New Rifle Barrel Break-in for Accuracy?

[G8rHunter]

I personally didn't see any personal attacks I only saw tongue in check comments. When I see those, it's someone's choice to pick up the offense or let it lie like the pile of poo it is. IMO

At least you're in agreement with Solomon, It's all pissing in the wind!

 

[G8rHunter]

I will be posting results in the future of one of my latest builds in 22-250.
View attachment 553249
View attachment 553250
View attachment 553251
Parker Hale M82 with a free floated 1.25" GM barrel , trued and bedded action, with PH adjustable sniper trigger !

Dang, that scope is GINORMOUS!!!

 

[tac]

Dang, so a 45-70 will have a shorter barrel life than a much smaller. 22?

Well, I shoot a .45-70 that was made in 1881, and that thing, with open sights, keeps all its shots inside 3-4 inches at 100m, just like it always did. .45-70 doesn't burn away a bit of the chamber every time you fire it, unlike many of the modern high-stepping over-bore calibres. You can't get a 300gr bullet making well over 3000 fps without paying for it in barrel life, or rather, lack of it..

Coming up to modern times, my Steyr SSG69 had over 12000 rounds through it, and the last day I shot it, I duplicated the factory target target of five shots in 3/4" that I shot back in 1981.

My Krico 650SS has well over 8,000 shot-count, and STILL makes five shot groups under 1/2 inch at 100m.

 

[G8rHunter]

In all honesty I could have missed something, and as a Mod I'm new to this and still have my training wheels on. The Mods here are attempting to provide guard rails not road blocks to dialogue. I'll admit it's a fine line at times, but we do our best to keep it civil while allowing strong opinions to be shared.

BTW, I like staying on topic, but some of the rabbit trails have been interesting as well. And, I will add, I never thought this much dialogue, this fast, would have occurred!

 

[DB is Here]

BTW, I like staying on topic, but some of the rabbit trails have been interesting as well. And, I will add, I never thought this much dialogue, this fast, would have occurred!

It was a great topic (Kudos) and I learned a lot. Ton of folks here to learn from, it's like I'm getting a college education on the things I wish they taught in college.

 

[G8rHunter]

It was a great topic (Kudos) and I learned a lot. Ton of folks here to learn from, it's like I'm getting a college education on the things I wish they taught in college.

I can relate, since I used to do rounds in a teaching hospital and was privy to enviable information. Six months ago, I didn't know the difference between shotgun gauges or ammo. Now, I am getting quite the education on rifles.

 

[Geardo]

A boresnake only cleans the bore...its the fired copper jacketed bullets at high velocity that burnish the bore.

The Cu isn't doing jack. Your barrel wears from high temp gasses.

 

[CLT65]

Really bad assumption, as I would prefer not to do a break-in. I started the post thinking maybe, but I was not 100% sure. For me, the evidence was overwhelming in favor. I doubt the vast majority on this thread were dissuaded!

No offense intended, and I don't mean to start anything up again, but if you're seeing "overwhelming" evidence in favor of the hundred-round break-in, you and I have been reading completely different threads. Either that or one of us is blindly ignoring any evidence that runs contrary to what we've chosen to believe.

Again, no offense intended, just an observation. We can have disagreement on the issue, no problem, but I'm having a hard time seeing anything remotely overwhelming.

 

[Mooseman]

The Cu isn't doing jack. Your barrel wears from high temp gasses.

Funny.. the Egyptians cut granite using copper tools ! If Copper under pressure and friction is not doing X amount of wear on the barrel steel then it defies the laws of physics and Metallurgy. The majority of the Plasma from the burning powder is right at the throat , hence the throat erosion first.

 

[G8rHunter]

For me, it has!

 

[DLS]

Dang, so a 45-70 will have a shorter barrel life than a much smaller. 22?

Nope, the life of a barrel's throat is dependent on pressure and temperature. The .45-70 is very low pressure and the peak flame temperature is pretty low relative to most other calibers. So, the throat will last a long time.

I had a friend who owned a .340 Weatherby Magnum, which is a very "hot" round. His 250 gr. handloads were averaging 2950 FPS over my Oehler 35p chronograph compared to most published data showing a couple hundred FPS slower. He had no sticky bolt or case head expansion, so it was apparent that his rifle could handle it but he did have to set back his barrel and recut the chamber after about 700 rounds. The throat looked like sandpaper under the borescope.

There are a lot of high-intensity rounds that can show this short of barrel life. The more overbore for the case and the higher the pressure (and attendant temperature) the faster the throat will erode.

I hope this helps.

 

[Geardo]

Funny.. the Egyptians cut granite using copper tools ! If Copper under pressure and friction is not doing X amount of wear on the barrel steel then it defies the laws of physics and Metallurgy. The majority of the Plasma from the burning powder is right at the throat , hence the throat erosion first.

If you are shooting 100 rds through hunting or target rifles, you are blowing tons of $$$ over time. Why not buy 2 identical Ballistic advantage barrel on sale for like $100 and test both out of the box, then "break" one in and see if groups improve. Shoot the same amount of rounds out of the other to keep things fair.

If you can disprove it to yourself you will save a ton of $$ in ammo in the long run.

 

[G8rHunter]

Funny.. the Egyptians cut granite using copper tools ! If Copper under pressure and friction is not doing X amount of wear on the barrel steel then it defies the laws of physics and Metallurgy. The majority of the Plasma from the burning powder is right at the throat , hence the throat erosion first.

The articles I have read specifically highlight the cleaning of the copper in the barrel. I'm sure it is a number of factors: copper, gases, velocity, etc.

 

[G8rHunter]

Nope, the life of a barrel's throat is dependent on pressure and temperature. The .45-70 is very low pressure and the peak flame temperature is pretty low relative to most other calibers. So, the throat will last a long time.

I had a friend who owned a .340 Weatherby Magnum, which is a very "hot" round. His 250 gr. handloads were averaging 2950 FPS over my Oehler 35p chronograph compared to most published data showing a couple hundred FPS slower. He had no sticky bolt or case head expansion, so it was apparent that his rifle could handle it but he did have to set back his barrel and recut the chamber after about 700 rounds. The throat looked like sandpaper under the borescope.

There are a lot of high-intensity rounds that can show this short of barrel life. The more overbore for the case and the higher the pressure (and attendant temperature) the faster the throat will erode.

I hope this helps.

Thanks for the explanation. Sounds like part of the problem begins with the manufacturer over boring or is it something occurring through a custom design?

 

[Geardo]

Funny.. the Egyptians cut granite using copper tools ! If Copper under pressure and friction is not doing X amount of wear on the barrel steel then it defies the laws of physics and Metallurgy. The majority of the Plasma from the burning powder is right at the throat , hence the throat erosion first.

NOVA Online | Secrets of Lost Empires | Pharaoh's Obelisk | Cutting Granite with Sand




Archeologists know that the ancient Egyptians had the skills to forge bronze and copper tools. Stonemason Roger Hopkins takes up a copper chisel, which works well when carving sandstone and limestone rock, to see if it might carve granite.

"We're losing a lot of metal and very little stone is falling off," observes Hopkins, which is hardly the desired result. Hopkins' simple experiment makes this much clear: The Egyptians needed better tools than soft bronze and copper chisels to carve granite.

 

[11Charlie]

If you are shooting 100 rds through hunting or target rifles, you are blowing tons of $$$ over time. Why not buy 2 identical Ballistic advantage barrel on sale for like $100 and test both out of the box, then "break" one in and see if groups improve. Shoot the same amount of rounds out of the other to keep things fair.

If you can disprove it to yourself you will save a ton of $$ in ammo in the long run.

I reload so cost is not the issue to me. Even if I didn't reload and it was a known fact that it was better I would do it. But it doesn't make a dang bit of difference so I don't.

 

[pharmseller]

it's like I'm getting a college education on the things I wish they taught in college.

Yeah, they send you off to college, try to gain a little knowledge,
But all you want to do is learn how to score…




P

 

[11Charlie]

But all you want to do is learn how to score…

Which doesn't require a break in period!

 

[DLS]

...Why not buy 2 identical Ballistic advantage barrel ...

You could easily do this on a Savage or AR since the barrels or so easy to swap. It might be fun to do for the experientially inclined.

As I posted earlier this was done and reported by the American Rifleman years ago and the objective testing showed that after a couple of hundred rounds both rifles exhibited the same levels of "conditioning".

The conclusion was that a certain number of bare rounds will micro polish the bore causing different levels of improvement, depending on how rough the barrel was to begin with. That number is very low before improvement stops however. About 10 rounds or so and the improvement seems to stop. You also have throat wear increasing every shot once you have smoothed out the tiny imperfections that breaking in addresses.

So as I said prior … I 'break in' my barrels by doing initial load development and call it good. Back in the day my rifles (and occasionally me) would consistently shoot Master and High Master scores. So, for me at least, my process works just fine and saves valuable round count on the barrel.

 

[Dwesson]

Really bad assumption, as I would prefer not to do a break-in. I started the post thinking maybe, but I was not 100% sure. For me, the evidence was overwhelming in favor. I doubt the vast majority on this thread were dissuaded!

You mean the anecdotal evidence, given to you by manufacturers of barrels, that could easily provide NON-anecdotal evidence, but choose not to?