Lube
- Thread starter butchb243
- Start date
Muscle Products Corporation is indicitive to our slogan "Putting the Strength In Lubrication". Our flag is not red...it is RED, WHITE, and BLUE.
Your research is both inadequate and incorrect.
http://www.dscr.dla.mil/products/epa/n10.htm
http://www.fp10.com/adjutantgeneral.html
I could provide much more, but why bother...
(I love this one) Quite to the contrary in all cases, but you fail to mention which competer(sic) you refer to. I'll go out on a limb here and assume you must mean Militec. Now if that is whom you mean, then here are the proper stats; in 2001 we converted 70% of the M-1 distributors to MPC Products...why?...simply because they perform better, and are a much more realistically affordable price, along with the fact that we offer over 14 different "specifically designed products" to do the jobs they do...not just a "1-product panacea" that works on everything. Sorry...no such animal.
Seems to me, I never even mentioned my product in my post...only the one "YOU" mentioned, outside of the reference to the "Rusty Nail Test"...and there I only mentioned BF.
What What does that mean?...outside of the obvious fact that Brad and Allan are soliciting folks like you to come on the forums and post garbage as you did. Too bad they don't have the where-withall to come on and post themselves.
You are exactly right. Give written advice (as you did) that may result in a lawsuit due to liability and negligence, will get you just that....a fat lawsuit. HOWEVER, if you give sound, proven, and responsible advice, you are revered in your field, as you then demonstrate true professionalism and concern for the end user. I'll wager you even promote the "drain your oil out of your crankcase and run your car" after adding your "favorite" additive package (what was that stuff again?).
Now there is a statement that just tickles me to no end. Word is, my friend, that Brad's company is on the way out and nearly broke. Unless YOU are in the industry itself, you wouldn't know this, but if you ARE (in the industry) then I believe your name is really Brad Giordanni or Alan Roth...kind of suspect it anyhow, Mr. "E".
Now, this one is an enigma. Seems like you are loosing your cool, not me
as I put forth the facts and figures. You just spout nebulous innuendoes and references without any foundation whatsoever. And if my Boss gets tight with me, well, I can always deal with me ( as one of my first requirements of me is to be professional when dealing with idiots as well as good folks, like most I've found on the forums, until now (even Tribologist and drcohen are a significant "cut" above your purely mercenary and rediculous "lubri-babble".)) Based on this statement alone, you would be a candidate for some therapy based on a "Projectionist" type behavior...but then again, I'll leave the psych to the shrinks.Now you're talking!! That's what the FP-10 Challenge has been all about (and continues to be). I welcome the person who want's to test it against Militec-1 with GREAT enthusiasm..as I have a convert as if it were BreakFree (which is a hands down loss to FP-10).
I agree wholeheartedly, and pray you do not.
Right again. Intelligence is inherint to humans. How we develop it is inherint to education and life's learnings, which bring us to wisdom and better living. Common sense is essential, but writing the book on halogenation techniques took a little more than just that, for me. I recommend you picking up "Martha Stewart's Book of Social Ettiquette" to start with. This may require a bit more in-depth reading that you may be accustomed to, but I'm sure you could find it on audio cassette.
Been there, Done that
I really don't know (honestly) why?...anyone else, please feel free to comment on this one too!! Thanks, for the best though, but I already have it....it's called "Firepower FP-10 CLP".
No worries. My test will be repeatable by all and the results, good or bad, will be published as they occur. Don't worry "E", I won't do a "don't try this at home" test...in fact, I'll be following your instructions all the way
Wrong address, if referring to "Firepower FP-10 CLP". Try 112 Fennell Drive, Butler, PA 16002
BTW, there is a "goat here"...is he your's?
Rule#1: Never bring a KNIFE to a Gunfight ( and your's needs a whole lot of sharpening)
Rule#2: Always do your home-work
Rule#3: If you do, (your homework) and you're coming after me...bring a body-bag. YOU'LL need it.
Stay tuned....test is about to start!
Regards,
George
PS...Hey CELT (Dia dhuit, mo chara). Email me your address and I'll see to it that you get that FP-10 for the test you want to do (bigger bottle too).
George,
go rahb maith agat!
You have mail.
For all eyes on this thread;
The test I run will a truely non bias one.
I really want to know first hand wich of the two (TW-25 or FP-10)
I have used both and both are tops. I currently use TW-25 because a buddy gave me some and it works great.
Whatever product comes out on top in my tests will be the one I use and give small amounts to my customers with thier custom rifles I build. I will also carry and promote the one I choose.
The test will take about 3 months since ammo is not free and the sitting time without cleaning between firings will be another factor for testing.
I will post my results as soon as I finish the 1500 rounds for each product.
The same ammo will be used and only one aplication of the product will be done after thorough cleaning before the first round is fired.
Celt
go rahb maith agat!
You have mail.
For all eyes on this thread;
The test I run will a truely non bias one.
I really want to know first hand wich of the two (TW-25 or FP-10)
I have used both and both are tops. I currently use TW-25 because a buddy gave me some and it works great.
Whatever product comes out on top in my tests will be the one I use and give small amounts to my customers with thier custom rifles I build. I will also carry and promote the one I choose.
The test will take about 3 months since ammo is not free and the sitting time without cleaning between firings will be another factor for testing.
I will post my results as soon as I finish the 1500 rounds for each product.
The same ammo will be used and only one aplication of the product will be done after thorough cleaning before the first round is fired.
Celt
Clayton Hufford
New member
Celt, I am glad to hear that you'll be testing FP-10 CLP. I look forward to your future comments! 
FWIW, I have tested virtually every lube and CLP-type product on the market since 1997. I compared ASTM test data and conducted my own, albeit non-scientific, corrosion, functional reliability, and wear tests. Nothing even comes close to the performance of FP-10 CLP.
I personally found TW-25B and MC2500 to be very good lubricants, but not too good at preventing corrosion, and contrary to popular belief, you still need to clean your gun. Nothing takes the place of preventative maintenance.
I found Militec-1 to be an absolutely lousy protectant, and again, you still need a cleaner. I have since discovered that Militec-1 is simply a lubricant ADDITIVE, and by itself it can actually be harmful to your weapons. The Militec-1 that you put in your engine is the same stuff that you put on your guns - that's dumb. Guns and cars are totally different in their requirements, IMHO.
FP-10 CLP is complete, so to speak, not just an additive or a "conditioner", nor is it a do-all wonder product, but a product designed FOR weapons from the start.
Just my thoughts,
Clayton
FWIW, I have tested virtually every lube and CLP-type product on the market since 1997. I compared ASTM test data and conducted my own, albeit non-scientific, corrosion, functional reliability, and wear tests. Nothing even comes close to the performance of FP-10 CLP.
I personally found TW-25B and MC2500 to be very good lubricants, but not too good at preventing corrosion, and contrary to popular belief, you still need to clean your gun. Nothing takes the place of preventative maintenance.
I found Militec-1 to be an absolutely lousy protectant, and again, you still need a cleaner. I have since discovered that Militec-1 is simply a lubricant ADDITIVE, and by itself it can actually be harmful to your weapons. The Militec-1 that you put in your engine is the same stuff that you put on your guns - that's dumb. Guns and cars are totally different in their requirements, IMHO.
FP-10 CLP is complete, so to speak, not just an additive or a "conditioner", nor is it a do-all wonder product, but a product designed FOR weapons from the start.
Just my thoughts,
Clayton
I fully understand that there is no substitute for cleaning and care of your gun.
I do however feel that with products as good as the ones being tested it is vital to do the extended no cleaning test, as I feel this will be the only real deciding factor. Wich one keeps working in harsh combat like conditions.
I specialize in SWS rifles and some may be used in harsh life and death situations. I want the very best.
Celt
I do however feel that with products as good as the ones being tested it is vital to do the extended no cleaning test, as I feel this will be the only real deciding factor. Wich one keeps working in harsh combat like conditions.
I specialize in SWS rifles and some may be used in harsh life and death situations. I want the very best.
Celt
Clayton Hufford
New member
Celt, I agree 100%. My cleaning comment was in reference to the marketing hype by Militec and others who think that their products will actually take the place of regular cleaning. Indeed many of these products help make cleaning easier compared to average gun oil, but they don't make a gun "self cleaning", IMHO.
I prefer CLP-type products as they've always worked best for me. They save time, money, and space. Contrary to popular belief, many CLP's outperform single purpose specialty products. When Break-Free CLP first came out, it was loads better than just about every gun oil out there, as well as protectants like Sheath and cleaners like Hoppes #9. FP-10 CLP is about five times better than Break-Free CLP in terms of lubrication, per ASTM results, and is also a better cleaner and protectant now that it has been improved and meets current mil-specs. Long term wise, FP-10 is much better as it contains no solids which can harden and gum up, especially in storage conditions.
Regards,
Clay
I prefer CLP-type products as they've always worked best for me. They save time, money, and space. Contrary to popular belief, many CLP's outperform single purpose specialty products. When Break-Free CLP first came out, it was loads better than just about every gun oil out there, as well as protectants like Sheath and cleaners like Hoppes #9. FP-10 CLP is about five times better than Break-Free CLP in terms of lubrication, per ASTM results, and is also a better cleaner and protectant now that it has been improved and meets current mil-specs. Long term wise, FP-10 is much better as it contains no solids which can harden and gum up, especially in storage conditions.
Regards,
Clay
Clay, no offense intended...
But up until Firepower showed up, which wasn't so long ago, and unless I am mistaken, you were singing the praises of Break-Free. I would just like to know when you were won over to FP-10 and based on what empirical evidence...
No ulterior motives to my question, in fact I am still awaiting after almost two months the promised info from Mr. Yoder at Armor Holdings about BF CLP and how it stacks up to FP-10. It's just that I notice a rather sudden change of heart on your part and am wondering ...due to what revelation?
But up until Firepower showed up, which wasn't so long ago, and unless I am mistaken, you were singing the praises of Break-Free. I would just like to know when you were won over to FP-10 and based on what empirical evidence...
No ulterior motives to my question, in fact I am still awaiting after almost two months the promised info from Mr. Yoder at Armor Holdings about BF CLP and how it stacks up to FP-10. It's just that I notice a rather sudden change of heart on your part and am wondering ...due to what revelation?
Clayton Hufford
New member
Romulus:
I really started seriously testing FP-10 about a year ago. I bought a large bottle from CJ Distributing. I tried FP-10 on every weapon I could get my hands on, and used it during training courses. I always knew, from reviewing the ASTM test data, that FP-10 was a better lubricant, compared to Break-Free CLP, or just about any other lube out there. However, I really "grew up" on Break-Free CLP, having used it since I was a kid, and having used it in the Army. I trusted it, even though it wasn't the best lube. It cleaned and protected better than most every product available.
Break-Free CLP changed its formula several times, and changed hands as well, going to Armor Holdings. IMHO none of this was a good thing. It took me a while to realize this.
Just recently FP-10 CLP was improved greatly in order to meet new mil-specifications. The new formula puts it well above any product I have ever used. FP-10 CLP was actually designed from the get-go to be used on firearms, and was improved to be the best.
I have spoken with George at MPC several times in the last few months, and learned ALOT about FP-10 and the lube industry in general. The level of customer service and support at MPC is far above anything I've ever experienced. When I call MPC, I get to speak with the guy that develops the stuff. To me, this means alot. I prefer to support companies that aren't afraid to tell me about their product, and to tell the truth.
In short, Break-Free CLP is good, compared to products like Rem-Oil, WD-40, etc. but it cannot compare to the new FP-10 CLP. As you've discovered, the customer service at BF has went downhill since Dwight Woodruff was replaced. I still have a ton of tech info that Dwight sent me a few years ago. Great guy.
FWIW, I am not employed by or related to anyone at MPC. I support MPC because they make the best gun (and auto) care products on the market, IMHO.
www.fp10.com
www.mpc-home.com
Hope this helps,
Clay
I really started seriously testing FP-10 about a year ago. I bought a large bottle from CJ Distributing. I tried FP-10 on every weapon I could get my hands on, and used it during training courses. I always knew, from reviewing the ASTM test data, that FP-10 was a better lubricant, compared to Break-Free CLP, or just about any other lube out there. However, I really "grew up" on Break-Free CLP, having used it since I was a kid, and having used it in the Army. I trusted it, even though it wasn't the best lube. It cleaned and protected better than most every product available.
Break-Free CLP changed its formula several times, and changed hands as well, going to Armor Holdings. IMHO none of this was a good thing. It took me a while to realize this.
Just recently FP-10 CLP was improved greatly in order to meet new mil-specifications. The new formula puts it well above any product I have ever used. FP-10 CLP was actually designed from the get-go to be used on firearms, and was improved to be the best.
I have spoken with George at MPC several times in the last few months, and learned ALOT about FP-10 and the lube industry in general. The level of customer service and support at MPC is far above anything I've ever experienced. When I call MPC, I get to speak with the guy that develops the stuff. To me, this means alot. I prefer to support companies that aren't afraid to tell me about their product, and to tell the truth.
In short, Break-Free CLP is good, compared to products like Rem-Oil, WD-40, etc. but it cannot compare to the new FP-10 CLP. As you've discovered, the customer service at BF has went downhill since Dwight Woodruff was replaced. I still have a ton of tech info that Dwight sent me a few years ago. Great guy.
FWIW, I am not employed by or related to anyone at MPC. I support MPC because they make the best gun (and auto) care products on the market, IMHO.
www.fp10.com
www.mpc-home.com
Hope this helps,
Clay
Last edited:
Thanks, Clay.
I sent an e-mail to BF and got an answer from Don Yoder. It was actually nice to hear from the top man himself (I understand he is the original formulator of BF, including it's latest improved version.) He told me that he knew nothing about FP-10, but if FP-10 obtained its mil-spec classification it would deserve it, as many have gone for it but never received it. He also added that the BF marketing dept. based in Florida would contact me and give me more info on BF and how it might stack against FP-10.
To date, not a peep from the Florida folks, It's been at least two months...
I sent an e-mail to BF and got an answer from Don Yoder. It was actually nice to hear from the top man himself (I understand he is the original formulator of BF, including it's latest improved version.) He told me that he knew nothing about FP-10, but if FP-10 obtained its mil-spec classification it would deserve it, as many have gone for it but never received it. He also added that the BF marketing dept. based in Florida would contact me and give me more info on BF and how it might stack against FP-10.
To date, not a peep from the Florida folks, It's been at least two months...
According to George the only difference between the new Mil-spec formula and the old stuff is the droppng point, the old stuff was -54 F and the new stuff is -65 F. eveything else is the same.
So basically I would never be able to tell the difference in the 2 cause I wont be shooting when its that damn cold
I also see that Shooters Choice has the new Mil-Spec formula on the shelfs in a gun shop near me.
Scott
So basically I would never be able to tell the difference in the 2 cause I wont be shooting when its that damn cold
I also see that Shooters Choice has the new Mil-Spec formula on the shelfs in a gun shop near me.
Scott
I'll agree with George on the WD-40. I have had a Model 69A Win. since before, well, a long durn time. Back in the good old days, I would slather it with 3-in-one oil. Years later, I wondered why the firing pin dropping took about two seconds. I used WD-40 on the gun, and thought the WD was gumming up all over that rifle. It turns out WD was only DISSOLVING all my mistakes at lubing. After further use, I decided it was good for displacing H20, and great at getting tar off my Grand Cherokee.
My 69A has since been properly cleaned and lubed with CLP. The firing pin drops in a mili-second. I am looking forward to receiving George's sample to try also. Heard good things about it. Will try it on my many Glocks few lube points.
By the way, CLP does NOT gum up. Period.
My 69A has since been properly cleaned and lubed with CLP. The firing pin drops in a mili-second. I am looking forward to receiving George's sample to try also. Heard good things about it. Will try it on my many Glocks few lube points.
By the way, CLP does NOT gum up. Period.
Clayton Hufford
New member
Scott, actually what happened was George changed FP-10 in order to lower the temp range to meet mil-specs, but the change influenced the entire range of characteristics in a positive way. I personally can tell a huge difference in the cleaning ability, and in the ease of application - it seems to coat surfaces better and its flow characteristics are much improved as well.
When comparing the old formula and the new side by side, you can REALLY tell the difference .
Best regards,
Clay
When comparing the old formula and the new side by side, you can REALLY tell the difference
.Best regards,
Clay
Clay,
That is what he said over on the 1911 Forum when I asked him about it.
On the other hand I have never compared the two formulas side by side so I am unable to comment on it myself, so I will take your word for it.
When cleaning the barrel and cylinders on a revolver I still use either Hoppe's or Shooters Choice then lubricate and wipe everything down afterwards.
Like I said on another post I have used it and was pleased with it but still seem to use G96 the most over all the other lubes I have.
I know its not the best but Im happy with it. And most of all its used regularly... I always clean my guns after each range trip. It works just about as good as B.F. CLP for light cleaning, I have not tried FP-10 for cleaning yet.
I did run some through the barrel of my .357 after cleaning with Hoppe's and let it sit for about an hour and the patch did not come out dirty.
P.S. I definatly favor G96 over B.F. CLP for trigger assemblies.
B.F. on the other hand is probably a better lubricant though.
If you wouldn't mind post the test results that you did one other time with how different lubes performed in it.
Scott
That is what he said over on the 1911 Forum when I asked him about it.
On the other hand I have never compared the two formulas side by side so I am unable to comment on it myself, so I will take your word for it.
When cleaning the barrel and cylinders on a revolver I still use either Hoppe's or Shooters Choice then lubricate and wipe everything down afterwards.
Like I said on another post I have used it and was pleased with it but still seem to use G96 the most over all the other lubes I have.
I know its not the best but Im happy with it. And most of all its used regularly... I always clean my guns after each range trip. It works just about as good as B.F. CLP for light cleaning, I have not tried FP-10 for cleaning yet.
I did run some through the barrel of my .357 after cleaning with Hoppe's and let it sit for about an hour and the patch did not come out dirty.
P.S. I definatly favor G96 over B.F. CLP for trigger assemblies.
B.F. on the other hand is probably a better lubricant though.
If you wouldn't mind post the test results that you did one other time with how different lubes performed in it.
Scott
Clayton Hufford
New member
No problem, Scott.
I only have two tests in which G-96 was mentioned. One is the RCMP trials done several years ago, in which FP-10, G-96, and TW-25B were the winners. The other is a friction wear and abrasion test performed on a F-1599-1A lubricity tester by the Falex Corp.
33 products were tested altogether, with G-96 coming in at #24, Break-Free CLP at #11, and FP-10 at #1. Obviously this is just one test, so don't take the results too seriously. I prefer to have the results from at least three different ASTM tests with which to do comparisons, but this is very difficult with products like G-96 as they refuse to provide any test data. I'm just not willing to lay down my cash to do anymore tests, as I think I have found the best available. Testing lubes is very, very expensive.
In every test that FP-10 is a part of, you can bet that it will come out on top, at least in every one that I've seen it has.
I think Southwest Research did some tests for George, the results of which are on his website.
www.fp10.com
http://www.swri.org/
Regards,
Clay
I only have two tests in which G-96 was mentioned. One is the RCMP trials done several years ago, in which FP-10, G-96, and TW-25B were the winners. The other is a friction wear and abrasion test performed on a F-1599-1A lubricity tester by the Falex Corp.
33 products were tested altogether, with G-96 coming in at #24, Break-Free CLP at #11, and FP-10 at #1. Obviously this is just one test, so don't take the results too seriously. I prefer to have the results from at least three different ASTM tests with which to do comparisons, but this is very difficult with products like G-96 as they refuse to provide any test data. I'm just not willing to lay down my cash to do anymore tests, as I think I have found the best available. Testing lubes is very, very expensive.
In every test that FP-10 is a part of, you can bet that it will come out on top, at least in every one that I've seen it has.
I think Southwest Research did some tests for George, the results of which are on his website.
www.fp10.com
http://www.swri.org/
Regards,
Clay
....as promised...
Sorry for the delay, but we were heavily involved in the Area 8 USPSA Tri-State Championships this weekend, and have been burning (and shooting) the candle at ALL ends
I have finished, compiled, documented, and posted the experiment I stated I would do in my previous post:
Here it is:
http://www.fp10.com/miltestprotect.htm
This was done to in the interest of YOU, the SHOOTERS, to PROVE that what I said about chlorinated hydrocarbons without proper inhibiting techniqes, can and will produce corrosion under the conditions of moisture and humidity.
Try it yourself...the truth is in the "doing" and "seeing". All the BS and marketing hype can't cover it up when the folks are willing to put it to the test.
Remeber the Rusty nail test with Breakfree and FP-10?
It was even MORE rigorous than this, as we used a 20% salt-water solution on the plates in that one. This one, was just Tap Water.
The link to the BF/FP-10 test:
http://www.fp10.com/FP-10testing/
Best regards,
George
Sorry for the delay, but we were heavily involved in the Area 8 USPSA Tri-State Championships this weekend, and have been burning (and shooting) the candle at ALL ends
I have finished, compiled, documented, and posted the experiment I stated I would do in my previous post:
Here it is:
http://www.fp10.com/miltestprotect.htm
This was done to in the interest of YOU, the SHOOTERS, to PROVE that what I said about chlorinated hydrocarbons without proper inhibiting techniqes, can and will produce corrosion under the conditions of moisture and humidity.
Try it yourself...the truth is in the "doing" and "seeing". All the BS and marketing hype can't cover it up when the folks are willing to put it to the test.
Remeber the Rusty nail test with Breakfree and FP-10?
It was even MORE rigorous than this, as we used a 20% salt-water solution on the plates in that one. This one, was just Tap Water.
The link to the BF/FP-10 test:
http://www.fp10.com/FP-10testing/
Best regards,
George
OK, George! I give, I give, I give! I just ordered a 16 oz. bottle of your product and am looking forward to joining Ted Nugent in slathering up my guns with it. Will let you know how it compares to my silly home brew of MMO and generic STP. Best to you, and here's to the continued success of your company.