Bravo Company 14.5” ELW Accuracy: A Quick Look

[Molon]

Bravo Company 14.5” ELW Accuracy: A Quick Look


ELW stands for enhanced light-weight. This barrel is from Bravo Company’s cold-hammer forged series of barrels. The barrel has a “continuous taper” design with a smooth shoulder at the gas block journal, which reportedly improves barrel harmonics. This barrel has a mid-length gas system and a 0.625” gas block journal.

According to Bravo Company, this barrel has a stripped weight of 1 pound, 5 ounces. For comparison, a Colt 14.5” M4 barrel has a stripped weight of 1 pound, 9 ounces.

BCM 14.5” ELW

Colt 14.5” M4 barrel. (not stripped)

I purchased this barrel as part of a BCM factory assembled upper receiver group with the MCMR 13” free-float hand guard. The barrel has BCM’s pinned and welded A2X flash hider.

Shooting off-the-bench at a distance of 100 yards (using a high magnification scope), this barrel produced a 10-shot group that has an extreme spread of 0.946” with a mean radius of 0.33”.

….

 

[Stavey]

Excellent.

 

[Jsp556]

Good to see you here Molon. Thanks for your contributions in the past and any you offer in the future.

 

[Basher]

Good to see you here Molon. Thanks for your contributions in the past and any you offer in the future.

I’ll parrot this. Molon’s contributions to ammo performance have been amazing. Glad to see the ELW perform so well, all things considered!

 

[Tx_Aggie]

Good to see you here Molon. Thanks for your contributions in the past and any you offer in the future.

Amen to that. Great to see @Molon posting here.

 

[Sogan]

Thanks for posting!

 

[Scotts556]

Great having Molon back! Barfcom wasn't worthy of your information!!

 

[Shooter McGavin]

I have a couple of the BCM 14.5 ELW mid length uppers. I run them with the BCM/ Vltor A 5 buffer system. Soft shooters and good accuracy.

 

[The DFC]

I have same upper 14.5 ELW BFH-also a 14.5 std profile non-hammer forged. I don't get anywhere near that accuracy with either and my non-BFH is more accurate then the BFH. I have 5 BCMs in total-11.5", 14.5, 16" BFH-non BFK etc and I've never even approached 1 moa with them.

 

[Centuriator]

That'll do! Over on M4Carbine.net they are debating the accuracy of BCM rifles, etc. This is interesting.

 

[bfoosh006]

Very good, "consistent" 10rd group, especially considering the barrels LtWt aspect and being a "production" barrel.

Welcome back to the forums Molon, I ( we ) have all missed your dogged pursuit of quality info shared for our benefit .

I have to say... you, Molon, have done more to inspire me to pursue knowledge than any one else. ( Just sayin' )

So... Thank You.

Did you happen to measure the gas port size ? ... Mine ( Fluted though ) is a very soft shooter, I have always heard the early ones had smaller gas port sizes... and FWIW it is very well "balanced" from that barrel profile.

Again... good to see Molon back.

 

[Molon]

Did you happen to measure the gas port size ? ...

I purchased the upper receiver group factory assembled, so I haven't torn it down yet to measure the gas port.

 

[Shooter McGavin]

That'll do! Over on M4Carbine.net they are debating the accuracy of BCM rifles, etc. This is interesting.

went over there and read through that. The testing done was always preface by saying I am not a very good shooter or they would test a match barrel against the BCM. Also, they would test the BCM using a RDO against an AR using a LPVO. I wished they had a least used the same optic for their testing. I don’t think you’ll ever get super tight groups out of a BCM upper, but I don’t believe that’s what they’re going for. Someone was trying to say a 11.5 BCM is accurate from just zeroing it at 25 yards, fuck that’s not a test.

 

[bfoosh006]

went over there and read through that. The testing done was always preface by saying I am not a very good shooter or they would test a match barrel against the BCM. Also, they would test the BCM using a RDO against an AR using a LPVO. I wished they had a least used the same optic for their testing. I don’t think you’ll ever get super tight groups out of a BCM upper, but I don’t believe that’s what they’re going for. Someone was trying to say a 11.5 BCM is accurate from just zeroing it at 25 yards, fuck that’s not a test.

And... that is a great example of why I miss Molon. 100yds, 10rds... here are the results, read the results how you want.

And while I truly appreciate others efforts and input / "shooting with what they have".....With Molon there is No....25yds, no, I compared it to a match barrel, and Molon can shoot.... so the results are some thing you can strive for. A benchmark if you will.

 

[Molon]

I run them with the BCM/ Vltor A 5 buffer system.

Same here.

 

[Docsherm]

That'll do! Over on M4Carbine.net they are debating the accuracy of BCM rifles, etc. This is interesting.

That is one barrel. The reason that it is discussed over on M4C is that people are getting less accurate barrels more often. I personally, have have noting but crap barrels from BCM going back to the beginning. Best I have had was about 3 MOA. Mine is a same size of 16.

I did a lkng write up backnin 2012 about a head to head review kf a 12.5 BCM and a 12.5 Noveske. I was getting 4 MOA from the BCM and .80 from the Noveske at 100 meters using identical parts, ammo, optics, and methods of shooting.



@Molon when did you get that barrel?

 

[Molon]

@Molon when did you get that barrel?

I purchased it as an upper receiver group in 2018.

 

[Docsherm]

I purchased it as an upper receiver group in 2018.

Ok, interesting. Thanks for the info.

 

[R0CKETMAN]

went over there and read through that. The testing done was always preface by saying I am not a very good shooter or they would test a match barrel against the BCM. Also, they would test the BCM using a RDO against an AR using a LPVO. I wished they had a least used the same optic for their testing. I don’t think you’ll ever get super tight groups out of a BCM upper, but I don’t believe that’s what they’re going for. Someone was trying to say a 11.5 BCM is accurate from just zeroing it at 25 yards, fuck that’s not a test.

Yes it was a mess and I expressed as much.

That is one barrel. The reason that it is discussed over on M4C is that people are getting less accurate barrels more often. I personally, have have noting but crap barrels from BCM going back to the beginning. Best I have had was about 3 MOA. Mine is a same size of 16.

I did a lkng write up backnin 2012 about a head to head review kf a 12.5 BCM and a 12.5 Noveske. I was getting 4 MOA from the BCM and .80 from the Noveske at 100 meters using identical parts, ammo, optics, and methods of shooting.
Molon when did you get that barrel?

link please?

I purchased it as an upper receiver group in 2018.

So semi recent production yielding good results all things considered.

 

[Docsherm]

Yes it was a mess and I expressed as much.




link please?



So semi recent production yielding good results all things considered.

Link to what?

 

[bfoosh006]

Link to what?

"2012 about a head to head review kf a 12.5 BCM and a 12.5 Noveske . "

I am curious as to your results as well.

I tried to look up my date of purchase , for my 14.5" ELW Fluted BCM... but couldn't find it. I know it is at least 5 years old.. and probably more. It has respectable "combat" precision, but at the time I wasn't focused on looking into more detailed / precision oriented results.

I might have to drag it out of the back of the safe, and look into it more closely.
It has stood a lonely vigil back there... Lol

 

[R0CKETMAN]

Link to what?

your review / testing

"2012 about a head to head review kf a 12.5 BCM and a 12.5 Noveske . "

I am curious as to your results as well.

yep

 

[Docsherm]

"2012 about a head to head review kf a 12.5 BCM and a 12.5 Noveske . "

I am curious as to your results as well.

I tried to look up my date of purchase , for my 14.5" ELW Fluted BCM... but couldn't find it. I know it is at least 5 years old.. and probably more. It has respectable "combat" precision, but at the time I wasn't focused on looking into more detailed / precision oriented results.

I might have to drag it out of the back of the safe, and look into it more closely.
It has stood a lonely vigil back there... Lol

It was posted on LF and it was removed by one of the moderators that was on the BCM payroll.

 

[bfoosh006]

It was posted on LF and it was removed by one of the moderators that was on the BCM payroll.

Well.. that just sucks. I have had my own run in with "rogue" moderators and their cronies. That is a long story.. Lol

I always enjoy a good read, I was looking forward to it.

I am going to have to get out my BCM's and try to see what they will do.

In your opinion... are the current Noveske barrels just as good as yours is / was ? ( not sure if you still have it )

I am not sure how long Noveske used Pac- Nor ( right ? ) but since the fire I don't know who makes Noveske barrels.

I have moved towards the AR's should be precise and reliable phase of my AR world... and am always looking for accurate barrels.

 

[Docsherm]

Well.. that just sucks. I have had my own run in with "rogue" moderators and their cronies. That is a long story.. Lol

I always enjoy a good read, I was looking forward to it.

I am going to have to get out my BCM's and try to see what they will do.

In your opinion... are the current Noveske barrels just as good as yours is / was ? ( not sure if you still have it )

I am not sure how long Noveske used Pac- Nor ( right ? ) but since the fire I don't know who makes Noveske barrels.

I have moved towards the AR's should be precise and reliable phase of my AR world... and am always looking for accurate barrels.

I have several Noveske barrels that are current and i have several that are older. I see no difference at all. Barrel life is looking to be the same also. That is what really stands out in my book.


And the 12.5 Noveske in question is my go to rifle. It is one of the first CHF ones and it has many rounds on it....... many. I just shot close to 500 on Monday. It is still a solid barrel and i can get a 10 rould sub MOA group if i do my part.

 

[Happiness Is A Warm Gun]

Good post, molon. I enjoy seeing stuff like this.

 

[Optimal]

What ammo was used for this test? I brought my 14.5 elw bfh barrel out and was getting 3 moa. It was purchased in 2015. Ammo federal m193.

 

[Molon]

What ammo was used for this test? I brought my 14.5 elw bfh barrel out and was getting 3 moa. It was purchased in 2015. Ammo federal m193.

I used hand-loads topped with the Sierra 52 grain MatchKing. The Federal XM193 is the reason that you are getting 3 MOA.



Attack of the (M193) Clones

clone: one that appears to be a copy of an original form.



Genuine M193 must be tested for and pass all of the specifications laid out in the mil-spec, MIL-C-9963. The required areas of testing included in MIL-C-9963 range from velocity, accuracy, chamber pressure and port pressure to waterproofing, temperature stability, bullet extraction, case hardness, fouling and more.


Genuine US Military M193 can no longer be sold to civilians, thanks to the Clinton Administration. The ammunition that is sold on the commercial market with some form of “M193” in its nomenclature is often referred to as an “M193 clone” because it “appears to be a copy” of genuine M193, but we generally have no idea what specifications of MIL-C-9963 that this ammunition has passed, or has even been tested for.

M193 is loaded with a 55 grain FMJ bullet with a cannelure. The bullet itself, must meet required specifications to be used in genuine M193. For example, the specification for the thickness of the gilding metal jacket of the bullet is 0.021" with a tolerance of - 0.002". For comparison, the jacket of Hornady’s 55 grain FMJ bullet has a thickness of approximately 0.028”. Jacket thickness can have a significant effect on terminal ballistic properties, particularly that of fragmentation. Even the composition of the copper alloy used for the jacket and the lead used for the slug must meet mil-spec requirements for genuine M193.


Genuine US Military M193 can only be charged with powder that has been specifically approved by the US Military for use in this cartridge. If the ammunition in question is not loaded with one of the approved powders, it is not genuine M193 and naturally we have no way of determining what powder was used in a load simply by visual inspection.


Genuine M193 will have the annealing iris visible on the shoulder and neck portion of the case. It will also will have crimped and sealed primers. Genuine M193 has a crimped case mouth along with sealant at the case mouth.


The velocity specification for M193 as cited in MIL-C-9963F states:

The average velocity of the sample cartridges, conditioned at 72 degrees, plus or minus 2 degrees Fahrenheit (F), shall be 3165 feet per second (ft/sec), plus or minus 40 ft/sec, at 78 feet from the muzzle of the weapon. The standard deviation of the velocities shall not exceed 40 ft/sec.


The specification is for a 20” barrel. Depending on multiple variables, this velocity specification equates to a muzzle velocity of approximately 3270 ft/sec, plus or minus 40 ft/sec.


I chronographed four different M193 clones back-to-back for comparison. All four of these loads are currently available on the commercial market (at the time of this writing). These loads were fired from a semi-automatic AR-15 with a chrome-lined, NATO chambered 20” Colt M16A2 barrel. The four loads are listed below:


IMI M193
American Eagle Tactical M193
Privi Partizan (PPU) M193
Winchester Q3131A1.




Chronographing of the M193 clones was conducted using an Oehler 35-P chronograph with “proof screen” technology. All velocities listed below are muzzle velocities as calculated from the instrumental velocities using Oehler’s Ballistic Explorer software program. All strings of fire consisted of 10 rounds each.



Each round was single-loaded and cycled into the chamber from a magazine fitted with a single-load follower. The bolt locked-back after each shot allowing the chamber to cool in between each shot. This technique was used to mitigate the possible influence of “chamber-soak” on velocity data. Each new shot was fired in a consistent manner after hitting the bolt release. Atmospheric conditions were monitored and recorded using a Kestrel 4000 Pocket Weather Tracker.



Atmospheric conditions.


Temperature: 79 degrees F
Humidity: 42%
Barometric pressure: 30.19 inches of Hg
Elevation: 950 feet above sea level

The accuracy specification for M193 cited in MIL-C-9963F is as follows:

The average of the mean radii of all targets of the sample cartridges, fired at 200 yards, shall not exceed 2.0 inches.

These averages are from 10-shot groups fired from machine rested, bolt-actioned test barrels, such as the ones pictured below. All things being equal (which of course they seldom are) this specification equates to a mean radius of 1 inch at 100 yards.



I conducted an accuracy (technically, precision) evaluation of the same four M193 clones that were chronographed above, following my usual protocols. This accuracy evaluation used statistically significant shot-group sizes and every single shot in a fired group was included in the measurements. There was absolutely no use of any Group Reduction Techniques (e.g. fliers, target movement, Butterfly Shots). The shooting set-up will be described in detail below. As many of the significant variables as was practicable were controlled for. Pictures of the fired shot-groups will be posted for documentation.



All shooting was conducted from a concrete bench-rest from a distance of 100 yards (confirmed with a laser rangefinder.) The barrel used in the evaluation was free-floated. The free-float handguards of the rifle rested in a Sinclair Windage Benchrest, while the stock of the rifle rested in a Protektor bunny-ear rear bag. Sighting was accomplished via a Leupold VARI-X III set at 25X magnification and adjusted to be parallax-free at 100 yards. A mirage shade was attached to the objective-bell of the scope. Wind conditions on the shooting range were continuously monitored using a Wind Probe. The set-up was very similar to that pictured below.



The test vehicle for this evaluation was a 16” Colt HBAR with chrome lining, a NATO chamber and a 1:9” twist. This is the barrel found on the Colt 6721 carbine. This barrel was free-floated with a 10” LaRue free-float handguard. I specifically choose to evaluate the accuracy this ammunition using an AR-15 with a chrome-lined, NATO chambered barrel, as this is the type of barrel that is most commonly used to fire this type of ammunition. It is sometimes possible to obtain slightly better accuracy from mil-spec/NATO pressure loads by firing them from an AR-15 that has a stainless steel match-grade barrel with a hybrid chamber such as the Noveske NMmod0 chamber or the Wylde chamber for examples; but you're not going to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.



The 16” Colt HBAR is one of the most accurate “off the shelf” chrome-lined, NATO chambered AR-15 barrels that I’ve evaluated. Three 10-shot groups fired from this barrel from a distance of 100 yards using match-grade hand-loads topped with Sierra 52 grain MatchKings had extreme spreads of:


0.85”
1.14”
0.88”



for a 10-shot group average extreme spread of 0.96”. Over-laying the three 10-shot groups on each other using RSI Shooting Lab software produced a 30-shot composite target with a mean radius of 0.32”.




IMI M193


Three 10-shot groups of the IMI M193 were fired in a row from a distance of 100 yards from the Colt 16” HBAR. Those three groups had extreme spreads of:


2.83”
2.77”
2.80”


for a 10-shot group average extreme spread of 2.80”. The three 10-shot groups were over-layed on each other using RSI Shooting Lab to form a 30-shot composite group. The composite group had a mean radius of 0.97”.





American Eagle Tactical XM193


Three 10-shot groups of the American Eagle Tactical XM193 fired in a row had extreme spreads of:


3.01”
3.25”
3.57”


For a 10-shot group average of 3.27”. The 30-shot composite group had a mean radius of 0.98”.





Prvi Partizan M193


Three 10-shot groups of the Priv Partizan M193 were fired in a row from a distance of 100 yards. The groups had extreme spreads of:

2.72”
3.89”
3.74”


for a 10-shot group average extreme spread of 3.45”. All three of these groups were over-layed on each other using RSI Shooting Lab to form a 30-shot composite group. The mean radius for the composite group was 1.01”.





Winchester Q3131A1


Three 10-shot groups of the Winchester Q3131A1 load were fired in a row. The extreme spreads of those groups measured:

2.95”
3.73”
3.35”


for a 10-shot average extreme spread of 3.34”. The three 10-shot groups were over-layed on each other using RSI Shooting Lab to form a 30-shot composite group. The mean radius for the composite group was 1.05”.






Here is a summary of the results of the accuracy evaluation of the four M193 clones.

....

 

[Shooter McGavin]

Federal Premium - XM193

web.archive.org

 

[Optimal]

Thanks I'll have to try it out with some match grade ammo. I was about to write it off and buy a criteria barrel and swap out my bcm elw bhf

 

[Jory45acp]

Installed one of these on a winter build and love it. No complaints so far 1500rds into it. That being said I've not tried anything but Hornady 55 SP handloads through it. Rifle build was never intended to be target grade build.

 

[WyCoShooter]

Resurrecting this conversation a bit, @Molon any experience with the ELW BFH barrels hosting a suppressor?

 

[Molon]

Resurrecting this conversation a bit, @Molon any experience with the ELW BFH barrels hosting a suppressor?

No.

 

[WyCoShooter]

No.

Thanks for getting back to me.