1911Forum banner
1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
465 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Has anyone tried the Bull Frog Emitters or Gun Sleeves for storage?
I saw the advertisement and wondered if it works like they say.
Raymond
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
745 Posts
Hello Raymond, also I have seen BullFrog advertisements, but I don't know other about these products. They don't put much technical infos on their site, too.
Regards, MAXM
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
I don't doubt the efficiency of the Bullfrog products. VCI's are widely used in the industry with great success for many years, however, some manufacturers warn against using their proprietary VCI product in combination with corrosion inhibiting oils without testing beforehand.

Doing a GOOGLE search for VCI corrosion (gun) delivers plenty of information.

Quickloader
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
114 Posts
I saw them in the Brownells catalog last night. ( I hate to say it, but I'm in that catalog way too often).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
465 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Here is some answers to my questions I got in a email from Bull Frog.

1) The emitters are will not have compatibility problems with existing lubricants.
2) The Gun wipes will remove any lubricants currently on the gun. We recommend that you completely clean the gun with Gun Wipes and then apply your lubricant to any moving parts.
3) There are no health hazards associated with the VpCI Emitters. However, there are most effective in enclosed spaces with minimal air flow.
4) Lubricants will not effect the rust blocking action of the gun sleeve. If the gun is over oiled - some staining of the gun sleeve fabric may occur, but it is purely a cosmetic problem.

Sportsmans Guide has the stuff so I will give it a go and see.I will keep yall posted.
Raymond
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
363 Posts
Curious...

Now yuz guys really gots me curious.

Got a web site for this, Ray or QL?

I'll order one (some) just to check it out and run some tests.

Sounds like FUN to me (lab-rat stuff... :D )

Best regards,
George
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
465 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 · (Edited)
http://www.bull-frog.com
The January 2004 issue of GUNS magazine has a article on the stuff.Thats where I saw it.
They dont sell to the general public,only dealers.
If your a prospect dealer they will send you a dealer sample.George.:D
I ordered mine from Sportsmans Guide.Good price or at least the best price Ive found.
It also available here at,
http://www.nrafoundation.org
I have not had any corrosion problems since I started using FP-10 and doubt I will,but anything to help with long term storage is a help and worth a try when you live in a humid environment like I do.
Im going to test one in my tool box as well.That should tell me something pretty fast.
Raymond
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
One of many, many sources regarding VCI's, addresses the incompatibility issue, too.

http://www.daubertvci.com/FAQ.asp

I'm always a bit reluctant when getting global information like "will not interact with anything...", if not backed up by the facts why "it" wouldn't. I don't try imputing this to the Bullfrog folks in any way, just a general thought of caution....
Being a burned (corroded:D) child with Militec-1, I learned to appreciate the value of naked technical facts rather than the "Trust me, I know what's the best for your purpose!" (reminds me of the SledgeHammer theme somehow :D...)

Go at it, George!

Quickloader
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
363 Posts
wow.....errr....geeze...MSDS?

The very first things I look at is their MSDS sheets. This helps to establish the product's & comany's compliance and gives an insight to their professionalism.

They are sooooo off the mark with CFR29, that it is an OSHA violation waiting to happen.

For example(s):
1. Improper DOT class...everything has one, but they say N.A. (not applicable). Bull***t, not Bullfrog.
2. They have more N.E.'s and N.A.'s on their sheets than any others I've seen in a long time. (Not Established, and Not Applicable)
3. They never heard of "The right to Know", apparently. Their Section II on all their products is lacking BIG TIME.
4. No establishments of Flash points, Upper & Lower explosive limits, vapor pressure, density, boiling points, and a host of other required data. Looks like they've been around for over 2 years, at least. They've had PLENTY of time to do the testing required by law.
5. Their "decomposition (by)products" is stone-cold wrong and needs to be more specific by law, else firefighters and users can be seriously injured or asphixiated. They list this for the foam, but nothing for the compound IN the foam:
HAZARDOUS DECOMPOSITION PRODUCTS (under fire conditions): Burning polyurethane foams produce toxic decomposition products that are not significantly different from those of other nitrogen-containing polymer such as wool leather, nylon, and ABS. The major toxicants are carbon monoxide, oxides of nitrogen, hydrogen cyanide.
6. A few of their sheets OPENLY admit to volitiles, but list none and give no info and have no appropriate data on them. Man...they're inviting themselves to get busted by OSHA.

I could go on, and on, and on....

This doesn't mean the products are bad, by any means. But it raises a flag of suspicion to one of 2 things.
1. They're a bunch of marketers who have no clue to the chemistries of their products or the Right to know laws.
2. They have something to hide, for whatever reason. (usually, THAT is either because it can be easily duplicated, or they're trying to make it look like a "miracle" or "wonder" product.)

Remember what I've said in the past...there's nothing new on the periodic table of the elements. As technologies advance, we just learn to recombine and improve older technologies. The last huge "invention" in the chemical industry was in 1972, when Dupont accidentally created (polymerized) Teflon, which is simply Carbon and Fluorine. (CF2-CF2-CF2....)

Now to get some. I may have to have Amy order it at her home, as other competitors have refused to sell us (imagine that) when they found out who they were selling to.

Best regards,
George
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
Bull***t, not Bullfrog
George, you crack me up man!:D :D :D
I may have to have Amy order it at her home, as other competitors have refused to sell us
One of these days you'll even have to have your beer bought by Amy, or sign a "won't do any analyzing" disclaimer before..:eek:

I had the same thoughts as under 1. and 2. at the end, hence my thinking about global information.

Keep it up!

Quickloader
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
363 Posts
Quickloader...

Thanks man. My philosophy (I hate philosophy :mummy: ) is to have a good sense of humor, no matter what, unless they're putting on the blindfold or shaving your head for the electro-cap. Then things seem to leave the humorless realm for the "moment".

Best regards QL
George
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
465 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Yeah I have my doubts of the stuff myself.Thats why I asked about them here and why Im going to test and find out for myself first hand.
I will see if what Bull Frog told me in the email is true or not.
If it is true and the product works as they advertise I will be pleased.

I also jumped on the Militec-1 band wagon without testing for myself,and went on others word and the supplied documentation that it was all I ever wanted.Found out the hard way it was not all that and a bowl of beans.In fact I raised so much stink about Militec-1 it got me some heat.George can testify to that.
As Forest Gump said,"thats all I have to say about that."

Im very critical about what a supplier puts forth in the supplied documents they have now.

George you know very well how I am and how many questions and doubts I have about gun oils and the like.Ive aggravated you so much about the FP-10 in the past Im ashamed.But I found out over the many months of aggravation to you that FP-10 is outstanding and what you say is true and you mean what you say.For that I say thank you.

Folks in my familly think Im a nit picking ars about gun oils etc..But hey Im not getting stuffed again.
So rest assured Im not going into this blind folded fella's.

Raymond
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
465 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Hey George,
Im really interested in what you find.You are the man.
I sure dont want anything messing with my FP-10,PL-10 or my firearms again.So I will do a little different than I did before and test it on something other than my firearms.:rolleyes:
Im slow but I learn eventually.:D
Raymond
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
363 Posts
Hey QL

Now that's more to sink my teeth into. BUT, their MSDS sheets are lacking just the same. BF just has the same copies on their site. I'll do some digging and research.

I had some contact with a company, a few years ago (can't remember, have to look in old files) which may have been them...not sure. They stressed vapor phase in lubrication and corrosion protection. The problem I had with them at the time, was that they used Ammonia Nitrates and possibly a calcium compound....not sure but I'll research tomorrow.

Best regards QL, and thanks,
George
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
Hey Raymond, George

:eek: :eek: :eek:!!! In Rust We Trust !!! :eek: :eek: :eek:

After browsing the Cortec site a bit, I don't doubt the effectiveness of their products regarding corrosion protection; addressing interactivity with other products, namely the ones containing chlorinated hydrocarbons, I'm not so sure in general; I'm too very interested in what George may come up with; I don't think of chemical interaction forming hazardous products in the first place here, but the possibility of inhibiting the chlorine reactivity to some degree, as Cortec states this in other words; couldn't this hinder the efficiency of FP-10 on the metal surface, thought a bit towards the extreme side here? Remember, they not only promote the VCI spenders which fill the air space, but these corrosion inhibiting liquids, lubricants and wipes, too. I wouldn't be surprised if the consequence behind the system would be using their products solely for obtaining the maximal result, but as George likes to say, nothing beats FP-10, in its unique and synergistic effect, that is.

I think this discussion, though hypothetic yet, is a typical example of setting priorities in what you expect a product to do in the first place; as long as a product like FP-10 does the trick for me, combining all the properties regarding gun care in such an ideal form in a single product, I see no need in adding unknown factors into the system; were I to store my guns for extended periods of time without the possibility or intention to inspect them in the interim, I'd give the Cortec/Bullfrog products a go without hesitation.

Besides, this habit of mine, inspecting my stored guns frequently, is what made the difference between an unpleasant experience and a certainly catastrophic one, without a doubt, regarding Militec-1; I feel I gave this product the credit of doubt for much too long, most likely because they are such nice folks there at Militec, and to some degree maybe because I wanted to believe in the product, you know, a la -c'm on, this little rust here and there must be the exception from the rule, if not, I'm to degreasing all my stuff again? Well, that's exactly what I had to do eventually. When I started using Militec-1, the product was promoted as an exceptional preservative besides being the best available lubricant, backed up by this letter from Beretta USA they have on their site, next to others of the same style, very convincing for me at this time then; today, in connection with the military evaluation process, they state themselves that corrosion protection wouldn't be a priority, so what? Gimme a break!
Am I pissed off by Militec? Not really, surprisingly, but very dissapointed, that's.

It's absolutely not my intention to bash someone's pet lube, the above represents my own experience and I'll stick with it, if others' experiences are different I'm happy for them, and their guns especially.;)

Quickloader
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
363 Posts
Cortec

Thanks QL. Nicely said.

Update -
I called Cortec and spoke with Brian Wertz. Nice fellow. We didn't speak of chemistries or proprietary info, but asked him for some samples to test, being very open and telling him I was MPC and what we manufactured. I explained that I was interested in his VpCI technology and would like to try it in the areas of our plant that sometimes see corrosion on steel. He was very compliant in sending me 3 different samples of their products. I WILL test it for it's effectiveness in this capacity as well as do some lab testing and analysis.

This morning, I looked in my files and found the info I was seeking. I asked Brian if they were affiliated with, or began in the UK under the name "Corroless International", of which he replied "not to his knowledge".

Surprisingly, both companies are incredibly similar and use Vapor Phase Corrosion Inhibition. (Cortec TM = VpCI, Corroless TM = VCI).
Here's a site for Corroless:
http://www.corroless.com/

A Corroless chemist and princiapl contacted me back in 1990, trying to get us to carry or distribute his products in the US. After a lengthy conversation, it was deemed not only inappropriate, as we were manufacturers and not distributors, but that their chemistries of corrosion inhibition were in direct conflict with the chemistries of boundary film lubrication through advanced halogenation.

Their principal corrosion inhibitor that was formed on the surface of metal was a "Carboxylic Salt" which was calcium carboxylate. Calcium sulfonates are used WIDELY in the industry and are very effective, so this is nothing new; just calcium with a carboxylic acid attached to form the salts. Their "delivery" method was what concerned me. They used Ammonia (NH3) and Nitric Acid (NHO3) to accomplish the vapor phase application of the salts, and to etch the metal for adherence. Aside from making me shudder, the halogenation process is inhibited by polar chemistries. Products that contain oxygen compounds, such as glycols, esters, and ethers are not harmful to the substrate when combined with mild halogens, but cause a neutralizing effect to take place. Whereas the ammonia and Nitric would have not only an inhibiting effect on our products but would be inversely proportional to our chemistries and lubrication theory and practice.

I was able to glean the info I needed for memory refreshment from the files, MSDS and spectrographs I had filed on the Corroless VCI 300 and a few others.

When I receive the samples and do the complete testing on the Cortec products, I'll post my findings....good, bad, or indifferent.
Until then, I'll refrain from any further comments (aside from their CRAPPY MSDS sheets) on their products, as they DO have relevance on many applications, but it is the effect on firearms that I am most concerned about.

Best regards,
George
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
George

very interesting.

So, before you start using the Cortec goodies at your plant, I'll have to order a few gallons of FP-10, not that you gonna spoil the good stuff with some nasty fumes???:eek:

Corroless--->Tikkurila Coatings--->Kemira ??? :rolleyes:

Indeed very similar to Cortec, weird coincidence?

What you are describing regarding the possible inversely proportional effects of some type of VCI's to FP-10's chemistry reflects my initial speculations; that's exactly what I meant with informations given regarding products' compatibility, first you have to know the facts and secondly you have to have the abilities to interpret them correctly, something you seldom find with sales managers in general.

For me, firearms maintenance is FP-10, primarily.:rock:

And yes, the BF MSDS are indeed crappy!

:D ;)

Quickloader
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top