Latest technique


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRRahHX9Zkg

Not really the latest technique, this has been posted twice a week on this forum for at least a couple years now. we need something fresh for being smug and condescending !!!

I'm sure glad that clod isn't breaking in my barrels.

More like the last five years.

I'm not sure what it says that half the guys on this forum worship some guy that'll intentionally trash a $1500 rifle/scope combination just to be obnoxious.

There's a lot going on in that video than seems to be flying over your head.

David

That was a pretty good satire, I laughed.

I used to offer dissertations on the why and how of barrel break in, but came to the conclusion that everybody had their own opinion, ritual, sacrament and mumbo jumbo regarding the process, and the fact that most rifles and shooters aren't accurate enough to see any difference, that it's better to keep quite. I bet the guy in the video was tweaking some noses for all those reasons.

Bull barrels versus cow barrels - just gotta love it.

My friend has a shooting tube in his shop, and he agonizes for a couple days breaking in barrels in accordance with instructions from his gunsmith (a major player in custom rifles). Meanwhile, I see guys at the range with new rifles shoot them fast enough to glow, and they go away perfectly happy as soon as the barrel cools enough so it doesn't melt the foam case liner. Me, I just do my thing.

That video is a true classic, we should refer to it as the toss it on the ground and shoot a shot method.

I too laughed, no matter what another does to his gear.

Interesting folks do "Break-in" - then you hear of shooters who go 50-400 rounds between cleanings. JS.

Nothing's flying over my head about it, I know exactly what he's trying to get across. I just find the whole thing obnoxious like his posts on here. He definitely has his fan club on here though, there are no shortages of people lining up to pat him on the back and sniff his rear.

You own an actual rifle?

The video guy used to post that video and more 5 years ago on Snipers Hide as "NOBODY".
I think he has shown up here lately, but his bad manners hardly stand out around here.

I think I have seen him lately at SH as "GawdamnRight".

By all means, lay it on me - what is he trying to get across?

David

That most people are idiots and he ain't wrong.

I get the broad view, I'm referring to some rifle specifics:

I count at least 4 points he's making besides the stupidity of barrel break-in.

David

LMAO

....With any premium barrel that has been finish lapped -- such as your Krieger Barrel --, the lay or direction of the finish is in the direction of the bullet travel, so fouling is minimal compared to a barrel with internal tooling marks. This is true of any properly finish-lapped barrel regardless of how it is rifled. If it is not finish-lapped, there will be reamer marks left in the bore that are directly across the direction of the bullet travel. This occurs even in a button-rifled barrel as the button cannot completely iron out these reamer marks.

Because the lay of the finish is in the direction of the bullet travel, very little is done to the bore during break-in, but the throat is another story. When your barrel is chambered, by necessity there are reamer marks left in the throat that are across the lands, i.e. across the direction of the bullet travel. In a new barrel they are very distinct; much like the teeth on a very fine file. When the bullet is forced into the throat, copper dust is removed from the jacket material and released into the gas which at this temperature and pressure is actually a plasma. The copper dust is vaporized in this plasma and is carried down the barrel. As the gas expands and cools, the copper comes out of suspension and is deposited in the bore. This makes it appear as if the source of the fouling is the bore when it is actually for the most part the new throat. If this copper is allowed to stay in the bore, and subsequent bullets and deposits are fired over it, copper which adheres well to itself, will build up quickly and may be difficult to remove later. So when we break in a barrel, our goal is to get the throat �polished� without allowing copper to build up in the bore. This is the reasoning for the "fire-one-shot-and-clean" procedure.

Every barrel will vary slightly in how many rounds they take to break in For example a chrome moly barrel may take longer to break in than stainless steel because it is more abrasion resistant even though it is a similar hardness. Also chrome moly has a little more of an affinity for copper than stainless steel so it will usually show a little more "color" if you are using a chemical cleaner. Rim Fire barrels can take an extremely long time to break in, sometimes requiring several hundred rounds or more. But cleaning can be lengthened to every 25-50 rounds. The break-in procedure and the cleaning procedure are really the same except for the frequency. Remember the goal is to get or keep the barrel clean while breaking in the throat with bullets being fired over it.

Finally, the best way to tell if the barrel is broken in is to observe the patches; i.e. when the fouling is reduced. This is better than some set number of cycles of "shoot and clean" as many owners report practically no fouling after the first few shots, and more break-in would be pointless. Conversely, if more is required, a set number would not address that either. Besides, cleaning is not a completely benign procedure so it should be done carefully and no more than necessary.....

-----------------------------------------------------------

........The age old question, "Breaking in the New Barrel". Opinions very a lot here, and this is a very subjective topic. For the most part, the only thing you are breaking in, is the throat area of the barrel. The nicer the finish that the Finish Reamer or Throating Reamer leaves, the faster the throat will break in.

Shoot one round and clean for the first two rounds individually. Look to see what the barrel is telling you. If I'm getting little to no copper out of it, I sit down and shoot the gun. Say 4 - 5 round groups and then clean. If the barrel cleans easily and shoots well, we consider it done.

If the barrel shows some copper or is taking a little longer to clean after the first two, shoot a group of 3 rounds and clean. Then a group of 5 and clean.

After you shoot the 3rd group and 5th group, watch how long it takes to clean. Also notice your group sizes. If the group sizes are good and the cleaning is getting easier or is staying the same, then shoot 4 - 5 round groups.

If fouling appears to be heavy and taking a while to clean, notice your group sizes. If group sizes are good and not going sour, you don't have a fouling problem. Some barrels will clean easier than others. Some barrels may take a little longer to break in. Remember the throat. Fouling can start all the way from here. We have noticed sometimes that even up to approximately 100 rounds, a barrel can show signs of a lot of copper, but it still shoots really well and then for no apparent reason, you will notice little to no copper and it will clean really easy.

This is meant as guide lines only. There is no hard and fast rule for breaking in a barrel......
Bartlein Barrels, Inc.


dave

My Gunsmith has chambered thousands of custom rifles over 30 years and has never "broken-in" a barrel.

http://www.6mmbr.com/GailMcMbreakin.html

David

http://www.snipercountry.com/Articles/Barrel_BreakIn.asp

David

The "break in" process is simple. It is a "shoot and clean" process.

Take your new rifle to the range on day one. Shoot it as much as you like. Come home and clean it.

Go to the range on day two. Shoot as much as you'd like then clean

Go to the range 5 days then clean

Go to the range 10 days then clean.


Barrel is broken in.

Most people couldn't break in a barrel in a lifetime following that procedure....

David

People, hello, you guys do realize that "the guy" in that video is our beloved Boxer, AKA Big Stick

I proved to myself,about 30 years ago.That a properly conditioned or broke in free bore.Will yield less overall copper fouling and longer intervals between cleanings.

dave

Nothing escapes you.

I'd be curious to hear about the testing procedure you used to prove that. And whether the "break-in" described by RC yielded different results

The reference to harmonic oscillations blew it wide open for me. No doubt, that's him!!

There's no way following any "procedure" will make a difference. Reading about breaking barrels in is what causes people to think it does. I've tried it on a few and, on others, just shot 'em. No difference.

If you have a good barrel, it shoots good. Bad ones shoot bad.

My gunsmith summarized it like this after a "break in" discussion.

He said, "this barrel has been rifled and hand-lapped with the best equipment and skills available. What can anyone do to possibly improve it?" Especially someone with a cleaning rod. More chance of damaging it with the rod than helping it

I remember when Gale often wrote disparagingly about break in on the Firing Line forum from his hospital bed ~~ 15 years ago. I had some email from him about his getting scopes made in Asia for the Marines, but that is 4 or 5 computers ago.
Although he built some elephant rifles and took them to the range, he was primarily thinking in terms of Rem700 round bottoms and benchrest competition.

I liked Gale, but he never offered anything more to support his opinion than a line of reasoning.

If barrel break in is to increase the number of shots between Copper fouling, then everyone breaks in their barrel regardless if they believe in it or not and regardless if the number of shots increases or not.

I have seen people post "objective data" on barrel break in, and even get a sticky, but I have never seen an experiment that would stand up to the testing standards I would need to sell it as part of my engineering biz.

There are barrel makers that make excellent barrels that believe in barrel break in, but they don't have any raw data supporting it on their web sites.

Nor do they show any firing range data supporting the need for the cryogenic tempering service they offer.

What does it all mean?
Just more accuracy rituals in the gun culture where... you have to want to believe.

The truth lies - well - wherever it does... if one set up a properly controlled experiment then one might get unbiased objective emperical data.

I believe in cleaning but also believe improper or excessive cleaning can damage or ruin a barrel.

Re the video - seen in the past and thought it would be of interest - for different reasons to different folks.

Dave thanks for the science of fouling and cleaning.

Only thing i have to offer on barrel break in...

One barrel i bought was brand new. I read the sheet that came with it from Kreiger. I broke the barrel in per the instructions. That barrel cleans so easily it is laughable.

ALL my other rifles were either bought used, or built with new barrels i just went and shot. They all come clean enough of copper fouling, but none of them clean like my Krieger. None of the other ones are Krieger though. They are an Adams and Bennett, and AR Stoner.

The other rifle i refer to here has a Krieger barrel on it sure enough, but i got it used and it does not clean as easily as my other one. For reference, the easy clean barrel is a 30-06, and the not as easy clean barrels are a 22-250 AI and two .223 Remingtons.

Satire at its finest.

My gunsmith summarized it like this after a "break in" discussion.

He said, "this barrel has been rifled and hand-lapped with the best equipment and skills available. What can anyone do to possibly improve it?" Especially someone with a cleaning rod. More chance of damaging it with the rod than helping it [/quote]

Both my gunsmith and Shilen told me the exact same thing. So I put 100 rounds through my Shilen and when I cleaned the bore there was next to zero copper.

Perhaps if I'd have taken the time to ruff the bore a bit with a cleaning rod I may have been more justified in a good copper cleaning.

Shod

I'm more interested in how Dave tested break-in vs no break in. People smarter than me have said it would be a very difficult thing to test, because all barrels are different, even from the same barrel maker. But if it's difficult to prove that it works, then it's also difficult to prove it doesn't.

Having said that, proving something to yourself (as he put it) is different standard than proving it, period. I know from his posts that he's an experienced shooter, so I'm just interested in his method. I have my own opinions but I'm pretty sure that like everyone else posting on this thread, I don't know everything there is to know about barrels.

And I do find it interesting that he focused on the throat, and not the rifling. Seems I've read something similar from a pretty well-respected gunwriter who posts here.

My guess is that the inherent quality of a Kriger [I only own two] is much better than the Adams and Bennett [I own at least two], that difference is going to be more important than the difference from break in, if break in difference exists.

I do not have a bore scope, but I can see ~ 1" of the muzzle very well. I put a 16" Nite Ize fiber optic flashlight or Underwater Kinetics beam guide up the breech and observe the muzzle with a magnifier.

The Krieger will be mirror like in the grooves from being lapped. The Adams and Bennett will be rough in the grooves.

Krieger, Lilja, Shilen Select Match, and other very expensive custom barrels will be mirror like.

Factory barrels on Rem700, Win M70, Ruger #1, Sav110, etc will be rough.

Having said that. I have a couple Rem700 barrels and a Ruger #1V that stay very accurate for a lot of shots between cleaning.... but, still, smooth is better and more important than break in.

Amen brother. I had a conversation a while back with Jack Sutton of Hart Barrels and to make a long story short, he told me that the reason they listed a barrel break-in procedure on their website was because it helped slow down all the emails they got from folks who were convinced that break-in was necessary. It's still listed in their Q&A section but also states what others have already stated about custom "match grade" hand lapped barrels. They also think cyro freezing and coated bullets are BS too, but WTF do they know, right ?

I've had more than one other barrel-maker and custom gunsmith tell me the same thing.

The heart of the matter...............

MM

The most interesting cryo treatment working thing I've read since it's inception in the mainstream was from Mike Venturino about black powder fouling.

Mike

The only thing I seem to recall hearing more than once was that cyro treating made things easier to machine (maybe easier on cutting tools, reamers and such) but I'm not positive on that one. I don't know if cyro treating is done before or after heat treating and I do know that cutting after heat treating is hard on tooling. Maybe cyro after heat treating makes it easier on tooling then ? All I do know about what Hart Barrel barrels told me was that they said that Crucible did "extensive testing" on cyro treating and that on 416 stainless, the treatment had virtually no effect on it. Hart said they offer the (cyro) service because some customers are unaffected by facts.

I remember that Jarrett said that he wouldn't "warranty" one of his barrels that had moly coated bullets run down them. I think I've told you John that I use a lot of those Nosler Combined Technology bullets in my 280 Ackley, 06 and 300 WM, but not because I think they offer some huge advantage over standard BT's, but I've used enough of them to say that my cleaning intervals are further apart. I don't know what "Lubalox" is exactly, but so far it hasn't seemed to harm anything.

Cryo talk,3:30


Not sure if he is talking about stainless or chrome moly, but that austinite (sp?) will not respond to heat treating, but does convert to martinsite (again, sp?) that does. This allows for an almost complete stress relief.

Another thing my friend and gunsmith noted was about bore roughness and copper fouling.

He's seen pristine, mirror-like bores copper foul horribly and bores that look like rough, rat tail files completely void of copper fouling.

He believes copper fouling is more of a "Metalurgy" issue than a bore finish issue

Savage must love that copper grabbing variation of 4140.

RD,

I'm not sure exactly what Lubalox is either, but it sure ain't moly. It does seem to cut down on fouling, though more so in some barrels than other. I never have been able to see any inside a bore, while moly is pretty obvious, especially in a borescope.

Check out the Beanland 308 thread in this forum. The barrel is yet to be cleaned.

I tried to find some info through a search and the only thing that kept popping up was that is some kind of oxide coating. I been waiting for them to make a run of 308, 168 gr bullets for my 30/06 and it's been over a year at least since I've seen a box any where, even places that jack up the price to almost $50 a box. I called Nosler back in July and they said a production run was scheduled for early Sept. They said it would have hit the dealers by early Oct and it never happened. Called them again and now they are saying early December. When they finally do, I'm buying an arse load of em. Seen the 180's often, but I've got a ton of them for my 300 WM.

I use the Big Stick beak in procedure but I do it before I have the smith cut the chamber. I guess you could call it a pre break in procedure.