Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 6/13/2014 10:37:10 PM EST
[Last Edit: 6/18/2014 4:03:12 AM EST by clharr]
I'll leave testing to the experts. Fuck it.
Link Posted: 6/13/2014 11:08:10 PM EST
Need a larger sample size if you really want to get technical, like say 5 or preferably 10 5-shot groups from each rifle for each type of ammo. And you unfortunately didn't shoot exactly the same ammo for all the barrel types.

This is an interesting idea and I'm curious how it turns out, but I suspect the results may be hard to determine. And try some Federal GM if possible
Link Posted: 6/13/2014 11:32:20 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Will816:
Need a larger sample size if you really want to get technical, like say 5 or preferably 10 5-shot groups from each rifle for each type of ammo. And you unfortunately didn't shoot exactly the same ammo for all the barrel types.

This is an interesting idea and I'm curious how it turns out, but I suspect the results may be hard to determine. And try some Federal GM if possible
View Quote


Feel free to send me money or ammo. This is simply a informal experiment using what limited match style ammo I have on hand, but yes you are correct.

I did shoot the same ammo out of the barrels being tested, the Krieger gun is not part of the test and my buddy threw me 5rds of BH 68gr so I shot it.

To get real data, one would need several examples of the same gun and fire those guns under the same conditions with the same ammo. I aint got time fo dat.
Link Posted: 6/13/2014 11:35:46 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By clharr:


Feel free to send me money or ammo. This is simply a informal experiment using what limited match style ammo I have on hand, but yes you are correct.

I did shoot the same ammo out of the barrels being tested, the Krieger gun is not part of the test and my buddy threw me 5rds of BH 68gr so I shot it.

To get real data, one would need several examples of the same gun and fire those guns under the same conditions with the same ammo. I aint got time fo dat.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By clharr:
Originally Posted By Will816:
Need a larger sample size if you really want to get technical, like say 5 or preferably 10 5-shot groups from each rifle for each type of ammo. And you unfortunately didn't shoot exactly the same ammo for all the barrel types.

This is an interesting idea and I'm curious how it turns out, but I suspect the results may be hard to determine. And try some Federal GM if possible


Feel free to send me money or ammo. This is simply a informal experiment using what limited match style ammo I have on hand, but yes you are correct.

I did shoot the same ammo out of the barrels being tested, the Krieger gun is not part of the test and my buddy threw me 5rds of BH 68gr so I shot it.

To get real data, one would need several examples of the same gun and fire those guns under the same conditions with the same ammo. I aint got time fo dat.

Haha, gotcha
Link Posted: 6/14/2014 3:11:25 AM EST
[Last Edit: 6/14/2014 3:12:35 AM EST by MS556]
Without more expensive ammo shot down range for more groups, about all one can conclude is that you have two rifles with basically interchangable milspec accuracy, and that the single point cut rifling of that Kreiger barrel is far superior to either button rifling or cold hammer forging.

If you repeated the test long enough for any real statistical differences to emerge they will probably be limited to the production of those two unique barrels and to other variables, such as manufacturing tolerances in the mandrels or broaches used or factory runs on that particular day, and not any inherent difference in accuracy of the rifling method. Get two more rifles with the same barrels, repeat the test and the result could be different.

Finally, one more humble observation: it is well-known that despite the best efforts of manufacturers to have uniform production standards and quality controls, there is still something we don't understand about why most barrels seem to uniquely prefer certain ammo. Even otherwise identical barrels from the same company and same production run may have individual preferences for ammo. One identical barrel might shoot its tightest groups with one weight and brand of ammo, and the other one shoot tightest groups with a totally different ammo.

Shoot enough different brands and bullet weights through each rifle and you may find that one or both might shoot 1 MOA with some kind of ammo, although it may not be the same for both.
Link Posted: 6/14/2014 3:28:27 AM EST
[Last Edit: 6/14/2014 3:43:53 AM EST by jukeboxx13]
Great test.

I am surprised the Krieger barrel did not do batter.

ETA: After looking again the kreiger did quite well imo.
Link Posted: 6/14/2014 3:55:50 AM EST
Good test. Where in TX are you?
Link Posted: 6/14/2014 6:40:55 AM EST
Nice test. Shows buttoned barrel performance equivalent to chf.

The funny thing about chf barrels is that they are cheaper and faster to make but in the us suppliers of forged blanks are limited so they involve a double mark up (mfg 1 to mfg 2). That results in unjustified higher cost.

Suggestions to get more consistent results:
Match trigger 3.5 lbs or lighter with overtravel stop if possible.
square targets with corner point of hold
Link Posted: 6/14/2014 7:34:43 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By MS556:
Without more expensive ammo shot down range for more groups, about all one can conclude is that you have two rifles with basically interchangable milspec accuracy, and that the single point cut rifling of that Kreiger barrel is far superior to either button rifling or cold hammer forging.

If you repeated the test long enough for any real statistical differences to emerge they will probably be limited to the production of those two unique barrels and to other variables, such as manufacturing tolerances in the mandrels or broaches used or factory runs on that particular day, and not any inherent difference in accuracy of the rifling method. Get two more rifles with the same barrels, repeat the test and the result could be different.

Finally, one more humble observation: it is well-known that despite the best efforts of manufacturers to have uniform production standards and quality controls, there is still something we don't understand about why most barrels seem to uniquely prefer certain ammo. Even otherwise identical barrels from the same company and same production run may have individual preferences for ammo. One identical barrel might shoot its tightest groups with one weight and brand of ammo, and the other one shoot tightest groups with a totally different ammo.

Shoot enough different brands and bullet weights through each rifle and you may find that one or both might shoot 1 MOA with some kind of ammo, although it may not be the same for both.
View Quote

Excellent post. Any difference between manufacturing process will be statistically insignificant.

Green0 also posted some good tips.

I would also add that shooting from a bipod is generally not the most accurate form.

A proper front rest, or sandbags will probably eliminate more variables that a bipod can cause ("hop", loading the legs with pressure, etc.)
Link Posted: 6/14/2014 7:53:58 AM EST
Thanks for taking the time to share your efforts. I did something similar a couple years back and experienced similar results. Then when switching to handloads it cut the groups down to just below or above MOA depending on the rifle. Thanks again for posting it.
Link Posted: 6/16/2014 6:09:07 AM EST
Thanks for posting, you didn't mention twist but assumed 1:7. For me Chrome Moley have been more consistent than chrome lined. I have only shot 1 chrome lined HF barrel 1:7 twist and it did not like lighter bullets which isn't surprising..
Link Posted: 6/17/2014 2:37:20 PM EST
I don't know that it's worth a data point but I have two FN CHF PSA 20" 1in7 HB barrels, both bought at the same time Spring 2012. They both shoot the same groups with the same loads. Submoa with tailored loads and they both like the same loads; they seem to be twins in vibration/whip cycles so I lucked out there from what I understand. Swapping an optic between them, a bobro with a PST 6x24FFP, there's even minimal adjustment, one needs 3 clicks right, 4 clicks up to shoot same POI/POA. Given I can't afford two good optics that's also another good thing.

The 16" PSA 'standard' barrels I have, not CHF, aren't capable of the same accuracy even after loads of load development.

I have tested them all against each other using Wolf Gold on the same day and the 20" run about 2MOA while the 16"'s run about 3 MOA using 20 rounds each although discounting a handful of called fliers. Cadence was primarily based on good picture good 'feel' but at a guess maybe 10 seconds, maybe 15 between shots.

Obviously not apples to apples given 20" versus 16" and the 20" have Specwar brakes on them while the 16"'s have standard birdcages. But for my particular barrels and my particular technique the CHF seem to be consistently the more accurate regardless of loads.
Link Posted: 6/17/2014 2:44:03 PM EST
[Last Edit: 6/17/2014 2:45:03 PM EST by Tophatman]
Weirdly my 20" 1 in 7 barrels _love_ 50grain bullets. I've shot 1/2" 5 shot groups with them, not every time or even most of the time but semi-repeatable. .75-1.0 is a more common group.

I think theseare them.

Link Posted: 6/17/2014 7:23:06 PM EST
Generally, I have found CHF to be about 1-2 MOA more accurate then button broached, especially once they heat up.
Have also found two identical barrels from the same manufacturer can have the same difference.
A lot can be said about the differences between CHF and button barrels just as a lot can be said about manufacturing tolerance and quality control.
If I understand correctly, more sniper barrels are rejected then approved due to tolerances being so much tighter.
Link Posted: 6/17/2014 7:51:10 PM EST
Exactly. Try some accuracy comparisons after both barrels have had a few mag dumps. Try some accuracy comparisons after both barrels have 15k plus down the pipe.

CHF will win every time when both barrels are apples to apples hot or have apples to apples high round counts.
Link Posted: 6/17/2014 9:00:58 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By theARlife:
Exactly. Try some accuracy comparisons after both barrels have had a few mag dumps. Try some accuracy comparisons after both barrels have 15k plus down the pipe.

CHF will win every time when both barrels are apples to apples hot or have apples to apples high round counts.
View Quote

You have zero evidence to support that claim.
Link Posted: 6/17/2014 11:23:43 PM EST
Using the same lower would give your testing a little more credit, not much but a little.
Link Posted: 6/18/2014 12:52:45 AM EST
I think the real answer is... quality manufacturing is quality manufacturing.
Link Posted: 6/18/2014 3:25:03 AM EST
I applaud your desire to gather information about different barrels.........but in reality, that is all you are doing.......gathering information about different barrels. Testing different barrels by different manufacturers, using different lowers, different barrel lengths, different this/different that.......doesn't really prove anything, except different barrels shoot differently.
You would have to shoot all those different barrels from a universal receiver/ machine mounted, in a controlled environment, to come to any kind of meaningful conclusion...........but hey........shooting is fun. Bang away.
Top Top