WD40 warning

[RC20]

The "WD" in WD-40 stands for "Water Displacer." It is a product that was created and intended to displace water. The base is not oil, it's kerosene -- with a bit of paraffin mixed into it.

Both Kerosene and paraffin are lubricants. Paraffin is used as a bike chain lubricant. No idea what the SAE for it is.

So while not the best lubricant, its use is to displace water and leave lube film behind.

As cases are extreme pressure application I would not use it for that, but its not a bad penetrating lube either.

 

[FITASC]

Almost 2000 uses for a can of WD-40
https://www.wisebread.com/almost-2000-uses-for-a-can-of-wd-40-1

Many in the article's first 200 have it being used as a lubricant.

 

[Unclenick]

Wasn’t his whole idea to use a small sample to get the results. Wouldn’t asking him to use more be counterproductive to the overall point. It sounds to me like you’ve proved his equation doesn’t actually work ??

I think you are getting the cart before the horse. I assume the whole idea was to see how the performance of different penetrants compares. What the t-test showed is that repeating the exact same test the exact same way is fairly likely to result in ranking all the penetrants differently except Liquid Wrench, which is very unlikely to fail to be ranked best. The order of the other penetrants could almost as easily have been arrived at by randomly drawing their names from a hat with nearly equal likelihood of getting it right.

This, by the way, is the exact same problem as trying to determine which of a half dozen rifles is most precise by shooting just one four-shot group with each of them. If the difference is large, say, the first rifle shoots a three moa group while a second rifle shoots a half-moa group, you have very solid evidence, even from just four shots each, that the second rifle is the more accurate of the two. But if the difference in group sizes is a small ratio, say two moa verses two and a tenth of a moa, you immediately realize you cannot reliably conclude which one will prove most accurate over the long run without shooting some more. This is because the next pair of four-shot groups could very well reverse the apparent precision order.

As to proving the equation wrong, the t-test is a very standard statistical equation that is built into Excel and that has been used literally millions of times over the last 112 years. While there are other, more sophisticated types of analysis for some particular kinds of situations, if the t-test were terribly wrong, someone would have noticed by now.

 

[Metal god]

Thanks UN , lets take that to the next step or keep it to group size . In load development and you’re shooting five shot groups in half grain increments . Can that be used in load development? I’ve heard many times you need to shoot 50 shot groups to know how accurate a load will be . What if one load shoots 2 moa at 300 yards and the other group shoots sub moa at 300 yards ( five shot groups ) . Can you conclude one is better then the other . Or is the shooter himself too big of a variable in the equation ?

 

[higgite]

My inquiry sent to WD-40:

Does WD-40 contain wax in any form? If yes, will the wax settle out to the bottom of the container over time? This is to settle a discussion among friends. Thanks.

WD-40's response:

Thank you for contacting WD-40 Company. While the ingredients in WD-40 Multiuse Oil are secret, we can tell you what WD-40Multiuse Oil does not contain. WD-40 Multiuse Oil does not contain silicone, kerosene, water, wax, graphite, chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) or any known cancer-causing agents.

Please do not hesitate to contact us again in the future at 1-888-324-7596 or via our website www.wd40company.com.

Sincerely,
Karen J Oakley
WD-40 Customer Care Team

 

[Metal god]

Thank god we can put to bed the kerosene & wax debate . It's also nice to know we won't be getting cancer any time soon

 

[Dfariswheel]

Some trivia about WD-40......

Everyone "knows" that if you get WD-40 on a primed case it will soak in and kill the primer.
The famed "Box O' Truth" web site did a test where they put a number of products, including WD-40, Hoppe's #9 solvent, and Kroil on primed case and let them soak for a month or more.
Upon testing not a single primer failed to fire.

The NRA Dope Bag Tech Staff tested primers and found that WD-40 and most any liquid would "kill" a primer..... But, once the liquid evaporates the primer, zombie-like comes back to life and will fire.

As for not working as a lubricant this may be true long term, but short term......
Famed multiple Vietnam tour Navy SEAL Harry Constance in his book "Good To Go", wrote that when he'd return from a patrol he'd strip the plastic stock and forearm off his Stoner light machine gun and drop the gun AND the linked 5.56 ammo into a cut off 55 gallon drum of gasoline and let it soak while he cleaned up and had breakfast.

Then he'd remove the gun and ammo, do a strip and clean then spray the gun AND linked ammo with WD-40 and he was ready to go out again.
He said that in his multiple tours he never had a stoppage in the Stoner.

WD-40 has it's place, with other products superior for specific jobs, but it still has it's uses.

 

[jfruser]

Famed multiple Vietnam tour Navy SEAL Harry Constance in his book "Good To Go", wrote that when he'd return from a patrol he'd strip the plastic stock and forearm off his Stoner light machine gun and drop the gun AND the linked 5.56 ammo into a cut off 55 gallon drum of gasoline and let it soak while he cleaned up and had breakfast.

Then he'd remove the gun and ammo, do a strip and clean then spray the gun AND linked ammo with WD-40 and he was ready to go out again.
He said that in his multiple tours he never had a stoppage in the Stoner.

Yep, not much chance for WD40 or any other cleaner/lube/protectant/whatever to gunk up if regularly stripped by gasoline.

I have found WD40 superior to most gun-specific lubes and oils for use on my Rem 1100 in cold weather. Remoil also works, but anything heavier than that runs the possibility of thickening to the point the action slows and can not fire cheap target loads. Heavy game loads still function, but I can tell the action can gets sluggish.

FTR, I will use most anything as a gun C, L or P. But my top go-to products are Breakfree CLP, Mobil 1 synthetic motor oil, Mobil 1 synthetic ATF, and synthetic grease.

 

[Unclenick]

Thanks UN , lets take that to the next step or keep it to group size . In load development and you’re shooting five shot groups in half grain increments . Can that be used in load development? I’ve heard many times you need to shoot 50 shot groups to know how accurate a load will be . What if one load shoots 2 moa at 300 yards and the other group shoots sub moa at 300 yards ( five shot groups ) . Can you conclude one is better then the other . Or is the shooter himself too big of a variable in the equation ?

Everything hinges on how much variation you get. If it is large, it takes more samples to be sure you have a difference from one to another load. If the variation is small, sometimes a few shots can tell you there is a difference worth having.

One trick I have used in the past is to use running averages. So, suppose I use three shots for each group in a ladder. I then use a running average of three groups. That is, I average groups 1, 2, and 3. Then I average groups 2, 3, and 4. Then I average groups 3, 4, and 5, and so on. This way, I am considering 9 shots at a time, which is much better than three. And if I see a pattern in that, I have much more confidence it is not just random chance at work. In this way, smaller group sizes can be made to present valid information if the load difference between them is not too large.

As to how many shots you need in a group to know what is actually happening, that depends on defining "actually happening". If you need to know ±10% it takes fewer shots than if you need to know ±1%. Basically, the higher the resolution you demand, the more shots you will have to take. How exact your determination needs to be depends upon how exact you need it to be. The more exact, the more shots you will need to fire per group.

Member Statshooter teaches statistics. He always shoots 30-shot samples. If you take samples of 30 you will find that a histogram only starts to show the shape of the Gaussian bell curve with about 30 samples. So if true certainty is your objective, then 30 will be your minimum. But if you only want to know to 90% certainty that one load is more accurate than another, it can often be done with much less. Just don't expect that to tell you exactly how much better.

 

[SHR970]

So far no one has been able to logically dispute my statement concerning the chemical composition of the product in question. Do we need to keep beating this horse?

 

[higgite]

As far as I'm concerned, that horse is dead. WD-40 CS settled what is not in WD-40 back in post #65.

 

[Pahoo]

Time to bury, this dead horse

As far as I'm concerned, that horse is dead. WD-40 CS settled what is not in WD-40 back in post #65.

Dead and starting to get ripe. Time to bury it !!!!! ……

Be Safe !!!

 

[cdoc42]

The last time I used WD40 was 52 years ago. I had used it on my Remington .270 bolt and the firing pin gummed up, and the rifle failed to fire one cold winter deer season day. I used carb cleaner to wash out the brown muck.

 

[higgite]

It's alive!!

 

[Shootrj2003]

Any thin oil can creep in and get at your primer,kerosene is a thin oil,penetrating oil,KroilWD40 THEY ARE DESIGNED TO Penetrate and all kill primer pretty good.

 

[Rockrivr1]

One thing that WD40 is really good at is breaking down Cosmoline. Had a Yugo SKS once that was encased in Cosmo and WD40 was the only thing that would break it up and get it off the rifle.

 

[Unclenick]

Any thin oil can creep in and get at your primer

Don't count on it. Some primers are killed fast but we've had some tests posted where primers have lasted weeks in penetrating oils or kerosene. It depends on the kind of sealant the primer does or doesn't have on it.