to chemically remove all the black carbon from these rings, they will still be grey where the powder gasses have etched the metal.
Aluminum oxide is used to make grinding wheels for your bench grinder, knife sharpening stones, etc. It's not exactly a "kind and gentle" abrasive.
Again, why is water called the "universal solvent?"
Straight from the USGS. "Water is capable of dissolving a variety of different substances, which is why it is such a good solvent. And, water is called the "universal solvent" because it dissolves more substances than any other liquid."
I know a number of people that use a spray bottle of water to clean their rifles after shooting the corrosive surplus ammo. Gets rid of the corrosive salts from the primer's, then they use an air compressor to blow out the water.
I know a number of people that use a spray bottle of water to clean their rifles after shooting the corrosive surplus ammo. Gets rid of the corrosive salts from the primer's, then they use an air compressor to blow out the water.
ShootistPRS
New member
Just a simple comment. You can do what ever you want with your gun. You are free to believe anything you want about any subject. You cannot dispute facts. Water moved the rocks that carved out the grand canyon. Water only wears rock when it gets into tight places and freezes. the pressure of the expanding ice breaks the rock. Water will carry those rock in its current and the rocks will wear away other rocks. You cannot dissolve steel with water. You can expose it to water and let the oxygen rust it and then the water will carry the rust away. Water will dissolve water soluble elements but not those that are not. Water can dissolve acids and bases that will dissolve metal and other element but it is the acid and not the water doing the damage.
Now, back to cleaning your gun. If it makes you feel better clean the carbon off the face of the cylinder. Abrasives do remove metal and when you clean with abrasives you are removing metal. As long as it makes you feel better about the gun and yourself do it! it doesn't affect anyone else. If you think that it will wear your gun out to polish it then don't. It's your property you have every right to let it get a build up of carbon on it until it won't move. I know that you won't let that happen but it is the other side of the argument of cleaning versus not cleaning and both are extreme examples. Live and let live.
Now, back to cleaning your gun. If it makes you feel better clean the carbon off the face of the cylinder. Abrasives do remove metal and when you clean with abrasives you are removing metal. As long as it makes you feel better about the gun and yourself do it! it doesn't affect anyone else. If you think that it will wear your gun out to polish it then don't. It's your property you have every right to let it get a build up of carbon on it until it won't move. I know that you won't let that happen but it is the other side of the argument of cleaning versus not cleaning and both are extreme examples. Live and let live.
I don't care about the lead rings, like mentioned before in this thread, they will be back the next time you shoot but I would like to see where anyone has ever removed enough metal where it was even noticeable let alone effect the functioning of the firearm. Without a machine to simulate years of continual buffing, I am going to go out on a limb and say ain't gonna happen. If lead rings are your nemesis, buff away, you aren't going to hurt a thing.
Bill DeShivs
New member
Again, I'm going to ask all of you who say it doesn't hurt anything to state your experience with metal polishing please.
Mike Irwin
Staff
"Mike- it's obvious you have your mind made up- but I'll have my say."
Curious statement, Bill, given that you've obviously made up your mind, as well, and it's a curious path.
Instead of looking at facts based on actual physical properties of the materials in question, you've apparently come to the conclusion that all abrasives are equally destructive, and will cause irreparable damage with a minimal amount of use.
"Lead Away cloths will remove bluing in one or two LIGHT uses..."
It has already been stipulated multiple times that Lead Away cloths will remove bluing. There are a couple of problems with your introducing that into this thread, though:
1. Bluing is NOT metal, it is a surface oxide treatment.
2. This thread started when the OP asked about how to remove carbon from STAINLESS STEEL.
By focusing on Lead Away's known ability to remove a surface oxide treatment that is NOT metal, you are moving the discussion off topic and clouding the discussion with irrelevancies.
"Re: water- all I can say is Grand Canyon. Why is water known as the "universal solvent?""
Do you know the definition of the word solvent? It means literally, a substance with the ability to DISSOLVE another material.
Diatomaceous earth is an mild abrasive, it is NOT a solvent -- it does NOT dissolve metal. Acids will dissolve metals, including steel, but Lead Away cloth contains no acid.
Your supposed example is flawed on its face and is absolutely incorrect.
"Re: gun barrels- they DO eventually wear out, don't they?"
Please show me where I've said that they don't (hint, you can't).
What I have said -- repeatedly -- and what you have apparently ignored, is that we routinely fire bullets that are far harder than the abrasive found in Lead Away cloths, and it can take literally tens of thousands of rounds to wear out a gun barrel.
Yet, we're apparently to believe that a far softer substance, one that is routinely used in health care products and even toothpaste, will somehow be far more destructive and apparently in a far shorter period of time.
You really have to explain how that works.
In fact, as I've said before, and I'll say again, you need to back up your claims with FACTUAL DATA and EXAMPLES.
Chicken little sky is falling claims about how "You're ruining your guns!" is NOT data, and it's not factual. It's hysteria, pure and simple.
Curious statement, Bill, given that you've obviously made up your mind, as well, and it's a curious path.
Instead of looking at facts based on actual physical properties of the materials in question, you've apparently come to the conclusion that all abrasives are equally destructive, and will cause irreparable damage with a minimal amount of use.
"Lead Away cloths will remove bluing in one or two LIGHT uses..."
It has already been stipulated multiple times that Lead Away cloths will remove bluing. There are a couple of problems with your introducing that into this thread, though:
1. Bluing is NOT metal, it is a surface oxide treatment.
2. This thread started when the OP asked about how to remove carbon from STAINLESS STEEL.
By focusing on Lead Away's known ability to remove a surface oxide treatment that is NOT metal, you are moving the discussion off topic and clouding the discussion with irrelevancies.
"Re: water- all I can say is Grand Canyon. Why is water known as the "universal solvent?""
Do you know the definition of the word solvent? It means literally, a substance with the ability to DISSOLVE another material.
Diatomaceous earth is an mild abrasive, it is NOT a solvent -- it does NOT dissolve metal. Acids will dissolve metals, including steel, but Lead Away cloth contains no acid.
Your supposed example is flawed on its face and is absolutely incorrect.
"Re: gun barrels- they DO eventually wear out, don't they?"
Please show me where I've said that they don't (hint, you can't).
What I have said -- repeatedly -- and what you have apparently ignored, is that we routinely fire bullets that are far harder than the abrasive found in Lead Away cloths, and it can take literally tens of thousands of rounds to wear out a gun barrel.
Yet, we're apparently to believe that a far softer substance, one that is routinely used in health care products and even toothpaste, will somehow be far more destructive and apparently in a far shorter period of time.
You really have to explain how that works.
In fact, as I've said before, and I'll say again, you need to back up your claims with FACTUAL DATA and EXAMPLES.
Chicken little sky is falling claims about how "You're ruining your guns!" is NOT data, and it's not factual. It's hysteria, pure and simple.
Mike Irwin
Staff
"Again, I'm going to ask all of you who say it doesn't hurt anything to state your experience with metal polishing please."
WHOA! Stop right there, Bill.
Given that you've refused to provide any factual basis for your claims, your apparent lack of knowledge of the differences between solvents and abrasives, and your apparent lack of understanding of the varying physical properties of the substances we're talking about....
You do NOT get to make that request right now.
You need to provide FACTUAL DATA to support your claims before you get to make a request like that.
I'll make this very clear.
1. Put up, or
2. Shut up and bow out of the conversation.
WHOA! Stop right there, Bill.
Given that you've refused to provide any factual basis for your claims, your apparent lack of knowledge of the differences between solvents and abrasives, and your apparent lack of understanding of the varying physical properties of the substances we're talking about....
You do NOT get to make that request right now.
You need to provide FACTUAL DATA to support your claims before you get to make a request like that.
I'll make this very clear.
1. Put up, or
2. Shut up and bow out of the conversation.
Mike Irwin
Staff
"No. Wait. Paper towels are abrasive. Use a soft linen rag."
Unclenick, I'm surprised at you. Everyone knows that linen is abrasive as hell (within certain parameters).
Here's a simple fact. Any solid material has the ability to abrade another material. It is simply a question of the differences between the two materials as to how much/how quickly the softer material will remove material from the harder substance.
Unclenick, I'm surprised at you. Everyone knows that linen is abrasive as hell (within certain parameters).
Here's a simple fact. Any solid material has the ability to abrade another material. It is simply a question of the differences between the two materials as to how much/how quickly the softer material will remove material from the harder substance.
Mike Irwin
Staff
"Straight from the USGS. "Water is capable of dissolving a variety of different substances, which is why it is such a good solvent. And, water is called the "universal solvent" because it dissolves more substances than any other liquid."
I know a number of people that use a spray bottle of water to clean their rifles after shooting the corrosive surplus ammo. Gets rid of the corrosive salts from the primer's, then they use an air compressor to blow out the water."
Solvents and abrasives are not the same thing. They are NOT analogous.
This discussion is about abrasives, so water's ability to dissolve materials is off topic to this discussion.
I know a number of people that use a spray bottle of water to clean their rifles after shooting the corrosive surplus ammo. Gets rid of the corrosive salts from the primer's, then they use an air compressor to blow out the water."
Solvents and abrasives are not the same thing. They are NOT analogous.
This discussion is about abrasives, so water's ability to dissolve materials is off topic to this discussion.
Mike Irwin
Staff
Birchwood Casey Lead Remover Cloths use aluminum silicate as the abrasive component (MSDS here: https://www.birchwoodcasey.com/geta...6/Lead-Remover-and-Polishing-Cloth-6-x-9.aspx)
Mohs hardness of aluminum silicate?
1.5 to 2, or the same a diatomaceous earth.
I can't find the abrasive used in today's Lead Away formulation, as Safariland doesn't list it, but I believe that it is the same aluminum silicate component, NOT aluminum oxide.
Mohs hardness of aluminum silicate?
1.5 to 2, or the same a diatomaceous earth.
I can't find the abrasive used in today's Lead Away formulation, as Safariland doesn't list it, but I believe that it is the same aluminum silicate component, NOT aluminum oxide.
Yeh Mike I get that. Bill asked the question a couple of times, I just googled it and answered it.
Alright Bill, another thing you have asked a couple of times. Where is your experience, real world, that it does anything to effect the firearms. All my time cleaning, or should I say flat out scraping, M9's, M4 bolt carriers, bolts, chambers, the inside of the uppers because carbon showing up on an inspectors finger was a B line back to the cleaning drawing board....no ill effect to the firearm.
Anyway, as I said, I could care less about the rings, to each there own. A simple question was asked on removal techniques and numerous good ideas have been provided but to suggest that a leadaway cloth for example, is going to noticeably effect a firearm, your the one that needs to provide the experience.
Alright Bill, another thing you have asked a couple of times. Where is your experience, real world, that it does anything to effect the firearms. All my time cleaning, or should I say flat out scraping, M9's, M4 bolt carriers, bolts, chambers, the inside of the uppers because carbon showing up on an inspectors finger was a B line back to the cleaning drawing board....no ill effect to the firearm.
Anyway, as I said, I could care less about the rings, to each there own. A simple question was asked on removal techniques and numerous good ideas have been provided but to suggest that a leadaway cloth for example, is going to noticeably effect a firearm, your the one that needs to provide the experience.
Last edited:
jackmoser65
New member
Exactly, a seemingly forgotten aspect on the part of the theorists.
Bill DeShivs
New member
I have a piece of Lead Away in the shop somewhere.
I'll try to do some experimentation soon and report back.
I'll try to do some experimentation soon and report back.