Polishing cleaning rod

Pete Wass said:
is in the business of testing all manor of shooting related things. His tests have shown him that Stainless rods do in fact mar barrels and that coated or fiber rods do not. He also said that bore guides, when using either coated or fiber rods are a waste of time.

I expect massive flames here but he is the one with the maginifying borescope. I still use a bore guide but quit the SS rods, me.

Pete
Click to expand...

Define "mar". That could be a broad term. I too have done my own ss vs carbon fiber test. I'm convinced that carbon fiber is safe on barrels.
 
mwezell said:
Define "mar". That could be a broad term. I too have done my own ss vs carbon fiber test. I'm convinced that carbon fiber is safe on barrels.
Click to expand...

A few years ago the home made guide was the rage, if the cleaning rod wore the steel barrel brass guides would indicate fast ware. Again, it is assumed the cleaning rod wares the muzzle. I do not push the cleaning rod through the barrel, I make every effort to pull. And I use a cleaning rod system that is unlike other systems. I thought there has to be a better way when someone brought me a rifle with a bore snake stuffed into the barrel.

Years ago a photograph escaped notice but won an award in the art world, seems the photographer managed to take a picture of a projectile at the moment it left the barrel. Anyhow the picture has not been seen in years but it was a shock to those that thought they had it all figured out; the picture was taken long before the term "are you kidding me?".

F. Guffey
 
Last edited by a moderator:
F. Guffey said:
A few years ago the home made guide was the rage, if the cleaning rod wore the steel barrel brass guides would indicate fast ware. Again, it is assumed the cleaning rod wares the muzzle. I do not push the cleaning rod through the barrel, I make every effort to pull. And I use a cleaning rod system that is unlike other systems. I thought there has to be a better way when someone brought me a rifle with a bore snake stuffed into the barrel.

Years ago a photograph escaped notice but won an award in the art world, seems the photographer managed to take a picture of a projectile at the moment it left the barrel. Anyhow the picture has not been seen in years but it was s shock to those that thought they had it all figured out; the picture was taken long before the term "are you kidding me?".

F. Guffey
Click to expand...

I have no doubt that, eventually, a rod would wear the lands and crown. I'm in the camp that dirt and debris from the cleaning process, that ends up on the rod(and brush) itself, is of more importance, as the dirt will make either abrasive. I don't know how to calculate the amount of pressure generated by pushing, say, a 44"x.250 diameter ss rod@x amount of resistance and convert that to how hard the rod would actually be bearing against the bore, under normal circumstances..but I think this is what is all comes down to. That's aside from ever getting a tight patch..and hitting the rod handle with the palm of your hand, for example. I have no doubt that this can and likely will damage the bore with a ss rod.

I don't use ss rods, or any other steel rod, for that matter. I prefer carbon fiber but I also own a couple of coated Dewey rods.

The test I did that I mentioned above, was a couple of years ago and I don't remember every value that I used in the test, but it went like this...I used pieces ss rod and a carbon fiber rod and chucked them into a chuck in my mill. I put an old barrel stub in the mill vise. I used a digital trigger pull gauge to approximate equal pressure of both rods against the piece of barrel stub and cranked up the machine so that the rod would spin against the od of the ss barrel stub. The test may not be the end all, be all on this subject, but it wasn't even close. The ss rod ran for a matter of seconds against the barrel stub before galling and gouging both the barrel stub and the rod. The carbon fiber rod ran for several minutes against it before I shut it off and examined both the rod and the barrel stub....You could hardly see where it had been running against one another.

Again, this test may be leaving out some important variable, in the real world. I don't recall how much pressure or RPM I used for the test but I think that both were way, way, WAY above what is generated in normal use. Either way, this dispelled the claims that carbon fiber was too abrasive to be used for a cleaning rod..to me.--Mike
 
Visible mark?

mwezell said:
Define "mar". That could be a broad term. I too have done my own ss vs carbon fiber test. I'm convinced that carbon fiber is safe on barrels.
Click to expand...

I haven't spoken with the tester but I think I remember his scope being 400x or so but, as I said, it's 2nd hand info. I trust the messenger though. Perhaps @ 400x things are more visible?

As I recall, the bore guide test was via a machine that stroked the rods for hours. As I said, I still use mine because I have it and it doesn't harm anything. It also seems easier to clean when I use it. Mebby it is superfluous but so what, I like using it.

It makes sense to me that one should keep clean the shafts of whatever rods they use, as they go so, in doing that, the "dirty" label for coated rod would be averted,

Pete
 
Last edited:
If you just clean the barrel with a dry piece of paper towel, no silicon or anything, it won't damage the barrel will it? And also, is it necessary to disassemble the gun and run the rod through the back of the barrel as opposed to leaving it in the gun and just running it down the front end and back?
 
EvanHo - what kind of rifle are you talking about? Most folks here talk about bolt action rifles...remove the bolt and clean from the action end of the rifle.
 
Tipton rod

mwezell said:
Define "mar". That could be a broad term. I too have done my own ss vs carbon fiber test. I'm convinced that carbon fiber is safe on barrels.
Click to expand...

I agree 100%. Carbon fiber doesn't gall. I use it on my Shilen Match Select barrel. Nothing embeds into that carbon fiber either. It's also stiffer than SS or any other metal rod. The stiffness along with a good bore guide will avoid the dragging of the rod diameter along your rifling by keeping it centered.
I had my barrel completely inspected recently with a bore scope & was told it looks perfect after 700 rounds.
 
One other thing

that I think is a factor is the size of the cleaning patch. Too big a one requires a lot of force to push through the bore. That can arch the rod potentially contacting the lands. Picking the right size patch is necessary imho. --Greg
 
glp said:
that I think is a factor is the size of the cleaning patch. Too big a one requires a lot of force to push through the bore. That can arch the rod potentially contacting the lands. Picking the right size patch is necessary imho. --Greg
Click to expand...

True but if the rod is pulled instead of pushed the rod will be straight. And then there were shooters that used a cord/string with a heavy lead weight. And then there were those that used a chain made of soft metal. I am not concerned about the diameter of the patch.

F. Guffey
 
A) it is clearly obvious that some responders are NOT bench rest shooters.

B) anyone that thinks that a carbon fibre rod will not allow crud to embed in the material is living in a fantasy world.
 
CMaier said:
A) it is clearly obvious that some responders are NOT bench rest shooters.

B) anyone that thinks that a carbon fibre rod will not allow crud to embed in the material is living in a fantasy world.
Click to expand...

Not that I doubt you, but what evidence do you offer to your point?
I described my test in detail..or as best I could. It did not account for embedding of debris on the rod other than I didn't clean it before doing the test. As I said, it's not that I doubt your view that cf is not non embedding..I would lean toward agreeing with that. But, I prefer it over coated in this regard and prefer coated over bare steel or ss for reasons I've already mentioned and because of what my own test proved to me and to my own satisfaction. In that test, it wasn't even close which one won. You are free to scrutinize my test all you want. I said it likely isn't all inclusive or something to that effect. I did the test to determine to MY OWN satisfaction if cf itself was as abrasive as I read so often on this and other forums. My conclusion is that it is not.
 
mike,
my opinion is based on years of working
with composites. the surface is just
not "closed" enough to stop embedding
of debris.
bore damage is a different subject,
i like coated rods that are kept clean.
 
CMaier said:
mike,
my opinion is based on years of working
with composites. the surface is just
not "closed" enough to stop embedding
of debris.
bore damage is a different subject,
i like coated rods that are kept clean.
Click to expand...

I agree, keeping the rod clean is what it all boils down to. I'm sure you've seen brass and aluminum rods that felt like sandpaper, they have so much crud embedded into them. What are your thoughts on my test and the results? It was really quite surprising just how much different the two were. I think the carbon rod could have run all day long like that and do little or no damage. Either way, I thought it was interesting. I've got a couple of Tiptons that re about 12-14 years old and they look and feel very good, FWIW. Before I started selling real estate, they got used virtually every day in my shop.
 
i will not lie...i only read part of your test post.
i would look at "stroking" vs rotation.
i think it is mostly blown way out of proportion,
correct rod dia, correct jag, correct patch,bore guide
and a good bbl to begin with.
some of my commercial guns take a long time to clean.
get spoiled with custom stuff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top