Simon Culver
Active Member
Can anyone give me any top tips about cleaning/ shooting in a new barrel?
Cleaning/ Shooting in a new Barrel
- Thread starter Simon Culver
- Start date
Moray Outfitting
Well-Known Member
This is as 'heated' a topic as the ones on cleaning! Same caveat as on the cleaning thread - it's your rifle and your choice. No 'Jihad' required if views do not exactly match yours! ( anyone know if there's a Youtube of Emo Philips? the US comedian and his 'die heretic' skit? )
Mike Norris posted about a year back regards barrel break-in. To put it mildly, not everyone agreed, but perhaps a worthwhile read. I think it was in reply on an existing thread.
If you've taken delivered of your custom rifle with match grade Lija etc barrel - then almost certainly the barrel will already be 'broken in'. The purpose of 'breaking in' is to condition the surface of the bore with a viw to obtaining one or more of the following - consistency, ease of cleaning, accuracy, preferred pressure and so on. By firing one shot through a pristine barrel, thoroughly cleaning back to pristine state and repeating, you are influencing the bore surface - smoothing inconsistencies and the like.
How can 'soft' copper affect 'hard' steel? Well once things are travelling at 3x speed of sound, high pressure in the tens of tons, hot gasses way up there and so forth it doesn't sound quite so incredible. Why clean each time - so the surface you want to affect is the one you work - not the layer of material left on it by the last shot. So it needs cleaning back to bore each time. Ross Seyfried in the 80's noted that a very light oiling of the bore can assist, but that seems counter intuitive.
Any system of shoot x, then shoot y number of rounds then you're done kind of leap-frogs the intended purpose. You shoot until the desired effect is achieved. ( all this assuming you buy into break in theology - many do not ).
If I am doing it, I fire one, clean - and when cleaning 'feel' what the bore is telling me. Often there's a hesitantion about 6-9" ahead the chamber and may be in other spots. As the process continues, these hesitations decline and may vanish completely or remain at a level so fine you are happy with it.
As a final check when I think I'm there, I'll fire one. Put a clean white patch down the bore and stop it 1-2cm short of the crown - then have a look at the bore with a good light and observe how fouled it is and general 'shine' from the bore.
Every rofle seems different and I've not found it possible to say Howa need X, Sako Y, Browning Z etc. Though Good Sako's work in 2-3 shots, Sauers seem fine straight off, Howa's 10-20 shots.
Mike mentioned this in his write -up and I honestly don't know why it should be, but from observation - you can do a break-in process at any stage in a barrel's life, but it never seems as effective as when done from new.
If anyone is now busy cleaning spittle from their screen because of any perceived insult, slight or heresy - it's your problem not mine!
Mike Norris posted about a year back regards barrel break-in. To put it mildly, not everyone agreed, but perhaps a worthwhile read. I think it was in reply on an existing thread.
If you've taken delivered of your custom rifle with match grade Lija etc barrel - then almost certainly the barrel will already be 'broken in'. The purpose of 'breaking in' is to condition the surface of the bore with a viw to obtaining one or more of the following - consistency, ease of cleaning, accuracy, preferred pressure and so on. By firing one shot through a pristine barrel, thoroughly cleaning back to pristine state and repeating, you are influencing the bore surface - smoothing inconsistencies and the like.
How can 'soft' copper affect 'hard' steel? Well once things are travelling at 3x speed of sound, high pressure in the tens of tons, hot gasses way up there and so forth it doesn't sound quite so incredible. Why clean each time - so the surface you want to affect is the one you work - not the layer of material left on it by the last shot. So it needs cleaning back to bore each time. Ross Seyfried in the 80's noted that a very light oiling of the bore can assist, but that seems counter intuitive.
Any system of shoot x, then shoot y number of rounds then you're done kind of leap-frogs the intended purpose. You shoot until the desired effect is achieved. ( all this assuming you buy into break in theology - many do not ).
If I am doing it, I fire one, clean - and when cleaning 'feel' what the bore is telling me. Often there's a hesitantion about 6-9" ahead the chamber and may be in other spots. As the process continues, these hesitations decline and may vanish completely or remain at a level so fine you are happy with it.
As a final check when I think I'm there, I'll fire one. Put a clean white patch down the bore and stop it 1-2cm short of the crown - then have a look at the bore with a good light and observe how fouled it is and general 'shine' from the bore.
Every rofle seems different and I've not found it possible to say Howa need X, Sako Y, Browning Z etc. Though Good Sako's work in 2-3 shots, Sauers seem fine straight off, Howa's 10-20 shots.
Mike mentioned this in his write -up and I honestly don't know why it should be, but from observation - you can do a break-in process at any stage in a barrel's life, but it never seems as effective as when done from new.
If anyone is now busy cleaning spittle from their screen because of any perceived insult, slight or heresy - it's your problem not mine!
ChesterP
Well-Known Member
This is as 'heated' a topic as the ones on cleaning! Same caveat as on the cleaning thread - it's your rifle and your choice. No 'Jihad' required if views do not exactly match yours! ( anyone know if there's a Youtube of Emo Philips? the US comedian and his 'die heretic' skit? )
Mike Norris posted about a year back regards barrel break-in. To put it mildly, not everyone agreed, but perhaps a worthwhile read. I think it was in reply on an existing thread.
If you've taken delivered of your custom rifle with match grade Lija etc barrel - then almost certainly the barrel will already be 'broken in'. The purpose of 'breaking in' is to condition the surface of the bore with a viw to obtaining one or more of the following - consistency, ease of cleaning, accuracy, preferred pressure and so on. By firing one shot through a pristine barrel, thoroughly cleaning back to pristine state and repeating, you are influencing the bore surface - smoothing inconsistencies and the like.
How can 'soft' copper affect 'hard' steel? Well once things are travelling at 3x speed of sound, high pressure in the tens of tons, hot gasses way up there and so forth it doesn't sound quite so incredible. Why clean each time - so the surface you want to affect is the one you work - not the layer of material left on it by the last shot. So it needs cleaning back to bore each time. Ross Seyfried in the 80's noted that a very light oiling of the bore can assist, but that seems counter intuitive.
Any system of shoot x, then shoot y number of rounds then you're done kind of leap-frogs the intended purpose. You shoot until the desired effect is achieved. ( all this assuming you buy into break in theology - many do not ).
If I am doing it, I fire one, clean - and when cleaning 'feel' what the bore is telling me. Often there's a hesitantion about 6-9" ahead the chamber and may be in other spots. As the process continues, these hesitations decline and may vanish completely or remain at a level so fine you are happy with it.
As a final check when I think I'm there, I'll fire one. Put a clean white patch down the bore and stop it 1-2cm short of the crown - then have a look at the bore with a good light and observe how fouled it is and general 'shine' from the bore.
Every rofle seems different and I've not found it possible to say Howa need X, Sako Y, Browning Z etc. Though Good Sako's work in 2-3 shots, Sauers seem fine straight off, Howa's 10-20 shots.
Mike mentioned this in his write -up and I honestly don't know why it should be, but from observation - you can do a break-in process at any stage in a barrel's life, but it never seems as effective as when done from new.
If anyone is now busy cleaning spittle from their screen because of any perceived insult, slight or heresy - it's your problem not mine!
Great answer. This is exactly how I have done mine from new. WRT the text in bold, it is surprising just how one can "feel" inconsistencies on a new barrel, but trust me, you can. When patching through (and here people all have their favourite concoctions....personally, I use Wipeout or M-Pro-7...used the latter for years for conditioning my barrels) and you start feeding the soaked patch up the bore, always using a boreguide, there will be one or more patches along the barrel where you feel a tight spot or hesitation to the patch going through.
I tend to keep shooting one, cleaning one, until this hesitation is gone (and the patch passes smoothly through the entire length) and then moving up to shooting 2 and patching. If on first patching I feel no hesitation, I move up to shoot 3 clean one, and so-on, until I can shoot 10 and patch through smoothly. Also, once when shooting 5 or more, as well as the smooth patching technique (feeling for tight spots where minute amounts of fouling can build up), I look for blue (copper) on the patch. I continue shooting limited numbers between cleans, until no blue is present, only the blackish powder residue fouling.
The idea I think (as Moray have indicated) is that tiny imperfections which are quick to attract fouling are removed or smoothed out and for this process to work, the barrel must be free of any copper wash up the barrel or other metallic fouling. The benefit longer term is to help the bore to be more resilient to copper fouling. By "polishing" the bore it is also said to make the throat area particularly more resistant to erosion by offsetting the effects for longer. Some cleaning compounds (like M-Pro 7) also contain conditioning compounds which help to maintain a pristine bore. Of course, the caveat here is that some barrels from new may benefit less than others from "break-in" and for some it may be unecessary. They way I look at it, it can't do any harm, and most likely is a good thing, so I have always done it. I was told that I didn't need to for my new Tikka but I went ahead anyway, and discovered that there were two tightish areas of the bore from new. One about 9 or 10 inches ahead of the chamber and one a few inches from the muzzle. They were both removed by gentle break in and cleaning.
It always amazes me on a seemingly perfect looking bore that you can feel these inconsistencies, but you can. The rifles I've broken in this way all shoot very well. I can't say whether that's because they're just good barrels, concentric and less prone to heat warping etc, or whether the break-in is simply helping consistency, but my experience of these rifles is that that they shoot better than the ones I've not taken this trouble with from the start.
People are free to do what they want with their own rifles, or criticise break-in as unnecessary but it's worked for me, as has regular barrel cleaning thereafter.
Last edited:
Moray Outfitting
Well-Known Member
ChesterP - thank you for the kind comments. Not unsurprisingly, i agree with what you wrote!
I had a couple of PM's regards 'wasting ammo, time and barrel life'. There's no reason this process cannot be combined with getting sights set up etc. There may be a few tweaks required as things progress - but rarely anything major. Definately not suggesting any kind of chore be made of it.
I had a couple of PM's regards 'wasting ammo, time and barrel life'. There's no reason this process cannot be combined with getting sights set up etc. There may be a few tweaks required as things progress - but rarely anything major. Definately not suggesting any kind of chore be made of it.
There was a page about this on the old Border Barrels website. From memory, they recommended the same routine as N.F.W.M. detailed above, filling the bore with Forrest Bore Foam for 24hrs each time before cleaning. They reckoned copper could build up on any minute burrs that were present in a new barrel.
Having this in mind, I wondered if a patch should be inserted from the muzzle end to help remove any copper that, I assume, would have built up on the breach side of the burr(s), or would the foam have completely dissolved it?
Having this in mind, I wondered if a patch should be inserted from the muzzle end to help remove any copper that, I assume, would have built up on the breach side of the burr(s), or would the foam have completely dissolved it?
ChesterP
Well-Known Member
Hence the reason for "feeling" the bore whilst patching out. Being too prescriptive isn't too helpful so generalising on specifically how many to fire and clean and using whatever solvent isn't quite as important imho as what you feel when patching out the bore and on what you find on the patches. 24 hrs with Forrest is probably overkill after firing a single shot....makes no sense for an efficient copper removal compound for a single shot where copper fouling may be little to non-existent. Yes, copper from bullet jackets can be stripped out from very small burrs and washed up the barrel, but shoot one/clean one until the bore feels smooth to patch out is usually a good indicator to up the number of shots. Personally, I would never insert a patch from the muzzle end. Even slight scratches to the crown can play havoc with accuracy. Breach side of lands wont have any coppering by definition and cleaning from breach end will take care of initial lands upwards.
I had a couple of PM's regards 'wasting ammo, time and barrel life'. There's no reason this process cannot be combined with getting sights set up etc. There may be a few tweaks required as things progress - but rarely anything major. Definatelynot suggesting any kind of chore be made of it.
It's amusing just why some consider a relatively few rounds in say 10,000 rounds of barrel life to be important LoL! You're spot on. Use the initial bedding in rounds for load development or whatever. No round shot should be ideally without purpose.
Last edited:
This bore conditioning is why the old quality barrel makers used to hone the bores. The honing using a lead lap removed the burrs if any and removed any tight spots and left a highly polished finish to the surface of the bore but of course this proceedure took time and cost money.
There also the be Ball Burnished proceedure that you could have done this only did the bore and not the grooves and I read something on this a little while ago. It was in relation to target rifle barrels but do not know if it is stilll being offered.
There also the be Ball Burnished proceedure that you could have done this only did the bore and not the grooves and I read something on this a little while ago. It was in relation to target rifle barrels but do not know if it is stilll being offered.
I may have not remembered everything correctly, but I am sure Border Barrels said the whole process took a week or more.
Other people have suggested to me that even slight crown damage is very critical.
Moray Outfitting
Well-Known Member
JTO - I remember the Border Barrel page you mention - it was Bore Foam they used, but they also were at pains to say that any solvent that worked was ok ( paraphrasing a bit ), but they liked Bore Foam and so had no reason to change.
Regards bore honing - I'm sure one of the barrel 'dudes' actually wrote that you seek a 'polish' only to the extent as visible to a 'rough eye' rather than perfect. As a perfect polish massively increased surface contact and bore friction - and this tended to happen 'catastrophically' - pushing up pressures etc. I do not recall who said it - so take with a pinch of salt - but it seemed to provide some foundation to the 'feel what a patch tells you' technique - in that probably was a good way to indentifiy a polished, but not too polished state.
I'm still sticking by the witchcraft element to all this though!
Regards bore honing - I'm sure one of the barrel 'dudes' actually wrote that you seek a 'polish' only to the extent as visible to a 'rough eye' rather than perfect. As a perfect polish massively increased surface contact and bore friction - and this tended to happen 'catastrophically' - pushing up pressures etc. I do not recall who said it - so take with a pinch of salt - but it seemed to provide some foundation to the 'feel what a patch tells you' technique - in that probably was a good way to indentifiy a polished, but not too polished state.
I'm still sticking by the witchcraft element to all this though!
hybridfiat
Well-Known Member
Once upon a time all barrels were cut rifled. The high end makers would then 'hand lap' each barrel with a lead plug cast into the bore with fine paste to remove the cutting marks and burrs, microscopic though they might be. Ordinary makers just put them out the door and 'running in' a barrel could lead to better accuracy and longer life as it would no longer get bad copper fouling on the rough bits.
Since then, button rifling and hammer forging have become the norm and a smooth even bore is pretty much guaranteed.
'Running in' a barrel IMHO is no longer needed.
Copper fouling still happens with newer barrels but not nearly to the same degree or with the speed that it once did.
Since then, button rifling and hammer forging have become the norm and a smooth even bore is pretty much guaranteed.
'Running in' a barrel IMHO is no longer needed.
Copper fouling still happens with newer barrels but not nearly to the same degree or with the speed that it once did.
Last edited:
Moray Outfitting
Well-Known Member
Hybridfiat ( great name - you have me wondering! )
Strictly correct - the hammer and button ( swage ) type processes potentially inflict less 'marking', but are not neccessarily utopia. The key remains - a. individual choice above all but b. no dogma about it being either essential in every case nor there being a set number of repetitions to get a result
I've seen all three types of barrel produce everything from a perfect bore through to dog-rough. Only disagree with your last sentence in the first paragraph on that basis.
Strictly correct - the hammer and button ( swage ) type processes potentially inflict less 'marking', but are not neccessarily utopia. The key remains - a. individual choice above all but b. no dogma about it being either essential in every case nor there being a set number of repetitions to get a result
I've seen all three types of barrel produce everything from a perfect bore through to dog-rough. Only disagree with your last sentence in the first paragraph on that basis.
Modern shooters, myself included, do not know what real jacketed fouling is like. We can only read about it as it was the early cupro nickle jacketed bullets that really fouled the bore and if what I have read is correct this was in the form of lumps of metalic fouling. The switch to Gilding metal jackets made this much less of a problem and the alloys used have been improved since then so we actually get little jacket fouling to deal with compared the the old days.
Similar threads
