TargetTalk

I know this is a matter of personal taste, but what are the advantages to a coated cleaning rod vs a stainless? Champions Choice has the Dewey rods at the same price. What to do? Oh, what to do?

Toss a coin. Whichever you pick, someone here will tell you that you made the wrong choice.

Coated. Won't gall your crown or breach shoulder if you forget to use a guide.

Both have their ups and downs. As Andre states, the coated rods might help protect your chamber/crown if you don't use a guide. The coated rods can also hold on to dirt and grit if you don't clean them. But the most important part of the cleaning discussion is to use a bore guide. On that front, MWerks makes some of the best on the market.

I will be getting a bore guide at the same time and this is for an 1827f biathlon rifle. I understand that it is most critical to coordinate the colors of the bore guide and the cleaning rod for maximum effect. The bore guide is black anodized aluminium, so does that scream stainless?

Don't forget to color coordinate the racing stripes and farkles.

Clarence will be along to give you tips on that.

Either one will work fine.
Using a bore guide is a good idea.
I think the #1 thing is to not have the rod flex in the bore while cleaning.
I just use a nylon brush and no tight fitting patches so it is easy to push through with no flexing.
Coated or stainless, I have both, just keep them clean.

As an aside, you could paint a barber pole style lines on your cleaning rod and watch it spiral as you go for effect :)

And Rover, you just cannot get over how my red, white and blue Steyr LP1 is so much prettier than your run of the mill bland looking one :)

Clarence

C. Perkins wrote:Either one will work fine.
Using a bore guide is a good idea.
I think the #1 thing is to not have the rod flex in the bore while cleaning.
I just use a nylon brush and no tight fitting patches so it is easy to push through with no flexing.
...

Clarence

Why would you ever push the rod with the attachment in place? Do you not have room to screw the attachment on after the rod has been inserted and then pull the attachment through the bore from chamber through muzzle?

Ed Hall wrote: Why would you ever push the rod with the attachment in place? Do you not have room to screw the attachment on after the rod has been inserted and then pull the attachment through the bore from chamber through muzzle?

Because pushing the rod in at the muzzle carries the risk if damaging the crown. Among rifle shooters it's the norm to push the rod in from the breech. I've never seen anyone push a rod into the muzzle to clean the bore (no-one who knew what they were doing at least), except where the breech design did not give access, as with some semi-autos. Some rifle shooters will even remove the jag or brush once it exits the muzzle rather than pull it back over the crown.

Ed Hall wrote:

C. Perkins wrote:Either one will work fine.
Using a bore guide is a good idea.
I think the #1 thing is to not have the rod flex in the bore while cleaning.
I just use a nylon brush and no tight fitting patches so it is easy to push through with no flexing.
...

Clarence

Why would you ever push the rod with the attachment in place? Do you not have room to screw the attachment on after the rod has been inserted and then pull the attachment through the bore from chamber through muzzle?

Only firearms I clean from the muzzle are my Ruger 10/22 and my revolvers.
Everything else is from the breech.
I am ever so careful when I do and also use a guide that fits the muzzle.
YMMV;
Clarence

Actually inserting the rod from the muzzle, attaching the brush in the chamber, and then pulling it back does have the advantage of there being no risk of the rod flexing. Using a false muzzle or something similar would allow that. The only major issue would be that you'd have to use a different type of patch and attachment to be able to patch the barrel rather than brush it. Very interesting concept.

-Jenrick

I understand the idea, but still wouldn't do it unless that was the only option. Cleaning from the breech is low risk with a bolt action if one takes a few simple precautions. Use a rod guide where possible, a good quality rod, patches that are the right size, and push carefully. So why fiddle with a muzzle protector, and struggle with fitting patches and jags in the breech with the loading tray in the way? I also dislike the idea of putting a clean rod through a dirty barrel, and then dragging it back through.

jenrick wrote:Actually inserting the rod from the muzzle, attaching the brush in the chamber, and then pulling it back does have the advantage of there being no risk of the rod flexing. Using a false muzzle or something similar would allow that. The only major issue would be that you'd have to use a different type of patch and attachment to be able to patch the barrel rather than brush it. Very interesting concept.

-Jenrick

It can be done that way but why drag dirt and cleaning fluids back towards the trigger?

Thoughts on using a dry pull through everytime after shooting? I know its not a proper cleaning, I do that periodically with a brush and rod etc.

Wasted effort. It will take out a little soot and unburned powder, but the "good" stuff needs the brush and solvent.