quote:

Originally posted by 303Guy:
Mention has been made of ammonia absorbing water. Thing is, ammonia is a gas. Ammonia based cleaners have ammonia gas dissolved in the water that they are made up of. I have no doubt that ammonia and other chemicals attack steel to some extent but does it attack the steel enough to matter? If users have been happy with the stuff for a long time it means that any such attack is insignificant over the life of the barrel. The thing is, water dissolves steel and it is the dissolved steel that rusts! But it takes a little acid in the water to actually dissolve the steel. That's why bare steel wetted by dew rusts so readily. Dew water is acidic. Now, ammonia is basic, so it should actually prevent oxidation of the steel, not cause it. But it is a gas so it could very well penetrate the steel surface. Given enough time, it could penetrate deep enough to do damage. In a short time, the penetration might be minimal and could dissipate out again once the source is removed. Who knows? (And don't forget the effects of electrolyses).

Water consists of oxygen and hydrogen. Add to the mix something that consumes the oxygen and you have ionized hydrogen able and willing to penetrate steel. Ever heard of hydrogen embrittlement?

303 Guy

Interesting post, but I have some questions...

1. HOW would ammonia attack steel (or the iron in steel)? Chemicals which attack other substances do so by combining with them and/or creating new substances from them. The result would be a product consisting of elemental parts of both ammonia and at least some of the elements of whatever was attacked. Is there a compound composed of ammonia and iron? If not, the ammonia itself is likely not what is attacking the iron or steel.

2nd - In real world terms, since when is iron or steel porous enough to let water penetrate its molecular structure? Water (or the oxygen in water) will chemically interact with the surface of iron or steel, but "dissolve" it? That's why rust is always initially a "surface" phenomenon. The iron oxide is porous enough to allow water to go through it to an unrusted layer of iron or steel, but I am surprised if the solidified liquid iron or steel itself is.

3rd - It certainly is true that acid speeds up oxidation of some materials, but may that not be because the acid in turn forms compounds with the material subject to rusting? Those compounds may either (or both) absorb water and/or be porous enough to allow the water to contact the material which will rust and hold it there.

Just questions, but the truth is, James Sweet WAS a chemist of some repute. The cleaner he developed was intended to be aggressive enough to remove copper-based fouling, and contained other ingredients to enhance both its action and its safety for its intended use.

So, as you said, anyone can choose to use it or not use it. But for someone to defame it because some person decides to blame it for their barrel problem, whether or not there is any established means or methodolgoy of its causing such things, really doesn't fly too well in my view.

If someone has proof it can be isolated as the cause of damage, let them come on here and explain exactly why and how that occurs chemically.

Otherwise it is little more than rumour, refuted by decades long successful use of Sweets by thousands of competitive, world-class, competition target shooters.


If I was going to try to proove it hardens and embrittles steel, I would look toward research along the line of the hydrogen embrittlement you suggested. That MIGHT be a possibility, but remains to be demonstrated.

quote:

Originally posted by billt:

quote:

Originally posted by dan_oz:

Once again, it is not because the ammonia attacks the steel.

I'm sorry, but here you are badly mistaken. There are warnings all over the place about how Meth cookers are refilling propane tanks with Ammonia to use in cooking the illegal drug. This weakens the tank itself, along with the valve to the point both can, and do rupture.

"Anhydrous ammonia is very corrosive and weakens the structure of the tank."

http://www.reubenyau.com/warni...a-and-propane-tanks/

http://www.fireengineering.com...ion=GLOBE&dcmp=GLOBE

You didn't actually read any of those links very carefully, did you? They refer to blue or green residue around the valve. Where did that come from? After all, corrosion products of steel aren't blue or green are they?

No indeed. That is because the warning is about the fact that the brass valve is what is attacked by the ammonia. In fact if you actually follow the warnings to their source at the National Propane Gas Association this point is made clear:

quote:

The brass valve in a propane cylinder will be damaged if it comes in contact with anhydrous ammonia. This deterioration will lead to cracking of the valve body or its components and can ultimately result in a violent, unexpected expulsion of the valve from the cylinder, causing personal injury or death.

But there again, we already knew that ammonia attacks copper and brass...

quote:

Originally posted by billt:
As far as Bore Tech Eliminator, it does the same job without all of these corrosive effects. In fact, it actually has rust inhibators in it, and is also bio degradable. You can read all about it here.

http://www.boretech.com/products/eliminator.shtml

The active ingredient operates in much the same way, and much the same cautions apply. In fact monoethanolamine solutions are well known for their corrosive effect on steel, which would be why the corrosion inhibitors have been added.

quote:

Ammonia is bad stuff. There are much better products that won't impose any risk to your health, or gun for that matter. Bill T.

You are mistaken if you think that Bore Tech Eliminator poses no risk to your health (or for that matter your guns). Of course if you get hold of and read an MSDS, and follow the instructions from the manufacturer, no harm need be done - same as Sweets.

quote:

Originally posted by Alberta Canuck:

...the truth is, James Sweet WAS a chemist of some repute. The cleaner he developed was intended to be aggressive enough to remove copper-based fouling, and contained other ingredients to enhance both its action and its safety for its intended use.

So, as you said, anyone can choose to use it or not use it. But for someone to defame it because some person decides to blame it for their barrel problem, whether or not there is any established means or methodolgoy of its causing such things, really doesn't fly too well in my view.

If someone has proof it can be isolated as the cause of damage, let them come on here and explain exactly why and how that occurs chemically.

Otherwise it is little more than rumour, refuted by decades long successful use of Sweets by thousands of competitive, world-class, competition target shooters.

Well said

Look, this is getting to the point of sillyness. If you like Ammonia, then use it. I have used it, found a much better product, and now I've given up on Ammonia based Copper removers and use something better. You can do likewise, or stay with what you think is better. I have no vested interest in either product, I just thought I would pass along a tip on a product that really does what it says. Now a days there aren't very many that do. Bill T.

quote:

Originally posted by billt:
Look, this is getting to the point of sillyness. If you like Ammonia, then use it. I have used it, found a much better product, and now I've given up on Ammonia based Copper removers and use something better. You can do likewise, or stay with what you think is better. I have no vested interest in either product, I just thought I would pass along a tip on a product that really does what it says. Now a days there aren't very many that do. Bill T.

Thank you Bill. I actually do appreciate any tips about something someone feels works well, believe it or not.

In point of fact though, Sweets also works well for its intended use in my long experience with it. It also does not harm guns if used as directed. Anyone who allows it in the gas mechanisms of gas-operated guns, or in the magazines of magazine fed rifles, should understand from reading the instructions on Sweets that is likely not a good practice.

My disagreeement is not with your recommending or liking to use another product.

My disagreeement is with the originally posted statement that Sweets is harmful to rifle bores. Used as directed, that has not been shown to be true.

quote:

Interesting post, but I have some questions...

quote:

Otherwise it is little more than rumour, refuted by decades long successful use of Sweets by thousands of competitive, world-class, competition target shooters.

Exactly! I would prefer to think of it as speculation! (Speculation leads to investigation which in turns leads to the discovery of the truth).

Water molecules cannot penetrate the surface of steel. But water in it's liquid form is not molecular - it is ionic. Ionized hydrogen is just an atomic nucleus. But actually, there are relatively huge spaces and gaps within the crystaline structure of steel. This is how hammering can harding steel - by forcing the gaps to close and raising the density. It is also how the carburizing of steel works - carbon migrates into and through the steel, filling these spaces and repacing some of the atoms in the crystals and so on. We really need a metallurcal chemist here - I am getting out of my depth!

I have no idea how ammonia might 'attack' steel (or the iron in the steel) but I do know that phosphoric acid, for example, prevents oxidation of steel but it also removes the 'shine'. In fact, it etches the steel surface. It is the '10' in PA10 etch primer - 10% phosphoric acid! PA10 uses a solvent which dissolves the acid (which is why it has to be properly cured before lacquer based paints can be applied over it). But please check out what I am saying before taking it as gospel!

Oh yes, oxygen is not the only 'oxydizing' agent around. Chlorine can take the place of oxygen, for example. Hydrogen will actually burn with a flame in the presence of concentrated chlorine. But unlike oxygen-hydrogen combustion, chlorine-hydrogen forms hydrochloric acid! Once again, we really need a chemist.

quote:

Water (or the oxygen in water) will chemically interact with the surface of iron or steel, ...

It is not the oxygen that makes up water that reacts with iron but rather, dissolved oxygen from the atmosphere. Water dissolves iron through an eloctrolytic action in the same way that lead is dissolved in a car battery, which is why it must be acidic - to form the electrolyte.

quote:

Originally posted by 303Guy:
But actually, there are relatively huge spaces and gaps within the crystaline structure of steel. This is how hammering can harding steel - by forcing the gaps to close and raising the density.

We are a long, long way from the point here, but that is wide of the mark. Hammering can close up any voids/cracks/discontinuities at the macro level, and that can improve such things as the fatigue life. At the level of crystal structure though it in fact operates by increasing the number of dislocations in the crystal structure. This increases hardness as the molecules are no longer as free to "slide" past one another and thereby allow plastic deformation.

quote:

Originally posted by 303Guy:It is also how the carburizing of steel works - carbon migrates into and through the steel, filling these spaces and repacing some of the atoms in the crystals and so on.

No, that isn't it. The iron crystal can only hold about .05% C at room temperature. Even most mild steel contains more than that.

What actually happens with carburising is typically that we take a low carbon steel and diffuse carbon into it (there are various methods). What we end up with is a steel with the low-carbon core but a thin "case" layer of higher carbon steel at the surface. Now at high temperature the carbon is dissolved in the steel, but if we cooled it very slowly we'd end up with a microstructure at room temperature consisting of grains of essentially pure iron (<.05% C), called ferrite, together with grains made up of laminations of iron and iron carbide called pearlite. There'd be a lot more pearlite in the case layer, and the distributed iron carbide would make it rather stronger and harder than the core.

Alternatively though we could quench the case-hardened item, and the higher carbon content of the case would enable it to undergo a transformation to a different structure called martensite, which consists of a very fine distribution of carbide in the ferrite matrix, and is very hard, while the core would not have enough carbon to undergo this transformation and therefore retain its toughness, thus combining the best of both worlds: a hard, wear resistant surface with a tough, shock resistant core.

quote:

Originally posted by 303Guy:

I have no idea how ammonia might 'attack' steel (or the iron in the steel) but I do know that phosphoric acid, for example, prevents oxidation of steel but it also removes the 'shine'. In fact, it etches the steel surface. It is the '10' in PA10 etch primer - 10% phosphoric acid! PA10 uses a solvent which dissolves the acid (which is why it has to be properly cured before lacquer based paints can be applied over it).

How phosphoric acid reacts with steel really has little if anything to do with ammonia (a base, not an acid) and steel, but FWIW the mode of action of phosphoric acid is to etch the steel, and react with any iron oxide to produce a slightly protective layer of iron phosphate.

Getting back to the main point though, I, like Alberta Canuck, have no problem with people choosing to use some other product, such as Bore Tech. What I do take issue with though is the regular appearance of claims that Sweets is unsafe, and all the sometimes laughable nonsense posted about it, including here. Jim Sweet was a nice bloke, knew what he was doing and made a product whose widespread use over decades is testament to the fact that it works well and, provided you follow the simple instructions, poses no risk to rifle barrels.

The simple need to follow directions should not count against it - the same applies to any solvent and many other things we use routinely.

Thanks for the clarification dan_oz. I stand corrected! Yeah, it was a long time ago but now it comes back to me! (I would love to hear more).

Does ammonia react with steel at all? I have found that cleaning steel with sugar soap (to remove acids used in rust removal) will prevent rust from forming for several days. How is that different from the ammonia in bore cleaning solvents? And if carbon is dissolved into the surface of steel at elevated temperatures (700C ?), how does anything penetrate the steel surface during the passage of the bullet or at any other time? Surely the surface temp of the steel in the bore cannot reach those levels? I can understand surface hardening or fatigue from the bullet compressing the steel surface - if that is what happens when 'throat erosion' occurs? It has been described as surface flaking. Can traces of the ammonia cleaners remain within the surface fissues, aggrevating erosion if not properly cleaned out after application?
(We humans do have a tendency to blame simultanious occurances for an event).

There is a similar example - blueing salts! Blueing is supposed to prevent rust right? Do it wrong and it causes rust!

Also, if an ammonia solution is left to dry in the bore, wouldn't the protection provided by the basic ammonia would be lost when the solution dries, leaving an unprotected bore ready to rust at the slightest hint of water?

In the case of Sweets, could it be that if left in the bore too long, the protective ammonia (or whatever) component could evapourate out. leaving the bore at risk of corrosion from the other elements in the product? (Meaning that zero damage will occur within a safe time period - as specified by the designer, who appears to have been a very clever man!) And FWIW I shall be using Sweets myself!

Guys, if you think Sweet's is doing a good job cleaning your barrel, try what I did. Buy yourself a small bottle of Bore Tech Eliminator. Then, the next time you shoot your pet rifle clean it as good as you possibly can with Sweet's. Clean until the patches no longer come out green. After that run several dry patches down your bore. Then run a patch soaked in Bore Tech Eliminator. I guarantee you the patch will COME OUT GREEN. That won't be because Sweet's got all the Copper out. Bill T.

I've really enjoyed reading everybody's posts on this subject. You all are obviously more knowledgable than I on the matter.

But the last few posts have kinda bothered me.

Please re-read my first post as I started this thread.

I didn't claim that Sweet's or ammonia based products were harmful.......I was asking the question to anyone else that may know if it was.

The info that I received from my gunsmith and susequent folks (Walther) said it was bad.

All of the input has been great and helpful

Thanks everyone!

quote:

Bore Tech Eliminator

There wasn't any in my local gunshop so I settled on the Sweet's. Then I realised it might not remove lead! Does it? (It doesn't claim to). It seemed to remove all kinds of crud from my rifle barrel but no copper - there never was any! I got it for when there will be. I'll let you folks know whether or not it does cause any problems - in about two hundred years time!

I would contend that gun smithes/shop owners see some of the most aggregious abuse of firearms in the hands of people who don't read the directions. That said, gun shop owners rarely see a gun after it is sold if it is not problematic.

I use Sweets as one part of a process to remove copper from a heavily fouled barrel.

My process scrubs the bore with a patch of: 1) Hoppes #9, 2) Sweets, 3) Iosso, 4) Hoppes #9, 5) Hoppes Gun Oil, 6) Dry Patch to get the excess oil out. I dry patch between each change of bore cleaner.

Keep in mind, if I don't have heavy copper fouling, I don't use Sweets, or Iosso. I would NEVER dream of leaving Sweets in a barrel more than 15 minutes!! That stuff can ruin a barrel!!

quote:

Originally posted by 303Guy:

quote:

Bore Tech Eliminator

There wasn't any in my local gunshop so I settled on the Sweet's. Then I realised it might not remove lead! Does it?

Bore Tech Eliminator removes Lead the same as it does Copper. Quickly. Bill T.

There it is again from yet another.........

from mike_elmer:
Keep in mind, if I don't have heavy copper fouling, I don't use Sweets, or Iosso. I would NEVER dream of leaving Sweets in a barrel more than 15 minutes!! That stuff can ruin a barrel!! [/QUOTE]

It seems that some believe it ruins the barrel and some are convinced it won't.

Let's say Sweet's can ruin a barrel if left in too long. Wouldn't it then follow that putting it in a barrel HAS TO BE BAD FOR ANY LENGTH OF TIME?

I mean, if the chemical is that rough on a barrel left in too long, it's got to be doing some damage no matter how long it's in.

quote:

Originally posted by rcamuglia:
There it is again from yet another.........

from mike_elmer:
Keep in mind, if I don't have heavy copper fouling, I don't use Sweets, or Iosso. I would NEVER dream of leaving Sweets in a barrel more than 15 minutes!! That stuff can ruin a barrel!!

Let's say Sweet's can ruin a barrel if left in too long. Wouldn't it then follow that putting it in a barrel HAS TO BE BAD FOR ANY LENGTH OF TIME?

I mean, if the chemical is that rough on a barrel left in too long, it's got to be doing some damage no matter how long it's in.[/QUOTE]:[/QUOTE]
-------------------------------



Sorry, but that is not correct either. The way ammonia can damage a barrel by being left in too long is by trapping water vapour from the air directly against the barrel steel under or in the ammonia. If one removes the ammonia before the oxygen in the water vapour can do its damage, the bore will not be harmed by it.

As I said before, you are not a person who should be using Sweets. You are too much of a worrier for it to be practical for YOU. That is not intended as an insult. I am sure you are a good man, hence your trying to warn folks off of a product which can cause harm if not used correctly. Give yourself some mental peace, and just don't use it.

But, you could also give the rest of us some peace too and quit trying to defame a good product.

Best wishes,

AC

I just finished talking to my local hot shot gunsmith. He says not to use Sweet's as it will surface harden your barrel and promote fire-cracking. Has anyone any info about this? He says Wipe Out is a better choice......

R

AC

The above is how I started this thread. I'm not DEFAMING SWEET'S. I'M JUST TRYING TO FIND OUT IF THE INFORMATION ABOVE IS CORRECT.

I thought that asking the question on this forum of very knowledgable folks would get me some great info.

quote:

Sorry, but that is not correct either. The way ammonia can damage a barrel by being left in too long is by trapping water vapour from the air directly against the barrel steel under or in the ammonia. If one removes the ammonia before the oxygen in the water vapour can do its damage, the bore will not be harmed by it.

You can't be serious about this. Water in contact with the bore will do its damage? I've hunted and shot competition in rain and snow where the barrel has been in contact with water ALL DAY. My firearms are not ruined because of it.


A reasonable person would conclude with all the information gathered on this thread, expert opinions (Walther barrels, Score High Gunsmithing), and even the WARNINGS on the Sweet's bottle, that it is not water or water "vapour" as you say that does the damage to bores.

quote:

Bore Tech Eliminator removes Lead the same as it does Copper. Quickly.

Dang! Lead is my biggest worry right now.

There is a test of sorts I can do to see whether or not Sweet's could be harmful to barrel steel. I shall take some barrel steel - 4140 - and apply Sweet's to it and see what damage I can induce! Surface hardening and fire-cracking - which was the original topic of this thread - may be a little more difficult to simulate (impossible, actually). I'll start by polishing a piece of the steel and seeing if that polish can be chemically damaged.

The source of this knowledge about sweets and fire cracking came from a salesman.

Hardly a reliable source of unbiased information.

quote:

Originally posted by billt:
I work in an aerospace machine shop. They have banned the use of Windex anywhere on the shop floor. If you are caught using it, it is reason for termination. These warnings are posted all over the shop. The reason is a while back one of the hand finishers used Windex with Ammonia to clean some very critical, highly polished, parts, and scrapped them because the Ammonia in the Windex attacked the finish. Refinishing them would have taken them undersize. Bill T.

quote:

Originally posted by Alberta Canuck:
The way ammonia can damage a barrel by being left in too long is by trapping water vapour from the air directly against the barrel steel under or in the ammonia.AC

Trust me when I tell you it wasn't "water vapor" that attacked the finish on those parts, causing them to be scrapped. Bill T.

Just clean your barrels with whatever you preferr, and don't leave ANY solvent in it for a long period of time. Oil the bore after cleaning, use lots of patches, follow the directions, and you will wear the barrel out by admiring it, long before cleaning it.

quote:

You can't be serious about this. Water in contact with the bore will do its damage? I've hunted and shot competition in rain and snow where the barrel has been in contact with water ALL DAY. My firearms are not ruined because of it.

It isn't just the water that does damage. It is the combination of water, oxygen, some of the breakdown products from shooting and cleaning, and a bare steel surface inside the bore.

The exterior of your barrel is usually protected by such things as the bluing, and probably some film of oil, which provides just that little bit of protection when you shoot in the rain - provided also that you dry it down and oil it before finishing up for the day.

However, put your rifle away in its case without drying it, to keep that moisture in place, and it will probably have a red coating by morning.

quote:

A reasonable person would conclude with all the information gathered on this thread, expert opinions (Walther barrels, Score High Gunsmithing), and even the WARNINGS on the Sweet's bottle, that it is not water or water "vapour" as you say that does the damage to bores.

I suppose in fairness to you that you might draw that conclusion if you really didn't understand the science, as clearly you don't, and took every opinion as being of equal validity.

quote:

Originally posted by billt:

quote:

Originally posted by billt:
I work in an aerospace machine shop. They have banned the use of Windex anywhere on the shop floor. If you are caught using it, it is reason for termination. These warnings are posted all over the shop. The reason is a while back one of the hand finishers used Windex with Ammonia to clean some very critical, highly polished, parts, and scrapped them because the Ammonia in the Windex attacked the finish. Refinishing them would have taken them undersize. Bill T.

quote:

Originally posted by Alberta Canuck:
The way ammonia can damage a barrel by being left in too long is by trapping water vapour from the air directly against the barrel steel under or in the ammonia.AC

Trust me when I tell you it wasn't "water vapor" that attacked the finish on those parts, causing them to be scrapped. Bill T.

Just for starters, the parts you described weren't even made from steel, but from either an Inconel or Waspaloy, according to you. These are nickel-based alloys, with properties completely unlike those of steel alloys used in rifle barrels. So right off the bat we aren't comparing apples with apples.

I've done some work with Inconel and similar alloys too, and one thing they are well known for is the difficulty in etching them. The usual etchants necessary are really, really powerful mixtures of concentrated acids, like glyceregia. Windex is nothing like these, so I'm left to wonder what really did cause the problem in the machine shop, and how.

Either way though, I don't see how your anecdote has any work to do here.

quote:

Originally posted by dan_oz:
Windex is nothing like these, so I'm left to wonder what really did cause the problem in the machine shop, and how.

Look, stop searching for the boogy man here. The parts were fine until the Windex with Ammonia was applied to them. The result was almost 6 digits worth of scrap. Again, I could care less if people want to use apple cider to clean gun barrels, or anything else for that matter. I've seen enough evidence of what Ammonia can do, as well as what a better job other products can do without Ammonia, for me to come to the realistic conclusion there are better products out there. Bill T.

quote:

Originally posted by billt:

quote:

Originally posted by dan_oz:
Windex is nothing like these, so I'm left to wonder what really did cause the problem in the machine shop, and how.

Look, stop searching for the boogy man here. The parts were fine until the Windex with Ammonia was applied to them. The result was almost 6 digits worth of scrap. Again, I could care less if people want to use apple cider to clean gun barrels, or anything else for that matter. I've seen enough evidence of what Ammonia can do, as well as what a better job other products can do without Ammonia, for me to come to the realistic conclusion there are better products out there. Bill T.

Bill,

Do you have any idea what the active ingredient that cuts the copper might be in Ammonia free bore cleaners?

Running a quiz isn't going to change what is and what isn't. I've used both Sweet's and Bore Tech Eliminator. In fact, I was forced used Sweet's for years simply because it is all there was back then, if you wanted to get Copper out of your barrel. It stunk the whole house up, and I don't care what anyone say's it is all but impossible not to get this stuff into your action and gas system. I never used Sweet's in semi auto firearms for this very reason, and stuffed paper toweling into the mag wells of by bolt guns to prevent it from getting everywhere. Now with Bore Tech Eliminator, I don't have to worry about any of it, and my guns come cleaner, faster too boot. Bore Tech will not hurt anything it touches like Sweet's will. Take a piece of blued steel like a scope ring, and submerse it in Sweet's overnight. Do the exact same thing with Bore Tech Eliminator. Then look the next morning and tell us which ring you would like to mount on your rifle. Bill T.

Bill,

Please don't misconstrue the intent of my question. I truly am interested to know how Bore Tech works. I have never heard of another chemical, aside from Ammonia, that would remove copper from another metal. That does not mean that Bore Tech doesn't work, but there must be an ingredient that causes the copper to release it's grip in steel bores.

Well, FWIW, I found no sign of damage to the exterior parts of the gun I just used Sweet's on. I was not being careful as this is a project gun. This does not mean it is harmless! But I am not surprised that a chemical that attacks copper would also attack aluminium. I did think that mike_elmer was wanting to know what is in ammonia free cleaners. I am interested to know, if anyone can enlighten us? If ammonia damage is not being done by water trapping, then can anyone enlighten us on how it does? Why should ammonia react with copper and not steel? Or is it the other ingredients that are doing the work while the ammonia removes the protective coatings (like oil)? Ammonia is a good cleaner by virtue of it breaking down electrostatic bonding of 'dirt', including oil.

quote:

Originally posted by 303Guy:
I did think that mike_elmer was wanting to know what is in ammonia free cleaners. I am interested to know, if anyone can enlighten us?

This gives a pretty good discription on how it works. Bill T.

http://www.boretech.com/products/eliminator.shtml

I'm going to try this as well. It sounds as good, or better than Bore Tech Eliminator. Bill T.

http://www.boretech.com/products/copperremover.shtml

You guys have been busy since I left!

quote:

Well, FWIW, I found no sign of damage to the exterior parts of the gun I just used Sweet's on. I was not being careful as this is a project gun. This does not mean it is harmless! But I am not surprised that a chemical that attacks copper would also attack aluminium. I did think that mike_elmer was wanting to know what is in ammonia free cleaners. I am interested to know, if anyone can enlighten us? If ammonia damage is not being done by water trapping, then can anyone enlighten us on how it does? Why should ammonia react with copper and not steel? Or is it the other ingredients that are doing the work while the ammonia removes the protective coatings (like oil)? Ammonia is a good cleaner by virtue of it breaking down electrostatic bonding of 'dirt', including oil

Thats almost the exact question I asked starting this thread. I'm glad you had no damage to your test gun as I was using Sweet's before I started the thread. It is interesting that the other products attack copper so well and say you can leave them in as long as you want........also saying they even leave a residue that PROTECTS THE BORE! Like Wipe-out.

I've used Sweets and Wipe Out for many years, and a few years, respectively and they both work fine if you follow the directions.

Duh.

I'm curious to know what the "other" non-ammonia copper solvent is too!

And, horror of horrors, I use JB sometimes too!

Thanks for the heads-up on the Bore-Tech stuff, Bill. I'll have to try some. Please post more pictures of Mrs Bill, eh? I married a hottie too!

Mark

INteresting, Bore Tech is out of Telford, PA... hmmmmm.

They mention patent protection as a reason to keep the formula a secret. They do not have a link to MSDS sheets. That would be a good place to start.

Gentlemen,

I have been trying to find some contact info for Sweet's, but can't even on the web. If anyone has a phone # for them please give it to me and I will call them and talk to them about this.

I just got off the phone with Woody at Lothar Walther barrels and spoke to him more about why he didn't recommend any ammonia based cleaning solvents. Here is a summary:

1. The ammonia itself does not hurt the barrel steel

2. The problem exists when the solvent is introduced to the
barrel. It mixes with the combustion by-products of the
powder and primer burning and creates NH2OH or nitric
acid which will etch the bore steel (I'm not sure that the
notation I gave is correct, but he said it was some
nitric acid compound).

3. The problem only occurs when the solvent is in the bore
in trace amounts. When it is completely saturated, he
says....no worrys.

4. What really causes problems is when a guy is at the
range, cleans his gun with ammonia between groups,
then fires more groups without removing ALL OF THE
AMMONIA.

5. He stated that it is ok to use the product if the bore is
cleaned with another solvent thoroughly to remove all
of the ammonia traces before firing again.

R,

Thank you for the update, and for starting the thread in the first place.

Your last post is very enlightening. I had never considered the primer and powder fouling mixing with ammonia, could create an other chemical that could react with a barrel. It makes sense.

Mike

I don't know if what he said is true; I'm not a chemist, but like you say, the possibility of forming another compound makes sense.

I started this thread to try to learn if what was told to me was true. The folks on this forum really know their stuff and I was just trying to learn.

I've been accused of trying to malign the product which, if the guys had read the start of the thread, couldn't be further from the truth. I just don't want to hurt any of my rifles!

I hope someone replies to these posts with either info that confirms or denies Woody's assertion.

That's good info RC, thanks for taking the time to research it. Bill T.

quote:

4. What really causes problems is when a guy is at the
range, cleans his gun with ammonia between groups,
then fires more groups without removing ALL OF THE
AMMONIA.

Now, without this thread, I would not have known that! I suspect that many folks - myself included - would have just assumed that firing a shot would remove any traces of the cleaner!

Thanks for the thread!

I must say that this thread is really entertaining to say the least !!! I have been using Sweets for over 20 years and use it every time I clean either shooting in the field or at a match. For those of you that know who Speedy Gonzalez is do you think that he would use something that would harm his tubes or recommend a product that would? Just for grins he took some old tubes and cleaned them with Sweets (both CR and SS) let them sit for 24, 48 and then several days and saw no damage with the bore scope. I leave it in my SS tubes routinely for an hour or two and have never seen any damage with the scope.


Now who is to say given marginal conditions (heat & humidity) that damage would not occur. Just to say that my testing has shown no ill effects from the use of Sweets period.


In any case keep going I have my pop corn!!

I'm glad to get that information on the test in the barrels!

Has anyone found a contact phone for Sweet's? I want to call them and ask them why they say on the bottle not to leave it in for more than 15 minutes! There's got to be some kind of reason.........

I have gotten traces of rust on a patch when I inadvertantly left it overnight in a chrome moly barrel (at Camp Perry!), so I'll bet that's what the warning's about.

I don't leave it in the bore too long anymore. Is this rocket science?

Mark