-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Gunsmithing Objective research on Barrel Break-in procedures
- Thread starter Jeff in TX
- Start date
Jeff,
When you're burnishing with the 2 products, do you push and pull the rod through, or just push through the direction of bullet travel?
Sorry if this seems like a minor question, I've always been instructed to never go muzzle to breech.
When you're burnishing with the 2 products, do you push and pull the rod through, or just push through the direction of bullet travel?
Sorry if this seems like a minor question, I've always been instructed to never go muzzle to breech.
Good stuff! I work at Rock Creek barrels and it's spot on! Hand final lapping does the break in for you! I've lapped a handful of factory barrels and groups sometimes are cut in half. When you lap a barrel you are basically getting the "scratches" ,if you will ,parallel to the rifling. This limits fouling. I've literally bore scoped thousands of barrels factory and custom. Its amazing what you can learn if you know what your looking at!
After I chamber one of our barrels I like to shoot it 5 times and then take the bolt out and look down the barrel from the muzzle. That tells me a lot. I'm looking for fouling patterns.
One thing I have done and I haven't seen posted yet is after chambering I sometime polish the throat with some 1200 grit lapping compound . I'm just polishing where the lands are cut out from the chamber reamer. Like the original post said, "you want a smooth transition for the bullet as it engages the lands.
My two cents.. I just became a registered member today.
After I chamber one of our barrels I like to shoot it 5 times and then take the bolt out and look down the barrel from the muzzle. That tells me a lot. I'm looking for fouling patterns.
One thing I have done and I haven't seen posted yet is after chambering I sometime polish the throat with some 1200 grit lapping compound . I'm just polishing where the lands are cut out from the chamber reamer. Like the original post said, "you want a smooth transition for the bullet as it engages the lands.
My two cents.. I just became a registered member today.
MMP,
Welcome to the hide and a great response! It always amazed me how Mike could get things done in a timely fashion. Everytime I'd call him it would turn into a hour or so on the phone getting a brain dump. The man really knows his barrels and internal ballistics inside and out and sharing what he knows, not to mention he builds some of the best barrels in the industry.
Welcome to the hide and a great response! It always amazed me how Mike could get things done in a timely fashion. Everytime I'd call him it would turn into a hour or so on the phone getting a brain dump. The man really knows his barrels and internal ballistics inside and out and sharing what he knows, not to mention he builds some of the best barrels in the industry.
Guys--
I'm a total; neophyte (newbie) to this whole process of breaking in. Elsewhere, with reference to lapping/breaking in/seasoning factory barrels utilizing lapping compounds, the posters were adamant that the strokes with the compound were to be in the direction the bullet travels. Pull, don't push the rod, taking care not to damage the crown. In the quote below, reference is made to "a hundred passes
"...Next [Mike] uses a second product for Sentry Solutions product called BP-2000, which is a very fine moly powder. Applied to a patch wrapped around a bore brush, he makes a hundred passes through the barrel very rapidly before having to rest...."
My question is this: Do I take this to mean that his passes are bi-directional, or is the bore brush removed, the rod reinserted, and the brush reattached at the breach end before the next pass? This is probably obvious to most "old hand" on this board, but I'm coming at this with "beginner's mind."
Thanks in advance for your guidance.
I'm a total; neophyte (newbie) to this whole process of breaking in. Elsewhere, with reference to lapping/breaking in/seasoning factory barrels utilizing lapping compounds, the posters were adamant that the strokes with the compound were to be in the direction the bullet travels. Pull, don't push the rod, taking care not to damage the crown. In the quote below, reference is made to "a hundred passes
"...Next [Mike] uses a second product for Sentry Solutions product called BP-2000, which is a very fine moly powder. Applied to a patch wrapped around a bore brush, he makes a hundred passes through the barrel very rapidly before having to rest...."
My question is this: Do I take this to mean that his passes are bi-directional, or is the bore brush removed, the rod reinserted, and the brush reattached at the breach end before the next pass? This is probably obvious to most "old hand" on this board, but I'm coming at this with "beginner's mind."
Thanks in advance for your guidance.
Objective research on Barrel Break-in procedures
Just spent two hours reading this.
First I admit I never "broke in" a barrel out of pure ignorance.
Second, I admit, I now will never "break in" a barrel out of pure laziness.
The "empirical" data some of you pocket protector wearing nerds demand was given by LowLight and ACTUAL barrel manufactures. Seems like some of you guys would rather shove a rod down the hole instead of shooting the damn thing. These guys do this for a living. To the rest of us, this is a hobby.
This is Snipers Hide forum after all........not clean crap and obsess over traditions forum.
See you on the line.
Just spent two hours reading this.
First I admit I never "broke in" a barrel out of pure ignorance.
Second, I admit, I now will never "break in" a barrel out of pure laziness.
The "empirical" data some of you pocket protector wearing nerds demand was given by LowLight and ACTUAL barrel manufactures. Seems like some of you guys would rather shove a rod down the hole instead of shooting the damn thing. These guys do this for a living. To the rest of us, this is a hobby.
This is Snipers Hide forum after all........not clean crap and obsess over traditions forum.
See you on the line.
Last edited:
It's my opinion that more barrels are ruined by cleaning rods than anything else. I only clean a new barrel every 10 rounds or if I see A LOT of copper fouling at the muzzle; then i use a foaming copper remover and let the chemicals do the work while I take notes in log book, double check fasteners for loosening, or shoot another gun. After 10 minutes max, I give is a quick brush with JBs, a swab of Slip 2000, a dry patch, and get on with shooting. Maximum number of rod strokes: maybe 20.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Great info. Never did Barrel break-ins come up in GS School or in the Military. Here is a supplement to support your info. Great read
How to Break-in a Barrel
How to Break-in a Barrel
I think the consensus here is that shooting the prescribed amount of rounds for barrel break in only deteriorated the barrel that much quicker. Secondly, many many shooters don't use the right cleaning products or methods, further deteriorating their barrels.
I was a sniper in the army and my first trip to the range with my M24 was going to be for barrel break in and to gather DOPE for the rifle. But as I was about to begin the shoot one clean one method with a metal cleaning rod, my STL corrected me prior to using that rod. And I was going to use it without a bore guide! It was a great lesson for me and one that practice every day.
MMP I see you haven't been on for a while but hopefully thins forward to your email. When you Polish where the lands meet the reamer marks with 1200 git compound what are you using? A cotton bore swab or something else? As MMP is no longer monitoring if anyone else is familiar I am interested in the correct way to polish the throat as described. Thanks.
Well. For a quality match grade barrel, it is really no need for barrel break-in. It is already in post 'break-in' stage. I normally shot match grade barrel...so I agree with the post.
https://www.midwayusa.com/product/266555/lyman-borecam-20-digital-borescope-with-monitor
$260 for a usable bore scope seemed like a bargain to me. IMO it's well worth it for serious shooters that want to do further research into their cleaning methods. Just be ready to be dissappointed in some of your barrels and pleased with others.
$260 for a usable bore scope seemed like a bargain to me. IMO it's well worth it for serious shooters that want to do further research into their cleaning methods. Just be ready to be dissappointed in some of your barrels and pleased with others.
A guy who goes by TiborasaurusRex has a number of videos on YouTube. One that pertains to barrel break in is entitled "SNIPER 101 Part 43 - Barrel Break In Procedures Compared." As of this writing, it has been viewed 248,942 times. I hope that this helps.
I agree with everything you say but what I think is you should clean the first few rounds down the barrel and then after that no more cleaning except when it really needs it. This is the reason why. number 1 when chambering a barrel the reamer cuts in one direction and it will push a burr over on one side of the land and most of the time the other side is burr free but it is possible for it to have a burr also. Now when the gun is fired the bullet can only do a couple things to this burr since it is connected to the land it will either roll over or break off or just a little piece may break off and the rest may just roll over. No one can know what actually happens unless you bore scoped between shots. So where did this piece go? or not go? and the next bullet down the barrel may grab it and drag it down the barrel scratching it. Sorry I have no proof of this but I would rather do preventative Maintenance just for the first few shots.
Good information all around. I do have a question though. And please take this as a legitimate question, I'm not trying to get anybody wound up or defensive, but would just like to understand...if shooting the rifle and sending projectiles down the barrel smoothes out rough areas of the metal, or tooling marks, how does a gunsmith look through a borescope and see damage that has permanently been made by a cleaning rod? Doesn't shooting the next handfull of rounds smooth those marks out also? And aren't most cleaning rods made of "softer" metal than the bore? I know I have seen multiple times on these threads where people point to more marks being put in the bore by use of cleaning rods without bore guides than damage from not " breaking in" a barrel.
Thanks for info and a very nice write up by Jeff.
Chris
Thanks for info and a very nice write up by Jeff.
Chris
I have long thought that it would be the height of arrogance for me to think I could improve on the barrels from the really respected barrel makers like Kreiger, Obermeyer, Rock Creek, Schneider, Lilja others just by shooting some abrasive coated bullets through the barrel, or by running a few patches through them. Their knowledge of what a finished barrel is supposed to be like inside is why people pay premium prices for those barrels.
Reading the earlier statement about the process of treating the bore with the alcohol/moly mixture, waiting for the alcohol to dry, then polishing the bore with patches saturated with moly powder made me think...
Since hBN (hexagonal Boron Nitride) is much more slippy than moly, why not use that?
To be honest, I did toy with the procedure a bit a few years ago. Now that I see it actually may have merit, I think I'll try it on the new factory barreled Howa 6.5 Creedmoor action I just got.
Action plan; mix hBN with 90% isopropyl alcohol and saturate the bore with wet patches, let the alcohol evaporate. Instead of patches with hBN powder, I'm thinking of heavily dusting a bore mop to pass back and forth through the bore about 200 times. The nano sized super lubricant hBN should reduce friction considerably, especially since I shoot only hBN coated bullets.
I'm also considering heating up the barrel with a hair dryer before the exercise. When I learned about hBN coating, I ran across suggestions that heating the bullets help the hBN penetrate better.
One very important consideration with trying something like this: the bore guide MUST seal the bore from getting hBN into the chamber. Experts would probably agree that you don't want the chamber to be so slippery that cases will not seal against the chamber wall.
Since hBN (hexagonal Boron Nitride) is much more slippy than moly, why not use that?
To be honest, I did toy with the procedure a bit a few years ago. Now that I see it actually may have merit, I think I'll try it on the new factory barreled Howa 6.5 Creedmoor action I just got.
Action plan; mix hBN with 90% isopropyl alcohol and saturate the bore with wet patches, let the alcohol evaporate. Instead of patches with hBN powder, I'm thinking of heavily dusting a bore mop to pass back and forth through the bore about 200 times. The nano sized super lubricant hBN should reduce friction considerably, especially since I shoot only hBN coated bullets.
I'm also considering heating up the barrel with a hair dryer before the exercise. When I learned about hBN coating, I ran across suggestions that heating the bullets help the hBN penetrate better.
One very important consideration with trying something like this: the bore guide MUST seal the bore from getting hBN into the chamber. Experts would probably agree that you don't want the chamber to be so slippery that cases will not seal against the chamber wall.
Well, that's done. I took my alcohol/hBN powder solution, shook it up, and applied it liberally to a succession of three patches through the bore of my new, unfired Howa 1500 barreled action, heavy #6, 24 inch in 6.5 Creedmoor.
After letting it dry thoroughly for a couple of hours, I then saturated a patch with hBN powder, tapped off the excess, and proceeded burnishing the nano particles into the bore by stroking the patch back and forth through the barrel, concentrating more on the throat with short strokes. After several patches and around 300 passes through the bore, I clean patched the bore three times and cleaned the chamber to ensure all loose powder is removed.
We will see what happens when I break in the barrel. I intend to push around 40 factory rounds through the new barrel, waiting for it to cool completely between firings with no further cleaning.
After letting it dry thoroughly for a couple of hours, I then saturated a patch with hBN powder, tapped off the excess, and proceeded burnishing the nano particles into the bore by stroking the patch back and forth through the barrel, concentrating more on the throat with short strokes. After several patches and around 300 passes through the bore, I clean patched the bore three times and cleaned the chamber to ensure all loose powder is removed.
We will see what happens when I break in the barrel. I intend to push around 40 factory rounds through the new barrel, waiting for it to cool completely between firings with no further cleaning.
Not all cleaning rods are the same. The coated ones from Dewey and Tipton are safe on a bore. The stainless steel ones and the ones you screw together in sections along with the type of tips can do damage. I stay away from anything stainless steel (rods & tips) going down my bore. I use bore foam products to clean and cotton patches and on occasion nylon cleaning brushes now and for the past few years. They work great for me!
I think over the past few years folks have or are figuring out a lot of the nonsense and myths of break-in procedures and cleaning. Take care of your weapon properly and should last you a lifetime!
I think over the past few years folks have or are figuring out a lot of the nonsense and myths of break-in procedures and cleaning. Take care of your weapon properly and should last you a lifetime!
It isn't just the cleaning rod, to get the best results, when using a high quality cleaning rod a bore guide should also be used so the patch and rod begins and stays more centered in the barrel.
Great thread! I just got my first custom built rifle and was looking for good advice like this on break in.
I have been reading on how to clean properly for accuracy for a long time and have tried many different methods and came to the conclusion that factory barrels from clean only have so many shots till accuracy falls off at least to some degree (same hole vs acceptable for hunting).
Some guns would lose it shortly after 10 rounds and some around 50 or so but then I bought my first Shilen select match and after the initial cleaning then after 10 rounds I have almost 100 down the tube and running consistantly around 1/4" c to c With boron nitride and hasn't seen a patch since.
D
Some guns would lose it shortly after 10 rounds and some around 50 or so but then I bought my first Shilen select match and after the initial cleaning then after 10 rounds I have almost 100 down the tube and running consistantly around 1/4" c to c With boron nitride and hasn't seen a patch since.
D
This
Suggest you quit fussing about the minor stuff, just get out and shoot.
Barrels are consumables, some are better than others due to better manufacturing processes, or luck. Some really suck.
IMO, if you have a "problem" barrel, consider getting a new barrel put on unless you enjoy the potential extended aggravation of trying to make it work acceptably.
Last edited:
Jeff n Texas
Barrel break in and cleaning are Benchrest requirements for the utmost in accuracy and not required on precision rifles or factory barrels
Much of what you wrote contradicts itself.
For the vast majority of shooters on this website barrel break in and for that matter cleaning is a waste of time.
The Gale McMillan story is so old it dates back to when he was in a huge fight with Bill Wiseman who was the guy actually making the barrels.
Speedy must have gotten his nickname from a girlfriend as anyone who has used him for a gunsmith would never call him Speedy. He was a world-class marketer but a horrible businessman.
On the cleaning rod you want it as stiff as humanly possible so it doesn't bend or bow which is what allows it to make contact with the bore if a proper rod guide is being used.
You break in a barrel to remove the perpendicular scratches created by the reamer bushing and nobody polishes out the leader or throat on a barrel.
The tiny scratches run perpendicular to the lap and you want them as smooth as possible so they don't strip jacket material off of your bullets. The same reason you lap a barrel.
If you don't clean between your first few shots it takes longer to burnish the scratches.
On Benchrest guns the barrels routinely get setback and recrowned at 250-300 rounds and tossed at 900 rounds and they are burning very little powder.
You are getting to the barrels full potential sooner so it's worthwhile. In the guns shot here were 2000 rounds is considered normal there is nothing to gain as gilt edge accuracy is never achieved.
Barrel break in and cleaning are Benchrest requirements for the utmost in accuracy and not required on precision rifles or factory barrels
Much of what you wrote contradicts itself.
For the vast majority of shooters on this website barrel break in and for that matter cleaning is a waste of time.
The Gale McMillan story is so old it dates back to when he was in a huge fight with Bill Wiseman who was the guy actually making the barrels.
Speedy must have gotten his nickname from a girlfriend as anyone who has used him for a gunsmith would never call him Speedy. He was a world-class marketer but a horrible businessman.
On the cleaning rod you want it as stiff as humanly possible so it doesn't bend or bow which is what allows it to make contact with the bore if a proper rod guide is being used.
You break in a barrel to remove the perpendicular scratches created by the reamer bushing and nobody polishes out the leader or throat on a barrel.
The tiny scratches run perpendicular to the lap and you want them as smooth as possible so they don't strip jacket material off of your bullets. The same reason you lap a barrel.
If you don't clean between your first few shots it takes longer to burnish the scratches.
On Benchrest guns the barrels routinely get setback and recrowned at 250-300 rounds and tossed at 900 rounds and they are burning very little powder.
You are getting to the barrels full potential sooner so it's worthwhile. In the guns shot here were 2000 rounds is considered normal there is nothing to gain as gilt edge accuracy is never achieved.
Last edited:
Reading so many replies in this thread, I decided to go check out some of the more well known barrel makers websites (Hart, Krieger, Benchmark). I quit after three or four. All had some kind of barrel break in procedure.
While I personally subscribe to the theory that barrel break-in is unnecessary, reading the Krieger website I saw the only scientifically plausible explanation for barrel break in that I've ever seen.
They claim the break in is actually just keeping to keep copper out of the bore while your first few bullets smooth out the marks left by the reamer that cut the throat of your rifle. They're saying the bullet jacket is shedding more copper on the initial tool marks from the reamer, which is then deposited in the bore and the cleaning procedure is simply to prevent additional copper from accumulating in the bore since more copper is being deposited during the first few shots according to their theory.
They do not claim that break-in will have any effect on the accuracy of the rifle barrel, they simply state that if too much copper accumulates on top of itself within the bore it will be more difficult to clean later on. Here's the quote from their website:
This is something I could see as being legitimate, unlike the others that claim the cleaning itself is going to do anything to your bore or that the break-in process will improve accuracy in any way. Krieger is just saying that it'll be a PITA to clean the first time if you let all the extra copper accumulate, so they recommend cleaning it more frequently while the tooling marks from the throat wear in since extra copper will enter the bore during that time. They also address the fact that you should not clean more than necessary because it can and does damage the bore in many cases.
I've yet to see any claim that break-in improves accuracy substantiated with data or anything besides anecdotes. Barrels being ruined by damage from cleaning is supported by data. The only break-in theory that makes any sense at all, objectively speaking, is Krieger's break-in justification where they just say it's to prevent the first cleanings from being a PITA because there's more copper accumulated in the bore than usual. Every barrelmaker that makes any claim regarding accuracy or that the cleaning itself will affect the bore is doing nothing but talking straight out of their ass, because I guarantee they can't back up their claims with data.
They claim the break in is actually just keeping to keep copper out of the bore while your first few bullets smooth out the marks left by the reamer that cut the throat of your rifle. They're saying the bullet jacket is shedding more copper on the initial tool marks from the reamer, which is then deposited in the bore and the cleaning procedure is simply to prevent additional copper from accumulating in the bore since more copper is being deposited during the first few shots according to their theory.
They do not claim that break-in will have any effect on the accuracy of the rifle barrel, they simply state that if too much copper accumulates on top of itself within the bore it will be more difficult to clean later on. Here's the quote from their website:
This is something I could see as being legitimate, unlike the others that claim the cleaning itself is going to do anything to your bore or that the break-in process will improve accuracy in any way. Krieger is just saying that it'll be a PITA to clean the first time if you let all the extra copper accumulate, so they recommend cleaning it more frequently while the tooling marks from the throat wear in since extra copper will enter the bore during that time. They also address the fact that you should not clean more than necessary because it can and does damage the bore in many cases.
I've yet to see any claim that break-in improves accuracy substantiated with data or anything besides anecdotes. Barrels being ruined by damage from cleaning is supported by data. The only break-in theory that makes any sense at all, objectively speaking, is Krieger's break-in justification where they just say it's to prevent the first cleanings from being a PITA because there's more copper accumulated in the bore than usual. Every barrelmaker that makes any claim regarding accuracy or that the cleaning itself will affect the bore is doing nothing but talking straight out of their ass, because I guarantee they can't back up their claims with data.
Copper fouling does not happen with bare lead bullets.
Copper fouling is a result of the copper jacket of the bullet being squeezed by the rifling and leaving deposits behind that got shaved off the jacket in the process.
The case for rounds is made of brass (or steel or aluminum) rather than copper.
Ive never did a barrel break in, even when some manufacturers suggested it. I didn't see how it would help. Even so when I ordered quality barrels, they are advertised as being hand lapped after barrel making. To me, it kind of seemed like sanding a piece of wood that has already been sanded smooth and finish.
Muzzle flash occurs because of powder still burning upon the projectile exiting the barrel. The powder column ignited? Yes. fully burned? No
The "break in" procedure is BS concocted by a businessman in the business of selling barrels. A barrel will shoot good or it doesn't. My best shooting rifle was built with a broche cut barrel from classic barrel works looking down the bore the tool marks are attrocious. I considered lapping it but decided to shoot it first i never bothered lapping it. Capable of a ragged hole 5 shot group at 200 yards and consistent 8" groups at 1000 yards it's good to go. No barrel procedure post manufacture will improve a barrels ability. Just shoot your rifles!!
This all has me very confused, I currently have a factory gun and barrel that I did not break in and have not cleaned once with around 700+ rounds through it. If anything it seems to be getting better (me too). I am in the process of building a really nice gun built by a pro with a custom barrel and very interested in ensuring I understand what I should do.
This is the most recent groups when i was zero'ing a new scope. The top left group, lower shot I said "crap" before I saw the impact, I rushed the shot. Order was center, top left, top right, lower left. Top right, and lower left were confirmation after turrets locked.
This is the most recent groups when i was zero'ing a new scope. The top left group, lower shot I said "crap" before I saw the impact, I rushed the shot. Order was center, top left, top right, lower left. Top right, and lower left were confirmation after turrets locked.
Looks like this discussion runs with so many variables. But having read the whole thing through I'd say that there is consensus that
Custom barrels:
-Do not need breaking-in. But many makers advise so.
-And few mentioned that most custom barrels have reamer marks, although there is reason to predict that they are much lighter than on factory barrels.
-Have far better bore surface and by default suffer less of copper depositing.
-Shoot well right out of the box. If it does not it is not going to.
Factory barrels:
-Many have noticed and testified the fact that keeps breaking-in process alive. It is that when cleaning between first shots, the amount of copper depositing to the bore reduces by the shots made. In the definition of breaking-in, "breaking" happening here makes the product better by accumulating less copper. This is something I have noticed too.
-It is an open topic if one should go the Tubb's Final Finish way or just shooting. All of the commenters here who used TFF felt they benefited from it. Afterall isn't this practically what the custom barrel makers do also. I'd even say that Lapping the tool marks and evening out the bore surface parallel to the rifling is one of the most important steps in making a custom barrel.
-Many here agree that breaking-in reduces copper depositing but not that it increases accuracy. I agree. But it is a well-known fact that accuracy will be affected when too much copper has accumulated.
-I found that the only downsides to breaking-in is that it causes marks to the bore from the rod movement. I found this both ironic and silly.
>Ironic in the way that some shooters go through the trouble of break-in to remove the tool marks and only manage to add them.
>Silly in the fact that the rod markings are assumed to be only made in the breaking-in process. If the user does not hold the reason to go easy with the rod on the barrel during the breaking-in, why should he not be able to cause rod markings in the bore later on too?
My insights on this matter:
1. Things can be done right or wrong.
Making assumption that breaking in a barrel is bad because I will use some harmful tools/ways to do it is not rational/nice. I am however worried about the number of "Cold bore" type of shots made during the process but I have no real facts whether they really are so harmful.
2. Breaking-in is not mandatory for factory barrels. Like couple of commenters have proved. @seansmd Could you take a photo of the crown to see possible copper accumulation in the rifling?
3. If I will get another factory barrel I will be probably lapping it. Has anyone here a good guide to it?
Custom barrels:
-Do not need breaking-in. But many makers advise so.
-And few mentioned that most custom barrels have reamer marks, although there is reason to predict that they are much lighter than on factory barrels.
-Have far better bore surface and by default suffer less of copper depositing.
-Shoot well right out of the box. If it does not it is not going to.
Factory barrels:
-Many have noticed and testified the fact that keeps breaking-in process alive. It is that when cleaning between first shots, the amount of copper depositing to the bore reduces by the shots made. In the definition of breaking-in, "breaking" happening here makes the product better by accumulating less copper. This is something I have noticed too.
-It is an open topic if one should go the Tubb's Final Finish way or just shooting. All of the commenters here who used TFF felt they benefited from it. Afterall isn't this practically what the custom barrel makers do also. I'd even say that Lapping the tool marks and evening out the bore surface parallel to the rifling is one of the most important steps in making a custom barrel.
-Many here agree that breaking-in reduces copper depositing but not that it increases accuracy. I agree. But it is a well-known fact that accuracy will be affected when too much copper has accumulated.
-I found that the only downsides to breaking-in is that it causes marks to the bore from the rod movement. I found this both ironic and silly.
>Ironic in the way that some shooters go through the trouble of break-in to remove the tool marks and only manage to add them.
>Silly in the fact that the rod markings are assumed to be only made in the breaking-in process. If the user does not hold the reason to go easy with the rod on the barrel during the breaking-in, why should he not be able to cause rod markings in the bore later on too?
My insights on this matter:
1. Things can be done right or wrong.
Making assumption that breaking in a barrel is bad because I will use some harmful tools/ways to do it is not rational/nice. I am however worried about the number of "Cold bore" type of shots made during the process but I have no real facts whether they really are so harmful.
2. Breaking-in is not mandatory for factory barrels. Like couple of commenters have proved. @seansmd Could you take a photo of the crown to see possible copper accumulation in the rifling?
3. If I will get another factory barrel I will be probably lapping it. Has anyone here a good guide to it?
Last edited:
I am over 1000 rounds now, it may be opening up.
I have a brake area 419, not sure how I would do that?
I'm in agreement regarding the value of this article and the level of effort put forth in its production. With all this being said though, why are so many major barrel manufacturers sticking to the shoot-clean-shoot methodology or the shoot three-clean-shoot three process?
I have owned quite a few rifles with high end barrels. While I'm not convinced that break in will really do much to a PROPERLY hand lapped barrel from a custom maker, I am not so arrogant that I think I know more than someone who makes barrels for a living.
When I buy high end barrels, I buy from barrel makers who have a well established reputation for selling products that perform well. While still not convinced that break in really helps a properly lapped barrel, I will follow the makers instructions simply because they know much more than I do, and they have a well earned and far better reputation for knowing barrels than I do. Even though I may not believe it will help, and I may not understand the logic behind the recommended break in instructions, I will follow them out of respect for the maker's reputation.
I have a general knowledge of how a barrel is hand lapped, but I haven't ever lapped one, so I will rely on the maker's experience. It would be sheer arrogance to think I know more about barrels than makers like Kreiger, Obeymeyer, Rock Creek, Schneider, similar makers. I don't want to be "that guy".
When I buy high end barrels, I buy from barrel makers who have a well established reputation for selling products that perform well. While still not convinced that break in really helps a properly lapped barrel, I will follow the makers instructions simply because they know much more than I do, and they have a well earned and far better reputation for knowing barrels than I do. Even though I may not believe it will help, and I may not understand the logic behind the recommended break in instructions, I will follow them out of respect for the maker's reputation.
I have a general knowledge of how a barrel is hand lapped, but I haven't ever lapped one, so I will rely on the maker's experience. It would be sheer arrogance to think I know more about barrels than makers like Kreiger, Obeymeyer, Rock Creek, Schneider, similar makers. I don't want to be "that guy".
Just an FYI, not all custom barrels are hand-lapped. The barrel of choice for Chad Dixon at LongRifles Inc are KP Barrels. KP barrels have ruled the .50 cal competitions for decades. Then they branched out into all the other calibers. They don't hand-lap their barrels as they don't see a need, unless a customer absolutely insists. Their barrels are drilled and cut on state-of-art equipment and they use bore scopes to check each and everyone they produce. They've done extensive testing and with and without and saw no difference. Once you lap a barrel by put lapping compound into a barrel it's very difficult to remove all of the lapping compound. The way it was explained to me, it's almost like fire lapping a barrel without using lapping compound impregnated bullets. I'm no expert on the subject, but most everything I've read is fire lapping a barrel is a huge no no and can do plenty of negatives to the barrel. I know this goes against everything we've read or thought. However, I'm no expert, I leave that up to the individuals who make their products, stand by and support them.
Chad is currently re-barreling my custom Tikka .243 win to a 6.5 Creedmoor and will be using a KP barrel. Those that know Chad, know his rifles, work and attention to detail are second to none.
Chad is currently re-barreling my custom Tikka .243 win to a 6.5 Creedmoor and will be using a KP barrel. Those that know Chad, know his rifles, work and attention to detail are second to none.
" This is not to say that moly is necessarily bad for a barrel, but it can be when applied to bullets. Never shoot moly coated bullets as they are bad juju for the throat of a rifle "
Rubbish , those people don't want moly used because it makes the barrel last way longer .
I have been using it for 30 years and have one barrel on 7000 rounds and still shooting well .
Rubbish , those people don't want moly used because it makes the barrel last way longer .
I have been using it for 30 years and have one barrel on 7000 rounds and still shooting well .
Your not wrong . There is so much variation in the size of cartriges and their powder capacities , length of powder columns , speed of powder burning rates and power of primers it can't be right for every cartridge , powder and primer combination . Not to mention free bore variations and seating distance of the lands variations . Those people mentioned are theorists wanting to fit every effect into a single explanation experience proves otherwise . The 22 Hornet is not going to behave internally the same as a 6 mm / 06 .
Last edited:
Similar threads
