GTA

General Discussion To Gateway To Airguns => The Shop => : MIKE I December 03, 2008, 01:11:47 PM

: Mystic JT-6 #2
: MIKE I December 03, 2008, 01:11:47 PM
This is a link to the specifications of the Mystic JT-6 #2 that I used for the S1K.
Tonight, we'll see how it does in the new RS-2.  

http://www.docs.citgo.com/msds_pi/591094.pdf

If someone knows what all of those specs mean, please chime in.  It would be interesting to compare to Moly and Tar.  

So far no change in the S1K, still shoots well.
: RE: Mystic JT-6 #2
: SDale December 04, 2008, 10:05:37 AM
Seems a little on the thin side to be used as tar.
: Re: Mystic JT-6 #2
: Gene_SC December 04, 2008, 11:58:15 AM
Mike, stick with the heavy tar and moly for air guns. It is the best thing for the air rifles. It is ok to experiment with other products but it has all been done before and the majority still says heavy tar and moly for air rifles....:)
: Re: Mystic JT-6 #2
: MIKE I December 04, 2008, 03:45:49 PM
Gene, I'm sure you are right.  I was mostly wanting to see if I could accomplish a teardown/reassemble.  So far so good.  I just finished doing the RS-2 with the JT-6 also, I'll redo both guns with the right stuff when it gets here.  

It did make a very positive improvement in both guns, but it isn't as nice as my friend's MM tuned B-26.  Both of my guns are harsher than his, even though they don't twang any more.  

Thanks for the guidance, this newby needs it.
: Re: Mystic JT-6 #2
: Gene_SC December 04, 2008, 05:14:30 PM
That's good to experiment Mike and that is something I am constantly doing with my air rifles..:)

Good luck
: I'm wondering...
: vinceb December 05, 2008, 01:15:44 PM
...if the properties of this stuff might be similar to the 'velocity tar' Maccari used to sell. I'm wondering if it might be good for applications where a lesser amount of damping might be necessary.

: Just bought me some of that stuff...
: vinceb December 06, 2008, 01:43:13 AM
Yes, it seems very slick but it isn't nearly as sticky as spring tar. It is probably good as a GP lube (used in prudent quantities), but I don't think it's gonna be a good substitute for tar.
: RE: Just bought me some of that stuff...
: MIKE I December 06, 2008, 08:05:45 AM
Niether one of the guns has that quiet sound of my friend's MM B-26, but they do shoot much nicer than they did before, with no twang at all.  I can see where the tar would likeiy be a better application.  It will be interesting to see how they differ after the tar/moly change over.

Does anyone know of a local-type source of tar and moly, or am I best off just getting it from JM?
: RE: Just bought me some of that stuff...
: vinceb December 07, 2008, 03:33:34 AM


Jim Maccari or Rich in Mich's 'spring shield' (http://home.comcast.net/~peterdragon/index.html/My_Homepage_Files/Page9.html). I also suspect that one of these might work as well, although I've not tried them: http://www.tsmoly.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=1_2&products_id=20&osCsid=5f3cca1a41d2b33db2af4e8c99d889d8 http://www.tsmoly.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=1_2&products_id=203 (http://www.tsmoly.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=1_2&products_id=203)



Edited by GC

: RE: Mystic JT-6 #2
: CharlieDaTuna December 07, 2008, 12:42:19 PM
Jim Maccari, Rich in Mich's 'spring shield'  a post regarding lubes

 
I might be missing something but I looked at the above link posted by VinceB as well as all over that website and see nothing where it is endorsed, mentioned, part of a consideration by Jim Maccari.  I also went to Jim's website and see nowhere where Rich or the lubricants mentioned in the above post is mentioned in the lubricants section or anywhere else. I have very strong doubts that Jim Maccari would endorse lubes other than what he markets himself.

It would appear to me that it is mis-information when making inference, tying in or putting a well know vendors name up in a same post in conjunction with another "Vendor" in that post in what would appear to be endorsing or promoting a product. That would be deception if you ask me.

Some may jump up and say that I am adverse to other innovations when it comes to lubes. It’s just the fact that most are not effective in the springer applications. Well I'll tell you what.... though I'm not adverse to the idea, by the same token, I have used nothing but Maccari's lubes on a few thousand guns over many years as has most Pro-Tuners.

 It would be pretty difficult, though not impossible (if proven to be better) for me to ever change lubes. My customers deserve the best and that's what JM provides and what I use. JM has an unblemished record of providing the best and most effective lubes (as well as other parts) available bar none to both the professional tuners as well as the general airgun enthusiast.

A little advice from an old man that has a couple of tunes under his belt for what it's worth.  If you are going to tune your gun, use lubes that have many years of proven efficiency and effectiveness, and reliability. Those lubes as far as I'm concerned come from Jim Maccari and no one else. They might cost a little more but you have the best available and is well worth the difference paid and your gun will love you for it.  And if you are going to send your gun out for a pro-tune, before you send it, ask him if he uses Maccari lubes and parts. If not, I suggest that you look around just a bit more and get what you pay for and expect in results both the short term as well as long term... years down the road.

And finally… if you see someone make a or respond to a post in what appears to be an attempt to use the name of a well known person to promote another person, or for personal gain or an attempt to promote another, question the integrity of the post, the person that made the post and whoever the post might be in reference to.  


: RE: Mystic JT-6 #2
: WBZsDAD December 07, 2008, 01:45:06 PM
I think the man was just trying to help, I didn't get the impression he was indicating that JM endorsed it or anything close. In fact it seemed to me he was saying it wasn't as sticky as tar.

 Damn you really have to be careful what you say in an attempt to help out someone for fear of chastisement!
: Re: Mystic JT-6 #2
: Gene_SC December 07, 2008, 02:15:46 PM
No Todd, it could have been misconstrued as and endorsement. I am sure others will agree and disagree. But Bob was only making it clear. No one is being chastised here. Please! We all interpret things differently, but I assure you that Bob was only making a point.
: I was listing two vendors for a product marketed as spring tar.
: vinceb December 08, 2008, 05:20:49 AM
If someone asked me where they could get an RWS 34, I might respond something like "Natchez, Pyramydair". I don't think that anyone would have seen this as a Natchez endorsement of Pyramydair.

I would like suggest a modification to Mr. Werner's 'question their integrity' comment. If something sounds questionable, and especially if the meaning of a post may seem ambiguous, first seek a clarification as to what was said. Then question the poster's integrity if the real meaning warrants it.



: RE: I was listing two vendors for a product marketed as spring tar.
: moe1942 December 10, 2008, 12:27:35 AM
Y'all never learn....
: RE: Mystic JT-6 #2
: MIKE I December 17, 2008, 10:49:09 PM
An update on the JT-6 tune.  After about 150 pellets, the S1K started twanging, just like the RS2 did.  The RS2 has been redone with JM lubes, the S1K is next.
: Re: Mystic JT-6 #2
: Jaymo December 18, 2008, 03:19:25 PM
Mystic JT6 is one fantastic grease. I use it every day at work. That said, I use JM tar and lubes on springers because they're available and they're fantastic.