Original email:
Hello I ended up getting a bottle of the new batch solvent from Watts. How long is it recommended to soak for copper removal. Also does it depend on the substrate in which one is attempting to remove copper from? Ex: bead blasted stainless vs nitride vs DLC. My test consisted of a 24 hr soak and tested the used solution for trace amounts of copper and lead. No copper was found. I like the product because of its non toxic nature however was just curious about the copper effectiveness.
Respectfully,
Response:
Good day,
Thanks for being a customer and I appreciate very much your report and questions. I love having the opportunity to deal directly with the end user. Too often big companies get so caught up in taking care of their dealers and distributors that they get distances from the consumers who are actually using the product.
Although I do not have a "schedule" to follow with regards to foreign asperity buildup removal (something maybe to consider?), it obviously will vary from type to type on the material being removed. It a,so matters a great deal on the underlying material, which you wisely pointed out. But material alone is not the only thing to consider.
While I do like to use the "24-hour" time frame as a standard for testing a products effectiveness, the industry doesn't really recognize one. Nonetheless, its a good basis for comparison on a qualitative basis. Unless you have very stubborn build up and a non-treated, raw substrate 24 hours should be plenty for Weapon Shield® Solvent to do the job. The substrate however brings in both practical and technological variables.
Practically (specking of barrel bores specifically), material type and the manner in which the rifling is produced account for the known variables. As a former barrel manufacturer for 23 years I can tell you that the three common methods of creating rifled bores create very different bore patterns. Considering Broaching, Buttoning and Hammer-Forging (in order of cleanest bore to roughest bore generally speaking), each create patterns in the bore that invent their own concerns with regards to the creation AND RETENTION of fouling.
Broaching, by comparison makes as clean/smooth a bore as can be initially created in manufacturing. Some types of broaching are better than others. Most use a 'single-point' cut style broach system where each groove is cut individually, and some taking multiple passes to do so. Olympic Arms as an example used to use a patented progressive broaching system (which is by now public domain) where all 4 grooves were cut, and lands finalized in one pass) which made as clean a bore as possible, as there would be no 'steps' on the grooves as each individual pass was just slightly different than the one before. Buttoning is just a swaging process that displaces metal to create the and and grooves. It ads some stress to the bore which can, if properly executed, be relived. But, the buttoning process has a tendency to rippled or 'fold' material in the bore. These fissures and anomalies that create places for fouling to not only occur, but build up and make difficult to remove. Hammer forging, while a very popular and inexpensive method of mass producing barrels, is the least consistent from barrel to barrel. It adds considerable stress to the barrel as well, that is not always capable of being relived. Don't get me wrong, buttoning can produce some absolute screamer barrels, but their bores will require work such as lapping and or proper break in to really produce consistent results. Barrel to barrel.
While all these rifling processes have their inherent pro's and con's, the material they are used on also makes a difference. I've seen lots of materials used for barrels over the year, but primarily they are 416 ASS, 4140 or 4150 carbon steel. Carbon steel is hard, and therefore more resistant to wear, but they also create more asperities than 416 SS. Carbon steel is more prone to corrosion effects. 416 Stainless broaches like butter which is another benefit to a cleaner/smoother bore right from the factory.
All that to say, cleaning buttoned or hammer forged barrels will be harder. Especially if they are not practically (physically) improved foundationally. These means lapping (which I'm not a fan of as it breaks the surface tension of the bore material exposing softer underlying materials prone to wear), or otherwise polishing to remove impurities from heat treat, rifling process or asperities left on the ore's surface.
Let's say I'm a huge fan or proper barrel break in. No matter all the other factors to consider in your barrel bore, whatever the quality of that bore, it will be fixed (good or bad) within the first 30-50 rounds fired. Making sure you do what's best for your bores future is imperative. Often time we get so excited about a new rifle purchase that we do not take the steps to care for your barrel. This is where the technological variables come into play.
Weapon Shield® products provide Advanced Boundary Film Technologies that create a layer of protection on your bore. This is done by an electro-chemical process using the additives in Weapon Shield®. Weapon Shield® actually help by using the asperities removed during the first dozen or so shots fired to fill in low microscopic low areas to smooth the bore's surface. They are them bonded to that surface by creating positively charged surfaces that actually work to repel fouling trying to stick in the bore. A properly treated Weapon Shield® bore (either foundationally, or after extreme cleansing), will be so m,much easier to clean moving forward that if cleaned after shooting will likely come clean with just a wet Weapon Shield® CLP patch.
Treated surfces such as Nitrides should clean easier, but again that depends on the surface courseness. Example, a Glock slide it somertimes rough, but a nitrited surface tend to be smoother. That courseness will certainlly affecrt your ability to remove burnt or laid in dirt and grime.
I realize that was quite a rant but I hope you fid it helpful.
