New barrel break in - is this necessary?

Barrel Break-in, necessary or needless.

  • Proper barrel break in procedures are important contributors to rifle performance.

    Votes: 19 24.7%
  • Barrel break in procedures are unnecessary and possibly harmful.

    Votes: 58 75.3%

  • Total voters
    77
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
My MP15 Sport barrel was SO rough when new the first cleaning swabs had fibers pulled from them and left traces of cotton in the bbl. Broke bbl in cleaning after each shot for 5, after 5 next 15. Copper solvent, brush then patches. After 20 rds bore was clean and SMOOTH. Make it more accurate...who knows. Will prevent copper fouling and make it easier to clean - YES. And I think we can all agree copper fouling WILL lead to reduced accuracy. It's your rifle do with it as you want...kinda like Ford or Chevy.
 
I don't use any special procedures to break in a barrel. I just shoot it and keep in mind to pay too much attention to the accuracy in the beginning, since I am getting used to the rifle/caliber. I also try harder not to overheat the barrel until it smooths out a bit. I guess you can call that a procedure
 
Quoted from an earlier post in this thread:

"the whole point of break in is removing the tool marks in the throat from the reamer."

Sir, please describe how much 'breaking in" would be required to remove tool marks from the throat, and about how long it would take to do so.
Thank you.
 
in my experience (mostly with broughton and bartlein bbls, and perhaps more importantly with my own sharp, new reamers) they stop copper fouling in 3-5 rounds. in one case, about 9 iirc, and in another case i never saw copper, so 0.

again, the theory is that copper adheres to copper very well. so once you start getting copper in there, you will get more and more to a point. the copper for the most part is not from friction in the bore. it is vaporized and then deposited in the bore as the gas cools. it got vaporized from the rough surface in the throat. so once those little burs in the throat gets smoothed out, and your bore is clean, you shouldn't get much copper fouling.

i could be wrong though. honestly, i think the net is simply that if you clean a few times up front, you save yourself quite a bit of hard-cleaning over the life of the bbl. i.e. if you let that initial copper take root, then it builds up and you clean with copper solvents to knock the buildup down, but it's difficult to remove all of it, so it will tend to build up again.

btw, i only break in the nicer hand lapped bbls. i never do that to factory AR barrels or pistols or anything like that.
 
According to this article (link posted by Bfoosh006), the grander purpose of break in is to polish the tooling marks from the throat.
http://www.kriegerbarrels.com/Break_...246-wp2558.htm

I have never heard this in any thread, post, or from other barrel makers. I do NOT believe what Krieger is saying about the throat. By the time you've fired enough rounds to remove tool marks left from the reamer, you've done quite a bit of shooting!! It seems to me that Krieger must be talking about lapping, as opposed to barrel break-in, which is the topic of this thread. Is Kreiger's word so unquestionable as to be the gospel truth? The president has more authority and wider audience than Keiger, and I don;t believe what he says, so where is Kreiger's absolute authority?

I don;t buy it. I'll just say, in opposition to the masses, that barrel break-in requires about 60 rounds, about 20 extra cleanings, and about 4 hours time, with the rounds fiired and cleaning added to the life of the barrel. With some shooters shooting substantially more than 1000 rounds over the life of the barrel, I do not see the objection to smoothing the bore and preventing future copper fouling.

Some object because, as they say, "It's not the rounds fired, but the cleaning". When asked to expound on this, these men will say "improper cleaning does more damage than....". Well, "improper cleaning" is an issue separate and apart from barrel break-in. Assuming that someone will use their cleaning equipment improperly shows little faith in the skill of other shooters and suggests a lack of faith in self. I think even the article (from the link) mentions this, which truly (unlike the oft-used LOL), again truly, made me laugh.

Break it in.....if you've got the time ( a couple of three or four hours). I understand when guys just can;t find the time. That's ok. In that case, don't break it in. But when guys don;t have that much time, how do they find time to shoot at all? Accuracy requires proficiency, which requires practice, which requires dedication, all of which requires time. But....we knew this already............. right?

As I said, there is just no way for the average shooter to qualify the benefits of barrel break-in. However, in light of information available to us, I cannot imagine a shooter with a brand new rifle foresaking the break-in process. Are we in such a hurry to "shoot the gun and quickly get back home?" How many of these threads have there been? Many, with many an (unintended) humorous post. There have been a few funny ones just in this thread. Heck, maybe mine are humorous, though it would be completely unintended. :)D)

If anyone here has any experience building Volkswagen or other air-cooled engines, you will definitely understand what is happening during that break-in process. Apply to new rifles.

Break it in.
 
Last edited:
I think it helps...some

I usually have a 'break-in period' simply because I have a new gun and I want to shoot the heck out of it. Get the feel of it and learn its ins and outs. Also, because if I bought it and didn't want to shoot it, IMHO it's a waste of money. I do have a very non-scientific approach, however I believe that a 'barrel break-in' is just as good, if not better for the gun and it's mechanisms as anything else. I do notice a difference in some of my guns consistency after around 100 rounds. I usually shoot around 20 rounds clean it spotless and shoot around 20 more till I'm around 100. Like l stated I have noticed a difference in consistency in some of my guns, mostly rifles, not so much with pistols. The one thing I always notice is how much smother the gun itself operates. I believe that's maybe more important than anything else.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top