Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 5/6/2005 11:35:05 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/7/2005 5:51:53 AM EDT by mach6]
That barrel seemed to have been quite a hot commodity while it was available. Just out of curiousity, how could it have been improved? Any suggestions?
Link Posted: 5/6/2005 11:49:53 AM EDT
I heard that the barrels won't accept normal handguards, and they only accept free-floated handguards. Go ahead and check ADCO, their site states this.

For those that want free float builds this is fine. If I paid $250 for a barrel, I would be quite mad if I couldn't use handguards like they were intended, not to mention finding out after I had paid.

But, theres always Murphy's law to worry about.

Link Posted: 5/6/2005 1:00:30 PM EDT
Due to a drawing error, the gas block was 1/8" out of position. Personally, I haven't had any issues with either handguards or function as a result and the barrel has performed well for the 90 rounds I have through it.



Other than that, the only other thing I would have done differently was to parkerize under the front sight base; but lack of parkerizing in that location is practically industry standard for commercial and LEO guns.

So far, I like both the barrel and contour. The recoil impulse is noticeably better than the carbine as well. If you are looking for a chrome-lined 16" 1/7 barrel, I think this is currently the top of the heap. However, there is a lot of development and research coming into the market this year, particularly with regard to barrels. The mere fact I bought one almost guarantees this approach to barrels will be old news before Fall 2005.
Link Posted: 5/6/2005 1:51:20 PM EDT
90 rounds is hardly a noteworthy testing period. Most will be fine with the fixes being offered or without any fix at all.
Link Posted: 5/6/2005 2:11:49 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mongo001:
90 rounds is hardly a noteworthy testing period. Most will be fine with the fixes being offered or without any fix at all.



I wasn't implying it was. I was just stating how many rounds I have downrange with it. I figure most people can draw their own conclusions from there. Otherwise, I agree with your second sentence.
Link Posted: 5/6/2005 2:35:58 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/6/2005 6:26:51 PM EDT by mongo001]

Originally Posted By Bartholomew_Roberts:

Originally Posted By mongo001:
90 rounds is hardly a noteworthy testing period. Most will be fine with the fixes being offered or without any fix at all.



I wasn't implying it was. I was just stating how many rounds I have downrange with it. I figure most people can draw their own conclusions from there. Otherwise, I agree with your second sentence.



Sorry, that sounded a little rougher than I intended it to. Only time and use will tell if any of these solutions will work long term.
Link Posted: 5/6/2005 6:25:32 PM EDT
What would you think of this barrel in a Wylde chambering?
Link Posted: 5/6/2005 9:31:14 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mach6:
What would you think of this barrel in a Wylde chambering?



My reaction: what would the value of a Wylde chambering be?

The point, at least as I remember it, was to get a mid-length that was as close to military-specification as possible. That is, 1:7 twist, chrome lined, M4 feed ramps, etc. The chrome lined barrel thing would be counter to the purpose of a wylde chamber.

That said, even though the barrels aren't match quality I think they're prefectly fine for anything short of, well, match use. I'd bet they're more accurate than most of the 1:9 twist barrels you see for sale.

KoAT
Link Posted: 5/7/2005 5:50:56 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/7/2005 5:54:54 AM EDT by mach6]

Originally Posted By King_of_All_Tyrants:

Originally Posted By mach6:
What would you think of this barrel in a Wylde chambering?



My reaction: what would the value of a Wylde chambering be?

The point, at least as I remember it, was to get a mid-length that was as close to military-specification as possible. That is, 1:7 twist, chrome lined, M4 feed ramps, etc. The chrome lined barrel thing would be counter to the purpose of a wylde chamber.

That said, even though the barrels aren't match quality I think they're prefectly fine for anything short of, well, match use. I'd bet they're more accurate than most of the 1:9 twist barrels you see for sale.

KoAT


====================
Actiually, the Wylde chambering would not run counter to the application of a chrome lining -- if the chrome lining was of a type that did not inherently compromise accuracy. The pages from FN Mfg's experiences with their SPR and M240B barrel manufacturing technolgies are what I have in mind. ARL at APG has done some interesting and most promising experimental work in this field, as well. So let's just make this not-so-broad assumption that this technology could migrate to the 5.56mm barrel in question. What I'm getting at is what could could turn out to be an optimal do-everything "RECCE" type barrel.
Link Posted: 5/8/2005 5:46:57 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mach6:
Actiually, the Wylde chambering would not run counter to the application of a chrome lining -- if the chrome lining was of a type that did not inherently compromise accuracy. The pages from FN Mfg's experiences with their SPR and M240B barrel manufacturing technolgies are what I have in mind. ARL at APG has done some interesting and most promising experimental work in this field, as well. So let's just make this not-so-broad assumption that this technology could migrate to the 5.56mm barrel in question. What I'm getting at is what could could turn out to be an optimal do-everything "RECCE" type barrel.



I see. I should have said "what would the point be for this barrel". Again, the point of this barrel was to get as close to mil-spec as possible.

As for the broader purpose of a Wylde chambered chrome lined barrel:
1. Completely agreed that chrome lining doesn't necessarily mean a tremendous accuracy loss. In fact, Colt barrels are generally very accurate. Not quite win-Camp Perry accurate, but plenty accurate for any practical use IMHO.

2. The Wylde chamber was designed for high power rifle competition - specifically to be mimimize bullet jump when shooting 80gr. SMK's and the like at bullseyes 600yds. away. For all but the high master classification, the accuracy one can obtain from a 5.56 chamber will be just fine - and really the only way to take a significant advantage of a Wylde chamber is to handload - preferably for that particular chamber and using consistently the same make of powder and bullet.

Again, I just don't see the point of using the Wylde chamber for anything practical. The accuracy potential gained is made irrelevant if you use mil-spec ammo and is not significant enough for anything practical.

My $0.02
Link Posted: 5/9/2005 5:16:35 AM EDT

Originally Posted By mach6:
What would you think of this barrel in a Wylde chambering?



Mine is looking like a 1.5-2MOA barrel with PMC 223A right now. I hope for better with match ammo. I guess whether this barrel would justify a Wylde chamber would depend on how much the Wylde chamber alone can improve accuracy.
Link Posted: 5/9/2005 11:57:07 AM EDT
Okay, points well taken on the Wylde chambering. So let's say you settle on a true 5.56mm chambering and proceed with the chrome lining if accomplished in such a way that military requirements accuracy is not inherently compromised. With MK262/264 ammo in a 16" tube, and all other weapons factors being equal, I would imagine you'd have more than an acceptable level of accuracy and reliability out to say...600M. Would you agree to that?
Link Posted: 5/9/2005 1:38:57 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/9/2005 1:40:23 PM EDT by Bartholomew_Roberts]

Originally Posted By mach6:
Okay, points well taken on the Wylde chambering. So let's say you settle on a true 5.56mm chambering and proceed with the chrome lining if accomplished in such a way that military requirements accuracy is not inherently compromised. With MK262/264 ammo in a 16" tube, and all other weapons factors being equal, I would imagine you'd have more than an acceptable level of accuracy and reliability out to say...600M. Would you agree to that?



That's my hope. I plan to try the rifle shown above out at about 450m before June 1st. May be awhile before I can attempt 600m though.
Link Posted: 5/9/2005 3:25:19 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Bartholomew_Roberts:

Originally Posted By mach6:
Okay, points well taken on the Wylde chambering. So let's say you settle on a true 5.56mm chambering and proceed with the chrome lining if accomplished in such a way that military requirements accuracy is not inherently compromised. With MK262/264 ammo in a 16" tube, and all other weapons factors being equal, I would imagine you'd have more than an acceptable level of accuracy and reliability out to say...600M. Would you agree to that?



That's my hope. I plan to try the rifle shown above out at about 450m before June 1st. May be awhile before I can attempt 600m though.



I know of one that didn't fair too well at 600. It couldn't consistently score a hit on the 4' X4' target - yep, that's 4 feet X 4 feet. But, then again, it's a chrome lined "utility" barrel and precision isn't really expected out that far.
Link Posted: 5/9/2005 5:13:46 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/9/2005 5:16:07 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/10/2005 9:39:55 AM EDT by mongo001]

Originally Posted By bigbore:

Originally Posted By mongo001:
I know of one that didn't fair too well at 600. It couldn't consistently score a hit on the 4' X4' target - yep, that's 4 feet X 4 feet.



Musta been the shooter, everyone knows 1:7 barrels are more accurate



Didn't you notice me moving the target back and forth???? And you thought somebody else was scoring your target.
Link Posted: 5/10/2005 5:23:22 AM EDT

Originally Posted By mongo001:
I know of one that didn't fair too well at 600. It couldn't consistently score a hit on the 4' X4' target - yep, that's 4 feet X 4 feet. But, then again, it's a chrome lined "utility" barrel and precision isn't really expected out that far.



A chrome-lined barrel or one of these chrome-lined barrels?

I plink pretty regularly with my Bushy 1/9 HBAR (chrome-lined) at longer distances. 600yds is the longest I've done and I was able to hold all shots on the target using 55gr at that distance, though a lot fewer in the black than I would have liked. The main problem I have is that that particular barrel doesn't like the heavier rounds (68gr+) and the wind can really play hell with 55gr at that distance; but IDPA silhouettes and the occasional smaller target are doable - though the IDPA target is about as small as I can do and still be consistent.

I'd be disappointed if this barrel doesn't do at least that well.
Link Posted: 5/10/2005 5:28:49 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Bartholomew_Roberts:

Originally Posted By mongo001:
I know of one that didn't fair too well at 600. It couldn't consistently score a hit on the 4' X4' target - yep, that's 4 feet X 4 feet. But, then again, it's a chrome lined "utility" barrel and precision isn't really expected out that far.



A chrome-lined barrel or one of these chrome-lined barrels?



This was a Giff/CMMG barrel.
Link Posted: 5/10/2005 2:53:59 PM EDT
Did you guys test the same barrel with the same ammunition at any other distances and would you share the results? Thank you.
Link Posted: 5/10/2005 3:04:19 PM EDT

Originally Posted By wyv3rn:
Did you guys test the same barrel with the same ammunition at any other distances and would you share the results? Thank you.



IIRC, Steve had decent results at the 300yd line, but I witnessed horrilble results from the pits when he was shooting at 600yds. It was constant "Score 4" - "NO HIT".
Link Posted: 5/13/2005 12:39:48 PM EDT
is there an updated thread on these barrels?
Link Posted: 5/13/2005 12:54:26 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/13/2005 12:57:10 PM EDT by M4-guy]
Look here.
Link Posted: 5/30/2005 8:02:56 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/30/2005 8:03:34 AM EDT by chiz45]
I've put 400 or so rounds through mine, and have only had problems with South African Gazelle ammo. I have had no notable problems with IMI M193, Winchester M193, or Wolf 55 gr. polymer. My shooting went like this:

1st day: 90 rounds, 1 failure to eject (round stuck in chamber, requiring rod to push loose).


2nd day (no cleaning, no modification with the gun from day 1. I did experiment with a regular, H, H2, and 9mm buffer. I settled on an H2 buffer as my favorite of the bunch.): 90 rounds, with numerous failures to eject (all with SA ammo, cases that would NOT come loose, other than to use a rod down the barrel to push it out). Interestingly, I would shoot an SA round, it would get stuck; I would clear it, and shoot another, which would also get stuck. After clearing, and with no cleaning, I would insert a mag of Q3131A, burn 20 quick rounds, without issue.

3rd Day (Between Day 2 and 3, i cleaned it by way of chamber brush, bore snake, and cleaned the bolt carrier assembly. I replaced the current extractor spring with a green Specialized Armament HD spring, and replaced the gas rings with 1 pc McFarlands). Shot a variety of SA commercial, M193 Win; IMI M193, and Wolf Polymer. Again, experienced problems with the SA, but this time a different one. Rather than needed to rod out the empty cases, i would get some failures to close battery on live rounds, requiring use of the FA. Sometimes the bolt would not move, so i would need to TAP RACK to get it to go. I had ONE similar situation with IMI, but it was just once. Wolf is clearly underpowered compared to the other rounds--you can feel the recoil difference, but to it's credit, it cycled well.

Regarding the M4 cuts and feedramps: I opted for this cut, and had purchased an LMT upper to go along with it. There is definitely a shelf, where the barrel extension hangs over the cuts in the receiver. I confirmed this with a paperclip, gently up the ramp. I slowly hand cycled a few rounds to see how it would impact feeding, but it doesn't appear to cause any malfs--the bullet, by force of the bolt, contacts the ramp much higher than the extension/receiver mating surface. Is this normal? Is this an issue?

I want this gun to be 100 (or so)% reliable. I will try day 4 with just M193, and see what happens.

Link Posted: 5/30/2005 10:50:41 AM EDT
I have shoot 600 rds out of mine with no malfunctions, I have shot ga arms canned heat, TAP 75 and BH 77 blems from cableas. The gun hasnt missed a beat
Link Posted: 5/30/2005 11:39:25 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/30/2005 11:39:54 AM EDT by mongo001]
I had a very similiar issue like chiz.
Link Posted: 5/30/2005 8:59:57 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mongo001:
I had a very similiar issue like chiz.



similar to my first problem, or second?

Link Posted: 5/31/2005 12:28:44 AM EDT

Originally Posted By chiz45:

Originally Posted By mongo001:
I had a very similiar issue like chiz.



similar to my first problem, or second?




Yes.
Link Posted: 5/31/2005 5:10:10 AM EDT
Chiz, have you tried replacing the buffer with a standard weight buffer? I was working on a midlength the other day that was demonstrating similar strange failures to function. Once we replaced the heavy buffer with a normal buffer, it ran fine.
Link Posted: 5/31/2005 6:05:44 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Bartholomew_Roberts:
Chiz, have you tried replacing the buffer with a standard weight buffer? I was working on a midlength the other day that was demonstrating similar strange failures to function. Once we replaced the heavy buffer with a normal buffer, it ran fine.



I don't think i've ever tried a standard, just an H, H2, and 9mm. I can give that a go..unfortunately, i gave away all my SA ammo so no ability to test there.

I am not sure how a different buffer weight would affect the cases getting stuck in the chamber though, and my repeated attempts at hand cycling to remove them. But any excuse to get to the range to try out new theories
Link Posted: 5/31/2005 8:15:39 AM EDT
FWIW, mine was a standard buffer. My cases were sticking so badly, the case rims were being ripped off the cases.
Link Posted: 5/31/2005 9:15:43 AM EDT

Originally Posted By mongo001:
FWIW, mine was a standard buffer. My cases were sticking so badly, the case rims were being ripped off the cases.



The Specialized Armament spring eliminated that for me. Giff did send me a PM indicating that my barrel may not have had the chamber polished. For some reason, M193 didn't have this problem. I was thinking of picking up some M193PD to test fire.
Link Posted: 5/31/2005 9:20:57 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/31/2005 9:28:28 AM EDT by M4arc]
Chiz - It really sounds like an ammo issue to me. I've run about 750 rounds of XM193 & Q3131A through mine so far and I haven experienced any failures, of any sort.

I will say that unless the ammo is out of spec your rifle should shoot it but sometimes I've found a carbine or two that likes to be broken in before it shoots stuff like Wolf or the SA stuff.

Try some M193 or Q3131A and see what happens.

ETA: There seems to be a rash of these issues with SA ammo lately: www.jobrelatedstuff.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=16&t=236834
Link Posted: 5/31/2005 9:47:15 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/31/2005 10:00:50 AM EDT by mongo001]

Originally Posted By M4arc:
ETA: There seems to be a rash of these issues with SA ammo lately: www.jobrelatedstuff.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=16&t=236834



FWIW, the barrel in that link is also a CMMG barrel. Not stirring the pot, but just pointing out commonalities.
Link Posted: 5/31/2005 9:51:23 AM EDT

Originally Posted By mongo001:

Originally Posted By M4arc:
ETA: There seems to be a rash of these issues with SA ammo lately: www.jobrelatedstuff.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=16&t=236834



FWIW, the barrel in that link is also a CMMG barrel. Not stirring the pot, but just pointing out commanalities.



True enough but he did state that his rifle ran with Lake City & Winchester but puked on SA. Stoney-Point and MisterPX also reported the same problem on that thread but didn't state what make rifle(or barrles) they were running.
Link Posted: 5/31/2005 9:52:56 AM EDT

Originally Posted By M4arc:

Originally Posted By mongo001:

Originally Posted By M4arc:
ETA: There seems to be a rash of these issues with SA ammo lately: www.jobrelatedstuff.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=16&t=236834



FWIW, the barrel in that link is also a CMMG barrel. Not stirring the pot, but just pointing out commanalities.



True enough but he did state that his rifle ran with Lake City & Winchester but puked on SA. Stoney-Point and MisterPX also reported the same problem on that thread but didn't state what make rifle(or barrles) they were running.



Yep, I read that.
Link Posted: 5/31/2005 9:58:31 AM EDT

Originally Posted By mongo001:

Originally Posted By M4arc:

Originally Posted By mongo001:

Originally Posted By M4arc:
ETA: There seems to be a rash of these issues with SA ammo lately: www.jobrelatedstuff.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=16&t=236834



FWIW, the barrel in that link is also a CMMG barrel. Not stirring the pot, but just pointing out commanalities.



True enough but he did state that his rifle ran with Lake City & Winchester but puked on SA. Stoney-Point and MisterPX also reported the same problem on that thread but didn't state what make rifle(or barrles) they were running.



Yep, I read that.



And to be fair several on that thread reported to have fired tens of thousands of rounds with issue. It's possible, I guess, that there are a few bad lot numbers running around out there.
Link Posted: 5/31/2005 11:29:37 AM EDT

Originally Posted By chiz45:
I am not sure how a different buffer weight would affect the cases getting stuck in the chamber though, and my repeated attempts at hand cycling to remove them. But any excuse to get to the range to try out new theories



Yeah, that puzzled me as well. First magazine - unable to fire more than two rounds in a row as bolt overrides magazine for some reason. Naturally, we thought bad mag, so replace with a known good magazine - same problem. Only now we get stuck cases as well that have to be cleared by slamming the rifle down on the deck while pulling on the charging handle. Unable to fire even one magazine completely due to number of various failures.

Replace heavy buffer with standard buffer and no problems at all. Gobbles same ammo from same mags and no stuck cases.

I still have no idea why that would be the case; but that is just what I saw. Sounds like you may have something different though as this problem was consistent with both Q3131 and PMC.
Link Posted: 5/31/2005 1:02:25 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/31/2005 10:51:09 PM EDT by M4A2_L073754]
Are those "sticky" chambers chrome lined, BTW?

I´m just curious to know because my midlength barrel chamber is obviously not, however bore is. Markings on the barrel are "MP 5.56 NATO 1-7 CB".

MN

ETA: corrected some typos
Link Posted: 5/31/2005 4:29:58 PM EDT

Originally Posted By M4A2_L073754:
Are those "sticky" chambers chrome lined, BTW?

I´m just curious to know because my midlength barrel is obviously not. However barrel is. Markings on the barrel are "MP 5.56 NATO 1-7 CB".

MN



Your giffman barrel's chamber is not chrome lined?
Link Posted: 5/31/2005 4:32:05 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/31/2005 4:32:45 PM EDT by chiz45]
oops, negligent discharge
Link Posted: 5/31/2005 11:09:38 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/31/2005 11:21:22 PM EDT by M4A2_L073754]
double

MN
Link Posted: 5/31/2005 11:19:47 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/31/2005 11:22:51 PM EDT by M4A2_L073754]
No, bore and rifling are chromelined but chamber isn´t. Couple of pics from 20" and 11.5" Bushmaster chambers vs. 16" midlength. Any differences?





MN
Link Posted: 6/1/2005 3:37:29 AM EDT

Originally Posted By M4A2_L073754:
No, bore and rifling are chromelined but chamber isn´t. Couple of pics from 20" and 11.5" Bushmaster chambers vs. 16" midlength. Any differences?

www.sniperworld.com/ar/govtchamber4.jpg
www.sniperworld.com/ar/sbrchamber5.jpg
www.sniperworld.com/ar/reccechamber9.jpg

MN




the bottom pic doesnt seem to be chromelined
Link Posted: 6/1/2005 5:01:13 AM EDT
You guys had to wait how long for these fine barrels
Link Posted: 6/1/2005 5:49:47 AM EDT
I just look at my group buy barrel and noticed that the chamber does not appear to be chrome lined. The chamber is totally black on the face and my upper has had several hundred rounds through it and been cleaned. This is totally unacceptable. Further I compared my group buy barrel to another CMMG barrel. The 16", M4 profile CMMG barrel has a very distinct chrome "ring" around the out side of the chamber.
Link Posted: 6/1/2005 6:07:16 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Azalin:
I just look at my group buy barrel and noticed that the chamber does not appear to be chrome lined. .



damn. I'm at work, i gotta wait ALLLLL day before i can check this!
Link Posted: 6/1/2005 6:50:52 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/1/2005 7:03:51 AM EDT by NewbHunter]

Originally Posted By Azalin:
I just look at my group buy barrel and noticed that the chamber does not appear to be chrome lined. The chamber is totally black on the face and my upper has had several hundred rounds through it and been cleaned. This is totally unacceptable. Further I compared my group buy barrel to another CMMG barrel. The 16", M4 profile CMMG barrel has a very distinct chrome "ring" around the out side of the chamber.



What is it that you are looking at in the pictures above to tell if it's chrome lined?

Nevermind, I see it now.

I can't quite tell from the pictures of my chamber posted in the GB thread if mine is chrome lined or not. My initial impression is that it doesn't appear to be so . I'll have to check my barrel when I get home tonight.
Link Posted: 6/1/2005 8:38:38 AM EDT
I spoke with CMMG about the chamber appearing to not be chrome lined. They told me that the chamber appeared to not be chrome lined due to the manner in which the barrel was parkerized. Can anyone verify if this is true? I have always been under the impression that pretty much no finish would stick to chrome lining.
Link Posted: 6/1/2005 8:48:01 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Azalin:
I spoke with CMMG about the chamber appearing to not be chrome lined. They told me that the chamber appeared to not be chrome lined due to the manner in which the barrel was parkerized. Can anyone verify if this is true? I have always been under the impression that pretty much no finish would stick to chrome lining.



Well okay then, now we just wait and see until parkerizing wears off....

MN
Link Posted: 6/1/2005 9:20:17 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/1/2005 9:21:21 AM EDT by chiz45]
Looks like another few boxes will test the parkerizing theory for me!
Link Posted: 6/1/2005 9:22:47 AM EDT
Parkerizing over chrome............................
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top