ARDEC approval letter for RADCOLUBE:
CLP-ARDEC-6ec1d25a.png

Radco is $80/gal vs $175(?)/gal for G96. I'm absolutely sure G96 is fantastic stuff. Just speaking for myself, though, I'm not seeing how both lubes that meet MIL-PRF-63460F can have a disparity in performance such that G96 is worth twice the price. I'll never run my guns as hard as many of you do, so maybe you'll see a performance difference. I'm taking on faith a bit that the strident requirements of the new spec will give a quality lube that is "good enough" for my less challenging uses.

RADCO has the same NSN and NATO code as the G96. If Big Army and Nato consider them to be essentially equal, that's good enough for me with my far more limited testing resources.

Radco only claims temperature range of -60F to 160F. I suspect that's ambient conditions because any oil that fell apart at 160F would never pass the M249 live fire test requirement the way Radco did. See the letter for that test result. I will never need my rifle in -60 temps. I'll be dead and unable to function before that happens (are we certain primers even work at -60F?).

I'm no scientist, just an engineer. And without ability to do any kind of real testing on my own, I'll bank the 50% cost savings and get on with life. Anecdotally, it works great. That's an anecdote, nothing more.

*I HAVE NO AFFILIATION WITH ANY LUBE MAKER OR ANYONE IN FIREARMS INDUSTRY*