Got into a discussion of rifle barrel quality and qualities over on the For Sale side and decided that it would make an interesting and informative subject for all us smiths. I'll start it off with my own experiences and observations.

Douglas: have done many dozen of these in calibers 17 thru 45, usually with good to great results. No dimension surprises and acceptable-to-splendid accuracy, AAMOF my most accurate barrel is a Douglas. Their practice of pushing the rifling button rather than pulling it, although less expensive, DOES sometimes result in microscopic chatter marks. They don't appear to affect accuracy or cleaning in any way so I've never worried about them. Have seen a few Douglas barrels 'walk' their groups but none that weren't fairly predictable.

Shilen: again have done many dozen of these, 17 thru 45, with results very, very similar to Douglas. I believe Shilen pulls their buttons and I've never noticed any chatter marks, their bores are normally quite smooth but no better IMO than Douglas. Their 40-cals are an odd size, tighter than most others. I have seen 2 Shilens that just wouldn't shoot even after multiple rethreading/rechambering for completely different rifles.

Hart: only one, OK but not Benchrest accuracy, smooth and consistent bore.

K&P: only one, 22LR bored VERY tight, had to use a 0.215" pilot, smooth, consistent and unlapped bore and quite accurate.

Green Mountain: have used several dozen of their buttoned barrels including some for the 10/22 and CFs from 17-45. All were smooth and consistent and accurate with no surprises but none were really 'hummers', at least not so far. I REALLY like the breech tulip on their octagon barrels. Have used only one of their cut-rifled barrels, a 50 I put on a Sharps 1874. Inside and outside were very smooth, unlapped but still very smooth. I didn't shoot it for accuracy but FWIW the rdnck Bill Bagwell reported stellar accuracy.

Bauska: Only 2, very rough inside, needed lapping very badly but still shot well if kept clean. No suprises but still needed lapping.

Ackley: only 3, all were very rough in rifling appearance like Bauskas and also equal in their performance. My 3-groove 17-cal Ackley would often 'smoke' bullets and would also smoke a jackrabbit into instant bunny hash. But looking down that rough bore would make a strong man flinch.

Lilja: no experience.

Lothar Walther: less than a dozen so far but have gotten GREAT accuracy. Bores are smooth and consistent and easy to clean, I will use them again.

Adams & Bennett: no experience.

Montana: no experience but will report back when I finish & shoot the first one in the shop.

Kreiger: less than a dozen so far in cals 28-35, very good in every way but no 'hummers' yet.

Badger: again less than a dozen in cals 40-50, very good in every way but no 'hummers' yet.

1903 Springfield military: some of the most accurate sporter-weight barrels around. Back when they were cheap it was the quickest way to a cheap-but-still-kickass iron-sight match rifle barrel on certain actions. Please be advised that A)the 2-grooves are generally just as accurate as the 4-grooves and B)many 2-groove barrels have been broached to 4-groove by dishonest dealers.

pre-64 M70: have done 4 of these on small-thread Mausers and Winchester high walls and am doing one on a 1903 Springfield now. I've used only the earlier cut-rifled barrels with the integral front sight ramp in cals 22-30 and have had very good results so far. Can't comment on the later broached barrels.

Mauser 7 & 8mm military: dimensions all over the place.

European 8mms: dimensions all over the place even when diffentiating between the early smaller 8mm bores and the later 'S' bores. Many have grooves measuring 0.328"!

We need your comments and experiences!
Regards, Joe

Thanks for this Joe.
Its a thread that I will keep reading.

Shilen's a couple of dozen from Brownells, never a problem with accuracy or cleaning, all shot moa or less.

Lilja - About 2 dozen, very easy to clean and again, sub moa on everthing I've done, 22-30 caliber.

Pac-Nor - 1 barrel used in 358 STA. Shot very well.

Benchmark - 6 used last month 22-30 cal. So far sub moa, used all 3 groove barrels, The verdict is still out but run very true in the lathe, very well polished. Have used a couple of these for 6.5x284 Norma's and shoot very very well!!!

Hart - 1 used in Hunter BR gun, very good, 1 used in 243 ACK. IMP. Fouled badly in 6 shots. Could have been the load.

Adams and Bennet - 1 used and the last one used.

I will continue at this point to use Benchmark or Lilja, not to say that others aren't as good, but when its working, why change. Give Benchmark a try, you won't be disappointed.

quote:

Originally posted by blagg:
Give Benchmark a try, you won't be disappointed.

Thanks for the contribution, Blagg. Do you have a link for the above?
Regards, Joe

I noticed John Burns and Greybull Precision use Benchmark bbls on their custom rifles. They must be good.

Dan Lilja uses Carpenter Steel if I recall correctly. Some builders say this metal is more crumbly. I have a few of these bbls and love them.

I'm not a builder but have quite a few and can attest to cleaning and accuracy:

Pac-nor: 1 30.06, easiest to clean, very accurate with multiple loads. Sub MOA rifle

Hart: 1 270, hardest to break-in, fouled terribly, very accurate with multiple loads. Sub MOA rifle.

Shilen: 2, 7Rem Mag, 300 RUM, clean easy, very accurate with multiple loads. Sub MOA rifle. The 7 is my first rifle ever to produce several one hole groups with Btips.

Lilja: 3, two 270s, one 270 AM, all 3 groove. Excellent in every way.

Broughton-Richards: 1, 270. Extraordinary bbl. Multiple sub MOA, hardly fouled after 8 shots. 2nd bbl to produce several one hole groups and settled on 0.137 @ 100 yards.

LW: 1, 6.5x284: Excellent bbl, cleaning, and accuracy.

Krieger: 2, 270 and 7mm Rem Mag. In works now.

Bartlien: 1, 6.5x284, in works now. This is a gain twist bbl: breech starts at 8.75 twist and ends 8 twist if I recall correctly.

Obermeyer: 1 in 308 on Sako action. Stopped working on it for now but again, another excellent barrel in every way.

2 barrels I really really want to try: Brux and Benchmark.

I would definitely use more Hart and Broughton barrels, as well as others.

You guys need to get a Rock Creek barrel.
Butch

quote:

Originally posted by butchlambert:
You guys need to get a Rock Creek barrel.
Butch

I forget that one...I'd like to try one of those too. Those are cut rifled, yes?

of those i have used, the only 2 i don't want to use again are shaw and bauska ..

everything else met expectations .. near moa works fine for me...
pacnor, douglas, shilen, badger, cutrifle, shaw, bauska, AB, enfield take offs, .311, and .308, MRC, and Mcgowen, springfield .308 barrels, win and rem take offs, cz take offs, most semidecent milsurps, lots of unknown german steel, and even most factory guns ... most russian barrels that have made it to me a crap, though 1891 with tikka/valmet barrels tend to shoot fine

guns are tools to me.. if i am building a bench gun, I'd call shilen and tell them what i'd like.

if i build a greater than .458, i call pacnor or mcgowen ... though these days, mcgowen get the nod.

barrels are barrels, for the large part ... just like rems and savages .. pick your poison and go to it

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
of those i have used, the only 2 i don't want to use again are shaw and bauska ..

everything else met expectations .. near moa works fine for me...
pacnor, douglas, shilen, badger, cutrifle, shaw, bauska, AB, enfield take offs, .311, and .308, MRC, and Mcgowen, springfield .308 barrels, win and rem take offs, cz take offs, most semidecent milsurps, lots of unknown german steel, and even most factory guns ... most russian barrels that have made it to me a crap, though 1891 with tikka/valmet barrels tend to shoot fine

guns are tools to me.. if i am building a bench gun, I'd call shilen and tell them what i'd like.

if i build a greater than .458, i call pacnor or mcgowen ... though these days, mcgowen get the nod.

barrels are barrels, for the large part ... just like rems and savages .. pick your poison and go to it

I've become a very big fan of the 3 groove bbls. I wish I had ordered a bunch in 7mm 3 groove when Greg still owned Broughton barrels.

Rock Creek barrels are cut rifled. Mike Rock is another barrel maker that learned at the knees of Boots Obermeyer. Mike is a metalurgist.
Butch

quote:

Originally posted by butchlambert:
Rock Creek barrels are cut rifled. Mike Rock is another barrel maker that learned at the knees of Boots Obermeyer. Mike is a metalurgist.
Butch

Well, why not just buy a bbl from Boots? His are cheaper, unless he raised his price.

For you that prefer a specific amount of lands and grooves and also land shape such as 5R or ratchet, or polygonal. It really doesn't matter. If you get a good barrel, you get a good barrel. The barrel makers make the different ones to cover what you ask for. Check Kreiger's website about 5R barrels. They find no advantage, but make them because their customers ask.
Butch

Doc, You can get a Benchmark in a 7mm 3 groove.

for Benchmark!

My second choice would be Shilen Select Match Sainless.

God Bless, Louis

quote:

Originally posted by butchlambert:
Check Kreiger's website about 5R barrels. They find no advantage, but make them because their customers ask.
Butch

Bartlien said the same thing. Here's what I have found (the exception is my 1 PacNor bbl): canted lands make for easier cleaning. Yes there is a demand for it and I think that's why Krieger finally started offering it. I spoke to Hart bbls about 2 weeks ago. At present, no intentions of ever offering any type of canted/Russian land. Krieger told me the same thing last year for the same argument...."there is no clear advantage."

Well, yes there is. Demand. That's good enough right there if you sell something and can make it.

quote:

Originally posted by youngoutdoors:
Doc, You can get a Benchmark in a 7mm 3 groove.

for Benchmark!

My second choice would be Shilen Select Match Sainless.

God Bless, Louis

I did a Google search awhile ago after posting on this thread. I didn't find a website for them. I did find a write up on them and saw that they offer both button and cut rifled bbls.

My idea of the perfect structured bbl: 3R grooves, with Obermeyer's land/groove dimensions of .010.

I have 2 Shilen select match bbls. Both shoot very well.

Curiously, I have talked with many custom rifle builders who, make many rifles then sell them, as opposed to taking specific customer orders only, and one in particular, in Texas, said he will no longer use Shilen barrels because of the continued concentricity issues he was having with them.

AFTER I bought my 2 Shilen barrels, I began to read and hear some fairly negative comments about Shilen going downhill for awhile, mass producing "custom bbls" so they were readily available at Midway, Brownells, and/or other suppliers. I talked with many builders who USED to use Shilen, then stopped. It really made me nervous.

But, I spoke with Shilen prior to purchasing 2 of his barrels and told him that they were going to be my FIRST custom barrels ever and I had very high expectations. Who knows, maybe he flagged my 2 barrels and made sure they were indeed top of the line.

I spoke to Lex on the phone some years ago. He is the one in TX that offered Shilen barrels at the time of my contact. This was after I had 2 more rifles built with Lilja barrels on them. I sent a couple of stocks to him for paint. We discussed Shilen barrels and he was the first to share with me his concerns about concentricity and how he was looking at other barrel makers.

I told him I was more than pleased with Dan Lilja's barrels and the builder's of my rifles were using more Lilja's than anything.

Next thing you know, Lex's website was updated offering only Lilja bbls. That's been a few years back. I guess, based on his site, he's still pleased with the Lilja barrels.

Doc,
It is funny how rumors like you are speaking of start. Shilen has been providing custom barrels to Brownells and others for many many years. How does that affect anything? Did you ask Lex what concentry has to do with it or are you just adding to the rumor mill?
Barrel makers don't make special barrels and if they knew one was special he would sell it to the very best shooter not somebody like you and I.
I think the worst thing a person can do is to post a rumor about something he thought he heard. If anybody has a problem with a product, they don't need to jump on the computer, they need to contact the maker and work it out.
Butch

JD I dont think they have a website, however you can do a search and come up with a phone number. They are in Arlington WA. They way I understand it they came from and were taught by Dan Lilja. They know their barrels.

mailto:benchmarkbarrels@yahoo.com

quote:

Originally posted by butchlambert:
I think the worst thing a person can do is to post a rumor about something he thought he heard.

I can think of many things much much worse a person can do. But, I know what I heard. I don't "think" I heard it.

Regardless, I'm not spreading rumor that isn't already widespread, as I read and heard it many years ago and in fact spoke with Shilen about it. He simply said, "we all try to cut each other's throats."

Other rumors were that all Savage rifles wore Shilen bbls.

I was doing my own research and when you have dozens of people say a certain barrel is either a shooter or it's not, I think it applies to all makes. I have no problem with Shilen. Both of mine shoot extremely well and I'd buy more.

My post here is not going to hurt Shilen one bit. As to the concentricity issue the builder had, who am I to debate that point or ask for clarity when I'm not a riflesmith, just a customer doing research trying to make a decision. My assumption was that Shilen was working more towards quantity in lieu of quality, like Ford truck's philosophy of flooding the market with their F series trucks and paying less attention to detail and quality.

When I call and/or email rifle builders and ask very specific questions on what components they use and I find that many are no longer using Shilen for whatever reason, then I don't think that is spreading rumor. They have their reasons, and I'm not going to debate them or cajole them into using Shilen because I have 2 that are excellent.

If you are directing your comment about me personally having a problem with Shilen and jumping on the computer about it, going on to say that they need to contact the maker and work it out, well I did, as previously mentioned.

You have a PM!
Butch

Butch,

I'll tell you what I directly observed with Shilen barrel concentricity.

The barrels as received did not have the outside concentric with the bore. The problem appeared to be that the ends had been prepped for taper turning and grinding by hand drilling for a center. The center taper was not concentric with the bore.

Not a big deal to a good machinist, except to the guy that is in a hurry to keep his costs down. What it amounts to is that it takes a lot more time to get the barrel centered in the lathe to chamber it. The outside is not close. Typically was only within about .020". The tapered centers are not right, so can't center the barrel on centers to square it up or thread it.

To get the barrel on, you had to put a precision rod (or reamer pilot)into the bore and indicate from that, or do a rough center based on the drilled centers, face the ends off, and then recenter accurately on the bore.

Lilja, Pac-Nor, Krieger, the outside is near perfect with the bore. Can rough indicate in off that, and then final indicate on the bore. Saves 2 to 10 minutes or more, and that's $10 to $20 more in your pocket at the end of the day in a production shop.

Not a big deal to the low volume and meticulous custom builder, the barrel quality is good and a few extra minutes don't count on a $5000 rifle. The extra minutes do count on a $100 chamber/thread/crown production shop barrel.

Douglas has had the same problem at times. Their barrels are turned roughly anyway, so you still have to grind and finish.

I've taken unturned blanks and sent them to McGowen to turn and polish. Their work has been very good for me. But, I heard the same eccentricity complaint about them from a very good builder, he had some bad turnings from them. They traced it to an air pressure problem, and they were using some kind of an air actuated chuck to clamp the barrels in the grinder and pressure surges were affecting it.

dave

We have used barrels from Shilen, Hart, Krieger, Lilja and othe top makers.

All the barrels shoot extremely well in our rifles.

One compnay that we have barrels from and would never use again - just as well, as they have gone out of business - are Blackstar barrels.

Personally I tend to lean towards Lilja barrels for the larger calibers - for no reason than we have many of his barrels, in several calibers. And without exception, and regardless of caliber, they all shoot EXTEMELY well.

My two hunting rifles, in 375/404. One has a Shilen barrel and one has a Lilja barrel.

Both rifles have been used by many hunters to shoot literally 100's of African game animals.

They still shoot 1/2" or less at 100 yards using our Walterhog bullets.

Following is my sighting in target for this year's hunt.

I load my ammo a couple of months before we go, and always fire a 3 shot group to check.

Past year's groups are no different than this one.

I think care in assembling the rifle has a lot to do with its final accuracy.

quote:

Originally posted by butchlambert:
You have a PM!
Butch

So do you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Dave, good post. Thanks for a confirmation.

My Obermeyer barrels arrived rough turned as well.

Excellent post Dave.

I got deeply into the discussion in the classifieds and only have this to offer, based on my esperience with installing hundreds of barrels and getting feedback from those clients.

I will not use a Shaw barrel, the ones I had on my rifles and others, were great shooters for about 20 rounds and then it took a week of daily scrubbing with Sweet's to get the copper out. I personally returned five of them and got my money back. Good customer service by the way.

I will not use a Pac-Nor again. I put one on my 22-250 and when I went to clean it, there was a noticeable loose spot about 8" from the muzzle. I sent it back and they refused to admit there was a problem.

I have NEVER had a problem with a Shilen barrel. They are excellent barrels and they have excellent customer service.

I have used Lilja, Krieger, Hart, Schneider, Rock, Bartlein, and Douglas. I may have forgotten a few. Oh yeah, Bauska

The barrel mentioned in the ad was not on my reccomend list. The client, a high-power shooter, and a good one, ordered a few of them because they were on a close-out and were cheap. You spends your money and you get what you pay for.

In retrospect, I understand that ER Shaw barrels are being made by a newer company than before.

I understand what you are saying Dave, but since I don't chamber in the steady rest or between centers it is not an issue.
Butch

Butch,

I presume you're chambering with the barrel through the headstock and using a spider to center the muzzle at the outside end of the headstock?

What are you using in the bore to indicate the barrel in? Particularly if the center taper on the bore is not concentric with the bore?

What I usually do on small barrels, is turn the barrel on centers, and turn a concentric collar each end. Then, put the barrel through the tailstock, indicate in each end using the concentric turning. It's easier than trying to use a reamer pilot and I don't have rods made for each bore. I've thought if I did a lot of work, it would be worthwhile to invest in accurately ground rods to fit snugly into the bore to indicate from.

My lathe headstock is quite small, so on the large octagon barrels I usually do, I have to turn the barrel on centers, and chamber in the steadyrest. No other way around it.

dave

FWIW I too have noticed concentricity issues with Shilen if using their factory center holes, but since I always cut off the ends (both ends) it's not usually a problem.

One of the 2 Shilens I've seen that wouldn't shoot had actually been personally delivered back to Shilen and hand-lapped by the younger Shilen. Sporter-weight stainless originally in 280 on a LR Mauser, later a 7x57 on another LR and then a 7x57 on a SR Mauser. 1.5-2.5 MOA at best. I still use Shilens though, a bad barrel can occur with any maker.

Also FWIW, both Boots Obermeyer and Bob Snapp learned their barrelmaking from Bill Prator at Trinidad.

I've used about a dozen Snapp rebores over the years in cals 35-45 and have always been extremely happy with the results.

Ron Smith: only one, a stainless gain-twist 32-40 on a high wall. The most accurate single-shot rifle barrel I've ever owned. Nowadays he even makes CM barrels and IMO makes the most accurate barrels I personally have ever seen perform.
Regards, Joe

how to Halfmoon barrels compare?

Red

Dave,
I'm like JD, I cut the ends of the barrel off. The breech after lapping is a little sloppy and I also don't want 4" of straight on the big end. A brief note on how I chamber. I have sets of Deltronic pins for the bore sizes that I chamber. 25 pins in each set .0001" between ea. pin. I have a 2 catheads, one on each side of the headstock. After warming up my late I indicate the pins. I rough drill the chamber. I then use a Mitutoyo 504-513 .0001 indicator. It has a .500 long probe, but a real thin body. I can reach in just over 2" and I indicate the grooves and check the land height at the same time. I find more variation in groove depth on a cut rifle barrel as they are cut one groove at a time. If you have a good button they are almost always perfect. After indicating the lands I use a short solid carbide boring bar and taper bore the chamber to about .020 of finished size. I'm getting ahead of myself, I cut my tenon and thread before chambering but after indicating the grooves. I'm a little different than most as I use a loose fitting bushing on my reamer. I want the flutes of my reamer to follow the taper bored hole and not a slightly crooked or curved bore as all of them are to some degree. After reaming I check runout in my chamber as far in as my indicator reaches. Another reason I don't like bushings are they have to be .0002 undersize to slide in a bore without leaving tool marks and they are also.0002 undersize in order to fit on the reamer and be able to turn.
I'm surely not saying my way is best or your way is wrong, this is just the best way I know.
Chambering in the headstock is much faster for me and I don't have to remove the barrel and disturb my setup.
As far as a barrel being nonconcentric, so what. I always take some kind of cut on the big end. The problem that I see in chambering in the steady rest or between centers is you have to find a way to turn the big end concentric to the bore. All the barrel blanks that I buy need some of it cut. How do you handle the small breech barrels? You have to cut them.
Butch

quote:

Originally posted by butchlambert:
I find more variation in groove depth on a cut rifle barrel as they are cut one groove at a time. If you have a good button they are almost always perfect.

That is something that has bothered me for a long time! I wondered if a button would create a more uniform rifling and it sure makes sense if you have a button instead of cutting one groove at a time, but then, how do we explain cut rifled barrel accuracy?

quote:

Originally posted by Doc:, but then, how do we explain cut rifled barrel accuracy?

i dunno .. shilen barrels hold quite a few records .. and every last one is cut on a pull button...

I think 2 things help the cut rifle barrels. The cutters do not stress the barrel like a button and they are able to control the twist rate or consisantly control it better than a button barrel.
Butch

I'm absolutely not a rifling expert, but I also think there are two things more beyond what Butch mentioned that help a cut rifled barrel. First, to cut well, the bore has to be reamed smoother than for a button. Therefore, it's likely it's more uniform to start with.

Second, the scraper cutting cuts down through any chatter or unevenness, helping uniform out the reamer chatter. But, cutting creates it's own cutter chatter. Most bores are lapped, and lapping the grooves makes the land tops wear even more. They become exceptionally smooth on a cut rifled barrel. I'm always impressed with how smooth a well lapped cut rifled barrel is in the bore scope. Cheap button rifled barrels (like factory Remington) are awful in the bore scope. Gouges, chatter, pieces ripped out of the surface, burrs.

Button rifled barrels telegraph initial bore roughness right down into the grooves. Although they should be smoother, they don't iron out initial unevenness very well. In the bore scope, a reamer mark on a land can be traced right down into the grooves and back up into the next land. Button rifled barrels like Douglas that aren't lapped seem quite rough with reamer chatter when you borescope them. My experience with them is they copper very badly at first. It usually drops off after 50 or 100 bullets, and is similar to a lapped barrel after that. Doesn't seem to affect the accuray, just the amount of copper fouling.

I don't know how any of this really translates into accuracy. Everything I have read seems to indicate that uniformity is the single biggest factor to accuracy. Uniform bore size, uniform twist, uniform land/groove dimensions. Absolutes smoothness takes a back seat to those things, but may make the barrel foul less. I don't have a big enough sample in my own shooting experience to draw any meaningful conclusions.

Butch,

You have the most detailed procedure for dialing in a barrel that I have ever heard of. It's far beyond the accuracy that I am capable of. My compliments.

dave

quote:

I'm always impressed with how smooth a well lapped cut rifled barrel is in the bore scope

I have it from a reliable source that one particular well regarded CRB maker does not lapp.
In regards to buttoned LW barrels, Ralf Martini whos no alien to buiding highly regarded best quality rifles, promotes them.

Maybe Broughton,MikeRock and Krieger offer 5r/5c bcause people ask for it, but did Boots Obermyer start producing 5r because; people asked for it?, as a marketing gimick?, or because he had sound imperical evidence to support and promote its technical advantages?

[quote]
Date: Apr 23 1997
Newsgroups: rec.guns

Barry S Brummett wrote:

# What does "polygonal rifling" mean? How is it different from other
# kinds? Is it a process or a pattern or what? Thanks in advance.

Instead of the rifling being square and hanging down in the bore so that
it can engrave a square notch in the bullet it has flats where the
rifling would be. The bullet is not upset much. Instead of having 6 or
8 sharp knotches it will have small flats that are very unnoticeable.
This makes the bullet fly better in the wind because there is no sharp
edges to bite into a cross wind. The bullet jacket is not deformed as
much so the chances of loose cores are much less. Since there is no
sharp corners to burn off the barrel life is much longer and is
dependent on heat checking alone to end its life. That is one major
reason most barrel makers are not interested in them. It would decrease
their business by half. They are more difficult to make than regular
rifled barrels for a couple of reasons one being they are difficult to
lap and give a cut barrel maker more problems due to tooling.

Gale McMillan.
[endquote]

I find this thread to be very informative. In terms of accuracy, I've been told there's no difference between # of grooves, depth of grooves, or style of lands, whether R style, perpendicular, etc.

BUT, it seems to make structural sense to me that a polygonal style rifling is easiest on the jacket, makes for easier cleaning, and could possibly promote a tad higher velocity.

I also think that a 3 groove barrel has the least amount of "work" done to the bore, and doesn't that make sense to be easier on a bullet as well? I'm curious about that.

Seems to me like the less stuff done to the bore in terms of cutting, or displacing the metal would be more favorable. But it's also my understanding that barrels are button rifled are heat stress relieved, so any stress introduced during rifling is relieved.

So, does anyone make a 3 groove polygonal barrel?

Doc , you're looking for a triangular bore ??
I too would like to know about stress relieving the barrels .Stresses are not necessarily bad as long as they are uniform, concentric.

quote:

Originally posted by mete:
Doc , you're looking for a triangular bore ??
I too would like to know about stress relieving the barrels .Stresses are not necessarily bad as long as they are uniform, concentric.

Actually, I prolly don't know WTF I'm talking about...what I'm asking is a bore with 3 grooves and the lands are "sloped" on both sides. I think the Broughton barrels are "canted" on one side only, or that was my understanding. What is a triangular bore, or are you just yankin mah chain?

I've asked several barrelmakers about stress relieving and their replies are all over the map. Some do, some don't and some do it twice or 3 times in different ways at different points in their production process.

BTW there are several statements in the McMillan quote above that IMO are mistaken. Yes he's an experienced barrelmaker but some of his assumptions aren't borne out in the real world of competition and some of his statements IMO don't apply to any barrels besides his own.

Don't forget that all opinions shown here including my own are worth exactly what they cost you.

BTW the concepts of both polygonal bores and 5R/5C rifling forms have been pursued back in the 19th century in both the UK & the US, they aren't really anything new. In fact on rare occasions collectors will encounter oval-bored dueling pistols, a practice that in the 19th century was considered to be cheating since duelers were supposedly required to be smoothbores (and with no sights).
Regards, Joe