Barrel break-in a myth?

[Hawk]

Since I'm not an expert I tend to rely on those that are and, as another noted, there doesn't appear to be a consensus.

To me, asking Gale McMillan about barrel break-in is like being able to ask Leonardo DaVinci why Mona has that particular smirk: one might guess the answer to be authoritative.

Then a recent Dakota magazine shows up within which is an article on the importance of extensive PITA barrel break-in. However, their break-in differs from most in that they do it - they're not asking the purchaser to do it.

Rock River said I needn't "break-in" my Varmint EOP as the barrel was already lapped. (Wilson air gauge barrel, I believe).

In the absence of consensus, I tend to go with McMillan or Dakota: if the barrel needs "broken in", whoever is doing the recommending is doing the "breaking-in". I tend to avoid buying a rifle accompanied by instructions that I do something Gale said I needn't do. It's not obsessive: I'd not avoid something I really wanted due to a "user break-in recommendation", but it does sink to the bottom of the pile.

 

[gaston_45]

"Falconeer, in re metal to metal contact, if a barrel is such soft steel that it is appreciably worn by rubbing it with a copper bullet jacket, it isn't much of a barrel. Most barrel wear is heat erosion from the powder flame temperature."

"If you clean your barrel thoroughly at all, you will break it in. The first shot or two on a clean bore are going to burnish and erode the tool marks."

Aren't these two statements in direct opposition to each other? I agree with the frist one Jim, copper will lose to steel. Which pretty much negates the need to break in, as the copper won't erode the steel fast and the flame and heat don't need bare metal to work their erosion magic.

A barrel is never truely broken in actually. After cleaning, the first few rounds always go to a different point of impact until fowling levels are at an optimal level to fill in the irregularities in the barrel metal. Seems a lot easier to just shoot and not clean the thing then to clean it and then have to shoot a few rounds you know won't go where you want them.

 

[Jim Watson]

Yes, that is somewhat contradictory, but it seems to me to be the way it works.

I guess if I shot a McMillan barrel, I wouldn't break it in, because the maker said it didn't need it.

My only name brand barrel is a Kreiger, who say that their BORE does not need "breaking in" because it has been lapped, but that their 13 +/- shot procedure is to smooth the reamer marks in the chamber throat.

I Tubb Final Finish fire lapped my rather rough Savage barrel, which made it noticeably smoother to run a patch through and easier to clean. But the tool marks are still visible. I am taking it to a match this weekend. I am undecided whether to clean it Saturday evening for Sunday's shooting. If not, we will see if accuracy holds through 120 shots + sighters.

 

[Outsider_10fp]

This seems to be a Savage question, so....
I have a 10fp too, I DID NOT do a "propper" break-in. I can still shoot a 2.5" skeet at 500 yards! It has seen well over 4000 rounds and has never had a hicup.

My break-in procedure for not just rifles but handguns also:
Buy
Clean
Shoot at range all day
go home ,clean
shoot at range all day
go home ,clean

 

[rockstar.esq]

Personally, I think the entire thing is more than a little ridiculous. As is the comparison to engines. Motorcycle manufacturers frequently recommend that you "break in" the engine by driving under some specified speed limit before your first oil change. Engines are not made to the precision level of a rifle barrel. Do what you want and when in question you won't likely go wrong following the manufacturers recomendations. However I own a 10FP-LE2 that wasn't "broken in" that holds groups at .219" at 100. Take it for what it's worth.

 

[Mute]

Fact is neither side can prove it one way or the other. How do you prove a barrel that was "broken in" shoots better than it would have without the break-in? Or vice versa?

Circumstantial evidence seem to suggest that break-ins are unnecessary sinceI've seen rifles that can achieve phenomanal accuracty both having gone through a break-in and without any break-in.

 

[alamo]

I recently saw a segment on "GunTec" on the Outdoor Channel or Outdoor Life Channel, one of those - they did the break-in procedure and claimed it made future cleaning of the barrel much easier. Don't know if that is true or not.

 

[thatguy]

Yes, it's a myth.

Some will strenuously argue otherwise, but it's a myth. All of these break-in procedures involve some combination of shooting X number of rounds and cleaning with X number of brush strokes and they are all useless. A few passes with a brass brush will not have any effect on a steel rifle barrel. The very fact that there are so many different variations on this break-in recommendation should be a clue that's it all made up.

 

[USSR]

Yeah, listen to thatguy. What do America's finest barrelmakers know?

Don

 

[blackhawk2000]

Yeah, listen to thatguy. What do America's finest barrelmakers know?

Don

http://www.snipercountry.com/Articles/Barrel_BreakIn.asp

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=60102


Some clown who calls himself Gale McMillan also claims it's a myth too. Who the hell is he, and what could he possibly know that America's finest barrelmakers don't know?

 

[swingset]

McMillan argues that the accuracy isn't improved by break-in. That's his SOLE AND ONLY contention. On that, I might agree even tho some benchresters claim otherwise. Can't say that it's proveable either way, but that point is McMillans.

What break-in does do effectively as mentioned above is make the gun easier to clean, less prone to excessive fouling.

I've done it both ways on identical guns, and I can attest this part of the "break in myth" is 100% true.

I have 2 77/22's and the one I "broke in" can go 400-500 rounds and when I clean it 2-wet patches of Kroil have it spotless. The non broke-in gun (same barrel) tends to get dirtier, and is tougher to clean.

In a way, that does affect accuracy.

 

[Blue Jays]

Hi All-

At the very least, just make certain to clean a new barrel before shooting it for the first time to ensure packing greases and other preservatives/contaminants are completely removed!

~ Blue Jays ~

 

[USSR]

What break-in does do effectively as mentioned above is make the gun easier to clean, less prone to excessive fouling.

swingset has touched upon the benefit of breaking in a barrel: Reduced fouling. I regularly compete in 1,000 yard F Class matches which require 40 rounds per match plus sighters. Typically, this is 45 - 50 rounds in one hour's time. A barrel that quickly fouls with copper will show a reduction in accuracy much sooner than one that does not. The copper in the bore will raise pressure and result in a higher ES and SD, thereby playing havoc with your late round scores. Will you notice much of anything with your hunting rifle or casual shooting rifle? Only that it may RETAIN it's accuracy under sustained fire longer, and clean up easier. This is why almost all the premium barrelmakers and the top competition shooters in the country recommend that this be done. That being said, you will always find guys who will say "Haven't cleaned my gun in 20 years, and still able to hit the beer can". All I can say is, we all have different levels of accuracy that we hold ourselves and our rifles to.

Don