Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 5/24/2002 2:21:20 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/24/2002 2:26:21 PM EDT by ArmaLiter]
I finally was able to make it to a 100yard range today along with my Ruger M77VLE rifle with a Tasco 10X42M Super Sniper scope.
The VLE comes with a nice 2-stage trigger and with a Harris S-series benchrest bipod.
The only thing that I didn't care much about using the bipod that without any sandbags or something to hold the bipod in place, the rifle jumped to the side after each time I fired. Next time I will remove the bipod and use an adjustable rifle rest.
I forgot my boresighter so I went through alomost a whole box of ammo in order to get the scope sighted in just right.
The weather was in the low 60s and some wind. I tried to take the shots when the wind died down somewhat.
With only 4 rounds of Federal Gold Medal Match .308 168gr Sierra matchking BTHP left, I took made this final group before calling it a day.
The shot in the very center was my 1st shot, the shot to the upper left was my 2nd, my 3rd went to the upper right and my 4th shot went back to the center just below my 1st shot.
I'm sure next time I can get even a tighter group after some more familiarity with the rifle and using a more stable rest. But for taking it out for the first time, I'm please with the results.



ArmaLiter

Link Posted: 5/24/2002 2:24:11 PM EDT
Nice shooting.

Can you post a picture of the rifle, too?
Link Posted: 5/24/2002 2:46:28 PM EDT
Sorry, I don't have a pic of my own rifle, but here is a link to a site on sniper rifles that includes the Ruger M77VLE with pic.


www.snipercentral.com/mk2vle.htm

ArmaLiter
Link Posted: 5/24/2002 3:11:30 PM EDT
You didn't do any barrel break-in?
Link Posted: 5/24/2002 7:31:02 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Jim_Dandy:
You didn't do any barrel break-in?



Yes I did. Actually, I did put some rounds through the rifle at 25 yards a couple weeks ago before I had the chance to get to the 100 yard range. That is when I performed the proper barrel break-in. But I had to remove and reposition the scope afterwards and that is why I had to resight in my scope again at 100yrds. When I shot the rifle again at the 100yard range, I continued the barrel break in.
What I did was fired 10 shots, cleaned barrel and then cleaned the barrel again after each 4 or 5 shots I took. I only put 45 shots total through the rifle and so I don't believe the barrel is totally broken in yet, so I think I'll continue performing the breaking-in procedure until I put another 40-50 rounds through it.


ArmaLiter
Link Posted: 5/24/2002 8:59:59 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Jim_Dandy:
You didn't do any barrel break-in?



"Break-in" is a scam invented by a custom Brl maker to sell more Brls. If the usefull life on a Brl is about 3500 rounds, and he can get you to fire 100 or more rounds "breaking in", he sells that many more brls.

Cleaning the packing grease out the the brl and then just shoot the darn thing.

BTW: nice rifle. I once saw Rugers .223 police rifle. Both the .223 and .308 version are very rare. Where did you find one?
Link Posted: 5/24/2002 9:30:33 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Jim_Dandy:
You didn't do any barrel break-in?



i hear this all the time...in reference to rifle barrels. but i never hear it in reference to handguns. what's the difference?

also, if a gun can't shoot outta the box (factory grease clean-up not withstanding) what good is it?

i can't understand the point of "barrel break-in". must be poor engineering. i'll bet my first door prize at the BRC that the russians don't bother breakin' in the AKs.
Link Posted: 5/25/2002 12:38:37 AM EDT
ARLady,

You are correct in that the Russian don't pamper the ak so.

However, precision firearms are worthy of all the addition attention lavished on them. Rare bolt action rifles are capable of under a minute of angle accuracy. They deserve to be babied. After all this is a rifle better than most shooters and if not treasured it will not remain such for long.

Dan
Link Posted: 5/25/2002 2:01:52 AM EDT

"Break-in" is a scam invented by a custom Brl maker to sell more Brls. If the usefull life on a Brl is about 3500 rounds, and he can get you to fire 100 or more rounds "breaking in", he sells that many more brls.

Uh, okay. If you say so.


i can't understand the point of "barrel break-in". must be poor engineering.

The point of barrel break-in is to lap, or smooth out the microscopic burrs and rough places remaining in the bore after the rifling process. The resulting smoothed surface won't pick up fouling as quickly and cleans easier. This doesn't apply to chrome lined barrels as found in military-type rifles like the AR15 or AKs.
Link Posted: 5/25/2002 5:02:38 AM EDT
Link Posted: 5/25/2002 5:59:43 AM EDT
Waverunner, what made you sell your VLE?
I see you also had a Super Sniper scope on yours.

ArmaLiter
Link Posted: 5/25/2002 6:03:26 AM EDT
Waverunner, where did you get the anti reflective screen for your scope? I've been looking for one.
Link Posted: 5/25/2002 7:04:36 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Jim_Dandy:

"Break-in" is a scam invented by a custom Brl maker to sell more Brls. If the usefull life on a Brl is about 3500 rounds, and he can get you to fire 100 or more rounds "breaking in", he sells that many more brls.

Uh, okay. If you say so.



Me and Gale McMillan.

yarchive.net/gun/barrel/break_in.html
Link Posted: 5/25/2002 7:09:29 AM EDT
If you say so and it makes you feel better, then follow that line of thinking.
Link Posted: 5/25/2002 10:11:20 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/25/2002 10:15:33 AM EDT by Redmanfms]
I tested this break-in theory about smoothing burrs and such with two identical unshot rifles. One I cleaned every 20 rounds, the other one my friend did the break-in to and then cleaned every 20 rounds. The other shooter and I found that the was not an appreciable difference between the two rifles after the break-in for many hundreds of rounds. Now (a couple years later) we still go out to the range and find that the rifles shoot just about the same. When cleaning the rifles we would count the number of patches that we needed to get the barrels clean, there were occasionally slight differences (sometimes the broken-in rifle required more patches, sometimes my rifle), but nothing consistent.

My question is this: If this is done (and supposedly good) for match rifles with chrome-moly steel barrels, why isn't it done for match pistols (or even recommended for pistols)?



Edited to add: We used the same rifle (Savage 110), same scope (Bushnell Trophy 3-9x), and exact same cleaning equipment, down to the exact same lubricants and cleaning chemicals.
Link Posted: 5/25/2002 10:44:58 AM EDT

My question is this: If this is done (and supposedly good) for match rifles with chrome-moly steel barrels, why isn't it done for match pistols (or even recommended for pistols)?

Actually they do, cast bullet shooters in particular.
Link Posted: 5/25/2002 12:11:13 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Jim_Dandy:

My question is this: If this is done (and supposedly good) for match rifles with chrome-moly steel barrels, why isn't it done for match pistols (or even recommended for pistols)?

Actually they do, cast bullet shooters in particular.



I've shot in bullseye and silhouette for a while and never seen or heard of anybody doing it.

If you can prove that there is a quantifiable difference between break-in and no break-in I might be swayed, but in my experience it hasn't made the least bit of difference.
Link Posted: 5/25/2002 4:44:08 PM EDT

I've shot in bullseye and silhouette for a while and never seen or heard of anybody doing it.

And this proves what? That you shot in a few matches? And.......?


If you can prove that there is a quantifiable difference between break-in and no break-in I might be swayed, but in my experience it hasn't made the least bit of difference.

I don't recall making an inference that I was trying to "prove" anything, do you? You're welcome to whatever beliefs and opinions you hold dear.
Link Posted: 5/25/2002 7:31:53 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/25/2002 7:38:52 PM EDT by Redmanfms]

Originally Posted By Jim_Dandy:
And this proves what? That you shot in a few matches? And.......?





Actually, I'm up to about 60 bullseye and silhouette. Of course, that's not counting other types of competition. How many matches have you been to?


I don't recall making an inference that I was trying to "prove" anything, do you? You're welcome to whatever beliefs and opinions you hold dear.


Wow, the old Sacred Cow come back. Way to go champ. Actually, it appears to me that I studied the matter and found no difference. You, on the other hand, seem to be completely unwilling to accept anybody's point of view. You derided AR15fan for stating that break-in is a scam and went on to state that break-in laps the barrel, improving accuracy. You then go on to infer that I'm inexperienced because I gave testimony that seems to indicate your Sacred Cow is dead.

My opinion is backed up by a scientific experiment that I have conducted and several years of personal experience. Your opinion appears to be based on whatever you hear over and over again. You should be an honorary liberal for that (you know, the whole "repeat the same thing over and over and it becomes fact" dogmatic system).
Link Posted: 5/25/2002 7:47:58 PM EDT

Wow, the old Sacred Cow come back. Way to go champ. Actually, it appears to me that I studied the matter and found no difference. You, on the other hand, seem to be completely unwilling to accept anybody's point of view.

And whose were you accepting besides your own?


You derided AR15fan for stating that break-in is a scam and went on to state that break-in laps the barrel, improving accuracy. You then go on to infer that I'm inexperienced because I gave testimony that seems to indicate your Sacred Cow is dead.

Derided? Please give examples. You appear to be picking a fight where there is none.
Link Posted: 5/25/2002 8:52:36 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/25/2002 8:53:43 PM EDT by Redmanfms]

Originally Posted By Jim_Dandy:
And whose were you accepting besides your own?



I can accept it if you can provide some evidence to indicate that it is anything other than a tedious waste of time and ammunition. Since you reacting to that with the "I'm not trying to prove anything" (when you are in fact trying to prove something) response of the intellectual coward.


Derided? Please give examples. You appear to be picking a fight where there is none.



Uh, okay. If you say so.



If you say so and it makes you feel better, then follow that line of thinking.



Innuendo is a powerful thing. You imply that he (and did it again to me) is just a Sacred Cow worshipping idiot who doesn't know anything. When pressed on the subject you:


And this proves what? That you shot in a few matches? And.......?


Implying of course that I'm inexperienced (argumentation through discreditation) thereby rendering anything I have to say as unsubstantiated.


Link Posted: 5/25/2002 9:03:18 PM EDT

Innuendo is a powerful thing. You imply that he (and did it again to me) is just a Sacred Cow worshipping idiot who doesn't know anything. When pressed on the subject you:


Implying of course that I'm inexperienced (argumentation through discreditation) thereby rendering anything I have to say as unsubstantiated.

Maybe you're just too sensitive. What is it exactly that you're wanting to see/hear to placate you? You know, most insurance plans offer some sort of mental health benefit. It most likely doesn't have to include a hospital stay in the nuthouse or prescription drugs. It can just be someone (HEADSHRINK) who's willing to listen to your Napoleanic ramblings and offer a kind voice where mommy and daddy failed. If you'd like, I can look it up in my insurance plan. I'm sure it's similar for your part of the country.
Link Posted: 5/26/2002 2:21:53 AM EDT
In my bench rest shooting days I tried both breaking in and not breaking in. I even used the same rifle with the same manf. on the barrels. My experience for what it is worth is that breaking in will only help a barrel that is rougher than normal. In other words if a barrel has a bore that could benefit from lapping it will benefit from breaking in. That said if we all shoot our guns we are all breaking them in to one degree or another. Is the slight difference between the "breaking in way" of firing your first shots and just shooting the rifle really important? My experience shows in most cases no.

PS. Before anyone ask, no it not all that hard to hit a bench rest and yes they are hard to clean.
Link Posted: 5/26/2002 6:57:10 AM EDT
I just want to add that whether or not breaking-in either rifle or handgun barrels actually helps or not that I break in all the barrels of all my firearms within the first 100 rounds I shoot.
If the process didn't actually do anything for my barrel's performance then I maybe wasted a few minutes of my time each time I cleaned the barrel after making a few shots and a few cents extra on bore cleaner and patches. Big deal.
The thing that I do know that it didn't hurt my barrel at all and if breaking-in DOES help, then I didn't waste my time.

ArmaLiter
Link Posted: 5/26/2002 9:49:23 AM EDT
Link Posted: 5/26/2002 9:50:21 AM EDT
Top Top