Barrel life - 3 and 4 groove vs. 5 groove

[hunter74]

I've heard that barrels with 3 and 4 grooves benefits with longer barrel life because of the bigger and maybe more rigid grooves/lands. What's you're qualified guess?

I shoot moderate loads with N140 and 107 SMK with canuba wax moly in my 6 NBR. I have a Lothar Walter bbl with 1:8 twist.,5 groove)

When my bbl is worne out I'm thinking about replacing it with a Border or another quality cut rifle bbl. Would anyone guess how many more rounds I could squeeze through a barrel like this? Better accuracy is also a good reason to try a cut rifle barrel.

Thank you!

 

[Spotcheck_Billy]

It's been my experience that barrels will erode at the throat and lose their useful accuracy long before you have to worry about the rifiling wearing out.

 

[hunter74]

It's been my experience that barrels will erode at the throat and lose their useful accuracy long before you have to worry about the rifiling wearing out.

OK,but doesn't this problem start in the throat and progress to where the rifling starts, or is accuracy already long gone before erosion reaching the rifling?

So you're saying that the number of grooves doesn't affect barrel life?

Forgive me if I'm asking stupid, but I'm learning and, people in this forum certainly has a lot of knowledge in precision shooting.

 

[BoydAllen]

Dan Lilja told me that customers have reported slightly longer life from his three groove barrels. I seem to remember that he said that he thinks that this is because the lands are larger and therefore less subject to erosion. One of the better shooters that I know has shot moly for a long time,cleaning with a bronze brush after each record group) he feels that he gets longer accuracy life that way. The barrel that he was using the day that I spoke with him about this had 2,200 rounds through it and gave a very good account of itself. He uses the whole NECO process, including wax.

 

[Spotcheck_Billy]

I'm just saying that I don't believe that there's been enough empirical data gathered nor has there been enough controlled testing performed to be able to say that any one of the forms of rifiling that you mentioned will last significantly longer than any of the others.

In reality, most shooters can get their barrels set back, the chambers re-cut, and the muzzles shortened and recrowned several times until there's no more material left to repeat the process and still have useful life left in the lands and grooves.

 

[hunter74]

Thank you for answers!

 

[mauser284]

It's been my experience that barrels will erode at the throat and lose their useful accuracy long before you have to worry about the rifiling wearing out.

I would agree with that with the exception being Hart and Shilen barrels! Never had much luck with either of those brands with a set back at both ends. Brands with rifling that is deeper than those two seems to often respond to removing some material from each end and doing a setback and re-crown.

That said I will freq. take a competition barrel remove 1/2 an inch from each end and re-use it for a hunting or varmint rig to great effect. I would consider that for Silhouette as well but not for BR or F!!!! This is especially true for SS barrels especially butter soft 416R!

 

[Northridge]

I have had fast and slow erosion travelers from every major manufacturer regardless of land count..

Shawn Williams

 

[k80skeet]

I'm just saying that I don't believe that there's been enough empirical data gathered nor has there been enough controlled testing performed to be able to say that any one of the forms of rifiling that you mentioned will last significantly longer than any of the others.

In reality, most shooters can get their barrels set back, the chambers re-cut, and the muzzles shortened and recrowned several times until there's no more material left to repeat the process and still have useful life left in the lands and grooves.

I would disagree with setting barrel back. From my experience from doing that was a waste of money. I am not saying it won't work somewhat well but in my opinion they are never as good as a new barrel and the time and expense isn't worth the effort. If I am going to bother to remove the barrel why not just by a new blank because the cost to recut the threads and chamber is the same as on a new barrel and time lost on a gamble that you might get another thousand rounds out of old barrel. I have done it and been sorry that I just didn't buy a new blank to start with. I do think cut rifling last longer than button pulled barrels. Just my opinion.

 

[deadidarren]

I would disagree with setting barrel back. From my experience from doing that was a waste of money. I am not saying it won't work somewhat well but in my opinion they are never as good as a new barrel and the time and expense isn't worth the effort. If I am going to bother to remove the barrel why not just by a new blank because the cost to recut the threads and chamber is the same as on a new barrel and time lost on a gamble that you might get another thousand rounds out of old barrel. I have done it and been sorry that I just didn't buy a new blank to start with. I do think cut rifling last longer than button pulled barrels. Just my opinion.

I agree with this in my country it cost you 350 to $400 to have a barrel chambered and screwed onto an action by a competent smith which unfortunately is rare so to spend the same amount to get a barrel set back you may as well spend the $600 to $800 for new barrel plus fitting fee and get on with it.

I am in my late 50s now and have absolutely no time for a barrel that won't shoot .

in my younger days i should have just beat my head against a concrete wall instead of persevering with a pos barrel and wasting money on components .

 

[k80skeet]

I agree with this in my country it cost you 350 to $400 to have a barrel chambered and screwed onto an action by a competent smith which unfortunately is rare so to spend the same amount to get a barrel set back you may as well spend the $600 to $800 for new barrel plus fitting fee and get on with it.

I am in my late 50s now and have absolutely no time for a barrel that won't shoot .

in my younger days i should have just beat my head against a concrete wall instead of persevering with a pos barrel and wasting money on components .

I think we all had to learn that lesson the hard way. Just most people won't admit it. I sure wish I had all those bullet & powder I wasted shooting through a shot out barrel. I could have bought a lot of new barrels cheaper. I did have one friend that shot 8000 through a 300 Win Mag trying to make a better load. He even set the barrel back a 5000 rounds and thought he had a new barrel. When we looked it with a bore scope he had fire cracking up 14" so it was junk when he had it rechambered.

 

[rgc54]

Looking at a 6br barrel with my borescope I don't know the round count on this Barrel but the erosion and fire cracking is 6 or 7 inches in front of the throat how do you rechamber that?

 

[Liven The Dream]

The cost of Chamber job for Match Quality barrels is gone way up.
The Cost to do a set back is a Costly chance to get a few more matches out of that Barrel ?
My Barrel Man won't do it .... I am dealing F/Open Rifles .

Now if you have a lathe and Tools ? Why Not.

 

[LCazador]

I agree with this in my country it cost you 350 to $400 to have a barrel chambered and screwed onto an action by a competent smith which unfortunately is rare so to spend the same amount to get a barrel set back you may as well spend the $600 to $800 for new barrel plus fitting fee and get on with it.

I am in my late 50s now and have absolutely no time for a barrel that won't shoot .

in my younger days i should have just beat my head against a concrete wall instead of persevering with a pos barrel and wasting money on components .

After 50 plus years of shooting and hundreds of barrels, my thoughts exactly! I shot the old two groove 03-A3 in many a match in the old days and they didn't clean any easier or last any longer. The number of grooves has been a lifelong argument!