The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

Steve E wrote:

Hubert wrote:Does LW barrel need more cleaning due to its different alloy? I rather let the chemicals do their job but it takes me "ages", I mean full afternoon, for LW barrel decent cleaning.

I have shot out several LW barrels and they need/take no more cleaning than any other Stainless barrel. If you run/break the barrel in properly it should take no more than 10 minutes to clean it. I actually think that once run in they clean easier than other stainless barrels.

Steve E wrote:

meles meles wrote:Run in ?

Don't start us on that owd chestnut, ooman ! A properly made barrel requires no running in. A barrel that requires running in hasn't been made right !

It's not the barrel but the leade that needs running in. No matter how good your reamer, no matter how good the machinist, when the chamber is cut the lead will have machining marks. Look at these with a boroscope and they look like the teeth on a b****** file. It is these marks that you are evening out/removing by running in your barrel. This is the area that will attract most fouling if not done properly.
Are you really going to tell the likes of Krieger, Bartlein, Obermeyer etc that they are wrong and that the advice they give to their customers is bull.
I know who and what I believe and you are not a one of them. I trust my barrel makers,I trust my machinist/rifle smith. I don't trust striped mono-chrome mammals, who have no pedigree.

AR15 wrote:Lothars LW50 is martensitic stainless steel. I have never had a problem chambering it or profiling it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martensiti ... less_steel

AR15 wrote:What do you make of this 410

http://www.schmolz-bickenbach.us/filead ... -0x-xx.pdf

meles meles wrote:

Steve E wrote:

meles meles wrote:Run in ?

Don't start us on that owd chestnut, ooman ! A properly made barrel requires no running in. A barrel that requires running in hasn't been made right !

It's not the barrel but the leade that needs running in. No matter how good your reamer, no matter how good the machinist, when the chamber is cut the lead will have machining marks. Look at these with a boroscope and they look like the teeth on a b****** file. It is these marks that you are evening out/removing by running in your barrel. This is the area that will attract most fouling if not done properly.
Are you really going to tell the likes of Krieger, Bartlein, Obermeyer etc that they are wrong and that the advice they give to their customers is bull.
I know who and what I believe and you are not a one of them. I trust my barrel makers,I trust my machinist/rifle smith. I don't trust striped mono-chrome mammals, who have no pedigree.

If you always do what you have always done, you'll always get what you always got.

Modern machining has moved on, ooman. We re-iterate: If a barrel needs running in, it hasn't been properly made. By that, we mean it hasn't been made with the best available tekkernoloji and an understanding of state of the art machining practice. A modern rifle barrel such as that developed for CHARM (go google) can hit a target, first time, at 3000 mards, with considerably less than 1 MoA accuracy, every time. It uses ESR (electro slag refined) steel and is machined such that the first round it ever fires is its most accurate.

Modern machinists have PhDs, often several of them, not greasy paws and swarf in their tea...

AR15 wrote:Will the higher sulfur content of the 416 result in increased wear in semi auto or full auto (hot) applications. Its been my understanding that due to the increase of sulfur in 416 over 410 that it has worse wear resistance characteristics, while being easier to machine. I believe the chromium content also has some significance too.
Would 416R not be better in this application due to the reduction in sulfur over the standard 416?

Would be interested to hear.