User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/19/2006 2:34:16 PM EDT
[#1]
I was wondering when this would hit the net... I don't have the answer. I've just been asking the question longer...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/19/2006 3:21:29 PM EDT
[#2]
Hopefully someone will reveal that it is a version of 17-4 PH with some exotic heat treatment. If not, then accuracy and better corrosion resistance on the O.D. is all it looks to have going for it vs. chromed 4150, or just looks if you like the look of a SST barrel.
Looks a little fishy to me for the $$$, IMO. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/19/2006 3:30:40 PM EDT
[#3]
oops wrong forum
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/19/2006 3:42:07 PM EDT
[#4]
I don't feel that a plating can be compared to a metal. The platings wear and flake off.
I think Olympic arms was producing maxhard barrels (melonite treated) that is 63RC to a depth of .050". Something gives me the impression that should be vastly superior to chrome lined and possibly competitive with the 17-4. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/19/2006 3:56:23 PM EDT
[#5]
The chrome lining in a 4150 barrel is not like bumper chrome, it does not peel or flake off, it gradually erodes away just like base metal will. It is bonded to the base metal very well.
I'm not that familiar with the melonite treatment, but how do they apply it to the I.D. of a barrel? Was the melonite treatment on the O.D.? Amidst all this, one thing to keep in mind is the armed forces have been using the 4150 CMV chrome lined barrels for a long time and probably doesn't like to have to replace some of them as frequently as they do so I suspect they have looked at many other materials and treatments, and still, they use the 4150. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/19/2006 4:39:05 PM EDT
[#6]
Interesting...
Has anyone actually done any scientific testing and produced any data proving how much better a 17-4 SS barrel is compared to other barrels? Seeing this data would help me decide whether or not the price is worth it... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/19/2006 5:05:22 PM EDT
[#7]
Wow, that's the first I've heard of it. Any more info? I imagine the Melonite/Tennifer application process isn't conducive to good accuracy (i.e., inconsistent plating). |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/19/2006 5:11:08 PM EDT
[#8]
That's exactly what I am looking for/hoping someone will have. Comparing the specs of the material it looks like the 17-4 will actually stand less than what most of us have now. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/19/2006 5:13:55 PM EDT
[#9]
Melonite/Tenifer is a treatment, not a plating and it is expensive. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/19/2006 5:25:56 PM EDT
[#10]
Correct. Me Glocks have a very nice finish, IMO.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/19/2006 5:56:51 PM EDT
[#11]
I've been running a Melonite treated barrel for the past 3 or 4 years, and I've abused the life out of it. Looking down the barrrel, you would think its a new barrel, well, at least you would when its clean. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/19/2006 6:36:48 PM EDT
[#12]
May I ask, where'd you get it from? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/19/2006 6:39:53 PM EDT
[#13]
I've been doing a bunch of digging on what makes these 17-4 barrels tick myself.
Note: this is all basically plagiarized from sources I totally trust. If you find something you can prove incorrect, please let me know. Grade 630 (or 17-4PH) is an "age hardening" steel -- its low tempering temperatures are great for stability and it can be made pretty hard. It has been used in the past by several different companies for barrels, but most ended up dropping the idea. It looks at first to be a great choice for a barrel, but further research will show that the steel manufacturers have some recommendations that preclude it from use, especially in auto loading rifles. 17-4 hardening temps start at 900(f), the higher the hardening temp, the softer the temper -- most barrels in the past were made to condition H1025, the last number of the condition is the tempering temperature... so condition H1050 17-4 was tempered at 1025. Steel manufacturers do not recommend using 17-4 in applications that will subject it to exposure and soaking in the temperature range of about 700 to 900 degrees (f) -- but it is arguable if a rifle barrel "soaks" in that range long enough to be a real concern, some situations certainly could. However, the kick in the nuts for 17-4 is that the steel manufacturers warn against using it in applications that will subject the steel to temperature within 50 degrees of the temper point, therefore a rifle barrel would have to be kept below 975(f) under all conditions, and as you know, that is not realistic. 17-4 should never be used for anything in solution treatment. I do not know of anyone that has expected 17-4 to work well in the application of a fighting rifle, but that does not mean it has not been done... I dont think it would be worth the investment to be honest(no surprise hearing that from me). 17-4 was popular with paper punchers though -- those that leave the bolt open and wait a minute between shots, and soft seat all their individually weighed hand loaded ammo. Bottom line is that if it was really a great steel for rifle barrels, it would be offered in all of the usual suspects catalogs. Its been done before, and will fade out again. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/19/2006 6:52:25 PM EDT
[#14]
Well the armed forces always does whats right. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/19/2006 7:00:31 PM EDT
[#15]
Thanks for the heads up Steve!
It is however quite interesting how the 17-4 barrels are marketed... "The barrel is harder, tougher, and more resistant to erosion than other barrels. " "These barrels are designed and intended for the professional. "
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/19/2006 9:48:02 PM EDT
[#16]
It was given to me as a prototype by someone who wanted to see what it would do getting heavy range use, as well as being carried daily. They aren't available commercially right now. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/19/2006 11:06:08 PM EDT
[#17]
"These barrels are designed and intended for the professional. "
If I had a nickel for every time  It was seem that prolonged FA fire would be the bane of such an animal. But hey, it makes your wallet lighter, and therefore easier to carry. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2006 5:00:51 AM EDT
[#18]
Good info! We'll see if anyone has any other revelations to post that will change all this. I can't remember but someone may - what is the cost of 17-4 round stock as opposed to 4150? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2006 5:54:45 AM EDT
[#19]
This thread has made me feel alot better about not being able to afford a 17-4 Noveske upper.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2006 6:38:45 AM EDT
[#20]
Ah, thank you for clearing that up. Any chance you could keep us updated as to its progress? Thank you. Justin |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2006 8:03:06 AM EDT
[#21]
Well, TELL them get CRANKING and spit those puppies out! |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2006 5:11:19 PM EDT
[#22]
a 36" piece of 1.125" round would run: 4150 - $50.00 17-4PH - $80.00 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2006 7:17:24 PM EDT
[#23]
Yes, but it's only fair to note that 17-4 is reputed to be Hell on tooling, thus the high premium. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/21/2006 10:01:10 AM EDT
[#24]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/21/2006 3:55:49 PM EDT
[#25]
Ahh, but it is typically precipitation hardened (thus, the PH designation) AFTER machining, since this can be accomplished at low temperatures with minimal dimensional changes to the part. Granted, it may be somewhat harder on tooling, but I don't think that alone nor the price of the stock is enough to justify the added $$$. I'm not saying it isn't a good material for barrel steel, or that they are not a good product, it just seems as though the cost is disproportionate to what you get. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/21/2006 4:53:49 PM EDT
[#26]
How do you square that with the specs of the steel, and what the manufacturer's say about its proper use? I'm talking specifically about how it handles heat. Thanks. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2006 6:03:17 AM EDT
[#27]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2006 9:58:28 AM EDT
[#28]
Anyone know if this is the alloy Armstech uses? I've erad several accounts that their barrels are a special SS alloy, designed for high rates of fire and long service life. Just curious if it's the same.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2006 12:22:16 PM EDT
[#29]
Did not say it would not stand the heat, just made the statement that it would not stand it any better than the heat treatment specs of 4150 I am familiar with and the hardness is much less than typical chrome overlays. I think you guys have established that the Noveske barrels may be at least as good as 4150 CMV chrome lined but I don't see any evidence in the round counts to suggest it is substantially better from a durability standpoint still yet, at least not enough to justify the cost. I'm sure they are a good product, I just think in my case I will stick to the 4150. A chrome lined barrel is pretty darn easy to clean too, don't see how it could be much easier. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2006 12:57:50 PM EDT
[#30]
Maybe the 17-4 PH is more resistant to erosion from the hot gases than the 4150 chrome lined???? Even though it is not as hard, I have seen enough funny behavior in metals that makes me think this could be possible.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2006 1:11:52 PM EDT
[#31]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2006 1:14:19 PM EDT
[#32]
I believe you, I'm just trying to get all the details I can about them to decide whether I want one or not. Do you think it may be more erosion resistant than the 4150 chrome lined also? Since it is not an erosion/corrosion type mechanism probably not, but just curious.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2006 12:30:46 AM EDT
[#33]
Well okay, fair enough. Who did the testing thou? In your post you alluded to a lot of 'they' and 'them' and 'the customer', so I'm naturally curious. Have a good one. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2006 7:09:21 AM EDT
[#34]
[THEY, THEM, THE CUSTOMER] = TIER ONE ASSETS WHO SHOOT PEOPLE FOR A LIVING + THE SHOOTERS WHO TRAIN THEM
WES GRANT M.S.T.N. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2006 9:58:23 AM EDT
[#35]
I think AR15.com should disallow people making claims of these secret squirrel, tier one, CAG, Delta, Dvgrp, Virginia boys using, testing, requesting their stuff...
It's unprovable, so - as we have recently seen - it's easy to fib about it. Not pointing any fingers, just trying to keep things honest, don't you know, eh? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2006 1:29:25 PM EDT
[#36]
THEN, BY ALL MEANS, TAKE IT UP WITH THE STAFF. YOU CAN CONTINUE TO DEBATE THE QUALITIES OF NOVESKE 17-4 BARRELS WITH OTHER AR15.COM MEMBERS AND DEALERS WHO DO NOT CARRY NOVESKE PRODUCTS, HAVE NEVER LOOKED DOWN THE BORE OF A 17-4 BARREL WITH A BORESCOPE, MET JOHN NOVESKE AND STAFF, VISITED HIS FACILITY, OR EVEN LAID EYES ON A SINGLE NOVESKE BARREL. PAUL AND I ARE OUT OF HERE. WES |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2006 1:35:14 PM EDT
[#37]
peace out, eh?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2006 1:37:31 PM EDT
[#38]
locked
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
