Barrel Breakin

[AllenOne1]

This is probably the best article I have seen on barrel break-in and why you need it. They reference pressure tests ran on accuracy barrels to describe how a barrel changes during the first shots through a new barrel.

Barrel Care: Do You Need to Break in a Barrel? Really? - Guns and Ammo

To properly care for firearm barrels, follow this ballistics expert's advice to avoid excessive buildup of copper deposits and powder fouling.

www.gunsandammo.com

 

[Cascade Hemi]

What I always notice in these types of articles there is no mention of the difference between "shoot once then clean, shoot twice then clean, etc" and just cleaning the barrel after the first 50 rounds. Is that because there is a difference or because the writer is just as steeped in fudd-lore as those he thinks he knows more than?

 

[AllenOne1]

What I always notice in these types of articles there is no mention of the difference between "shoot once then clean, shoot twice then clean, etc" and just cleaning the barrel after the first 50 rounds. Is that because there is a difference or because the writer is just as steeped in fudd-lore as those he thinks he knows more than?

You didn't read the article did you?

 

[Cascade Hemi]

You didn't read the article did you?

Did you? The author only discusses measuring new barrels and his "break-in" procedure. Barrel performance changes from new, what, if any, does cleaning play a roll? The author makes no mention of that at all, only that barrels need to be cleaned. He did take the time to pimp his favorite cleaner though.

 

[AllenOne1]

Did you? The author only discusses measuring new barrels and his "break-in" procedure. Barrel performance changes from new, what, if any, does cleaning play a roll? The author makes no mention of that at all, only that barrels need to be cleaned. He did take the time to pimp his favorite cleaner though.

You're the only one talking about cleaning other than them cleaning too much on some small bore barrels.

 

[wade2big]

Did you? The author only discusses measuring new barrels and his "break-in" procedure. Barrel performance changes from new, what, if any, does cleaning play a roll? The author makes no mention of that at all, only that barrels need to be cleaned. He did take the time to pimp his favorite cleaner though.

He specifically said that it wasn’t an endorsement. LOL.

 

[Cascade Hemi]

You're the only one talking about cleaning other than them cleaning too much on some small bore barrels.

"This is probably the best article I have seen on barrel break-in and why you need it."

Are you divorcing the break-in from the cleaning? If cleaning isn't a component of the "break-in" then you don't "need" anything because it'll happen without the shooters input. It's like you're playing a word game when your favorite article is called out for being a fluff piece for the Smater-Than types.

Yes, clean your barrel when new. How much?Just take a wild guess because that's anything anyone has ever produced, even when they have the testing capabilities right in front of them.

 

[Haney]

"This is probably the best article I have seen on barrel break-in and why you need it."

Are you divorcing the break-in from the cleaning? If cleaning isn't a component of the "break-in" then you don't "need" anything because it'll happen without the shooters input. It's like you're playing a word game when your favorite article is called out for being a fluff piece for the Smater-Than types.

Yes, clean your barrel when new. How much?Just take a wild guess because that's anything anyone has ever produced, even when they have the testing capabilities right in front of them.

 

[Niles Coyote]

The author is a well respected ballistician and has worked in the industry for years, @AllenOne1 thanks for sharing. His results of a barrel cleaning up easier and collecting less fouling if that procedure is followed mirror my own.

 

[Cascade Hemi]

View attachment 7998372

Barrel break-in pissing contest, Nevabendunbefo.

 

[Frank Green]

Ok all…..! I’ll give a little more background so ease up all!

Dave Emary I’ve known for years. Well over 20 now. He use to work at Hornady. Now he works at another place that I will keep to myself.

Daves been around the block and knows what he is talking about. He’s called me and bounced things/ideas off of myself and vice versa.

You also need to read the article and understand what your reading. He does note that higher quality barrels break in or should I say settle down much faster than a production barrel or a aftermarket barrel of lower quality.

Ive said it over and over again….the only thing you break in on a good barrel is the chambers throat. We don’t polish the throats. If the reamer leaves a nice finish the amount of fouling is typically lower and the barrel will settle down much sooner/lesser shots. Dave makes note of that in the article. I’m just saying it differentl.

I know of only two gunsmiths that polish the throats after chambering a new barrel and those are the only two guys I would trust to do mine. Dave Tooley and Al Warner. Both have done work for myself. I’ve had several discussions with both of them on it. If you don’t know what you’re doing when polishing the throat….don’t do it or you will most likely wreck it!

I typically shoot 2 rounds on a new barrel and clean the barrel. I look to see how the barrel is cleaning. If it’s cleaning fast and easy and I’m not getting a lot of fouling out of it. I’ll sit down and shoot about 20 to 25 rounds thru it. Not hot and heavy. Go easy on it. I watch the groups and at times will clock the velocity from the first round fired if I have time for the chronograph. Normally I consider it done after it’s cleaned again.

I don’t do all the one shot one clean or the five three shot groups and the five five shot groups anymore. More of a waste of time in a good barrel and a good chambering job.

Some barrels are so bad they never settle down.

The article is a good article.

I‘ve directed customers to Dave E. needing ballistic work and all I’ve ever received was a thanks and a comment that the guy knows what he’s doing and very helpful etc….never a single bum word back about him.

Later, Frank
Bartlein Barrels

 

[Cascade Hemi]

Ok all…..! I’ll give a little more background so ease up all!

Dave Emary I’ve known for years. Well over 20 now. He use to work at Hornady. Now he works at another place that I will keep to myself.

Daves been around the block and knows what he is talking about. He’s called me and bounced things/ideas off of myself and vice versa.

You also need to read the article and understand what your reading. He does note that higher quality barrels break in or should I say settle down much faster than a production barrel or a aftermarket barrel of lower quality.

Ive said it over and over again….the only thing you break in on a good barrel is the chambers throat. We don’t polish the throats. If the reamer leaves a nice finish the amount of fouling is typically lower and the barrel will settle down much sooner/lesser shots. Dave makes note of that in the article. I’m just saying it differentl.

I know of only two gunsmiths that polish the throats after chambering a new barrel and those are the only two guys I would trust to do mine. Dave Tooley and Al Warner. Both have done work for myself. I’ve had several discussions with both of them on it. If you don’t know what you’re doing when polishing the throat….don’t do it or you will most likely wreck it!

I typically shoot 2 rounds on a new barrel and clean the barrel. I look to see how the barrel is cleaning. If it’s cleaning fast and easy and I’m not getting a lot of fouling out of it. I’ll sit down and shoot about 20 to 25 rounds thru it. Not hot and heavy. Go easy on it. I watch the groups and at times will clock the velocity from the first round fired if I have time for the chronograph. Normally I consider it done after it’s cleaned again.

I don’t do all the one shot one clean or the five three shot groups and the five five shot groups anymore. More of a waste of time in a good barrel and a good chambering job.

Some barrels are so bad they never settle down.

The article is a good article.

I‘ve directed customers to Dave E. needing ballistic work and all I’ve ever received was a thanks and a comment that the guy knows what he’s doing and very helpful etc….never a single bum word back about him.

Later, Frank
Bartlein Barrels

I'm not arguing with you, or even with Dave Emery. However, his article only says barrels change from new and that you should clean them at some point early on. He clearly states his way is not THE way, just his opinion. The rest was really kinda fluff. So what makes the article good? The oldsters at the range will tell you the same thing with a twinkle in their eye. Why didn't Dave tell us if the pressure change was positive or negative? Or if the change was even consistently the same positive or negative? How about correlations between performance and break-in?

Here's his summary:

"The bottom line is that a barrel and its performance change during the initial firings. The number of rounds it takes to get a rifle barrel to settle in varies depending on the quality of the finish of the rifling. A high-quality, smooth barrel will probably take some 10 to 20 rounds to settle in. A low-cost, massproduced barrel could take upwards of several hundred rounds to break in. If you don’t clean the bore frequently during this initial period, especially the first five to 10 rounds, you’ll leave a lot of copper in the barrel that will require work to get out later."

The last Bartlein I "broke-in" I shot a casual 25 rounds through it before touching it. Then I cleaned it and shot another 50 rounds. It was never hard to clean and had no more fouling than any of the other Bartleins I have. Sure, the velocity changed from round one up to around round 10 or 15, every decent barrel does. What does this have to do with performance or even the necessity to "break-in" a barrel if there's such a narrow set of outcomes and a wide set of practices?

@AllenOne1 promised me the 'best break-in article he's seen' but it's basically the same break-in article that's ever been written. I like Wipe-Out though so at least Dave Emery pimps the good shit if nothing else.

 

[Rob01]

The first post lost me at Guns and Ammo link. LOL

 

[AllenOne1]

The first post lost me at Guns and Ammo link. LOL

Yeah "Guns and Ammo" made me pause too, I wasn't expecting too much but started reading anyway. By the time I was done I had to go back up and see who wrote it, that's when I saw Dave's name and knew it was legit.

 

[Edds]

Ok all…..! I’ll give a little more background so ease up all!

Dave Emary I’ve known for years. Well over 20 now. He use to work at Hornady. Now he works at another place that I will keep to myself.

Later, Frank
Bartlein Barrels

Why would you keep it to yourself? Is this info not correct?

Dave Emary Retires as Hornady Senior Ballistician « Daily Bulletin

Dave Emary is concluding his 24-year career at Hornady. Although retiring from full-time duties, Emary will continue with Hornady as a consultant. AccurateShooter.com wants to acknowledge Dave's decades of important work in the gun industry. Brilliant, dedicated, and forward-thinking, Dave has...

bulletin.accurateshooter.com

 

[AllenOne1]

I'm not arguing with you, or even with Dave Emery. However, his article only says barrels change from new and that you should clean them at some point early on. He clearly states his way is not THE way, just his opinion. The rest was really kinda fluff. So what makes the article good? The oldsters at the range will tell you the same thing with a twinkle in their eye. Why didn't Dave tell us if the pressure change was positive or negative? Or if the change was even consistently the same positive or negative? How about correlations between performance and break-in?

Here's his summary:

"The bottom line is that a barrel and its performance change during the initial firings. The number of rounds it takes to get a rifle barrel to settle in varies depending on the quality of the finish of the rifling. A high-quality, smooth barrel will probably take some 10 to 20 rounds to settle in. A low-cost, massproduced barrel could take upwards of several hundred rounds to break in. If you don’t clean the bore frequently during this initial period, especially the first five to 10 rounds, you’ll leave a lot of copper in the barrel that will require work to get out later."

The last Bartlein I "broke-in" I shot a casual 25 rounds through it before touching it. Then I cleaned it and shot another 50 rounds. It was never hard to clean and had no more fouling than any of the other Bartleins I have. Sure, the velocity changed from round one up to around round 10 or 15, every decent barrel does. What does this have to do with performance or even the necessity to "break-in" a barrel if there's such a narrow set of outcomes and a wide set of practices?

@AllenOne1 promised me the 'best break-in article he's seen' but it's basically the same break-in article that's ever been written. I like Wipe-Out though so at least Dave Emery pimps the good shit if nothing else.

Now that summary you gave was outstanding thank you! I was so sure you hadn't read the article, my apologies.

 

[Cascade Hemi]

Now that summary you gave was outstanding thank you! I was so sure you hadn't read the article, my apologies.

I've read it five times now thinking I missed something special. There's no there there. All the juicy stuff Dave only hints at but leaves out. The best I can take away is if you don't clean the barrel early on in the "break-in" you'll just have to clean it a little more later. No accuracy penalty. No mind blowing reveal. Really just stuff that is widely known to everyone.

My first post was lamenting that Dave stated his preferred break-in method but then never gave us details why. It's the same as every other article on the subject; "Do it this way or else". Or else what? My experience says or else you'll do it another way and the results will be the same. Do the crazy time consuming "break-in" or just do whatever the hell you want so long as you don't use stainless brushes, lapping compound on a drill, or get the barrel glowing hot. Dave could have wrapped the article up in two paragraphs.

 

[Frank Green]

Why would you keep it to yourself? Is this info not correct?

Dave Emary Retires as Hornady Senior Ballistician « Daily Bulletin

Dave Emary is concluding his 24-year career at Hornady. Although retiring from full-time duties, Emary will continue with Hornady as a consultant. AccurateShooter.com wants to acknowledge Dave's decades of important work in the gun industry. Brilliant, dedicated, and forward-thinking, Dave has...

bulletin.accurateshooter.com

Dave works at a place that does testing etc….the reason I won’t name it is because I haven‘t asked him for permission to do so.

He left Hornady on good terms and technically not retired. At least of last or early this year he’s still working.

This way any testing that is done regardless of what he is working on no one can say he is being biased towards Hornady or anyone else.

The place he is working at has been around since WW2 (no it’s not Lake City). Probably the best kept secret around. Hell I didn’t even know the place existed till he told me was going there. He touched base with me when he started as he most likely would be needing test barrels. Indoor/underground ranges and if I recall correctly outdoor ranges to 3 miles. Might have been longer.

If I’m ever near him….you can bet I’m going to ask if I can stop and visit!

 

[DJL2]

I don't know if Nathan Foster published any of his barrel care/cleaning related stuff on-line or if it's all just in his books... his stuff is probably more the discussion to have about cleaning, polishing, etc. as it relates to getting a barrel to shoot. I don't want to put words in his mouth, but he is more geared towards what "normal" folks can do to get mass produced guns to shoot their best.

 

[Baron23]

Dave works at a place that does testing etc….the reason I won’t name it is because I haven‘t asked him for permission to do so.

He left Hornady on good terms and technically not retired. At least of last or early this year he’s still working.

This way any testing that is done regardless of what he is working on no one can say he is being biased towards Hornady or anyone else.

The place he is working at has been around since WW2 (no it’s not Lake City). Probably the best kept secret around. Hell I didn’t even know the place existed till he told me was going there. He touched base with me when he started as he most likely would be needing test barrels. Indoor/underground ranges and if I recall correctly outdoor ranges to 3 miles. Might have been longer.

If I’m ever near him….you can bet I’m going to ask if I can stop and visit!

Can I come too?

 

[308pirate]

The place he is working at has been around since WW2 (no it’s not Lake City).

NSWC Crane?

 

[Frank Green]

NSWC Crane?

Nope! Good guess though!

The place can also handle up to 8" guns / artillery pieces.

 

[CK1.0]

I read the article. IMHO it's just another example of someone suggesting you look at a Rorschach test and see the same thing that they do.

The only thing the author says with any real certainty is that over time the excessive buildup of copper and carbon fouling will effect its performance as that will have an effect on pressure/speed/accuracy/etc.

Duh.

Early in the article, the author says that barrels that are "mass-produced" require break-in because they do not receive any "post rifling lapping, or smoothing", mentioning in the next paragraph that the barrels he uses for testing have been "lead lapped" but the throats still have not yet been polished.

Therefore, I feel like the explanation that could be argued for "zero break-in" is simply that: sending the first 100-200 rounds downrange with a new barrel is not really "shooting"... it's just "post rifling lapping".

If one's goal is to have the cleanest barrel on the block, with little to no copper deposits left behind or to be found when they observe it meticulously with a borescope, then, by all means, this seems to be the way to go.

That said, there is nothing any of us can attach to a brush that is more abrasive than sending a press-fit piece of metal down the bore with 50,000+ pounds of pressure behind it. It can even be argued that the copper deposits that are left behind or "stubborn" when cleaning are useful, as they are filling in the voids and inconsistencies left behind in the bore from its initial machining (much like a painter might with filler and sanding before painting a fine piece of trim).

This is why my barrels broken-in with only 1-2 dry patches and ~200rds, shoots just as well as anyone else's at my club, some of which spend all day with half of a Bass Pro's cleaning isle worth of shit.

Like most, I miss because I suck, not because I didn't break-in my barrel properly.

 

[spife7980]

Nope! Good guess though!

The place can also handle up to 8" guns / artillery pieces.

Im going to guess its EMRTC as the article closes with it.

"Although he has retired from Hornady, Dave Emary will still use his skill set and vast ballistics knowledge in a new job at a familiar place — as Director of Engineering at the Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center. EMRTC is internationally recognized in explosives research and testing. For Emary, it’s just his way of easing into retirement."

 

[CK1.0]

I wasn't trying to be a dick earlier @AllenOne1, obviously, I just feel differently about barrel break-in and it seems every time I read anything about it, I just end up with more questions than answers.

The author lends credence and credibility to doing things a certain way, partly because he's been doing things a certain way for a long time...

If anything, it makes me wonder what would happen if that same qualified individual was to conduct more of an actual legit "break-in vs no-break-in" test over some time and with multiple barrels..? then, I might become a believer.

Until then, my shit always shoots better than I can, and I'm lazy, so I'm a "no break-in" guy.

 

[Cascade Hemi]

I wasn't trying to be a dick earlier @AllenOne1, obviously, I just feel differently about barrel break-in and it seems every time I read anything about it, I just end up with more questions than answers.

The author lends credence and credibility to doing things a certain way, partly because he's been doing things a certain way for a long time...

If anything, it makes me wonder what would happen if that same qualified individual was to conduct more of an actual legit "break-in vs no-break-in" test over some time and with multiple barrels..? then, I might become a believer.

Until then, my shit always shoots better than I can, and I'm lazy, so I'm a "no break-in" guy.

So you're saying the first response in this thread nailed it?

 

[CK1.0]

So you're saying the first response in this thread nailed it?

Maybe, as there always seems to be more "that's the way we've always done it" than, you know, science... lol.

I don't believe in coincidence, and I'm going on 5 barrels in a row now that have shot great with zero break-in procedure beyond a couple of dry patches followed by 100-200 rounds (and I'm not that lucky).

I am not aware of anyone having done it, but an honest-to-goodness real-world unbiased test, trying to find out whether it matters or not, and why, would be helpful. However, in lieu of evidence, I don't think it matters and will be sticking with my "I'm not that lucky" hypothesis.

 

[AllenOne1]

Maybe, as there always seems to be more "that's the way we've always done it" than, you know, science... lol.

I don't believe in coincidence, and I'm going on 5 barrels in a row now that have shot great with zero break-in procedure beyond a couple of dry patches followed by 100-200 rounds (and I'm not that lucky).

I am not aware of anyone having done it, but an honest-to-goodness real-world unbiased test, trying to find out whether it matters or not, and why, would be helpful. However, in lieu of evidence, I don't think it matters and will be sticking with my "I'm not that lucky" hypothesis.

At least you have a process that you follow repeatedly that appears to be working for you. Do you document anything on the first 200ish rounds, any cleanings, cleaning results if any, velocity at points during that 200.

Now you have me thinking. I'm sitting on a brand new barrel how should I document that first 200 that would be of any help to me and others going forward? Big can of worms? We would need several people to document the same 200 period and even then I don't know if it tells us anything.

 

[Rob01]

Maybe if you are trying to prove something to someone on the internet you can document everything including your color of socks when shooting lol but I see no reason to document anything but round count and when cleaned during a barrel life. I keep an Impact Data Books barrel log for every barrel and log in every round. I have a loading log also so I know what my load is for the rifle if handloading so I know velocity but don't stress that too much as I know when a barrel should be going by my barrel log so I know if the change in velocity is normal or not.

I have tried all the "break ins" out there from the shoot one and clean to the Tubb TMS rounds to doing nothing and you know what? After a few hundred rounds it makes no difference. They all shot great and cleaned up but they were also custom barrels. Even with the few factory barrel I have had in ARs they acted similarly. Now all I do is clean it when I get it in from smith and then clean it good down to steel after the first 3-4 range trips and done. Broken in. Usually shoot 20 rounds or so on those first trips to zero scope and get some rough data as velocity may change some.

 

[Ichi]

I have tried all the "break ins" out there from the shoot one and clean to the Tubb TMS rounds to doing nothing and you know what? After a few hundred rounds it makes no difference.

I was about to ask about the Tubb Final Finish rounds. I bought some to take care of a gas port burr in a new AR barrel. I just have not had enough time to deal with it.

 

[Rob01]

I was about to ask about the Tubb Final Finish rounds. I bought some to take care of a gas port burr in a new AR barrel. I just have not had enough time to deal with it.

The Final Finish and TMS are two different systems. Final Finish is for factory barrels and can be used for break in and I have used them in the past also on factory barrels and it actually works well. Depending on the condition of the bore you may not need all 5 grits and might start in the middle and use only 3.

The TMS or throat maintenance system is good to smooth out the throat on custom barrels and maintain over the life. I used it on a .243 barrel I used in matches back around mid 2000s. Did the break in with it if shoot three, clean, shoot three more and clean and then used it about every 300 rounds and at 1880 rounds that barrel was still half moa and didn’t lose any velocity. I was running 115 DTACs at 2995fps.

So if you wanted to try them then give them a shot and see how they work for you.

 

[striped1]

Fucking google it. It isn't a fucking secret for fucks sake. He works here. .

New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology’s Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center

 

[CK1.0]

Lol, I don't have any documentation for my first 200 rounds with any of my barrels because there's nothing to document. I don't do anything other than send rounds downrange.

While I don't do any traditional barrel break-in procedure, I do consider the first 200rds a "break-in period", because, as mentioned earlier, the rounds are doing the final lapping/polishing of the barrel and it will speed up during this time because, science.

I don't do any real form of load development during the first 200 beyond picking a generic charge weight/speed out of thin air (really more of an educated guess for a middle-of-the-road charge based on known load data). Sometimes I'll try different bullet jumps/seating depths to get an idea about what jump range the particular barrel/bullet combo might like, but nothing is set in stone.

I pick "200" because I've had barrels that stopped speeding up after ~100rds, but then have also had a couple that that didn't settle down until ~150ish, so since then, 200rds it is, and all have been good/stable speed-wise with every one since.

After I've shot 200 rounds, I clean the barrel. I only use Boretech Eliminator, the Boretech nylon brushes, and cotton patches, that's it. No pastes or abrasives of any kind, ever. Going forward, that's the only stuff I use and the way I clean the barrel, every 200-400ish rounds, for the rest of its (hopefully long) life. I've never understood the obsession some guys have about bringing the barrel back to squeaky raw-steel-clean... kind of sounds like an easy way for one to mess up a perfectly good barrel to me honestly.

No bore scoping or any of that because what the barrel looks like is of no consequence to me (and might only make me fuck with it more than I probably should when it should just be left alone... ignorance is bliss they say). One could probably call me "anti-borescope" in a sense. To me, it sounds like lots of guys were better off when borescopes were too expensive for everyone to have one in their toolbox. I mean, if I ever have a problem that necessitates me using one to figure out what is going on (like a carbon ring/donut or something), then sure, but otherwise, nope.

I included all that because, as you can probably tell, my barrel break-in ethos is more of a "do no harm" philosophy than anything else.

 

[AllenOne1]

Lol, I don't have any documentation for my first 200 rounds with any of my barrels because there's nothing to document. I don't do anything other than send rounds downrange.

While I don't do any traditional barrel break-in procedure, I do consider the first 200rds a "break-in period", because, as mentioned earlier, the rounds are doing the final lapping/polishing of the barrel and it will speed up during this time because, science.

I don't do any real form of load development during the first 200 beyond picking a generic charge weight/speed out of thin air (really more of an educated guess for a middle-of-the-road charge based on known load data). Sometimes I'll try different bullet jumps/seating depths to get an idea about what jump range the particular barrel/bullet combo might like, but nothing is set in stone.

I pick "200" because I've had barrels that stopped speeding up after ~100rds, but then have also had a couple that that didn't settle down until ~150ish, so since then, 200rds it is, and all have been good/stable speed-wise with every one since.

After I've shot 200 rounds, I clean the barrel. I only use Boretech Eliminator, the Boretech nylon brushes, and cotton patches, that's it. No pastes or abrasives of any kind, ever. Going forward, that's the only stuff I use and the way I clean the barrel, every 200-400ish rounds, for the rest of its (hopefully long) life. I've never understood the obsession some guys have about bringing the barrel back to squeaky raw-steel-clean... kind of sounds like an easy way for one to mess up a perfectly good barrel to me honestly.

No bore scoping or any of that because what the barrel looks like is of no consequence to me (and might only make me fuck with it more than I probably should when it should just be left alone... ignorance is bliss they say). One could probably call me "anti-borescope" in a sense. To me, it sounds like lots of guys were better off when borescopes were too expensive for everyone to have one in their toolbox. I mean, if I ever have a problem that necessitates me using one to figure out what is going on (like a carbon ring/donut or something), then sure, but otherwise, nope.

I included all that because, as you can probably tell, my barrel break-in ethos is more of a "do no harm" philosophy than anything else.

You have more document right there than you give yourself credit for, nice write up on what you do and your thought process.

 

[AllenOne1]

Maybe if you are trying to prove something to someone on the internet you can document everything including your color of socks when shooting lol but I see no reason to document anything but round count and when cleaned during a barrel life. I keep an Impact Data Books barrel log for every barrel and log in every round. I have a loading log also so I know what my load is for the rifle if handloading so I know velocity but don't stress that too much as I know when a barrel should be going by my barrel log so I know if the change in velocity is normal or not.

I have tried all the "break ins" out there from the shoot one and clean to the Tubb TMS rounds to doing nothing and you know what? After a few hundred rounds it makes no difference. They all shot great and cleaned up but they were also custom barrels. Even with the few factory barrel I have had in ARs they acted similarly. Now all I do is clean it when I get it in from smith and then clean it good down to steel after the first 3-4 range trips and done. Broken in. Usually shoot 20 rounds or so on those first trips to zero scope and get some rough data as velocity may change some.

If you see no reason to document anything than don't.

 

[Rob01]

If you see no reason to document anything than don't.

I say basically the same thing as the other guy but don't do it in multiple paragraphs so I am the bad guy. LOL Ok.

 

[Cascade Hemi]

this is the most successful thread @AllenOne1 has ever started.

 

[jpop8807]

Ya this subject confused me too my howas 1500 had a similar procedure. I didn't follow it I just shot it and I'm not having any issues. There was a article I read by some guy names Mcmillian he said just shoot it and clean it as you go. He seems knowledgable. He did say clean the barrel before shooting it but thats about it. Also we got a few new m110s, and no one broke those barrels in unless it was done before we got them and we got some sub moa groups. But we I mean my sniper section they don't like to share.