I have a question concerning modern chrome lined barrels. It stems from a recent situation where through a series of odd events that have nothing to with this question but nevertheless led to me purchasing a JSE Surplus upper with a 1:7 Wilson Arms barrel (non chrome lined). I wasn't exactly happy about this but I ended up with PSA Magpul edition lower with a PSA LPK married to the above named upper for $580....so not a terrible deal for a pretty solid rifle. I've never even thought about buying an AR15 that wasn't chrome lined because of the better durability, easier cleaning and corrosion resistance I often hear about as opposed to non-chrome lined barrels. Then in an attempt to talk myself out of spending another $200 for a good CL barrel I got to thinking about all the older battle rifles I often see around like the M1 Garand or Mosin's or the later M14's none of which to my knowledge were chrome lined but I still often see them all these years later putting holes through holes. To my knowledge corrosive ammo was also used a lot back then as well. I know for a fact some of those rifles had an amazing amount of rounds through them but yet even without the chrome lining they are still going strong. How can this be if non chrome lined barrels are only good for 5,000 rds like I saw on one sight? 10,000 rounds on another sight. I've read so many different numbers it makes my head spin. I see these decades old battle rifles still going strong and it makes me wonder how important it really is to have a CL barrel or how close it is to a sort of marketing gimmick or easy upsell opportunity. Don't get me wrong I know that CL barrels do have more positives than a non CL barrel and this will probably be the only non CL barrel I will ever own on AR15 but the question still stands. If a CL barrel is so much more durable than a non CL barrel how do people account for the number of high round count WW2 era barrels still going strong? Different manufacturing back then? Different barrel steel back then? Am I missing something or way off base somewhere? Thanks in advance for any replies.
Non-chrome lined barrel durability from WW2
- Thread starter ryno31
- Start date
- Status
I also realize that some those rifles I see may have been surplus and not had many rounds through them but I do know for fact that some of those rifles have been handed down through the generations and had the snot fired out of them along the way. Those are the rifles I'm focused on.
rcmodel
Member in memoriam
Well, for one thing, its real hard to heat up a barrel cherry red on a five-shot bolt action or 8-shot Garand rifle.
Not so hard on an AR-15 with a stack of 30-round mags.
Thats the first thing that comes to mind.
The other thing is, a .30 cal rifle has a bigger hole in the barrel then a .223.
So pressure & heat of burning powder has more room to get away.
rc
Not so hard on an AR-15 with a stack of 30-round mags.
Thats the first thing that comes to mind.
The other thing is, a .30 cal rifle has a bigger hole in the barrel then a .223.
So pressure & heat of burning powder has more room to get away.
rc
Last edited:
JHansenAK47
Member
What is the criteria for a good barrel? Worn barrels will still shoot. I've seen a few M16A2 rifles with the front sight tip buried between the front sight posts.
Ibmikey
Member
I seriously doubt your Wilson barrel will ever get shot out unless you have vast ammunition supplies to feed it. Chrome lining is nice if humid conditions or rapid fire are the norm, if wear is that great a concern have your bore treated with Nitride and your worries will be gone forever. I have a dozen with chrome lining, three with Nitride and half dozen with parkerizing they all shoot just fine in the plinking, hog hunting category which satisfies me.
The big plus is barrels are easily changed so if you can afford enough ammo to wear it out you can afford to replace it.
The big plus is barrels are easily changed so if you can afford enough ammo to wear it out you can afford to replace it.
Very, very few Garand rifles have the original barrels still on the receivers and almost all that do display indications of excessive wear.
Chrome lining wasn't utilized to increase barrel life on M16 rifles.
It was added to make the rifles easier to keep clean under field conditions.
Melonite lining was developed to increase the barrel life of machine guns. HTH
Chrome lining wasn't utilized to increase barrel life on M16 rifles.
It was added to make the rifles easier to keep clean under field conditions.
Melonite lining was developed to increase the barrel life of machine guns. HTH
I have never seen a US issue chrome lined Garand barrel.
I have an Armalite M4 forgery and at 100 yards, its chrome lined barrel is surprisingly accurate. I have a bud with several President 100’s patches, one day in the pits he told me that he loved Colt HBAR barrels, which I think are chrome lined. People would take the HBAR barrel off and replace with a custom barrel and he would get the take off barrel for next to nothing.
I have a FN M70 PBR with a chrome lined barrel, it shoots well for a hunting rifle.
I have a M1a with a HRA GI chrome lined barrel. I made it as GI as possible, stock, barrel, etc. The barrel is thinner than my match barrels and so I don’t believe it is a fair to compare the accuracy of the thing against my Super Matches. Yet, the barrel shoots well at 100 yards, I have shot the thing at 600 yards, it would hold the eight ring. Not quite so stellar.
Now I don’t know how good of a shot you are, but none of the serious long range shooters that I know shoot chrome lined barrels. The absence of chrome lined barrels in rifle competition leads me to believe that they are not, on average, as accurate as a non chrome lined match barrel. I have non chrome lined barrels on several factory NM AR15's, and they absolutely hammer. Wilson match barrels are very good barrels. Now I have shot many military rifles and I don’t consider a Mosin, an Arisaka, a SKS, an AK47, target grade rifles. They were not built to that standard and the Soldiers who were issued the things were not, and are not, trained to a high level of marksmanship. Basically a rifle that hits a guy at 300 yards is as accurate as a military rifle needs to be. The accuracy required to do that is around 3 MOA. Good modern chrome lined barrels will shoot within that standard and are just fine for all applications except serious target shooting. If your Wilson barrel is as good as any of my Wilson barrels, it is capable of target grade accuracy.
The peak accuracy lifetime of target barrels is often discussed and disagreed on, but many whom I know, consider the peak accuracy of a 308 Win barrel to be around 3500 rounds and it decreases from there. When barrels stop clustering shots at 600 yards it is time to replace the barrel. A 308 barrel with 5000 rounds will still hold the ten ring, but X counts will drop. I took one 308 match barrel close to 5000 rounds in a M1a, it shot exceptionally well on the 300 yard reduced target, I had one match with almost 75% X count, but at 600 yards, the thing was loosey goosey.
Cheap hunting barrels are of the same accuracy grade as military barrels. Some of the 70’s Ruger centerfire barrels were the cheapest around and shot big groups. I have a current Ruger hammer forged barrel and it shoots very well, shot a 196 with it at 1000 yards. Still, it is not as accurate as a Douglas.
I would be happy with a chrome lined barrel on a hunting rifle or a military rifle. The thing will shoot within a non supported hold, less likely to rust, and would out last me. I won't use one in competition.
I have an Armalite M4 forgery and at 100 yards, its chrome lined barrel is surprisingly accurate. I have a bud with several President 100’s patches, one day in the pits he told me that he loved Colt HBAR barrels, which I think are chrome lined. People would take the HBAR barrel off and replace with a custom barrel and he would get the take off barrel for next to nothing.
I have a FN M70 PBR with a chrome lined barrel, it shoots well for a hunting rifle.
I have a M1a with a HRA GI chrome lined barrel. I made it as GI as possible, stock, barrel, etc. The barrel is thinner than my match barrels and so I don’t believe it is a fair to compare the accuracy of the thing against my Super Matches. Yet, the barrel shoots well at 100 yards, I have shot the thing at 600 yards, it would hold the eight ring. Not quite so stellar.
Now I don’t know how good of a shot you are, but none of the serious long range shooters that I know shoot chrome lined barrels. The absence of chrome lined barrels in rifle competition leads me to believe that they are not, on average, as accurate as a non chrome lined match barrel. I have non chrome lined barrels on several factory NM AR15's, and they absolutely hammer. Wilson match barrels are very good barrels. Now I have shot many military rifles and I don’t consider a Mosin, an Arisaka, a SKS, an AK47, target grade rifles. They were not built to that standard and the Soldiers who were issued the things were not, and are not, trained to a high level of marksmanship. Basically a rifle that hits a guy at 300 yards is as accurate as a military rifle needs to be. The accuracy required to do that is around 3 MOA. Good modern chrome lined barrels will shoot within that standard and are just fine for all applications except serious target shooting. If your Wilson barrel is as good as any of my Wilson barrels, it is capable of target grade accuracy.
The peak accuracy lifetime of target barrels is often discussed and disagreed on, but many whom I know, consider the peak accuracy of a 308 Win barrel to be around 3500 rounds and it decreases from there. When barrels stop clustering shots at 600 yards it is time to replace the barrel. A 308 barrel with 5000 rounds will still hold the ten ring, but X counts will drop. I took one 308 match barrel close to 5000 rounds in a M1a, it shot exceptionally well on the 300 yard reduced target, I had one match with almost 75% X count, but at 600 yards, the thing was loosey goosey.
Cheap hunting barrels are of the same accuracy grade as military barrels. Some of the 70’s Ruger centerfire barrels were the cheapest around and shot big groups. I have a current Ruger hammer forged barrel and it shoots very well, shot a 196 with it at 1000 yards. Still, it is not as accurate as a Douglas.
I would be happy with a chrome lined barrel on a hunting rifle or a military rifle. The thing will shoot within a non supported hold, less likely to rust, and would out last me. I won't use one in competition.
Last edited:
A 1x7 barrel will wear faster then a slow twist so getting it chromed is a good idea. Maybe chrome was added to make cleaning easier but being very hard it also increases barrel life
dprice3844444
member
slam,when the navy converted garands to 762 nato,they were chrome lined
Well, since you already bought the barrel, buying a replacement now would make no sense. Just shoot it out and you'll get your $ worth.
Firing schedule will be the main factor. Plink a few rounds once or twice per month and it will last a lifetime. Attend a few high round count courses or shoot 3 gun with it, it may only last a couple years.
For a standard 16" M4 type AR, so long as it will do ~3 MOA, the barrel is still fine in practical terms. That's about all you can count on from a new issued M4 and issued M855 ball ammo anyway.
Firing schedule will be the main factor. Plink a few rounds once or twice per month and it will last a lifetime. Attend a few high round count courses or shoot 3 gun with it, it may only last a couple years.
For a standard 16" M4 type AR, so long as it will do ~3 MOA, the barrel is still fine in practical terms. That's about all you can count on from a new issued M4 and issued M855 ball ammo anyway.
dogrunner
Member
To the best of my knowledge ALL m/14 bbls were indeed chrome lined with the exception of the National Match guns.
I know the 14 service rifle I was issued was lined, I also used the NM model in command competitions and it was not CL.
I know the 14 service rifle I was issued was lined, I also used the NM model in command competitions and it was not CL.
briansmithwins
Member
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2005
- Messages
- 4,631
You know all those 'sewer pipe bore' Mausers and Mosins? Non-chromed barrels and corrosive ammo did them in. The only reason we had Garands with good barrels is that most of them were arsenal rebuilt after WWII and/or Korea. The Carbines were in better shape since they always had non-corrosive ammo used in them.
As far as hardchrome and .223, I prefer it. Modern hardchroming doesn't affect accuracy that much and you get the benefit of a longer wearing barrel that's more resistant to corrosion and offers easier extraction. That last point is important with a design like the AR, where available extraction force is minimal under the best of circumstances.
BSW
Great stuff guys. Thank you. I've decided to just order another barrel for it. More of a peace of mind thing than anything. I don't suppose anyone would have any reviews on JSE Surplus barrels? It appears like they manufacture them in house from the info I looked at. I will send them an email to ask some questions. The barrel I'm looking at has a 1:7 twist, nitride treated, and has M4 feed ramps, so pretty much everything I'm looking for. Their CS has always been great to me in the few times I've dealt with them. I'm a big believer in you get what you pay for and at less than $150 this barrel leaves me feeling a little anxious. However, I am on a budget and this would keep me within that budget. I know companies like PSA also offer outstanding products for much less than other products which often times aren't as quality though more expensive so I've got an open mind. The rifle it will be going is basically back up to my Noveske lower/BCM upper main rifle to help keep the round count lower on that rifle....and because I wanted to buy another AR! I still want this to particular to be good to go for whatever application I may use it for though. Anyone have experience or feedback with JSE Surplus barrels. Link to the particular barrel provided below.
http://www.jsesurplus.com/16M41x7Nitride5.56BarrelStripped.aspx
http://www.jsesurplus.com/16M41x7Nitride5.56BarrelStripped.aspx
You can probably sell your unfired Wilson barrel for a decent price. That should offset the cost of the new barrel.
Personally, I wouldn't worry about it, and shoot the Wilson barrel. They have a good reputation, and you're not shooting corrosive ammo in large quantities. Assuming you could buy or load ammo for $0.35 each, and the barrel stopped shooting well at 5000 rounds (which is conservative), you'd have spent $1750 in ammo. You will definitely have gotten your money's worth.
At that point, you'll need a new barrel, and you can upgrade. That 5000 rounds you just shot will have made you a much better shooter, and in a position to take advantage of a better barrel.
Regardless, good luck! You'll never regret getting cool stuff!
-John
Personally, I wouldn't worry about it, and shoot the Wilson barrel. They have a good reputation, and you're not shooting corrosive ammo in large quantities. Assuming you could buy or load ammo for $0.35 each, and the barrel stopped shooting well at 5000 rounds (which is conservative), you'd have spent $1750 in ammo. You will definitely have gotten your money's worth.
At that point, you'll need a new barrel, and you can upgrade. That 5000 rounds you just shot will have made you a much better shooter, and in a position to take advantage of a better barrel.
Regardless, good luck! You'll never regret getting cool stuff!
-John
carbine85
Member
Chrome lining for a sport gun and target shooting isn't necessary. I have non chrome line barrels with over 10K rounds fired and they still shoot great. Target barrels aren't chrome lined for a reason, they are more accurate. A well made 4140 non chrome barrel will probably hold up to anything you will put it through.
The 1:7 twist isn't necessary either. The Military developed it to stabilize tracer rounds in short barrels.
The 1:7 twist isn't necessary either. The Military developed it to stabilize tracer rounds in short barrels.
Willie Sutton
Member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2013
- Messages
- 2,025
"Personally, I wouldn't worry about it, and shoot the Wilson barrel."
^ This.
Chrome lining is absolutely unessential for civilian use, and most certainly not needed for civilian use with non-corrosive primers. To believe otherwise is magical thinking based on intuition and not science or rational analysis.
Forget looking at "sewer pipe Mausers & Mosins", that were likely used in the mud and filth of Stalingrad with zero cleaning and daily use of corrosive primers. Your range-queen AR-15 should be compared to any other sporting rifle made in the last 50 years and shot with non corrosive primers. Peek down the bore of 100 used rifles at Cabelas sometimes and tell me what you see... your AR will look like just that in 100 years no matter what.
If you want to waste your money, change your barrel. Someone who's not in the business of wasting money will love to have it. I'd be delighted to have it.
Willie
.
^ This.
Chrome lining is absolutely unessential for civilian use, and most certainly not needed for civilian use with non-corrosive primers. To believe otherwise is magical thinking based on intuition and not science or rational analysis.
Forget looking at "sewer pipe Mausers & Mosins", that were likely used in the mud and filth of Stalingrad with zero cleaning and daily use of corrosive primers. Your range-queen AR-15 should be compared to any other sporting rifle made in the last 50 years and shot with non corrosive primers. Peek down the bore of 100 used rifles at Cabelas sometimes and tell me what you see... your AR will look like just that in 100 years no matter what.
If you want to waste your money, change your barrel. Someone who's not in the business of wasting money will love to have it. I'd be delighted to have it.
Willie
.
tark
Member
I believe the Japanese were the first to issue a rifle with a chrome lined bore. (the type 99 in 7.7mm) I'm pretty sure they did it to keep the bore from rusting in the humid tropical conditions with the corrosive ammo they used. And it worked. Most type 99s you run into have good bores.
HorseSoldier
Member
+1 -- corrosive ammo is bad (without proper cleaning/maintenance) and humid jungles are bad (without propery maintenance), but in combination they're a potential nightmare for accuracy and reliability.
Willie Sutton
Member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2013
- Messages
- 2,025
^^ This. It's a classic
(Along with the same authors book on gunsmithing. Roy Dunlap knew his stuff).
Willie
.
(Along with the same authors book on gunsmithing. Roy Dunlap knew his stuff).
Willie
.
- Status
