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
Posted: 4/30/2002 7:30:02 PM EDT
OK, I am about to buy a Rock River Arms
16", Mid length handguard upper...

My choices of barrel metal are Chrome Moly
or Stainless Steel. They both have .223/5.56 NATO chambers so that is not an issue. I can also get them chromed (if stainless can even BE chromed - I don't know.)

I am not really looking for accuracy, just something that will be used for blasting, so I want it to be easy to clean.

What do you guys think? Which will last longer?
Thanks
Link Posted: 4/30/2002 8:07:44 PM EDT
For your stated purpose the Chrome Lined Chrome/Moly would be your best choice. It will last the longest and will clean up easier. The Chrome lining in the chamber will also help reliability.

After that the Chrome/moly will last the second longest; stainless will have the shortest life. Nobody chrome lines stainless barrels (I don't even think its possible).
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 12:15:15 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Forest:
After that the Chrome/moly will last the second longest; stainless will have the shortest life.



Would you please give a pointer to the documentation on SS having a shorter life span the the nonchromed chrome/moly barrel.

Thanks,
mark
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 11:42:02 AM EDT

Originally Posted By budam:

Originally Posted By Forest:
After that the Chrome/moly will last the second longest; stainless will have the shortest life.



Would you please give a pointer to the documentation on SS having a shorter life span the the nonchromed chrome/moly barrel.

Thanks,
mark



I'll second that. Where's the proof of that statement Forest? I have never seen this in print, and have never found this to be true. As a matter of fact, the Navy is now considering (much to the consternation of the acquisition big-whig Vietnam era purchasing agents) going to un-chromed 416 stainless steel barrels in theor SopMod M4's The stainless steel have oout performed the chrome lined and chromemoly barrels consistantly. And, to think that a chromeoly barrel cleans easier than a 416 SS? BUNK!

Show us your proof.


Link Posted: 5/2/2002 1:32:49 PM EDT
Stainless steel has the shortest longevity? You mean I've been mislead all these years? Damnit!
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 1:42:17 PM EDT
"After that the Chrome/moly will last the second longest; stainless will have the shortest life. Nobody chrome lines stainless barrels (I don't even think its possible). "

Well at least know I have another reason to buy new upper. Seriously I am very new to AR's and when I bought it didn't know the above fact. Thanks for the info.

http://www.villagephotos.com/pubimage.asp?id_=234574
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 3:06:49 PM EDT
Stainless does clean easier than chrome/moly and has better heat resistance. That means the throats tend to last longer. If you want the best resistance & easiest clean up go with a chrome lined barrel.

However wear resistance (i.e. the rifling) is better for the chome moly. Noitce they make match barrels out of stainless because its easier to machine. I have worn out stainless .45ACP pistol barrels rather easily (within a couple of years)

Now the argument is do you worry about the rifling being worn early or the throat getting worn out early. My guess it depends on your style of shooting. Lots of FA or rapid fire the throat area is more of a concern and Stainless would be better. For slow fire where the barrel doesn't heat as much I'd be looking for a chrome moly.


the Navy is now considering (much to the consternation of the acquisition big-whig Vietnam era purchasing agents) going to un-chromed 416 stainless steel barrels in theor SopMod M4's The stainless steel have oout performed the chrome lined and chromemoly barrels consistantly



What are their criteria? Is this stock stainless or stainless with special hardening processes applied after production. To say something 'outperforms' w/o specifing HOW & in WHAT AREAS is meaning less. What I am concerned with and what the Navy is concerned with may be 2 different things.

For example I mentioned Stainless is better at resisting heat. Well that would make a nice perfomance plus for full-auto weapons. Hmm Navy M4s... that means SEALs / SOCOM. SOCOM troops have been buring out barrels early due to lots of full-auto fire (more than regular troops). Could that be a reason the Navy is looking at these barrels? Do you shoot lots of full-auto? If so then you might want to look at an OLY stainless with their Max-Hard treatment applied. Of course it costs a lot more too....
Link Posted: 5/8/2002 12:58:30 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Forest:
Stainless does clean easier than chrome/moly and has better heat resistance. That means the throats tend to last longer. If you want the best resistance & easiest clean up go with a chrome lined barrel.

However wear resistance (i.e. the rifling) is better for the chome moly. Noitce they make match barrels out of stainless because its easier to machine. I have worn out stainless .45ACP pistol barrels rather easily (within a couple of years)



So far you have expressed opinion based upon your experiences.

Can you point me to documentation that backs up your claims?

I would think National Match shooters choose SS because they get the best accuracy with it. This of course can happen because of multiple characteristics.

Easier machining is your suggestion. I would also like to learn about this also – documentation would be appreciated.

We can all learn I look forward to receiving documentation that supports your experiences, so that we may all be a more knowledgeable group.

mark

Link Posted: 5/8/2002 3:12:47 AM EDT
Here is some stuff to read about stainless from a barrel maker:

www.schuemann.com/

And if some of you had a borescope.........well, you would flip-out and then crap your pants.

Dave S
Link Posted: 5/8/2002 1:38:11 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Forest:
...stainless will have the shortest life. Nobody chrome lines stainless barrels (I don't even think its possible).



What are we talking about here? Barrel bore erosion? What is the demand on the barrel, in other words what is it's purpose for? That's like saying an apple is better than an orange because I like apple juice better... It's all relative.

Sorry to jump in late but I can confirm the Navy's testing of 416SS barrels, and the fact that they love them. If it weren't for a bunch of tired old generals who had their M16's rust up because they were sent to Southeast Asia with brand new, unchrome lined chromemoly steel barreled M16's and NO CLEANING KITS, or training on how to clean them, and were then supplied ammunition that made so much carbon that acid was forming in the monsoon moistened barrels within minutes, the whole of DoD would be purchasing SS barrels.

I have seen 416 SS barrels with 60K rounds through them, and still able to shoot 1.5 moa. Conversely, I have yet to see any chrome lined (to military specs) barrel go beyond 600 rounds of sustained full auto fire, or 1,000 rounds of intermittent full auto, and not have the chrome in the bore fail miserably, which is exactly why the SopMod people are trying desperately to get the old crusties to buy SS barrels.

Additionally, I went to the web site that Dave S. mentioned. I can't say I, or we at Safari Arms have experienced the same thing. And we have been in business for longer than 10 years or so. I also noticed that after all of his personal opinions on barrels steel, that he than introduces the greatest thing in barrel steel, that of course, can only be had from him. But, hey, maybe it is better, I can't say. You be the judge.

Tom S.
Oly Arms
Link Posted: 5/8/2002 1:51:58 PM EDT
I have heard that stainless while very durable, is temperature sensitive ie it warps more so than other kinds of metals. Which would seem to me, would not do much for accuracy. What is different about the stainless steel used in rifle barrels? Anybody remember the Delorean? It was made out of stainless and had a heck of a warping problem. I too am stuck on what kind of material I want in my barrel.
Top Top