AR Sponsor
Posted: 10/9/2008 2:53:56 AM EDT
|
Are the barrels he has in stack right now the same one that almost put him out of work? His prices are pretty good. I am looking into a 16 or 18 inch 6.8. I an kind of confused about the performance between his original 4 groove 1/11 and the over chromed one. I reload so I what could I expect from his over chrome barrel with 110grn 16 inch barrel. Some crony data would be great. AL |
|
Interesting 6.8mm SPC testing thread above which may be of use to you on the 4 groove 1/11 twist issues: www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=121&t=369145 mike |
|
Apparently only some of the barrels Cardinal Armory has have the chrome problem, so it's a roll of the dice whether you get a good one or not. There is a more in depth report over on 68forums.com, including pressure data. The Cardinal Armory barrel with excess chrome still performed better with lower pressure than the SAAMI 1:10 barrel from DPMS. |
|
I purchased a 16" lightweight bbl. from Cardinal Armory at about the same time and from the same batch of barrels that had problems. I am one of the lucky ones (I guess) as mine eats any ammo I feed it from the hottest handloads to SSA combat loads to mild commercial loads. I love my 6.8 and now use it more than any of my AR's in 5.56 especially for 3-gun matches. MadDog 
|
|
I lieu of Tim coming here and posting himself, I can tell you this: Prior to this unfortunate discovery, the SPC II, 1 in 11, 4 groove barrels were really the only ones on the market which handled the hotter rounds consistently well. However, based on conversations with Tim and our testing, some barrels were affected by two different problems: 1) Superior Plating applied a chrome layer that was too thick, exceeding the SAAMI tolerance for bore constriction. Since Tim did not have an air gauge, and he trusted both ER Shaw and Superior to send him back a barrel that was to specs, he got burned. 2) ER Shaw barrels have enough imperfections in the bore that there might be "tight spots" where the button either chattered on its way through, or inconsistently bored the blank, leaving tight spots along the length of the barrel. These were discovered by us when we ran a pilot down the bore. If chrome were applied too thick, and it builds up on these spots, the bore could be as tight as .003 or .004" too small, possibly even spiking pressure with commercial loads. Overall, this appears to be the situation: 1) not all the barrels were similarly affected. Some are tight because of a mass-production manufacturing process, and the chrome exacerbates this. 2) chrome lining was over-applied and made a very few bores with the right spec, too tight. 3) Not all Cardinal barrels are tight, but some of those made in the last year, have to be presumed so. Mine is pretty uniform, but .276, and it does occasionally pop a primer with the SSA 115 grain combat rounds. That is my least favorite bullet anyway, so I just don't use them. I have to load to the barrel, but it is exceptionally accurate, loves the Barnes .276 bullets and I will be keeping mine. It is still my favorite barrel. 4) If you buy one, then Tim is simply saying that it is hit or miss as to what you'll get. They are priced accordingly. He can't possibly afford to test every barrel now, nor to air-gauge them, because many people are asking for refunds if they have tight bores. All in all, this is one of the saddest stories in all of 6.8 history. Tim is a great guy that had good intentions all along, got extremely busy because of his great product and service, and he go burned when the quality control slipped. The KT-68 forever changed the 6.8 for the better, and Tim is one of the pioneers of the entire premise of the "new, improved 6.8." Today, it bears little resemblance to the lame cartridge that we had at the beginning, and he still deserves a lion's share for the credit. You guys are a very discerning bunch, I'll tell you that. And Tim, I truly do wish you well in your future endeavors. I trust we will all be hearing from you again .... ETA; after my chamber was polished by Tim, I still had the same issue.... SSA 115 grain OTM combat rounds were at the edge of acceptable pressure, and would show swipes and occasionally pop a primer...this indicated that the bore was tight. The pilot confirms that, but it is very close to spec at only ~.001" tighter. The bearing surface of that bullet is the largest in the 6.8 lineup, and if you are going to have pressure signs, it should be with that round. |
|
Although I have posted this information previously on the 68forum, I thought it appropriate to post most of those details here to shed some light on my personal experience with the current Cardinal 6.8 SPC barrels. It is only my own personal experiences but I thought it was needed to provide some balance to the negative reports of undersize Cardinal bores to illustrate that NOT all barrels are affected with this undersize condition. The following LONG post contains excerpts from three separate posts: Re: Current “potentially undersize” Cardinal barrels… I feel they are great barrels regardless of a very small percentage reporting high chamber pressures when using combat loads. The barrels Tim is now shipping from current inventory have been checked for undersized chambers, and reamed and polished to size where needed. The workmanship is excellent. However, he cannot GUARANTEE that all barrels will shoot Combat loads. If you plan to do so...then Denny's or Constructor would be the way to go. However if you plan to shoot SSA commercial loads for hunting...a Cardinal barrel would be my first choice. My own opinion is that the undersize bores involved a VERY small number of affected barrels that proved to be under spec. out of MANY that were produced and sold without pressure issues. Yes...there have been documented cases of barrels that would not shoot combat loads without excessive pressure signs. However, I think the problem was overemphasized to some extent because Tim did not want ANY sub standard barrels to reach customer hands and was willing to share all the negative details of this problem openly. I now have seven Cardinal 6.8 barrels all of which were manufactured during the time frame when Tim experienced undersize bores from Superior plating. I have checked all the minimum bore dimensions of these barrels with pin gauges and have yet to find one undersize. They all check within spec of .2700" or larger. In my case, I never intended to shoot combat loads through all seven barrels. I would not be hesitant to buy more barrels from Tim as they remain a great bargain. At $180...for an ACCURATE 11:1 Chrome Lined SPC II barrel they are a steal and they won't last forever. When Tim is sold out...that's all there will be ever again. Kerry _____________________________________________________________________ I prefer a Cardinal barrel in 1:11 twist SPC II chamber over a 1:10 twist barrel from Stag , DPMS or RRA for several reasons: 1. The 1:10 and 1:9.5 twist barrels ALSO may not handle the combat loads without high-pressure signs because of the faster twist rate. Those barrels that have the improved SPC II chamber spec will reduce this risk but may STILL be no better that the current Cardinal barrels at handling Combat loads. 2. Historically, the Cardinal 6.8 SPC barrels have been more accurate than chrome lined barrels from other entry level 6.8 SPC barrel suppliers. 3. The incidents of tight barrel bores have been VERY small and have created high chamber pressures only with combat loads or hot reloads. 4. For the average hunter, standard commercial loadings will most often be used and even the rare “tight” bore barrels will, in nearly all cases handle the commercial loads without a problem. 5. If you reload…lets assume in the worst case scenario that you might receive one of the rare “tight” bore barrels from Cardinal and use of combat loads show signs of high pressure. First you still have the ability to use standard commercial loads. As a reloader you also have the ability to work up your own reloads to the point you begin to see high pressure…and then back off. Your reloads may not as potent as the combat loads…but still above commercial velocities. 6. Many who have reported “tight” barrels have reported a restriction in the bore when attempting to pass a .2680” diameter pin gage through the bore. I would contend that a large percentage of these reports were normal burrs at the location of the gas port. This burr is present on all barrels and the normal recommended procedure is to just shoot it out with the first round fired. Because many of these barrels were tested with pin gages before the barrels were fired…a burr at the gas port may have contributed to additional “tight” bore reports that were not actually tight. 7. You state that your use will be in the 100-300 yd range. Most who are using combat loads or reloading for maximum velocity are trying maximize the 6.8 SPC performance to the maximum possible and extend the effective range of the cartridge beyond your 300 yd. limit. It does not appear that maximum loads or combat loads are needed to achieve your goal. In my own situation, I checked seven barrels with a .2701” dia. pin gage. This diameter gage is .0001” WITHIN the correct bore diameter specification of .2700” to .2720”. However on three barrels a gage as small as .2691” would not pass. Had I not checked further these barrels would have been reported as “tight” undersize bores by many owners. However, it was obvious the gage was sticking at the gas port and a visual inspection of the bore confirmed this. I used a .270 cal bronze bore brush and made two to three passes down each of the “tight” bores. After doing so, two of the three barrels allowed a .2701” gage to pass through the bore without restriction. Both were actually within spec. but were “tight” because of the burr. The third would not allow a .2696” gage to pass…again sticking at the gas port. Knowing that the gas port diameter on a 16 “ or 18” mid length gas system is a .0860” diameter, I used a #44 drill to carefully clean the gas port by hand. There was an obvious burr that was still located at the gas port. This burr would have been removed once the barrel was fired…but I want to determine if this barrel was also within spec. After continued effort to remove the burr using the numbered drill, I brushed the bore again with the .270 bronze brush and checked again with a series of pin gages. NOW the barrel would allow a .2696” gage to drop through the bore without restriction. A .2699” gage still had a slight restriction at the gas port. With light finger pressure a cleaning rod could easily move the gage past the gas port and no other area of the bore was restricted. In effect, the smallest bore gage to pass was only .0001” below the .2700” minimum bore spec. Above and below the gas port a .2701” gage would pass without restriction. I am confident that after the first shot the burr will be gone and the entire barrel will allow a .2701” gage to pass. So what does this all mean…? I contend that it illustrates that the constricted bore problems reported are not as widespread as many people think. Have there been Cardinal barrels tested that have experienced high pressure signs with combat loads or hot reloads? Certainly. Art at SSA and others have data to positively corroborate that contention. But I do not think it is as widespread a problem as many believe. I think some of the reported overpressure signs may not have been directly related to an undersize bore. Some may have been the result of undersized chambers, which Tim has addressed by reaming and polishing all chambers now. Other high-pressure signs may have been timing or recoil buffer issues. I think the number of “tight” bore reports have been overstated due to barrel restrictions that were in actuality related to gas port burrs. As reported by Cardinal the excess chrome issue has been a sporadic problem. Of all the barrels sold by Cardinal Armory since July of 2007...a period of over 14 months of sales, I am aware of fewer than ten barrels that have been confirmed to have high pressure signs due to excessive bore chrome. That is a VERY small percentage of barrels produced. For those who might say…put your money where you mouth is…I have…. Has any other 6.8 SPC owner purchased more than (7) Cardinal barrels for personal use? ALL of my barrels were produced during the period of questionable plating quality. These include 16” lightweight, 18” standard weight, 20” fluted and 18” unfinished. ALL of these barrel’s bores are within spec. when checked with precision pin gages. I can’t provide a better recommendation of the Cardinal barrels than that. BTW, I have no connection to Tim or to Cardinal Armory other than I feel he has gotten a bad rap because he was honest enough and open enough to share his dirty laundry with anyone who would listen. And for that…and a bad vendor…he is now loosing his business. Some on the 68forum will not agree with me…but I would not hesitate to buy another Cardinal barrel over a Stag, DPMS or RRA. If you want an accurate chrome lined barrel at a bargain price, plan to hunt and do not plan to push the envelope with reloads, a Cardinal barrel will serve you very well. Kerry __________________________________________________________________________ I just received three additional 6.8 SPC barrels from Tim at Cardinal that were shipped from his current barrel inventory. All three barrels were among those with bores plated by Superior plating. All have had the chambers inspected and polished as needed. When they arrived, I inspected each for minimum bore diameter using “Z series” gage pins ranging in size from .2680” Minus to 2.700” Plus. A “Z series” gage will have a maximum tolerance of .0001”. This means a .2700 Minus gage should measure .2699” and a .2700 Plus gage should measure .2701”. Note that the correct specification for 6.8 SPC bore diameter is a nominal dimension of .270” +.002 -.000”. Basically this means a bore within spec must measure from .2700 to .2720”. If a .2700 Plus gage passes through the bore unrestricted, we know, that at least for bore diameter, it is within specification and exceeds the minimum bore diameter required. We cannot measure the groove diameter without an air gage so the gage pin method ONLY determines the size of the minimum bore diameter. Some have contended that a .2690 gage should be used to determine if a bore is undersize…allowing a .001” clearance between the gage and the bore. I would disagree that this clearance is necessary and in fact will not gage the actual bore diameter accurately. If the bore is clean and the gage is clean and temperature of all components are at room temperature… a .001” clearance is excessive and will hinder making an accurate bore measurement. Certainly if a .2690 gage does not pass, the bore is excessively undersize. But the fact that this size gage does pass is not a guarantee that the bore is within specification. Note that I am NOT attempting to make any correlation between these bore diameters and resultant chamber pressures. This is only being done to eliminate ONE variable which MAY have an influence on chamber pressures. However, there is substantial anecdotal evidence to suggest that if the bore diameter is within specification, the rifle will not exhibit high-pressure signs when fired. Having said that…these are the results of my inspection of these three barrels. The measurement procedure was as follows: After running a cleaning patch through the bore, I began with a .2680 minus” gage and attempted to drop the gage throughout the length of the bore. If it passed unrestricted I went to the next larger gage and so on until either a restriction was found, or the .2700 Plus gage passed through the bore indicating a bore within specification. The first barrel measured was a 16” lightweight. It allowed a .2700 Plus gage to pass and was within specification. The second barrel measured was a 18” barrel. It allowed a .2700 Plus gage to pass and was within specification. The third barrel measured was a 20” fluted barrel. It had a gas port burr that would not allow a .2690 Plus gage to pass. I then ran a bronze 270 cal brush down the bore twice and re-measured. A .2695 Plus gage will still hang at the gas port. After hand reaming the gas port with a #44 drill bit, a .2700 Minus gage would pass with light restriction at the gas port. A .2700 Plus gage would pass on either side of the gas port. I believe after once firing the barrel this light restriction from the gas port burr will be gone. I consider the barrel at .2700 Minus to be within practical specification for our purposes. The point of all this is that there are still good 6.8 SPC CL barrels in inventory at Cardinal which were plated by Superior and are still within specification. At $180- $220 each…these remain an OUTSTANDING bargain. Is there still a risk to buying one of these barrels from Cardinal? Perhaps… although I have yet to encounter a bad one. But the risk is extremely small. And if you encounter one, it should still be acceptable for use with commercial loads. I would not be at all hesitant to buy more…but after buying a total of seven 6.8 SPC barrels from Tim, I think I have enough for my own needs. For those who might question my background in precision measurements, I am a retired Manufacturing Engineer, Journeyman Tool Room Machinist, CNC Programmer and machine shop owner. Kerry |
Kerry +1, good post |
|
The very vast majority of the 1:9.5" and 1:10" twist SPC and SPCII chambered rifles will not handle the hotter loads, period point blank. You want SPCII or DMR chamber, 1:11" or 1:12" twist I'm going 18" barrel, DMR chamber 1:12" 3 groove for my setup. It will handle everything I throw down it's throat... |
|
Thank you very much that was the most clearly written post on this I have read. You just sold a Cardinal barrel for Tim. Ill be ordering soon. I have spent more this year on ARs and reloading than I have in the past 3 or 4 combined. so I have to either shmooze the other half or sneak it by her. AL |
Tim is a good guy with a great business/work ethic. I would not hesitate to buy anything from him, even with the known issues... |
|
I ordered three more of Tim's 6.8 barrels last night online and received confirmation this afternoon that they shipped today... That makes a total of (10) of the 6.8 SPC barrels that I have bought from Tim. This morning Tim formally reported that Cardinal Armory is closing and that he began working today in a 50-60 hr per week new job. http://68forums.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3915 However his web site remains open and all current inventory is being sold below his cost. Do yourself a favor...and Tim as well, by buying what you can from him while his prices are low and at a time when he can use the sales to help meet his expenses. When his current inventory of 6.8 SPC barrels are gone....that's all that will ever be produced. In 2-12 months people will lament the fact that they did not buy a Cardinal 6.8 SPC barrel when they were still available at bargain prices. Don't be one of those people. "He who snoozes...looses...!" Kerry |
|
I've been wanting a 6.8 for a good long while now. BRD is a Black Hole as has been noted many times before now. Shame it took this to motivate me. So now I have a 6.8 for better for worse. Purchased, 1-18" barrel, 1-5C1, 1-CProd. 18rd mag., and 1-YHM ML smooth forend. Those Items will be joined by a bolt yet to be purchased and joined to a lonely CMT with m4 cuts that only had brief duty with a 5.56 barrel. Now should I put it on my CAV AID lower or or my A2 stocked lower with the two stage trigger? Also need new scope mount and scope, hmm...Black Hole. I did get 4 boxes of SSA (should be good for a couple of deer/hogs). I won't be one of those people Kerry. |
|
HTR, very nice post. You recognized Tim Hicks for what he did for the 6.8 community. He definitely possesses the knowledge and wisdom that demonstrated what the 6.8 capabilities are. I admire Tim for standing up and doing the right thing, and recognizing the reality and gravity of his situation. Facts are facts though as far as the consumer is concerned, and the facts are that the barrel manufacturer ER Shaw and the chromer Superior grossly manufactured barrels so far off specs that every manufacturer that buys their components should test them immediately. In the 6.8 barrel test, Model 1 Sales had a CL barrel that was clogged as well so this isn't just confined to Cardinal Armory. I wonder if ER Shaw makes barrels for Model 1 sales? I'll be leery of anything with ER Shaw or Superior plating associated with it. When it gets down to it.. it is buyer beware and consumers not willing to gamble should buy from a reputable company that has a warranty and the means to honor the warranty. Cardinal isn't going to be around any longer. This is a fact of business. If you want to buy a Cardinal Armory barrel you are taking that risk. There have been other posts from Cardinal barrel owners who stated their barrels were showing pressure signs with "standard" loads. So let's not sugar coat the situation. If you want to buy 10 barrels go right ahead, but let's make sure everyone knows there are more problems out there than a few. I mean really, if it were just a few barrels, why is Cardinal throwing in the towel? I could afford to throw a few away and stay in business. No, sorry, the problem is bigger than that. This is a quality control issue as well as a liquidity issue. These are common signs and causes of a business in financial trouble. If you want to take a chance, buy a barrel or ten. Your opinion may change if you get a bad barrel that has problems with standard loads, or you may be perfectly happy. Keep in mind, no refunds and no exchanges once Cardinal is gone. If you want to help Cardinal out, but aren't sure about buying a barrel, buy some of the accessories Tim has for sale. As for barrels, there are other options, and there are some great ones coming very soon for those who can wait. |
|
From the posts on the 68forums of those that have bought barrels and tested them, there would seem to be very few barrels that have not handled "combat" loads with no signs of pressure problems. Yes, as acknowledged by most prior posters, there have been a few, apparently very few, buyers that have received a barrel that would not handle a "combat" load without signs of overpressure. So, as acknowledged by most, there is some element of risk. Others have bought multiple barrels and all have worked as intended. For the price, it seems that the barrels are hard to beat when compared to many existing barrels from other companies that have never been able to handle the high pressures. There is an excellent chance that the vast majority of Cardinal barrels will handle the high pressure loads for far less money than other barrels that will not. Certainly from the standpoint of accuracy, they work very well and are more than up to the task when the current price is compared to others. Go to 68forums and check out the opinions of owners. 
|
|
I purchased my Cardinal Armory 16" Lightweight BBL. at the same time and probably from the same batch as the problem barrels. Mine has been flawless with absolutely NO PROBLEMS. I haven't done any "scientific testing" but rather purchased and shot EVERY commercial load on the market including every COMBAT load that SSA sells. I have even cooked up my own HOT loads and my bbl. is just fine. My only regret is that I didn't buy the bbl. AFTER the problems were brought to light as I would have gotten a much better price. Take the chance, you won't be dissappointed. MadDog
|
No answer to the question above? It was a batch of barrels with problems, some worse than others. Another example, if it were just a few of the barrels in the batch then why would Cardinal Armory submit two overchromed barrels to the 6.8 testing? Wouldn't you send two "good" barrels to a published test and evaluation? Think about it. I'm just saying be realistic and fair with people unfamiliar with the situation who are looking to purchase a Cardinal Armory barrel. Tim told us what was happening and didn't mislead anyone, so you guys shouldn't sugar coat this to a potential 6.8 shooter either. If everyone was happy with their barrels, Cardinal would still be pumping out uppers. |
|
Ask BillClo about his. Pressure signs with commercial ammo. :) HTR stated his barrel's performance a few posts ago. Two barrels submitted to the 6.8 testing had issues. Plus Cardinal noticed overchroming earlier in the year when it came out there was excess chrome in chambers. It's a big batch, not a few. Those are facts, not feelings. I was about to buy Cardinal, yep, just about to order when all this came out. I've been in the business world long enough to know there's more going on behind the scenes than what you get out of a press release. For me I feel you should get it right the first time with a purchase. I can afford a few dollars more for a White Oak Armament 6.8 1:11, SPC II barrel and have a warranty and knowledge the barrel will perform. AR15Performance has LW50 6.8 barrels coming, and there's also the Xtreme upper coming early next year that will surpass Cardinal's level. Or you can buy a Cardinal Armory barrel that'll probably end up handling the same ammo you can run in a Stag or RRA that comes with a warranty? The choice is yours. I don't care what you buy, but I do believe in sticking to the facts and not misleading someone away from reality. |
Since I believe in complete openness, objectivity and seek the truth, I should clarify here: I am the one that secured the barrels for the 6.8 Performance test. I had talked to Tim many times before the test, and I had been a loyal customer, and I liked his design. A 16" superlight, purchased by me, on the open market so to speak, was the one that I donated for use in the test. Tim did not have an opportunity to "hand select" a barrel. The 20" barrel we had, was a used barrel, purchased by me from another 68Forums member. So, again both barrels were randomly purchased "off the shelf" specimens. Also, I want to note this: I talked to Tim about the barrels I had, and told him that I wanted to place a pressure transducer on them to see what really would happen and how they would measure up against the new "gold standard"...the 12 twist, 3 groove DMR chambered barrel. When I asked if he wanted me to discuss the results with him before writing the report, he said "Well, no, you don't have to do that. I know that you guys are looking to do very objective testing, and I don't want to color your report with any bias whatsoever." This speaks volumes about Tim, and his desire to let the market....and all of you...see what we found, when doing a scientific test, since there has been so much BS and conjecture over the last 3 years about the 6.8 My 16" superlight upper is believed now to be .276 in the bore, and .269 at the riflings. It is obviously affected by this issue, as it occasionally pops primers from the SSA 115 OTM load. However, I stated before and will reiterate. This makes it perfect for the .276 Barnes TTSX bullets, which, with the gas rings, decrease pressure substantially. Thus, I get 2700 FPS, and 2/3 MOA with this barrel and no pressure signs with that load. It is NOT a POS and currently my favorite. Tim himself said that he could not test every barrel in that batch, plated by Superior. All of the barrels he now has in inventory were plated by Superior plating. Therefore, Tim has said that all the barrels in this batch must be expected to have the same "quality control" questions as regards the work done by Superior Plating. THAT is why, on each page, there is the disclaimer stating" These barrels are NOT guaranteed to handle SSA combat loads." The buyer should simply take that FWIW. You can also see that some purchasers here have bought them since and they are having no issues. I have also bought another from Tim since then....a 12.5" SBR, and so far, it too looks like it does indeed make ejector swipe marks on the hottest loads with bullets of the largest surface area, like the 115 grain SSA combat OTM. I need to test it further, but it looks like, very anecdotally, that it too is a .269 / 276 barrel. Tim could not build uppers from any more ER Shaw barrels, after that last batch was received, because he could not afford to buy another inventory allocation, even if plated by US Chrome. He had to face the prospect that he would have to compensate every person that asked for a refund or exchange.... because he is an honest business person. Without a means to test the "new" barrels he would have to purchase from Shaw and then plate by US chrome, he still then could not guarantee the quality. This is ultimately what forced him to close. I do not believe that Tim's ethics or morals are what is in question. It was obvious to me he was an honest, ethical person that went out of his way for his customers, many of us whom became his friends. Just think how seldom it is that this happens any more, in business of any kind. This was, and is a very unfortunate situation. I will be buying one last 16" superlight barrel from him, so that I can loan this gun to my Hog hunting clients. I, better than most, know the risks and the benefits of buying a CA barrel right now. I will gladly take my chances at those prices. |
|
I feel bad for this guy everyone seems to love what he does and him as a person. From an outside look it seems he would have a lawsuit against the chrome company. Unless he did not have a contract with specs in writing. I am no lawyer though. I hate to see an honest man run down and out. I dont know him but wish him the best of luck. AL |
And that was the problem. Tim had a verbal agreement that would have been too expensive for him to pursue and prove. Not having a written contract with Superior Plating was an imprudent business move, but not an unethical one. He was too trusting for his own good. Sadly, having a good moral quality like that can be dangerous for your business. |
OK...have you posted the inspection results of the Cardinal 6.8 barrel you bought...? I have...and posted the detailed inspection results above. Yet after you suggest forum members should "look at the posted results by those that have actually bought the barrels..." you then criticize me and HTR for "misleading" potential buyers...for not being factual. Apparently our reported success does not coincide with what you believe the results SHOULD be...therefore we are somehow misleading other potential buyers. Based on my own positive experiences...it would appear that those who are inferring that all Cardinal barrels are bad and that buying one now is a very high risk...are the ones misleading potential buyers If you want FACTS and not conjecture...The FACTS are that the three additional barrels that I ordered on the 12th and shipped on the 13th were received Thursday. Two of the three checked .2701" (within spec) on minimum bore diameter. The third checked .2699" at the gas port due to a residual gas port burr. But this barrel checked .2701" above and below the gas port with no restrictions. This makes 10 barrels now that have checked good...out of 10 bought. Those are the Facts... I am aware of Bill's bad barrel. I am aware of the two barrels tested by HTR...It is common knowledge that SOME Cardinal barrels have checked undersize. But I contend that the problem has been overstated. The entire purpose of my original post was to offer the other side of the story...that there are MANY...repeat MANY Cardinal barrels in private hands that are within specification and are not undersize. If the problem was as widespread and all encompassing as you contend...there would have been a firestorm of complaints leveled at Tim for all the bad barrels shipped over the past 14 months...the period that Superior plating was Tim's chrome supplier. Yet in those 14 months there have been fewer than 10 barrels reported to be undersize and creating high pressures. If this problem was as widespread as you suggest...I would have expected to at least have experienced one bad barrel out of ten purchased...but I have not. As a result, I bought two more 16" SPR barrels with the DLC Diamond coat finish on Thursday. When they arrive I will inspect them and report the details. Based on my own PERSONAL experience...I expect them to be within spec just like the first ten. If they are not..I will report that. I too want to just report the facts...and the facts regarding my multiple purchases are that ALL of the barrels I have purchased have been good. I too could have "spent a little more" and bought a WOA or a barrel from Harrison or ANY 6.8 barrel for that matter. But I chose to buy Cardinal barrels and I DO NOT regret that decision as obviously I am willing to buy more...still. For me, they continue to be the best value. If a potential buyer needs the reassurance of a warranty...buy something else. No one is twisting your arm. I am just sharing my own experiences after multiple barrel purchases. Please keep in mind that high pressures are not just a function of bore constriction. High pressure can be the result of several variables. The timing of the gas systems is often overlooked. Yet different weight bolt carriers, buffer weights, and buffer springs can have considerable effect on timing...and pressures. The fact that high pressure signs are found on one barrel dues not immediately condemn the barrel. It may in fact be the cause, but eliminate the other variables first before jumping to the conclusion that you have a bad barrel. Just my $.02... Kerry |
|
If one was to go ahead and purchase one of these barrels and it does turn out to have a tight bore, is there any method one could use to open it up a bit? Hand lapping or something similiar? I ask because I went ahead and bought a 12.5" from Cardinal just to get into the 6.8spc game. I am fully aware of the problems, but decided to go ahead w/it anyway. I also hae a adjustable gas block from Paladin Machine and a LMT Enhanced Bolt coming for it as well. Does anyone think that a PRI Fat Boy Gas Tube could also help w/pressure issues? Figured if I end up a fanboy of the cartridge, I will be ordering custom barrels from here on out anyhow. And sorry about the Hi-Jack. |
|
I doubt you are going to have any problems. If its a bit tight, you may have to back of on your loads about 50 fps or so or run a tubbs kit on it. I am getting 2550 with barnes 110 ttsx with a 16" barrel and 30.5gr h335. I have loaded it up to 32gr, but they were ultra hot and I was getting cratered primers, swipe marks and the beginnings of case separation. Next is RL 10x and hopefully 2700. If I dont get 2700 I will run a tubbs final finish kit on it to loosen it up a bit. That said I shot an 80# hog 2 days ago. The shot was low and back and not a good shot, as my scope was off. Ran 20 yds and dropped like a rock. Nothing wrong with with that TTSX bullet at 2550 either. |
Either you are totally devoid of reading comprehension, or you have just taken the wrong poster to task. I have neither criticized you, or HTR, or anyone else for that matter. I suggested that potential buyers read the comments and find some reassurance that buying a Cardinal Armory barrel at the current prices was a heckuva deal. Do you understand my stance more clearly now? Gotta love the 'net |
Strawdawg, I owe you a public apology. I did indeed take the wrong poster to task as I was referring to comments made by STLTXN...and confused his post with yours. You did indeed support the position HTR and I had taken. The references in my post were to STLTNX in his post that followed yours. Again...Totally my mistake...! Sorry that I cast dispersions where they were not warranted. Kerry |
All too true. For anyone wanting to go into business for yourselves, there is a valuable lesson to be gleaned from this...put EVERYTHING in writing and have it notorized (or some other legal contract method, depending on your state). |
| I bought a Cardinal's 18" barrel before the chroming issue came to light. Subsequently, I bought one of the 16" superlight barrel because of the discounted price. Both barrels have no issues with standard SSA 15 gr. OTM and Hornady 110gr. BTHP TAP. One day I'll get a few boxes of combat loads to try. Quite frankly, being confined to shooting the standard loads does not bother me at all and I'm sure the paper target or bad guy couldn't tell the difference anyway. |
No problem. :) It is easy to get confused when dealing with multiple quotes. |
Before offering up solutions, read the entire episode. Pin gage is not accurate enough. They need to be air gaged. |
There has to be more to it than that.
There IS more to it than that... The issue is this: Measuring the minor diameter of the bore with a pin gage is only measuring one of two diameters of the bore that control chamber pressure. However, because the rifling button produces the groove diameter and bore diameter at the same time, in a single operation, we can be fairly positive that both diameters will be within tolerance as long as the rifling button is not damaged. If the minimum bore diameter checks good with a pin gage…then the groove diameter should also check within tolerance with an air gage. Since none of us have dedicated .2770” four groove air gages at our disposal, the use of the pin gage method to check minimum bore diameter provides a good “indication” that the groove diameter is OK as well. BUT…keep in mind…The only way to Guarantee the groove diameter is within tolerance is to air gage it. Then we look at the chrome plating. When done correctly the chrome deposition will be uniform throughout the chamber and bore. If the application of chrome reduces the groove diameter by .0001”….it should also reduce the minimum bore diameter by an equal .0001”. However, what happen at Superior is that on some select barrels they allowed the barrel to remain in the plating process too long…resulting in a greater chrome thickness than was specified. As a result, Tim began reaming and polishing EVERY chamber to insure that they were within spec as some chambers were reported to be undersize before this added operation was performed. But there is no good method to easily remove excess chrome in the bore. However, as long as this “excess” chrome was deposited evenly…then a pin gage would be able to find those undersize barrels that have too thick a chrome layer…. and could be pulled from inventory. I have not confirmed this with Tim, but I do suspect it has been done since every barrel I have received in the past month are passing the gage pin test. In addition, I have not heard of a single report of an undersize barrel received in the last month The problem for Tim is that measuring the minimum bore does not GUARANTEE that the groove diameter will be within spec. To do that requires a specially ground air gage head made specifically with clearance for four groove rifling, which is used to precisely measure the groove diameter. These specially gages are both expensive and require long manufacturing lead times. Tim had ordered such gages, but they were not going to be available for 6-8 weeks. Because of Tim’s business ethic he was not willing to sell the barrels in inventory and still guarantee that they could shoot combat loads until every one had been 100% inspected with these new gages. However, the financial situation was that Tim and his business could not survive for 6-8 weeks without any barrel and upper sales. He simply did not have the cash reserves necessary. He had hoped an investor would step in to provide the operating capital necessary to get him through that 8 week period . However, after one party indicated interest…that “investor” never committed. Tim had to make payments to his vendors to keep his business open and the only way he could do so was to sell the existing barrels with a disclaimer that he could not guarantee that ALL barrels would handle combat loads…even though a VERY LARGE percentage have done so. The groove diameter of a barrel has a much larger surface area that contacts a bullet than does the minimum bore diameter. This is simply because the rifling is very narrow and the grooves, by comparison, are very wide. As a result, the groove diameter will influence chamber pressure more than the minimum bore diameter. Until Tim could quantitatively measure the groove diameter…he could not, in good conscience, guarantee the barrels would shoot combat loads. It was as simple as that. He did not have the financial resources to order new barrels that would be gauged 100%…and he could not survive for the time needed to build the air gages needed to insure that current inventory barrels were within tolerance on BOTH the minimum bore diameter ( easy to measure) and the groove diameter ( very hard to measure accurately) The reasons Tim was forced out of business are: 1. He was under funded and did not have the cash reserved to handle a financial hit the size of what he was facing. 2. The chrome supplier had failed to check ALL barrels to insure that every one was within spec. 3. Tim did not have a written contract with the chrome supplier and the supplier would not accept fault for the few undersize barrels that were surfacing. 4. Tim is too honorable to leave his customer’s holding the bag when this problem surfaced. If he could have done it…it would have replaced every bad barrel with a 100% inspected, in tolerance barrel. Because of item #1…he could not do that. For him the only solution was to sell what barrels remained with a disclaimer…so that he could pay off his debts…and close his business. A less honorable businessman would have sold all remaining barrels without the “combat load” disclaimer and then refused to replace the few that were undersize. Unfortunately, some barrel buyers like Billclo purchased his barrel BEFORE these issues were known and well before any disclaimer was posted. Tim, wanted to resolve these problem barrels with good replacement barrels, but he had no way of measuring a replacement without gauging the groove diameter. So he had no way to guarantee that a replacement would be better than the original undersize barrel. And…he had no funds to order another new batch of known good barrels. It is my understanding that Bill and Tim did come to some agreement in resolving his particular barrel problem. What makes this is frustrating is that Tim is one of the good guys. He did not and does not deserve this fate. Only ONE barrel (Billclo) that I am aware of, showed high pressure signs with standard commercial loads. All other Cardinal barrels have operated normally with standard ammunition, and MOST will handle the combat loads as well, as reported by MANY owners on this forum and the 68forum. There are MULTIPLE manufacturers of 6.8 SPC barrels on the market with 1:9.5 and 1:10 twists combined with early SPC chambers that will not shoot combat loads. With one exception, the WORST of the Cardinal undersize barrels were STILL able to shoot the same standard ammunition as these other manufacturer’s barrels yet you don’t hear people complaining about these other barrels when they can’t shoot combat loads… Tim was one of the 6.8 SPC pioneers who based his entire business around this one cartridge. He built a reputation for stellar customer service that was the envy of every competitor. He produced some of the most accurate chrome lined 6.8 SPC barrels on the planet. And did all of this with fair and reasonable prices. When you begin to be made aware of the total picture and the circumstances involving Tim and his efforts to be fair to the customer, even at his own expense… to be totally open about sharing details of his dirty laundry, holding nothing back and covering up nothing…you begin to appreciate what a raw deal he has been dealt. The demise of Cardinal was a combination of errors and circumstances that has taken away for good… one of the best sources of quality, accurate, 6.8 SPC barrels from us all. A year from now people will lament that they did not buy more of Tim’s barrels when they were still available. They are EXCELLENT barrels at bargain prices…and many shown on the Cardinal web site are now… sold out… never to be replaced. It is really a shame… Kerry |
|
UPDATE: I have finally found an undersize Cardinal barrel.... Details and inspection results here: 68forums.com/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=4049 Kerry |
AR Sponsor