Why I don't care if FIREclean is canola oil

1
Several days ago, Andrew Tuohy posted the best evidence in "canola-oil gate," complete with spectroscopic analysis.

Over at The Firearm Blog, a poster shows us the patent application from the makers of FIREclean, for the the concept of repackaging vegetable oils as firearm lube. Along the way, he states exactly why I was looking at all this with a smile (maybe even a smirk) rather than shock and revulsion: "I know I might be shattering people's worldview, but most, if not all, gun lubricants and cleaners on the market are high mark up products made from cheap chemicals. Nobody out there is inventing new chemicals to use with guns."
Last edited by WilsonLNU on Tue Sep 15, 2015 10:22 am, edited 1 time in total.
I carry for Kitty Genovese.

Image

Re: Why I don't care if FIREclean is canola oil

4
If you really need a laugh, check out this video that purports to show why FIREclean is so amazing:

[youtu_be]http://youtu.be/S0OAsOCEJfQ[/youtu_be]

Apparently there's a simple inverse relationship between smoke generated and weapon fouling. :rolleyes:

But hey, the anecdotal stuff about it working so well in suppressed weapons sounds nice. Having never used either FIREclean or supermarket canola in my weapons, I'm left wondering if it could be more about the application style they're hawking than the ware itself.
I carry for Kitty Genovese.

Image

Re: Why I don't care if FIREclean is canola oil

5
Who cares what it's made of? What I want to know is how it works. All these companies that market these chemicals promise the moon and the stars.

It appears that the author's understanding of chemistry is marginal. B100 biodiesel, which is 100 % mixed vegetable oils (minus the glycerine) makes a truly first-rate agent for a solvent tank. It beats the pants off Stoddard, or petro diesel, and any other such solvents, and yet it's made from old, used up fry oil.

The best cleaners I've ever found are low tech chlorinated brake cleaner, Flitz, JB Bore Paste, and Chore Boy. I'll be a happy man if I never spend another buck on overpriced snake oil "gun cleaners".
Hell is where:
The British are the chefs
The Swiss are the lovers
The French are the mechanics
The Italians make everything run on time
And the Germans are the police

Re: Why I don't care if FIREclean is canola oil

6
beaurrr wrote:Who cares what it's made of? What I want to know is how it works. All these companies that market these chemicals promise the moon and the stars.

It appears that the author's understanding of chemistry is marginal. B100 biodiesel, which is 100 % mixed vegetable oils (minus the glycerine) makes a truly first-rate agent for a solvent tank. It beats the pants off Stoddard, or petro diesel, and any other such solvents, and yet it's made from old, used up fry oil.

The best cleaners I've ever found are low tech chlorinated brake cleaner, Flitz, JB Bore Paste, and Chore Boy. I'll be a happy man if I never spend another buck on overpriced snake oil "gun cleaners".
Not sure why you state that the author's understanding of chemistry is marginal. I didn't see anything from either author linked where they said that it's being vegetable oil made it function poorly.

Personally, I've gotten great use out of conventional 5w20 motor oil in everything but my AR-15, and pharmacy-aisle petrolatum in that. Both let me wipe fouling right out with cotton swabs, which is why I wonder if the good anecdotal results from FIREclean have more to do with their application method than the specific lubricant. More specifically: I wonder if it's because so many people are fielding their other wonder lubes in wrong ways.
I carry for Kitty Genovese.

Image

Re: Why I don't care if FIREclean is canola oil

9
WilsonLNU wrote:Tuohy didn't spend much space on the smoke-point stuff (one 74-word graph that concluded it didn't sway him). I read it as giving some modicum of credit to the guy who did that test just for being part of bringing the debate into existence, not for demonstrating anything scientifically.
I would agree with that.

Maybe what chafed me was the singling out of a product that is hyped in the exact same way as so many others of its type and yet he spends no effort trying to learn about them.

Therefore, it seems reasonable to question his motive.
Hell is where:
The British are the chefs
The Swiss are the lovers
The French are the mechanics
The Italians make everything run on time
And the Germans are the police

Re: Why I don't care if FIREclean is canola oil

10
beaurrr wrote:Maybe what chafed me was the singling out of a product that is hyped in the exact same way as so many others of its type and yet he spends no effort trying to learn about them.

Therefore, it seems reasonable to question his motive.
I take your larger point, which is pretty close to that in my original post that pretty much all expensive firearms products - whether lubes or paint finishes (aka ceramic engine enamel) - are rebrands of existing economical stuff.

As for Mr. Tuohy, he gained my respect when he brought actual data to the brass-vs-steel gunfight, and in his entirely too kind scrutiny of "Battle Rifle Company." I see his post on FIREclean-vs-canola as something similar to the former: He saw the argument going on at AR-15 forum(s) and on YouTube, and he wanted actual data, so he got in touch with someone who could do spectroscopy.

He also attempted to get FIREclean's side of the story, as detailed in his post.

His data-based approach to things impresses me much more than the personality-centric stuff I've seen from Mr. Vickers. As you point out, it's still true that he's so far failed to introduce the larger context of industry repackaging. Here's hoping he can rectify that.
I carry for Kitty Genovese.

Image

Re: Why I don't care if FIREclean is canola oil

13
Reminds me of the whole Amsoil bullshit we have in the motorcycle (and car) industry. You'll have all these assholes swearing up and down that Amsoil is the best thing ever when it comes to lubrication and that every other brand is inferior by several magnitudes. There's also this study that all these people reference to prove their point because Amsoil Is The Best!!!11!

Then you start looking into it and find that Amsoil is the damn Avon, Herbalife or Tupperware of lubrication... It's plain old Multi Level Marketing and all those assholes are either "independent dealers" or friends of such who have been drinking the Kool-Aid...

We sell a good number of reputable oil brands but refuse to carry that stuff just out of principle.
Image
Image

Re: Why I don't care if FIREclean is canola oil

15
It appears the makers of FIREclean do care.
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016 ... rew-tuohy/
FIREClean did respond, insisting that “allegations do not focus on actual performance or relevant tests, and draw a misleading picture”.

Now it seems that on March 17th, FireClean LLC has filed a lawsuit against Mr. Tuohy and Everett Baker, a man who performed his own tests to verify Tuohy’s findings. In their complaint, FireClean LLC claims that “Tuohy initiated a public smear campaign against FireClean” and holds that Mr. Baker “contacted Tuohy for the express purpose of conspiring with him to further defame and damage FireClean”. FireClean LLC also states that since the publishing of the test, their revenues have fallen by over $25,000 per month.

Andrew posted on his blog this morning that he and Baker were now defendants in a lawsuit. Andrew has taken the initiative to set up a gofundme page for his legal defense, where he estimates that it will take $15,000 in expenses to have a fair legal defense.
Deviant Ollam had posted the link above on Twitter.
sbɐɯ ʎʇıɔɐdɐɔ pɹɐpuɐʇs ɟo ןןnɟ ǝɟɐs
ɯɯ6 bdd ɹǝɥʇןɐʍ
13ʞ
"ǝuıqɹɐɔ 1ɐ4ɯ" dɯɐʇsןןoɹ --- ɯoɔos0269ǝן ʇןoɔ
"ǝuıqɹɐɔ ʇuǝɯǝɔɹoɟuǝ ʍɐן sʇןoɔ" dɯɐʇsןןoɹ --- 0269ǝן ʇןoɔ
(béɟ) 59-pɯɐ

Re: Why I don't care if FIREclean is canola oil

16
DispositionMatrix wrote:It appears the makers of FIREclean do care.
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016 ... rew-tuohy/
FIREClean did respond, insisting that “allegations do not focus on actual performance or relevant tests, and draw a misleading picture”.

Now it seems that on March 17th, FireClean LLC has filed a lawsuit against Mr. Tuohy and Everett Baker, a man who performed his own tests to verify Tuohy’s findings. In their complaint, FireClean LLC claims that “Tuohy initiated a public smear campaign against FireClean” and holds that Mr. Baker “contacted Tuohy for the express purpose of conspiring with him to further defame and damage FireClean”. FireClean LLC also states that since the publishing of the test, their revenues have fallen by over $25,000 per month.

Andrew posted on his blog this morning that he and Baker were now defendants in a lawsuit. Andrew has taken the initiative to set up a gofundme page for his legal defense, where he estimates that it will take $15,000 in expenses to have a fair legal defense.
Deviant Ollam had posted the link above on Twitter.
I've already donated to the defense fund.

Larry Vickers claimed via facebook that his "test" appeared to use different ammo (different headstamps) for the two different lubes and levels of smoke because they were his personal reloads. In skimming the lawsuit filed, I noticed FireClean makes the opposite claim: "81. In fact, the ammunition used for all of the firings depicted in the video were
standard pressure, factory-loaded, including factory remanufactured, ammunition."
I carry for Kitty Genovese.

Image

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests