6 comments on “FIREClean vs. Canola Oil

  1. Pingback: FireCLEAN Files Lawsuit against Bloggers – GunsAmerica Digest

  2. Pingback: One Year Later… | Granite State Guns

  3. A High Temperature Simulated Distillation (ASTM D7169) analysis comparison of the two oils would be a good confirmation of composition likeness. This is a GC-FID analysis (Gas Chromatography-Flame Ionization Detector) that compares the boiling point distribution of the materials up to 720 °C. It would provide a mass percent off plot (i.e. mass of material eluted versus temperature) that could be overlaid and compared. This plot is also called a boiling point curve as documented in the ASTM method.

    • I had hoped to do GC testing in the original comparison, but I was told that the GC setup my college had wasn’t working properly or somehow wouldn’t work for this type of oils. I never got a clear explanation but was essentially told “Nope, you can’t have access to that.” Since the original testing I’ve graduated, so I wouldn’t even have access to the same lab I used the first time.

      • The GC method used in D7169 requires a specialized setup on the hardware end of things according to the guidelines in the ASTM method. The test would be definitive in determining the likeness between the two oils from a physical boiling point distribution standpoint. The GC setup at your previous environment would have had to have a custom setup to even attempt to do this test justice. If you wish to pursue this testing I do know of a laboratory that could perform it according to ASTM protocol. It won’t be cheap however. At least, I still believe the lab analyzes samples from “outside” the company proper.

        Some years back (~2015) I did order two 2oz. bottles of this product at what I at the time thought was a crazy price of about $15 per 2oz. bottle. I stuck it on the shelf and sort of forgot about it because at the time I was using other gun cleaning and lubrication products that accomplished what I wanted. I have since from time to time used it successfully to remove deeply embedded carbon deposits on some of my firearms. This is after a thorough pre-clean with 2-propanol, CLR and Ballistol and plenty of bronze brushing and clean patches. I always followed the use of FIREClean by using a more conventional cleaner/lubricant afterwards (such as Ballistol or EWL30 Slip 2000). The patches run through the “pre-cleaned” barrel came out blackened when FIREClean was used. I thought to myself this is sort of strange.

        At any rate, could you tell me what Canola oil was specifically used in your comparison for NMR and FT-IR? Iodine Number, in analytical chemistry, measures of the degree of unsaturation of an oil, fat, or wax; the amount of iodine, in grams, that is taken up by 100 grams of the oil, fat, or wax. Doing the proton NMR or Hydrogen-1 NMR was certainly worthwhile doing on these samples.

  4. To be completely honest I have no idea what canola oil was used for the testing. All samples were gathered by Vuurwapen Blog, numbered by third person not involved in the testing, and sent to me. I had no idea what samples were what products during the testing (with some exceptions due to the visual appearance of the green Frog Lube, etc.) until after the results were sent to Vuurwapen Blog and the identities were posted publicly.

    Since I was sued by FireClean for posting the results of my testing, I have no interest in doing additional testing. I was told that the GC column at my school would be repaired and able to run these samples several months after the first testing was published, but the lawsuit killed any chances of that happening.

    As for Iodine Number testing, FireClean claimed to have had it done, as well as several other tests, all shortly after my data was published. However they refused to release their full data, despite my repeated requests as according to them I had “already made up my mind and wasn’t willing to change.” There are a number of other tests that could have or had been performed, however as they were funded by FireClean I doubt we will ever see the results shared outside of court filings in their lawsuits.

    As for your use of FireClean, I never questioned if the product worked as a lubricant. With Youtube tests showing guns firing with things like mud or even raw eggs “lubricating them.” An oil like FireClean would have no problem lubricating firearms, however some other claims (by others than FireClean themselves) of preventing corrosion have fallen short. In my personal experience I never noticed it being any easier (or harder for that matter) to clean my AR with FireClean compared to Hoppes oil, but after sitting in the case for six months I had a hell of a time cleaning the gelled product out of a rifle, revealing rust underneath. Results vary based on the use, who was doing it, and how long it sat. Even the time the product was purchased can play a role, as filings in the second lawsuit against Tuohy showed that outside labs concluded the oil either degraded or the formula changed over the years.

    These are just my opinions though. I love when others puck up where I left off and get testing done on their own. I’m just out of the game now because one lawsuit is enough for me… #DontSueMeBro

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s