The salt grinder stopped working so I took it apart and found it was all choked up with caked salt. I got that out with a chisel (not a good one) and used the Dremel to clean and buff the metal parts as well as sanding the inside of the wooden body which I then polyurethaned to stop ufure adhesaion. I washed in water the tools (not the Dremel motor but the collet and so on), dried them then sprayed with CRC (=WD40). Ten days later - thick rust and the little wire brush had almos corroded away to nothing. Scary stuff. Nothing good or irreplaceable damaged though
Blow. The inside of the grinder came unfinished. I reasoned that the water from the salt was being drawn into the wood as humidity bounced up and down, causing it to form a solid cake inside the grinder. I'll see how it goes. We live in generally moderate to high humidity here.
Both! I was just amazed that what I thought was careful washing, drying and application of hydrocarbon didn't get rid of the stuff... Do you think grease woudl have done any better? Or vaseline?
I've been told by a number of people that WD-40 contains water - most recently when the lock on my shop door had frozen and I mentioned to the neighbor whose torch I was borrowing that I intended to dose the lock with WD-40 as soon as I could get inside. He told me to use regular oil because the water content of the WD-40 would worsen the freezing problem.
HUH? WD40 & it's ilk are "water displacers". My '80 E150 van w/300CID 6cyl. would frequently get damp in heavy rain or blowing snow in winter, wouldn't start after being parked overnight. Pop the hood, wet the distributor & wires down with WD40, hit the key, instant start.
Don't know where the notion of it having water in it got started. I'm not positive, but seems to me that I heard WD40 was developed by Uncle Sam to keep the %^#$%!@#()*& M-16 functioning in actual field conditions.
Probably not. It's 50 years old and the M16 isn't. Should have stuck with the M1, but evidently it's easier to teach troops to use a hose than to aim and shoot.
Charlie Self I don't approve of political jokes. I've seen too many of them get elected.
The M1 was a good rifle (provided that your thumb maintained a friendly relationship with the bolt :-) but was heavy (11.6 pounds with ling and bayonet, IIRC). The M-16 is a lot lighter, packs more of a whollop, and as you noted has a selector switch. Seems to me that the .223 ammo is considerably lighter, too - although I'm not sure.
When the M16 came out, I traded in a .45 "grease gun". Talk about a no-aim hose...
Gramps (Coast Artillery Corps & duty in the Philippines during the Morrow uprising said the Army changed to the .45 cause the dudes would wrap themselves in ripped up bed sheets and keep coming at you with their swords, and the .38 wouldn't do much to stop 'em, but the .45 would knock them on their arse, sheets and all.
True. It's something called "stoddard solvent." It displaces water.
Where people get into trouble with WD-40 is that it's not an oil. People "oil" something with WD-40, and then it rusts as soon as the "stoddard solvent" stuff has evaporated away. I think that's where the notion of WD-40 --> rust comes from.
It's good for getting water out/off of something, but no good for sealing it against future corrosion. So mayhap shoot the lock with WD-40 and then apply a few drops of oil.
While I don't know everything, I can make a few valid comments . . . all though sufficient ones have probably already been made.
The 'best battle implement' M-1 {per Gen. G.S, Patton} uses the same 30-06 round as the venerable '03. Typically, .30 caliber Military 'Ball Ammunition' has a 180 grain bullet with an MV {muzzle velocity} of 2700fps and a ME {muzzle energy} of 2910 ft/lbs.
The .223 cartridge - present metric military designation is 5.56mm - is much lighter at 56 grains, with a MV of 3250fps and a ME of 1320ft/lbs.
That says it in a nutshell - along with the simple equation Energy equals Mass times Velocity which will give the energy at range {discounting factors such as bullet drop, sectional density, etc.}
For background - read the following, or stop here.
A 'direct comparison of {Military} effectiveness' is not really valid - each was developed for different times, and different functions. The 30 caliber,
30-06 round was developed from the 30-40 Krag cartridge and the 1903 rifle was 'developed' from the stronger German Mauser action. This was a period where Accuracy of shooting was of primary concern and the 'Generals' believed that rapid fire would 'waste ammunition'. {It is also an old saying that 'Generals/Armies always prepare to fight the last war' }The development of the machine gun in WWI punctured that balloon !! However, at the beginning of WWII the 1903-A3 was 'on the line' along with the M-1 {The Marines were probably the last to be changed over - rent the B&W movie 'Guadalcanal Diary', and read 'From Here to Eternity' }. All services still adhered to the doctrine of identifying the target and AIMING.
The M-16 was developed from the Stoner ARMALITE civilian rifle. The Army actually turned Stoner down, which is why it was first offered to the 'commercial' marketplace. It was actually an Air Force General {SAC ?}who purchased some for airbase protection that started the military 'investment'. By the time Viet Nam started 'warming up', the long range {1,000 yards +}, accurate shooting 30-06 - and later adoption & re-designation of the slightly shorter & 'softer shooting' .308 Winchester to 7.62mm, was found un-necessary in the close-quarter jungle fire fights. Also Doctrine had changed. Other than for Snipers {.308 Remington Mod 700 action based rifles}the ability to lay down 'massed area fire' has replaced selecting individual targets. Therefore, the ability to CARRY a LOT of ammunition, with an 'effective range' of less than 300 meters {maybe 100 meters?}, and a lighter & 'handier' weapon, now has primary importance.
Just as a 'by-the-by' a Military round is NOT designed to KILL - but to 'incapacitate'. It takes much more personnel to save, move, and care for an injured man, then to simply 'remove' him. Of course, in this time of 'Martyr Brigades' and 'Suicide Bomber's ' I wonder how much 'care' is given . . . other than when the cameras are rolling.
I think the big incentive came from the fact that 9mm ammo is cheaper, and you can get more of it into the magazine. 15 rounds vs. seven, plus all the pussy Europeans were using it, so we had to follow suit.
I miss my 1911. (No, I wasn't in the military. I bought a civilian version as my first handgun, when I turned 21...) That thing was fun as hell to shoot, and used to scare everyone at the range half to death to boot. Nothing like walking up with my .45 while everybody else is plinking with nines and 22s. Ping, poot, bang, KA-BLAM! Heads turn... "What the hell was THAT?"
Ah, the days when I could afford to piss away 40 cents every time I pulled the trigger.
Those things just aren't economical unless you reload, and I never got into reloading. I wound up selling it. I wish I hadn't. :(
And I think the latter was the point of the whole deal, because no one needed to come close to precise aiming any more. The concept of a hit that did the job was passed on to a series of hits that did the job and chewed up the landscape.
M1 thumb was an interesting phenomenon, especially if that bolt closed on YOUR thumb.
The Star models of the Springfield were sweet, but even the everyday models would outshoot my talents.
I hated that thing. At 15 yards, I was better off throwing it than firing it. Of course, that was the military version, which had a trigger feel about like driving with a gearbox minus every other tooth. I understand the civilian types are usually tuned. The POS out of the armory wasn't tuned and often hadn't been cleaned well. 'S what happens when ossifers handle weapons, I guess. Us enlisted types only got to check out the pistols on alternate leap years.
Charlie Self I don't approve of political jokes. I've seen too many of them get elected.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.