• If you are being asked to change your password, and unsure how to do it, follow these instructions. Click here

.243 Barrel Life and Cryogenics

The only barrel I have truthfully torched beyond belief was a Ruger #1 stainless in
243 win.
The round count was around 788 rounds and she went from a 1/2moa weapon to a 3 minute weapon... in about 5 rounds.
It was VIOLENT.
Granted- I did baby it for a while, but this was used as a varmint rifle that had shot strings at prairie dogs that were 12-25 rounds back to back. Not very decent for barrel life.
Cleaning habits were sound IMO... however, I WAS running 46gr of I7828 on a 100 grain Sierra or a 95 CT, with a 210M... both shot same POI... oddly enough.

So I had MANY factors against me... warm load, and long shot strings.
Ruger has also been known to have "soft barrels"...
 
I certainly won't claim to be an expert, but I was always under the impression that barrel life was determined to some extent by throat erosion due to the rifling being exposed to essentially a blast furnace. High temperatures and pressures basically melting the exposed surfaces of the rifling. My thoughts were always towards using an alloy with a higher melting point. Anyone every try making barrels out of titanium? I know it would be cost prohibitive, but other than that?

I think titanium to be HARD not TOUGH,
too brittle to handle barrel stresses. ?
 
So much for the titanium barrel idea. I had a feeling there was a reason no one seemed to be trying that, but I figured it was cost or difficulty tooling. Given its uses in other high stress applications, I figured it would be strong enough, but it sounds like it might be a case of different kinds of stresses. Thanks for clearing that up, not that I would ever have been able to afford one...
 
My first answer to anybody asking this question would be to give the data to a metallurgical engineer with the alloy number.

Of course he's going to be somewhat blunt, and probably make you a little mad at yourself for even asking the question. The term "cryogenics" is not new. Came into serious use during WWII, but now is kinda left in the shadows. Yes we still do it, but not all the time. Yet we now use it with non ferritic alloys now days. Still it has it's pluses (which I'll tell you about later). Believe it or not it was developed as a fast way to cold stabilize aluminum. They started doing this in freezers that would hold the parts (engine blocks for aircraft) for two to three weeks. Then somebody came up with a LOX and even later nitrogen that could be done in 36 hours.

When you heat treat a piece of metal (anykind), you are faced with a way to quench the heat treat (or to stop the heat). Yes you can do this via air, and with very low carbon steels this works well (think 8620 in a normalizing process). This does everything the cold process does, but with heat. Of course you can't do this with a hardened piece of metal. Why can't I normalize a hard piece of steel? (in our case a prehardened piece of steel) Because the heat process will draw the RC number back (soften it). With this in mind we will simply toss the steel in the deep freezer (nothing like the one in your house) and let it set there for a month or two. Otherwise we do the cryogenics process. I for one still think the slower process is better, but we also don't usually have 90 days lead time!

What do we want to get (results) out of cold stabilizing or cryogenics? I want to see the parts machine easier, and most of all change less during the process. The steel (in this case) is quenched via oil or water (I cannot by contract discuss the process in depth). In a perfect medium we want to quench the metal instantly all the way into the very center. Forget that idea!!! From the moment I dump that chuck of iron into the tank the whole world changers for the iron. Gets hard and develops stress points, but even six months later it's still going thru the quench process (bet a few here didn't know that!), and is actually changing three years later. Just they hand God dealt us. So now we have a piece of steel with some "retained martensite" (a form of granular structure that's not so good). How do I get around it? Best thing I can do is to dump it in the deep freeze (Cryo being preferred as it a much faster process, and time is everything in the quench process). The cryo process really helps the granular structure form correctly. Won't make a barrel last a shot longer, but it will do something. It will change less from the time it's cold to when it's heated.

To take this further; lets look at the stainless steel products that are so in vogue these days. 416 SS seems tobe everybody's favorite. Machines well, and can be bought prehard. (important). Barrel makers have their own special 416 recipe. Too many have an extra shot of Sulphur added, and that's not so good. They do this to aid machining and gain an increased tool life at your expense. Still remember that as the barrel heats up and then cools; it lets go of some items retained in the alloy. In this case it's Sulphur. Making the surface somewhat porous. The real bad side of 400 series steel is a little ditty called retained martensite. Now some guys are doing stainless in some exotic alloys that are quite a bit better. Think 15/5, 17ph4 re-arc met, and if your brave 18** numbers. These are well known to be hard on tooling and machinery. Still machined everyday by folks that know their business. With these you can be assured they have a cryo setup close by, and may use it as much as three times during machine processes. Makes it easier as well a much more stable. Yet all this will still not gain you one more shot.

gary
Gary,
Say a given barrel is properly stress relieved before fring,
After firing say 400 shots how much stress is re- induced into the steel after so much work?
Wouldn't this change barrel harmonics.?
 
I think titanium to be HARD not TOUGH,
too brittle to handle barrel stresses. ?

Titanium is not hard, but fairly though. Problem is that it will work harden, and while machining will setup some crazy harmonics. I've seen inserts literally turn to dust from the harmonics. Strength wise (without doing some digging) I'd put the strength per square inch is right there with 4140, but with a fraction of the weight. Many people quote that titanium is stronger than steel. Kind of a vague statement. Pound for pound it is, but in real world stuff it square inches of area.

gary
 
Fact of the matter is that if rifle barrel manufacturers could do it cost effectively and have the same safety margins and life as SS and chrome moly blends, they would have done it. ( The biggest problem I have heard of is a need for a steel liner??)
That's where barrels that are carbon fiber wrapped come into play, but that's an entirely different conversation.
 
Gary,
Say a given barrel is properly stress relieved before fring,
After firing say 400 shots how much stress is re- induced into the steel after so much work?
Wouldn't this change barrel harmonics.?

now that's the question of the day! I know they have a set of factor numbers for artillery with a new barrel when a certain number is reached. Be pretty hard to do with a rifle what with chamber pressures all over the place. Let alone heat. What I think (just me) is that one would have monitor the bore every fifty rounds or so for heat cracks (some call it checkering). At least that will give a good hint of a time line.

The next serious issue is the barrel alloy. Lets just say you bought a barrel blank cut from 4350 prehard steel, or even 416 SS steel. Fired about 850 seriously hot loads thru it. Then the throat was beginning to go south. You call JE or Shortgrass to have them get ready for a rebarrel job out of the same 4350 or 416 steel. Next barrel goes south at 775 shots. But you say it's the same kind of barrel! Wrong! Steel varies from lot to lot number, and in many cases ingot to ingot. What I'm saying is that there's just no good way to figure barrel life that rings a bell with me. I might add here that the only way to stress relieve a barrel without softening the metal, is to try a deep freeze, or induce compressive stress (won't be much help). I seriously doubt the deep freeze will help as well.

We start out with fine cut barrel that is machined as best as we can get. We check the barrel hardness, and it comes in at 32RC no matter where we test it. Still there's no way to check the bore. About the only thing else todo is a sonic test or X-ray the steel.
Yet every time we pull the trigger, we shoot heat thru the barrel. The heat tends to draw back the steel (lessons the RC number). Still not the entire blank, but the surface of the bore (maybe .030" deep at worst). Of course that will increase the wear.

gary
 
Ok. have you ever measured the actual time that an average barrel is in service?
What's a good average number... 2-5 seconds of actual throat life?
gun)
 
Warning! This thread is more than 9 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.
Top