Any new or used rifle I buy gets torn down and inspected/lubed before it is ever fired. Ones I have built from scratch are inspected internally as well. After 200 or so rounds with no cleaning, I would say that particular rifle is good to go. Someone spoke earlier about a malfunction 200 rounds in because of a gas ring that was worn or bent. That is why any newly purchased rifle should be torn down and inspected before initial use.

For me, 200 rounds break in, both handguns and rifles.

1-2 magazines of varies ammo.  A regular AR doesn't need break-in.  You people with everything needing a break in.  Barrel breakin is such BS

Barrel break-in, yes. It's BS.

But I can't tell you how many times I've had an out-of-the-box issue with even top tier AR's.

Yet another example of someone who doesn't know what he's talking about, yet tries to pretend that he does.


Criterion CORE Barrel Break-In

The accuracy evaluation of this barrel began with factory loaded Federal 77 grain Gold Medal Match ammunition.  One of the first groups fired from this barrel had an extreme spread of 0.18”.  That group is pictured below.






The very next group fired from this barrel had an extreme spread of 1.5”.  That 10-shot group is pictured below.





A 10-shot group with an extreme spread of 1.5” is perfectly acceptable for a 16” chrome-lined AR-15 barrel with a weight of 1 pound, 12 ounces.  However, this barrel isn’t broken-in yet.  The bore-scope image shown below was taken prior to any shots being fired.  It shows the sharp tooling marks on the lands in the leade, which run perpendicular to the direction of bullet travel.  






For the barrel to shoot to it’s potential, the sharp edges of these tool marks need to be “burnished” out.  So, I continued shooting 10-shot groups using a variety of factory loads and hand-loads.

For comparison, the bore scope view shown below is from the leade of a Colt M4A1 SOCOM barrel that's been fully broken-in.




As the fired round-count for the CORE barrel approached 150, the size of the groups shrank and became more consistent.  At this point, I fired the three 10-shot groups “of record” using one of my standard match-grade hand-loads topped with Sierra 55 grain BlitzKings.  When fired from my Krieger barreled AR-15s, this load has produced ½ MOA 10-shot groups at 100 yards.









The three, 10-shot groups fired in a row from the Criterion 16” CORE barrel from a distance of 100 yards had the following extreme spreads:

1.15”
1.09”
1.13”

for an average 10-shot group extreme spread of 1.12”.  The three, 10-shot groups were over-layed on each other using RSI Shooting Lab to form a 30-shot composite group.  The mean radius of the 30-shot composite group was 0.39”.


The smallest 10-shot group . . .






The 30-shot composite group . . .









.....

An additional reason that some AR-15 barrels need a break-in is because of the burr at the gas port.

Ballistic Advantage barrel gas port . . .


....

@Molon I never really gave much thought to barrel break-in…until you started posting pics such as these. I mean, I believed the SME’s but, like they say, “a picture is worth a thousand words.” As always, awesome content.

I would assume what's being referred to is more the often elaborate "break-in procedures" some people use -- such as firing one round and running a patch after each for x number of rounds and so on -- rather than arguing that firing rounds, in general, won't smooth out imperfections. What you're describing doesn't seem to consist of any particular barrel "break-in procedure" so much as establishing that barrels often won't achieve full accuracy potential until fired repeatedly.

It's one thing to argue all barrels require an elaborate, methodical break-in and quite another to say barrels won't immediately produce maximum accuracy: one requires deliberate actions while the other will happen as a matter of course through simple use. It's a small but important distinction. I would argue for most rack-grade ARs that will be shooting mass-produced FMJ ammo, any sort of elaborate "shoot, patch, shoot" procedure is indeed bullshit and a waste of time. Merely firing the weapon and cleaning as normal will produce the desired result.

There is possibly an argument for some sort of break-in procedure when a high degree of precision is the goal (and I believe some manufacturers recommend it), but I don't know if any data exists comparing a step by step break-in procedure versus simply firing the gun and cleaning as normal.

1 or 2 magazines?
ETA: your entire post.

Attached File

Do you frequently pretend that people posted something that they didn't?  Here's his exact statement . . .



.......


Show us exactly where in this thread I stated it was.  Oh wait . . . you can't, because it didn't happen.  




Which is barrel break-in.

...

Do you always respond to a normal discussion like you're trying to get in a fight?

I was also referring to a similar statement made immediately above yours, the specific statement quoted, and a sentiment that's often repeated in general. Most of the time when someone says "barrel break-in isn't required," they really mean a specific, elaborate break-in method. And while I personally believe a general break-in period of at least several hundred rounds is a good idea for multiple reasons, for the purposes most are going to use an AR -- up to and including self-defense -- barrel break-in specifically isn't required. Is that what "BS" means in this case? Maybe we can argue semantics over the term bullshit -- what fun!

Even if the specific poster you quoted clarifies that he meant exactly what you think he meant, it wouldn't invalidate the general nature of the observation.



Show us exactly where in that post I'm suggesting you did -- it's clearly a statement tying into the context of the post regarding the distinction between specific break-in procedures versus just shooting the gun as normal and "break-in" happening as a matter of course. There is literally nothing in my post attacking you -- if you weren't so obviously desperate to start an argument where there was none and be "right," you might have taken a moment to realize that.



Of course, and I never said otherwise. The whole point of the post, that people often say "barrel break-in" when they really mean "elaborate barrel break-in procedures" -- and how that distinction might entirely change the meaning of a statement -- seemingly eludes you.

Yet another all mouth and no data post of yours.

...

An AR off the shelf should offer all the accuracy necessary to, without break in, easily hit minute of torso out to two hundred meters but good to know that a new barrel is broken in when it gets consistently accurate.

Not break-in per se, but a decent check of reliability.

I've seen gas keys, gas blocks, barrel nuts and other things come loose, but needed several rounds to show up.

All of them.

Till it fails. Meaning don't trust it. Use it knowing it could fail. This is the safest way.

If I built the rifle, I would need far fewer rounds develop trust in a rifle than if I bought a factory rifle.  If I bought a used Frankenrifle from an unknown builder, I would most likely want to tear it apart, examine everything, reassemble it, and begin testing with it.  In terms of how many rounds:

I built the rifle:  fewest test rounds
factory built NEW rifle :  a few more rounds
factory built USED rifle:  more rounds than a factory built new rifle
used frankenrifle:  this would take the most rounds to test...regardless of who built it.

A used Les Baer, Daniel Defense, Eagle Arms (Coal valley era), Wilson Combat, and similar rifles that haven't been screwed with or modified would require testing, but the minute someone started turning a factory rifle into their "custom" rifle, it would go into the used Frankenrifle category.

Interesting. I have always believed that the hardness of chrome precluded any attempt to do a barrel break un.

Gale McMillan says barrel break in is BS (one of the biggest name ever in the industry) A barrel will not shoot itself more accurate.

I personally agree with McMillan. I have an FN SPR that shoot 1/2 inch and a Remy M24 1/4 inch. A colt LE 901 1 inch or slightly better. I didn't break in any of them.  

Barrel break in had gotten so stupid that people think you have to break in a chrome lined barrel or even Glock barrels. It's to be point of stupidity. Also a waste of ammo.

If barrel break in makes you feel better then do it.  Breaking in a Colt M4 actually funny.  Like a Glock barrel break in.  A lot of people do it though

Please read this and end the stupidity.  Nobody on this thread knows more (including Molon) then McMillan

https://www.6mmbr.com/gailmcmbreakin.html

Yeah, I was sorta under the same impression, but I never bothered to really research barrel break-in procedures. I just bought stuff that was supposed to be “quality” kit, like Colt, Noveske and Rock Creek. Plus, I would always check out MOLON’s posts to see how accurate/precise various barrels were and make decisions on what to buy based on his info.

It wasn’t until I started seeing bore scope pics that I realized how ignorant I was about this kinda stuff. To be honest, I’m still ignorant about a lot of things regarding more of the nuanced AR knowledge, but that is why I am glad to have people like Molon, Samuse, Tigwelder and a bunch of others to drop knowledge.

Wanna know how I know that you didn't even actually read that article, or that if you did, you have some pretty poor critical thinking skills?


Quotes from the article that you posted a link to are in black below; my replies to those comments are in red.



"As a barrel maker I have looked in thousands of new and used barrels with a bore scope and I will tell you that if every one followed the prescribed [one shot, one clean] break-in method, a very large number would do more harm than good.”

Here’s a newsflash for the famous stock maker; neither myself, nor any straight shooter that I associate with has ever “done more harm than good” by breaking-in a barrel.  The famous stock maker thinks that he’s the only person who knows how to properly clean a barrel and that the rest of us monkeys do nothing but damage when we clean a barrel.




“The reason you hear of the gain in accuracy is because if you chamber a barrel with a reamer that has a dull throater instead of cutting clean sharp rifling it smears a burr up on the down wind side of the rifling.”


So the famous stock maker admits that there are artifacts (burrs)  left in the throat of the barrel that need to be removed before a barrel can achieve its best accuracy, yet he fails to mention that even with a sharp reamer, there can still be reamer marks left on the leade of the barrel.




“It takes from one to two hundred rounds to burn this burr out and the rifle to settle down and shoot its best.”

And there it is folks, the process of breaking-in a barrel of the famous stock maker is to fire 100 to 200 hundred rounds through the barrel to remove the artifacts left in the throat from the reaming process.  Remember this.




“Another tidbit to consider--take a 300 Win Mag that has a life expectancy of 1000 rounds. Use 10% of it up with your break-in procedure.  For every 10 barrels the barrel-maker makes he has to make one more just to take care of the break-in. No wonder barrel-makers like to see this.”

Now here’s where the famous stock maker really contradicts himself.   Remember from his statement above, the break-in process of the famous stock maker is to just fire one to two hundred rounds through the barrel.  His break-in process uses up to 20% of the barrel life for the example he uses.  Yet, the famous barrel maker pretends that those using a specific break-in procedure will “use 10%” of the barrel’s life “with your break-in procedure.”  

I’ve clearly and scientifically demonstrated with the bore-scope views that I've posted in previous threads, that a specific break-in procedure can remove all the artifacts in the throat of the barrel with a mere 20 rounds being fired.  That shows that the break-in process of the famous barrel maker, of firing up to two hundred rounds through the barrel, uses up FIVE TO TEN TIMES the amount of barrel life as a specific break-in procedure that only requires twenty rounds.  




“Now when you flame me on this please [explain] what you think is happening to the inside of your barrel during the break in that is helping you.”


Seriously??  The famous stock maker is unaware of what happens during a specific break-in procedure?  Again, the famous stock maker flat-out contradicts himself.  He stated above that he was aware that artifacts of the reaming process had to be removed from the throat of the barrel for the barrel to achieve its best accuracy, but now he pretends that he is unaware of that.  Such hypocrisy.



“Consider this: every round shot in breaking-in a barrel is one round off the life of said rifle barrel. No one has ever told me the physical reason of what happens during break-in firing.”

The famous stock maker again claims to have no idea what happens during a specific break-in procedure? I’m just a lowly member of the general population and I clearly described with bore-scope views what happens during a specific break-in procedure.  The artifacts left on the leade of the barrel are removed.  The bur at the gas port on many AR-15 barrels also needs to be removed.  This same process is described in detail on the website of one of the most prominent precision barrel makers in the business, Krieger Barrels Inc., yet the famous stock maker has never heard of this?






“In other words what, to the number of pounds of powder shot at any given pressure, is the life of the barrel. No one has ever explained what is being accomplished by shooting and cleaning in any prescribed method”.


The delusions of the famous stock maker continue.






“Nev Maden, a friend down under that my brother taught to make barrels was the one who came up with the [one shot one clean] break-in method. He may think he has come upon something, or he has come up with another way to sell barrels.”

Now the famous stock maker is trying to rewrite history.  Precision shooters were performing break-in procedures on their barrels long before the famous stock maker or “Nev Maden” were ever born.  



“I feel that the first shot out of a barrel is its best and every one after that deteriorates [the bore] until the barrel is gone.”


Again, the famous stock maker flat-out contradicts himself as here clearly stated at the beginning of his article that the artifacts left in the throat form the reaming process had to be removed for a barrel to achieve its best accuracy and that “it takes from one to two hundred rounds to burn this burr out and the rifle to settle down and shoot its best.”





“If some one can explain what physically takes place during break-in to modify the barrel then I may change my mind.”

Kreiger barrels Inc. has done just that, in detail, on their website.  (see below)






“As the physical properties of a barrel don't change because of the break-in procedures it means it's all hog wash. I am open to any suggestions that can be documented otherwise if it is just someone's opinion--forget it.”


The hypocrisy of the famous stock maker knows no bounds.  He hasn’t presented one single iota of documented, factual data to support his unsupported opinion.  

The famous stock maker also completely failed to mention the burr found at the gas-port on many AR-15 barrels that can prevent an AR-15 barrel from shooting to it’s potential, even though the famous stock maker has “looked in thousands of new and used barrels with a bore scope”.



From Krieger Barrels Inc.

“With any premium barrel that has been finish lapped -- such as your Krieger Barrel --, the lay or direction of the finish is in the direction of the bullet travel, so fouling is minimal. This is true of any properly finish-lapped barrel regardless of how it is rifled. If it is not finish-lapped, there will be reamer marks left in the bore that are directly across the direction of the bullet travel. This occurs even in a button-rifled barrel as the button cannot completely iron out these reamer marks.
Because the lay of the finish is in the direction of the bullet travel, very little is done to the bore during break-in, but the throat is another story. When your barrel is chambered, by necessity there are reamer marks left in the throat that are across the lands, i.e. across the direction of the bullet travel. In a new barrel they are very distinct; much like the teeth on a very fine file. When the bullet is forced into the throat, copper dust is released into the gas which at this temperature and pressure is actually a plasma. The copper dust is vaporized in this gas and is carried down the barrel. As the gas expands and cools, the copper comes out of suspension and is deposited in the bore. This makes it appear as if the source of the fouling is the bore when it is actually for the most part the new throat. If this copper is allowed to stay in the bore, and subsequent bullets and deposits are fired over it; copper which adheres well to itself, will build up quickly and may be difficult to remove later. So when we break in a barrel, our goal is to get the throat polished without allowing copper to build up in the bore. This is the reasoning for the "fire-one-shot-and-clean" procedure . . .”

Continued at:  http://www.kriegerbarrels.com/Break_In__Cleaning-c1246-wp2558.htm

For me, a known, quality manufactured rifle; I am comfortable with 3 magazines without any issues.

If issues present themselves within those first 3 magazine, I will run another 3 and try to reproduce those issues. If they don’t present themselves within that time frame, I consider it good to go.

Deleted

Deleted

Molon you are a condescending one aren't you.  You can say Gale is full it all you want.  You can post mile long posts all you want.  You are the guy that will always put people down if they don't agree with you.  That's fine have at it.  I have plenty of experience that contradicts yours. That doesn't make mine wrong. You way isn't the only way.

I've never made any such statement that "my way is the only way", so now failing to post any data to support anything that you say, you resort to flat-out lying.  I've have NEVER said that anyone needs to do anything regarding barrel break-in.  What I've done, unlike you, is provide actual scientific data as to what happens when a barrel breaks-in, to rebut retarded statements posted such as "barrel break-in is BS."  I've also shown with the Criterion CORE barrel as an example, exactly how during the course of a barrel breaking-in the the size of groups shrink.

....

You really can't help yourself, can you? Since you don't seem to be aware, this is the point most sensible people would realize they made an ass of themselves and simply stop. But, by all means, double-down with more unreasonable, orgulous antagonism because you can't think of anything else to say.

For the record, I've posted reams of data over the years on everything from running logs on hard-use suppressors over 20k+ round periods -- detailing carbon weight retention, time-lapse baffle wear, and maintenance results -- to posts on extended periods without maintenance, tracking barrel/parts life over high round counts, and plenty in-between; I'm curious, exactly what "data" would you like me to post regarding my observational speculation on the likely intent of people using the phrase "barrel break-in?"

I know, let's post a poll! We need data, we need facts -- I'm going to put my top men on this immediately.

Deleted.

As long its from a quality manufacturer or I put it together from quality parts, I'm generally far more concerned with verifying the reliability of my mags.

For an off the shelf new gun, I'm comfy with 200ish. To me it's more important to see if there is any unusual wear or other isssues afterwards though.

I'd take a new Glock from the display case to a gun battle if I had to and be plenty confident. When I built my G-26, I had to test it out a bit to have that level of confidence. Not because I doubted myself, but because it had parts from several manufacturers, none of which were Glock.

As for barrel break in, there is a lot of data from a lot of people that proves it's value. If done properly, it will generally make a barrel last longer, shoot more accurate and be easier to clean. Chrome lined and nitrided barrels may not benefit from such an excercise, but others usually do.
Gator

My son's PD is just up the road from Daniel Defense, which is what they have. They literally open them up, wipe them down, go qualify and call it good.

I generally shoot a few magazines on the first outing to sight in and let the moving parts get acquainted. Then I clean and inspect the whole gun for unusual wear while paying particular attention to the BCG and barrel lugs. Lube, reassemble and run a few more mags through it. If it holds zero and functions reliably, I consider it GTG. My process for a carry pistol is pretty much the same.

180-200 rounds.