cleaning
- Thread starter bigly6
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
team sidewinder
Member
Well I don't know what everybody else is using but I use 303 Aerospace Protectant. I think you can get it on Amazon but I got mine at a shop that carries kayaks and rubber rafts. They use it on the exteriors to keep down the UV rays from deteriorateing the boats. I think it is pretty close to Armorall. The 303 keep makes your gun nice and black, doesn't attract grit, removes dirt/dust, fingerprints and oil/grease. I should add the 303 isn't near as glossy as Armorall when it dries.
Welcome to the forums.
Welcome to the forums.
Last edited:
Majorlk
Member
I simply wipe it down with a rag dampened with BreakFree CLP to remove any debris, then dry it off and wipe down with a silicone-impregnated rag. Been doing this on all my firearms for more years than I can remember with no problems.
If there's something that the CLP doesn't remove, then I use polymer-safe GunScrubber. Be advised that GS will remove ALL oil and anything else on the surface, so metal will need a light coat of either RemOil or a silicone rag to protect the surface.
If there's something that the CLP doesn't remove, then I use polymer-safe GunScrubber. Be advised that GS will remove ALL oil and anything else on the surface, so metal will need a light coat of either RemOil or a silicone rag to protect the surface.
lild9ve
Member
yep breakfree clp is some great stuff, i use it on all my guns that have polymer, no problems what so ever.....
Majorlk
Member
No, it won't hurt polymer and yes you can use it on your pistol.
JaPes
Member
Breakfree CLP has been good to go on my polymer frame firearms.
Breakfree Powder Blast is the one you don't want to spray on polymer lowers. I found out the hard way.
lild9ve
Member
nope i have a 15-22 and sigma 9ve and the CLP is good to go
Brett248Vista
Member
BreakFree CLP is all I use.
chuck s
Member
Just so ya know, Breakfree CLP hasn't met military specifications in at least 20 years. There's better CLP out there. Not sure what part of the spec if fails and it's probably good to go for non-duty weapons.
-- Chuck
-- Chuck
Brett248Vista
Member
Actually, to be technical, it met MilSpec MIL-L-63460B which wasn't 20 years ago. MIL-L-63460C was a typo by the government an was revised to MIL-L-63460E and I do not believe it meets the "E" spec, only because it carries "solid particles" (Teflon).
I don't plan on changing what I use... And I'm quite sure you will find the majority of military members still use it... They just can't run it through on a Military PO because of the E spec, it won't be in the ordering system.
