Carbon Fiber Barrel Accuracy

[mountaincarver]

IMO I don't think a carbon wrapped barrel is more accurate but is usually as accurate as a quality made steel barrel. I own two Christensen arms rifles, my 6.5cm elr is very accurate. But had a 338 Lapua BA tactical that would not shoot good groups. Just traded it for a Christensen 338 Lapua TFM but haven't got to shoot it yet. What a cool gun carbon fiber everything and only 7.5 pounds.

i agree with this.

 

[mountaincarver]

throughout the winter while shooting in 15 to 60 degree weather, i am experiencing sticky bolt and a few case head cracks when cold. these are loads that show no signs when warm, and below book max. i feel this change is more pronounced with this barrel.

 

[zog]

It is a cut rifled steel barrel and that is all the bullet ever see's. They then remove material from the steel barrel blank so they have space to wrap carbon fiber around the steel barrel profile. The carbon fiber never comes into contact with the bore. So like any steel barrel cut rifled, CHF, Button, Broached the limiting factor is normally throat erosion and crown erosion. The reason Proof barrels are accurate is because just like Krieger and Brux they make very good cut rifled steel barrels. I have yet to see any research performed by a third party engineering firm that their carbon wrapping of the steel barrel they make actually does anything that is statistically significant repeatable way. Kind of like carbon fiber shift paddles in your BMW does not make the car any faster it is just man jewelry. You have to differentiate yourself from the large pool of custom barrel makers some how! Price is one way and gimmicks are another.

I agree and I don't.

It is hard to agree that the carbon does nothing. It sure seems that such a skinny barrel would whip like crazy, and the carbon wrap puts back most of the stiffness that is removed when turning the barrel down so far. Then you've got an almost-as-stiff barrel as you started with, with far less weight. Or a stiffer barrel than the same weight steel barrel; same idea. I don't think it's the same concept as decorative carbon components in a car.

I agree that it is hard to tell if the performance is from the carbon wrap, or if it's that these barrel makers are just wrapping cool looking carbon around their already excellent steel barrels. They need to keep a leg-up over so much competition, and enthusiasts are eager to spend on the latest thing.

I also agree that I can't find proof (pun intended) that the carbon-wrap concept works, from an independent controlled test. I would sure like to see it.

So far what I see is people who swear by their carbon barrels. Can't argue with them, many are probably better shooters and hunters than me. They love their carbon barrels, they admit that its partly how cool they look, but most people (including me) are not very objective about their own decisions.

It has been a year since this topic was posted - has anybody found any objective carbon wrap vs steel barrel testing? I would really like to see an independent marksman test equal weight and length fluted steel and carbon barrel from the same manufacturer side-by-side on identical setups.

Having said all that, being a gun enthusiast myself, I recently acquired my own Proof carbon barreled action. I'll see for myself when I get the rifle finished, but I won't know for sure if it will be any different than an equal weight quality steel barrel on the same setup. Unless I'm really proud of it, then it will no doubt be better.

 

[BrentM]

I agree and I don't.

It is hard to agree that the carbon does nothing. It sure seems that such a skinny barrel would whip like crazy, and the carbon wrap puts back most of the stiffness that is removed when turning the barrel down so far. Then you've got an almost-as-stiff barrel as you started with, with far less weight. Or a stiffer barrel than the same weight steel barrel; same concept.

I agree that the barrels are excellent but it is hard to tell if it's the carbon wrap or if it's that these barrel makers are just wrapping cool looking carbon around their already excellent steel barrels. They need to keep a leg-up over so much competition, and enthusiasts are eager to spend on the latest thing. Happens to me.

I also agree that I can't find proof (pun intended) that the carbon-wrap concept works from an independent controlled test. I would sure like to see it.

So far what I see is people who swear by their carbon barrels. I can't argue with them, many are probably better shooters and hunters than me. They love their carbon barrels, they admit that its partly how cool they look, but most people (including me) are not very objective about their own decisions.

It has been a year since this topic was posted - has anybody found any objective side-by-side testing? I would really like to see an independent marksman test equal weight and length fluted steel and carbon barrels side-by-side on identical setups.

Having said all that, being a gun enthusiast myself, I recently acquired my own carbon proof barreled action. I'll see for myself, but I won't know for sure if it will be any different than a quality steel barrel on the same setup.

I'd be really surprised if any one would spend the time on this any more. It has been well excepted that pound for pound the carbon barrels are structurally more sound and tune easily. They are not what most people would consider more accurate round for round unless shooting strings of fire. I took a 6.5-284 sporter weight barrel and did a 10 shot 2 min string compared to my proof and the difference was staggering after 3-4 rounds. My proof stayed within .75 moa at 400 and the sporter was 3 moa. That same sporter will put 2-3 within .5. So accuracy wise the 2 barrels were similar within 2-3 shots, especially first round. From a hunting perspective this is mute point...both barrels were about the same weight and both put the first 2 rounds on target. I felt after shooting both in extreme temps I had more zero issues with the sporter tho. Not sure why other than just super thing barrel being affected by temp extreme's. Not sure.

Next test, I added a witt brake to the sporter and added a TBAC brake to my proof. I could only do the witt clamp on because the barrel thickness was to thin for a good shoulder and the radius brake was not effective enough. Personal opinion. Both shot fine but the heavy witt changed the poi a bit more. Rezero and good to go. Again, not a big difference. The thin barrel was not a good match for the suppressor so it was never used. My smith had lots of concerns about the shoulder and said I needed more barrel thickness. So that was it for me. Carbon was a win win. My hunters will all have carbon if I can afford it. They look good, hold a can very well, easy to tune, accurate, and makes me happy.

 

[Deviant]

I now have 7 of them and I am sold. I can't prove all the benefits other than weight savings but I know one thing for sure. They fricken shoot tiny groups and they don't copper foul. I did have one bad one out of the bunch but Proof Research supplied a new barrel and paid the smith to cerekote it and reinstall the new barrel.

 

[sp6x6]

My first is ten years old now.I really like it in a hunting rifle.We have many over a dozen gun manufactures in the area I live.So you get to se alot of different set ups. Seems like when I last looked at PRS top shooters and what they where using, Proof Steel barrel was on top,this is also high volume and cost related Ide say.I have a friend with multiple WR in 1000 bench,have not heard of carbon wrap in his circle.Have friends that work at Defiance,and one that is ex guide has a steel pipe on his 338NM and it shoots. The cost is a factor,there all steel on the inside.Many builds can accomplish the same weight in steel.Cody just did that with his 338NM, lighter than my 338NM carbon. I dont have alot of rifles so... my next probably CF

 

[Deleted member 103481]

Prs guys want the heaviest rifle shooting the teeniest cartridge so they can watch the round impact and stay totally on target. It makes no sense for them to use a light barrel, they put truck axles on their 18lb rifles shooting a 22BR through 6creed sizes cartridge. Just not what they are made for.

I very much liked mine and will own another, but my current build is getting a heavy sporter steel.

I do wonder (if they are truly as theoretically accurate or more so than pure steel barrels) why the LR benchrest crowd aren't taking advantage of them so they can grab a few more inches of barrel and stay at light gun weights.

 

[BrentM]

Prs guys want the heaviest rifle shooting the teeniest cartridge so they can watch the round impact and stay totally on target. It makes no sense for them to use a light barrel, they put truck axles on their 18lb rifles shooting a 22BR through 6creed sizes cartridge. Just not what they are made for.

I very much liked mine and will own another, but my current build is getting a heavy sporter steel.

I do wonder (if they are truly as theoretically accurate or more so than pure steel barrels) why the LR benchrest crowd aren't taking advantage of them so they can grab a few more inches of barrel and stay at light gun weights.

Mostly cost and at the heavier contours it's an advantage

 

[Westernhuntr]

The only benefit of CF over steel is asthetics with a huge brake or suppressor.

I spoke with a really high quality barrel maker that builds turned down blanks that are used in several CF offerings.
He told me nothing beats steel for stiffness if it's a #4 contour or larger, and that long shot strings can create issues with heat being trapped inside the CF.

The weight savings are really minimal if you compare them to a steel varmint contour that's fluted.
I have a number of 26" fluted barrels that are .720 at the muzzle, they weigh around 3.2-3.4 lbs depending on caliber.
Strength is another consideration, those blanks must be super thin because my gunsmith told me he got a CF delivered a few months ago that was literally bent like a banana!

 

[Deleted member 103481]

Mostly cost and at the heavier contours it's an advantage

If you're talking about why LR Br competitors aren't using them, I can promise you cost isn't why.

 

[Bart B]

Every barrel whips and wiggles at it's own resonant and several harmonic vibration frequencies exactly the same for every shot fired. Short and fat barrels do so at higher frequencies than long and skinny ones.

As long was all bullets leave at the right place on the muzzle axis upswing, slower ones will leave at higher angles to compensate for their greater drop at target range compared to faster ones.

 

[elkaholic]

I've been holding off a little on this but I will say this much: I have a lot of clients with both carbon and standard barrels so I get to observe a lot of results. Anytime there are extra steps involved in manufacturing ANYTHING there is more chance for inconsistency.

 

[BrentM]

If you're talking about why LR Br competitors aren't using them, I can promise you cost isn't why.

i can't imagine wanting to blow up a 1000.00 cf barrel mutliple times per year. Most comp guys are getting barrels pretty cheap and having a in pocket or diy chambering those barrels. I'd never run a cf for comp as I blow them out way too fast. Nice heavy contour barrel and hammer down.

 

[Rum Man]

Well just shot my 338 Rum with a 30" Benchmark Carbon Sunday just to check my zero . 300 bergers at 2884 fps. 100 yrd zero then shot a large rock out to 1011 yrds. With ease !

Rum Man