Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Barrel Break In Yes or No?

Can you cite your plasma claim?

Here is a pretty good layman's discussion about point load: https://sciencing.com/calculate-overturning-moment-5173314.html

For the example given all of the energy in the bullet is deposited in a single point (or a very small area) on the target. If that energy is enough to cause deformation, it will do so. One thing I will point out is that bullets impacting mild steel (read low deformation threshold) will cause craters or push through. If you increase the quality of the steel (A500, for example), you have to increase the energy significantly to get the same effect.
The reason I bring that up is that the steels used in barrels are quite high quality these days. Don't really think that the bullets or brushes are going to cause significant damage to barrels made with today's steel.

One thing I do see a lot of people talking past one another on is this. After machining or forging, there will be micro-fractures in the surface of the bore. Some will have machining marks or inclusions as well. In order for a barrel to function optimally, those need to be filled. That can be done in a couple of ways. One that is mentioned is DynaBore coating. With that, the silica fills in those imperfections and is cured in place by heat and pressure. The other method and the one that has lead us down the path of "break-in" is by filling those imperfections with copper (or lead). This was the old "season" the bore of muzzleloaders thing as well. As you shoot it, and clean it after each shot, you are removing the carbon layer, which allows copper to deposit on copper in all those little imperfections. After a few rounds the barrel becomes "smooth", and cleaning becomes easier because now all of the fouling is above the surface of the bore, rather than stuck into all those little imperfections. This is also why you will see a change in accuracy when you "clean down to bare steel" using copper solvents. You need to refill those imperfections.

My personal opinion is that with today's materials and tools, "break-in" is not that important anymore because the bores in our barrels, even from factory offerings, are much better than they were 50-70 years ago (in the heyday of gun writers).

[/quote] Have you ever tried just shooting a Krieger barrel, and cleaning it after every range session?

Another thing I might mention is that I know more than one custom rifle maker (and even a couple of barrel makers) who included a "break-in procedure" on their website, just because so many customers (and potential customers) phoned or e-mailed asking for one. None of those guys believes in it, but they put one on their website just so they wouldn't have to waste time answering those e-mails and phone calls about why they didn't find break-in necessary.


[/quote]
Gordy told me to clean the barrel, fire ten rounds, then clean again. Break in done. I added the Dyna-Bore Coat after the "break in" on my most recent rifle from Gordy. I don't clean the bore after every range range session. I never have. I am probably too cleaning averse, but I do believe that many barrels are damaged by improper cleaning methods and/or cleaning too frequently/vigorously.
[/quote]

We're actually talking basically the same thing.

Gordy's method is basically what I do, whether I fire 10 or 15 or whatever number of rounds during the initial 2-3 range sessions. Then I quit cleaning the barrel until accuracy falls off noticeably--which usually takes quite a while.

However, if the barrel fouls enough to quit shooting well after less than 20 rounds post-cleaning, I then apply Dyna Bore-Coat. That sort of fouling is pretty rare with lapped custom barrels, and even many that aren't lapped. It's even uncommon in several brands of factory barrels these days. All of which is why I use a bore-scope when shooting a new barrel, to actually see what's happening inside, rather than going through some rigid number of shots/cleaning.

My other point (which apparently some still don't get) is "break-in" will happen even if you shoot 50 rounds, then clean the barrel. The bore does NOT have to be cleaned after every shot, which is what so many published/advocated break-in techniques advocate--or every 3 shots, or whatever. A bullet will "burnish" any imperfections just as well after the barrel is cleaned to bare metal whether one shot's fired between cleanings, or 50 shots.

Thirty years ago, before immediately breaking-in a new barrel supposedly became such a necessity, many shooters noticed that new barrels started shooting more accurately after 100-200 rounds. This was because they'd been cleaned a few times.

I've even known new factory barrels to shoot very well after never being cleaned--at least for longer than they should have. A good friend's Model 70 Winchester Classis is a good example. It's a .270 Weatherby Magnum, and like a lot of older hunters be believed that scrubbing the bore after every hunting season with a brass brush dipped in Hoppe's No. 9, then running patches through it until they came out pretty white, was how to clean a barrel.

Then, several years after he bought the rifle, he phoned me, saying he thought the barrel was "shot out." I asked how many rounds had been fired through it, and he didn't know, because he never counted them--but guessed maybe 500. I said it was highly unlikely the barrel was shot out, and eventually he dropped it off with some of his "pet" handloads.

It turned out the bore contained alternating layers of copper and powder fouling. I've seen this sort of "geologic" fouling before, including on a couple of used rifles I purchased when the owner thought they were shot out. It would have taken days to get it all out with solvents, so I used JB Bore Paste to scrub it out. I then shot a couple of groups with the handloads, and they went into the rifle's normal small groups. I cleaned the bore again (which didn't take long with a good copper solvent), and installed DBC. He was ecstatic, and his rifle still shoots very accurately a decade later, DESPITE never being "properly broken-in" when new--or even really cleaned for a number of years.

DBC treatment on my 257 Creedmoor rifle = i did the DBC treatment 2 years ago and never cleaned this rifle for 2 years with 250 + shots fired in this rifle . i cleaned it yesterday with wipe-out and boy did it clean up easy and fast i was very surprised . so after a very good cleaning with wipe -out and alcohol . i then dried out the barrel with clean white patches then gave it another DBC treatment for another 250 + rounds of ammo to be shot thru this rifle. i also just ordered some more DBC from Midway , Midway has DBC in stock right now.

I suspect DBC has a longer life than 250 shots. That said I suppose extra treatment shouldn't hurt up to a point.

When DBC first appeared, the manufacturer believed it lasted the life of the barrel, but a few years ago they suggested it might need to be renewed if the rifle got shot a lot. Which would be more than 250 rounds....

Gordy told me to clean the barrel, fire ten rounds, then clean again. Break in done. I added the Dyna-Bore Coat after the "break in" on my most recent rifle from Gordy. I don't clean the bore after every range range session. I never have. I am probably too cleaning averse, but I do believe that many barrels are damaged by improper cleaning methods and/or cleaning too frequently/vigorously.
[/quote]

We're actually talking basically the same thing.

Gordy's method is basically what I do, whether I fire 10 or 15 or whatever number of rounds during the initial 2-3 range sessions. Then I quit cleaning the barrel until accuracy falls off noticeably--which usually takes quite a while.

However, if the barrel fouls enough to quit shooting well after less than 20 rounds post-cleaning, I then apply Dyna Bore-Coat. That sort of fouling is pretty rare with lapped custom barrels, and even many that aren't lapped. It's even uncommon in several brands of factory barrels these days. All of which is why I use a bore-scope when shooting a new barrel, to actually see what's happening inside, rather than going through some rigid number of shots/cleaning.

My other point (which apparently some still don't get) is "break-in" will happen even if you shoot 50 rounds, then clean the barrel. The bore does NOT have to be cleaned after every shot, which is what so many published/advocated break-in techniques advocate--or every 3 shots, or whatever. A bullet will "burnish" any imperfections just as well after the barrel is cleaned to bare metal whether one shot's fired between cleanings, or 50 shots.

Thirty years ago, before immediately breaking-in a new barrel supposedly became such a necessity, many shooters noticed that new barrels started shooting more accurately after 100-200 rounds. This was because they'd been cleaned a few times.

I've even known new factory barrels to shoot very well after never being cleaned--at least for longer than they should have. A good friend's Model 70 Winchester Classis is a good example. It's a .270 Weatherby Magnum, and like a lot of older hunters be believed that scrubbing the bore after every hunting season with a brass brush dipped in Hoppe's No. 9, then running patches through it until they came out pretty white, was how to clean a barrel.

Then, several years after he bought the rifle, he phoned me, saying he thought the barrel was "shot out." I asked how many rounds had been fired through it, and he didn't know, because he never counted them--but guessed maybe 500. I said it was highly unlikely the barrel was shot out, and eventually he dropped it off with some of his "pet" handloads.

It turned out the bore contained alternating layers of copper and powder fouling. I've seen this sort of "geologic" fouling before, including on a couple of used rifles I purchased when the owner thought they were shot out. It would have taken days to get it all out with solvents, so I used JB Bore Paste to scrub it out. I then shot a couple of groups with the handloads, and they went into the rifle's normal small groups. I cleaned the bore again (which didn't take long with a good copper solvent), and installed DBC. He was ecstatic, and his rifle still shoots very accurately a decade later, DESPITE never being "properly broken-in" when new--or even really cleaned for a number of years.

[/quote]

As usual thats good info. I'm still leaning back to Krieger notes. And as I've mentioned it really takes nothing much to push a few patches every few shots.

Even our Krieger tubes tended not to shoot as well even with break in, until they had 100 plus rounds down the tube. Then they settled and as long as you followed velocity and adjusted loads they tended to have good lives.

I do know that for some reason not knowing to break in a few M1A tubes that those cleaned harder, and then found out the break in and those cleaned better. Could very well simply have been luck or lack of as it was only a few barrels.

Being as I trust ya enough, the next tube will get maybe a full 50 and clean and coat just to see.. if you are correct. LOL

Wow. I mis posted above. I never read this. Doug probably believed. So what are your thoughts on replacing now? 1000 Rounds? surely not 250?

Also to a point, can't a barrel only get so dirty? Having played that game once just to see, of not cleaning a barrel for over 5000 rounds and it still basically shooting as well as it did clean, it opened eyes a bit as to how often one needs cleaning. Scared the whole time too when doing that... but I've seen others do it also..

I suspect a bore would need a reapplication of DBC only after the throat starts to crack due to heat erosion. Don't know for sure, but I generally install DBC in all my small-varmint centerfire barrels, primarily so I don't have to clean them in the field--which was the SOP back when I started shooting lots of "burrowing rodents." But I also suspect that was because the favored powders back then were older, dirty-burning sphericals, especially H335, an almost universal choice in the .223 Remington then. It was usually very accurate, but within 50 rounds or so laid down such a layer of powder fouling that you couldn't even see the copper fouling inside the muzzle!
And powder fouling is pretty abrasive itself, which exacerbated copper fouling.

This fouling is due to the coatings on the granules, which are the primary method of adjusting burn-rate in sphericals--and the coatings almost by definition don't burn very well. That started to change when Ramshot TAC appeared, which burns VERY cleanly when used around 60,000 PS--though not very cleanly below that. I suspect the way the Belgian company which makes solved the problem was by developing coatings that ALSO burned once they reach a certain pressure/temperature. But like most powder manufacturers, they're pretty closed-mouth about their trade secrets, so have never been able to confirm that.

The main point, however, is that pretty much eliminated having to frequently scrub bores in the field--and a few years later DBC appeared. But neither cleaning-burning powers like TAC or DBC prevent bore erosion, which is mostly caused by the heat of powder gases. Once the throat starts cracking then the DBC has cracked too, which can result in more copper fouling. I have smoothed some cracked throats with bore-lapping bullets, then reapplied DBC, which worked well.

I've shot out a bunch of DBCd barrels, and while Dyna-Tek says DBC may need to be re-applied in high-volume barrels, I've not had a barrel yet that needed reapplication before the barrel was ready for replacement. As MD says, when the throat is highly cracked, then bore-lapping bullets (or setting the barrel back) and a reapplication of DBC will likely get you a bit more life out of the barrel. I tend to replace barrels at that stage, rather than setting back, which may be why I've not seen the need to re-apply DBC within the lifespan of the barrel.