Barrel break in

[Oily]

New to the forum first post. Have 2 new rifles 223 and 260. My question is do I need to break them in with J bullets before I start with CBs

[Clay M]

Not necessarily .
I usually shoot about 200 rds of jacketed bullets through my new rifles.
Not because they need it , but because I always have plenty of jacketed bullets on hand and want to shoot the new gun ASAP.
My Ruger #1 .45/70 has never had a jacketed bullet fired through it, and probably never will.
Same with my Sharps.
Just make sure if you do shoot jacketed bullets that you get all the copper out of that barrel before you change to cast.

[JSnover]

It won't hurt but you don't have to.

[Oily]

Sorry for my tardy reply had 12 slabs of ribs and 3 pork butts on the smoker for a benefit. Delivered and back online. My wife can't wait till I start Hi Tek coating my boolits.

[Oily]

another question; can I break in my barrels using HiTek coated bullets. Sorry haven't reloaded or cast in 25 years and am trying to catch up. Reading this site could make a guy go blind with all the great info and new techniques. I learn something new every time I log on cudos to all that share their knowledge and experience with us. Cast On my friends

[JSnover]

If you subscribe to the break-in school (a lot of people don't), the main thing will be to keep the bore CLEAN between shots. I don't see any reason not to coat your boolits. People have broken them in with cast/lubed and copper jacketed. Doesn't seem like PC would hurt anything.

[runfiverun]

if you have a good smooth barrel your just putting stress on the throat.
if it has chatter marks and stuff then a break in period is better.

I have gone straight to cast in new rifles without even giving it a thought.
eventually the antimony on the surface of the water dropped boolit will polish the rifles barrel.

[HangFireW8]

Break-in must be the most over-thought aspect of shooting.

Rough barrels take longer to break-in.

Smooth barrels require little to no break-in.

Clean it more often when new until it doesn't foul quickly when shooting.

Gale McMillan would void warranties on his hand-lapped barrels for anyone using an abrasive to break-in a barrel. He said he understood why other barrel makers recommended lengthy break-in procedures; they sold more barrels that way.

[Oily]

Thanks to all for the replies always seemed to me if it shoots well shoot it. Easy to get caught up in the conjecture of psuedo {experts} on the subject who have only one option. My original question sounds foolish now as I have broken in 10/22 barrels with lead bullets that shoot 1/2 moa @ 50 yds. Will send feedback after I break them in to show my results. Cast on my friends

[Oily]

I also apologize for capitalizing the j on j boolits in my first post. Such sins may be forgiven in time.

[EDG]

It depends on how rough the barrel is.
I have some of the hand lapped Badger barrels that have all of the surface texture lines running the length of the barrel.
I have never fired a j bullet in them because there is nothing that needs smoothing

I have also had many rifles with tool marks that resembled a corn cob. They might take 50 to 200 rounds to break in.
My break in is not very formal. I clean between each round for between 5 and 10 rounds. More rounds if I think it is really rough.
Then I continue to work up loads and shoot test groups and clean between each 5 shot group. Since I am working up loads from round #1 it adds no wear to the barrel.
Most of the cleaning is done with Hoppes and a synthetic patch with a lot of grab so that it can drag out any loose crud. If it feels smooth 4 or 5 patches is about all I use.
If it feels rough and I can see fouling, especially like the stripped off metal on top of the lands then I will use a brush and Hoppes. Then I will clean the stuff loosened by the brush
with a few synthetic patches. Quality barrels in good condition do not need much if any brushing. You might have to brush an old military barrel or a neglected barrel.

One thing that really helps is to light a light film of Hoppes or similar rust preventing but copper attacking solvents in the bore. It must be so light that it does not drain down on the stock or you will need to stand it on the muzzle. Wipe the Hoppes with a new film one a week or more often for several weeks to remove the fouling with little work or scrubbing of the metal.
Hoppes is very safe. If you have an especially crud loaded old rifle you can plug the muzzle then stand it on the muzzle and very carefully pour the bore full. Plug the chamber to prevent evaporation an leave it a week. Then clean with a patch and you will be amazed at the green. I have also wet cotton rope wet with Hoppes and pulled into the bore. Then stand in the corner on the muzzle for a few nights to a week. You will eventually pull out a green rope.

[w5pv]

I usually just start shooting cast until I get that carnauba shine in the bore.Cleaning the bore with 1/2 Reds Bore cleaner and 1/2 Kroil when it looks dirty and then running very slightly Micro Lubed Kroil patch followed by a dry patch.When I get that carnauba shine then I say the bore is broke in and very easy to keep clean from then on.Some Stainless Steel bore are harder to get broke in.

[OS OK]

SNIPER 101 Part 43 - Barrel Break In Procedures Compared - YouTube (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjZg-OMy_rMAhUM5mMKHdUKCWoQyCkIHzAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DAX f6oZzLYaY&usg=AFQjCNFgySty0RQN8iRDrab1c0lvfHNKRw&sig2=3da7uk9SMY8eEXxySwC6ow)

Nuff said!

[gnostic]

Years ago the NRA dismissed the concept of breaking in barrels.

[HangFireW8]

Years ago the NRA dismissed the concept of breaking in barrels.

You mean back when Remington, Winchester and even Savage made smooth barrels?

[Oily]

Thanks for the replies. Ruger American Predator shoots decent with cast with no fouling at all.Rem 700 Varmint in .223 fouls everything I put down the tube.Only shot 50 rds so far so looks it will take awhile on it.Severe storms here in OK put a damper on any decent sessions.

[JSnover]

If barrel break-in is accomplished within the first 100 rounds (or whatever number satisfies you), then you have a choice: fire them all in the same day or spread them out over a few months (or years in some cases).

[country gent]

While I normally do a break in of some sort on new barrels ( and occasionaly on a used rifle) I let the barrel tell show me what to do. I first give it a good inspection with a bore scope paying attention to lead throat areas ( cutter marks here tend to run across the bore). And also tooling marks rough areas in the bore. I then shoot 1 round cleaning between shots if lead or jacket fouling is present I then continue this for up to 10 rounds. On most custom High grade barrels this takes care of the rough areas in the throat lead area.Jacketed bullets are easier to see fouling as most cleaners turn colors when cleaning jacket fouling. 2 rounds cleaning between for 10 rounds. clean well here and a quick look witht the bore scope to see whats going on This normally takes care of alot of the issues. then cleaning every 10 rds for awhile ( I normally do this for a complete total of 100 rds but not always) Again I let the individual barrel tell me what it needs. If fouling has stopped I may not fire the whole series of shots. Like load development, bedding and most firearms releated let the rifle tell you what it needs.

[Earlwb]

I don't know, I never thought about it, I never really bothered to break in a barrel. I would go to the range to sight the rifle in, do some target shooting to get a good feel for it and that was about it for the gun. Then it was off to hunting with it. So I guess one could consider that initial shooting a break in but I didn't.

Now then today they have some processes that use EDM (electric discharge machining) and that may leave a barrel more rough on the inside. So maybe a break in might be needed now. I don't know yet for this method.

[JSnover]

I don't know, I never thought about it, I never really bothered to break in a barrel. I would go to the range to sight the rifle in, do some target shooting to get a good feel for it and that was about it for the gun. Then it was off to hunting with it. So I guess one could consider that initial shooting a break in but I didn't.
I'd bet that's how most people do it. If a new gun shoots good'nuff out of the box, it's good'nuff for them and the 'break-in' process happens whether they know it or not, it just takes a lot longer. Keeping it clean during those first few boxes of ammo will determine how well it breaks in.

[MrWolf]

On my first and only AR-15 with a DPMS barrel, I followed their recommended break in with j-words. I watched the groups walk their way to center. My first time ever with one so was being my anal self and followed what manufacturer said. Lot of cleaning between shots but it worked so...

[JSnover]

Sure it works. What you did was check it off the list of Things To Do With A New Gun.
Some people (like my dad for one) never break in their barrels, so in some cases it actually takes years to complete the process. Their ignorance is bliss, I suppose, but the Western Field 30-30 he bought back in the 70s shoots well and the bore is fine. I suppose the point of impact may have shifted a bit and the group size may have shrank a little along the way but he never knew the difference, just made sure it was zeroed before deer season.

[AK Caster]

Never broke one it, don't plan to. I think the entire procedure is snake oil and a waste of time. If there was something to it big companies like Ruger, Winchester, Remington, etc would tell you how to do it.

[country gent]

While winchester ruger remington and savge dont tell how to do it several of the top barrel makers Pac Nor, Krieger, Obermeyer ( when he was in buisness), Hart all do tell how and what to expect. Not sure if Mc Gowen does or not. Like stress relieving ( deep cyyrogenic freezing of barrels), diffrent forms of contouring fluting processes, Pins versesthreads and clamp ons for as blocks and front sights alot is personal opinions as once done one way it cant be redone to prove diffrently. As I said above let the rifle barrel tell you what it needs wants.

[M-Tecs]

In my opinion barrel break in is mislabeled on custom barrels. Leade angle break in is more appropriate. You are trying to smooth any rough spots the chamber reamer left in the leade angle. Copper or lead will adhere to the rough spots and these areas don't smooth out as quickly or as evenly on one that has not been broken in properly. The bore scope proves this. Chambers cut with carbide reamers tend to have smoother throats and leade angles than chambers cut with HSS reamers.

Break in also helps with problem spots in rough bores but the reality is that 95% of the shooter will never notice a difference between broken in or not broke in.

[gnostic]

Yes, it was 30 or 40 years ago...

[Texas by God]

On a bench rest rifle I can understand it but for a hunting rifle? In my opinion time and ammo spent practicing shooting beats shoot five,clean, shoot five,clean and so on.

[35remington]

SHOOTING a rifle "breaks it in." Rather than wasting my time as in the link provided in post 13, which means all his range time is spent scrubbing, solventing, abrasiving, patching and repatching (each time for EVERY DANG SHOT FOR 30 SHOTS!!!!!!) in some anal retentive procedure, I develop loads, chronograph, and gather information while breaking the gun in.

I have yet to see where a rifle barrel is "destroyed" if some anal retentive, OCD type "break in procedure" is not followed. Those that espouse such things haven't really got any idea of whether it helps or not. By the time he's got enough rounds down the barrel to "break it in" I've shot more ammo, gathered more information, narrowed which loads shot better and worse, got chronograph data and generally had a lot more productive day than these zeebs. AND I've "broken in" my barrel as well. With a lot less wasted time.

If you spend all your darn time cleaning instead of shooting, just what amount of time do you have on your hands? Is someone paying for your range time? Do you like gathering almost zero info when you shoot?

I do not. Range time is hard enough to get without spending it all on a procedure that no one is really sure helps anything. If it takes 20-30 rounds to break in a barrel using OCD methods, and 100-200 rounds any other way, and it takes the same amount of time to do it ( I bet I can break in a barrel faster than the OCD methods by simply shooting the gun while also gathering other data) why do it in the first place?

[M-Tecs]

why do it in the first place?

For the average hunter/shooter bore break has little if any benefit. For high volume accuracy shooters like NRA High Power and prairie dog shooting bore scoping indicates there may be some very real benefits via more even leade wear patterns.

In building and working on long range target/ bench rest rifles I have seen some guns that had significant issues still shoot really well. I have never seen a barrel with leade angle issues shoot really well.

With the advent of cheap digital bore scopes see should start seeing picture and video proof to support the various claims on this issue.

[35remington]

Cut a decent leade to begin with and dispense with it. If it doesn't have a decent leade, have someone throat it properly and save your barrel life for the prairie dogs and targets.

I have serious doubts that a ten thousandth of copper wash on a barrel prevents a bullet from wearing in a leade or makes a bullet wear in a leade differently, or can alter the actual accuracy of the barrel. I also seriously doubt it will extend barrel life in any way.

If someone can provide a link to scientific barrel testing where a dozen barrels were "broken in" and a dozen not, from reputable makers, and can show any statistically significant differences in accuracy in so doing, I'd be all ears. I have never seen such an established test that had any pretense toward objectivity or fact finding. The heck with "wear patterns" and "video proof" from scoping the barrel.......show me a difference in how they shoot where a barrel was "saved" or had better accuracy with "break in."

[M-Tecs]

Cut a decent leade to begin with and dispense with it.

Any and all machining leaves machining marks. Things like through the muzzle high pressure oil flush and carbide reamers minimize these machining marks. Rough spots hold copper and these spots do not wear the same as the areas with copper build up. That is the point of barrel break in. It's to remove the copper build up each time so the rough areas some out some. A rough spot on a leade angle will hold a lot more the a tenth or two of copper and or carbon. Carbon rings are another interesting problem. Not sure why they form but the only folks that seem to ever have them tend to believe over cleaning is a problem.


I have serious doubts that a ten thousandth of copper wash on a barrel prevents a bullet from wearing in a leade or makes a bullet wear in a leade differently, or can alter the actual accuracy of the barrel. "

After cutting a couple hundred chambers and inspecting with a bore scope I have no doubt the copper build up on the leade does affect how it wears.


show me a difference in how they shoot where a barrel was "saved" or had better accuracy with "break in."

That I can not do, however, I have reworked chambers that had rough leade angles (not my work) that did not preform too expectations. After setting the barrel back and re-cutting the chamber with a carbide reamer and high pressure through the barrel flush these barrels all showed significant accuracy improvements.

[35remington]

That's not what I asked that truly matters in the outcome. I asked someone to show me a statistically valid test where break in was shown to make a difference in how it shoots, or a statistically valid test that showed break in was better than no break in. Microscopes are all well and fine, but it's how the rifle shoots that matters.

Given that heat has a large role to play in how a leade wears, if not the primary role, I remain skeptical. We're giving way too much attention to friction and covering steel with a ten thousandth of copper when we can really do little to address heat either way.

Scope a bore with no cleaning from the get go and one de coppered every shot. According to this theory the coppered barrel should show less throat wear. I have my doubts a ten thou of copper will make a difference either way.

If you want your throat and barrel to last, then, you should never clean it because the tiny film of copper will protect it and save it from friction? Funny I've never heard that not cleaning your barrel will make it last longer and save your perfect leade and extend your barrel life. Yet somehow a tiny bit of copper is somehow a protectant from wear.

[35remington]

If my throat was ill suited for cast bullets, jacketed shooting often eases a sharp leade and helps with accuracy, true. The rifle then shot better with cast bullets and sometimes with jacketed. I've had that happen before. But this took shooting with jacketed bullets, and we tend to forget it's the shooting that reshapes the leade, not the cleaning.

I'd be fascinated if anyone could detect differences in barrel interiors and more importantly accuracy if 100 rounds were shot in each, one break in and the other not, with blind tests in multiple barrels. Both types of barrels would be cleaned to bare steel before they were imaged and shot. That is, the guy doing the bore scoping did not know what was done to the barrel he is imaging, but more importantly accuracy testing.

Anyone have any links to photos showing a difference that is online?

[M-Tecs]

That's not what I asked that truly matters in the outcome. I asked someone to show me a statistically valid test where break in was shown to make a difference in how it shoots, or a statistically valid test that showed break in was better than no break in. Microscopes are all well and fine, but it's how the rifle shoots that matters.

Given that heat has a large role to play in how a leade wears, if not the primary role, I remain skeptical. We're giving way too much attention to friction and covering steel with a ten thousandth of copper when we can really do little to address heat either way.

Scope a bore with no cleaning from the get go and one de coppered every shot. According to this theory the coppered barrel should show less throat wear. I have my doubts a ten thou of copper will make a difference either way.

If you want your throat and barrel to last, then, you should never clean it because the tiny film of copper will protect it and save it from friction? Funny I've never heard that not cleaning your barrel will make it last longer and save your perfect leade and extend your barrel life. Yet somehow a tiny bit of copper is somehow a protectant from wear.

You are ASSUMING that copper builds up evenly in a new throat/ leade angle. That is normally incorrect since the machining marks on each land are never 100% the same. Rough spots hold lots of copper and carbon. If you clean and get 100% of the copper and carbon out it makes little difference if you do the normal break in or not. The problems is once you get a couple of layers of copper and carbon most never get that area 100% clean and this does promote uneven wear.

Most of the wear on the barrel is from heat/gas erosion not bullet friction.

[M-Tecs]

Krieger Barrels currently hold the majority of long range benchrest and High Power records. Krieger cannot make barrels fast enough to keep up with demand so they are not trying to increase sales. They know a lot more about this subject than I do, but, my borescope and experience mirrors there recommendations.

https://www.kriegerbarrels.com/faq#breakin

BREAK-IN & CLEANING:

With any premium barrel that has been finish lapped -- such as your Krieger Barrel --, the lay or direction of the finish is in the direction of the bullet travel, so fouling is minimal compared to a barrel with internal tooling marks. This is true of any properly finish-lapped barrel regardless of how it is rifled. If it is not finish-lapped, there will be reamer marks left in the bore that are directly across the direction of the bullet travel. This occurs even in a button-rifled barrel as the button cannot completely iron out these reamer marks.

Because the lay of the finish is in the direction of the bullet travel, very little is done to the bore during break-in, but the throat is another story. When your barrel is chambered, by necessity there are reamer marks left in the throat that are across the lands, i.e. across the direction of the bullet travel. In a new barrel they are very distinct; much like the teeth on a very fine file.

When the bullet is forced into the throat, copper dust is removed from the jacket material and released into the gas which at this temperature and pressure is actually a plasma. The copper dust is vaporized in this plasma and is carried down the barrel. As the gas expands and cools, the copper comes out of suspension and is deposited in the bore. This makes it appear as if the source of the fouling is the bore when it is actually for the most part the new throat.

If this copper is allowed to stay in the bore, and subsequent bullets and deposits are fired over it, copper which adheres well to itself, will build up quickly and may be difficult to remove later. So when we break in a barrel, our goal is to get the throat “polished without allowing copper to build up in the bore. This is the reasoning for the fire-one-shot-and-clean procedure.

Every barrel will vary slightly in how many rounds they take to break in For example a chrome moly barrel may take longer to break in than stainless steel because it is more abrasion resistant even though it is a similar hardness. Also chrome moly has a little more of an affinity for copper than stainless steel so it will usually show a little more color if you are using a chemical cleaner. Rim Fire barrels can take an extremely long time to break in, sometimes requiring several hundred rounds or more. But cleaning can be lengthened to every 25-50 rounds. The break-in procedure and the cleaning procedure are really the same except for the frequency. Remember the goal is to get or keep the barrel clean while breaking in the throat with bullets being fired over it.

Finally, the best way to tell if the barrel is broken in is to observe the patches; i.e. when the fouling is reduced. This is better than some set number of cycles of shoot and clean as many owners report practically no fouling after the first few shots, and more break-in would be pointless. Conversely, if more is required, a set number would not address that either. Besides, cleaning is not a completely benign procedure so it should be done carefully and no more than necessary.

[35remington]

I do not ASSUME that copper builds up evenly. What I do not understand is how a bullet can only act on a barrel to "perfect it" when all copper is gone. According to "break in" savants the "excess" copper from a single uncleaned shot or two is sufficient to make the whole process go haywire, apparently to somehow turn a perfect barrel into less than it could be. According to some the firing of just another shot or two when copper is present will compromise the whole "break in" principle. This is why after a single shot, some advocate cleaning down to "bare metal."

How many of them scope the guns afterward and see if they are down to bare metal? I'd lay very heavy coin a lot of the "clean decoppered" guns still have copper in them if they are a rough as a cob and "needing" break in, and they attribute magical properties to the cleaning anyway despite not removing what they most desperately want to remove. Copper does not come out of reamer marks easy.

If copper was the evil it is supposed to be, terribly delaying break in, we'd better be advocating bore scoping it between shots to be sure the copper really is gone....yet nobody does that, taking it on faith the hated, accuracy robbing copper is out of there. I have rough barreled rifles that are quite resistant to repeated attempts at cleaning rough areas in their interiors (some of my microgroove Marlins are particular offenders here) with multiple cleanings. Some have to be beat on a while to get copper out of reamer marks with truly long term applications of chemicals, soaking for a considerable time.....more time than you can manage on the range. This includes rather nasty solvents, and reamer marks at right angles to bullet travel are unaffected by abrasives. They still have copper remain.

I might suggest that at most things are delayed because the bullet does the altering....and we're shooting the gun. I might also suggest that nothing is really delayed, and nothing is lost. I might also suggest if the "shoot-clean" method truly gets copper out between shots, the barrel's probably smooth enough that break in doesn't help. Until proof exists otherwise I'll just have to labor under that presumption. Since there no consensus exists on the topic room for considerable doubt exists. It's not a proven principle like gravity, certainly.

It is my observation that the reshaping of the leade actually comes from shooting or recutting it, not from cleaning it.

The proof that would be convincing is something no one can come up with....and this topic has been beat to death for 20 plus years.

Even guys that "know" don't agree on the topic.

[35remington]

Yes, and Gale McMillian thinks it's all a bunch of ****. He makes barrels too.

Looking on a patch "to see if the fouling is removed" is a poor substitute for a bore scope. I will and do suggest judging patch appearance and correlating that to copper removal in my rifles is sorta like gazing in a crystal ball. I regularly get clean patches "pushed through" from a barrel that has copper in reamer marks. A quick push through of a patch doesn't substitute for a long soak that nobody on the range does.

In regards to Krieger's claims, Krieger suggests the bullet reshapes the leade, and claims the only reason to do break in is to get the copper out (duh?) and not for accuracy reasons. I don't have a single gripe about their suggestion as they don't claim it improves the barrel's accuracy in any way. Makes sense.

M, the gripe I have is the suggestion elsewhere that it improves accuracy. That is not substantiated.

[M-Tecs]

Some different opinions here

http://combatrifle.net/barrel_break-in.htm

http://benchrest.com/showthread.php?87651-New-Hart-Barrel post #4 is interesting

[35remington]

A lot of the links posted there don't claim dire effects from not doing it, nor great improvements from doing it. They all advise methods that are different.....some quite different. Very understandable if they are not sure themselves. So I'm in good company, I guess. That wasn't a surprise.

I also note that if copper fouling and running over it with the bullet was bad, all would advocate cleaning after every shot until the barrel was "broken in" and had no copper fouling (at least what could be taken out visibly on a patch), but a number of them advocate several shots between cleanings, up to 5 or 10, when the copper fouling was reduced.....but not completely eliminated because they say "diminished significantly" not "stopped completely." So I guess some "running over" of the copper in the barrel by the bullet can't hurt all that much. Nor does it help all that much. No proof either way.

Shilen only says shoot 5 shots with clean after every shot, then go for longer intervals. Others go more. Pac Nor advocates shoot one, then clean, then shoot three and clean. Surely they are shooting copper over copper then....or do they have such a smooth barrel they don't care? Maybe it doesn't matter either way.

Compass Lake will let you shoot 20 shots between cleanings right from the start!!!!! Maybe they don't have a clue, according to some.

Since there's no consensus, I'd say even the barrel makers are a bit fuzzy on just what the value of "break in" is.

[Hawk4570]

SNIPER 101 Part 43 - Barrel Break In Procedures Compared - YouTube (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjZg-OMy_rMAhUM5mMKHdUKCWoQyCkIHzAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DAX f6oZzLYaY&usg=AFQjCNFgySty0RQN8iRDrab1c0lvfHNKRw&sig2=3da7uk9SMY8eEXxySwC6ow)

Nuff said!

^This^

If you're trying to shoot wee tiny (smaller than bullet diameter) groups at 100 or 200 yards or looking for first-round hits on far distant targets, some form of elaborate break-in may be called for.

Other than that, make sure there's no obvious burrs, maybe run a wet patch & hit it with the bore snake to make sure chamber & bore are clean & dry before shooting.

The only barrel I've 'broken-in' is a White Oak SPR barrel for AR. Followed manufacturer's recommendations: Sight-in, maybe 15-20 rounds, clean thoroughly, maybe a touch of JB at the throat if needed.

[country gent]

One thing I observed when breaking in in several barrels over the years. With each stage completed the barrel seemed to clean easier and felt smoother not a scientific form just and observation. They seemed to clean easier and not have a clean to fouled change in impact. These were hart krieger pac nor, shilen, douglas and lilja barrels On M1As, a pre 64 model 70 match rifle and several ar 15s &10s. Along with several hunting rifles. The match rifles I could shoot an 88 round nra match and clean with 5-10 strokes of a nylon brush then 3 patches clean chamber and gas system. Done. For storage I did use a Hawkeye bore scope to ensure they were clean. As to during the process only a couple were bore scoped during the process but they did Show an improvement in surface finish. This was a visual check also. One thing I did occasionally do was chrnograph rounds during the 3, 5 and 10 rd stages. and velocity readings did seem to become more consistant as it went along.

[gnoahhh]

I too have endured lengthy break in protocols with jacketed bullets- to what effect I truly can't tell you. Conversely I have started out with the shoot-clean-shoot-clean protocol, gotten tired of it after a few shots, and commenced with shooting 3-5 shot groups and then cleaning, for the first 25-30 shots- to what effect I can't tell you. I usually give at least a passing nod to whatever the barrel maker tells me to do- to what effect I can't tell you.

I have a couple barrels that have never seen a jacketed bullet from the git-go. The latest one is a Criterion (by Krieger) button rifled .30-06 from the CMP for my dedicated 03A1 cast bullet shooter. It started out hovering at MOA with cast mid-range loads and after several hundred rounds it still hovers there. Will it get better with time? Maybe. I doubt it'll get worse, and it suits me just fine as-is. (I will admit to hitting the leade with a 1½º included angle throating reamer before I started shooting it.)

I am tempted on my next AR-15 .223 to try giving the chamber/throat area a good licking with J-B Bore Paste before initial shooting to ameliorate somewhat the tedious break in, what with having to pull the BCG each time to clean between shots. Thoughts?

[35remington]

One thing is indisputable:

If the barrel is rough, the barrel's still rough after break in.

If the barrel is smooth, the barrel is smooth before break in. Some of the "magical" attributes ascribed to "break in" have more to do with the barrel than anything "break in" did, as a few shots over bare steel won't "polish out" rough spots in barrels. They're still rough. Last I checked steel is a lot harder than gilding metal. You would have to suspend common sense to believe otherwise, yet that is just what many seem to do when "break in" is discussed.

I have yet to have a rifle that fouled a lot from the get go not continue to foul a lot after shooting a "break in" series. Conversely, barrels that didn't foul a lot from the get go didn't get helped in fouling less from "break in." They already weren't fouling much. Whatever minor fouling that they did have may have come from the newly cut leade, sure, but that doesn't have anything to do with "break in" so much as just shooting the throat in.

My bore scope says some of my Savage barrels that were rough at the start with reamer marks aplenty still have reamer marks and roughness afterward. And yeah, I tried it. How a few bullets shot over bare barrel steel can supposedly change a so so finished tube into a glass smooth hand lapped wonder (if the hosannahs of the claimants are to be believed) while simultaneously making the rifle vastly easier to clean and keep decoppered is beyond me.

If you want a smooth barrel that doesn't foul much, get a barrel that has those characteristics that don't hang on to fouling. Don't expect a few bullets encased in relatively soft metal to polish a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

[M-Tecs]

Other than you I have never read or heard anyone claim that barrel break in fixed any or all of the myriad of issues you list above. Barrel break in is nothing more than an attempt to start are new barrel in the best possible manor. Nothing more.

At best it will to smooth out microscopic machining imperfections without adding a cumulative copper-fouling layer that will protect microscopic problem area's from the gas erosion and bullet friction.

Most of the long range match rifle shooter believe barrel break in reduces the round count before the barrel settles in. Generally match rifle barrels are settled in at the end of the break in or very soon after. IF not broken in barrels for the same manufacture and caliber seem to take 100 to 200 rounds more to settle in for both accuracy and fouling.

Having chambered and scoped a couple hundred match rifle barrels I believe barrel break in aids in a more even wear of the leade angles. This is based on looking at a large number of barrels that are at the end of the competitive life. If is common to see the leade angles and lands not evenly worn/eroded. The area that has the least amount of wear/erosion has a significant copper build up so yes copper will protect these areas from erosion.

On a bolt gun when I cut a chamber and I don't like the appearance of one or more of the leade angles I just recut it. However on M14's/M1's and M1's that is not possible unless you use a separate throat/leade reamer or a lap. If one or more leade angles holds more copper break in has its benefits.

Unless I am looking to resolve a specific issue I don't bore scope my factory rifles. I am much happier if I don't look since most are pretty grim compared to what I will accept in my work.

[HangFireW8]

More than 20 years ago when Savage was building a rep for 110 accuracy, I got one and did the clean every shot break-in. They had a rep for rough barrels as well as accuracy. The grooves looked smooth, but the lands on mine looked very, very rough, like a coarse matte finish.

At first the patches stuck and shred. I got a Lot of green. Around twenty shots things got much easier. I did a Foul Out run, got some copper and declared break-in done.

At 100 shots I did another Foul Out run and got only a very little copper. The barrel remained very easy to clean, smooth as silk. The lands now look normal.

[35remington]

M, I've heard all kinds of outlandish claims for break in. Including that accuracy will be lost if it is not done. Just my experience.

[M-Tecs]

If there was something to it big companies like Ruger, Winchester, Remington, etc would tell you how to do it.

From the Savage web site http://savagearms.com/firearms/proceduresbarrelbreakin/

From the Remington web site https://support.remington.com/General_Information/Is_there_a_recommended_break_in_procedure_for_Remi ngton_rifles%3F

From the Winchester web site http://www.winchesterguns.com/support/faq/what-is-the-recommended-procedure-for-breaking-in-a-new-barrel.html

http://riflebarrels.com/support/centerfire-maintenance/

http://www.bartleinbarrels.com/BreakInCleaning.htm

http://pac-nor.com/care/

http://www.texas-mac.com/Barrel_Break_in_Process.html

[Four Fingers of Death]

Before Stainless Steel barrels hit the scene, I can't ever say I heard of anyone breaking in a barrel. I tend to break in barrels because, welllllllllllll, you only get one chance at it. With smaller calibres, I do a good break in and with the larger calibres, a short break in. You can generally see that the barrel gets easier to clean as you go along. I really think, that once you see this improvement, no further breaking in is necessary.

Is that based on pure scientific research and testing, heck no, just what I have worked out for me.