Carbon fiber barrel longevity?

Not sure where you are getting your information about degradation of the CF or the binding matrix, but that is inaccurate information. They are extremely stable and inert. Generally, CF barrels will last at least as long as a conventional SS barrel if not a bit longer due to its better heat dissipation capability.
My work designs glue and works with carbon fiber both of which degrade with exposure to UV and ozone over time. Just no idea how long.
 
"milspec" isn't always the "best spec" --I will agree that proof knows what it is doing when it comes to space craft and fighter jets, they in fact do hold a contract with the DOD for the barrels used on the barret MRAD-- but remember the MIL has different standards than the private sector when it comes to longevity-- you or I may want the barrel to last for 100+ years with low round counts-- the mil has totally different criteria for choosing manufactures and specifications-- they would probably be happy if a barrel lasted a few years with the round counts they go through--as others have said, barrels are consumables especially to the MIL

I'm not knocking polymers, CF barrels or proof, I'm just saying that without more knowledge of materials used and longevity testing there is no real way to know how long a CF barrel would last-- though I think they would last quite a long time. I would love to see a side by side longevity test done of a proof CF and SS barrel, but where would you start? how could you make the 2 "equals"

as we know marketing hype is used in every industry-- I bought a glass strand/CF reinforced polymer AR lower from a company that claims they have a background in aircraft design and manufacturing, they even brought an experimental aircraft to market-- the 8 oz. stripped lower fell less than 18" and it broke-- gotta use the right materials for the job with the right dimensions
My understanding of "barrel wear" is that it occurs at the lands of the rifling, as a result of the products of ignition and the bullets traveling in contact with them as they leave the barrel. So why all this discussion of CF barrels wearing out, without anyone mentioning the steel lands?
 
My understanding of "barrel wear" is that it occurs at the lands of the rifling, as a result of the products of ignition and the bullets traveling in contact with them as they leave the barrel. So why all this discussion of CF barrels wearing out, without anyone mentioning the steel lands?
I don't think it is the copper bullet wearing out the stainless/CM barrel but more the immensely hot gasses that vaporize the steel, bullets don't cause fire cracking right ?
When we clean, we are cleaning copper fowling on top of the lands.
Has anyone ever had a CF barrel delaminate ?
 
Earlier in this thread explained how PROOF Research winds carbon fibers on their barrels. I feel this is the most UNIFORM way to wrap a barrel and uniformity of stiffness would seem to be important in maintaining uniformity of barrel harmonics.

So - how does Christensen and others making CF wrapped barrels wrap their barrels??
If Proof can show us videos of that process how about the others?

Eric B.
 
I posted the thread a while back but there is a huge difference between tension compression barrels and the ones you can cut to desired length, they work in the opposite philosophy
 
I live about an hour from the range I shoot. I put the CF barreled rig in the drag bag and when I get home the barrel is still warm to the touch. My steel barrels are not. This was a heavy barreled 308 that now sports a CF.

Just my observations.
 
IMO the proof barrels heat very quickly compared to steel barrels and i don't think they are stiffer than steel at the same barrel diameter. However they are significantly less weight and I believe they are stiffer than a steel barrel of that same weight class. Probably one of the best barrels for back pack hunting. i have a 26" in 28 Nosler and shoots great- but it does heat up quickly after 3 rounds. In the book Modern Advancements in Long Range Shooting Vol 2 both Bryan Litz and Cal Zant both did extensive tests on all barrels including proofs and Christensen arms, it was interesting to read the conclusions on barrel wear, heat, stiffness, POI shifts and weight for all the barrels.
 
IMO the proof barrels heat very quickly compared to steel barrels and i don't think they are stiffer than steel at the same barrel diameter. However they are significantly less weight and I believe they are stiffer than a steel barrel of that same weight class. Probably one of the best barrels for back pack hunting. i have a 26" in 28 Nosler and shoots great- but it does heat up quickly after 3 rounds. In the book Modern Advancements in Long Range Shooting Vol 2 both Bryan Litz and Cal Zant both did extensive tests on all barrels including proofs and Christensen arms, it was interesting to read the conclusions on barrel wear, heat, stiffness, POI shifts and weight for all the barrels.
any link to that "conclusion" report? or can you summarize their conclusions?
 
From what I saw last weekend it will take forever to find a load for my new rifle if all this is true, and I suspect it is. Maybe it is time to invest in a fan to cool it.
 
yup, I was hoping for a summary

Its pretty lengthy and i don't want to infringe on someones hard work. I will say they did extensive tests and really put some time, money and effort into testing these barrels. Its not a this barrel sucks and this barrel is awesome contest, more of pros and cons between CF and steel- you just get to take that info and decipher how you want. I have a proof and really like it for hunting but compared to my 6.5 in steel M24 contour it doesn't stand a chance in competitions. Different barrels for different things. All in all the book is a good one if you like to read on long range shooting topics!
 
Warning! This thread is more than 6 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