-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
is a modular barrel possible?
- Thread starter 2aBaC̶a̶
- Start date
- Nov 3, 2010
- 9,702
- 20,404
My thought is they could make the barrel sections and attach them, then do the rifling.
The ACE
The A.C.E. or Accurizing Chamber Extension is the future of precision bolt action rifles. Correcting the accuracy robbing issues that happen when trying to drill the chamber into the barrel. The patented A.C.E. may be the last missing piece needed to ma
www.wolfprecision.net
ACE chamber from wolf precision
The bullet deforms to follow the rifling, and if the sections don't lineup, it will deform the bullet in more/different places and will change the velocity (from the sudden step of engraving more rifling grooves into the jacket), change bullet shape, affect BC, and probably even affect accuracy and consistency.
I can see it where you start with a 16" barrel for some applications, then screw on an extension for others requiring more velocity. The issue is creating a repeatable locking mechanism that aligns the barrel that does not degrade for thousands of rounds. The big issue is zero change.
Best way to do that, would be a lock-nut and an alignment pin, either pinned like a recoil lug on a switch-barrel action, or like an AR barrel fitting into the upper receiver.
- Nov 3, 2010
- 9,702
- 20,404
Sorry, I should have made my post better. I was referring to how the sections lined up as well. I’m not super articulate sometimes
Similar to what I was thinking. Similar to how an ar barrel indexes into a receiver with threaded nut screwing it tight.
I remember Brown Precision doing something along these lines years and years ago.
That's the Brown Precision in northern California that is pretty much the originator of the kevlar/carbon fibre stocks.
They used to do take down precision sniper rifles for cops and fbi.
I believe they are no longer in business.
Too bad, they did some nice stuff.
That's the Brown Precision in northern California that is pretty much the originator of the kevlar/carbon fibre stocks.
They used to do take down precision sniper rifles for cops and fbi.
I believe they are no longer in business.
Too bad, they did some nice stuff.
Alot of things are gimmicks until they arent.
don't really have a purpose in mind other than doing something that's never been done.
I'm sure we could think of practical applications after the fact.
no runout over the length? if that's even a thing?
reduced harmonics?
anyone with the right machine could manufacture their own barrels?
adjustable length?
adjustable taper?
is it even possible to build a barrel that goes together like a modular 22 suppressor?
This is a fantastic start though. So instead of many pieces, a multi (but less than 4) piece barrel with modular chambers for a given caliber. Since the shot out portion of the barrel is usually the chamber end, there would be the option to replace it at possibly less cost. Given the repeatability of machining almost identical objects now, the barrel parts should theoretically all be the same (think shouldered prefit barrels). Mated with suppressor threads and the end piece already lends itself to attaching a muzzle brake. I would speculate that the bore would be the biggest hurdle but with shorter pieces of barrel, that should be less of an issue.
partial barrel swaps forward of the chamber? maybe half steel half carbon fiber? shot the throat out no problem here's a replacement.
you would need to make the sections and screw them together then bore and cut the rifling . also you would have to be exceptionally precise witht the torque values on the individual sections if you where to take them off and put them back on again in order to have the rifling line up perfectly again
I'd think your accuracy would be shit. If you burn through say 500 rounds and then add a couple sections the difference in the rifling is going to matter, you won't have even wear. I'd also think it would be dangerous on the chamber end if you worked up a new load or something with a worn section then decided to add a few or messed up the order and had a cartridge developed on worn rifling jumping into fresh rifling there would be pressure issues.
I think you'd be better served with a high tolerance action like a Zermatt with multiple barrels you could swap out in about two minutes with a vice depending what it is you wanted to accomplish.
I think you'd be better served with a high tolerance action like a Zermatt with multiple barrels you could swap out in about two minutes with a vice depending what it is you wanted to accomplish.
I'm sure that could be addressed but I also don't feel like the rifling would matter, only the bore. Shorter sections would lead to shorter stiffer tooling that would likely wander less. Transitions on the rifling sections could alleviate any issues with the bullet traveling from one section to the next.
What you describe in the first paragraph would be an issue with an entire replacement barrel with load work ups on the chamber side of it. And I doubt the wear over say 10 or 12 inches of barrel would matter that drastically. Maybe someone who builds barrels could chime in. But I see a huge cost savings of buying sections over the long run in lieu of replacing entire barrels. If companies like Zermatt can hold high tolerances ( I know it's actually accuracy and repeatability) then it's at least an idea. It would afford smaller cases for travel as well and I wouldn't have to have a vise and tools to reassemble when I get there.
Then what happens when you put them together and under or over tighten them? That slug would be as confused as a drunk in a mall parking lot looking for his car.
Good point. Maybe a fine index mark on the two pieces that needs to be aligned.
That sounds like making an easy process hard.
I'm not understanding why anyone would want or need to have a barrel in small pieces. They are made in a variety of configurations and easy to swap now.
I'm not understanding why anyone would want or need to have a barrel in small pieces. They are made in a variety of configurations and easy to swap now.
what about a small leade at each junction. The alignment might not matter as much then?
Right, but I'm sure no one saw the need for barrels that could be swapped so easily without a smith involved either. Whether it goes anywhere or not, new ideas lead to innovations eventually. Imagine changing rounds ( .243 to 6cm, 6gt) by switching chambers, not barrels. Or if you have a two piece barrel and are traveling far from home, using a much smaller case to travel.
sometimes you have to just let your imagination run wild and think what if. and look for reasons why somone would want something. sometimes people do random pointless shit just for the sake of doing it then somone else looks at it from a different perspective and sees a practical use.
I hear you, I guess the photo of of the silencer in a bag full of 2" pieces got stuck in my head!
I'm sorta addicted to high power air rifles at the moment and some of the tech on those is really interesting also. Like having a 30" barrel on a 34" long gun. The chamber is under your cheek and there isn't explosive ignition to worry about. Instead of changing barrels, they have rifled liners of multiple calibers that are swapped from .22 to .50 cal. and the air can be adjusted from 3000 psi to 4500 psi. So I'm with ya on advancing possibilities.
What if I was He-Man banging She-Ra with her feet behind my ears on the back of a battle lion? But it's not Halloween...
If you spend time a lot of “ideas” are already patented. Weather they can actually function is something totally different.
The biggest hurdle for any new idea is the cost comparison to current products.
With barrels being relatively cheap and such high quality 99% of the time the cost offset isn’t enough…just buy a new barrel. Which is the problem with the Wolf chamber. It’s just to expensive compared to a new barrel.
Best case is a replace the throat area and gain barrel life. But chopping a few inches of barrel and rechambering only gets about 50% more life out of the rest of the barrel. So you go from 2000 rounds to 3000 rounds for the price of a second chamber job. We are talking peak accuracy not generic shooting.
So if the cost of the new modular barrel plus the cost of a few replacement pieces is close to the price of a current barrel and a second chamber job or 2 “prefit ” barrels
it’s a problem looking for a answer in so many words.
The biggest hurdle for any new idea is the cost comparison to current products.
With barrels being relatively cheap and such high quality 99% of the time the cost offset isn’t enough…just buy a new barrel. Which is the problem with the Wolf chamber. It’s just to expensive compared to a new barrel.
Best case is a replace the throat area and gain barrel life. But chopping a few inches of barrel and rechambering only gets about 50% more life out of the rest of the barrel. So you go from 2000 rounds to 3000 rounds for the price of a second chamber job. We are talking peak accuracy not generic shooting.
So if the cost of the new modular barrel plus the cost of a few replacement pieces is close to the price of a current barrel and a second chamber job or 2 “prefit ” barrels
it’s a problem looking for a answer in so many words.
Not an engineer or someone who's tested it, but the krummlauf has a detachable rifled section of barrel, don't think it mattered much, you'd just get 2x the bullet distortion, likely not good for ultimate prescision but for most uses probably ok.
It is possible given enough money.
It is much more practical to just purchase a new barrel.
Between R&D costs and machining costs to hold the sections to the tolerances needed it would be very expensive.
Then you have to ask if it will perform any better or even the same as a standard barrel.
It is much more practical to just purchase a new barrel.
Between R&D costs and machining costs to hold the sections to the tolerances needed it would be very expensive.
Then you have to ask if it will perform any better or even the same as a standard barrel.
Sactly! Keep the part count as a prime number helps control vibrations.
not everything has to have a reason or be practical or marketable. sometimes you just do shit because its a crazy hair brained idea nd DOESN'T make sense and because it's never been done before.I mean if we are gonna go so far outside the norms then I could see someone testing something like the following.
Precise smooth bore for the entirety, would velocity be higher?
Make it in sections a few inches long each, with a rifled section is always put on the end. Solves lining up rifled sections.
If throat erosion happens just replace that first section.
If the rifled section wears out just replace that end piece.
Possible problem is that I don’t know if a bullet could handle the rapid transition from not spinning, to instantly spinning many thousands of rpm in such a short distance, as opposed to starting its spin at the throat like normal.
It wouldn’t work very well.
Still also not sure why or what this solves. And it seems gimmicky.
Last edited:
Hmmm, that’s a brain twister.
I’m wondering and searching for advantages or applications.
Small package, adjustable balance, adjustable efficiency, replacement of burned out areas, etc.
Rather than small threaded links like pictured of the suppressor, I’m thinking more along the lines of either a short barrel with heavy wall bloop tubes of various lengths, or else a stack of short sections with exterior alignment ribs that slide into a straight “rifled” sleeve with locking ends.
As for advantages the former might have some match shooting use as it could be configured how a person wishes. The latter, ‘eh a dash of “Day of the Jackal” meets James Bond, but who knows?
I’m wondering and searching for advantages or applications.
Small package, adjustable balance, adjustable efficiency, replacement of burned out areas, etc.
Rather than small threaded links like pictured of the suppressor, I’m thinking more along the lines of either a short barrel with heavy wall bloop tubes of various lengths, or else a stack of short sections with exterior alignment ribs that slide into a straight “rifled” sleeve with locking ends.
As for advantages the former might have some match shooting use as it could be configured how a person wishes. The latter, ‘eh a dash of “Day of the Jackal” meets James Bond, but who knows?
OK, I've been thinking about your idea and realized that the air rifle example could solve your problem. The whole idea is born out of: replacing the combustible portion of the chamber and or burnt areas in the barrel without purchasing a whole new barrel? among other things and uses. If this is correct then why does the chamber need to be part of the barrel? (other than recording rifling assigned to a sold gun) This is where the high powered air rifles are able to get past government oversight; they are not firearms. In these rifles (higher priced, high power ones 1100 fps and up to 800 fpe slinging 400 grain slugs in .457 and 50 cal.) They have barrels that contain a rifled stainless steel sleeve wrapped in carbon fiber that fits inside the barrel (housing) and is interchangeable with most calibers. The carbon fiber and the sleeve is sized to ft the standard barrel at any caliber. In air rifles the slug is all that enters the barrel, which has the breach closed behind it. There is no combustion, but: if the same idea was brought to firearms where the barrels with sleeves are screwed into an added combustion chamber where the cartridge sits and the slug head has entered into the sleeve portion when chambered; I believe we would have all your looking for. Gas ports for blowback is still possible (the Hatsan Bliss Air rifle will cycle 1000 rounds a minute at 1000 fps in .30 cal., but only has a 30 round clip!) The engineering would have to be looked at for sleeve thickness since we are dealing with high heat not a factor with air. Anyhow, your post got me thinking and its probably not feasible as a marketable option with current regulation on rifling identification making the cost go up. Nor am I a competent machinist or engineer and probably am missing important points. Might have to leave it to the back yard machinists to do for themselves. My last 2 cents on this, thanks for putting up with me!
I see lots of angles and directs you could take this.
Can most gunsmiths make a barrel out of a solid piece of steel? I'm guessing it takes several special machines that your typical gunsmith doesnt have? also guessing they would probably go with something like a multi axis cnc before that. How many steps of typical barrel manufacturing could you skip by using a cnc and doing something like this? can you do rifling? can you do everything up to hand lapping? I dont know limitations or capabilities of modern machines.
if so, in theory any gunsmith with the right machine could run a program and essentially build a custom barrel. even if the pieces were welded together permanently. could it be done?
Can most gunsmiths make a barrel out of a solid piece of steel? I'm guessing it takes several special machines that your typical gunsmith doesnt have? also guessing they would probably go with something like a multi axis cnc before that. How many steps of typical barrel manufacturing could you skip by using a cnc and doing something like this? can you do rifling? can you do everything up to hand lapping? I dont know limitations or capabilities of modern machines.
if so, in theory any gunsmith with the right machine could run a program and essentially build a custom barrel. even if the pieces were welded together permanently. could it be done?
A gunsmith likely cannot afford the type of equipment needed to rifle a barrel.
If they did purchase the machines needed, they surely would not interrupt production for this unless people were willing to pay $$$ for it.
Everything the OP asked about is not only possible, but arguably the future of precision rifle design.
One only needs to look to the past and see that not only is it all possible, but with new materials, manufacturing methods and visionary thinking (not 1890’s bolt guns) that this sort of thing is inevitable.
And I guarantee it is already being discussed and in some interesting places… built and tested.
If you think structured barrels and gain twist are revolutionary, hold this beer and….
Sirhr
One only needs to look to the past and see that not only is it all possible, but with new materials, manufacturing methods and visionary thinking (not 1890’s bolt guns) that this sort of thing is inevitable.
And I guarantee it is already being discussed and in some interesting places… built and tested.
If you think structured barrels and gain twist are revolutionary, hold this beer and….
Sirhr
This is the use case I envisioned reading OP. Maybe 3 pieces: a 16” base (legal reasons) and 2 4-5” sections. You could go from 16” to 21 or 26 in a minute or less.
“Is it possible?” Of course. People are doing shit on the nano scale now. How many hundreds of years have watch makers been timing shit up on the micro scale? Timing a barrel by section is chump change compared to a bunch of stuff that’s made now if one with the skills only takes their time.
“Is it at all practical?” Of course not.
“Is it at all practical?” Of course not.
As someone who has chambered hundreds of barrels, i do not agree with his (ACE) system. Im not saying its wrong, im not saying i dont like it (its genious actually), however i disagree with a few points.
The single biggest issues i have is the claim of the first inch being the straightest. Another claim is we can not accurately measure past it, and he examples a short finger indicator.
if he can not measure past the first inch, how can he claim the rest is not as straight ? Theres 3 distinct different methods for dialling the bore of a barrel (or in this case measuring the bore of a barrel). Its misleading.
interesting idea. Id be worried about carbon build up in the join. Stacking surfaces always will introduce error. Some may be +0.02mm and the other is -0.02mm, so it appears to be "perfect", however is not. You need a huge sample set.
The single biggest issues i have is the claim of the first inch being the straightest. Another claim is we can not accurately measure past it, and he examples a short finger indicator.
if he can not measure past the first inch, how can he claim the rest is not as straight ? Theres 3 distinct different methods for dialling the bore of a barrel (or in this case measuring the bore of a barrel). Its misleading.
interesting idea. Id be worried about carbon build up in the join. Stacking surfaces always will introduce error. Some may be +0.02mm and the other is -0.02mm, so it appears to be "perfect", however is not. You need a huge sample set.
Similar threads
