I'm stumped

[Roger Fisher]

WD-40, no good for gun.

Ol Daryl loves it (in her bore)   I will say that rumor has it that the WD-40 has been 'improved' over the years,; but what do I know I'm just the 210 lb gorilla in the room...  I will relate this::: 30 to 35 years ago I built (read stuck together) an iron mtd long rifle with a douglas barrel and had much rust problem.  I recall that in mid week after a shoot/shoots I had to go in her bore (and got a lot of brown rust) had to wipe her good and reoil til next weekend shoot.  One ol boy grabbed the can of wd out of my shootin box and thru it down into the woods (bush to you Canadians)  He said to stay away from the WD-40.  Which I did ever since.  I do admit using it now from time to time.  I usually use Ballistol in the bore (not the lock gets gummy some).

I do recall most of the rust problem was during a very humid summer period...  So seems like the WD has been improved in more recent times.  I also assume that my cleaning and drying methods were good and complete....

[Hungry Horse]

Roger;

  If you tried that load in my gun, you would be in the shop, pulling the breech plug, and trying to figure out how you were going to get that ball out of the middle of the barrel. Oh, and you'd be on my farm. TTYL.

                 Hungry Horse

[hanshi]

If WD40 has been changed it's news to me - a lot of things are news to me, however.  Had a friend that kept his revolver coated (too much) in WD40 and claimed he still ran into rust.  I don't know.  I used it way back and found it didn't hold up as a long term rust inhibitor.  I still use it, actually rely on it, for cleaning uses.  But I use Barricade as the final rust protector.

[sydney]

For long term give Ezzox a try
The outdoor test i read about using polished plates showed
 better protection than other products
  Sydney

[hammer]

Robby, my first guess would be oil left in the breech, especially if the rifle is stored horizontally.   I would try flushing it through with spirit or alcohol to ensure all oil is cleaned out before loading for the first shot.  For percussion rifles I then fire off a couple of caps and follow up with a good wipe of the bore to clean out the fouling from the caps plus anything they have blasted out.   

Good luck,

Peter.

[smylee grouch]

Keep shooting Robby and record all the info from every shot and all the variables. Eventualy you will figure it out and keep us posted as to the results. Interesting goings on here and most people will want to know how you make out.    Smylee

[volatpluvia]

My experience is like Daryl's.  I used the stuff from 1978 and if I cleaned and dried right I had no trouble with rust.  I had some barrels more than a decade and did not experience a loss of accuracy or in smoothness of loading or a difficulty in cleaning.  I too stored my gonnes muzzle down to keep any lubricant from pooling in the breach.  Mostly I used alcohol and murphy's oil soap for patch lube at shoots and for cleaning.  Whatever they were selling at the gunshop for patch lube for hunting.
volatpluvia

[nosrettap1958]

After cleaning the barrel and lock parts with hot soapy water I dry then apply WD-40 to the barrel and lock parts to displace all of the water. WD-40 is great stuff for an additional cleaner as it will displace any and all of the water used. After all of that that's when I use a preservative oil on the metal.
My thought, the very bottom of the grooves of the barrel have a thin coat of rust and the first shot blows that rust out. But in doing so that very thin coat of rust is tearing up the patch. Get a bore light and before shooting drop it in and see if you can see anything. The rust may be soooo thin it is hard to detect.

Being a Rice barrel I don't think its a rough spot.

[BONES]

After 40 years of ML shooting I have tried a lot of lubricants and cleaning solutions.  For many years now I use a solution of equal amounts of rubbing alcohol/hydrogen peroxide/Murphay' Oil soap for everything.  It cleans good, it is a good patch lube on the range, you can clean your hands at lunch break, and clean a cut or scrape.  Also I keep a damp patch on my loading rod when I load which wipes the barrel as I load.  To my way of thinking I am staying one shot dirty all the time.  This works for me but keep in mind find out what works for you and stick with it.

[Daryl]

After cleaning the barrel and lock parts with hot soapy water I dry then apply WD-40 to the barrel and lock parts to displace all of the water. WD-40 is great stuff for an additional cleaner as it will displace any and all of the water used. After all of that that's when I use a preservative oil on the metal.
My thought, the very bottom of the grooves of the barrel have a thin coat of rust and the first shot blows that rust out. But in doing so that very thin coat of rust is tearing up the patch. Get a bore light and before shooting drop it in and see if you can see anything. The rust may be soooo thin it is hard to detect.

Being a Rice barrel I don't think its a rough spot.

This must be the situation. I can think of no other reason for that first shot damaging the patch, when successive shots do not.

For cleaning patches, I use store bought flanellette - ie: baby diaper material, thick and soft. Been a long tme since there was a baby here, so I buy the stuff(quite innexpensive) by the meter or yard.  After drying out, the ones used for drying the bore are reusable again and again.  I use jags (electric drill in a bench vice using a file) or reduced in a lathe until they fit very snuggly with a doubled flanellette patch. The doubled patch being VERY tight goes the the very bottom of the grooves and into sharp corners and then drys the bore perfectly.  sometimes I have to take the barrel back inside and clamp it in the bench vice to pull that last patch out that PERFECTLY dried the bore.  The FLUSH of WD 40 then does it's thing after drying - then the excess is patched out, gun wiped down, ressembled and stored- muzzle down.  We do not have a humidity problem here, but it will get up into the 90's percentile at times. I've never had a gun rust with this method of cleaning, even when I lived next to the ocean in Surrey BC.
I clean with cold, ie: tap water, I chase any residual moisture out oil with a WD40 flush and that's it- no other oils nor preservatives.
I firmly believe that some are having difficulty due to not removing their barrels for cleaning and due to their methods are not getting their bores clean. Damp or wet patches then dry ones do not clean out ALL of the fouling from inside the bore and breech area., in my opinion.

[nosrettap1958]

I agree Daryl, regardless of cleaning methods he is using he is not getting his barrel 100% clean.

All I'm saying is that this particular barrel, and all rifled barrels are differant as there are NO two rifles that are the same, is not getting cleaned enough using the techniques he may have used in the past with his other rifles.   Not better cleaning methods just differant cleaning methods need to be used here on this barrel and from the impression I got it sounds like this barrel is a real stinker to get clean.

[smylee grouch]

Disregard this if it has already been brought up but you wouldnt be dealing with flash rust from your cleaning method would you?

[Daryl]

ooooo- flash rust is very bad - we've seen it just about destroy a barrel over time over time using boiling hot water in one of the 12L14 barrels.   The flash rusting flash every time it was cleaned compounded over time, in this instance, perhaps 15 years to rot the bore from one end to the other - pitted - we lapped it with lead laps twice and got it smooth enough that fouling doesn't build up any more, but it's still not smooth like my other barrels, cleaned with nothing but cold water as indicated.

[Robby]

I can assure you that when I clean my guns they are indeed, and practice, CLEAN! Then 100% dry! There is NO residual rust anywhere, except in my old bones. C'mon fellows, that's like saying my kids have dirt behind their ears, It didn't and this doesn't happen!
I've been busy and have had only one chance to spend some time at the range. For this trip I made a punch, .015 over bore size, from a piece of 1/8" hard felt I made some wads, lubed with Wonder lube 1000. I reduced the charge a bit thinking the wad would increase pressure some what. Other than that, everything else the same. First shot, patch was in good condition, maybe a touch more fraying around the edges, not sure. Point of impact was the same as without the wad and full powder load.
Next trip I will try a piece of patch material on the powder instead of the wad. I'm trying not to over think this, and believe the truth of it is probably something very simple.
I think Pletch was correct in his analysis.
I do appreciate all the input!!
Robby

[axelp]

If it is a matter of the fouling helping to improve the over-all patch seal, maybe a thicker/stronger patch material might solve the problem?

I tend to use a loose patch ball combo and I admit I suffer from burned patches and poor accuracy frequently.

I am just a plinker--- but I am going to try a thicker patch and a short starter and see what happens.

K

[Daryl]

Don't forget the .0's james.  A .24 patch is so thick one that I don't even think I could load it with my meat hook hands and no wrists, as Hatchet Jack describes them.

[jamesthomas]

 Well, check my math for me .490 is .10 less than .50 which is the bore diameter so .10 + .12 = .22 so my .24 patch gives me .02 extra pressed into the grooves am I right or do I have something wrong?. I deleted my previous post because using a thicker patch was already mentioned. I just checked my patches and they are .24. Loads easy using any lube I have tried. I do use a short starter. He might still try a thicker patch so he does'nt have any blowby which is what may be shredding that first patch. .5 + .16 (rice round bottom grooves right?) gives him an extra .01 pressed into the grooves using a .22 patch?.

[Daryl]

.490" is .010" less than .500". ie: 10 thousandths smaller, not 100 thousandths smaller, as in .1".  A small difference on paper but a huge difference in actual measurement. 100 times different.  It is a common mistake and many of us, me included, have made it - right here. The reason your math seems to work, is the .0's zero is missing in all your figures.

Rice .50"- we'll assume it's a true .5" bore and they usually have .016" rifling, so: .500bore + .016rifling + .016rifling = .532"- groove to groove.

A .490" ball + .024"patch + .024"patch = .538" - .532" = .006" total compression divided by 2 (2 sides) = .003" compression in the bottom of the grooves - each groove.

This load, we know, loads quite easily and might show good accuracy as well, with moderate loads.  However, .003" compression might not be enough compression for heavy hunting loads and might show burn throughs or burnups with them.  A .495" ball will increase the compression slightly and improve this fit.

As to patches being reusable, they should be. You should be able to pick up a fired patch, re-lube it and use it again - perhaps up to 5 times - then, you'll know it's a good one. I've done this 'test' and showed exactly the same accuracy as with 5 new patches.

We have guys here who use .490" balls and .012" patches and claim "good" accuracy - so - whatever anyone is happy with is good by me, from now due to LB's 'directive'.

[Pete G.]

Well, check my math for me .490 is .10 less than .50 which is the bore diameter so .10 + .12 = .22 so my .24 patch gives me .02 extra pressed into the grooves am I right or do I have something wrong?. I deleted my previous post because using a thicker patch was already mentioned. I just checked my patches and they are .24. Loads easy using any lube I have tried. I do use a short starter. He might still try a thicker patch so he doesn't have any blow by which is what may be shredding that first patch. .5 + .16 (rice round bottom grooves right?) gives him an extra .01 pressed into the grooves using a .22 patch?.

Your patches are .024" .24 is almost 1/4". That's what Daryl was pointing out.

[jamesthomas]

 Gotcha!!

[Roger Fisher]

.490" is .010" less than .500". ie: 10 thousandths smaller, not 100 thousandths smaller, as in .1".  A small difference on paper but a huge difference in actual measurement. 100 times different.  It is a common mistake and many of us, me included, have made it - right here. The reason your math seems to work, is the .0's zero is missing in all your figures.

Rice .50"- we'll assume it's a true .5" bore and they usually have .016" rifling, so: .500bore + .016rifling + .016rifling = .532"- groove to groove.

A .490" ball + .024"patch + .024"patch = .538" - .532" = .006" total compression divided by 2 (2 sides) = .003" compression in the bottom of the grooves - each groove.

This load, we know, loads quite easily and might show good accuracy as well, with moderate loads.  However, .003" compression might not be enough compression for heavy hunting loads and might show burn throughs or burnups with them.  A .495" ball will increase the compression slightly and improve this fit.

As to patches being reusable, they should be. You should be able to pick up a fired patch, re-lube it and use it again - perhaps up to 5 times - then, you'll know it's a good one. I've done this 'test' and showed exactly the same accuracy as with 5 new patches.

We have guys here who use .490" balls and .012" patches and claim "good" accuracy - so - whatever anyone is happy with is good by me, from now due to LB's 'directive'.

Just to point out the importance of this read on:  (Always at least one clinker in a load of coal)-- Testing a bunch of .016 teflon (green) in my ol Getz with my normal .454 ball and 85 3 f Goex at 100 yds rest on the 8 ring black bull (with a white spotter over the 10 ring so I could see it (some)  calm winds slightly dark under tree canopy.  Fired 3 shots (loaded a little loose after ball was started) that 'grouped the size of a basketball.   Holy Kow!   Then switched to my 'regular' sunforger .020 green teflon rest of the load the same held the same (or tried to). Shot 5 shots 3 tens, one liner 10 and a 9.  First 4 could have covered with a half dollar.  So, since I figured I solved that question went home (to get out of the heat)  So, thats solved til next time at least.

[Daryl]

Tks Roger, good shooting and good example.   

I've heard people say "I can't shoot better than a basketball anyway, so that accuracy would be OK with me". 

What that person fails to understand, is that his innacuracy is added to the group size that the load is capable of.

Thus, if the shooter is capable of only a basketball sized group, and the load is capable of only a basket ball sized group, his group will be at least 3 basketballs in diameter.

 To illustrate how that happens, put the load's capability in the centre, then the load's worse shots are on the outside, right? - place the shooters basket ball capability's edge, barely overlapping the outside of the loads capability - all the way around. That is the smallest group the poor load and poor shooter are capable of shooting.

Yes- I know it's an extreme example and hopefully we don't shoot that poorly, but the match and method are real.  To shoot offhand as well as possible, we need an accurate load, not a ho-hum load.