Cold Hammer Forged Barrels ? - Page 2

AR-15 » AR Discussions

AR Sponsor:

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Cold Hammer Forged Barrels ? (Page 2 of 3)

Posted: 10/3/2011 9:20:20 PM EDT

[#1]

" Whatever process used, the proof (of a good barrel) is in the shootin' "

Posted: 10/3/2011 9:36:17 PM EDT

[#2]

The work hardening is the main benefit, and it directly affects bore life.

Posted: 10/3/2011 9:52:27 PM EDT

[#3]

Colt Canada is going to be making Cold Hammer forged barrels for all Colt rifles. From what I heard all the M4 barrels are going to be hammer forged. Diemaco/Colt Canada barrels kick ass. There is only one C7 barrel that I know of that was shot out. It was a school rifle at CFB Borden and had 60,000 rounds through it. Most of it full auto.

Posted: 10/4/2011 1:57:23 AM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:
" Whatever process used, the proof (of a good barrel) is in the shootin' "

This is perfectly stated.

Durability claims are just "claims" until someone takes a few thousand barrels of either type with the only variable being process used to create it and shoot them out using an impartial test.

That ain't gonna happen anytime soon methinks.

If you want to believe that CHFed barrels are the best thing since sliced bread as stated by the people who profit from their sale then that's fine... But let's bring the tech section back to technical and leave the canned selling points quotes out of it.

The bottom line then is any process when done correctly can produce a durable accurate barrel that 99% of us can't shoot to it's maximum potential or afford to shoot out until it's bottom potential. That is a TRUTH. So buy what makes you happy.

That's it.

It is a moot point for me anyways... I prefer SS

Posted: 10/4/2011 2:55:34 AM EDT

[#5]

My only real experience measuring a hammer forged barrels "extended" lifespan would be in factory barrels from Ruger and Remington. Along with a Weatherby, which I am fairly certain to be hammer forged. A Ruger in .220 Swift was basically missing a good portion of the throat before I could work up a load with it.

Ive never had a Remington last any longer than usual compared to a Shilen.

And Weatherby in a .30-378 lasts this side of 500rds.

Posted: 10/4/2011 3:59:45 AM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:

Quoted:

The claims of superiority are built right into it (in blue).

Thank you BCD! How could we have missed that. We almost forgot that button barrels don't have a uniform bore, they don't last long, they don't have a consistent surface, they don't have hardened steel and they are not accurate. Sure glad our military uses CHF barrels.

That's exactly what I'm trying to say - it's not simply a description of the manufacturing process, it has all these other claims built into it with nothing to support them.

Oh, I thought you were backing his claim. My apologies to you.

No problem, I'm used to arguing with someone I'm agreeing with - I've been married a long time . . .

And to EBW, I'm not on either side of this yet - I started the poll to gather information. I read a number of threads on here where mfg. "A" or "B" were put forward as the clear choice, without challenge, based almost entirely on these CHF barrels. That seemed odd to me, because the word on bolt-action rifles has always been the opposite. Maybe they have some unique benefit in the AR platform, where extreme accuracy is less of an issue than durability / longevity ?

I am starting to reach one conclusion - the internet seems to be crawling with shills

I'm unsure whether or not you are directing your "shill" comment at me, but the businesses that I own/co-own are not in the firearms industry and I have no relation or affiliations to anyone with an interest in profiting from the sale of CHF barrels or production of CHF barrels. I use them and like the ones that I own. If you weren't directing the comment at me, then please disregard.

Truly, you will be fine with any quality barrel from a reputable manufacturer. Personally, configuration, barrel material, and profile are more important to me. I chose the Noveske 10.5" CHF and Centurion Arms 16" Midweight Midlength for very specific reasons. They are both from high quality steel and both have a midweight profile, which makes much more sense to me than Govt profile. The Centurion barrel had the added feature of being a midlength. If other companies made steel midweight barrels of high quality, in a length/configuration that I want, I would buy them whether or not they are CHF, as long as the price reflects that fact that they do not come from M249 blanks. Centurion Arms no longer makes midweight profile barrels and I will not buy a Govt profile barrel from them as long as that is all they produce, CHF M249 blank, or not. Noveske midweight steel barrels are just hard to get. I have been trying to get a 14.5" from Rainier, but they have been out for some time now.

Posted: 10/4/2011 4:14:16 AM EDT

[#7]

Although not exactly CHF, but done along the same lines. Look up autofrettage, it is a process done with cannon barrels for generations to produce a barrel that gives a longer service life. Cannon tube manufacturing is a well studied science and the Governments of the world spent billions over the years to produce better artillery tubes, one of the things that produces better tubes to is work hardened them through the autofrettage.

So as I said, CHF does produce certain theoretical advantages that most will never be able to take advantage of

Posted: 10/4/2011 4:26:34 AM EDT

[#8]

http://www.adcofirearms.com/acc/Barrel_Thoughts.cfm

Any counterpoints to the claims made here? I'm interested to hear how a chrome lined CHF barrel lasts longer than a chrome lined button rifled barrel. Wouldn't the chrome lining wear equally on both (as claimed by ADCO)?

Posted: 10/4/2011 5:25:50 AM EDT

[#9]

This is how a cold hammer forged barrel is made

However, as we have attempted to show in this article, hammer forging makes dimensionally uniform, smooth barrels which tend to err on the side of a properly tapered bore, and the process makes barrels quickly. Because of all of these advantages, most round factory barrels, including shotgun barrels, are hammer forged.

You can read the article, or you can read my post from a couple of pages ago, they both say the same thing.

Lots more information about the process, in case anybody wants to get educated.

Posted: 10/4/2011 6:16:20 AM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
http://www.adcofirearms.com/acc/Barrel_Thoughts.cfm

Any counterpoints to the claims made here? I'm interested to hear how a chrome lined CHF barrel lasts longer than a chrome lined button rifled barrel. Wouldn't the chrome lining wear equally on both (as claimed by ADCO)?

I hate to get into this mess, but I agree with the information posted on ADCO's site. I used to shoot 2,000 rounds of 223 a month on average, back when ammo was cheap. Most of my rifles were chrome lined button cut 4140 steel and would get 12-15,000 out of those barrels without issue. All of my shooting with those rifles was at 100 yards or less so I never noticed any significant loss of accuracy. I'm sure there was but I couldn't notice it with the type of shooting I was doing. I didn't even have M4 feedramps in most of my rifles so I'm not sure how they even worked for more than a 100 rounds.

But 10 or more years ago those were common barrels and idiots like me shot them like crazy never knowing we weren't tier 1. Ammo was cheap and life was simpler before "The Chart".

Back to the OP's question. I own some CHF barrels and am not convinced they are more accurate or will last longer then button rifled barrels. I don't shoot any where near the volume I used to shoot either so I may never find out. I own them because I happen to like DD barrels and they offer the profiles I like. I also buy them when I can get a good deal on them and seldom pay more than $30-$50 over other quality barrels I have purchased. If someone made a nicely finished comparable NON CHF barrel for $100 less I would most likely move away from DD just for the cost savings. I don't think most shooters will ever see a real world difference in barrel life, certainly not enough to justify anymore than $50 cost difference.

For accuracy I would buy a SS button cut barrel.

Posted: 10/4/2011 6:45:29 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
My point is that you do not know that the CHF barrel is cheaper to produce.

Actually I do. It's been stated that it's a cheaper/faster way to produce barrels if your making them in LARGE quantities. What would make them expensive is the cost of the machine's/tooling. But most companies that buy them are producing thousands of barrels. The machine's/tooling is very expensive for a small company. I highly doubt that small companies selling CHF barrel's are actually making them. As far as out-sourcing price, CHF barrels are much cheaper to make then button rifled barrels.

As for the Accuracy comments. Sure, they can be accurate but so can any other barrel that someone took the time to make. It's all based on the quality control.

Thats why you see thousands of CHF barrels as target/match barrel's right?

Posted: 10/4/2011 8:37:15 AM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:

Quoted:
My point is that you do not know that the CHF barrel is cheaper to produce.

Actually I do. It's been stated that it's a cheaper/faster way to produce barrels if your making them in LARGE quantities. What would make them expensive is the cost of the machine's/tooling. But most companies that buy them are producing thousands of barrels. The machine's/tooling is very expensive for a small company. I highly doubt that small companies selling CHF barrel's are actually making them. As far as out-sourcing price, CHF barrels are much cheaper to make then button rifled barrels.

As for the Accuracy comments. Sure, they can be accurate but so can any other barrel that someone took the time to make. It's all based on the quality control.

Thats why you see thousands of CHF barrels as target/match barrel's right?

If I recall, Daniel Defense purchased the equipment to make hammer forged barrels a few years ago so they do make their barrels. I'm sure they are providing barrels to other companies that offer CHF. PSA is getting theirs from FN and perhaps another supplier as well.

But yes, the equipment is expensive and most are getting re badged barrels from some of the larger companies.

Posted: 10/4/2011 9:03:38 AM EDT

[#13]

Most shooters do not shoot enough to become proficient to the point where they could tell a difference, and most do not shoot enough rounds to wear out a barrel.

Posted: 10/4/2011 9:05:33 AM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
A good barrel is a good barrel, whether button rifled or cold hammer forged.

~Augee

+1

sounds simple

Posted: 10/4/2011 10:09:47 AM EDT

[#15]

It isn't going to matter at all if thE barrel is chrome lined. I agree and trust what steve says on this subject. I've never worried about steel barrels except I was worried about the SS upper I bought, but steve debunked that myth also.

Posted: 10/4/2011 12:11:40 PM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
http://www.adcofirearms.com/acc/Barrel_Thoughts.cfm

Any counterpoints to the claims made here? I'm interested to hear how a chrome lined CHF barrel lasts longer than a chrome lined button rifled barrel. Wouldn't the chrome lining wear equally on both (as claimed by ADCO)?

The chrome lining is worn through before the barrel is "shot out" by most people's standards. The work hardening resulting from the hammer forging produces a harder surface underlying the chrome which will be more resistant to throat erosion.

Posted: 10/4/2011 3:27:54 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:

Quoted:
My point is that you do not know that the CHF barrel is cheaper to produce.

Actually I do. It's been stated that it's a cheaper/faster way to produce barrels if your making them in LARGE quantities. What would make them expensive is the cost of the machine's/tooling. But most companies that buy them are producing thousands of barrels. The machine's/tooling is very expensive for a small company. I highly doubt that small companies selling CHF barrel's are actually making them. As far as out-sourcing price, CHF barrels are much cheaper to make then button rifled barrels.

As for the Accuracy comments. Sure, they can be accurate but so can any other barrel that someone took the time to make. It's all based on the quality control.

Thats why you see thousands of CHF barrels as target/match barrel's right?

Then post data/numbers and prove it.

Posted: 10/4/2011 3:50:51 PM EDT

[#18]

Not as good, but cheaper / faster to mass-produce

X 10000

Posted: 10/4/2011 4:13:39 PM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
Then post data/numbers and prove it.

Why should I? Look all over the internet. Its already a known fact that it's a cheaper way to PRODUCE barrels. One machine does everything, it shapes it, puts the rifling in it, etc...

The only thing that costs money is the machining/tooling. Which, if you produce a lot of barrels, pays for itself overtime considering how much time your saving on producing a barrel. And time is money.

If you have no clue what your talking about then don't post.

Judging by the poll, no one has a clue and just follow what brand name companies say

Posted: 10/4/2011 4:38:43 PM EDT

[#20]

Bbls can be made in different ways and the way the rifling is don't does not matter as much as the care put into the work. Cut hammered SS Cromolly, they can all shoot well if done right.

Posted: 10/4/2011 5:23:36 PM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Then post data/numbers and prove it.

Why should I? Look all over the internet. Its already a known fact that it's a cheaper way to PRODUCE barrels. One machine does everything, it shapes it, puts the rifling in it, etc...

The only thing that costs money is the machining/tooling. Which, if you produce a lot of barrels, pays for itself overtime considering how much time your saving on producing a barrel. And time is money.

If you have no clue what your talking about then don't post.

Judging by the poll, no one has a clue and just follow what brand name companies say

So you think that a company would use a more expensive button cut barrel on their less expensive rifles and then use a cheaper hammer forged barrel on their more expensive rifle? I would think that if a manufacturer could get CHF barrels cheaper that is all they would use. They would just charge extra for the ones that are marked CHF.

Posted: 10/4/2011 5:30:39 PM EDT

[#22]

I just bought one of Noveske's CHF barrels in an upper, it was delivered today, If I ever shoot it out I will let you guys know how many rounds it took. I voted pie because I have no clue if it is actually better but I was talking to a Noveske guy and he said they had a few that were around 40K rounds, still in use.

Posted: 10/4/2011 5:34:37 PM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:
So you think that a company would use a more expensive button cut barrel on their less expensive rifles and then use a cheaper hammer forged barrel on their more expensive rifle? I would think that if a manufacturer could get CHF barrels cheaper that is all they would use. They would just charge extra for the ones that are marked CHF.

I don't know what companies charge for other companies to buy CHF barrels. But look at the poll, people obviously want CHF barrels yet almost non have a clue why they or can post anything as to why there superior than others.

Posted: 10/4/2011 7:03:57 PM EDT

[#24]

I'm a firm believer that the process doesn't matter nearly as much as the care and skill and quality control. Any process can produce a great barrel or a POS. I also believe that manufacturers are hyping CHF barrels to make a greater profit. FN chrome lined hammer forged barrels are the only ones I know of that are used in precision bolt rifles, but I'm pretty sure their accuracy and long life is due to their unique chrome lining process and not because they're hammer forged.

Posted: 10/5/2011 5:08:35 AM EDT

[#25]

Constructor over at 68forums posted a long article talking about the CHF process, pros, and cons.

Ultimately, the article concluded that CHF barrels were more to accuracy issues as the barrel heated up than a standard barrel of the same profile.

Anyone save the article?

Posted: 10/5/2011 5:32:55 PM EDT

[#26]

Nevermind, Constructor was nice enough to post it over on 68forums again.

http://technology.calumet.purdue.edu/met/higley/NotesOnHammerForgedBarrels.pdf

Posted: 10/6/2011 11:56:31 AM EDT

[#27]

Bingo. Process doesn't matter nearly as much as the quality of the material and the care used in creating the barrel. Cut, broached, buttoned or CHF can all produce top quality barrels, and they can also produce pure trash. It just depends on the skill and attention to detail of the maker. I've gone through scores (literally) of CHF barrels over the years and found them to be every bit as accurate as the best cut or buttoned barrels, but that's dealing with only one manufacturer and one barrel style; Sauer 202s in 6.5x55. I've also used several Winchester M70 match barrles that were hammer forged, and never seen one that wasn't a shooter. By the same token, I've seen lots of CHF barrels that were pure garbage, right out of the box. Most of these are on brands that you can pick up at the local WalMart, go figure. I shoot HP-XTC, Service Rifle, so my concerns are primarily 200-600 yards. I normally get one season out of a barrel, and then it becomes a back-up and practice rifle for the next season. All of these are either cut or buttoned barrels, as the best US makers are using these processes. No chrome lining, something that you'll never see on a serious precision rifle built for accuracy. As far as accuracy potential between cut and buttoned barrels (so long as a quality maker is being discussed), flip a coin. I've used Harts, Saterns, Kriegers and several others with good results. Never used a CHF for this application because I don't know of anyone making true match quality barrels for this application. If I did, I wouldn't be afraid to try it, but wouldn't go out of my way to use one simply because it was a CHF barrel. As far as those big WalMart brands, yeah, CHF is a cheap way to produce large numbers of barrels without a lot of highly skilled machinists. Once the costs of the machinery is amortized, the rest is downhill and they make out like bandits.

Posted: 10/6/2011 3:53:50 PM EDT

[#28]

Where is anyone with serious creds or industry experience saying that CHF as a process is supposed to yield a more accurate barrel? It's a process that's efficient for high output that happens to yield good durability. Not saying CHF can't be accurate, but if accuracy were my major concern, I'd definitely go with another rifling method.

Posted: 10/6/2011 3:57:30 PM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:
Where is anyone with serious creds or industry experience saying that CHF as a process is supposed to yield a more accurate barrel? It's a process that's efficient for high output that happens to yield good durability. Not saying CHF can't be accurate, but if accuracy were my major concern, I'd definitely go with another rifling method.

Well, it cost $100 more, and the people selling them say there more accurate so it must be true.

Posted: 10/6/2011 5:18:16 PM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:
So you think that a company would use a more expensive button cut barrel on their less expensive rifles and then use a cheaper hammer forged barrel on their more expensive rifle? I would think that if a manufacturer could get CHF barrels cheaper that is all they would use. They would just charge extra for the ones that are marked CHF.

A low volume company would likely use button-rifled barrels because they're cheaper at their particular output level. A high volume company, like Bushmaster who has been using CHF barrels for years, will use CHF as they're going to be cheaper at their output level. On a per unit basis, CHF is cheaper IF you're cranking out high volume. Remember, every FFL making ARs is not making their own barrels, far from it!
Also, just because CHF barrels may be cheaper to mass produce doesn't mean the mfg is selling them for less. Obviously, they're able to sell them for more, so that is what they're likely doing.
Daniel Defense has been making barrels for other companies, like Spike's. Tom has said before that he made the actual DD lightweight profile design and that they were producing the barrels. These barrels were not marketed as CHF, though.

Posted: 10/6/2011 6:08:58 PM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:
Where is anyone with serious creds or industry experience saying that CHF as a process is supposed to yield a more accurate barrel? It's a process that's efficient for high output that happens to yield good durability. Not saying CHF can't be accurate, but if accuracy were my major concern, I'd definitely go with another rifling method.

BCM is an industry and they say so......they pump out batches that sell out in a matter of HOURS. But I'll leave it up to them and their consumers to explain why

Posted: 10/6/2011 6:34:36 PM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:
BCM is an industry and they say so......they pump out batches that sell out in a matter of HOURS. But I'll leave it up to them and their consumers to explain why

Of course a company that sells CHF barrel's is going to say there more accurate. Why do they sell out? Because people that have now clue what a CHF barrel is buys them because everyone else does. Same reason people buy $300 rails, and knock down one's of the same quality for $150. "Well....This one's $150 more because it must be better" I'm not saying that they can't be accurate. Like I said in my posts, any barrel can be accurate it's just how much time/quality is put into it.

Posted: 10/6/2011 6:35:10 PM EDT

[#33]

I'm no expert, but I've looked into this subject and based on what I have read I've come to the conclusion that cold hammer forged is the way I would rather go.

Button rifling can lead to the button being worn down and it is more complicated than cutting. You get a superior barrel though on average going button rifling over cutting although a very skilled person can produce a very high quality barrel with cut rifling on par with a button or cold hammer forged barrel.

Button rifling is more efficient though than cold hammer forged barrel and less QC intensive.

Cold hammer forging is more efficient than button rifling and is even less QC intensive than button.

The CHF efficiency reduces costs, because with button rifling if you don't do it right you could end up having to throw out whole batches of barrels. Now all that said a button rifle is not inferior to a cold hammer forged barrel if the manufacturer of the barrel is experienced and knows what they are doing. Button rifled barrels can be very high quality and a high quality button rifled barrel like an LW barrel is even capable of being higher quality than a cold hammer forged barrel. However, when I hear that a barrel is cold hammer forged it tells me that it is highly likely that I will not get a lemon barrel so it should give me real good service life. It's one factor I look for among MANY in barrel selection.

Too each their own though. YMMV and so forth.

Posted: 10/6/2011 6:42:52 PM EDT

[#34]

Really depends on the process employed during hammer forging as well.

GFM Hammer forged machines are pretty top notch and cost BIG money.

I believe that profiling the barrel BEFORE the hammer forging is key to maintaining good grain structure. Some companies will profile AFTER the hammer forging, which IMO doesn't make sense to me from what I've read.

Remember as well that barrels don't just go into a machine and come out done. You NEED experienced employees along every step of the way. I do think it's the best way to go though over cut or button if everything else is equal IMO.

Posted: 10/6/2011 6:50:39 PM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:

Quoted:
BCM is an industry and they say so......they pump out batches that sell out in a matter of HOURS. But I'll leave it up to them and their consumers to explain why

Of course a company that sells CHF barrel's is going to say there more accurate. Why do they sell out? Because people that have now clue what a CHF barrel is buys them because everyone else does. Same reason people buy $300 rails, and knock down one's of the same quality for $150. "Well....This one's $150 more because it must be better" I'm not saying that they can't be accurate. Like I said in my posts, any barrel can be accurate it's just how much time/quality is put into it.

You may have misunderstood.....he asked who in the industry says so....i named some1. I then said id let them andthose who buy explain because i cant. I never doubted why they would say so, that's quite obv

Posted: 10/6/2011 11:04:03 PM EDT

[#36]

If you ask barrel makers, they will tell you that whatever method they use is best. It's just another way of making the rifling. As long as the tools are sharp, and the blank is quality they will be equal.

Posted: 10/7/2011 3:04:05 AM EDT

[#37]

CHF is a better process. But the vast majority of users won't shoot enough to benefit from it.

Posted: 10/7/2011 5:15:29 AM EDT

[#38]

How do you profile a barrels OD before you CHF?

Posted: 10/7/2011 3:58:56 PM EDT

[#39]

From a metallurgical standpoint HF materials will always out perform the same material formed by other processes. Product performance is improved over other manufacturing processes as the cold forming process rearranges the grain structure to follow the part configuration. This favorable characteristic eliminates the potential for porosity fatigues, increases over-all strength performance (shear strength, etc.) and reduces risk of other types of material integrity.

Sooo thru experience if I have the choice in the SAME configuration I will choose the forged material.

You can not compare a HLCL to a non CL Match Grade part that costs way more, you need to stick to comparing apples to apples to be even close to believable.

Posted: 10/7/2011 5:43:35 PM EDT

[#40]

Quoted:
If you ask barrel makers, they will tell you that whatever method they use is best. It's just another way of making the rifling. As long as the tools are sharp, and the blank is quality they will be equal.

Couldn't resist the fix

Posted: 10/7/2011 6:11:49 PM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:
From a metallurgical standpoint HF materials will always out perform the same material formed by other processes. Product performance is improved over other manufacturing processes as the cold forming process rearranges the grain structure to follow the part configuration. This favorable characteristic eliminates the potential for porosity fatigues, increases over-all strength performance (shear strength, etc.) and reduces risk of other types of material integrity.

Sooo thru experience if I have the choice in the SAME configuration I will choose the forged material.

You can not compare a HLCL to a non CL Match Grade part that costs way more, you need to stick to comparing apples to apples to be even close to believable.

Good point.

Posted: 10/7/2011 6:14:16 PM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:
If you ask barrel makers, they will tell you that whatever method they use is best. It's just another way of making the rifling. As long as the tools are sharp, and the blank is quality they will be equal.

Biggest issue will always be with the human error factor. As automated as things have become people still play an incredibly critical part in the manufacturing process. You can have the best materials and the best tooling, but without experienced folks at every stage of manufacturing you're not going to get the consistent high quality. In this country skilled labor in such manufacturing isn't easy to come by anymore either.

Posted: 10/7/2011 6:14:19 PM EDT

[#43]

Very few people will ever shoot their rifles hard enough to benefit from CHF barrels, but some people have actually had that benefit.

Monty of Centurion Arms was doing testing on weapons on the government dime, given his day job with the Navy

, and actually got to witness performance first hand as thousands upon thousands of rounds were fired through test guns, and CHF barrels objectively lasted longer. Given that the average AR-15 owner doesn't put more than 1-2K through their AR in a year, CHF is not "needed", but it is nice to have. I mean, we don't need cars with more than 100 horsepower to commute around town, but I drive around with a LOT more horsepower than that.

CHF barrels for AR-15s are definitely a premium option, no need to knock it if you personally don't believe the value they offer.

As for CHF barrels' potential accuracy, FN's family of precision rifles use CHF barrels, and are capable of amazing accuracy. CHF Noveske and Centurion Arms barrels have also been well tested, and shown to be capable of producing amazing accuracy in spite of their chrome lining

Posted: 10/7/2011 6:15:34 PM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:
From a metallurgical standpoint HF materials will always out perform the same material formed by other processes. Product performance is improved over other manufacturing processes as the cold forming process rearranges the grain structure to follow the part configuration. This favorable characteristic eliminates the potential for porosity fatigues, increases over-all strength performance (shear strength, etc.) and reduces risk of other types of material integrity.

Sooo thru experience if I have the choice in the SAME configuration I will choose the forged material.

You can not compare a HLCL to a non CL Match Grade part that costs way more, you need to stick to comparing apples to apples to be even close to believable.

Your "o" key is stuck.

CHF (funny) barrels are hotter than hell after the process, and each one will contain the flaws of the others. But they all will be denser than a conventional barrel. Few will be as accurate.

Posted: 10/7/2011 6:37:14 PM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:
Very few people will ever shoot their rifles hard enough to benefit from CHF barrels, but some people have actually had that benefit.

Monty of Centurion Arms was doing testing on weapons on the government dime, given his day job with the Navy

, and actually got to witness performance first hand as thousands upon thousands of rounds were fired through test guns, and CHF barrels objectively lasted longer.

Given that the average AR-15 owner doesn't put more than 1-2K through their AR in a year, CHF is not "needed", but it is nice to have. I mean, we don't need cars with more than 100 horsepower to commute around town, but I drive around with a LOT more horsepower than that.

CHF barrels for AR-15s are definitely a premium option, no need to knock it if you personally don't believe the value they offer.

Actually seeing the results of this type of testing would settle a lot of conjecture.

It seems simple enough :

This many button-rifled barrels averaged (x) thousand rounds before failing a certain standard, same number of CHF barrels averaged (x + n) rounds.

or, This many finished button-rifled barrels averaged a Rockwell hardness of HRC "x," finished CHF barrels averaged HRC "x + n."

But, for whatever reason, you never do.

Posted: 10/7/2011 6:39:52 PM EDT

[#46]

http://technology.calumet.purdue.edu/met/higley/Experiments%20with%20Hammer%20Forged%20Barrels%20on%20AR-15s,%20Part%20II.pdf

Old data but I would be completly happy with 1/2 MOA. Now put that with the latest in projectiles and I think you can run with current comparably softer SS match sticks.

Posted: 10/7/2011 7:25:46 PM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:
http://technology.calumet.purdue.edu/met/higley/Experiments%20with%20Hammer%20Forged%20Barrels%20on%20AR-15s,%20Part%20II.pdf

Old data but I would be completly happy with 1/2 MOA. Now put that with the latest in projectiles and I think you can run with current comparably softer SS match sticks.

I'm not gonna argue to much, but the first gun(The one shooting .5moa) is heavily modified. It's using a Ruger M77 barrel etc.. Which IMO Ruger make's some good quality barrels(I believe I read were only 8 people make all the barrels). The other barrel is also a Ruger barrel, which seems to have been made for accuracy.

I said it before, and I will say it again. Anyone can make an accurate barrel if they take the time to do it.

Posted: 10/7/2011 9:00:06 PM EDT

[#48]

Quoted:
Very few people will ever shoot their rifles hard enough to benefit from CHF barrels, but some people have actually had that benefit.

Monty of Centurion Arms was doing testing on weapons on the government dime, given his day job with the Navy

, and actually got to witness performance first hand as thousands upon thousands of rounds were fired through test guns, and CHF barrels objectively lasted longer. Given that the average AR-15 owner doesn't put more than 1-2K through their AR in a year, CHF is not "needed", but it is nice to have. I mean, we don't need cars with more than 100 horsepower to commute around town, but I drive around with a LOT more horsepower than that.

CHF barrels for AR-15s are definitely a premium option, no need to knock it if you personally don't believe the value they offer.

As for CHF barrels' potential accuracy, FN's family of precision rifles use CHF barrels, and are capable of amazing accuracy. CHF Noveske and Centurion Arms barrels have also been well tested, and shown to be capable of producing amazing accuracy in spite of their chrome lining

Speaking of Monty, I wish he would do another run of midweight CHF barrels. I'm very happy with my Noveske and Centurion CHF barrels, but I don't like the M4 profile Monty has now. That is actually the only reason that I bought my latest Noveske barrel and I am confident that I am not the only guy out there that will buy the Noveske instead because of the profile.

Posted: 10/8/2011 12:40:36 AM EDT

[#49]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Very few people will ever shoot their rifles hard enough to benefit from CHF barrels, but some people have actually had that benefit.

Monty of Centurion Arms was doing testing on weapons on the government dime, given his day job with the Navy

, and actually got to witness performance first hand as thousands upon thousands of rounds were fired through test guns, and CHF barrels objectively lasted longer.

Given that the average AR-15 owner doesn't put more than 1-2K through their AR in a year, CHF is not "needed", but it is nice to have. I mean, we don't need cars with more than 100 horsepower to commute around town, but I drive around with a LOT more horsepower than that.

CHF barrels for AR-15s are definitely a premium option, no need to knock it if you personally don't believe the value they offer.

Actually seeing the results of this type of testing would settle a lot of conjecture.

It seems simple enough :

This many button-rifled barrels averaged (x) thousand rounds before failing a certain standard, same number of CHF barrels averaged (x + n) rounds.

or, This many finished button-rifled barrels averaged a Rockwell hardness of HRC "x," finished CHF barrels averaged HRC "x + n."

But, for whatever reason, you never do.

See the Army's Extreme Dust testing in which H&K hammer forged barrels saw less long term firing wear in extreme condition compared to similar Colt barrels. This lead to one of the proposals of the PIP to include a CHF barrel.

Posted: 10/8/2011 6:25:43 AM EDT

[#50]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Very few people will ever shoot their rifles hard enough to benefit from CHF barrels, but some people have actually had that benefit.

Monty of Centurion Arms was doing testing on weapons on the government dime, given his day job with the Navy

, and actually got to witness performance first hand as thousands upon thousands of rounds were fired through test guns, and CHF barrels objectively lasted longer.

Given that the average AR-15 owner doesn't put more than 1-2K through their AR in a year, CHF is not "needed", but it is nice to have. I mean, we don't need cars with more than 100 horsepower to commute around town, but I drive around with a LOT more horsepower than that.

CHF barrels for AR-15s are definitely a premium option, no need to knock it if you personally don't believe the value they offer.

Actually seeing the results of this type of testing would settle a lot of conjecture.

It seems simple enough :

This many button-rifled barrels averaged (x) thousand rounds before failing a certain standard, same number of CHF barrels averaged (x + n) rounds.

or, This many finished button-rifled barrels averaged a Rockwell hardness of HRC "x," finished CHF barrels averaged HRC "x + n."

But, for whatever reason, you never do.

See the Army's Extreme Dust testing in which H&K hammer forged barrels saw less long term firing wear in extreme condition compared to similar Colt barrels. This lead to one of the proposals of the PIP to include a CHF barrel.

I've read the results of those tests (that I can find), and they are almost exclusively concerned with comparing the number of stoppages induced in the weapons. The same number of rounds were fired in all the weapons, and I can't find any comparison of the amount of wear sustained. I'm not saying it's not there, just that I can't find it. The closest I have come is this PIP-related follow-up article in ArmyTimes, dated 2007 :

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/12/army_m4_hearing_071217w/

Quote: "Another upgrade under consideration is a "hammer-forged" barrel, (Brig. Gen.) Brown said.

While there is no timeline in place, Brown said switching to this specific manufacturing process could yield M4 barrels that “have a longer life.”

For a guy with access to what Brig. Gen. Brown would have access to, "could" is kind of under-whelming, but it seems to be as close as I'm going to get.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Cold Hammer Forged Barrels ? (Page 2 of 3)

AR-15 » AR Discussions

AR Sponsor:

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us