Barrel Nut Disadvantages?

[DShortt]

If Dave Tooley chambered and threaded it, it wouldn't need to be clocked.

I think you mean Dave would clock it for me if needed but yes. I definitely wouldn't worry about any of his work.

 

[Edd]

I think you mean Dave would clock it for me if needed but yes. I definitely wouldn't worry about any of his work.

No, that isn't what I mean. He uses a method that makes clocking un-necessary.

 

[DShortt]

I don't know what method he uses so I'll take your word for it.

 

[Will Henry]

The only time I have used a barrel nut was when the barrel shank was too small to give me an adequate shoulder, or when the nut was requested. I currently have two rifles with nuts. One is a BSA in 223 which is used to shoot coyotes. The other is a Ruger 77 to which I fitted a Savage heavy barrel. The 223 is a good 1/2 moa rifle and might even be better than that but that's plenty good enough for a 400 yd coyote and that's about as far as I shoot at them (I don't shoot live targets at very long ranges. Just my preference.) The Ruger (intended as a cast bullet rifle) has yet to be tested, so who knows?
I make the nuts hexagonal so I can use a box end wrench on them.
These are not precision rifles so they prove nothing. I think Jackie's rifle is likely to shoot as well as it did with a shoulder. WH

 

[jackieschmidt]

Wow. It took me awhile to catch up with this thread. 10 pages or so since I last visited it. I've seen this before a few times over on Sniper's Hide or other forums where type A personalities collide over something like how scopes track or some other variable we deal with in our disciplines.

Let's be real for a second here. We're all type A or we wouldn't be in this game, but that also makes us think in binary and that this should be cut and dried, where a single test will tell us what we want. Conversely, the scientific method takes a much more pessimistic approach to the problem. We need to develop a clear hypothesis, and delineate that against a NULL hypothesis. Once that is determined, we need to come up with a test--preferably double-blind--that will unambiguously prove or disprove our hypothesis.

I would think at the least, we'd need 10 rifles of each design (20 total) identical in every other way and at least 10 shooters each doing ten matches each of at least 10 shot groups. To be double blind, the shooter can't know which rifle is which so some means of hiding the shoulder or nut should be devised. Once all the data are in, a blind analysis needs to be performed and statistical model analysed and if possible, evaluated against the NULL hypothesis (no idea how we would test that) and p-values assigned.

Already, you can see that this is going to be a costly endeavor and will likely never materialize unless we can get the Army Ordnance Corps or SAMMI or someone else with a vested interest and deep pockets involved somehow.

TL;DR: this is not going to be solved anytime soon by just throwing our anecdotes around.

Or someone that has the means, the skill, and knows exactly what they are doing can do it and see what happens.

This is not an overly complicated thing. It is nothing more than comparing the viability of two different methods of securing a barrel in an action.

It is only complicated to those who wish to make it so.

 

[DShortt]

Agreed. No matter how a method is tested someone will always find a problem with it.

That's very easy to do. Instead of dialing in the throat and the breech, you dial in the throat and the muzzle. Or you use a bushing on the muzzle and just dial in the throat.

Of course, you must then drill and prebore to get the breech lined up with the throat.

That's not how I choose to do it but I don't have a stable of match winning barrels to my credit either.

 

[SKWERLZ]

That's very easy to do. Instead of dialing in the throat and the breech, you dial in the throat and the muzzle. Or you use a bushing on the muzzle and just dial in the throat.

Of course, you must then drill and prebore to get the breech lined up with the throat.

Not how I do it but I’d be surprised if that’s not what the vast majority of manufacturers do it.

 

[urbanrifleman]

Pretty interesting 16 pages of arguing over a nut!

It seems more like looking to fix a problem that doesn't exist with a data set of one. Then declare a winner.

But you are correct. There are lots of people that seem to be obsessed with this thing they have no intention of ever using.

 

[SKWERLZ]

It seems more like looking to fix a problem that doesn't exist with a data set of one. Then declare a winner.

But you are correct. There are lots of people that seem to be obsessed with this thing they have no intention of ever using.

For the majority of shooters wanting to swap out a barrel on a savage, 700, tikka, howa and custom actions an barrel nut setup is a convenient and consistent option.

Automatically poo pooing it is silly and elitist.

 

[urbanrifleman]

For the majority of shooters wanting to swap out a barrel on a savage, 700, tikka, howa and custom actions an barrel nut setup is a convenient and consistent option.

Automatically poo pooing it is silly and elitist.

I agree.

 

[rijndael]

Automatically poo pooing it is silly and elitist.

People on this site are regularly testing theories and want proof/evidence. Why would accepting barrel nuts as equal to shouldered barrels be different?

 

[rijndael]

There are lots of people that seem to be obsessed with this thing they have no intention of ever using.

I'm still intersted in their testing and conculsions, whether they intend to use it or not.

 

[SKWERLZ]

People on this site are regularly testing theories and want proof/evidence. Why would accepting barrel nuts as equal to shouldered barrels be different?

Then prove it

I never said they are equal, it’s like pelosi saying you’re guilty till proven innocent.

A proper test would be quite expensive because of the variables in individual blanks.

In my own experience I’ve found them to be no different but that’s a tiny sample of a proper test so I make no assumptions because I know I don’t have enough information.

Some FEA analysis would be interesting.

 

[urbanrifleman]

I'm still intersted in their testing and conculsions, whether they intend to use it or not.

Oh, I am sure there are lots of people that are going to give any testing a lot of weight. However, one barrel is not a test... but in these days of meme science, it doesn't suprise me.

 

[urbanrifleman]

Then prove it

It really only matters WHO says it. Not whether it is actually true.

 

[SKWERLZ]

It really only matters WHO says it. Not whether it is actually true.

True!

 

[Bottom Fodder]

There is more than one way to ”skin a cat” “if it feels good do”
I’m a nut user and I have no problem and not going to change because of “something I read on the internet”

 

[Road_Clam]

Lot of info and opinions to digest within this thread. My amatuer takeaway?

95% of recreational shooters will notice no difference between the nut and shoulder debate . The remaining 5% of master competition shooters prefer a shoulder.

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

I have a nice piece of 4142 Chrome Moly at 38 RC, it’s a left over drop from a job.

I have about a three day outside align boring job working a crew at SouthWest Shipyard starting tomorrow, so I won’t be able to get started for several days.

I will set a dividing head up to put a dodecagon shape (12 sides) on the outside to fit a 12 point end wrench. That is a good way to retain the wall thickness. Chuck that up in a 6 jaw, do the thread, which will be a 1.245 inch 20 tpi, and face at the same time.

Here is a sketch. Pretty simple stuff.View attachment 1428162

One difference is heat sink properties of a more typical nut set up vs a shoulder and rigidity of the overall bbl. but I like what you plan to do because your setup will essentially leave those attributes as near the same as is practical, for your test. It's just not like most nut bbls are set up is all, as most nutted bbls are not 1.25 od and are not as stiff as a typical shoulder barrel, be it a straight contour or say hv contour. Good on you for doing this. It'll be interesting to see how it goes.

I don't have a strong opinion either way but those are two reasons I generally prefer a shouldered bbl..fwiw.

 

[TylerFromMS]

One difference is heat sink properties of a more typical nut set up vs a shoulder and rigidity of the overall bbl. but I like what you plan to do because your setup will essentially leave those attributes as near the same as is practical, for your test. It's just not like most nut bbls are set up is all, as most nutted bbls are not 1.25 od and are not as stiff as a typical shoulder barrel, be it a straight contour or say hv contour. Good on you for doing this. It'll be interesting to see how it goes.

I don't have a strong opinion either way but those are two reasons I generally prefer a shouldered bbl..fwiw.

I have a 1.25” straight 6BR bugholes nut barrel cut from a brux that I started shooting f class with and it was a beast. Now that I have to change barrels more often, the shouldered ones are just easier and more repeatable regarding headspace.

Your reasons are the same as mine, with the addition that usually the barrels I cut are for either custom or semi-custom (like a Kelbly Atlas) actions.