Why would PSA want to waste money on marketing when they can't even keep up with orders now?  Marketing is what you  do when you have a lack of orders, not a surplus.   Business 101.

This is a good point.  One of the reasons I don't advertise for my business is because I am already booked for months on end.  On the other hand, forum presence is a pretty effective way to market and they are here.  If they didn't show presense around here, they wouldn't be moving anywhere close to the product they do.

I agree that a rest of some sort is a must, even if I have to build one.

10 shot groups for each load

All testing will be done on the same day

I think all muzzle devices should be removed, if possible (not sure what others might bring)

I planned to just use a variety of off the shelf loads to do the testing. A wide variety from WOLF on up. Handloads are certainly welcome if someone wants to contribute, but I feel that off the shelf results with these barrels will be more relevant to the forum body as I would estimate that there are fewer handloaders than guys who just go buy some ammo and have a session. (that's me, no time for handloading )

Can someone please direct me to a template of exactly what information needs to be recorded for each group? Any help or link on that would be greatly appreciated. A PDF that I can print would be a Godsend

Any suggestions for which targets to use and what type of measuring device to use? I have scale rules and a decent mic. Just let me know which is appropriate. Targets with enough unobstructed room on them for writing would be great as well. As far as I know, we will be using a 100 yard range.

Is it appropriate to clean the bore when switching to a different load? As tough as CHF barrels are supposed ot be, I think they should just be cleaned before the comparison and not between groups. I want to know what they do when they are not pristine.

Any suggestions or advice will be greatly appreciated and I certainly appreciate your patience. This is worth doing right and I do not want to rush it. It will be a couple of weeks before the testing happens. I have things that I need to acquire for this and money is tight right now. I went crazy at the end of the year.... I'm a sucker for a good deal.... or deals  

evl....

Please understand, my curiousity was satisfied and I really just wanted to avoid more of the same replies. It was starting to get to me. I was going to sit on it until after testing, but decided to let it out and see what happens. The mystery behind CHF barrels has been driving me nuts since I bought my first Centurion barrel in '08 or '09 (gorgeous medcon 16" midlength with a beautiful recessed crown). It took me forever to find out what the differences were between them and the Noveskes. I thought for sure that some of you guys that have been around for a long time knew exactly what was going on with these, but just couldn't say whether you knew or not. I reluctantly started this new thread fully expecting to have my account locked, but had to clear the air. It just wasn't right to leave it where it was. I will be proud to make this contribution to the site. It will not be the end of the conversation though. We may never get all of the companies to reply in one place about the details of their barrels because of NDAs, but at least myself and possibly some others can do some testing, offer it up, and let individuals base their own conclusion on the actual results of how they shoot.

If I do not make myself work this weekend (I hate my boss!).... I will strip the PSA barrel and take some photos of it beside the Centurion and a few views of my mic on certain areas. You guys can also see why I am complaining about the new Centurion 11.5".   See blue statement in OP I will pull one of the N4 barrels as well and explain some of the differences that I have observed between it and the others.

Take a look at some of molon's threads for ideas.

Clean the barrels well between loads. Fire at least three or five fouling shots. Many barrels won't settle in until you fire ten or more though. Each load will have a different powder, and the barrel will need to be seasoned for it. You will also need to shoot a few shots to warm the bore as well, before shooting the actual shots for score.

To score, just use a dial caliper. Use the backside, ( inside jaws ) of it, and put them in the holes that you are measuring. Extend the jaws until you touch the paper ( outside of the holes ) then subtract the diameter of the bullet. .224 from the measurement in this case. Write that on the paper. Call any fliers that you know are known fliers as well, and mark them accordingly.

I would say use the same scope on all rifles as well, but then you may get into differing weather and wind conditions. You will have to determine if it's better to do that. At the very least, have each scope be the same quality, magnification, and have the same type of crosshairs, in this case I'd say standard X, or Multi X.

Take a watch. Make sure you use the same cadence with all shot strings. 15 seconds to 30 seconds is more than enough between shots, and 15 is probably better.

As far as the target. A standard target with a small enough black, and a maybe a 1 inch red or orange bull would probably be good, although there are some targets specifically for that sort of thing. You really don't need grids since you're going to be using calipers.

Make sure to mark each target with all the info, gun, load etc., BEFORE you shoot them. It's very easy to forget and leave out info and mix things up during the shoot.

As far as info on the target.

Gun Make/model
caliber
date/time/temp
weather conditions
load/make/weight
velocity/average for that load
Shooter's name
Scope used
Position fired from
Any weird things with feeding, extraction. ammo not sounding right etc, and with any of those, mark that shot. ( Have your spotter do that )

Honestly, I would do the chronographing separately from the target shooting.
With that, You'll want
Velocity average
High
Low
Standard Deviation
Extreme Spread

Have a dedicated spotter. He should have a target identically marked to the one you're shooting. When you fire, he will mark that shot down in that position on his target. In competition, he would call that out, and give you corrections to windage, elevation etc, and you would correct for them. In this case, you are testing the rifle, and not your skills, so he will just mark it down. Don't correct for your misses, but continue to aim at the exact same spot. Impact area isn't important, group size is. If you adjust, it will be about your skills rather than the inherent accuracy of the rifle. All the spotter will do is mark each shot and number it.

If you pull one, if you know you caused a flyer, let the spotter know, and he will mark that one as a flyer. Again, don't correct for it.

That' pretty much it. Pick up each case after each string, and if feasible , have another separate person pick them up as they are fired, ( so long as they stay out of the line of fire ), and mark them with a marker in the order they are fired. Use a different color marker for each gun. Check the cases and see how they look for any signs of pressure or anything else.

Well, I can't think of anything else. Hope that helps.

Maybe if EWP reads this thread he might have a PDF or something you can use. I will IM him over on 68forums and see if he does if no one else comes forward.

Take a look at rimfirecentral.com.  They have some great target shooting forums over there, with lots of info on scoring targets etc.  

Also check out http://www.ontargetshooting.com/features.html  You can use a scanner and software to calculate your groups.

they still won't end up paying more than $11 per barrel for shipping. end of story. it's not shipping costs. look for other answers.

The other answers have been provided for you. You don't like the answers.

I agree with all the facts you state, but you're completely wrong about the PSA "light weight" and the Noveske "light profile"  (Thunder Ranch and Skinny MOE rifles) appearing to be identical.  First of all, PSA offers their "light weight" barrel in 14.7" and 16" uppers, whereas Noveske only offers their "light profile" barrel in a 14.5" length.   The main difference, though, is the profile is completely different.  If you look closely at the pictures, you'll see the PSA barrel is in fact heavier.  The Noveske light profile barrel is a traditional pencil profile barrel, which is .625" under the gas block.  The PSA "light weight" is actually an in-between profile, similar to Spikes' "optimum profile", and it is .750" under the gas block.  There was a thread on here not even a couple weeks ago where several people ordered PSA's "light weight" barreled upper and were surprised to find out it wasn't a .625" barrel.  PSA has since clarified this on the product page.

As far as your conclusion as to why the PSA barrels are cheaper, shipping is most certainly one reason, but we don't know if that's the only reason.  With Noveske offering barrels with different profiles, crowns, and/or gas port sizes, there could very well be other factors adding to the cost.  If FN makes these barrels special for Noveske, they may very well charge more for special order items.  If Noveske modifies the barrels (such as drilling gas ports) in-house, then there are labor and equipment costs that could also contribute to the cost.

I think this is a great discussion and it has piqued my interest in PSA's FN made barrels, but let's keep facts and speculation separate until we know for sure what we're talking about.

Don't you get it?  They're the same, but different.

OP  I must of missed the first topic?

Would like to hear more about this

In the beginning...

The PSA and Centurion LW barrels are identical.... but have different rollmarks (I hope this is acceptable as functionally insignificant) and the Centurion looks like a chopped 16" with half of the roll mark obliterated (Ridiculous for $300) Monty at Centurion has stated that the rollmark situtation will be addressed with some of the Centurion barrels. From the best that I could tell, the gas ports were .005" different, but we are talking about an 11.5" barrel and a 12.5" barrel, so different port sizing is to be expected. Those are the differences. Patience, pics will follow of all but one of the 5 barrels and it won't be included because it is one of two Noveske 10.5" N4s and I don't want to waste time tearing something down that is completely identical to the other one.

I just lost an employee and my ass is getting handed to me at my outdoor design and build company and my subcontracting company. I am doing a lot of the work in the field myself now, which I am no stranger too, but spare time is extremely hard to come by and I really don't feel like tearing down 3 uppers until the weekend. Have a cup of coffee, smoke a cigar, and relax ;) I will thoroughly explain the differences if you will ..... (please see red words in above post) ;)

Not directed at you Aimless, but some people around here have zero appreciation for the efforts and expense of others to contribute something of substance to this forum and bring some things to light, for absolutely zero personal gain other than to say "I did it" I do have better things to do (like finishing and testing my Saiga 12 for 3 Gun!), but I am indeed a "money where your mouth is" type of guy and I will do what I say I will.... period. Read my feedback, get a clue

Reminds me of the beginning of Star Wars, LOL!  "In the beginning....."

pav,
I appreciate the wealth of knowledge on the testing procedures. Thank you.

Just some ideas, that's all.  I wish I could help a lot more, but you are in the other part of Georgia.

It seems to me though, that you are rocking the boat. A boat that really doesn't want to get rocked. We will see.

I was going for Genesis...and on the sixth day He created Palmetto State Armory (Charlton Heston voice-over)

I kid, but at least no one seems to be trolling the thread aggressively, which is a plus. Perhaps this will inspire more critical views by end users of their own equipment, and contribute to the good of the Order of the Bolt Face.

Thanks for the clarification/correction on the barrels.  My observations were based on pics from the websites, as stated.  I know my conclusions are based on incomplete data. I tried to make a clear distinction in my post between what was known and what I was concluding based on those facts.  As a disclaimer, I don't own any CHF barrels, my issued guns are Colt and my personal is a BCM LW carbine.  BCM is another company that doesn't advertise their sources.....

Rob

This is the truth.  Been in manufacturing my whole life.  I fix/repair/reengineer stuff every day - EVERYTHING in EVERYTHING has a source.  The only obstacle is finding the source sometimes.  Only stands to reason that if FHN makes a double chrome barrel that appears to be their niche and the equipment to do it is horribly expensive then they do EVERYONE's barrels of this design.

This is the one I have been curious of as this would verify their quality of parts due to ISO cert and it would only stand to reason if PSA is already getting barrels from them.

OP to clarify (not that I care one way or another), Noveske's CHF barrels are FN, and their SS barrels are PacNor? That was my understanding, but correct me if I am wrong..

okay thanks dude. but just FYI i am fine with "other answers."

the only thing i have brought up in this thread is SHIPPING.

it's not shipping that causes the price differences between noveske and PSA.

i don't really give a shit what the price differences are from. if it turns out that the PSA barrels are exactly the same i will happily buy PSA barrels for future builds.

it's unfathomable how people can keep bringing shipping, specifically up as a big deal when it is a small incremental cost.

i don't care if jimbo shows up at FN and dumps 200 barrels in his pickup bed and pays NOTHING for shipping. NOTHING vs. $11 is still... $11.

That $11 dollar increase would be more like a $17 increase. Any increase in cost necessitates an increase in price that reflects what the company's profit margin needs to be to remain profitable. NO, shipping isn't the only thing. If they are the same, and we don't know that yet, but quite a few factors point in that direction, the shipping, the business model, the tax structure, the fact that one company makes enough on other sales of other products that they can sell the rifles as a loss leader and still be profitable, the fact that employee salaries and overhead may be and are probably lower in SC, higher numbers ordered from PSA  and so on and so forth.

Add to that, there may be other processes that the higher end companies may want that also add to the cost. These differences may be external or functional for that company's rifles. They may or may not add to accuracy.

If the barrels are the same inside, and if the other features don't aid accuracy, or functionality to a great degree,. the end customer will have to decide if the extra cost is worth it. If I am buying a barrel for a build, and I can get the same or within less than .25 moa difference, and the rifle still function just as reliably, with the only difference being  a different crown, and a different port size and the like, and I can save that much money, I'm saving the money.

I'm interested as I just bought a 14.5" middy from Centurion Arms.

As an economist (yes, I am one), I'm interested in understanding price differences across locations. We simply don't have enough information to explain the price differences other than brand name (yes, certain brands command a premium for various reasons, and a brand name is the obvious, low-cost method of identifying a particular standard of "quality"), but I am uncomfortable attaching such a wide variation in prices to something so trivial as transportation costs. Now, if we are talking about moving truckloads of freight almost continuously across space then maybe (think: steel, coal, other raw materials).

While accuracy evaluations may be useful to an extent, that is hardly a definitive test of sameness. I mean, RRAs and Stag barrels are known for being accurate, but few would put those in the same class as a Colt or Daniel Defense. The only explicit difference we can identify is the tapered bore, which Centurion Arms is quick to mention but PSA doesn't cite it all. I don't see why they wouldn't mention it when they are quick to highlight other specifications such as HPT/MPI. I'm looking forward to the results regarding gas port sizes and so on, and I think the OP did a fair job in his first thread highlighting some of the observables. It would be nice to have an analysis done on any other observable characteristics, such as actual chemical composition of the steel but that is, of course, costly.

At the end of the day, only FNH and the other companies involved can definitively answer these questions. We are pretty much spinning our wheels otherwise (not that it isn't fun or worthwhile).

Here are some pics of my Centurion Arms 14.5" barrel for the sake of fun:

Most likely packing oil.

~Augee

It looks like lube to me...

I see that was a 16" barrel chopped by Centurion to 14.5".

You see correctly!

I have heard folks SPECULATE that you shouldn't cut down a chrome lined barrel as you can chip the lining unevenly at the crown when you turn it and end up with poor accuracy.

Anyone have good information about this?  ADCO?

Yep, non issue.

To the best of my knowledge, that is correct. Noveske's SS barrels are not related to any other SS barrels on the market as far as I know. From what I understand, those are absolutely unique to Noveske. I have owned a couple, but couldn't see a significant difference in accuracy between them and my CHF barrels. I wasn't using heavy match ammo and that may have been part of the reason.

Bumper chrome chips.... barrel chrome no. I have cut many myself and never had a problem with the barrel chrome.

Centurion Arms has given a legitimate reason for this, however, many may not like the look of it. The question is "Does it matter to you?". See blue statement in OP regarding threading.
This is what gets under my skin. If I am paying a premium for an 11.5" barrel.... I want it to look like a premium barrel that was originally produced as an 11.5" barrel, not a chopped 16" with no finish on it at all at the muzzle and half of a rollmark The crown isn't even like the one on my 16" Centurion midweight middy. That one has an incredible looking crown and I have never seen another AR barrel with that same crown machining. When I ordered the 11.5", I was looking forward to having that same beautiful recessed crown and the same level of quality product that I received with the 16" midweight middy. The barrel looks like going 11,5" was an afterthought, and the crown doesn't even look remotely like the one on the other barrel. The threads have flats on them as if someone turned the barrel too far before threading or didn't cut the threads deep enough. An A2 FH goes on there fine, so it is probably turned down to far before theading. I know that internally it is just as good as the other Centurion barrel, but I do not feel like I got my money's worth, especially after looking at the 12.5" PSA barrel. It looks like it was manufactured as a 12.5" and has finish on the muzzle (under the FSB to, for whoever asked that earlier ). The crown of the PSA is nothing special, but neither are the crowns of my N4 barrels. If they were less expensive than they currently are, I would buy a 16" Centurion barrel if it had the crown that my other 16" barrel has. I will not buy another sub-16" Centurion barrel. I used to be a dedicated advocate of Centurion Arms CFH barrels, but feel that they are going downhill and cheaping out without passing it on to the customer in the form of a price reduction to reflect that the barrels are no longer premium quality
I will no longer recommend them.... I retract the previous statement and will continue to recommend Centuion Arms.

I didn't say anything to the vendor as they have been very good to me and I chalked it up as a lesson learned.... and a reason to look to companies other than Centurion Arms for CHF barrels.

Also, I think a major contributor to the pricing of the Noveske N4 barrels is the proprietary profile. That is a Noveske only spec and John probably doesn't have tens of thousands of them finished at one time in each length and profile. I'm not sure of it contributes to accuracy, but the slightly heavier profile may prove to be beneficial when the barrel gets extremely hot. However, I doubt that the average user will ever see that benefit.

About the tapered bore....
Are all M249 SAW blanks tapered bore? Seems like it might be a good way to get the mandrel back out easier/faster. I read somewhere that a tapered bore produces slightly higher muzzle velocity. Seems like they both make sense. Anyone?  

That's why my offer to work up loads for the barrels was made.

If someone would like to send me other weights, I will work them up as well. I will also need a little powder. I can get the powder, but I can't afford to buy everything needed.

I will count up my empty cases and see how many I have. If I have enough, and anyone is willing to donate projectiles of other weights than the 55gr fmj that I have, I will load a range of them from start to near max to be tested. I think I still have enough primers to load 500 or so more. I don't think we'll need over a hundred for each bullet weight though.

OP, let me know how many barrels you're testing. I'm basing this on thinking you're doing two barrels. Three barrels would of course be more.

Metal composition of the FN CHF blanks is within the same spec and tolerance. I understand how identical barrels may perform better with different ammos. That is why Peengwin and I will acquire as many different ammos as possible. I have not noticed any significant difference between any of the CHF FN manufactured barrels that I have owned and fired. I don't plan on running these hard or long enough to get a CF out of one. My goal is to give the average user a good starting point for forming their own conclusion based on the results. I doubt that most users here, including myself, will ever run things hard enough to get a CF of one of these barrels, so I think it is somewhat irrelevant. I have ran 300 rounds as fast as I could with a Geissele SD3G and it didn't take long, but that is about as carried away as I will ever get. I just can't see being in a self defense situation where firing like that would be useful or viewed as legitimate self defense in the eyes of the law or a jury. Accuracy and service life is why I like these FN blanks. I can't afford to shoot all of the barrels out or cause a CF, but I can get some groups with them. I feel that is far more relevant  to most of the interested here. I have never heard of anyone posting about a CF with a barrel from a CHF FN blank under conditions that weren't well beyond "normal use". Now if someone wants to purchase a few hundred thousand rounds and bring a FA lower, we will try some "abnormal use testing"....

To all,
With all due respect, why would I make these statements in an open forum if I did not wholeheartedly believe them and trust the info that I was given by multiple well repected and trusted sources?  Why haven't some of the companies came here to discredit my claims yet? Just saying. Monty knows how to post here, I have seen it. I'm sure John is sharp enough to figure it out though I have never noticed him posting here. Is it unreasonable to say that all of the companies involved are legally allowed to point out the differences in what their barrel starts out as, if differences exist? Why have they not come forward and enlightened us? We can keep coming up with little nitpicking things about the barrels for eternity. Here is an example, say I go buy a GMC truck and a Chevy truck that are 100% indentical (within reason and as far as equipment options and mechanical specifications go). One of the trucks has an engine that lasts 200k miles and the other has seen 300k miles and is still going. Does this mean they were  not mechanically identical and within the same original manufacturer specification and standard (GM)? I think some of the things that are being pointed out are somewhat unreasonable to even base sameness on at this point for the average to above average user. I am basing my statement of "sameness" of these barrels on all of the barrels starting life as FN manufactured CHF blanks that fall within the same specs, from metal composition to internal dimension tolerances, and are tested to the same standards. Is this an unreasonable classification of "sameness"?  Help me comprehend how and why it is unreasonable if you believe so. I have a lot to do and running around in circles here saying the same thing over and over 50 different ways to fill the loopholes people find as a nitpicking point is not benefiting anyone. Please understand my position and do not take offense as it is not intended to be taken that way. I am merely growing tired of the nitpicking. Let us be reasonable adults and move forward. Peengwin, others, and I will be sacrificing our own time, money, resources, and efforts to benefit the forum as a whole with a contribution toward gaining a little more understanding of the differences in functionality, if any, of these barrels. If you want to find out anything other than how these barrels compare when it comes to accuracy, put your money where your mouth is, or leave it alone

I'm really looking forwad to your findings with this and I really appreciate you taking your time and money to do something like this.

My only suggestion would be to keep the test as basic as possible.

My opinion is that you should not use home loads...I would use XM193 or something similar that can be found everywhere. I know it won't yeild the best groups but I think it is a great standard to go by as most using these barrels are not going to load their own rounds.

Whatever you end up doing I can't wait for the results.

That sucks to the people who paid big money for those Centurion barrels to only find out they are cut down with the logo cut off and the crown different from the 16" barrels.  It certainly does seem like an after thought.  I was seriously considering one of their barrels, but decided to go in a different direction.  I am glad I did now.

Regarding bore taper - a quick google search "hammer forged barrel" or similar, will pull up a lot of hits on the process.  Anyway, hammer forging is computer controlled with great precision and allows for the tapering of the bore during the forging process.

I agree, however, it would be interesting to see how they will do with some good handloads if we can get our hands on any. I game for any ammo as long is it is safe to use. Well, anything except TulAmmo....

Thank you. I didn't get much with terms that I used. I will try it a few others ways and see what I can learn.

I have both the N4 16" Reece and a PSA CHF LW middy now. I ordered the PSA to find out about the rumor in this thread and compare and since it was less than 1/2 the price of the Noveske.  

Guess what, it is externally the exact same barrel. All external dimensions are the fucking same according to my Mitytoyo Calipers. Both Shoot identical (1.5 MOA with handloads).They both even like the same exact handload 69 SMKs, RL 15, and BR4 primers on LC brass. I have no way of finding out about a tapered bore and I never heard the N4's having it, so I am not sure it does. Since FN is making everything else the same I seriously doubt the PSA is any different.

I will never, ever buy another Noveske. It looks like Noveske just ordered the same barrel from FN that PSA did and added a freaking huge mark-up due to the Noveske name. I assume PSA is making a good profit, so the Noveske mark-up must be astronomical since the PSA is less than 1/2 the price of a N4 barrel.

Baldmonk,

I am curious if you were able to measure the gas post sizes on your 16", Noveske and PSA midlength barrels?

I'd be interested to know what the differences are if any...

Negative. Just the profiles and compared the crowns.

I will pull the Front Sight Blocks this weekend and measure (won't be exactly a precise meaurment as i will be using the inside portion of my dial calipers as I don't have snap gauges that small or if they make any that small for that matter, but I am sure I will note any big difference).  My week is full until Sunday. I can't see that they would be different when everything else seems the same and mid-length reduces the back pressure to some extent anyway from the carbine length gas.

Killer thread, thanks a million.
I'm going to take a closer look at Palmetto's uppers.





Bill