Looking to develop a non toxic gun oil.

[grampajack]

I agree the timken test is pretty shady when used for marketing, but I think it can be useful for development so long as you do your best to make it repeatable.

As far as commercialization, not planning on that at the moment. I'm not saying I wouldn't if I just so happened to come up with something that was the proverbial magical unicorn spit, but thus far I don't think I've come up with anything that outperforms what's already on the market. The point is just to get a reasonably priced alternative to the non toxic stuff on the market.

I would be more than happy to provide a sample to whoever is willing to test it, providing they shoot enough to give real feedback. That would certainly speed up my process by orders of magnitude. All I can promise is to disclose what's in any given batch, and it's up to you to decide if it's safe for your guns, health, etc.

I'm a little reluctant to discuss what's in it, for fear of infringing on someone's patent or leading them into doing something dangerous. I'm not a chemist, so I can't really guarantee that anything I'm doing is safe. There's always the possibility I will create some toxic by-product or something. I think the risk of that is very low given my intent to use only natural ingredients, but everything starts out natural.

I will say this. The absolute best oil I've found is safflower, with a smoke point of 510* and a melting point of 0*. Its problem is that it has an iodine number of 140, so it dries extremely quickly. The most stable oil is fractionated coconut oil, with an iodine value of 1. You can leave the stuff out for years and it won't oxidise. It's really overkill for the application. But it has a narrow temperature range. So basically I've got two strategies. I can make safflower non drying, or I can expand coconut's temperature range. I've successfully expanded coconut's temperature range, but I don't have a strategy to make safflower non drying yet.

 

[Gottcha]

Thanks for the welcome! It try to help out when I can ha!

 

[jdchen0407]

I agree the timken test is pretty shady when used for marketing, but I think it can be useful for development so long as you do your best to make it repeatable.

As far as commercialization, not planning on that at the moment. I'm not saying I wouldn't if I just so happened to come up with something that was the proverbial magical unicorn spit, but thus far I don't think I've come up with anything that outperforms what's already on the market. The point is just to get a reasonably priced alternative to the non toxic stuff on the market.

I would be more than happy to provide a sample to whoever is willing to test it, providing they shoot enough to give real feedback. That would certainly speed up my process by orders of magnitude. All I can promise is to disclose what's in any given batch, and it's up to you to decide if it's safe for your guns, health, etc.

I'm a little reluctant to discuss what's in it, for fear of infringing on someone's patent or leading them into doing something dangerous. I'm not a chemist, so I can't really guarantee that anything I'm doing is safe. There's always the possibility I will create some toxic by-product or something. I think the risk of that is very low given my intent to use only natural ingredients, but everything starts out natural.

I will say this. The absolute best oil I've found is safflower, with a smoke point of 510* and a melting point of 0*. Its problem is that it has an iodine number of 140, so it dries extremely quickly. The most stable oil is fractionated coconut oil, with an iodine value of 1. You can leave the stuff out for years and it won't oxidise. It's really overkill for the application. But it has a narrow temperature range. So basically I've got two strategies. I can make safflower non drying, or I can expand coconut's temperature range. I've successfully expanded coconut's temperature range, but I don't have a strategy to make safflower non drying yet.

Welp I just purchased a brand new 1911 I would be willing to test on. i usually put about 200 rds a week. and clean after every range trip. let me know if you need a guinea pig.

 

[grampajack]

Welp I just purchased a brand new 1911 I would be willing to test on. i usually put about 200 rds a week. and clean after every range trip. let me know if you need a guinea pig.

PM sent. Thanks, JD, I appreciate your help. Hopefully I'll be sending you something within the month.

 

[cdk8]

I'm interested to hear what comes of this.

The product I use when I want extremely low toxicity has been Corrosion-X. I think very highly of it, but it definitely favors corrosion resistance & greatly reduced fouling (as a dry lube) over friction reduction. I've not had any functional issues with it though, but I'm always interested when new things come about.

 

[ironworkerwill]

Shark liver oil! It's good enough for the irritated end of a gut.

 

[barnbwt]

*sniff* "Mmmmmmm....fish."

 

[Dr. Sandman]

What is the difference between good chemical and bad chemicals? You say that you want to avoid chemicals. That is impossible! Everything is made up of chemicals! This thread reminds me of a relative that went off the deep end, trying to rid herself of harmful influences like trans fats, radiation from microwave ovens and non-organic produce. She still smokes, though. Ridiculous. If one searches the internet hard enough, you can find bad press about everything. BTW, I like the Hoppes #9 line and Rem-Oil. I highly recommend.

 

[Elkins45]

What is the difference between good chemical and bad chemicals? You say that you want to avoid chemicals. That is impossible! Everything is made up of chemicals! This thread reminds me of a relative that went off the deep end, trying to rid herself of harmful influences like trans fats, radiation from microwave ovens and non-organic produce. She still smokes, though. Ridiculous. If one searches the internet hard enough, you can find bad press about everything. BTW, I like the Hoppes #9 line and Rem-Oil. I highly recommend.

Normally I tend to say the same thing, but I see where the OP is coming from. There are degrees of harmfulness, and most naturally occurring oils are pretty well known, as opposed to some synthetic stuff...although hemlock oil isn't going on my gun no matter how slick

I find myself very interested in what he comes up with. If it works as well as other stuff but is less toxic then everyone wins.

 

[grampajack]

What is the difference between good chemical and bad chemicals? You say that you want to avoid chemicals. That is impossible! Everything is made up of chemicals! This thread reminds me of a relative that went off the deep end, trying to rid herself of harmful influences like trans fats, radiation from microwave ovens and non-organic produce. She still smokes, though. Ridiculous. If one searches the internet hard enough, you can find bad press about everything. BTW, I like the Hoppes #9 line and Rem-Oil. I highly recommend.

Obviously I'm using the word chemical in the colloquial sense, as in an unnatural, lab produced substance. And while I don't necessarily condone smoking, at least habitually, it's relatively harmless compared to most of the crap most people eat. Riddle me this, Why have cancer rates gone up dramatically while smoking rates have gone down dramatically? And it's not just cancer, BTW. Like I said before, there's a new autoimmune disease popping up every week. Then there are all these new mystery diseases that defy classification. They've just classified two new ones called MCS and EMHS that sound like science fiction. IMO, we're playing with crap we don't even begin to understand. Just because something won't kill a lab rat outright doesn't mean our body knows what to do with it. The conventional definition of toxicity is beyond absurd. Personally, I'm tired of eating crap I can't pronounce. Or breathing it, or putting it on my skin.

 

[jcwit]

Been reading and thinking all about this whole thread, I understand completely where your coming from grampajack.

But you gotta remember the average lifespan is now the longest it's ever been in recorded history, even with all these"chemicals".

Only other thing I can tell you is never ever eat in a restaurant!

 

[grampajack]

Been reading and thinking all about this whole thread, I understand completely where your coming from grampajack.

But you gotta remember the average lifespan is now the longest it's ever been in recorded history, even with all these"chemicals".

Only other thing I can tell you is never ever eat in a restaurant!

Naw, I don't live in a bubble like that. I do as much as is convenient. Although I don't eat fast food, but that's using the word food rather loosely IMHO.

Like I said before, this is as much about cost savings as anything else. I simply refuse to pay insane prices for frog lube and fireclean.

 

[JohnKSa]

https://www.amazon.com/Lubriplate-L0882-060-FMO-350-Multi-Purpose-Mineral/dp/B00HVB7GXK

Non-toxic. Food Grade.

https://www.lubriplate.com/PDFs/PDS/8_8-FMO-85_200_350_500.aspx

...for use in food processing facilities as a lubricant or anti-rust agent on equipment in which there may be incidental contact involving the lubricated part and the edible product.
...acceptable for use as Release Agents (3H) on grills, ovens, loaf pans, boning benches, chopping boards or other hard surfaces in contact with meat and poultry food products to prevent food from adhering during processing.​

Excellent lubrication and corrosion prevention capabilities according to Grant Cunningham, noted gunsmith.

http://www.grantcunningham.com/2006/05/lubrication-101/

What would I consider a “best in class” oil? Generally, it would be one made for lubricating food processing machinery, like Lubriplate’s FMO-AW oil (specifically the 350-AW weight.) Food grade lubricants have to prevent wear in sometimes corrosive environments and they have to do so even after being wiped off of the surface they’re protecting (which is actually part of the requirement for food contact ratings!) They have good boundary protection and very high corrosion resistance especially in the presence of acids, alkalis, and moisture. They’re darned near tailor-made for our use!​

https://www.lubriplate.com/PDFs/PDS/8_7-FMO-85-AW_thru_3800-AW.aspx

The LUBRIPLATE FMO-AW Series of Lubricants... are formulated with non-toxic, USP white mineral oils and are fortified with anti-oxidants, corrosion inhibitors, anti-wear agents and foam suppressants.​

36 cents an ounce, so nearly 3 times cheaper than your price target of $1.00 an ounce.

 

[jcwit]

Thanks JohnKsa, very informative.

Not sure how to save this but will write it down on a 3 X 5 card for future reference.

Thanks again!

 

[JohnKSa]

To get that price you have to buy 5 gallons which runs just over $200

If you want it in more manageable quantities, you can buy it here:

https://lubrikit.com/

In 4 ounce quantities from that website it's going to run you about $2.25 an ounce. Apparently the folks doing the repackaging and marketing want to be paid for their troubles.

 

[jcwit]

Well Thank You X 3 again.

I was doing some searching and was wondering just how old I would be to use up a 5 gal. pail of that stuff at my age of 73! LOL

 

[Elkins45]

Well Thank You X 3 again.

I was doing some searching and was wondering just how old I would be to use up a 5 gal. pail of that stuff at my age of 73! LOL

If there's a Grainger store near you they can get the similar grease offering from CRC in a 14 ounce grease gun tube. It's very similar to the Lubriplate product: an aluminum soap in a mineral oil base with zinc oxide. I bought a tube after reading that article, but also to use in cast bullet lube experiments.

I think it was around $1/ounce--the most expensive tube of grease I have ever bought.

Edit-found it here: grease https://www.grainger.com/product/CRC-White-Aluminum-Complex-Multipurpose-4JB56

Oil https://www.grainger.com/product/CRC-Food-Grade-Machinery-Oil-2F132

The data sheets for the oils indicate they are primarily white mineral oil. I wonder if they are significantly different than the stuff they sell at the drugstore? That's what I use on my carbon steel kitchen and pocket knives.

 

[Elkins45]

Obviously I'm using the word chemical in the colloquial sense, as in an unnatural, lab produced substance. And while I don't necessarily condone smoking, at least habitually, it's relatively harmless compared to most of the crap most people eat. Riddle me this, Why have cancer rates gone up dramatically while smoking rates have gone down dramatically? And it's not just cancer, BTW. Like I said before, there's a new autoimmune disease popping up every week. Then there are all these new mystery diseases that defy classification. They've just classified two new ones called MCS and EMHS that sound like science fiction. IMO, we're playing with crap we don't even begin to understand. Just because something won't kill a lab rat outright doesn't mean our body knows what to do with it. The conventional definition of toxicity is beyond absurd. Personally, I'm tired of eating crap I can't pronounce. Or breathing it, or putting it on my skin.

Well, that's a complex question, but the highly simplified answer is that nature wants us all to die eventually so something has to kill us. If we cured cancer tomorrow then we would all start dying of something else.

Please don't take this as criticism: who could possibly be opposed to having fewer toxic substances around them? I know I have to go, but cancer isn't the method I would choose either.

 

[lysanderxiii]

Riddle me this, Why have cancer rates gone up dramatically while smoking rates have gone down dramatically?

Careful with your statistics...

The number of lung cancer cases per 100,000 people tracks along the number of smokers per 100,000 people pretty well.

Since 1970, both have dropped by about 1/2, at least in males. The number of female smokers has dropped less than 25% since 1970.

While I agree that some of the stuff we eat, drink and breath isn't all that good for us, smoking is not positively linked to prostate cancer, which is one of the faster growing cancers among males.....

Now, riddle me this: Does it matter if the base stock is '100% natural', if the resulting long chain molecule is the same as a purely synthetic one?

 

[jcwit]

Riddle me this: Why has life expenctancy dramatically increased while we use all these synthetic chemicals and HMO food?

I watched to many people get sick and many die believing in natural cures.

 

[grampajack]

Riddle me this: Why has life expenctancy dramatically increased while we use all these synthetic chemicals and HMO food?

I watched to many people get sick and many die believing in natural cures.

Life expectancy has increased due to medication, medical devices, surgical procedures, and trauma care. Life expectancy may be up, but quality of life is way down. Who the heck cares how long they live if it means living with some terrible autoimmune disease, especially if it was preventable?

I also never said anything about natural cures. How you can equate avoiding petrochemicals with a "natural cure" I have no idea. That's like saying that avoiding trans fats is a "natural cure." You obviously have your mind made up, so I don't know why you're still arguing. I'm not here to debate the validity of my lifestyle or find low toxicity alternatives. I'm here looking for suggestions as to how I can make a frog lube/fireclean-like product for less money. I don't know what's so difficult about that.

 

[jcwit]

There is no argument in my post. Just my experience in what I have seen with my own eyes in 73 years here on earth!

Frankly, I 'd suggest using baby oil or mineral oil which is the same without the nice smell. I use this on some of my airguns to keep the"O" rings lubed.

You are right thinking outside of the box. One of the best waxes I've found for wood gun stocks is brown shoe polish.

 

[JohnKSa]

I wonder if they are significantly different than the stuff they sell at the drugstore? That's what I use on my carbon steel kitchen and pocket knives.

Yes they are.

"The LUBRIPLATE FMO-AW Series of Lubricants... are formulated with non-toxic, USP white mineral oils and are fortified with anti-oxidants, corrosion inhibitors, anti-wear agents and foam suppressants."

If there's a Grainger store near you they can get the similar grease offering from CRC in a 14 ounce grease gun tube.

While Lubriplate does offer food safe grease, the product I linked to is an oil, not a grease.

 

[VoodooMountain]

I'm with the op. I try to limit my exposure to un-needed or detrimental chemicals. We are constantly surrounded by thousands of chemicals on a daily basis and have almost no research to prove hardly any of them to be safe. That isn't an exaggeration. They are so prevalent and mostly not understood that they are innocent until proven guilty per our government guidelines and any research that is done, which is exceedingly rare, only looks at an individual chemical and not how they behave in the body with hundreds of other chemicals.

So if a chemical is guaranteed to cause cancer with long term exposure over a period of many years the same way smoking does we may never even know it due to lack of research or simply not knowing where to even look.

But back to posed question, there are some decent alternatives but exposure to a gun lube is such a small portion of everyday life for most people it is a non issue.

It sounds like to me the op should be healthy enough given his lifestyle that exposure to slip2000 isn't going to put his body over the edge.

 

[Elkins45]

Yes they are.

"The LUBRIPLATE FMO-AW Series of Lubricants... are formulated with non-toxic, USP white mineral oils and are fortified with anti-oxidants, corrosion inhibitors, anti-wear agents and foam suppressants."While Lubriplate does offer food safe grease, the product I linked to is an oil, not a grease.

I linked to an oil as well, although most of my post was about the grease. The oil I linked to is also a food safe oil but is a CRC product. I would imagine they have more similarities than differences. The CRC oil is in a spray can so the portioning of a big bucket of the stuff isn't such a bother.