As an owner, I understand the desire to be able to perform the occasional -
meaning as needed - "deeper clean" than field-stripping.
However, as someone who served many years as a LE armorer, for a variety of firearms designs, and who helped maintain, service and repair a few hundred issued weapons ... I've seen more "problems" caused by excessive, exuberant and untrained "cleaning and lubrication", than I've ever seen resulting from any actual problems with the guns.
Yes, it's not uncommon to hear even experienced trainers and armorers opine that a dirty/wet gun will generally run better and longer than a dirty/dry semiauto ... but (there's always a "but"
) ...
It depends on what someone means when they say "wet".
I've seen excessive amounts of solvents, CLP's and lubes introduced to pistols, and end up where they aren't intended to be introduced/use, and then the accumulation end up gathering fouling, grit and debris which eventually turns in sludge or heavy grunge that interferes with the normal operation of the guns.
I remember one user managed to cause his fairly new (2 years old?) issued 4566TSW to start having the hammer to fail to hold in single action while he was shooting. It followed the slide, but without firing a subsequent shot. Just kept returning to DA. They brought it to me, and I stripped it down and inspected everything. The area in the frame housing the trigger bar, hammer, disconnector and sear - which was supposed to be dry - was coated in a thick wet, blackened "goo". When i cleaned it all off, I saw that the parts and assemblies didn't appear visibly damaged or worn, or otherwise out-of-spec, but as good as you'd expect for such a lightly used gun in good condition. I reassembled the gun and performed the usual bench checks for functioning, which were all good.
I gave the gun back to the issued user, and the instructor who had brought the problem to me, and had witnessed the hammer-follow, and told them to back downrange and re-shoot the same course-of-fire, using the same ammo, and tell me the results. The gun now worked exactly as designed, without any further problem. That confirmed, I asked the issued user to describe his usual cleaning regimen. I believe I told him something to the effect that cleaning the gun was NOT supposed to be like cleaning and washing off his car, and explained a practical cleaning and lubing practice. (
Less is more when it comes to most applications of solvents, CLP's cleaners and lubes.)
Okay, now when I went through the SIG pistol armorer class (think Classic P-series pistols), they did repeatedly tell us that SIG's were "wet" guns, but they also clearly described what they meant by "wet". It
didn't mean so wet that oil-type liquid lubes ran off the lubricated surfaces by force of gravity, or ran out and were wicked away by holsters or clothing. They told us the lubed surfaces ought to be able to be confirmed by sight and touch, meaning we could see a shiny surface and/or touch them and see they were just wet enough for normal functioning. Not so wet that the oil would run and migrate into places it ought not to be.
Now, some of the newer plastic guns can run just fine with as few as 5-8 small drops of lube judiciously placed in the appropriate spots. (Read the manuals.) Some may run dry, but don't overlook any spots a manufacturer may
warn needs to be lubed (like the connector/trigger bar surfaces of a Glock, for example). Also, don't be surprised if a lack of lube between sliding/impacting surfaces may result in accelerated wear and tear. Especially if it involves steel on aluminum. When in doubt, follow the gun manufacturer's recommendations. Some manufacturers may devise different recommendations based upon a specific end-user's (think agency) expected operating environment, or any special (harsh) environments. Ditto recommendations for periodic inspections and service intervals, and when it comes to recommended intervals for replacement of "wearable parts".
I've also seen my fair share of folks who thought they needed to have their issued guns cleaned better than normal field-stripping made possible, and they ended up damaging the guns by their earnest, but uninformed and untrained efforts. Sigh.
One guy, who really fancied himself a "gun guy", ended up dropping off a freezer bag filled with most of the parts for his issued duty pistol. He said he'd not been able to get any farther in his complete disassembly, but was then unable to reassemble it.
He dropped it off when I wasn't at the range armory, so I didn't get to express the joy I felt when putting the gun back together (filling in the missing parts), after carefully inspecting everything to make sure he hadn't damaged the gun beyond repair.
Some enthusiastic gun owners seem to think that being able to "work on guns" is something contained within men's DNA.
If that were the case, I'd probably not have seen so many factory-provided class guns accumulate so much damage in armorer classes.