Barrel Nut Disadvantages?

[jackieschmidt]

That looks great.

 

[RobertOly]

So I've read through this thread a couple times, and it seems to me there is a bit of inattention to several factors that "should/must" be accounted for, in order to weigh these in the balance.

1. What percentage of thread engagement will the action and both barrels use?
2. What percentage of thread engagement will the nut use?
3. If a sample size of N=1 is legitimate, your P value and R correlation data will be absolutely meaningless. Are you accounting for this?
4. What factors support the hypothesis vs the null? Have they been identified?
5. How will repeatability be calculated and verified?
6. What factors of harmonic variation develop by shortening a barrel the intended amount and how will those variables be selected and minimized or excluded from the data set?

These are not difficult items to identify, but isolating them will be extremely difficult. Any test or evaluation without addressing these and a multiplicity of other variables will render the data, at best, anecdotal.

The amount of rounds and barrels that should be tested will be cost prohibitive.

If you are interested in real science regarding shooting and accuracy, consider designing an experiment that would meet the rigors of real science based experimentation. All else is opinion and anecdotal.

 

[RobertOly]

There really are some interesting opportunities for testing, but the way this is unfolding seems more analogous to Ford versus Chevy. My question would be," which Ford versus which Chevy for what purpose.

It's important to identify what it is that you're trying to evaluate and coming up with a "better or best" has to be taken into consideration with the materials and the intended use/ measuring modality.

 

[Dusty Stevens]

There really are some interesting opportunities for testing, but the way this is unfolding seems more analogous to Ford versus Chevy. My question would be," which Ford versus which Chevy for what purpose.

It's important to identify what it is that you're trying to evaluate and coming up with a "better or best" has to be taken into consideration with the materials and the intended use/ measuring modality.

The barrel will not be shortened. It wont have the reamer back in it only modified for the nut. We’re not doing chalk board stuff here we are using 2 guns that are proven and 2 shooters that can see a difference in the sand in their rests on target. This isnt an over the hood public range shootoff in varying conditions where the data is meaningless. These guns will be tuned to their max with each setup. Thanks for slipping in though. Good to see folks thinking.

 

[jds holler]

Just curious -- how much torque will be applied to each system?? And would this possibly be another variable to consider?-- and to drive us nuts.
Or should I say even more nuts. jd

 

[jackieschmidt]

The barrel will not be shortened. It wont have the reamer back in it only modified for the nut. We’re not doing chalk board stuff here we are using 2 guns that are proven and 2 shooters that can see a difference in the sand in their rests on target. This isnt an over the hood public range shootoff in varying conditions where the data is meaningless. These guns will be tuned to their max with each setup. Thanks for slipping in though. Good to see folks thinking.

Dusty, I have tried to explain exactly what will be done, but I guess many of our members do not bother to read the posts.
.

 

[SKWERLZ]

The disadvantage of the barrel nut is a gunsmith isn’t going to get any money from me. I bought an action wrench and barrel nut wrench for less money than what a lot of smiths wanted to chamber and fit a barrel with no long wait time.
Ive fitted 4 Shilen barrels on Savage target actions and they all shoot way better than I expected.

I spent some significant coin on two Brux blanks chambered in 7 saum set up for barrel nuts by a well known smith for my mini ELR project.
Those barrels were amazing and worth every penny!
Best barrels I’ve had yet.

I’ve also had 6 Shilen prefits that were considerably cheaper, they all shot well to very well but quality of chambering was noticeably less and they were noticeably outclassed by the two more expensive barrels done with a lot more care and more expensive blanks.

 

[rijndael]

Then prove it

It's not on me to prove anything. I couldn't care less what you, or anyone else, uses. I will sit back and watch more clueful people provide evidence to help everyone draw conclusions. I don't care if it's a sample size of 1 or 500.

 

[jimmymac]

I’d like to thank this thread for helping me get through a sleepless night.

I like testing. I like when others do tests. I see no reason not to do this one. Don’t understand that logic. If anything, I thank those that are doing and sharing. I also like shouldered barrels that are consistent from one to the next. Screw one off. Screw another one on. I don’t even think about headspace.

 

[jelenko]

Dusty, I have tried to explain exactly what will be done, but I guess many of our members do not bother to read the posts.
.

Maybe it would help for people to consider the possible outcomes; e.g.,

• There in less than a very small difference say, 1/100 of an MOA, in group size
• There is between a difference between that very small amount and say, 1/10, of an MOA
• The difference in group size is greater than 1/10 of an MOA.
• Were the differences consistent across all groups?

And, of course, theoretically, either the shouldered or nutted barrel could have the smaller or larger group sizes.

I'm thinking our interpretation of the results would be:

The smaller/less consistent the differences are, the more additional samples would be indicated.​

The larger/more consistent the differences are, the more it indicates which attachment method produces smaller groups.​

 

[urbanrifleman]

I spent some significant coin on two Brux blanks chambered in 7 saum set up for barrel nuts by a well known smith for my mini ELR project.
Those barrels were amazing and worth every penny!
Best barrels I’ve had yet.

I’ve also had 6 Shilen prefits that were considerably cheaper, they all shot well to very well but quality of chambering was noticeably less and they were noticeably outclassed by the two more expensive barrels done with a lot more care and more expensive blanks.

You kind of made my point. The least of the factors is the nut. That bullet doesn't know any different between the two.

The biggest factor is the barrel blank. A screamer blank makes a screamer barrel.

 

[urbanrifleman]

Maybe it would help for people to consider the possible outcomes; e.g.,

• There in less than a very small difference say, 1/100 of an MOA, in group size
• There is between a difference between that very small amount and say, 1/10, of an MOA
• The difference in group size is greater than 1/10 of an MOA.
• Were the differences consistent across all groups?

And, of course, theoretically, either the shouldered or nutted barrel could have the smaller or larger group sizes.

I'm thinking our interpretation of the results would be:

The smaller/less consistent the differences are, the more additional samples would be indicated.​

The larger/more consistent the differences are, the more it indicates which attachment method produces smaller groups.​

No matter the outcome, there will be no "proof" of anything. Only opinion.

But this entire discussion has been based in opinions... So, that makes sense.

And I genuinely am disturbed by this idea that if I don't "support" this test, I'm some kind of troublemaker or cynic (as said by several of the posters). Or, I have a bad attitude or some other nonsense. This whole view is very Lord of the Flies.

It's an inconclusive test. That's my educated opinion on the subject (and I am educated on this exact subject). Any conclusions drawn will not be scientific in any way. Just conjecture.

 

[rijndael]

That's my educated opinion on the subject (and I am educated on this exact subject).

Dr. UrbanRifleMan - Thanks for stopping short of saying "I am the science"

 

[CharlieNC]

BUT you must shoot 100 5-shot groups to have a statistically valid comparison LOL !

 

[Bottom Fodder]

Well we’re up to 20 page talking a nut! And let me say I’m pro nut
“it’s the barrel that makes the difference“

 

[urbanrifleman]

Dr. UrbanRifleMan - Thanks for stopping short of saying "I am the science"

Funny thing is I haven't mocked anyone's qualifications in this discussion. But people have mocked mine. All the while, others claiming I'm the agitator.

Very Lord of the Flies indeed.

 

[rijndael]

Funny thing is I haven't mocked anyone's qualifications in this discussion. But several people have mocked mine.

I don't even know what your qualifications are, I said it in jest. You may have a unique qualification in engineering threaded joints, or maybe you're from Virginia Tech's Fastener Testing Lab. I have no clue.

All I do know is that you sell barrel nut solutions and you see no value in this exercise because the sample size is too small. You don't need to write the dissenting opinion on why you think this is a waste of time, we get it. Some of us still want to see how this plays out.

 

[DShortt]

Funny thing is I haven't mocked anyone's qualifications in this discussion. But people have mocked mine. All the while, others claiming I'm the agitator.

Very Lord of the Flies indeed.

I think the thread and it's contents speak for themselves.

 

[urbanrifleman]

I have no clue.

Then why didn't you say that? Instead of some smartass comment directed at me?

My qualifications are in testing methods, and what makes a test valid. That's why I commented on it.

 

[rijndael]

Then why didn't you say that? Instead of some smartass comment directed at me?

As I said, it was in jest, a joke, I intend mean for you to take it personally.