Orcon
Member
I'm not saying you're wrong, but if I'm shooting a high end, hand lapped barrel it shouldn't have any burs or chatter marks in it to start with. Link please.
How do I break in a new Mini-14 SS barrel?
- Thread starter socalbeachbum
- Start date
- Status
I'm not saying you're wrong, but if I'm shooting a high end, hand lapped barrel it shouldn't have any burs or chatter marks in it to start with. Link please.
The article you linked is about the necessity (or there lackof) of any additional break-in procedures of benchrest barrels that are already hand-lapped by the manufacturer, like all higher grade match barrels. Once that has been done, all rounds fired through it only mean additional and premature wear as imperfections have already been polished out.
so somethings you guys apparently need to understand about barrels and lapping...
let's stipulate gale mcmillan magically handlapped his barrel to perfection (which in reality i wouldn't bet on, though it is mostly good enough). THEN he ships it to your gunsmith who proceeds to put it in a lathe and ream out the chamber.
what this means is that the magically lapped surface is cut away from the throat/leade and everything else touched by the reamer. gunsmiths do not then send the barrel back to have the throat hand lapped again.
so the process of cleaning up the slightly rough area in the throat, which happens in the first few rounds of firing, cannot possibly be affected by anything that the barrel maker did.
orcon, i'm not saying "burs" or "chatter marks" but there will be very small but noticable tool marks in the beginning of the lands no matter how good the gunsmith is. they are easy to see with a bore scope
let's stipulate gale mcmillan magically handlapped his barrel to perfection (which in reality i wouldn't bet on, though it is mostly good enough). THEN he ships it to your gunsmith who proceeds to put it in a lathe and ream out the chamber.
what this means is that the magically lapped surface is cut away from the throat/leade and everything else touched by the reamer. gunsmiths do not then send the barrel back to have the throat hand lapped again.
so the process of cleaning up the slightly rough area in the throat, which happens in the first few rounds of firing, cannot possibly be affected by anything that the barrel maker did.
orcon, i'm not saying "burs" or "chatter marks" but there will be very small but noticable tool marks in the beginning of the lands no matter how good the gunsmith is. they are easy to see with a bore scope
as an example, please see the first 2 pics in this thread https://www.ar15.com/forums/precision-rifles/AR-15-Barrel-Break-In/4-4186/
which show before and after break in on a krieger barrel
of course, this is a religious topic for most, and no amount of evidence will change what people believe. i mean, how could those pictures possibly refute a 20 year old conspiracy theory? especially when you combine it with an appeal to authority fallacy?
which show before and after break in on a krieger barrel
of course, this is a religious topic for most, and no amount of evidence will change what people believe. i mean, how could those pictures possibly refute a 20 year old conspiracy theory? especially when you combine it with an appeal to authority fallacy?
The truth is out there and today's instruments are commonly available and affordable so inspecting the results has become easier. Automatic translators will probably make a mess of this, but here is a fairly concise article in finnish, about manufacturing and finishing high-grade barrels, including (already once translated) 1970's interview material of Ed Shilen and Clyde Hart. The same author has written at least a couple of comprehensive and in-depth articles on fire lapping and hand lapping in print, it was one of his articles in mid 80's that first got me interested in the subject.
Gotta love Google Translate. If it wasn't for them I would have never known that the finnish word for gunsmith could even translate to bitch and rifle barrel to cockroach. I'm still working on the stomach tray ("[casting] pearls before swine" would be appropriate) issue. The Google translation is hilariously hopeless... enjoy!
Ya that's why I said we know better. Plenty of various match/varmint/bench rest shooters etc. around here that shoot out to 300-1000 yards and I'll have to ask a few if they know of anyone who does. I have friends that have done both. I don't since I couldn't care less, not being a particularly anal type. We've got plenty of them here though. Ever hear of the NRA Whittington Center?
Minute-of-Jihadi is all care I care about these days.
To the OP: shoot it
All the best, M
Last edited:
Orcon
Member
Isn't standard throat erosion going to take care of this? Seems like a self solving problem.
Frankly, neither have I since benchrest competition went from guns remotely resembling a rifle to scifi-stocks and bench-mounted rail guns many moons ago. On the other hand, so many mass produced rifles these days have raw bores because of cost-cutting measures that the old artform of hand lapping is in renaissance again. Not to mention the overemphasis on accuracy far beyond what's useful outside the realm of a concrete bench and a shooting rest or hardcore mountain/plains hunts. Every other word you hear on the rifle range these days is "MOA" combined with an arbitrary number.
GBExpat
Member
<chuckle> That reflects the way that I have felt about them for a long time.
While I traded-off the one that I purchased in the late '70s, I still have the SS 184- that I bought in '86.
the first x number of rounds down the bore (on my bartlein barrels, it averages around 3 rounds) will take care of it for sure.
the reason you want to clean between them is that the rough throat strips copper off the jacket of the bullet and deposits it in the bore of the barrel.
copper adheres to copper so if you try this you will almost surely find that if you use a copper solvent and remove all of the copper from the bore the first several rounds, that you can go hundreds of rounds after that and not get any more copper in the bore.
this is easy to verify based simply on the color of the patches when you clean with a copper solvent.
many people think you should maintain some sort of copper equilibrium and clean out the powder but not the copper with a powder only solvent when you clean. i think these people are terribly misguided because
-copper adheres to copper and you never know how it will build up or vary in the bore.
-you can prevent copper in the first place and zero copper is much more consistent than varying copper
-if you clean powder fouling out, it comes back after the first shot, so there doesn't appear to be any way to maintain a consistent level of powder fouling
ime, if you fire dozens to hundreds of rounds in a row, each laying down copper and squishing it into the bore, it's practically impossible to clean it back to bare steel. there always seems to be more copper coming out.
its important to understand i think the difference this makes is lower extreme spreads in velocity, not accuracy at 100 yards. I don't think gale mcmillan could have figured this out because chronographs sucked when he was alive and the short range benchrest crowd just throws powder because it's not that important to 100 yrd accuracy.
W.R.Buchanan
Member
All over the place on this topic. On a Mini 14 you probably wouldn't see much difference in accuracy however it wouldn't hurt to spend a little quality time with your new gun.
If you simply clean the barrel after firing a few rounds you will probably get all the benefit of the process that you are going to see.
Most of the barrels I am seeing from Ruger now are pretty smooth right out of the box. I have several recently made Ruger Rifles and all of them shoot MOA or Better. My 580 series Mini 14(2005) is the exception but it is still 1.5-2 MOA.
If you are trying to eek out the last bit of accuracy from a rifle barrel then following the strict break in process is a good idea. With a Mini 14 I doubt you will see the difference. A Mini 14 that shoots 1.5-2 MOA is a pretty good gun, and when you consider what the thing is actually designed for they are exceptional guns. It was designed to be a replacement for the M1 Carbine and it is head and shoulders above that gun. For Self Defense Mini's are pretty decent guns and if you run out of ammo they make a really good club, and they much better than any AR in that respect.
I love mine!
Randy
If you simply clean the barrel after firing a few rounds you will probably get all the benefit of the process that you are going to see.
Most of the barrels I am seeing from Ruger now are pretty smooth right out of the box. I have several recently made Ruger Rifles and all of them shoot MOA or Better. My 580 series Mini 14(2005) is the exception but it is still 1.5-2 MOA.
If you are trying to eek out the last bit of accuracy from a rifle barrel then following the strict break in process is a good idea. With a Mini 14 I doubt you will see the difference. A Mini 14 that shoots 1.5-2 MOA is a pretty good gun, and when you consider what the thing is actually designed for they are exceptional guns. It was designed to be a replacement for the M1 Carbine and it is head and shoulders above that gun. For Self Defense Mini's are pretty decent guns and if you run out of ammo they make a really good club, and they much better than any AR in that respect.
I love mine!
Randy
Break it? Wrap it around a tree.
Break it in? Clean it. Slather the operating parts with CLP. Shoot a few hundred rounds through it.
That does not translate to "dump a Tapco catalog of aftermarket junk on it and bump fire it til it glows."
The Mini was never a match grade accurate rifle. You want good groups? Take your time.
Break it in? Clean it. Slather the operating parts with CLP. Shoot a few hundred rounds through it.
That does not translate to "dump a Tapco catalog of aftermarket junk on it and bump fire it til it glows."
The Mini was never a match grade accurate rifle. You want good groups? Take your time.
- Status
