Breaking in barrel.

[dreddrockz]

Perhaps it does matter and perhaps not, but for now long it takes what harm can it do? Initial thorough clean is essential tho.

 

[purdeydog]

In the end after a good initial clean I shot it 10 times cleaning between each shot. I then shot it three times and cleaned, I did that 3 times.

I home load with 55g. MV was disappointing for some reason, so some load development checking to be done. Not sure if I like the rifle yet. Good trigger, but the stock is terribly flimsy. Got a few hours on the range tomorrow to stretch it’s legs a bit and see how it goes.

 

[wildrover77]

Breaking in is wasting ammunition, time and barrel life. You only need to speak to a metallurgist to learn that. Rifle/barrel makers suggest it to help you on the way to wearing out your barrel. It’s like tyre manufacturers telling you to do burn outs for the first 100 miles to break your tyres in

 

[Jack0106]

Breaking in is wasting ammunition, time and barrel life. You only need to speak to a metallurgist to learn that. Rifle/barrel makers suggest it to help you on the way to wearing out your barrel. It’s like tyre manufacturers telling you to do burn outs for the first 100 miles to break your tyres in

Really you guys don't do that? what about Blinker Fluid?

 

[ejg]

With an M12 I'd make all shots count, in 243 you might only have 1500-2000 and the rifle is in the bin.
My take, clean the barrel when unpacking, then zero and shoot.
edi

 

[Jack0106]

With an M12 I'd make all shots count, in 243 you might only have 1500-2000 and the rifle is in the bin.
My take, clean the barrel when unpacking, then zero and shoot.
edi

Seems kind of a waste to drop that money on a gun that could potentially be finished in 2 years if youre sometimes shooting targets.

 

[Island]

With an M12 I'd make all shots count, in 243 you might only have 1500-2000 and the rifle is in the bin.
My take, clean the barrel when unpacking, then zero and shoot.
edi

Is this relating to M12 barrels specifically?

 

[ejg]

No not relating to this type of barrel but we all know a barrel will only have a limited life span. A 243 will normally have less accurate life span than say a 308. The M12 is a rifle that can't be rebarrelled.. if she starts going off after x shots be it in a year or in 20 she goes in the bin.
edi

 

[Ronin]

Press fit barrels

 

[ejg]

Sauer and Mauser had the chance to design an equal to a T3 but they rather opted to build the equivalent of a throw away Bic lighter. I lost all respect for the company.
Edi

 

[Muir]

Some if not all modern rifles are guaranteed 1 MOA from the factory. Would you not say that the break in period is done before you even get the rifle. Never under stood the whole 5 shots clean/ 10 shots clean etc

It's a myth. The whole deal was started by a US barrel maker to get guys to shoot out their new bench rest barrels faster. It's pretty well documented. People carry it on because it adds a layer of mystique to the shooting -a ritual that calls out the Red gods of accuracy to bless their rifle. I average about four new factory rifles a year -different chamberings and styles. I have never 'run in' a barrel. I don't own any inaccurate rifles.~Muir

 

[NigelM]

It's a myth. The whole deal was started by a US barrel maker to get guys to shoot out their new bench rest barrels faster. It's pretty well documented. People carry it on because it adds a layer of mystique to the shooting -a ritual that calls out the Red gods of accuracy to bless their rifle. I average about four new factory rifles a year -different chamberings and styles. I have never 'run in' a barrel. I don't own any inaccurate rifles.~Muir

I'm sorry Muir, but I have to respectfully disagree.

I have broken in a great many custom barrels for a UK gunmaker as well as many of my own. They have been a mix of chrome molly and 416 stainless, custom made rather than factory by a very good UK barrel maker and are hand lapped to a good standard prior to fitting.

The first patch that goes through following proof always has traces of metal swarf on it. You usually need to look under a magnifying glass to see it (sometimes not) but that swarf is steel from the inside of the barrel. CM tends to be worse than SS and takes longer to break in. The brake in process for us is shoot one/clean one until no more swarf is visible under the glass.

If you don't clean that swarf out after each shot it just gets pushed down the barrel by the next shot. Steel on steel is not a good combination for forcing down a barrel under pressure and if not removed leaves it's little marks on the inside.

Factory barrels are not hand lapped to the same degree and the few I have broken in (Remington and Tikka) both showed swarf in the first 5 or more shots to some degree. The only barrels I have never experienced swarf from are Bartleins - also the easiest to clean of the lot which is no coincidence.

Now you can argue that not breaking in and allowing the swarf to mark the inside of the barrel has no discernible effect on the accuracy of the rifle and you may be right, but why then are we so careful with our cleaning rod/jag/brush materials to ensure the metals are always much softer than the barrel steel and why do we only use bullets with a softer metal jacket than the barrel steel?

There is real physical evidence that the break in process is needed if you want to get the best out of a barrel, it's really not just a myth.

 

[Island]

No not relating to this type of barrel but we all know a barrel will only have a limited life span. A 243 will normally have less accurate life span than say a 308. The M12 is a rifle that can't be rebarrelled.. if she starts going off after x shots be it in a year or in 20 she goes in the bin.
edi

True. Barrels are indeed a consumable item, but I would argue most strenuously that 1500-2000 rounds "usable life" is WILDLY pessimistic wrt .243W, particularly in a stalking rifle.

A close friend of mine (a professional stalker) has recorded what must be nigh on 30k rounds through his Sako and it still has life in it yet. OK, you might not win any BR matches with it but it is more than sufficient for stalking.

My last Mannlicher had nearly 2.5k through it when I traded it and it would still hold sub-MOA with Federal, RWS or Sako 100gr ammo. The reason for shifting it on was nothing to do with accuracy but simply because the I did not find the double set-trigger particularly comfortable.

My current Mannlicher has had, in my ownership, nigh on 1k through it (unknown round count prior to my ownership, but looking at the overall condition it can't have been much more than 500 or so) and if I do my bit right with the homeloads it will hold 0.5MOA or slightly less with boring monotony. Equally it will spit Federal, RWS or Sako factory rounds at sub-MOA all day.

I have yet to meet, or talk to, anyone who has "shot out" a stalking rifle barrel under normal conditions of use.

If you are going to be loading up max-pressure rounds using a double-base powder and rattling 100 of them downrange in rapid succession each week then you are going to fry any barrel, regardless of the caliber, rifle model or manufacturer.

But for a stalking rifle? Ease (or even possibility) of barrel replacement would not be a driving factor in my decision making process.

Even at 100 rounds annually, and taking your 2000-round life figure, that equates to 20 years use. At a price point of what? £1200 for the Impact, that equates to effectively £60 a year that the rifle has "cost" you. Not a lot in the grand scheme of things.

I understand fully that there are those for whom ease of barrel replacement will be a factor, but I would hazard a guess that the majority of stalkers never consider it (nor indeed need to consider it). Obviously, if the rifle is to be dual purpose (stalking and regular target use) then it may have to be taken into consideration.

 

[ejg]

I am now just buying two shot out remington rifles 243 and 22-250. Just re-barrelled a 243 that had a rusted up barrel. Actually only have a few rifles in our safe that are on their first barrel. It is all fine if you buy a rifle that you actually don't intend to shoot but for those who demand good precision, and shoot a lot be it at fox or maybe even deer then the likelihood of a re-barrel comes in very handy.
What is actually the advantage for a customer in buying one of these throw away rifles over say a T3? Or is the advantage only with the manufacturer who makes a larger profit and can't wait to sell you another.
A shot out or bad shooting or rusted barrelled rifle still has a value. Who is going to invest in a proper bedding job if you might only have 1000 shots left in the life of the rifleand action. Who is going to purchase an aftermarket stock or optimise a rifle to suit the owner better if there is an end so close?
We have quite a large customer base, also local fox shooters, two guys for example shot out two 223 rifles in under 4 years, just guys who love shooting.
Then their is a possibility that a barrel is just duff and not up to expectation. Mauser will just send you away and you are stuck with the Problem.
Recently I shot an M12 in 308 for an owner who was not so happy with the performance, maybe 1500-2000 rounds down after only a few years. Recon he will try sell it to the next unfortunate guy... Who would want that rifle?

edi

 

[Muir]

I'm sorry Muir, but I have to respectfully disagree.

I have broken in a great many custom barrels for a UK gunmaker as well as many of my own. They have been a mix of chrome molly and 416 stainless, custom made rather than factory by a very good UK barrel maker and are hand lapped to a good standard prior to fitting.

The first patch that goes through following proof always has traces of metal swarf on it. You usually need to look under a magnifying glass to see it (sometimes not) but that swarf is steel from the inside of the barrel. CM tends to be worse than SS and takes longer to break in. The brake in process for us is shoot one/clean one until no more swarf is visible under the glass.

If you don't clean that swarf out after each shot it just gets pushed down the barrel by the next shot. Steel on steel is not a good combination for forcing down a barrel under pressure and if not removed leaves it's little marks on the inside.

Factory barrels are not hand lapped to the same degree and the few I have broken in (Remington and Tikka) both showed swarf in the first 5 or more shots to some degree. The only barrels I have never experienced swarf from are Bartleins - also the easiest to clean of the lot which is no coincidence.

Now you can argue that not breaking in and allowing the swarf to mark the inside of the barrel has no discernible effect on the accuracy of the rifle and you may be right, but why then are we so careful with our cleaning rod/jag/brush materials to ensure the metals are always much softer than the barrel steel and why do we only use bullets with a softer metal jacket than the barrel steel?

There is real physical evidence that the break in process is needed if you want to get the best out of a barrel, it's really not just a myth.

We will continue to disagree on this one.~Muir