Barrel Break-in... show me the money

[Linefinder]

Seems to me the hardest part is how do you actually decide if a barrel shoots better after breaking in, or not....because....

If you utilize a "break-in" procedure with a barrel, you won't really know if it's been "improved" simply because you cannot fire that barrel now "without" a break-in procedure.

OTOH, if you simply fire bullets without following a procedure, how can you say it would have shot any better,or worse) if you had "broke it in"?.

Basically, since you destroy the initial "evidence" with either procedure, you have nothing valid with which to compare the results. Each barrel is a universe unto itself, IME.

FWIW, I used to "break-in" barrels. Now I just shoot a couple hundred pdogs and call it good.

Mike

 

[Chuckhunter]

Barrel break in means something totally different to me. Back in my early BR days, circa: late 1970's, I was shooting Bill Atkinson's barrels exclusively. If anyone has ever had the pleasure to bore scope one, you'll find more toolmarks than if it were machined by a Huntington's patient with a die grinder and a chisel. You see old Bill didn't hand lap his barrels. That didn't mean they weren't uniform or that they wouldn't shoot but they had to be broken in. Since I know nothing about using a lap, that meant sending bullets down the tube. Jacket build up was pretty fierce in the early stages but normal cleaning procedures kept that in check. It was fun to watch those barrels finally start to come around at about 50 rounds and just keep getting better and better until about 500 rounds, then they would just seem to live forever. Just scoped a new Hart this summer that I turned into a 243AI. That thing was as smooth as a baby's butt. Shot right from the get go and is still shooting great. This is by no means scientific, I just do what the scope says I should be doing. Hope everyone has a great Holiday season.

 

[Posit]

So I conclude the answer to the initial question is: 1) there is no empirical data available, and 2) if there was, the answer would probably be yes, no, or maybe. ,Chuckle)

Personally, with a custom barrel, I would go with the manufacturer's recommendation. If I had a bore scope, I would use that tool to reach a decision re a particular barrel. Absent a bore scope, for a factory barrel, I'm gonna continue a 50-60 round break in process because I think it can't hurt and might help. Note theis includes zeroing the scope and initial load testing, so its not a total waste. Besides, it benefits the shooter, because I enjoy the range time.

 

[fdshuster]

Posit: You summed it up perfectly: my thoughts exactly.

 

[Rust]

As I mentioned earlier, barrels in the old days,40+ years ago) had a lot of tooling marks in them. In particular the marks left by the bore reamer,better barrels back then were gun drilled first and then reamed to size) which either left reamer marks on the lands if cut rifled or ironed down directional reamer marks on the lands and grooves if button rifled. Some of those bores were pretty rough and wouldn't shoot out of the box to well, and coppered up badly although in some cases the coppering smoothed out some of the worst offenders. the worst cae scenario was if the button rifled barrels were chambered from the wrong end, shooting against the ironed down reamer marks was like shooting down a file.

Call it seasoning, fire lapping or break in, those old barrels didn't really come in until they had rounds down them, a lot of rounds. Which was why old high powered shooters dreaded replacing a barrel, because in addition to the time it would take to start working right, there used to be much more of a chance that the next barrel wouldn't be as good and sometimes a sight worse.

Looking down a new barrel nowdays,just in case) the finish is smooth and uniform the length of the barrel. The only rough spot would be right at the leade of the rifling and that only takes a couple of shots to clean up. Easily accomplished while chronoing the new barrel against the standard load.

But if a new barrel shows any flaws with the bore scope, it doesn't get mounted in the first place, it gets sent back.

So since the advent of premium barrels that are drilled, reamed, lapped prior to rifling, stress relieved, rifled, stress relieved and finish lapped any break in that might possibly be required is handled by load developement and chrono'ing loads.

 

[Forum Boss]

I think it's sensible to accept that barrels with very different internal surface qualities may respond differently to "break-in" procedures.

My "break-in" for a Pac-Nor 3-groove SuperMatch 6BR barrel that was very smooth was wet patches only every three rounds until round 18. Rounds 16, 17 and 18,with Scenar 105s) went into 0.178" with no fouling signs. Since then I've only used wet patches and WipeOut. The barrel,which doesn't foul hardly at all) has never seen a brush and is still shooting 5-shot groups in the low to mid-twos,with 105s) after 700 rounds.

How much better results could have been achieved for that barrel by a lengthy, aggressive "break-in" procedure?

 

[wyo]

Obtunded posited that barrel break in might actually and really be "beneficial to the shooter" more than being actually beneficial to barrel accuracy and ease of cleaning as is often believed. The kind of sound scientific testing he suggests would be interesting and be more conclusive than the usual anecdotal observations. With the human creature, perceptions and feelings often tend to determine what we believe [biases governed by our feelings suggesting and determining what we believe to be fact]. If we find "comfort" or some sense of security in the practice of barrel break in, in this case, than we do it. Hmmm, interesting psychological element to this particular question. I know personally I've felt a sense of satisfaction by practicing the procedure and felt that my rifle cleaned easier but I no longer practice barrel break in because I need more proof than feeling good after having done the same. Seems like a waste of good worry. Does barrel break in really have any scientifically verifiable merit as claimed, believed and practiced outside of how shooters feel about it? Personally I want to develop loads and shoot loads through my guns with a minimal amount of wasteful procedure interfering with my focus on those 2 things. I guess my bias is very evident.

 

[kelbro]

Hmmmm... Betcha the barrel makers could add $100 or so if they said the barrels were already 'broken in'.

 

[Twud]

I just had Clarence Hammonds build me my first custom. It's in 6BR 1/12 twist with a Kreiger barrel. When I picked it up I asked him about break in. His response "Just shoot it", to prove his point the gun went on top of filing cabinet and out came the bore scope. The bore was shiny and smooth with only a couple minor reamer marks. The first time I fired it I gave it a half hearted break in routine of 5 rounds, then fired my first group of 3. At no point could I get any copper out of the bore. I've got about 100 rounds through it now and still no copper fouling, I mean none at all and the groups keep getting tighter with load development.
Based on my experience I don't think it's necessary with a custom barrel.

 

[1shot]

+1 to what Rust said. I used to get a bbl. and rush right off the the gun plumber to get it chambered up. Last year, I got a new tube and started my break-in/load development and it copper fouled like nothing I have ever seen! The more I shot it, the worse it got. Long story short, the bbl. had a tear in one of the lands that was 1.75" in length!! Now the mfg. made it right very quickly, however there was some unavoidable down time. So now, I scope every bore before I do any chambering. On the subject of break-in, I do a shoot and clean for 5 rounds, but I'm doing chrono work at the same time. Then I take that info and start doing 3 round groups over the chrono and cleaning in between. The bbl. always tells me when it's ready to go to work, but it's never been over 20 rounds.
I hope this helps,
Lloyd

 

[wfeher]

i have a mc Gowen pre fit savage in 300wsm and all i did was shoot 1 clean for the first 3 rounds then clean every 3 rounds till i hit 15, then i just started shooting. so now i clean just as needed. barrel groups less than 1/2 inch at 100 yds all day. i cant ask for much better i reckon.

 

[Rooster50]

Two stories about breakin on barrels. A couple of years ago I was doing at least a 20shot breakin on every barrel, including a 1-8 twist Kreiger chambered in 6MM AI. It started cleaning up well after 10 rounds but I did the 20 anyway. It shot .5 groups fron the get go with 95gr bergers, until around 350 rounds down the tube. Then it improved to under .250 every time and stays there to this day at around 500 rounds. Did the breakin make a difference probably not but they say do it so I did.

Jump forward 3 years I now have a bad shoulder and the less strokes I do on a barrel the better it feels so, here's my new breakin procedure. Taking a mildly wore out bronze brush and wrappint a patch around it that has been saturated with JB bore paste and shortstroking the barrel for about 4 or 5 passes. Then washing out the barrel with Brake free aerosol, a couple of dry patches and back in for another round with the JB bore bright. It seems to have the same effect as the breakin and takes less than 1/2 hour. The rifle cleans up better and just recently I did this with 300wsm Savage Model 16. The first round I used to fine tune my bore sighting job made an adjustment and shot a,473 group with the next 3 shots. I went ahead and shot 6 more rounds of different loads and cleaned the rifle with 2 wet patches of Bore Tech carbon remover and 2 wet patches of Bore Tech Copper remover. Rifle Clean as a whistle,verified with a bore scope) breakin done and we went Elk hunting.

I DO NOT DO BREAKINS ANY MORE EVEN ON FACTORY BARRELS!!!!!!!!!!

 

[anyrange]

 

[Akbushape]

Guess I'll put in my 2 cents. Hang with me here. First off i'm
not a hard core paper puncher. More into the hunting. Packing a
rifle that is poorly sighted in or the barrel is shot out is sort of iresponsible as well as a waste of effort. The more fine
tuned you can get your gun the better for well placed shots. To
do this you have to punch holes in paper.
I would agree that with a well made custom grade barrel the need for break in probably is eliminated or greatly reduced.
However on a new barrel of mass produced quality,factory Barrel) doesn't it make sense that if you want that barrel to
shoot well when you take it out in the field, then some break-in
would be in order? Firing and cleaning to smooth out a rough barrel does not seem like a waste of ammo to me. I believe it
has been well established that a polished and smoother barrel
improves accuracy. What you are accomplishing with the break-in
is smoothing out the burrs and tool marks inside the barrel. Whether you accomplish this by hand laping or firing and cleaning, it still needs to be done. While you're breaking her
in you can be tuning your scope, practicing different firing
positions, different ranges, breath control, trigger pull and
on and on and on. Waste of time? I don't view it that way.

 

[KMH]

Now I just want everyone to know that I haven't read every single post on this thread but have investigated BREAK-IN with top gunsmiths. Two of which I will mention as I know they won't mind.

1. What does the break-in process accomplish. Well the primary reason is the leading edge burr created by the reamer while cutting the throat. The sharper the reamer and the better the gunsmith, the less the burr. Do you have to shoot one-shot clean to remove this...no. It will eventually be removed by normal shooting. Also, you do not have to shoot bullets to remove this burr. One thing I learned from Dave Tooley by speaking to him. Is when he firefoms brass using pistol powder and no bullet and cream of wheat or oatmeal filler, that will polish and deburr the throat area with minimal wear on the barrel. Know I have heard that pistol powder will firecrack barrels faster and can destroy them. Bogus according to Dave through viewing many barrel with a borescope using this method. I do however recommend not using molding clay or anythign like that to us as a plug when doing this...that can cause problems. Dwight confirmed everythign Dave said but said he doesn't break-in a barrel at all. He said, buy the time you do load development...the throat will be broke in if a good sharp reamer is used...that's why he keeps his reamers very fresh he said.

2. To a lesser degree, the smoothing out of the marks left across the top of the lands by the pilot. Both Dwight and Dave said these should really be a non issue as a proper bushing and chambering methods will not leave anything that will harm accuracy that will be there after the burr on the leading edge is removed.

What do I do...whatever I feel like at the moment. I fireform,normally) in a different barrel and then shoot 5 shots through the new barrel...clean...shoot five more....clean and go into load development while watching for copper in the bore.

Not a scienctific STUDY but some things just don't need them. I remember a college that got a 150,000 dollar grant to study why Hog crap smell....their conclusion...it smell because it feces...wow...needed a study for that one.

Kevin

 

[82boy]

Now I just want everyone to know that I haven't read every single post on this thread but have investigated BREAK-IN with top gunsmiths. Two of which I will mention as I know they won't mind.

1. What does the break-in process accomplish. Well the primary reason is the leading edge burr created by the reamer while cutting the throat. The sharper the reamer and the better the gunsmith, the less the burr. Do you have to shoot one-shot clean to remove this...no. It will eventually be removed by normal shooting. Also, you do not have to shoot bullets to remove this burr. One thing I learned from Dave Tooley by speaking to him. Is when he firefoms brass using pistol powder and no bullet and cream of wheat or oatmeal filler, that will polish and deburr the throat area with minimal wear on the barrel. Know I have heard that pistol powder will firecrack barrels faster and can destroy them. Bogus according to Dave through viewing many barrel with a borescope using this method. I do however recommend not using molding clay or anythign like that to us as a plug when doing this...that can cause problems. Dwight confirmed everythign Dave said but said he doesn't break-in a barrel at all. He said, buy the time you do load development...the throat will be broke in if a good sharp reamer is used...that's why he keeps his reamers very fresh he said.

2. To a lesser degree, the smoothing out of the marks left across the top of the lands by the pilot. Both Dwight and Dave said these should really be a non issue as a proper bushing and chambering methods will not leave anything that will harm accuracy that will be there after the burr on the leading edge is removed.
Kevin

Kevin this is well said. I agree with you 100%, and this is my findings as well, with the smiths I know.

Its funny how many times I have been flamed from saying " break in is hog wash."

 

[Obtunded]

As interesting - and largely supportive - as I found these comments, the best [sic] evidence anyone can come up with is ..."My gunsmith said...".

I think those experience and opinions are as valuable as any, but the lack of any substantive proof, our comments still only represent an amalgam of anecdote and opinion.

 

[Twud]

Never could understand how a bronze brush and bore solvent could have any affect on bore irregularities. Seems like you'd need something as hard, or harder to make any difference.

 

[Akbushape]

Twud, wouldn't it be the bullet forced out the barrel repeatedly that would work on smoothing out the irregularitys.
All the solvent and brass brush does is remove the copper fouling,and carbon) left in the barrel after the bullet wears on the irregularity.
I'll go a little deeper. As a bullet passes,under duress)
past a burr, a little of the burr will be worn down and in the
process a little copper from the jacket will be shaved off by
the burr and will build up in front of the burr. A scrubbing
with solvent and a brass brush will take out the copper build
up but do practicality nothing to smooth out the burr. With
the copper removed from the burr the next round forced out the barrel will wear down the burr more than it would if the burr
was protected by the copper fouling from the previous shot.
Look down a good custom barrel with a bore scope and there
should be essentially no burrs or imperfections. Look down a
factory barrel and it will be riddled with tiny,mostly),hopefully)
imperfections. Thats why barrel break in on a factory rifle,
if you want to make it as accurate as is reasonable, is necessary. On a good custom barrel, without a lot of imperfections, benifits from a break-in regimen may be minimal
or nonexistent. For the bench shooter out to win a trophy, even
minimal improvement before that first shoot may be worth it.
If you want the best accuracy from your barrel, yes, break-in is
benificial. If the gun is shooting good enough to suit you right
out of the box and you don't care to spend the time to make it shoot any better, then break-in for you is a waste of time. There really is nothing scientific about this, it's just sort of common sense and whatever purpose or expectation an individual has for thier gun. Testimony from a lot of shooters
is that their gun shot best after 50 to 300 rounds,depending on
the individual gun. This is due to the barrel getting "broken-in". If fractions of a MOA is important to you then you can speed this process up by following a good break-in procedure.
If it's not important to you then why waste your time. But what
ever you do, have fun doing it.
God bless America,and please hurry)

 

[Twud]

I have no problem with breaking in a barrel, I just don't understand how copper, or bronze, can wear down stainless steel.
After my experience with a Krieger I don't think I'll ever own a factory barrel again. My Weatherby is being rebarelled right now. My 284 is next.