Prove clean barrels are more accurate.

Talk about them here.

Moderators: mpallett, bakerjw

User avatar
silencertalk
Site Admin
Posts: 33978
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 8:31 am
Location: USA

Prove clean barrels are more accurate.

Post by silencertalk »

I see people cleaning every X shots, where X < 100.

I dare someone to shoot a 30 shot group with a clear barrel. Then fire 500 rounds without cleaning.

Then shoot a 30 round group with the dirt barrel.

I would like to know at what point will a dirty barrel have less accuracy?
User avatar
robpiat
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 870
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 5:34 pm
Location: Roswell,GA

Post by robpiat »

Robert,

I have read somewhere, that high quality benchrest barrels are cleaned every shot string, then a fouler is fired, and then the match string.

The theory is that a typical savage, remington, etc barrel has many imperfections and the fouling actually helps quite a bit to smooth out the irregularities more than it hurts. Allegedly, in a honed match barrel, there are no such imperfections and it shoots best clean.

Ultimately any testing will likely only be relevant to that type of rifle.
User avatar
Max
Silent Operator
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:38 pm
Location: TEXAS

Post by Max »

I’ve been shooting 22lr matches with a Anschütz 54 free rifle for 15 years + and never cleaned the barrel.. That’s 400 to 500 rds a year = 7500rds No loss accuracy..
User avatar
doubloon
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 11897
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 11:02 pm
Location: Houston-ish

Post by doubloon »

In airguns "dirty" barrels are often more consistent than clean barrels.

There is no "fouling" to speak of in airguns but I am a believer that significant copper fouling can negatively impact accuracy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDtd2jNIwAU MUSAFAR!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CrOL-ydFMI This is Water DavidW
Complete Form 1s http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=79895
User avatar
Wahoo95
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1264
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 8:04 am
Location: NC

Post by Wahoo95 »

My 700 shoots best after about 40rds through it. It's shoots great for the next 60 or so before needing to be cleaned. Rimfire barels rarely need to be cleaned, however centerfire barrels are more likely to accumulate copper fouling which has a negative affect on accuracy.
Go Hoos!!!!
User avatar
smcharchan
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 2268
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 6:06 am
Location: VA

Post by smcharchan »

It can not be proven.

As a general rule, higher quality barrels (hand lapped, etc) that have a proper land and groove diameter do not experience a loss of accuracy with increased round count because they do not experience a build up contaminates in the bore.

There are exceptions, but I suspect that they are not significant enough to be able to prove anything.
User avatar
smcharchan
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 2268
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 6:06 am
Location: VA

Post by smcharchan »

Wahoo95 wrote:My 700 shoots best after about 40rds through it. It's shoots great for the next 60 or so before needing to be cleaned.
Remington barrels (700, 7600, 7400, 750, etc) are notorious for having rough bores. You may want to consider "tubs final finish". I have used it and am very happy with it. On the three guns I used it on it made my group size more consisted and made the gun easier to clean.

A hand lapped or hammer forged barrel would have eliminated the problem of rough bores, but that is a story for another day...
Timberwolf
Silent Operator
Posts: 57
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 11:20 am
Location: This Solar System

Post by Timberwolf »

smcharchan wrote:
Wahoo95 wrote:My 700 shoots best after about 40rds through it. It's shoots great for the next 60 or so before needing to be cleaned.
Remington barrels (700, 7600, 7400, 750, etc) are notorious for having rough bores. You may want to consider "tubs final finish". I have used it and am very happy with it. On the three guns I used it on it made my group size more consisted and made the gun easier to clean.

A hand lapped or hammer forged barrel would have eliminated the problem of rough bores, but that is a story for another day...
And wear the barrel out so that you would have to invest in another one.
Certified Glock,Sig,S&W,Remington Armourer.

Nice try = You suck spelled different.

Proud member of WTFDTSG Club.
User avatar
silencertalk
Site Admin
Posts: 33978
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 8:31 am
Location: USA

Post by silencertalk »

smcharchan wrote:It can not be proven.
Do you mean, if you do the accuracy test with and without cleaning there will be no difference?

While we are discussing this, how about the voodoo of barrel break in? I break in my barrels but I don't believe it helps anything.
User avatar
silentobsession
Elite Member
Posts: 1258
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 4:24 pm

Post by silentobsession »

rsilvers wrote: While we are discussing this, how about the voodoo of barrel break in? I break in my barrels but I don't believe it helps anything.
I am very curious about this as well. I suspect we will not be able to come up with an answer either because there are so many people on either side of the argument.

GAP says to break them in. Noveske says there's no need. Different type of weapons, yes, but interesting nonetheless.
Timberwolf
Silent Operator
Posts: 57
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 11:20 am
Location: This Solar System

Post by Timberwolf »

Certified Glock,Sig,S&W,Remington Armourer.

Nice try = You suck spelled different.

Proud member of WTFDTSG Club.
User avatar
silencertalk
Site Admin
Posts: 33978
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 8:31 am
Location: USA

Post by silencertalk »

I think barrel makers have to pretend it matters as it further shows they are neurotic.

Noveske is extra cool for speaking the truth.

I do it just so I know it was done if I sell it to someone who cares. I once sold a $5000 rifle that I put 20 shots through it, and the buyer wants to know if I cleaned it each round or not.
User avatar
Mongo
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 4168
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 12:27 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Post by Mongo »

I agree, the break in clean 1-1 s--t is bull s--t. I agree with what Robert is saying as well , in that most barrel makers are there to tow the line and if you read McMillan's link above you will see that he is not afraid to tell it like it is.
Firearms Engineer for hire on piece work basis.
No job is too expensive :)
http://weaponblueprints.com/
User avatar
silencertalk
Site Admin
Posts: 33978
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 8:31 am
Location: USA

Post by silencertalk »

Cool.

Also, Cryo barrels == BS.
User avatar
Mongo
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 4168
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 12:27 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Post by Mongo »

rsilvers wrote:Cool.

Also, Cryo barrels == BS.
I never understood the Cryo s--t. Everything I had in all my Metallurgy classes would say this is bull s--t. Every time I ask one of the guys that does this process they can not tell me when is happening only that it "is better". So I always assume this was more horse s--t as well.
Firearms Engineer for hire on piece work basis.
No job is too expensive :)
http://weaponblueprints.com/
User avatar
smcharchan
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 2268
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 6:06 am
Location: VA

Post by smcharchan »

rsilvers wrote:
smcharchan wrote:It can not be proven.
Do you mean, if you do the accuracy test with and without cleaning there will be no difference?
Yessir! I am suggesting it would be impractical (in terms of rifles, calibers, and rounds required) if not impossible to prove that there is a statistically significant difference.
User avatar
silencertalk
Site Admin
Posts: 33978
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 8:31 am
Location: USA

Post by silencertalk »

Then there is no difference.
User avatar
no4mk1t
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1487
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2007 5:34 pm
Location: SC

Post by no4mk1t »

rsilvers wrote:
smcharchan wrote:It can not be proven.

While we are discussing this, how about the voodoo of barrel break in? I break in my barrels but I don't believe it helps anything.
It depends on what kind of barrels are under discussion. If you are talking about a Kreiger, Lilja, Hart, or some such high quality hand lapped barrel, then no, it doesn't help. The "break-in" has been done for you with the lead lap before you get the barrel.

Mass produced factory/military barrels do benefit from a break in whether it be from a shoot one, clean, shoot one procedure, or the firing of abrasive coated bullets ala Tubb. The end result is reduced copper fouling and sustained accuracy for a greater number of shots before cleaning is necessary. In reality, this will only matter to the target shooter who needs consistent accuracy for say 100 consectutive rounds or so between cleanings. The Fudd deer hunter who buys 2 boxes of ammo year will never know the difference.

Now that most mass producers have gone to hammer forging, I think you will see less of a need for break in on factory barrels as hammer forging produces a smoother bore for mass production.
"My choice early in life was either to be a piano-player in a whorehouse or a politician. And to tell the truth, there's hardly any difference.
Harry S. Truman
User avatar
smcharchan
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 2268
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 6:06 am
Location: VA

Post by smcharchan »

rsilvers wrote:Then there is no difference.
Well, I wouldn't say that. I would say it is incorrect to make a universal statement, as there are probably sufficient examples in the contrary to make a universal statement incorrect.

If someone asked me for advice about this I would probably say, "You will most likely not find a significant drop in accuracy as long as your bore isn't excessively dirty. Unfortunately, the only way to know if this is the case for your particular setup is to test it."
User avatar
PeteSB
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 164
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 3:23 pm

Post by PeteSB »

I can't add too much to this topic as I think the last two post pretty much nailed it.

Ultimately you're going to have to spend the time to get to know your rifle and understand there's a certain amount of art involved in coaxing out that last 5% of accuracy that most shooters will never see.
User avatar
NF Optics-Bill
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 9:37 am
Location: GA

Post by NF Optics-Bill »

smcharchan wrote:
rsilvers wrote:Then there is no difference.
Well, I wouldn't say that. I would say it is incorrect to make a universal statement, as there are probably sufficient examples in the contrary to make a universal statement incorrect."
I agree with the above. To make a blanket statement that a barrel doesn't need to be cleaned to contribute to accuracy is inaccurate. To what extent of accuracy are we talking about - you left that part out.

Benchrest shooters who are measuring groups to the 3rd and 4th decimal point will very much disagree with you that the accuracy effects can't be measured.

Field shooters on the other hand I can agree somewhat with what you are saying. I've currently got an XM-3 that I use for demo's etc, with over 900 documented rounds through it without cleaning - it'll still knock out a 1/2MOA or so group without too much difficulty. I know it will need to be cleaned eventually but I'm not planning to bother until I start seeing the accuracy drop off.
User avatar
silencertalk
Site Admin
Posts: 33978
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 8:31 am
Location: USA

Post by silencertalk »

My 500 round proposed test was only to make it 5 times easier for the other side to win but really I said some people clean before they hit 100 rounds.

I don't need many examples. I need just one example to the contrary.

I am willing to include bench rest into the test. Any demonstrated improvement in a statistically valid test would do.

So, take a 6mm benchrest shooter.

Fire 30 rounds on a clean barrel.

Fire 470 more rounds.

Do another 30 round group.

If the first group has a significantly lower (outside of the range of random chance) mean radius than the second group - I lose.

Of course a 6mm benchrest rifle only has a barrel like of 700 rounds so this would consume a barrel. I would prefer the test with a high-grade .308 tactical rifle as that is more of a practical application.

I have an idea since you are 900 rounds without cleaning...

Shoot a careful group of ideally 30 rounds but if you don't want to, then at least 10 - the more the better. Scan and post target.

Clean the rifle.

Fire a few fouler rounds.

Shoot another careful group. Scan and post results.

You could even make it the basis of a magazine article.
long-shot
Member
Posts: 45
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2008 8:41 am
Location: Missouri

Post by long-shot »

I absolutely love this thread. I used to shoot 500 rounds between cleaning because that's when enough crap built up on my crown that accuracy went away. Now I have to clean the crown every 150 rounds because I shoot with a suppressor (Cyclone K).

I would firmly argue that cleaning does more damage then shooting! I love the guys I shoot with in matches who pull out the cleaning gear as soon as the day is done while I throw my rifle in the trunk and drive away with a higher score.
User avatar
NF Optics-Bill
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 9:37 am
Location: GA

Post by NF Optics-Bill »

long-shot wrote: I would firmly argue that cleaning does more damage then shooting!
You don't have to firmly argue anything. Ask any barrel maker or gunsmith worth their salt and they'll tell you the same thing often with data to back it up.
User avatar
Remy1492
Silent Operator
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 11:10 pm
Location: Corpus TX

Post by Remy1492 »

long-shot wrote: I would firmly argue that cleaning does more damage then shooting! I love the guys I shoot with in matches who pull out the cleaning gear as soon as the day is done while I throw my rifle in the trunk and drive away with a higher score.
I of course clean my corrosive guns right away. Other rifles usually sit.

Part of the shooting experience IS the cleaning and tinkering.

My dad loves to fly fish. I am convinced sometimes he'd rather sit there, prep flies and prep his gear on a nice sunny day, than go FISH!
Cleaning seems like a zen experience to bond with the gun for some guys. It is for me sometimes if I am not rushed. Other times I do a quick minimal clean to avoid rust or getting my cases, clothes dirty from gunpowder.
Post Reply