why does the barrel get the credit?

[Derek M.]

Is anyone aware of any data supporting or negating a relationship in barrel specs to accuracy? For example, look at Bartlein's gain twist barrels. Is there any evidence that these barrels give an edge in competition? What about the 5R or 5C style lands?

Obviously, in the article posted earlier, the Broughton barrel the shooter chose was an excellent barrel. I wonder if the shooter would be just as satisfied to put a Hart, Oberymeyer, Krieger, Benchmark on that action when the current Broughton is done. Or with that kind of group at 1000 yards, does he stick with Broughton? Just fertile grounds for discussion.

I sure don't want to come across as offensive, but with the heavy gun category, if the rifle is cradled and aimed at the target and the only thing the "shooter" has to do is lightly touch the trigger off, as I've seen in some benchrest videos, I'm a bit dismissive. If the shooter just sets up the rifle, doesn't cradle it or make any real contact other than helping the trigger break, that's more of a function of a quality built rifle with excellent components and credit to the handloader/shooter as well. That kind of shooting doesn't compare to a bipod and a prone position and no rear rifle rest so I'm less impressed. Still impressed though.

 

[sp6x6]

Is anyone aware of any data supporting or negating a relationship in barrel specs to accuracy? For example, look at Bartlein's gain twist barrels. Is there any evidence that these barrels give an edge in competition? What about the 5R or 5C style lands?

Obviously, in the article posted earlier, the Broughton barrel the shooter chose was an excellent barrel. I wonder if the shooter would be just as satisfied to put a Hart, Oberymeyer, Krieger, Benchmark on that action when the current Broughton is done. Or with that kind of group at 1000 yards, does he stick with Broughton? Just fertile grounds for discussion.

I sure don't want to come across as offensive, but with the heavy gun category, if the rifle is cradled and aimed at the target and the only thing the "shooter" has to do is lightly touch the trigger off, as I've seen in some benchrest videos, I'm a bit dismissive. If the shooter just sets up the rifle, doesn't cradle it or make any real contact other than helping the trigger break, that's more of a function of a quality built rifle with excellent components and credit to the handloader/shooter as well. That kind of shooting doesn't compare to a bipod and a prone position and no rear rifle rest so I'm less impressed. Still impressed though.

A lot of guys shot free recoil in light gun class that goes to 17# in Penn. rules 1000. I have first hand seen them shoot in the 2's for 5 that is impressive.The work that they go to in reloadind. Myfriend has shot multiple WR and he sorts eveyrthing and high grades ammo for right conditions or special matches.It would take a average shooter 1/2 a lifetime to figure this stuff out,he could right a book about it.He rleoads with pressure to seat the bullet capabilities,and other practices that I have never seen mentioned in print. I have looked at stackes of targets of his that are under 3'' 5 shot at 1000.They shoot 10 for score ,this does not just happen because gun is heavy,that is also in a 6mm. His 65# custom 338 LAI doesnt shot like this. When you see him run a string you would be impressed. By the way he shot Krieger

 

[sbhooper]

The bench shooters at our club will order a dozen "premium maker" barrels and end up with maybe a few that they will consider for their rifles. They have been doing this for years and are convinced that each barrel, even though subjected to the same construction process, is unique in terms of performance. Having seen this first hand, I have to concur.

This is why a safe, accurate load in one barrel, may be over-pressured junk in another. I have seen this first-hand in two factory Savage barrels. Both were very accurate, but one barrel was much tighter than the other and forced pressures to a dangerous level with loads that were fine in the other one.

 

[Mikecr]

Derek, occasionally squirrels find a nut with each barrel available. But not one single barrel brand has stood out as actually providing an edge over others. Not really.

Nobody knows what rifling parameters, groove parameters, twist system, length, profile, or finish, per cal, is best. It has never been defined.
I have to believe this could be defined with a mathematical formula, but I know it would take huge resources to do it.
The closest we've approached this amounts to no thanks, and thanks, of the German war machine.

 

[Frank7mm]

I am surprised at the lack of credit on the Smiths part. If you assemble premium parts with a crocked chamber, threads not square to bore, uneven crown, and sloppy headspace you will unlikely get awesome groups. Yes reloads are very important but if you polish a turd you still have a turd.

 

[Michael Eichele]

I am surprised at the lack of credit on the Smiths part. If you assemble premium parts with a crocked chamber, threads not square to bore, uneven crown, and sloppy headspace you will unlikely get awesome groups. Yes reloads are very important but if you polish a turd you still have a turd.

That's because the margin for error on the assembly part of this equation is greater than the actual barrel. A great barrel can still shoot good if the chamber is cut a little bit large or if the headspace is a hair long or of the throat isn't perfect. If any of these help accuracy? No. But IMO do not make as much of a negative impact as many believe. Of course you have to take what an acceptable level of accuracy is. Most here feel that 1/2 MOA us acceptable. It's actually pretty easy to reach the 1/2moa mark AS LONG as the barrel itself is capable of it. If you want groups in the .1s with regularity it's going to take not only good smithing but an exceptional barrel.

NO AMOUNT of perfect smithing will make a lemon barrel shoot good.

It just seems that more times than not, if a rig won't shoot good, it's a barrel issue. Not a smith issue.

With all this in mind, I've had some pretty shadey smithing done and still had the rigs shoot in the .2s and .3s with repeat ability.

 

[Canadian Bushman]

That's because the margin for error on the assembly part of this equation is greater than the actual barrel. A great barrel can still shoot good if the chamber is cut a little bit large or if the headspace is a hair long or of the throat isn't perfect. If any of these help accuracy? No. But IMO do not make as much of a negative impact as many believe. Of course you have to take what an acceptable level of accuracy is. Most here feel that 1/2 MOA us acceptable. It's actually pretty easy to reach the 1/2moa mark AS LONG as the barrel itself is capable of it. If you want groups in the .1s with regularity it's going to take not only good smithing but an exceptional barrel.

NO AMOUNT of perfect smithing will make a lemon barrel shoot good.

It just seems that more times than not, if a rig won't shoot good, it's a barrel issue. Not a smith issue.

With all this in mind, I've had some pretty shadey smithing done and still had the rigs shoot in the .2s and .3s with repeat ability.

Not to mention at these levels of competition most barrels are fitted very well. IMHO .001-.002 deviation in alignment across a 30" barrel is not gonna have much affect on accuracy and a good smith will get them within that.

 

[WapitiBob]

I had a factory Rem 700 that shot 2" on a good day.
The smith took .001 off both sides of the factory lug, .001 off the face of the action, and .0005 off the action lugs. Never touched the bolt face as it didn't move a tenth indicator and hand lapped the bolt lugs to the action. Worked up the new barrel and it instantly went to 3/4" with the original load, then to .6 with ALR's.
The barrel made the difference, but chambering that barrel is in the mix too.

 

[Derek M.]

NO AMOUNT of perfect smithing will make a lemon barrel shoot good.

Agreed. And any amount of lemon smithing won't make a perfect barrel shoot good either.

I don't disagree that the barrel is a chief component. No doubt about it. But I seem to read and hear a lot more about barrel makers advertising their record setting barrels on their websites compared to record setting actions, smiths, stocks, etc.

 

[Bullet bumper]

I've chambered over 150 custom barrels for myself and can attest to this as well. The percentage of duds has gone down over the 22 years I have been building my own but they are still there. All else considered the barrel makes a rifle accurate. I would put 95+% of the accuracy on the barrel with the remainder on the bedding, action truing, etc.

And it will not shoot worth a dam if the bullet is out of ballance and not concentric no matter how good the barrel is . So the 95+ % is out the window.

 

[Mikecr]

There are many reasons that most exceptional barrels would not be recognized.
But even when everything is cleared from the table, as observed by those who have done just that, barrels present as better or worse than others.

If you go to the competition forums and search 'hummer' you'll find that a great deal of human effort has been expended to understand the subject at hand. And yet humans have so far failed to do so.