Is moly coating worth the extra on bulletts?? I know it helps with barrel fouling but does it really make a barrel last any longer?? Or do todays low friction bullets take that out of the equation?? Any feedback would be appreciated..
Moly
- Thread starter PMPerformance
- Start date
Re: Moly
P M P, moly has gotten kind of a bad rep due to the fact that it builds, up. I have heard of more than 2 cases where moly formed a ring around a the throat area was almost hardened to the point that it took a flat head screw driver and considerable amount of force to get it loose. The new "er" thing out similar to moly is hBN, might be worth looking into. Works on the same principles as moly i believe but isnt as "accumulating"
P M P, moly has gotten kind of a bad rep due to the fact that it builds, up. I have heard of more than 2 cases where moly formed a ring around a the throat area was almost hardened to the point that it took a flat head screw driver and considerable amount of force to get it loose. The new "er" thing out similar to moly is hBN, might be worth looking into. Works on the same principles as moly i believe but isnt as "accumulating"
Re: Moly
I have been using Moly for many years and i have never had any problems of so called buildup. I think the buildup your talking about is a carbon buildup ...mostly from people who only clean their guns every 3K rounds or 3K miles or which ever comes first
I have been using Moly for many years and i have never had any problems of so called buildup. I think the buildup your talking about is a carbon buildup ...mostly from people who only clean their guns every 3K rounds or 3K miles or which ever comes first
Re: Moly
I have 2 magnums that have had nothing but Moly'd bullets through them since break in. One is a 338WM with over 1500rnds through it, & it will still shoot 1/2 moa for the 1st 5 rnds.(hunting rifle) The second is my precision rifle in 300WM that has 1100rnds through it, & shoots .3 moa.
I just run a lightly oiled bore snake through it several times (like once for every 2-5 shots fired) after shooting, & put it away. Once a year I'll scrub it out down to the metal.
I have 2 magnums that have had nothing but Moly'd bullets through them since break in. One is a 338WM with over 1500rnds through it, & it will still shoot 1/2 moa for the 1st 5 rnds.(hunting rifle) The second is my precision rifle in 300WM that has 1100rnds through it, & shoots .3 moa.
I just run a lightly oiled bore snake through it several times (like once for every 2-5 shots fired) after shooting, & put it away. Once a year I'll scrub it out down to the metal.
Re: Moly
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bigwheels</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have 2 magnums that have had nothing but Moly'd bullets through them since break in. One is a 338WM with over 1500rnds through it, & it will still shoot 1/2 moa for the 1st 5 rnds.(hunting rifle) The second is my precision rifle in 300WM that has 1100rnds through it, & shoots .3 moa.
I just run a lightly oiled bore snake through it several times (like once for every 2-5 shots fired) after shooting, & put it away. Once a year I'll scrub it out down to the metal. </div></div>
So do you think they have made your barrel last any longer than non moly bullets??
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bigwheels</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have 2 magnums that have had nothing but Moly'd bullets through them since break in. One is a 338WM with over 1500rnds through it, & it will still shoot 1/2 moa for the 1st 5 rnds.(hunting rifle) The second is my precision rifle in 300WM that has 1100rnds through it, & shoots .3 moa.
I just run a lightly oiled bore snake through it several times (like once for every 2-5 shots fired) after shooting, & put it away. Once a year I'll scrub it out down to the metal. </div></div>
So do you think they have made your barrel last any longer than non moly bullets??
Re: Moly
I moly most of my bullets and have for years, never had any problems like listed above, but I couldn't say whether or not it has extended my barrel life either.
I moly most of my bullets and have for years, never had any problems like listed above, but I couldn't say whether or not it has extended my barrel life either.
Re: Moly
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: P M P</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bigwheels</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have 2 magnums that have had nothing but Moly'd bullets through them since break in. One is a 338WM with over 1500rnds through it, & it will still shoot 1/2 moa for the 1st 5 rnds.(hunting rifle) The second is my precision rifle in 300WM that has 1100rnds through it, & shoots .3 moa.
I just run a lightly oiled bore snake through it several times (like once for every 2-5 shots fired) after shooting, & put it away. Once a year I'll scrub it out down to the metal. </div></div>
So do you think they have made your barrel last any longer than non moly bullets?? </div></div>
The beauty of moly isn't that your barrel lasts longer, it's that you can 'supposedly' shoot longer stings before having to clean the bore. The copper fouling is less. Bench rest guys like moly for this reason.
Also, the dreaded 'moly ring' has been attributed to early use, where the application process of imprinting moly into the 'pores' of the copper was crude and imprecise. There would be a caking of the moly on the surface, much like breading a chicken wing with too much flour.
One would shoot these bullets down the bore and get a lot of residue. Nowadays, you have a very slick 'plating' of the moly into the bullet's surface and I don't think one has any more moly ring problem. I've got the Lyman Moly tumbler kit and it really does a good job of plating. So much so that I don't get any moly on my fingers when handling them.
I've bought moly bullets where the stuff is caked on and it's quite nasty. Putting a few BBs in a coffee can with a spoonful of moly and then rotating it while woofing down a ham sandwich, isn't the proper way.
A big issue with moly is that the moly coating, however thick, can trap moisture against the barrel steel and cause pitting, but people who I know, who shoot moly bullets will first swab their bore with ethanol and remove any moisture, before they either coat the bore with moly paste, or fire a lot of moly coated bullets.
Moly bullets do impart less friction traveling through a bore, so one needs to up the charge weight by ~1 grain to achieve the same velocities. Personally, my tests chronoing like bullets, both moly and naked, have shown me that this isn't always the case.
Chris
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: P M P</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bigwheels</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have 2 magnums that have had nothing but Moly'd bullets through them since break in. One is a 338WM with over 1500rnds through it, & it will still shoot 1/2 moa for the 1st 5 rnds.(hunting rifle) The second is my precision rifle in 300WM that has 1100rnds through it, & shoots .3 moa.
I just run a lightly oiled bore snake through it several times (like once for every 2-5 shots fired) after shooting, & put it away. Once a year I'll scrub it out down to the metal. </div></div>
So do you think they have made your barrel last any longer than non moly bullets?? </div></div>
The beauty of moly isn't that your barrel lasts longer, it's that you can 'supposedly' shoot longer stings before having to clean the bore. The copper fouling is less. Bench rest guys like moly for this reason.
Also, the dreaded 'moly ring' has been attributed to early use, where the application process of imprinting moly into the 'pores' of the copper was crude and imprecise. There would be a caking of the moly on the surface, much like breading a chicken wing with too much flour.
One would shoot these bullets down the bore and get a lot of residue. Nowadays, you have a very slick 'plating' of the moly into the bullet's surface and I don't think one has any more moly ring problem. I've got the Lyman Moly tumbler kit and it really does a good job of plating. So much so that I don't get any moly on my fingers when handling them.
I've bought moly bullets where the stuff is caked on and it's quite nasty. Putting a few BBs in a coffee can with a spoonful of moly and then rotating it while woofing down a ham sandwich, isn't the proper way.
A big issue with moly is that the moly coating, however thick, can trap moisture against the barrel steel and cause pitting, but people who I know, who shoot moly bullets will first swab their bore with ethanol and remove any moisture, before they either coat the bore with moly paste, or fire a lot of moly coated bullets.
Moly bullets do impart less friction traveling through a bore, so one needs to up the charge weight by ~1 grain to achieve the same velocities. Personally, my tests chronoing like bullets, both moly and naked, have shown me that this isn't always the case.
Chris
Re: Moly
I've used molly and non molly. The only advantage I notice using molly is less copper foiling (no big deal). Disadvantage are; it cost more, takes more time from reloading if you're molly your own bullets, takes up to a full grain to get the same velocity that non molly would have achieved with less powder, and after you give the barrel a good cleaning it takes five fired rounds to settle the barrel. There's no proof that it'll give longevity to the barrel.
I've used molly and non molly. The only advantage I notice using molly is less copper foiling (no big deal). Disadvantage are; it cost more, takes more time from reloading if you're molly your own bullets, takes up to a full grain to get the same velocity that non molly would have achieved with less powder, and after you give the barrel a good cleaning it takes five fired rounds to settle the barrel. There's no proof that it'll give longevity to the barrel.
Re: Moly
I haven't tried HbN, but I nixed moly about a year after I started using it because I honestly couldn't see any gains in practical results.
I haven't tried HbN, but I nixed moly about a year after I started using it because I honestly couldn't see any gains in practical results.
Re: Moly
Haven't tried HbN. Heard that the million of a micron are smaller than molly. I'll sit this one out until there's some soild proof that their's a clear advantage using HbN. There's no mirical bullet lubicant that will give us all that we want to hear.
Haven't tried HbN. Heard that the million of a micron are smaller than molly. I'll sit this one out until there's some soild proof that their's a clear advantage using HbN. There's no mirical bullet lubicant that will give us all that we want to hear.
Re: Moly
The great thing about HbN is when you clean your tube, it doesn't attract water and or trap water, clean and easy to work with, the bullets are much slicker, the only downside I have found is it's not lung friendly, try it I bet you switch.
The great thing about HbN is when you clean your tube, it doesn't attract water and or trap water, clean and easy to work with, the bullets are much slicker, the only downside I have found is it's not lung friendly, try it I bet you switch.
Re: Moly
Another thing I like to know, is why it takes more powder to propel an object using molly then non molly? I don't have a PhD in physic, but I have dealt with high pressures to push an object, such as a concrete pump on a high rise. More powder = more gas, which = higher temperatures. So that means that the temperature will be higher at the beginning of the lands and groves, than non molly. Thus, causing excessive wear? Can anyone clear the air on how more = less pressure? It doesn't add up!
Another thing I like to know, is why it takes more powder to propel an object using molly then non molly? I don't have a PhD in physic, but I have dealt with high pressures to push an object, such as a concrete pump on a high rise. More powder = more gas, which = higher temperatures. So that means that the temperature will be higher at the beginning of the lands and groves, than non molly. Thus, causing excessive wear? Can anyone clear the air on how more = less pressure? It doesn't add up!
Re: Moly
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: McCarthy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Can anyone clear the air on how more = less pressure? It doesn't add up! </div></div>
Basically, moly reduces the coefficient of friction between the bullet and the lands. Less friction equals less pressure. Less pressure also means less velocity, so you bump the load to get the velocity back to where it was. But these relationships are not linear, so when you bump the load to get the velocity back, you are actually running at a lower pressure than you started with.
A key consideration here, of course, is that if you are running at or near case capacity, you won't have any room for the additional powder, so you will ultimately sacrifice velocity and not be able to get it back. For those who are running compressed loads in a 308, moly is probably a bad idea for this reason.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: McCarthy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Can anyone clear the air on how more = less pressure? It doesn't add up! </div></div>
Basically, moly reduces the coefficient of friction between the bullet and the lands. Less friction equals less pressure. Less pressure also means less velocity, so you bump the load to get the velocity back to where it was. But these relationships are not linear, so when you bump the load to get the velocity back, you are actually running at a lower pressure than you started with.
A key consideration here, of course, is that if you are running at or near case capacity, you won't have any room for the additional powder, so you will ultimately sacrifice velocity and not be able to get it back. For those who are running compressed loads in a 308, moly is probably a bad idea for this reason.
Re: Moly
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: McCarthy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Another thing I like to know, is why it takes more powder to propel an object using molly then non molly? I don't have a PhD in physic, but I have dealt with high pressures to push an object, such as a concrete pump on a high rise. More powder = more gas, which = higher temperatures. So that means that the temperature will be higher at the beginning of the lands and groves, than non molly. Thus, causing excessive wear? Can anyone clear the air on how more = less pressure? It doesn't add up! </div></div>
I'm not a rocket surgeon either, but there's greater friction between a naked bullet and barrel steel that helps create a higher build up in pressure (> fps) which doesn't occur with the slicker moly, Danzic, Hbn coated bullets.
Aberdeen Proving Grounds once high speed 'x-rayed' bullets being fired down a bore and they discovered that projectiles actually stop in the barrel a couple/few times. As pressure builds, friction is overcome and the stalled bullet moves forward, only to be stopped again by friction, before finally leaving the muzzle once and for all.
Moly and the like, are high pressure lubricants so for any given powder charge, the bullet with less friction to over come, will 'cause' a lower pressure to develop, ultimately resulting in weaker velocities.
And no...I didn't sleep at a Holiday Inn last night.
Chris
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: McCarthy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Another thing I like to know, is why it takes more powder to propel an object using molly then non molly? I don't have a PhD in physic, but I have dealt with high pressures to push an object, such as a concrete pump on a high rise. More powder = more gas, which = higher temperatures. So that means that the temperature will be higher at the beginning of the lands and groves, than non molly. Thus, causing excessive wear? Can anyone clear the air on how more = less pressure? It doesn't add up! </div></div>
I'm not a rocket surgeon either, but there's greater friction between a naked bullet and barrel steel that helps create a higher build up in pressure (> fps) which doesn't occur with the slicker moly, Danzic, Hbn coated bullets.
Aberdeen Proving Grounds once high speed 'x-rayed' bullets being fired down a bore and they discovered that projectiles actually stop in the barrel a couple/few times. As pressure builds, friction is overcome and the stalled bullet moves forward, only to be stopped again by friction, before finally leaving the muzzle once and for all.
Moly and the like, are high pressure lubricants so for any given powder charge, the bullet with less friction to over come, will 'cause' a lower pressure to develop, ultimately resulting in weaker velocities.
And no...I didn't sleep at a Holiday Inn last night.
Chris
Re: Moly
Moly-coateds are possibly also "Slicker" in the air during exterior flight.
C-130s and C-141s painted in matte (drag) camouflage gained noticeable mileage efficiency once they were painted in "Air Superiority Grey," a smoother finish.
Moly-coateds are possibly also "Slicker" in the air during exterior flight.
C-130s and C-141s painted in matte (drag) camouflage gained noticeable mileage efficiency once they were painted in "Air Superiority Grey," a smoother finish.
Re: Moly
The moly coating is also suppose to give better ES and SDs. This is what I heard. Is this truth or fiction? I don't know.
The moly coating is also suppose to give better ES and SDs. This is what I heard. Is this truth or fiction? I don't know.
Re: Moly
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MAGUA</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have been using Moly for many years and i have never had any problems of so called buildup. I think the buildup your talking about is a carbon buildup ...mostly from people who only clean their guns every 3K rounds or 3K miles or which ever comes first
</div></div>
I agree 100% . Unless people say Exactly what they mean by the word Moly the input is useless.
Many coated commercial bullets are NOT PURE MOs2 and can be a host of different substances some not even containing any MOs2.
You can not put down or comment on pure MOs2 until you have coated it yourself and you know for sure what is on your bullet.
I have used it for many years like way before Neco ever brought out a process and I have never had that kind of radical buildup you refer to. However after some experimenting and firing some 200 to 300 shots without cleaning ( I would have to check my records). I did observe some darker and more obvious black spots on the lands . They were not a thick build up and were so thin it was not possible to measure anything at all but subsequent cleaning with Sweets and JB paste removed the slight darker build up.
I guess if you fired thousands of rounds without cleaning then it may build up more but then your barrel may be over fouled and no good anymore. No one should do that anyway.
The idea that you don't have to clean anymore with MOs2 is not accurate . You have to clean to suit the purpose that you put the gun too. The pattern of use.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MAGUA</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have been using Moly for many years and i have never had any problems of so called buildup. I think the buildup your talking about is a carbon buildup ...mostly from people who only clean their guns every 3K rounds or 3K miles or which ever comes first
I agree 100% . Unless people say Exactly what they mean by the word Moly the input is useless.
Many coated commercial bullets are NOT PURE MOs2 and can be a host of different substances some not even containing any MOs2.
You can not put down or comment on pure MOs2 until you have coated it yourself and you know for sure what is on your bullet.
I have used it for many years like way before Neco ever brought out a process and I have never had that kind of radical buildup you refer to. However after some experimenting and firing some 200 to 300 shots without cleaning ( I would have to check my records). I did observe some darker and more obvious black spots on the lands . They were not a thick build up and were so thin it was not possible to measure anything at all but subsequent cleaning with Sweets and JB paste removed the slight darker build up.
I guess if you fired thousands of rounds without cleaning then it may build up more but then your barrel may be over fouled and no good anymore. No one should do that anyway.
The idea that you don't have to clean anymore with MOs2 is not accurate . You have to clean to suit the purpose that you put the gun too. The pattern of use.
Re: Moly
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sinister</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Moly-coateds are possibly also "Slicker" in the air during exterior flight.
C-130s and C-141s painted in matte (drag) camouflage gained noticeable mileage efficiency once they were painted in "Air Superiority Grey," a smoother finish. </div></div>
If the word " slicker " means improved BC then you may well be correct. Moly reduces the engarving on the bullet jacket and base deformation caused by the lands gouging along the bullet. Small fins of extruded copper can appear on the base of the bullet on a non MOs2 bullet.
So this all must translate to a better ballistic form. How much is open to debate but I have noticed moly bullets striking higher on the target than my ballistic program predicts. This information has been confirmed by mechanicaly pushing coated and uncoated bullets through barrels and inspecting the resultant damage on bullet exteriors .
When dealing with normal rifle bullets the MOs2 finnish in most cases is not any smoother than the normal copper alloy jacket finnish if its nice and polished. The main BC advantage comes from reduction of rifling engravement and extrusion on the jacket material.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sinister</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Moly-coateds are possibly also "Slicker" in the air during exterior flight.
C-130s and C-141s painted in matte (drag) camouflage gained noticeable mileage efficiency once they were painted in "Air Superiority Grey," a smoother finish. </div></div>
If the word " slicker " means improved BC then you may well be correct. Moly reduces the engarving on the bullet jacket and base deformation caused by the lands gouging along the bullet. Small fins of extruded copper can appear on the base of the bullet on a non MOs2 bullet.
So this all must translate to a better ballistic form. How much is open to debate but I have noticed moly bullets striking higher on the target than my ballistic program predicts. This information has been confirmed by mechanicaly pushing coated and uncoated bullets through barrels and inspecting the resultant damage on bullet exteriors .
When dealing with normal rifle bullets the MOs2 finnish in most cases is not any smoother than the normal copper alloy jacket finnish if its nice and polished. The main BC advantage comes from reduction of rifling engravement and extrusion on the jacket material.
Re: Moly
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dar</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The moly coating is also suppose to give better ES and SDs. This is what I heard. Is this truth or fiction? I don't know. </div></div>
Don't know that , that is the case. If the jacket damage is consistant from shot to shot weather coated or uncoated . I think the ES would be the same for each type of bullet. I could be wrong as I have not tested that out.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dar</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The moly coating is also suppose to give better ES and SDs. This is what I heard. Is this truth or fiction? I don't know. </div></div>
Don't know that , that is the case. If the jacket damage is consistant from shot to shot weather coated or uncoated . I think the ES would be the same for each type of bullet. I could be wrong as I have not tested that out.
Re: Moly
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Aberdeen Proving Grounds once high speed 'x-rayed' bullets being fired down a bore and they discovered that projectiles actually stop in the barrel a couple/few times. As pressure builds, friction is overcome and the stalled bullet moves forward, only to be stopped again by friction, before finally leaving the muzzle once and for all.
Chris
</div></div>
I would have to see the proof on that one mate. I don't think that is physicaly possible.
It is possible for the bullet to enter the bore by primer pressure alone being pushed by a column of unignited powder burning only at it's base and then stop for a nanosecond second while the powder goes off and then re accelerates it but it would only be in loads of very slow burning powders I think and I just can't see it stopping a couple or few times along the barrel . I don't believe it sorry.
If you are going quote this below then look at it closely as it contains inconsistancies . He mentions the primer ignition twice and includes it twice.????
How a video or thermal imaging could resolve things happening in nanoseconds is beyond me.
" When Mike worked at Aberdeen proving grounds, the Army used high speed bore videos with mirrors, thermal imaging and computers to analyze any and everything that happens when the firing pin hits the primer and the round goes off. When the primer ignites there is enough pressure to move the bullet forward into the lands. The bullet then stops. As the primer ignites the powder, more pressure builds moving the bullet forward where it can stop again. Once there is enough pressure from the round going off, the bullet is moved down out the barrel. All of this happens in nanoseconds (billionths of a second). Your bullet starts and stops at least twice and sometimes three times before it leaves the barrel. This is fact."
For a bullet with considerable mass to stop instantly and come to a complete stop after being given even sight acceleration in the extreemly short distances that it moves in a nanosecond is against the laws of physics. Once that powder starts to burn there is no way its is going to stop again I just don't believe that part at all. I think their tests were flawed or this part is bull.
I agree it could stop after initial primer flash is over and before powder pressure rises but after that no way.
If it did stop even for a nanosecond I rekon the barrel would blow up from the pressure rise trying to reaccelerate it.
It would be like having a constriction in the bore. I think their tests were not able to tell the difference between slowing down and stopping at the extreemly fast speeds and nanoseconds involved.
I am sorry for disagreeing with you but I just can't see it.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Aberdeen Proving Grounds once high speed 'x-rayed' bullets being fired down a bore and they discovered that projectiles actually stop in the barrel a couple/few times. As pressure builds, friction is overcome and the stalled bullet moves forward, only to be stopped again by friction, before finally leaving the muzzle once and for all.
Chris
</div></div>
I would have to see the proof on that one mate. I don't think that is physicaly possible.
It is possible for the bullet to enter the bore by primer pressure alone being pushed by a column of unignited powder burning only at it's base and then stop for a nanosecond second while the powder goes off and then re accelerates it but it would only be in loads of very slow burning powders I think and I just can't see it stopping a couple or few times along the barrel . I don't believe it sorry.
If you are going quote this below then look at it closely as it contains inconsistancies . He mentions the primer ignition twice and includes it twice.????
How a video or thermal imaging could resolve things happening in nanoseconds is beyond me.
" When Mike worked at Aberdeen proving grounds, the Army used high speed bore videos with mirrors, thermal imaging and computers to analyze any and everything that happens when the firing pin hits the primer and the round goes off. When the primer ignites there is enough pressure to move the bullet forward into the lands. The bullet then stops. As the primer ignites the powder, more pressure builds moving the bullet forward where it can stop again. Once there is enough pressure from the round going off, the bullet is moved down out the barrel. All of this happens in nanoseconds (billionths of a second). Your bullet starts and stops at least twice and sometimes three times before it leaves the barrel. This is fact."
For a bullet with considerable mass to stop instantly and come to a complete stop after being given even sight acceleration in the extreemly short distances that it moves in a nanosecond is against the laws of physics. Once that powder starts to burn there is no way its is going to stop again I just don't believe that part at all. I think their tests were flawed or this part is bull.
I agree it could stop after initial primer flash is over and before powder pressure rises but after that no way.
If it did stop even for a nanosecond I rekon the barrel would blow up from the pressure rise trying to reaccelerate it.
It would be like having a constriction in the bore. I think their tests were not able to tell the difference between slowing down and stopping at the extreemly fast speeds and nanoseconds involved.
I am sorry for disagreeing with you but I just can't see it.
Re: Moly
I use HBN and it reduces the pressure for sure, you have to add approx 1 grain of powder to get the same velocity from a 308 . never had a build up problem also never used moly? the HBN works well for me
Bill
pr<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: deadly0311</div><div class="ubbcode-body">P M P, moly has gotten kind of a bad rep due to the fact that it builds, up. I have heard of more than 2 cases where moly formed a ring around a the throat area was almost hardened to the point that it took a flat head screw driver and considerable amount of force to get it loose. The new "er" thing out similar to moly is hBN, might be worth looking into. Works on the same principles as moly i believe but isnt as "accumulating" </div></div>
I use HBN and it reduces the pressure for sure, you have to add approx 1 grain of powder to get the same velocity from a 308 . never had a build up problem also never used moly? the HBN works well for me
Bill
pr<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: deadly0311</div><div class="ubbcode-body">P M P, moly has gotten kind of a bad rep due to the fact that it builds, up. I have heard of more than 2 cases where moly formed a ring around a the throat area was almost hardened to the point that it took a flat head screw driver and considerable amount of force to get it loose. The new "er" thing out similar to moly is hBN, might be worth looking into. Works on the same principles as moly i believe but isnt as "accumulating" </div></div>
Re: Moly
I can't say for sure, as I've never shot out a barrel yet either with, or without moly. But I did go back, & double check my rnd counts, & the 338 has just shy of 1800 rnds through it, & the 300 has over 1300 rnds through it. I've never heard of another magnum rifle with 1800 rnds , & not needing a new barrel. I may be wrong.
I can't say for sure, as I've never shot out a barrel yet either with, or without moly. But I did go back, & double check my rnd counts, & the 338 has just shy of 1800 rnds through it, & the 300 has over 1300 rnds through it. I've never heard of another magnum rifle with 1800 rnds , & not needing a new barrel. I may be wrong.
Re: Moly
Hi. I would like to hear ideas how to remove moly from my barrel. I bought a used TRG-22. The previous owner had shot 1500 rds with 155grs moly scenars. I have shot 200rds with it. The rifle was supposed to be accurate and trouble free, but it does actually tend to rise pressure in condition and loads that should not do so.(-20C pressure marks with 45.8grs of Vv N150) The previous owner has been using 47.1grs of Vv n150 in all conditions without problem. ) The accuracy is poor. It is hard to get even 1moa accuracy. And no there is nothing mechanically wrong in the rifle. I had it cheked at a gunsmith.(who did not measure the inner dimension of barrel). And no the problem is not the shooter. I soot 0.5moa all the time with my trg-42 at the same session.
I believe there is a moly build up in the barrel and I want to get it of. First thought is to use JB bore paste and Hoppes powder solvent, forrest cleaning foam and VFG plugs. I will carefully examining the inner dimension of barrel while cleaning. (You can not by Kano kroil or Sweets 7,62 in Finland)
Hi. I would like to hear ideas how to remove moly from my barrel. I bought a used TRG-22. The previous owner had shot 1500 rds with 155grs moly scenars. I have shot 200rds with it. The rifle was supposed to be accurate and trouble free, but it does actually tend to rise pressure in condition and loads that should not do so.(-20C pressure marks with 45.8grs of Vv N150) The previous owner has been using 47.1grs of Vv n150 in all conditions without problem. ) The accuracy is poor. It is hard to get even 1moa accuracy. And no there is nothing mechanically wrong in the rifle. I had it cheked at a gunsmith.(who did not measure the inner dimension of barrel). And no the problem is not the shooter. I soot 0.5moa all the time with my trg-42 at the same session.
I believe there is a moly build up in the barrel and I want to get it of. First thought is to use JB bore paste and Hoppes powder solvent, forrest cleaning foam and VFG plugs. I will carefully examining the inner dimension of barrel while cleaning. (You can not by Kano kroil or Sweets 7,62 in Finland)
Re: Moly
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sinister</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Moly-coateds are possibly also "Slicker" in the air during exterior flight.
C-130s and C-141s painted in matte (drag) camouflage gained noticeable mileage efficiency once they were painted in "Air Superiority Grey," a smoother finish. </div></div>
You can't be serious.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sinister</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Moly-coateds are possibly also "Slicker" in the air during exterior flight.
C-130s and C-141s painted in matte (drag) camouflage gained noticeable mileage efficiency once they were painted in "Air Superiority Grey," a smoother finish. </div></div>
You can't be serious.
Re: Moly
I have observed some of the "Big Dogs" at regional and National F-Class events and have noticed the absence of moly or other coatings. I think that speaks volumes. AG
I have observed some of the "Big Dogs" at regional and National F-Class events and have noticed the absence of moly or other coatings. I think that speaks volumes. AG
Re: Moly
I just cleaned mine with JB Bore paste and alot of patches, it worked well. We borescoped my DPMS 260 barrel after 800 shots and I had a significant buildup of moly at the throat and the accuracy deminished (the 7.5 twist probably did not help). I was cleaning the rifle about every fifty shots. My FN with a chrome lined barrel has no buildup and it is cleaned about every 200 or 300 shots and has 5000 rounds through it and continues to be accurate (5/8" MOA). I think the 142 SMK is so long that it has more surface moly and sticks to the troat more when the gun is shot alot in a short amount of time. Just my two cents worth.
I just cleaned mine with JB Bore paste and alot of patches, it worked well. We borescoped my DPMS 260 barrel after 800 shots and I had a significant buildup of moly at the throat and the accuracy deminished (the 7.5 twist probably did not help). I was cleaning the rifle about every fifty shots. My FN with a chrome lined barrel has no buildup and it is cleaned about every 200 or 300 shots and has 5000 rounds through it and continues to be accurate (5/8" MOA). I think the 142 SMK is so long that it has more surface moly and sticks to the troat more when the gun is shot alot in a short amount of time. Just my two cents worth.
