What it boils down to, if you think it helps do it. So people write it off to justify not spending the money to have it done. I talked to George Kelbly about it and decided to try what can it hurt and he was right. Kreiger still does it, and it doesn't hurt them. It does seem to take the walking out on twenty round strings. The two barrels i had done were average in the wind but they shot the smallest i ever saw. The barrels were Brux and did very good this year at 1000 yds and at 100 yds they shoot like a PPC. with groups in the zeros small zero's like .043 for five.I had 4 more frozen for next year. I had bedding problems with my light gun and fixed that with a glue and screw. I zeroed it in with two shots and shot one group .072 and went to the Va. state 1000 yd. match the agg. for 4 matches was 2.88. My other light gun i use for heavy shot 4" ten shot groups and a bunch of 100's,it was frozen too. Both barrels shoot the first shot out of a clean barrel in the group at 100 yds. I see too many good traits not to try it again and i will. ...... jim
Cryogenically treated barrels???
- Thread starter thefitter
- Start date
BoydAllen
Gold $$ Contributor
Kriegers are done before the hole is drilled, and it improves the straightness of the drilling. IMO that is the best stage to do a barrel, because it has no potential to change finished dimensions. If one wanted to do it again, after rifling, at that point any austenite would have already been converted, and cutting the rifling does not introduce much stress, but still because it was done once already, there would be almost no chance of any problem.
I was told by a very well known, and respected, barrel maker that, "You cannot stress relieve 416 stainless by freezing it".
Been there, tried this.
Now I save money by not wasting it on cryo treatment for rifled barrels. If the maker chooses to cryo his steel prior to HIS machining it into a rifled tube (which I think may very well have some positive benefits), that's his call. Once the cutter or button has done its job, no, no point to it, and not one whit of difference that I could see, feel, smell or measure in any way.
Now I save money by not wasting it on cryo treatment for rifled barrels. If the maker chooses to cryo his steel prior to HIS machining it into a rifled tube (which I think may very well have some positive benefits), that's his call. Once the cutter or button has done its job, no, no point to it, and not one whit of difference that I could see, feel, smell or measure in any way.
I do no idea if it effect on the pure accuracy or wear on a barrel but I had a friend that bought a 6.5-06 second hand Remington 700 hunting rifle......this rifle had a custom barrel of unknown mfg. It would shoot 3 shot groups into about an inch at 100 yards but when it heated up with 4-5 shots it started to walk shots up and to the right and it opened the 5 shot groups consistently to about 2 1/2 inches at 100yds. We pillar bedded free floated the barrel and tried it again with the same results. He sent it away to some company to have it cryro treated and got it back and it now shoots 5 shot groups without "walking" the 4-5th shots into about an inch.
I'm now a believer in that it can help at least some stress problems.
I'm now a believer in that it can help at least some stress problems.
jonbearman
I live in new york state,how unfortunate !
It all depends on the process and if it doesnt go into a tempering oven afterwords then it is not being done to design of the process.It is not a magic process,it works in some cases and not in others.I agree about the stainless have little to no affect and I only do them upon request.
The process is widely used in a number of very technical manufacturing fields. What I've heard from most of those adherents, is that it makes a noticeable difference in how the material machines, or other properties that are useful in the manufacturing process.
Once it's made into a barrel, however, it doesn't seem to offer any tangible benefits to those of us who are merely using the barrels. In a side-by-side blind test with a control barrel, it resulted in absolutely no discernible difference in accuracy. This was based on a series of ten, 10-shot groups fired from each barrel, both before and after the treatment. The ammunition was all from the same lot of bullets, powder and loading session, without my knowing which of the barrels were treated (by three different cryo facilities, incidentally) and which one was the control barrel. All of the barrels were Harts, purchased at the same time and from the same run, specifically for this test. They were identical as we could possibly make them, and the groups fired showed that we were pretty successful in matching them up. When I cleaned these barrels, I did them all at the same time, and in exactly the same manner. Inspection with my bore scope gave no clue as to which ones were treated and which one wasn't. No difference whatsoever in how they cleaned. In the meantime, all of these barrels were used in our regular QC rotation, firing 168 and 175 grain bullets for daily production testing. As each barrel hit the 1,000 round mark, it was pulled and set aside. Once all had the same number of rounds on them, I again repeated the original ten, 10-shot groups from each, using the same control ammo. Ditto for cleaning and reassessing the fouling/erosion conditions, etc.. Still no difference. This process was repeated every 1,000 rounds until the barrels quit shooting and had to be retired. It's been a while, but I do recall that all barrels quite shooting within about 500 rounds of their mates, essentially no difference in longevity between them. Ted Lancaster revealed to me which of the barrels were treated, and which was the control once the testing was completed, but there's absolutely no way I could have told you by simply looking at, or shooting them. So, while it may well make a difference in how the material machines or forms, it didn't affect the attributes that we need as shooters of the finished products. Lot of rounds down range in that one, and it was all pretty rigidly controlled from start to finish. Bottom line is, no, I won't bother sending a finished barrel off for the treatment.
Once it's made into a barrel, however, it doesn't seem to offer any tangible benefits to those of us who are merely using the barrels. In a side-by-side blind test with a control barrel, it resulted in absolutely no discernible difference in accuracy. This was based on a series of ten, 10-shot groups fired from each barrel, both before and after the treatment. The ammunition was all from the same lot of bullets, powder and loading session, without my knowing which of the barrels were treated (by three different cryo facilities, incidentally) and which one was the control barrel. All of the barrels were Harts, purchased at the same time and from the same run, specifically for this test. They were identical as we could possibly make them, and the groups fired showed that we were pretty successful in matching them up. When I cleaned these barrels, I did them all at the same time, and in exactly the same manner. Inspection with my bore scope gave no clue as to which ones were treated and which one wasn't. No difference whatsoever in how they cleaned. In the meantime, all of these barrels were used in our regular QC rotation, firing 168 and 175 grain bullets for daily production testing. As each barrel hit the 1,000 round mark, it was pulled and set aside. Once all had the same number of rounds on them, I again repeated the original ten, 10-shot groups from each, using the same control ammo. Ditto for cleaning and reassessing the fouling/erosion conditions, etc.. Still no difference. This process was repeated every 1,000 rounds until the barrels quit shooting and had to be retired. It's been a while, but I do recall that all barrels quite shooting within about 500 rounds of their mates, essentially no difference in longevity between them. Ted Lancaster revealed to me which of the barrels were treated, and which was the control once the testing was completed, but there's absolutely no way I could have told you by simply looking at, or shooting them. So, while it may well make a difference in how the material machines or forms, it didn't affect the attributes that we need as shooters of the finished products. Lot of rounds down range in that one, and it was all pretty rigidly controlled from start to finish. Bottom line is, no, I won't bother sending a finished barrel off for the treatment.
Keven, You did hit on a very important point,10 shots and ten times. 20 shots at 5 times you would have seen difference. A better test was to index the barrel and shoot it 20 times and plot the group and then freeze it and do it again. Index it to the same mark on the action and watch the difference....... This test was done with rail guns .... jim
dmoran
Donovan Moran
To bad Kevin's extensive test did not include both "pulled and cut" rifling barrels as well, since it seem to be some what more popular with "cut rifled" barrels.
I also tend to read/hear more positives coming from "cut rifled" barrels and had a positive experience with Cryo in one that I tried it, where it would hold POI tight from cold to hot.
There is definitely overwhelming PLUS's to it for machining ability......
Donovan
I also tend to read/hear more positives coming from "cut rifled" barrels and had a positive experience with Cryo in one that I tried it, where it would hold POI tight from cold to hot.
There is definitely overwhelming PLUS's to it for machining ability......
Donovan
I prefer cut barrels myself, but unfortunately, used far more buttoned barrels at Sierra. Hart was pretty much the "go to" barrel, and a long standing favorite of the then president. Don't think he'd ever used one, but they were the ones that he'd latched onto . . . go figure. Hart makes a fine barrel, and I had nothing against using these. Good bit cheaper than most of my preferred cut barrels anyway, and that (no doubt) figured into his decision.
I think the real solution here is obvious; use the best made barrels you can buy, as they're not going to have many of the induced stresses that cheaper barrels are prone to. They may all look exactly the same from ten feet away. I can assure you, they're not, and you generally get what you pay for.
I think the real solution here is obvious; use the best made barrels you can buy, as they're not going to have many of the induced stresses that cheaper barrels are prone to. They may all look exactly the same from ten feet away. I can assure you, they're not, and you generally get what you pay for.
Jon,
you're making an assumption here, and no, I doubt that you would have seen any difference in the overall results. There was, frankly, very, very little difference in the group sizes of ALL of these groups, across the board in the early testing. The key point here, is statistically valid numbers. They (Sierra) normally use 10-shot groups for all of their regular testing, and that's what I was going to be using in all of the rest of the testing that generated the remaining 17,000+ rounds that went downrange for this one. Bottom line was, I knew what to expect from ten round groups with this bullet, and it gave very reliable results during the testing.
I'm missing something on what you mean by indexing these barrels? They weren't switch barrels, they were all barreled actions, blueprinted and trued, as per our regular procedures. As far as testing both before and after the treatment process, yes, they were; ten, 10-shot groups from each before they were treated, to establish a baseline accuracy, and then again immediately after they were returned from being cryo'ed. As for the fixtures themselves, they were return to battery machine rests, utilizing only the barreled actions. Very standard stuff here.
you're making an assumption here, and no, I doubt that you would have seen any difference in the overall results. There was, frankly, very, very little difference in the group sizes of ALL of these groups, across the board in the early testing. The key point here, is statistically valid numbers. They (Sierra) normally use 10-shot groups for all of their regular testing, and that's what I was going to be using in all of the rest of the testing that generated the remaining 17,000+ rounds that went downrange for this one. Bottom line was, I knew what to expect from ten round groups with this bullet, and it gave very reliable results during the testing.
I'm missing something on what you mean by indexing these barrels? They weren't switch barrels, they were all barreled actions, blueprinted and trued, as per our regular procedures. As far as testing both before and after the treatment process, yes, they were; ten, 10-shot groups from each before they were treated, to establish a baseline accuracy, and then again immediately after they were returned from being cryo'ed. As for the fixtures themselves, they were return to battery machine rests, utilizing only the barreled actions. Very standard stuff here.
Kevin, Depending on what size barrels you were testing,they heat at different rates Hv. or LV. indexing to a witness mark so to see if the movement is in the same direction, when the barrel was reinstalled. No i did not make an assumption, heavy barrels don't move that much on ten shots. When you go past that point it is very easy to see, 20 shots will show you a direction. All can prove it by is small centered five shot groups and small centered ten shot groups with a light gun. The testing Lou and George did prompted me to start freezing them and the results were nothing short of amazing. I think the people i shoot with can attest to that and so will the record books....... James o'Hara
The barrels were 1.350" OD, the standard for their machine rest systems. Okay, I see where you're going with this now. Possibly, but then, we used the heavy barrels to reduce such things in daily use. Remember, these were barrels that I used every day, day in, day out, for all the routine QC testing. When we built some new rest systems, I tried to get them to reduce the barrel OD down to a more normal 1.250" (industry standard for blanks, whereas the 1.350" we used were oversized and incurred an extra cost; they also eliminated a number of barrels by those makers who didn't want to mess with making oversized blanks), but that was a non-starter. "We've always done it this way," the standard fall back position to any form of change.
Kevin, Now i see why you didn't experience any improvement, they don't get hot enough. Real world heavy varmint barrels do heat very fast compared to a 1.250- 1.350 OD. used on many heavy guns. To combat this Freezing stops the walking and lets me compete with 50 lb. guns and it does help on the light ones also. James O'Hara
Joe Maisto said:
Joe,
This is a typical application for the cryo process... The process is commonly used after heat treatment of certain steels to eliminate the remaining austenite.... This is the only application of the cryogenisatipn in metallurgy.
Regarding 416 steel barrels, why then use a process intended to remove Ausrenite from a steel who is already Martensitic??
R.G.C
Tom, I'm just a shooter or was in some respects, but i do know when something works. You of all people know the problems i had all season with reamers and bedding and a screwed in light gun shooting 10 shots was shooting better than the glue in with five. I move one thing at a time,to see if there is a gain or not, i never shot as many 50's and 100's in a row with different guns till after the barrels were cyroed. The loads are the same in both guns,bullets,seating depth and both barrels are average in the wind. ..... jim
butchlambert
Site $$ Sponsor
300 below ain't cryo. Do a little study on cryo. It must be much colder than that to be a real cryo. I have been able to pick out a cryo'ed blank over a non cryo'ed blank when chambering. I have had multiple cryo'ed barrels and some blanks that were done before rifling. I'm like Kevin, I can see no improvement. I guess if it makes you feel better do it, but use a company that gets it closer to absolute zero.
Upgrades & Donations
This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.