To clean or not to clean - testing results

[barronian]

For those of you who haven't already seen Saeed's test results:-

Clean Or Not Clean Your 22 Barrel?Updated With 3 Rifles. Updated 50 Yards! - Topic

forums.accuratereloading.com

Some real testing results to add to the "opinions"

 

[Hoser]

Dirty barrels shoot pretty good, until they dont. Shooting on electronic targets at the Olympic Training Center I would start to get off call fliers somewhere around the 125-150 round mark with Eley Match and TenX in my Lilja Titebore.

After I clean it and run 10-20 rounds through it, accuracy is right back where it was. This is common for most of my smallbore rifles.

And keeping the dreaded carbon ring away is easy if you keep it clean.

When dudes with Olympic Gold medals tell me to clean my rifles every couple hundred rounds if it needs it or not, I listen.

 

[straightshooter1]

Dirty barrels shoot pretty good, until they dont. Shooting on electronic targets at the Olympic Training Center I would start to get off call fliers somewhere around the 125-150 round mark with Eley Match and TenX in my Lilja Titebore.

After I clean it and run 10-20 rounds through it, accuracy is right back where it was. This is common for most of my smallbore rifles.

And keeping the dreaded carbon ring away is easy if you keep it clean.

When dudes with Olympic Gold medals tell me to clean my rifles every couple hundred rounds if it needs it or not, I listen.

Hmmm??? So . . . it sounds to me like a "not clean" barrel is still better than a really clean one; one just has to have it a little dirty (e.g. 10 or 20 rounds through it to get back to accuracy) rather than really dirty. ?

 

[billmeek]

I may well be wrong, but I think a lot of the clean/don't clean comes from the initial quality of the barrel. Many of the factory barrels that come on lower-end 22 rifles need a decent number of rounds though them in order to smooth out (aka condition) the barrel. The better the barrel, the less it takes for the rifle to be in the sweet spot. Custom made hand lapped barrels may well be best with little (to no) fowling shots.

If this is true, that may be why many 22 shooters without higher-end barrels will shoot until accuracy suffers and only then clean the barrel. They have passed on their "knowledge"/experience to others which is often taken as fact.

I bought a Hawkeye borescope so I can keep an eye on my newer, more expensive 22 barrels and investigate problems that have popped up with the older cheap 22s.

 

[straightshooter1]

I may well be wrong, but I think a lot of the clean/don't clean comes from the initial quality of the barrel. Many of the factory barrels that come on lower-end 22 rifles need a decent number of rounds though them in order to smooth out (aka condition) the barrel. The better the barrel, the less it takes for the rifle to be in the sweet spot. Custom made hand lapped barrels may well be best with little (to no) fowling shots.

If this is true, that may be why many 22 shooters without higher-end barrels will shoot until accuracy suffers and only then clean the barrel. They have passed on their "knowledge"/experience to others which is often taken as fact.

I bought a Hawkeye borescope so I can keep an eye on my newer, more expensive 22 barrels and investigate problems that have popped up with the older cheap 22s.

Hmmm??? So, when you see numbers from an extensive test (see attached), does it tell us anything?

Note the three high end rifles used (in red) and numbers are MOA's at 50 yds.

 

[billmeek]

It tells me that I know nothing about the state of the barrels used in the test when clean. I also haven't read the results in detail. Is "clean" meaning that no or little fouling shots were fired before testing?

In the CZ 2 out of the 3 on average performed better with a clean barrel. With the Anschutz, on average 50% performed better clean.

Were the shots all made in the same day in the 40 X? If so, would shooter fatigue be an issue after cleaning the barrel? If not the same day, was the shooter having a bad day? Was the environment (i.e wind) a factor? My point here being there are so many variables that could effect the results with 22LR.

I'm not saying I'm right and the results of the 40x are wrong. I admitted up front that I may well be wrong. It's simply a theory I have that I wanted to share and get input from others with more experience than myself. Discussion is always a good thing.

 

[straightshooter1]

It tells me that I know nothing about the state of the barrels used in the test when clean. I also haven't read the results in detail. Is "clean" meaning that no or little fouling shots were fired before testing?

In the CZ 2 out of the 3 on average performed better with a clean barrel. With the Anschutz, on average 50% performed better clean.

Were the shots all made in the same day in the 40 X? If so, would shooter fatigue be an issue after cleaning the barrel? If not the same day, was the shooter having a bad day? Was the environment (i.e wind) a factor? My point here being there are so many variables that could effect the results with 22LR.

I'm not saying I'm right and the results of the 40x are wrong. I admitted up front that I may well be wrong. It's simply a theory I have that I wanted to share and get input from others with more experience than myself. Discussion is always a good thing.

Good points, and the tester did cover some of those issues (except things like shooter fatigue and "bad days"). He says when cleaned them to be as clean as they can get and inspected the barrel(s) with a bore scope, which was done upon each change of ammo (the link at the top of that attachment gets you to the web pages with the details). He also says he fired a number of fouling rounds before each set (something like 10 or 20 rounds, as I try to recall). Firing 10 rounds per each group with 6 groups per set is pretty good numbers in my book. . . though still not as exhaustive as one might find as a test facility like Lapua has.

As you say, there's MANY variables at play when trying to nail down the performance of 22 LR ammo. While there's many open questions like the one's you've mentioned, it seems to me these numbers with the method applied can give one an indication of what the answer is to the issue of clean vs not clean. From what I can see, there's enough results and looking at the whole to see that a "not clean" barrel tends to have some advantage. Yes, there are a few exceptions shown there and that seems to speak to the uncertainty of .22 LR ammo. And so, in a competition, one has an element of luck in one's ammo performing as expected.

 

[billmeek]

Now look at it from a different perspective. How often do the benchrest shooters clean their barrels? What about the Olympic team? What does Eley recommend?

From my understanding, all 3 recommend cleaning very often (i.e. Eley - 200 rounds). How much research have these groups done on 22LR accuracy?

 

[straightshooter1]

Now look at it from a different perspective. How often do the benchrest shooters clean their barrels? What about the Olympic team? What does Eley recommend?

From my understanding, all 3 recommend cleaning very often (i.e. Eley - 200 rounds). How much research have these groups done on 22LR accuracy?

All are good questions. I'd like to see the science they used to made their decision. Just because everyone is doing something doesn't mean it's correct . . . huh? And it'd be interesting to know just "why" Eley makes their recommendation. Could it be a similar reason as rifle manufacturers build their factory guns with really long throats (e.g. to address the general public's various use of the product)?

 

[Hoser]

So why wait until accuracy drops off?

Just take the 5 minutes clean the barrel after a couple hundred rounds. While you are in there use some compressed air and blow out all the grime and goop that comes along with rimfires.

Do it often and it wont be such a chore when accuracy drops off.

Take a peek inside a well used match barrel with your borescope and you will be amazed how pitted they get on the bottom quarter of the barrel.

 

[billmeek]

straightshooter1,

I read where the Olympic team changed their barrel cleaning procedure several years ago to where they clean after each match or range session. As for Eley, this might be of interest:

Does a cleaner gun mean a cleaner shot?

With 15 years’ experience as a Benchrest competitor and champion, Dan Killough knows how to extract maximum accuracy from a rimfire barrel.

eley.co.uk

But I think these recommendation only apply to better barrels.

Hoser,

I don't have a well used match barrel at this point. I've only gotten back into shooting 22LR this year after 30+ years. Most of mine are inexpensive factory rifles. I have a couple of better, what I might term midgrade, barrels for a 10/22 that are only a month or 2 old and have a Proof Research 10/22 barrel on order.

I initially followed the conventional wisdom of 'shoot until accuracy suffers' but have changed my cleaning process. For the lower-end (factory) barrels, I'll shoot about a brick before cleaning. From my experience, these rifles often take more rounds through them until they reach good accuracy. It's not uncommon to put a box through one until it hits it's stride. On the midgrade (i.e. Feddersen), only a few fouling shots (less than 10) were required for them to shoot very well. I'll have to see how the Proof responds when I get it in-hand. My "guess" is that it's be spot-on with only a few rounds.

 

[straightshooter1]

straightshooter1,

I read where the Olympic team changed their barrel cleaning procedure several years ago to where they clean after each match or range session. As for Eley, this might be of interest:

Does a cleaner gun mean a cleaner shot?

With 15 years’ experience as a Benchrest competitor and champion, Dan Killough knows how to extract maximum accuracy from a rimfire barrel.

eley.co.uk

But I think these recommendation only apply to better barrels.

Hoser,

I don't have a well used match barrel at this point. I've only gotten back into shooting 22LR this year after 30+ years. Most of mine are inexpensive factory rifles. I have a couple of better, what I might term midgrade, barrels for a 10/22 that are only a month or 2 old and have a Proof Research 10/22 barrel on order.

I initially followed the conventional wisdom of 'shoot until accuracy suffers' but have changed my cleaning process. For the lower-end (factory) barrels, I'll shoot about a brick before cleaning. From my experience, these rifles often take more rounds through them until they reach good accuracy. It's not uncommon to put a box through one until it hits it's stride. On the midgrade (i.e. Feddersen), only a few fouling shots (less than 10) were required for them to shoot very well. I'll have to see how the Proof responds when I get it in-hand. My "guess" is that it's be spot-on with only a few rounds.

I like that article, particularly where he says their "engineers have crunched the numbers", which leave me with some confidence in the recommendation. However, it seems it's very specific to the use of high end rifles and their Eley products. . .??? I wouldn't just assume what's good for them is good for me. It's like this article that kinda goes the other way:

Volquartsen Firearms

It seem we're all still left with just testing what method works best for our specific rifle.

 

[billmeek]

While you can run thousands of rounds through a 22LR (my Savage B22 once saw over 10 bricks) between cleanings, the article from Volquartsen doesn't go into any detail on how it effects accuracy. They do mention the "fun" of not having to clean 22LR which doesn't inspire a great amount of confidence in the article. That's a whole different topic versus chasing accuracy.

In my opinion, as long as you take care not to damage the barrel when cleaning, I don't think a solid cleaning regiment should hurt accuracy. Knowing what it takes round-wise to reach peak accuracy is something that will take experimentation with your rifle and ammo.

 

[Larry Jones]

I agree with barrel quality as well. I personally don't own a high end barrel, but my run of the mill stock rifles shoot better fully fowled. My X ring shoots great within the first 10

 

[straightshooter1]

In my opinion, as long as you take care not to damage the barrel when cleaning, I don't think a solid cleaning regiment should hurt accuracy. Knowing what it takes round-wise to reach peak accuracy is something that will take experimentation with your rifle and ammo.

Yup . . . that's the boat I'm in.

 

[TimK]

I shoot with Hoser at the Olympic Training Center here in Colorado Springs. I see some of the best shooters in the world, and they clean immediately after shooting while the barrel is still warm. They do it right there on the firing line. It's no guarantee that it's the best approach, but these men and women are about as detail oriented as it gets. I'd be surprised if they didn't have good reasons. I've spoken with a few of them, and the prevailing opinion seems to be that clean is better. They also mention that cleaning is easier immediately after shooting stops.

One thing seems clear, (as has been stated above and in previous posts) clean shoots better than dirty. At least, that's the case in my match barreled rifles. I think I start to see accuracy dropping off in the 150 round range. If I can clean without causing problems (like damaging the crown), I see no reason not to do so.

I go to a monthly prone match (typically 80 rounds) with a freshly cleaned barrel. I'll fire 10-20 sighters to confirm my data at the different ranges, and that gets the barrel settled in. The gun seems good through the match. We then re-configure in the afternoon for a PRS style match with roughly the same round count. Towards the end of that match, I often think I start seeing shots off call. Might be shooter fatigue, but I don't think so.

In fact, I just finished a second rifle (AR with .22 conversion) that I will reserve for the afternoon match. I didn't do that just to deal with the cleaning issues, but a happy side benefit of two guns is that I can shoot both matches with rifles that are right in their cleaning "sweet spots".

 

[flatland1]

Since I started doing my own 22RF bbl work, using only custom bbls from Benchmark, Krieger, & Lilja, I've gotten into the habit of wiping bores out with a relatively mild solvent (Ed's Red) after every range session. I can usually feel any lead deposits in a bore, and if I do, it gets a bronze brush pushed through a few times. This very seldom happens with the SK & Lapua ammo I usually shoot, though I have gotten a few shiny streaks of leading out on patches a few times when a bbl was brand new. If I'm not sure what's going on, I get the Hawkeye & check the bore visually with it. I seldom see much need for more than a very few fouling shots - most often, it's only one or two before the bbl starts shooting on call. Since I clean frequently, I really have no idea how long these custom bbls will go before accuracy drops off.

 

[billmeek]

On a bolt action 22, it's pretty easy to clean the barrel by removing the bolt. On 10/22s, you have to remove the action from the stock (if there is a cleaning hole at the rear of the receiver) or use something like an Otis cleaning kit. I have to wonder just how much of the conventional wisdom about not cleaning 22 rifles comes from just laziness and people attempting to justify their preference of not cleaning?

 

[Booner1334]

Last week I shot some of the best groups out if my RPRR-consistant groups-and the only difference I attribute that to is my cleaning methods. I started using the felt pellets since the last time I shot the rifle back in December. I also didn't get a cold bore flier as I usually do. And I was shooting the same ammo lot as I did back in December.

I'll be heading to the range later today with the RPRR and my CZ 455 and will clean them both with the pellets before I shoot and will see what happens.

Felt pellets and a 20 caliber solid cleaning rod to clean the barrel followed by some cotton patches to dry it, then shoot.