Barrel Nut Disadvantages?

[Alex Wheeler]

Some thoughts...
We are not even coming close to loading the threads on a barrel joint. You cant compare this to other clamping applications like in a engine. I used to drag race, build engines and was a mechanic for 15 years. I was into that stuff just like Im into rifles now and tried to learn everything I could. In an engine a fastener is used for clamping. Ideally you measure the fasteners stretch, if you can get to both sides like you can on a rod bolt. The rod does not know if it is a bolt or a stud/nut, so long as that fastener is stretched to spec. On a head the best way to torque by degrees since you cant measure stretch in a blind hole. The reason studs are liked on heads is it guides the head on and normally they are finer threads with better finishes than the block so torque ratings are more accurate/consistent. Not to mention they gui⁷ed the heads on nice and you dont tear up gaskets fighting that heavy pos . The threads in the block do not know if there is a nut or a head on the top of the fastener. None of that applies to rifles.
I have experimented with this area of rifle accuracy. Like most things, I assume there can be improvements made. I twisted my bed to cut .0003-.0005 of taper in the tenons. I did this for years. I tried many types of lube. Many torque values. My conclusion after trying all this stuff is that theres nothing there. The standard thread joint we use on quality actions is not moving. We would not be able to shoot zeros if there was any movement, and a .270 puts the same load on the joint as a 6br if run to equal pressure.
Trust me, I wish there was something here. Because then we could fix it and shoot smaller.

 

[jelenko]

Some thoughts...
We are not even coming close to loading the threads on a barrel joint. You cant compare this to other clamping applications like in a engine. I used to drag race, build engines and was a mechanic for 15 years. I was into that stuff just like Im into rifles now and tried to learn everything I could. In an engine a fastener is used for clamping. Ideally you measure the fasteners stretch, if you can get to both sides like you can on a rod bolt. The rod does not know if it is a bolt or a stud/nut, so long as that fastener is stretched to spec. On a head the best way to torque by rotation since you cant measure stretch in a blind hole. The reason studs a liked on heads is, it guides the head on and normally they are finer threads with better finishes than the block so torque ratings are more accurate/consistent. Not to mention they guid the heads on nice and you dont tear up gaskets fighting that heavy pos . The threads in the block do not know if there in a nut or a head on the top of the fastener. None of that applies to rifles.
I have experimented with this are of rifle accuracy. Like most things, I assume there can be improvements made. I twisted my bed to cut .0003-.0005 of taper in the tenons. I did this for years. I tried many types of lube. Many torque values. My conclusion after trying all this stuff is that theres nothing there. The standard thread joint we use on quality actions is not moving. We would not be able to shoot zeros if there was any movement, and a .270 puts the same load on the joint as a 6br if run to equal pressure.
Trust me, I wish there was something here. Because then we could fix it and shoot smaller.

Alex - Would this mean that it doesn't matter if we use a shouldered vs a nutted barrel?

 

[Alex Wheeler]

Alex - Would this mean that it doesn't matter if we use a shouldered vs a nutted barrel?

In my opinion, it does not matter in regards to clamping force. We can get plenty with either system. I prefer a shoulder for a few reasons. A solid shoulder seated against an action face has no where to go other than radially and the v threads fight that. There is no way that you could cock the barrel at an angle because the shoulder wont allow it. With a nut there is no solid shoulder. Thats why I dont like them or use them. Also for the guy swapping barrels, a shouldered barrel will go to the same spot and same HS every time. So if your worried about things changing when you pull off a barrel and put it back on, a shoulder is the way to go. Like I said earlier, we are not asking much from a thread joint this size and while I really dont like nuts and wont fit barrels with them obviously they are working fine. Im not sure how they got the DIY reputation. A shouldered barrel is way easier to install. And a smith has to chamber it either way. When I do savages, I just cut a shouldered barrel for them. The only issue you run into is stocks inletted for nut barrels. If I did more Id spec out a special contour that fits a nut contour that I could fit with a shoulder.

 

[Bottom Fodder]

I like barrel nuts cause fits my personally

 

[DShortt]

I'm not sure why all the discord is really necessary. As has been mentioned if a barrel nut system is just as good as a shouldered barrel matches will start to be won with them and it will be obvious. If no one is willing to try competing with a barrel nut system it's their money and time so it's their choice.
Personally the only obvious ADVANTAGE I can see to a barrel nut system is a prefit barrel can be purchased practically anywhere and headspaced by the end user without a need to final ream the chamber. I suspect that's not the most precise way to do things if your a competitor so it's not the route that is normally chosen.

 

[INTJ]

Tubb's ATR action will probably outshoot anything on the planet (this is my opinion) yet not "everyone would be shooting it" really is true. I am sorry, no offense, but that idea is a bit silly. His action uses a barrel extension on the barrel. No one is using that tech. In fact, there is laundry list of innovations in his action . Some of which are TRULY game changers in design. Patented. Innovations.

In my opinion, most of the other actions are basically modified Mausers by comparison... I know... I know... How controversial to imply that nearly ZERO innovation has really occurred in bolt action actions in 150 years, but it is true. They still look nearly identical to the original. Certainly improved, but not really any different. I doubt there are any substantial patents floating around on bolt actions being used today because few updates being used today is patent able as unique.

And the idea that how the pipe thread is tightened on the barrel is some kind of game changer seem kind of silly to my brain, which was a mechanical engineer designer brain for 25 years. But hey, lots of people buy unsubstantiated theories.

And I really do think most of the stuff bantered about these days is just marketing. People marketing their products. "Oh mine's better because of yada yada yada", or "that guy sucks because of blah blah blah".

Marketing.

I let my nut barrels do their own talking. I find results outweigh theory.

LOL!!

You are welcome to come out to Deep Creek anytime and show us the superiority of your barrel nuts and Tubb action.

Or how about just posting your 1000 yd groups?

 

[INTJ]

Vaughn's finding was that standard barrel threading unloads considerably under firing pressure. That tightening that kind of connection ever higher, consistently helped (with his results). I believe he went up way higher in torque than is common.

Then he went into a different kind of threading system that spread the loading across more threads, and he found that extreme tightening was no longer needed. This is just what a fine threaded tenon tightened with a barrel nut does. And you can go finer threading while employing less tightening force.
I would rather have fine/shallow threading around the chamber than coarse/deep threading.

The direction of tension comes into this as well.
Pre-tensioning is stretching within modulus of elasticity.
A bolt/shoulder connection pre-tensions with the first few threads, toward the bolt face.
A stud/barrel nut connection pretensions with all threading at once, away from the bolt face.
Firing pressure pushes/stretches the barrel outward. Albeit a very small amount.

With a shouldered connection, and tightening ever more, the threading behind those first few taking all the load is pulled toward the bolt face. A weird front-side loading. On firing, those threads snap the other direction, towards their back-side, for a time unloading.

With a nut, and tightening ever more, all barrel threading in the action ring is pulled by the nut together to it's back-side. With this condition set, firing pressure is spread across all threads in the action ring in the same outward direction, increasing load on them (not unloading).

I am not a competitor, nor a mechanical engineer, I don't have barrel nuts in current guns, but this all makes sense to me.

Yes, Vaughn talked a lot about threads and even proposed a certain thread configuration as a way to fix the issue he saw.

But an idea or theory isn't valid if it doesn't work. The true validation happens on the target. Those of us that seek and achieve the highest levels of precision and accuracy do not do what Vaughn proposed.

Again, all you have to do is post groups that validate your theory.

 

[INTJ]

I'm not sure why all the discord is really necessary. As has been mentioned if a barrel nut system is just as good as a shouldered barrel matches will start to be won with them and it will be obvious. If no one is willing to try competing with a barrel nut system it's their money and time so it's their choice.
Personally the only obvious ADVANTAGE I can see to a barrel nut system is a prefit barrel can be purchased practically anywhere and headspaced by the end user without a need to final ream the chamber. I suspect that's not the most precise way to do things if your a competitor so it's not the route that is normally chosen.

I started the thread a couple years ago just as an exercise in thinking. It was driven by the very bad results we were getting with a load development on a barrel clamp setup.

However, on the internet, there is always at least one guy who will take offense and become defensive. That is fine, most of us are that guy sometimes.

However, the best way to resolve those differences is to show actual results, and maybe use humor.

That leaves the nutters in a bind......

I think a shouldered barrel is a better way than a barrel nut. That doesn't mean I think a barrel nut is a bad way to do things, but let's be honest. The main reason for barrel nuts is because it's more convenient for people without lathes to install barrels.

 

[DShortt]

I started the thread a couple years ago just as an exercise in thinking. It was driven by the very bad results we weee getting with a load development on a barrel clamp setup.

However, on the internet, there is always at least one guy who will take offense and become defensive. That is fine, most of us are that guy sometimes.

However, the best way to resolve those differences is to show actual results, and maybe use humor.

That leaves the nutters in a bind......

I think a shouldered barrel is a better way than a barrel nut. That doesn't mean I think a barrel nut is a bad way to do things, but let's be honest. The main reason for barrel nuts is because it's more convenient for people without lathes to install barrels.

I agree partially with your last sentence. If someone competing wants to take the challenge and win a few large competitions using a barrel nut set up it would definitely be noticed. So far as I know that hasn't been accomplished yet.

 

[INTJ]

I agree partially with your last sentence. If someone competing wants to take the challenge and win a few large competitions using a barrel nut set up it would definitely be noticed. So far as I know that hasn't been accomplished yet.

Probably the original reason for the barrel nut was speed in manufacturing for Savage. Also, like you said, a barrel nut allows a prefit to me made to fit any action without fiercer machine work. A shouldered prefit is much more limited.

I was actually hopeful the Savage LRBR rifle would be a low cost way to get started in LRBR. However, the barrel nut wasn't the biggest error. They put the wrong stock on that rifle. The dual port action was great, but they should have used a flat bottomed rear stock vs a tapered one.

I think a 28" 6 BR barrel in a light varmint contour ought to be okay with a barrel nut, in terms of shooting consistently enough to work for entry level BR.

 

[urbanrifleman]

I agree partially with your last sentence. If someone competing wants to take the challenge and win a few large competitions using a barrel nut set up it would definitely be noticed. So far as I know that hasn't been accomplished yet.

I had a customer that shot at the Nationals with one of my barrels. He did pretty good.

 

[urbanrifleman]

LOL!!

You are welcome to come out to Deep Creek anytime and show us the superiority of your barrel nuts and Tubb action.

Or how about just posting your 1000 yd groups?

Tubb and his son in law Nate already set ELR records with the Tubb ATR action. As have several others. 1000 yards is short range to the Tubb family.

Pretty funny how people talk shit about things they don't know shit about.

 

[INTJ]

Tubb and his son in law Nate already set ELR records with the Tubb ATR action. As have several others. 1000 yards is short range to the Tubb family.

Pretty funny how people talk shit about people.

ELR is not precision shooting, and an ELR rifle would have its ass handed to it in an LRBR match.
However, you can convince me simply by posting target pics of groups that are better than mine.

You know, I REALLY try to give you the benefit of the doubt, but that chip on your shoulder is so huge it makes it hard.....

 

[urbanrifleman]

ELR is not precision shooting, and an ELR rifle would have its ass handed to it in an LRBR match.

I never said a word about Tubb or anyone else, so quit making stuff up.

However, you can convince me simply by posting target pics of groups that are better than mine.

You know, I REALLY try to give you the benefit of the doubt, but that chip on your shoulder is so huge it makes it hard.....

Funny how the dicks always accuse everyone else of being dicks.

You said "ELR is not precision shooting" .

I rest my case.

 

[INTJ]

Funny how the dicks always accuse everyone else of being dicks.

ELR is not precision shooting...

I rest my case.

LOL!!! I am not offended, I am amused.

I didn't mean the crack about "chip on your shoulder" to be an insult, just an helpful observation, but I see how you took it. That is the pitfall of the internet.

I guess a little instruction and clarification is needed here.

ELR is about ACCURACY. It's about hitting what you are shooting at. Competitors often miss their very large targets and a match winner may simply be the guy who missed the target the least. That isn't precision. That also isn't a slam against ELR, as it has some very exacting requirements and takes a lot of skill. However, it isn't precision shooting.

PRECISION shooting is when one of the criteria is for all your shots to be close together. The longer the distance, the less the precision due to many factors. At ELR distances it's primarily about reading and adjusting for conditions.

 

[urbanrifleman]

LOL!!! I am not offended, I am amused.

I didn't mean the crack about "chip on your shoulder" to be an insult, just an helpful observation, but I see how you took it. That is the pitfall of the internet.

I guess a little instruction and clarification is needed here.

ELR is about ACCURACY. It's about hitting what you are shooting at. Competitors often miss their very large targets and a match winner may simply be the guy who missed the target the least. That isn't precision. That also isn't a slam against ELR, as it has some very exacting requirements and takes a lot of skill. However, it isn't precision shooting.

PRECISION shooting is when one of the criteria is for all your shots to be close together. The longer the distance, the less the precision due to many factors. At ELR distances it's primarily about reading and adjusting for conditions.

Yah... you're real helpful.

Ps:. I don't really care if you are offended. I could care less. Your the agressor in this conversation, not me. My comments are defensive. If you don't realize that, maybe you are not as mature as you think you are...

 

[INTJ]

Yah... you're real helpful.

Ps:. I don't really care if you are offended. I could care less. Your the agressor in this conversation, not me. My comments are defensive. If you don't realize that, I really do not care.

LOL!!! Whatever makes you feel better. One thing that we are very much in agreement on is that you are very defensive.

 

[urbanrifleman]

LOL!!! Whatever makes you feel better. One thing that we are very much in agreement on is that you are very defensive.

You talk a lot of crap. I wonder if you would do that in person. It seems anyone who reacts to your comments is "defensive".

Barrel nut prefits are my business. I'm pretty good at it. I've tested the things. Lots of them. I bet you haven't.

It's the same old crap I've heard for years. It's tired. I'm tired of it. I've heard about enough of these condescending opinions by people who don't know anything about what they are talking about.

 

[Bill K]

All I will add is, if the barrel nuts are so bad, why are so many, decent and good barrel makers doing prefits and barrel nuts. It is not just because of the ease and demand. They work well and give shooters a option to DIY rifle work and shooting.

 

[DShortt]

All I will add is, if the barrel nuts are so bad, why are so many, decent and good barrel makers doing prefits and barrel nuts. It is not just because of the ease and demand. They work well and give shooters a option to DIY rifle work and shooting.

I did not mean anything derogatory in my remarks about barrel nuts. I would like to see some more shooters compete successfully with them. I appreciate the flexibility of the barrel nut system personally.