That chrome barrel lining is a great idea, I wish everyone would offer that.

Accuracy Test

That's baloney, showing the group sizes taking off like that after 750 shots or so in the .22-250. Maybe if they never cleaned the bore. And shot it as fast as they could load it.

More baloney is that chromed barrels are not generally capable of fine accuracy in the first place. Some do okay but it's a crap shoot I wouldn't spend money on. It's an apples and oranges comparison...JMO.

Goodness....my 22/250 must have died a while back, and I didn't notice.

And has any 223 WSSM ever shot under 1 inch to start with. I though they were all all knackered on delivery.

That graph is the biggest load of marketing lard I've heard in a while.

For varmint accuracy and given normal cleaning, most 22-250s can be counted on to give 5-6000 rounds before starting to taper off. And then, it's a gradual process -- not like what the chart shows.

JB, my WSSM shoots under half an inch. Even with me shooting it.

At 250 rounds, I still can't really detect any barrel erosion - and this is a regular stainless barrel, without any chrome lining. I don't shoot it like a p-dog gun, of course, but I can assure you, the sky is not falling. FWIW, Dutch.

The 22-250 control barrel is "carbon" steel. Hardly a fair comparison. I wonder what the accuracy decay curves for "chrome moly" and "stainless steel" barrels look like. rollinghills

Seems to me like I recal reading something somewhere about some work the military had done testing barrel life and the results were that 308 velocity loads (2,600-2,800fps) gave about a 10,000 shot life and loads running from 3,500 to 4,000 fps cut it in half to about 5,000 rounds.

I would guess that winchester used the same technology of FN Herstal with the chrome lined bores. I have one of the SPR rifles in 308, chrome lined bore. Thing is crazy accurate. Federal Gold Medal 168s and a MKIV M3 scope really put it on groundhogs. Way out. Just too heavy to carry around.

JB747 THE 223WSSM SHOOTS JUST AS GOOD AS ANY
22-250. DON'T CONFUSE WINCHESTERS SLOPY WORK WITH THE INHERINT ACCURACY OF THE 223WSSM.

Kevin Weaver just finshed my new 223 wssn. He built it on a mod 70 action with a 26" 1-14 #2 fluted by Panor. We are still in the barrel breakin and load development stage. It just fired a 4 shot group with 40gr Nosler BTs over 46grs of Varget at 4406 fps into a sub .4 inch goup at 100yd.
We are going to work up the 52 TSX for whittail after we are satisfied with the coyote loads.
It should only shoot better as the barrel shoots in.
Dr B

Another "Major" load of bullshit.

quote:

Originally posted by HP Shooter:
Another "Major" load of bullshit.

Do you have any facts too prove it, ASSHOLE?

I just presented labratory data, using controlled conditions, too prove my statement, what do you have?

WOW....

a totally unbiased 'scientific' experiment undertaken by a manufacturer who provides NO information about the actual conditions and processes under which the experiment was conducted...

I'm having trouble getting off my knees from praisin' the Lord for this most valuable information... (thank you Lord)... a key aspect of scientific research is that sufficient onformation is provided to reproduce the experiment...

Yeah... I'm convinced....



not...

What a major load of crap...

quote:

Originally posted by MajorCaliber:

quote:

Originally posted by HP Shooter:
Another "Major" load of bullshit.

Do you have any facts too prove it, ASSHOLE?

I just presented labratory data, using controlled conditions, too prove my statement, what do you have?

If that is what you think "laboratory data, using controlled conditions" is, your credibility (whatever you have) is all gone to shit.

Where are the details of the loads used? Where are the detailed data tables showing each single group with MV, number of shots in group, extreme spread and std deviation? How about throat length measurements every X rounds, so we can try to correlate that to accuracy loss? I could go on, but I think people here who actually collect and analyze data for a living get the point.

This is about as far as one can get from a serious study, and only fools fall for it.

As far as Brownings findings being a load of crap, I doubt it. I find no reason to believe that a chrome lined bore wouldn't substantially outlast a conventional barrel. Especially in this case where the cartridges are comperable in terms of capacity and velocity.

Further, just because WE don't know the all the conditions and data associated with this test, we shouldn't assume that it's marketing crap. Get a grip, this is Brownings website not the pages of Precision Shooting. I think it would be helpful to at least ask them about their findings before calling them charlatans.

I will confess to being skepticle after seeing the 22/250 go to crap after 700 rounds. It seems to me that they may have stacked the test somewhat to help their baby.

Gabe

quote:

Originally posted by papaschmud:
I find no reason to believe that a chrome lined bore wouldn't substantially outlast a conventional barrel... [] ...seems to me that they may have stacked the test somewhat to help their baby.
Gabe

Exactly... are they testing chome lined bores, or are they really comparing the different chamberings under the same conditions...

You've actually confirmed that publicising their findings as 'research' is crap... don't have to ask them... Their own press release says it all... hype, bullshit, call it what you will, it ain't scientific research.... I'll go with bullshit...

quote:

Originally posted by papaschmud:
It seems to me that they may have stacked the test somewhat to help their baby.

Gabe

Anyone who "stacks the deck" in what is supposed to be a scientific, impartial test is guilty of fraud. Plain and simple. I don't give a damn if Browning's name is all over it. Fraud is fraud.

Is this "test" supposed to compare a .22-250 to a .223 WSM, or a chrome-lined bore to an unlined bore? It is impossible to draw any conclusions on either if the variables are uncontrolled.

I have shot a friend of mines super shadow in 223WSSM. I can't say anything about barrel life, but it is a 1/2 MOA rifle with factory loads sorted for bullet runout.

Browning quote..."The 223 and 243 WSSM cartridges are said to “burn up†barrels in as little as 300 rounds. Nothing could be further from the truth. Test results show that even in non-chromed barrels, the wear performance of WSSM calibers is equal to the beloved 22-250."

Then why do they feel the need to chrome plate for the WSSM's but not the 'equal' 22-250 which they also chamber guns for?

Spin, pure and simple; Browning BS. A marketing ploy to counteract the internet chat and hope that more guns will fly off dealer shelves.

I have a Browning model 1885 in 22-250 Rem that still shoots tiny groups after thousands of rounds of handloads. It is a chrome moly barrel. If it only gave 4" groups at 100 yards I'd take it out of my gun vault and use it as a fence post!

quote:

Originally posted by HP Shooter:
Another "Major" load of bullshit.

Well said friend.....I wish I'd said that!!!

Wow, things you learn... Lets put our scientist hat on and look at it...

Barrel wear is a function of pressure and the material going down the bore. I guess it doesn't matter how the cartridge is shaped.

Chrome barrels will last longer than none chromed barrels, but twice? Not likely. Military went to chrome barrels in the second runs of the M16 at the request of Army Ordinance to keep pressures under control (actually to keep fouling under control, thereby reducing pressures which tended to pop the M16's barrels like opening a can of Bud) With history in mind, and knowing the specs of the WSSM's, I believe the move to chrome was more than likely to prevent blowups rather than any intrinsic accuracy or barrel life concerns.

It is unlikely that a manufacturer will spend more money on their product for no reason, they may; however, camoflauge that reason.

John

Some facts on barrel life that I have used;

I totally wore out a 22/250 winchester factory barrel shooting kangaroos in 1100 rounds
Ditto a Ruger 270 barrel in 1800 rounds
A Remington 222 has had 3000 + rounds under similar conditions and shows little wear.

When I shot Fullbore about 20 years ago chrome lined 308 barrels from the same source outlasted unlined barrels by at least twice.

quote:

Originally posted by HP Shooter:

Anyone who "stacks the deck" in what is supposed to be a scientific, impartial test is guilty of fraud. Plain and simple. I don't give a damn if Browning's name is all over it. Fraud is fraud.

I don't think they are claiming the test as a comparison of cartridges. I read it as a comparison of systems. All they are trying to support is that a WSSM with a chrome barrel is at least as long lasting as a 22/250 with a standard barrel. Yes, it's apples to oranges, but who cares?

I know of no chromed 22/250's being factory produced, and both Browning and Winchester's WSSM's are chromed. So they are actually comparing the systems available to us in the real world vs. the theoreticle difference between the two calibers in identicle rifles.

Fraud, I think not. Reality perhaps.

Gabe

Owwww, Papa, now why did you have to insert reason into this thread?

The boys had a perfectly good internet style lynch-mob going again....

For the life of me, I can't figure these guys out. They worship the ground the Swift shoots over, heap adolation on the 240 Wby, but the WSSM's with essentially the same case capacities are nothing but evil throat burning devil-spawn.....

I suppose that's why we are called gun nuts? JMO, Dutch.

Reckon I'll have to bury my M70 actioned 22-250, re-barreled over 30 yrs ago with thousands of rounds through the Douglas premium barrel, still showing supberb accuracy although it is long since worn out. Guess the old 30X Unertl has gotta go too for something with a lot of knobs and plastic on it too. I won't see the next 30 yrs, but send me a smoke signal and let me know how many short mags are still here.

I've never had a WSSM nor will I. Never had a chrome lined barrel either. (oops does a shotgun count). I do currently own a factory MKX barreled action in 22-250. When it was new it shot .75MOA. At last count it had fired close to 9000 rds. Groups are still sub MOA.

The biggest issue I have with the data is the concept that a rifle will go from a 1" rifle to a 4" in a matter of 200 rds for either the carbon or chrome barrel. Well benchrest shooters really push the envelope pressure wise and they worry about .01" of accuracy changes. The guys I know start worrying about their rifles at 1500 or so. Then they just set back and rechamber and shoot another 1500. Since that is stainless does that make it better than chrome???

If you want to compare something you should only change one issue. So the WSSM should be shot in both barrels or the 22-250 in both. Changing two issues at once doesn't allow you to draw any valid conclusions. Is it the barrel or WSSM vs 22-250 causing the change.

Since the WSSM, 22-250, swift etc.all hold close to the same powder. Loaded the same and fired the same I would expect the same barrel life in the same type barrel. I also don't doubt that done correctly a chrome lined barrel would last longer. More or less accurate? This data didn't address it.

The major piece that I feel puts the entire matter in question is both barrels going away over a 200 shot range.

quote:

Originally posted by Joe Young:
Reckon I'll have to bury my M70 actioned 22-250, re-barreled over 30 yrs ago with thousands of rounds through the Douglas premium barrel, still showing supberb accuracy although it is long since worn out. Guess the old 30X Unertl has gotta go too for something with a lot of knobs and plastic on it too. I won't see the next 30 yrs, but send me a smoke signal and let me know how many short mags are still here.

Old and worn out?

Nice group joe young!!!! I suppose the liberals in canada could make a graph showing they are not stealing crooked thieves too!

quote:

Originally posted by Dutch:
I can't figure these guys out. They worship the ground the Swift shoots over, heap adolation on the 240 Wby, but the WSSM's with essentially the same case capacities....
Dutch.

If the WSSMs have the same capacities and are operated at the same pressures as the .220 Swift and the .240 Weatherby, why wouldn't they burn barrels out at the same rate?

And doesn't the .22-250 have slightly less capacity than the Swift? So couldn't one expect it to have slightly greater barrel life than the Swift and anything else of the same capacity of the Swift? Or is there some "Brand magic" going on here?

When they make one statement of 'fact' - that a .22/250 will go from 1" groups, to 4" groups after firing around 800 rounds (we all know that is bullshit), the rest of the test is bullshit as well.

Deliberate misrepresentation to sell product.

If someone would fire 200 rounds as fast as they coulsd shoot them,how long would the rifleing last ?

quote:

Originally posted by Dutch:

evil throat burning devil-spawn.....

Gabe

quote:

Originally posted by HiWall:
When they make one statement of 'fact' - that a .22/250 will go from 1" groups, to 4" groups after firing around 800 rounds (we all know that is bullshit), the rest of the test is bullshit as well.

Deliberate misrepresentation to sell product.

Dutch? papa? MajorBSer? Comments?

quote:

Originally posted by HP Shooter:

quote:

Originally posted by HiWall:
When they make one statement of 'fact' - that a .22/250 will go from 1" groups, to 4" groups after firing around 800 rounds (we all know that is bullshit), the rest of the test is bullshit as well.

Deliberate misrepresentation to sell product.

Dutch? papa? MajorBSer? Comments?

800 rds without cleaning, would probably do it!

It depends entirely on how the test was conducted. If it was a "steady fire" regimen, I would not doubt it.

I can burn out a 22-250 in 150 rounds, guaranteed. Just give me a rifle with a detatchable magazine and a bunch of loaded replacement mags, and let me have-at. Thirty minutes later, when the red-hot glow has subsided, she'll be toast. Heck, she might not be straight enough to make a good tomato stake!

Or, I can make it last thousands of rounds by shooting one round an hour.

Browning probably chose a regimen where the chroming shines, and they don't have 800 hrs to do a test. So, it was probably fairly rapid fire. When you get a barrel nice-an-hot, things can go to heck in a hurry. Can you burn a 22-250 to a crisp in 800 rounds? Of course.

The most surprising thing to me, is that the chromed barrel performed as poorly as it did, comparitively. JMO, Dutch.

I was taught in the military that chrome lining increases the life of a machinegun barrel 300%

probably does.........ever try to shoot a prairie dog with a machine gun ?

quote:

Originally posted by skb2706:
probably does.........ever try to shoot a prairie dog with a machine gun ?

No, I prefer a howitzer

quote:

Originally posted by skb2706:
probably does.........ever try to shoot a prairie dog with a machine gun ?

FRONT TOWARD ENEMY