Barrel break in

[Trent]

He apparently does have a good track record for design and machining, how about you?

Wait... what?

The only thing I can say is I answered the OP's question, so far you have not.

Jim

Did you? Seems all that you did was pointed to some other people's theories.

[Bob Mc Alice]

.......and good old boy Larry P. has gotten rich pushing break in by selling tons of cleaning supplies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjbnYm_HmXg

[Jim T.]

Hey guys, so when did this thread turn from "jovial" to "hilarious???"

You have a moron shooting a gas operated AR-10 without eye protection vs John Krieger

An apparent fat, inbred, snipershide reject vs Tracy Bartlein: and

A plain, unadulterated, goofball vs. Dan Lilja

Thanks for making the choices so easy.

Maybe you two should make a youtube video??????

[Trent]

This one is the best one Bob.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPQM4h-UZtc

[Trent]

Jim, I think you lost your sense of humor when you gave up on silhouette 2 years ago. Maybe you should show up to a match and relieve a little stress. You have that $5000 bike seat shoved so far up your butt that you've forgotten how to have a good time. Or I guess you could just drink a little more Chateau Leoville Poyferre.

[Jim T.]

Actually, it is a $10,000 Lynskey Helix OS, SRAM Red, full Envy carbon, etc, etc.

Have not given up on silhouette yet, just found other things that are more "fun" that keep getting in the way.

You have the right idea, drinking good wine is fun and pleasurable, maybe someday you can try it???

Even more cheerfully,

Jim

[Trent]

Last time I saw you you were straddling a Campagnolo.

Maybe we should have a discussion over screw tops versus corks. That could be fun too.

[dustinflint]

Actually, it is a $10,000 Lynskey Helix OS, SRAM Red, full Envy carbon, etc, etc.

Jim,

If you're going to brag on how expensive your bike and components are, you at least have to spell them correctly. It's Enve, not Envy!

C'mon man!

Dustin

[Jim Beckley]

Trent, Are you measuring pee-pees with JimT now? At least it looks like McAlice is holding
it for ya!

[Trent]

Trent, Are you measuring pee-pees with JimT now? At least it looks like McAlice is holding
it for ya!

Talk about shrinkage!!

[Jerry G]

Do break in your new bbl. It makes it clean easier.

Is there enough there for the goo-roo to grab iwth a needle nose pliers?

[Snake]

JimT....trent may be on target...the earth may be flat....I know it is in Kansas. But skeptics are to be encouraged and argued with...it keeps us honest. One day someone will give Trent a look down the bore with a borescope...he may then acknowledge that the 'theories' he rails against have some empirical basis..... But this thread remains jovial...even if my sween is bigger

[Trent]

One day someone will give Trent a look down the bore with a borescope...he may then acknowledge that the 'theories' he rails against have some empirical basis.....

Been there done that (borescope). Are you telling me that you have looked at an acceptable sample of barrels (say... 30) that have been "broken in" through shooting AND cleaning, and another sample of barrels of the same make/model (say... 30) that have just been shot THEN cleaned? You are then telling me that you can see some evidence that PROVES that barrels need to be "broken in"? What is it that you see?

I mean, in order to have empirical evidence (or basis) you must have done an experiment, right?

Yes, I am a skeptic through and through. I need proof, not faith. Benchresters do a lot of things that simply boost confidence and don't provide measurable performance gains per se. I'm not against barrel "break in", I simply think it is a made up and unproven procedure. In my opinion it's a theory. It is certainly, at this point in time, not a proven fact. I do think that barrels break in... or rather, in my case they "shoot in" and reach their potential within a certain number of shots and then they'll maintain that potential for a certain number of shots. I think we can all agree that each barrel is an unknown (although an average can be determined). Snake, buy 60 barrels and run a test on each of them and settle this once and for all so that we can end the theories on both sides of the debate. (and talking to 60 different people about their barrels doesn't count)

McAlice, you own a high end borescope, why aren't you breaking in your barrels the proper way? Ah, we'll leave McAlice out of this since he is so new to shooting centerfire. I think he has only shot a little over 25,000 rounds of 7-08 alone, and who knows how many thousands of rounds of other cartridges. He is still wet behind the ears.

But this thread remains jovial...even if my sween is bigger

"sween" just sounds small. I have a SWOON... as in "Snake swoons over Trent's one eyed wonder".

[Snake]

I have no quarrel with the shooting then cleaning regimen. however I disagree with shooting 50 rounds before the first cleaning. i contend that its unwise and detrimental to go more than 5-6 rounds before cleaning out the copper....I always thought the shoot 1 then clean was a bit much. My last two barrels each went over 7500 before they opened up beyond 1 moa at 200. I have a 308 barrel that went over 15000 ...when sectioned the throat eroded to about 2 inches...it still grouped at a minute....it however copper fouled like mad and required actually cleaning to keep it at the moa.
I still contend that some sort of a breakin is required to insure accuracy and useful barrel life.
While you're smacking your swoon...remember who the Snake is ...shorty! I heard your motto "it may not be big a round but its short"

[Trent]

You remembered it wrong. Here... "It may be short, but it sure is skinny."


My theory conflicts with yours. I feel that a barrel is a constantly changing thing. With fire cracking in the throat, erosion and jacket wear/tear on the bore (albeit jacket wear is actually very little in comparison to throat wear) I can't see that "break in" can have any effect what so ever on barrel life. What ever break in procedure is used, the effects are erased with real world use. You yourself said that you've had barrels "break in" within 2 or 3 shots. You can't convince me that 3000, 4000 or 5000 rounds later that the effect of those first 2 or 3 rounds can still be contributing to barrel life. Nor the first 25 shots. Saying that there is a true positive correlation (really I mean "causation") between "break in" and barrel life would require PROOF. I would venture a guess that your choice in powder, bullets and cleaning regimen have more to do with your barrel life than your break in procedure (especially in your example of the barrels that only take 2 to 3 rounds to "break in").

I'm referring to this:

Some barrels...like Shilen break-in after two or three shots.

This debate is kind of like debating whether or not God exists. There is absolutely no proof that God exists. People that believe that He does rely solely on faith. Note: I am not trying to debate the existence of God, I am merely using this as an example. We have no proof... but different beliefs.

Yes, I am a skeptic to the core. I can't help it.

If nothing else we are spicing up the High Power forum since it has been a little boring as of late. Good thing McAlice posts some photos for us sometimes!