Barrel Nut Disadvantages?

[INTJ]

This is a pretty easy thing to quantify. Take a top flight barrel, a top level platform (13.5 lb. HV Benchrest rifle), chamber it for a supremely accurate cartridge (30BR) and do the barrel as conventional shouldered fit up. Test it.

Then, extend the threads forward and fit it up with a nut. Test it.

Testing would be with a proven shooter over flags at 100 and 200 yards.

A double blind test would be best...two shooters evaluating this in parallel testing with no sharing of results until the testing was completed.

I would rather see it chambered in a 6BRA or Dasher and see how it shoots at 600-1000 yds. I have seen a bunch of one hole, low ES groups at 100 yds not hold up at 600+.

Such to the point that I think 100 - 200 yd groups are only meaningful for short range BR rifles or lever actions.

 

[urbanrifleman]

Somebody send me a barrel and a nut and ill do both chambers and pay for the shipping both times. Itll have the exact chamber both times in the exact barrel. (I wont have to ream it twice) so itll be a perfect test

I genuinely appreciate you Dusty, and I'm sure you would do a great test, but I have to say it wouldn't make any difference how the test turned out.

Besides, I said I already did it in my personal rifles. I've tested the exact chamber and barrel head to head. I saw no statistically relevant difference.

But of course, there will be people that will say my test is invalid, for this reason, or that reason. Or simply that I'm a "nobody" in the world of competitive shooting, or whatever and not a valid authority.

Because it's marketing. Not science. There are people who have a real problem with the nut barrel, and I'll go so far as to say there are gunsmiths who have a real problem with people being able to buy prefits and build their own rifles and compete (do not discount this, it's a real thing). I've seen it. I know for a fact that there is genuine animosity out there from some top gunsmiths toward the prefit industry, as I have been told directly.

That's my honest take on it. Funny thing is that I always thought there were plenty of customers to go around for everyone. I think there are others who don't share that open mindedness.

 

[urbanrifleman]

I was a mechanic for 15 years. Did I learn a lot ? Yes, did I still have cases here and there that stomped my tail ? Yes !!! Studs and nuts are superior Vs bolts in clamping a head down to a block. Yes studs do help line each other up. A head bolt when torquing it down, the resistance is against the head itself and also the block, the shank twists depending on the grade of the bolt and possibly inconsistent threads in the block. Each bolt very likely even when torqued the same ft lbs not all will be the same. Studs and nuts don’t have this problem as the studs are already tight in the block, more even torque can be applied to all the nuts securing it to the block. Only resistance is between the nut and the head. Does it relate to the barrel world I don’t know.

I think this is an excellent example. My question would be if you change the way you clamped the head down in your hopped up Chevy would it change the quarter mile time?

My guess is no it wouldn't make any difference or you wouldn't be able to prove any difference because as factors go in quarter mile times, the head bolts are way down the list in factors that would make a difference.

 

[jackieschmidt]

I would rather see it chambered in a 6BRA or Dasher and see how it shoots at 600-1000 yds. I have seen a bunch of one hole, low ES groups at 100 yds not hold up at 600+.

Such to the point that I think 100 - 200 yd groups are only meaningful for short range BR rifles or lever actions.

This might be a discussion for a new thread, but assuming you are using a suitable bullet for 600 yards, what would compel the bullet that shoots into one hole with an excellent ES not to perform at the same MOA level at 600 yards as it did at 100 yards.

The major thing that comes to mind is conditions.

 

[AlNyhus]

Assuming you are using a suitable bullet for 600 yards, what would compel the bullet that shoot into one hole with an excellent ES not to perform at the same MOA level at 600 yards as it did at 100 yards.

The major thing that comes to mind is conditions.

Exactly, Jackie.

The 100-200 testing over flags will allow the mechanicals of both methods to be be tested rather than tune up or condition issues of longer yardages.

Pure accuracy aside, both setups could be evaluated and quantified by the POI stability of both joint styles.

 

[LHSmith]

Tunnel test. Perhaps Bart, Krieger, or Gene B. already have done this.

 

[rijndael]

Tunnel test.

Or just a 100Y indoor range?

 

[Alex Wheeler]

I think 100yds would work fine for the test. The difference in tunes needed for long range are just tunes, you can still measure the raw accuracy at 100. With a good action and good job on the barrel, I think you will see no difference in the accuracy. But it would be interesting test to see.

 

[Alex Wheeler]

I genuinely appreciate you Dusty, and I'm sure you would do a great test, but I have to say it wouldn't make any difference how the test turned out.

Besides, I said I already did it in my personal rifles. I've tested the exact chamber and barrel head to head. I saw no statistically relevant difference.

But of course, there will be people that will say my test is invalid, for this reason, or that reason. Or simply that I'm a "nobody" in the world of competitive shooting, or whatever and not a valid authority.

Because it's marketing. Not science. There are people who have a real problem with the nut barrel, and I'll go so far as to say there are gunsmiths who have a real problem with people being able to buy prefits and build their own rifles and compete (do not discount this, it's a real thing). I've seen it. I know for a fact that there is genuine animosity out there from some top gunsmiths toward the prefit industry, as I have been told directly.

That's my honest take on it. Funny thing is that I always thought there were plenty of customers to go around for everyone. I think there are others who don't share that open mindedness.

I can see how some gunsmiths would feel that way. But its just time for them to step up their game and offer the same thing. Most of the good actions out there you can chamber for without the action. I dont like nuts, but I have no problem doing shouldered prefits for guys. Actually I like it, no need to handle or ship an expensive receiver. I do a lot of them and I see a lot of the prefit companies offering shouldered prefits also.

 

[Fuj]

I wonder if anyone else posting in this thread has made 300 nut barrels.

I would'nt because I know better. I'm a dyed in the wool Savage
action guy. I own 3, and I am a wild catter, that shoots my own
creations against some top shooters in the state of Pa. I've shot
my creative heavy barrel nut jobs in steel match's with good
results. I changed games to short range score, and with the same
equipment. I jumped in to get educated. I had some mid pack
finishes and started in a new direction. I do my own barrels, and
if not, I have good friend, fellow shooter, and gunsmith, Ethan Lam
do my specs.....Point being; with the same barrels with low round
count, I cut them back and had them shouldered. I can do this because
of the thicker than standard barrels I use for Savage. At this point
my scores are better, and the only nut jobs left are my fire forming
barrels on a beater action.

Note that getting rid of the nut gets rid of a variable. A shouldered
set up is only 2 pieces (male/female). Nut jobs are three. You now
entered another female component !!

Ether way, I have shot them side by side under match conditions.
Other then my hunting rifles, all match rifles will be shouldered.

Here is one of my 1.200" Brux barrels cut for a nut. My original SA284
now my fire forming barrel.

 

[jackieschmidt]

Exactly, Jackie.

The 100-200 testing over flags will allow the mechanicals of both methods to be be tested rather than tune up or condition issues of longer yardages.

Pure accuracy aside, both setups could be evaluated and quantified by the POI stability of both joint styles.

What many miss is what needs to be tested is the mechanical link between the barrel and the action. That being, which is better in securing the barrel so there is zero movement under the stress of the cartridge firing.

We are assuming the all mating surfaces on the action, barrel, and nut are machined truly straight and square.

You could do it with any good consistent shooting rifle, with an emphasis on consistency.

I have the means to do this. The Bat M action would be a perfect test bed. I could shoot one of my decent 30BR barrels as in, then remove it, turn a sufficient amount of length to extend the thread. Machine a nut to fit it. Put it together, setting the headspace with the nut, and see how it shoots.

 

[DShortt]

I've been following this discussion with interest and I have a question.
Suppose you took a barrel with a nut, installed and headspaced it and install the nut with LocTite? Have you just duplicated a shouldered barrel or does that still introduce an at least theoretical variable?
Yes, I understand that many don't like the appearance of a barrel nut and I understand why. My thinking is by doing this you could reinstall the barrel and retain your POA/POI and if at a future date you wanted to install the same barrel on a different action the nut could be heated enough to remove, the threads cleaned and the barrel swapped to a different rifle.

Just thinking out loud. What do you as a group think?

Edit to add - I have bias one way or another in this. I only post this to add what I think is an interesting question to this discussion.

 

[LVLAaron]

You'd have a hard time keeping the loctite where you want it (on your nut, and not in your action)

 

[DShortt]

You'd have a hard time keeping the loctite where you want it (on your nut, and not in your action)

It would require finesse, that is for certain. I think if the LocTite were applied to the inside of the nut a distance from the nut shoulder and the rifle suspended muzzle down while it sets it wouldn't be a problem. Perhaps LocTite tends to 'wick'? I personally don't know if it does or not but I would think gravity would mitigate the possibility?

 

[rijndael]

Perhaps LocTite tends to 'wick'?

What about LocTite stick vs. Liquid?

 

[LVLAaron]

There are many loctites... some wick, some don't. That's why it's always important to reference it by it's number and not it's color.

 

[DShortt]

There are many loctites... some wick, some don't. That's why it's always important to reference it by it's number and not it's color.

Right, understand.

 

[Rat Rifle]

I've been following this discussion with interest and I have a question.
Suppose you took a barrel with a nut, installed and headspaced it and install the nut with LocTite? Have you just duplicated a shouldered barrel or does that still introduce an at least theoretical variable?
Yes, I understand that many don't like the appearance of a barrel nut and I understand why. My thinking is by doing this you could reinstall the barrel and retain your POA/POI and if at a future date you wanted to install the same barrel on a different action the nut could be heated enough to remove, the threads cleaned and the barrel swapped to a different rifle.

Just thinking out loud. What do you as a group think?

Edit to add - I have bias one way or another in this. I only post this to add what I think is an interesting question to this discussion.

It’s been done many times for a long time

 

[jelenko]

If someone is going to do a test, how about they start a GoFundMe and the rest of use contribute?

 

[LHSmith]

If someone is going to do a test, how about they start a GoFundMe and the rest of use contribute?

I believe they are a left leaning organization. May not even take it on due to shooting sports involvement.