Barrel Break in

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Covelo-NdN

Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2014
Messages
71
Location
Ukiah CA
hello High Roaders, this message is in regards to breaking in a new rifle barrel. I have never "broken in a barrel" but I want to. Why, I don't know why. But I wanna try it.

So here is my question.

What ammunition should I use to break in the barrel? Cheaper factory or my hand loads?

I hand load, shoot TTSX 150 grain in this 7 MM. can/should I use these?

My plan is to shoot, clean,shoot clean first ten rounds and then go on with my life lol.

Thanks for the feedback
 
My personal belief is: clean it, shoot it and enjoy it. Don't obsess about some internet expert telling you to shoot one, clean, etc, etc. If it has a problem, lap a little and shoot some more.
 
Some barrels benefit from breaking in, and some do not. Don't waste your time breaking in a barrel that does not need it.

Breaking in a barrel will not improve accuracy for a clean barrel. If a barrel copper fouls excessively, breaking in will increase the number of shots you can go between copper cleanings.

In order to break in a barrel, it must be well and truly clean.

As the bullet transits the barrel, little microburrs scrape off copper. When the next bullet transits, the copper protects the burr and you are on your way to a build-up. The microburrs must be exposed for break-in to work.

So shoot one round, and see if you're getting any blue on your patch. If you are, clean until you don't anymore. Then shoot another round. By and by, your patches will start to be quite clean. Switch to shooting three, then cleaning. When you can shoot three with almost no blue, you're done. Clean again and apply Ultra Bore Coat.

I have a lovely 1917 Carl Gustaf 6.5x55. You'd think that after 100 years, the bore would be broken in. But no, it fouled quite a bit. So I did the break in routine. Now it goes a lot longer between copper cleanings.
 
Some mfg's state in their manuals that barrels need to be broke in and they give you the procedure to do that.

My experience is that the higher end rifle mfg's who guarantee 1 MOA want you to break in the barrel. Those that don't have any claims to the accuracy of their barrels never get into barrel break in.

That tells me that their barrels are, shall we say, not worth the effort.
 
Actually talking to a bbl mfg a couple years ago, the cheaper the gun/barrel the more it needs to be broken in. His match barrels were hand lapped, most if not all standard barrels are not and the tolerances on cheap rifles are even worse.
Most major rifle mfgs have barrel break in procedures now. I know Winchester, Savage and Howa does,
 
All barrels shoot better after a few rounds have been through them. Some reach their full potential after 20 rounds, others may take 200. At that point the barrel is broken in. The barrel can't count and doesn't know or care when you clean it. Shoot it, clean it when dirty. Some barrels get dirty sooner than others and may be harder to clean if copper fouling is allowed to build up. This is the whole idea behind the barrel break-in procedure, you prevent copper fouling from building up in rough barrels. At the end of the day you'll see no difference in accuracy if you clean it 10 times during the 1st 200 rounds or wait until 200 rounds have been fired and clean it once. It'll take more work to get it clean if you wait until after 200 rounds. But no more than cleaning it 9 more times.
 
Back in the 90's I bought a Savage Model 10 Sierra. This is a 6 1/4 lb rifle with a 20" barrel chambered for 300 WSM. My gunsmith suggested lapping it with Iosso. I spent 3 nights swabbing the barrel with the stuff, loaded some 168gr SMK's with a starting load of IMR-4350 and hit the range. That little rifle shot the first seven 3 round groups under an inch. I have been a fan since then. My new KImber and Bergara just got the same treatment.
 
I've never seen any need to "break in" a good barrel. They've all had best accuracy from the start. Even good broach rifled 7.62 NATO service grade barrels from the government facility at Springfield Armory.
 
Not this again.

Are you guys familiar with Gale McMillan? This is what he had to say about barrel break in:
Posted: 01-27-2000 08:57
I will make one last post on this subject and appeal to logic on this subject I think it is the height of arrogance to believe a novice can improve a barrel
using a cleaning rod more than that a barrel maker can do with 30 years of experience and a * million dollars in equipment . The barrel is a relatively
precise bit of machining and to imagine that it can be improved on with a bit of abrasive smeared on a patch or embedded in a bullet. The surface finish
of a barrel is a delicate thing with more of them being ruined with a cleaning rod in the hands of someone who doesn't know how to use one. I would
never in a million years buy a used rifle now because you well may buy one that has been improved. First give a little thought to what you think you
are accomplishing with any of the break in methods. Do you really believe that if what you are doing would help a barrel that the barrel maker wouldn't
have already done it. The best marketing advantage he can have is for his barrels to out perform his competitors! Of coarse he is happy to see you
poking things in your barrel . Its only going to improve his sales. Get real!!!! I am not saying the following to brag because the record speak for it' self
McMillan barrels won the gold at 4 straight Olympics. Won the Leach Cup eight years running. Had more barrels in the Wimbledon shoot off every year
for 4 straight yearsthan any other make. Set the national 1000 yard record 17 times in one year. Held 7 world records at the same time in the NBRSA .
Won the national silhouette matches 5 straight times and set 3 world records while doing that . Shot the only two 6400 scores in the history of small
bore and holds a 100 yard world record that will stand for ever at .009 of one inch. All with barrels the shooter didn't have to improve on by breaking
them in.
Click to expand...
 
Somebody should buy 40 new rifles all same mfg and caliber. "Break in" 20 of them and shoot the other half with same ammo and same conditions, then report back to us with the results.
Sadly, I am currently unable to take on this project at this time. So until then, I spose we will all have our own firmly held opinions.
 
Kingcreek wrote:
Somebody should buy 40 new rifles all same mfg and caliber. "Break in" 20 of them and shoot the other half with same ammo and same conditions, then report back to us with the results.
Click to expand...

Okay, I'm game. You sponsor it and I'll design the test to ensure it is scientifically and statistically sound.
 
CoalTrain49 wrote:
Some mfg's state in their manuals that barrels need to be broke in and they give you the procedure to do that.
Click to expand...

While the makers of the more pedestrian guns do no mention the word "break in" anywhere in their manuals.

I went back and looked at the manual for every gun I bought new and none of them had a break in procedure. I didn't look at the manual of the guns I bought/inherited used since it was too late to break them in even if it was necessary.
 
I don't think there's anything to be gained by break in of a hand lapped barrel.
It does make sense to follow the recommendations of the manufacturer though.
Some say that a rough barrel can be broken in anytime, after a thorough cleaning.
meh
 
After my many years of doing empirical data analysis, I am not sure that 20 rifles is a big enough sample to see if break in is effective. I think the sample should be about 200 to get the confidence interval small enough. I volunteer to help share the testing load if we are going to test something like a 6.5 CM or 243 ...[Serious note: on any such test you need to focus on the confidence interval, not the p-value. Once upon a time, I had a full population of about 5 million numerical samples. As a test, I took several random samples of 100,000 from this population and calculated the mean. The means of these samples varied from 5% to 10% from the true population mean. Keep this in mind the next time you see a poll about anything.]
 
ford8nr said:
Actually talking to a bbl mfg a couple years ago, the cheaper the gun/barrel the more it needs to be broken in. His match barrels were hand lapped, most if not all standard barrels are not and the tolerances on cheap rifles are even worse.
Most major rifle mfgs have barrel break in procedures now. I know Winchester, Savage and Howa does,
Click to expand...

I think there are some good barrels coming to us on some relatively inexpensive rifles. I broke my Howa barrel in per their their recommendations. It's 1 moa but I'm not sure if the barrel break in was the reason.

I also have a new Ruger 77 and there is no barrel break in recommended in their manual. I didn't break it in and the accuracy was horrible after 500 rounds. Sent it back to Ruger and they replaced the barrel so they must have agreed that it was bad. I broke the new barrel in (Howa method) and this barrel is better but certainly much lower than my expectations. I don't think you can help some barrels.

So here is where I have to disagree with this. My developing theory is you either have a good barrel or a not so good barrel. I think break in will accelerate the accuracy of a good barrel. I don't think it will help not so good barrels to any great degree.

A 1 moa rifle is beautiful thing and should be the goal of all barrel manufacturers. I think we're getting very close to having that standard on all bolt guns. If Savage and Howa can do it, anyone can.
 
Last edited:
Dr T said:
After my many years of doing empirical data analysis, I am not sure that 20 rifles is a big enough sample to see if break in is effective. I think the sample should be about 200 to get the confidence interval small enough. I volunteer to help share the testing load if we are going to test something like a 6.5 CM or 243 ...[Serious note: on any such test you need to focus on the confidence interval, not the p-value. Once upon a time, I had a full population of about 5 million numerical samples. As a test, I took several random samples of 100,000 from this population and calculated the mean. The means of these samples varied from 5% to 10% from the true population mean. Keep this in mind the next time you see a poll about anything.]
Click to expand...
hot DANG! :D
R we gonna do regressions and scatter plots and stuff ???
iu
 
A 1 moa rifle is beautiful thing and should be the goal of all barrel manufacturers. I think we're getting very close to having that standard on all bolt guns. If Savage and Howa can do it, anyone can.
Click to expand...

:thumbup:

After owning two beautiful stainless Ruger Hawkeye 77 MkII's, it's stunning to me that they would take so much time to craft such a lovely gun with such crap barrels. If my Rugers shot like my Savages (that cost 1/2 as much) I never would have sold them.
 
Offfhand said:
"Best accuracy" compared to what? And how did you know?
Click to expand...
Best accuracy is as good as can be had with good bullets in proper tests. All test shots under 1/3 MOA at 100, 1/2 at 300, 2/3 at 600 and 3/4 MOA at 1000. That's as good as it gets. Single, few shot groups ranged from near zero to those limits. If one chooses to base accuracy on the smallest few-shot group fired, so be it. They're near impossible do repeat. Just like the biggest ones.

I know because I've shot them as well as others reporting it. Some data came from Sierra Bullets' ballistic man who tested most all of their bullets for accuracy at 100 yards.
 
Newtosavage said:
After owning two beautiful stainless Ruger Hawkeye 77 MkII's, it's stunning to me that they would take so much time to craft such a lovely gun with such crap barrels.
Click to expand...
In 1991, Ruger gave the USA Palma Team 20, hand crafted match rifles chambered in .308 Win. They hoped those single shot rifles would be a good thing for all to see. Their barrels made by Green Mountain had either 4 or 6 grooves; why, I don't know. Their triggers were not very repeatable in let-off. Stocks were poorly shaped for precise shooting from prone. The 4-groove ones shot about half MOA better at 1000 yards than the 6-groove ones. The most accurate one was a 4-groove but just barely held the 20" ten ring tested from prone. The rest were "wash tub" rifles. Dubbed as the size of groups they shot. Nobody, save one, on the team used them in the World Championships. Their own rifles shot the ammo under 10 inches at 1000 in tests. One who used a Ruger did so as his own rifle went south and he had no other choice.
 
I see a new business opportunity; barrel break-in bullets, custom ammo specifically designed and scientifically proven to break in your barrel without the hassle of frequent cleanings. I figure I'll buy some Winchester white box and repackage them in a fancy custom box (five cartridges per box for $14.99).

It'll be kind of like those deer whistles that you stick on your bumper, no one can prove that they work but enough people will believe in them to support the business.
 
I chatted with Gale M. years ago at the Nationals about breaking in barrels. His remarks about the masses who do was, in so many words: "Most who claim their new rifle/barrel is more accurate after a 'break in' are actually seeing the results of finally their mastering its trigger. Their test groups average size is smaller and here's the icing on that cake; "finally, one group is the tiniest ever." He believed the barrel makers mandated breaking theirs in so they would wear out faster and more barrels could be sold.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
  • Locked
Barrel Breaking
Replies
16
Views
1K
RugerOldArmy
RugerOldArmy
W
  • Locked
Thoughts on Barrel break-in
Replies
16
Views
783
Art Eatman
A
G
  • Locked
Barrel Break-in? Yes or no?
2 3
Replies
55
Views
5K
taliv
T
L
  • Locked
Barrel Break-in
2
Replies
36
Views
1K
Art Eatman
A
N
  • Locked
Breaking in a New Barrel
2
Replies
27
Views
2K
makarov
M
Back
Top