Author Topic: Sperm Whale Oil article  (Read 17146 times)

Offline Roger Fisher

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6805
Sperm Whale Oil article
« on: April 23, 2012, 10:13:53 PM »
All you folks out there that get M Loader magazine have a good look at Fred Stutzenbergers article comparing shooting results (groups) of various lubes.  Turns out as most of us suspected/assumed/hoped/preached that good ol cheap and handy spit was best after sperm whale oil.   What say you.  ???

Offline bluenoser

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 751
Re: Sperm Whale Oil article
« Reply #1 on: April 23, 2012, 10:23:24 PM »
And ...... it's easier to get these days.  I enjoy Fred's articles.  I'll be watching for the Postman.

Daryl

  • Guest
Re: Sperm Whale Oil article
« Reply #2 on: April 23, 2012, 11:48:19 PM »
I personally found LeHightValley Lube to give almost identical results as spit - with perhaps a slight edge over spit - BUT- it took an extra 10gr. of 3f or 2f to do that. All loads shot without wiping, of course.

54Bucks

  • Guest
Re: Sperm Whale Oil article
« Reply #3 on: April 24, 2012, 01:24:04 AM »

That was the 1st article I read in the new issue. From his test it was very close between Sperm Whale Oil vs Spit when measuring center to center of three shot groups from 2 test guns. He listed results from a .45 cal. Green Mt barrel with Sperm Oil being .26 and .46 vs Saliva being 1.06,1.18, and 1.27. In the other test gun, a Rice .50 cal., he listed the results of Sperm Whale Oil being .51 and Saliva being .65. I find it odd that the .45 cal. gave both the tightest groups with Sperm Whale Oil, and also the widest groups with saliva/spit compared to the .50 cal. test gun. The .50 cal test gun did not show the same type of results comparing Sperm Whale Oil vs Spit. That leads me to question more than just the lube for the differences in group size.
 Having done a quick search for Sperm Whale Oil, it's a big no no, $2000.00 fine to buy or sell it. And I'm not sure if just possessing it is legal. I even found that Dixie is selling somekind of synthetic replacement for Sperm Whale Oil. But I'de be surprised to find it compares to the real McCoy. Since I have a dry mouth I guess I might try the nest best thing to Whale Oil or Spit.........fish oil?

mjm46@bellsouth.net

  • Guest
Re: Sperm Whale Oil article
« Reply #4 on: April 24, 2012, 02:11:37 AM »
If you're going to use fish oil for lube, watch out for bears.  ::)

The other DWS

  • Guest
Re: Sperm Whale Oil article
« Reply #5 on: April 24, 2012, 02:31:34 AM »
Automatic Transmission fluid is synthetic whale oil.  the early automatic transmissions actually used whale oil.   those old hydro-matic might have been a bit fishy.

we had a local transmission shop where I used to get my cars and Jeeps worked on.  The family that ran it was like a 3rd or 4th generation to operate it.   I asked about Whale oil some time back and was told the story.  They said they had some, a few gallons, of old old stock but it was not for sale.
 It was also highly desired in the precision watch trade since as a lubricant it downs not change consistency with temperature changes.  Very critical in the old days when a precision time-piece was absolutely critical for determining ships navigation.
I'm guessing they were holding out for big big bucks from the high grade watch restoration/collectors

William Worth

  • Guest
Re: Sperm Whale Oil article
« Reply #6 on: April 24, 2012, 02:48:24 AM »
Someplace...net-talk maybe, it seems I read that whale oil was even used on moving parts of spacecraft.  Seems it's actually a wax.

Daryl

  • Guest
Re: Sperm Whale Oil article
« Reply #7 on: April 24, 2012, 06:19:13 PM »

That was the 1st article I read in the new issue. From his test it was very close between Sperm Whale Oil vs Spit when measuring center to center of three shot groups from 2 test guns. He listed results from a .45 cal. Green Mt barrel with Sperm Oil being .26 and .46 vs Saliva being 1.06,1.18, and 1.27. In the other test gun, a Rice .50 cal., he listed the results of Sperm Whale Oil being .51 and Saliva being .65. I find it odd that the .45 cal. gave both the tightest groups with Sperm Whale Oil, and also the widest groups with saliva/spit compared to the .50 cal. test gun. The .50 cal test gun did not show the same type of results comparing Sperm Whale Oil vs Spit. That leads me to question more than just the lube for the differences in group size.
 Having done a quick search for Sperm Whale Oil, it's a big no no, $2000.00 fine to buy or sell it. And I'm not sure if just possessing it is legal. I even found that Dixie is selling somekind of synthetic replacement for Sperm Whale Oil. But I'de be surprised to find it compares to the real McCoy. Since I have a dry mouth I guess I might try the nest best thing to Whale Oil or Spit.........fish oil?

Were the same loads, ie: powder charges tried first with one then the other lube - or were the loads worked up for the best accuracy with each lube then group sizes compared?

If you are comparing lubes to determine which gives the best accuracy adjusting powder charges is necessary.  Not adjusting powder charges will deliver spurious results that are next to meaningless, only trends can be shown.

For example - in testing my .40, had I merely used spit's best accurcy load of 55gr. 3F with LHV, the spit would have won out with 1/2 the group size of the LHV.
 
However, final testing, using 65gr. 3F, showed that LHV had a very small, maybe 1/10" advantage in absolute accuracy over spit - which might have been reversed with a simple patch material change - there are so many variables, it would be quite tedius to do a complete, comprehensive test.


Fred_Dwyer

  • Guest
Re: Sperm Whale Oil article
« Reply #8 on: April 24, 2012, 08:16:08 PM »
Quote
I guess I might try the nest best thing to Whale Oil or Spit.........fish oil?

Jojoba oil. High anti-oxidant properties.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jojoba_oil

JBlk

  • Guest
Re: Sperm Whale Oil article
« Reply #9 on: April 24, 2012, 08:21:11 PM »
My Dad had a old coal miners lamp that resembled a small water can with the wick reaching through the spout.This type of light was what the miners referred to as a whale oil lamp.I know that this lamp laid in his garage for at least twenty years in temperature changes for minus twenty to well over one hundred.When we had his auction the wick of the lamp was still wet and pliable as though it had just been used.

Offline hanshi

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5310
  • My passion is longrifles!
    • martialartsusa.com
Re: Sperm Whale Oil article
« Reply #10 on: April 24, 2012, 10:29:28 PM »
When I started with black powder I used spit and found it worked great for years.  Nowadays I could probably come up with a whale oiled patch easier than a spit patch.  Unlike the whales I've just dried out in my old age. ::)
!Jozai Senjo! "always present on the battlefield"
Young guys should hang out with old guys; old guys know stuff.

Offline Bob Roller

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9322
Re: Sperm Whale Oil article
« Reply #11 on: April 24, 2012, 11:04:34 PM »
I still have part of a bottle of sperm oil I bought from Wes Kindig for a dollar in honest Silver Certficated money and after I clean a newly finished muzzle loader,I oil the bore with a patch oiled with this stuff.
The oil is from 1954 and no perceptible changes.

Bob Roller

FRJ

  • Guest
Re: Sperm Whale Oil article
« Reply #12 on: April 24, 2012, 11:59:29 PM »
I was at a differential class at the old Hinsdale GM training center in 75  and the instructor was discussing what to use to stop limited slip chattering. He said that whale oil was no longer used as the guy that used to "manipulate" the whales had died and no one had been found to replace him. Actual truth was that whale oil had been outlawed sometime before that and selling or buying it would land you in jail and facing a hefty fine. I use spit when I can make it and wswfluid when I cant. For hunting loads I use mink oil. FRJ

Candle Snuffer

  • Guest
Re: Sperm Whale Oil article
« Reply #13 on: April 25, 2012, 04:43:41 AM »
With whale oil being outlawed, it's to bad Fred didn't test spit against some other patch lubes, or maybe he did?  I didn't see the article but have always enjoyed Fred's writing.  I use spit for target shooting and TC bore butter for hunting.  Have had good success with both.  I do like the ease of using spit.

hlary

  • Guest
Re: Sperm Whale Oil article
« Reply #14 on: April 25, 2012, 06:54:29 PM »
I read the article last night too and it seemed to me that the fish oil came in as a better second to the sperm oil than did the spit. (I may have to check the table of results again.) One thing's for sure though, regardless of the load, patch, sighting method, etc the sperm whale oil put all shots into one hole! Now that's some good stuff.

Daryl

  • Guest
Re: Sperm Whale Oil article
« Reply #15 on: April 25, 2012, 06:59:32 PM »
I don't have the article either - are the powder charges for the various lubes the same?

Offline Jerry V Lape

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3020
Re: Sperm Whale Oil article
« Reply #16 on: April 25, 2012, 10:28:57 PM »
Wonder how close dog drool is to human spit in performance.  I could just borrow someones bulldog, boxer,or  mastiff, wave a piece of meat in front of it for a few minutes and be in business selling a new secret lube with almost zero production costs!  If that didn't work perhaps the local dairy farmer would let me gather cattle drool but it would be for bores .54 or larger.   ;D

Daryl

  • Guest
Re: Sperm Whale Oil article
« Reply #17 on: April 25, 2012, 10:53:15 PM »
Gotta be at least as slippery as Hoppe's #9 Plus?  :D

Offline Dphariss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9749
  • Kill a Commie for your Mommy
Re: Sperm Whale Oil article
« Reply #18 on: April 26, 2012, 01:35:54 AM »
All you folks out there that get M Loader magazine have a good look at Fred Stutzenbergers article comparing shooting results (groups) of various lubes.  Turns out as most of us suspected/assumed/hoped/preached that good ol cheap and handy spit was best after sperm whale oil.   What say you.  ???

Depends on how oily the patches are. Whale oil is not a particularly good lube as will be noticed in that it loads harder in a clean bore than Neatsfoot for example.
If the Whale oil or Neatsfoot is squeezed out of the patch leaving them nearly dry accuracy usually improves. But this generally requires wiping every shot.
Spit is really a "non-lube" and this means that it, like Sperm Whale Oil, it does not slide up the barrel very easy on the way out. This increases load inertia and reduced velocity variations.
I seldom use spit, like once of twice in the last 30(?) years. I ringed a bore with it in my youth.
Did he try the Dutch Schoultz method? It does very well too and is also basically a non-lube.
Dan
He who dares not offend cannot be honest. Thomas Paine

Daryl

  • Guest
Re: Sperm Whale Oil article
« Reply #19 on: April 26, 2012, 02:41:24 AM »
The difference between spit and bear grease in my .58 Hawken, was 57fps and 53fps with 2 different loads, 20 gr. apart.   The difference between shot to shot velocity variations was 8 and 10 for the spit and 42 and 69 for the grease.  These were heavy hunting loads and the heavier load produced less variation with spit, but slightly more with the grease. The amount is too small to be significant in either load.

54Bucks

  • Guest
Re: Sperm Whale Oil article
« Reply #20 on: April 26, 2012, 03:41:50 AM »
I don't have the article either - are the powder charges for the various lubes the same?

 He doesn't give the powder charges used to support his 3 shot center to center group results after a fouling shot,then wiped before the next comparison. He only copares this list of lubes:Canola Oil,Coconut Butter,Crisco,Fish Oil,Flaxseed Oil,Jojoba Oil,Olive Oil,Saliva, and Sperm Whale Oil. He provides group sizes for a Green Mt. .440 ball and Rice .490 ball. All testing was with .018 ticking patch material. The only thing I noticed about powder charges was only for the Rice .490 with Crisco results.  A 2.11 group @ 50 with 62grain FFF, and a 1.86 group @ 50 yd. with 70 grains of FF. He also doesn't mention barrel length for either test gun.
 He does give  center to center of group size/with each lube and a loading resistance of LOW-MED-or High. For example: he gives the Sperm Whale oil results in the Green Mt. .45 as Low, and the Rice .50 as Medium. The loading resistance he gives for fish oil and spit are the same.
 I'm not sure of the value of the resistance rating either..... considering both test guns are using .010 under sized balls.

Daryl

  • Guest
Re: Sperm Whale Oil article
« Reply #21 on: April 26, 2012, 03:56:53 AM »
TKS Bucks - your information was VERY helpful - you answered the questions I needed info on.  Unfortunately, the test data is severely lacking and is of very little use for me, at least. I know it sounds as if he tried - I submit he tested too many different lubes which took too much time which restricted his time to test the variables that would have made the test more meangful. 

Offline Dphariss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9749
  • Kill a Commie for your Mommy
Re: Sperm Whale Oil article
« Reply #22 on: April 26, 2012, 05:28:01 PM »
The problem is that 3 shot groups may work for magazine articles but they are pretty poor evidence in real life.
Unless 3-4 are shot with each load. They will work to show if a load has promise and needs more testing.
Sorry but this is just a fact.
Low numbers of shots are just to susceptible to the "rule of compensating errors".
The shooter makes an error in sighting or holding that is eliminated by the load putting a bullet in the opposite direction and thus right in the middle of the group when it reality it was a flier.
The only way around this is a machine rest or multiple groups or more shots per group.
When doing groups for BPCR I used to shoot 12-15 shots.
In the course of such shooting I have shot 3 consecutive shots at 300 yards with a 40-70 that were an inch center to center. But the load was really doing about 4-4.5" at that distance. So rather than 1/3 MOA it was a 1 MOA + capable load.

Dan
He who dares not offend cannot be honest. Thomas Paine

Offline hanshi

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5310
  • My passion is longrifles!
    • martialartsusa.com
Re: Sperm Whale Oil article
« Reply #23 on: April 26, 2012, 07:40:03 PM »
I remember long ago reading from a number of sources that statistically, seven (7) shots gave the most accurate results.  I normally use 5 shots but 7 is better than 5 and at least equals 10 shots.  I was required to take lots of statistics courses in college but can't come up with a formula for this one.
!Jozai Senjo! "always present on the battlefield"
Young guys should hang out with old guys; old guys know stuff.

Daryl

  • Guest
Re: Sperm Whale Oil article
« Reply #24 on: April 27, 2012, 12:31:24 AM »
I personally prefer 5 shot groups, with 3 or 4 consectutive groups being necessary for statistical stability. I do use 3 shot groups when roughing in the sights at 25 yards, the move to 5 shot groups at 50 yards for load development as 25 yards is useless for that, if shooting further is expected.