• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Best 12.5 barrel?

Totally by accident/timing that this thread came up and today I got a phone call to quote gas gun barrels (can't go into the whole detail). Last barrels we made the company where out of c.m. steel and they nitride them etc.... they want to get away from the nitride finish. They see the same thing as the ammo maker has seen with nitride barrels. When the barrel is new and again say for the first 250ish rounds pressure is up with velocity.

So back to earlier posts... that is another variable. If one brand of barrel being shot is nitride finished and the others are not... again your not doing apples and apples.
Just got a melonite barrel that is not lapped. The manufacturer recommend cleaning before firing and clean every 2 or 3 rounds to for a few cycles get the barrel to shoot the best.

I figured that process would take the tooling marks out but I I wondered if that had anything to do with the barrel being melonited or not???
 
Just got a melonite barrel that is not lapped. The manufacturer recommend cleaning before firing and clean every 2 or 3 rounds to for a few cycles get the barrel to shoot the best.

I figured that process would take the tooling marks out but I I wondered if that had anything to do with the barrel being melonited or not???

What brand?
 
All barrels aren't the same and they never will be. You have your design and everyone else has theirs. I don't think Eric would be too keen on letting out trade secrets. I'm fine knowing I can take a BCM, BA, Criterion and Colt and the ARP barrels and shoot all of them through the same chrono using the same ammo from the same lot on the same day and looking at the results. I think most people choose barrelsby the name attached to them, not the performance.
 
Last edited:
IMHO 12.5” is about the perfect compromise for a ‘do everything’ AR chambered in 5.56…. Short enough for CQB work, but still long enough to get a nice sight radius, and more easily stabilize heavier (longer) bullets with 1:7ish twist rates.

I have a couple 10.5” and one 11.5 inch, as well as a couple 14.5” and 16” in 5.56…but my favorites are the 12.5” uppers.

Have two 12.5” BCM and one 12.5” DD barrels on my work horse rifles usually kept in scabbards on side by sides, etc. for general pest and varmint eradication, but the best shooting one by far was from a company called Micro MOA.

I think they’re out of business now, but they built a great barrel. Great customer service too; they really took care of me when I screwed up the barrel extension due to my own stupidity when I was just getting started in the AR game. Still, they make (made) an awesome product. Will miss this one when it’s shot out.

i-LdPRG4f-X3.jpg


i-CDP8754-X3.jpg


i-QKhMV3r-X3.jpg


i-JDQkCdx-X3.jpg


Had a temp clamp-on gas block in this pic, but good comparison here to my son’s 10.5” upper on his SBR (we have several SBR’d lowers):

i-TsrwfRb-X3.jpg


i-6vwWBLw-X3.jpg



Recently picked up another 12.5” barrel with an integrated gas block from a company called HM Defense; they call it a monobloc barrel. Put it on an upper for a rifle I built to test parts reliability over the next couple years…figure it’s one less thing to break in case we ever get to the point where I can grab only one rifle that has to last forever.

i-h24vnmn-X5.jpg


Only have a couple hundred rounds through it so far, but no complaints. Good, but nothing extraordinary; a good shooting barrel that’s accurate enough for my needs. Maybe MOA or slightly better on a good day with great ammo; on par with my DD and BCM barrels.

i-Vzmm3ZM-X5.jpg
I got recently my HM Defense, 12.5 upper, also. Still in the process of the build. Nice glass on yours! I'm thinking an ACOG for mine. How's your's close up?
 
People mansplaining to Frank Green about empirical data on barrels.....the Hide is hilarious sometimes

People mansplaining to Frank Green about empirical data on barrels.....the Hide is hilarious sometimes
Frank seems to think every barrel on the market should use the same chamber, same bore area, same diameter land to land and groove to groove. That's like saying every VW should use the same specs as every Corvette.
I say it's up to the people making the barrels to design and make the best they can. Provide the best performance including accuracy, velocity and wear and offer it to the people at a decent price...capitalism.

When talking ARs and especially SBR ARs I see no reason at all to spend $500 on a barrel that will shoot military grade ammo and wear out twice as fast as a typical $200 chrome lined AR barrel.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JohnCarter17
Is velocity important?
https://www.itstactical.com/warcom/ammunition/military-ammunition-failures-and-solutions/
a small portion of that report-

"The disturbing failure of 5.56 mm to consistently offer adequate incapacitation has been known for nearly 15 years. Dr. Fackler’s seminal work at the Letterman Army Institute of Research Wound Ballistic Laboratory during the 1980’s illuminated the yaw and fragmentation mechanism by which 5.56 mm FMJ bullets create wounds in tissue. If 5.56 mm bullets fail to upset (yaw, fragment, or deform) within tissue, the results are relatively insignificant wounds, similar to those produced by .22 LR–this is true for ALL 5.56 mm bullets, including military FMJ , OTM, and AP, as well as JHP and JSP designs used in LE.

This failure of 5.56 mm bullets to upset can be caused by reduced impact velocities when hitting targets at longer ranges, as well as by the decreased muzzle velocity when using short barrel carbines. Failure to upset can also occur when bullets pass through minimal tissue, such as a limb or the torso of a thin, small statured individual, as the bullet may exit the body before it has a chance to upset. Finally, bullet design and construction plays a major role in reliable bullet upset. Without consistent bullet upset, wounding effects are decreased, rapid incapacitation is unlikely, and enemy combatants may continue to pose a threat to friendly forces and innocent civilians."

So if we have a 12.5-13" barrel that is faster than a 14.5, isn't that a good thing?
 
I got recently my HM Defense, 12.5 upper, also. Still in the process of the build. Nice glass on yours! I'm thinking an ACOG for mine. How's your's close up?
Not sure what you’re asking…. By close up do you mean shooting at close range?

TBH, the closest I’ve shot this one is 25 yards at a range when doing the initial zero. Plenty of time behind 12.5“ barrels in shooting houses and doing other training though; never, ever had to employ my weapon in anger while I was in though, thank God. I always told my guys that if we were engaging with our weapons, I’ve already been on the radio to get us the hell out of wherever we were supporting the cool kids. And if we’re at the point where I have to employ my weapon, things have gone seriously sideways, and we’re already fucked.

Closest I ever came was one time in Kandahar, and we got put in the NATO dorms…yes real no-shit dorms! The tally breached the perimeter relatively close by and everyone was running around trying to set defensive positions inside the hallways. I took one look at the Navy dude standing there who looked at me and, I shit you not said “Locked and loaded sir!”… LoL. I said thank you, but please put your weapon on safe and tell everyone else to do the same…and by the way, don’t even chamber a round until you see that mean looking Polish edit: now that I think about it recall he was either Hungarian or Bulgarian SF dude outside the door there, or the other one outside the other door at the checkpoint manning a 249 (or whatever the hell those dudes were running over there) open fire. In the meantime, get everyone off the first floor and lock the doors.

Geez… More risk of friendly fire than getting engaged by a bad guy… I honestly felt safer outside the wire. 🙄

Again, I was no door kicker, not even close, but have had a few work for me over the years and got to play with some of their toys. Frankly, if you’re looking for a rifle for close in work (i.e. within 10 yards or so…across the room distances), I prefer a suppressed 8-10” 300BLK upper with a non-magnified red dot shooting subs…. For 12.5” and longer the same, but shooting 6.8

Just my preferences, and my $0.02. There are plenty of folks on this forum with actual real world experience who can offer a better perspective than me though, that’s for damn sure.

edit #2: Thinking I may need a Bartlein barrel to replace that Micro MOA when it’s shot out! 😏
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: fastman
When I say apples to apples what I mean and to be specific.

Take brand X, brand z etc... barrels.

You have to measure the bore size and groove size of each to make sure they are with in a given tolerance/spec.... so lets say .2190" on the bore and .2240" on the groove and a tolerance for each at min spec. +.0005".

You can have barrels with nitriding and not nitride but the bore and grooves have to be to the same spec/tolerance.

Same chamber needs to be used as well.

Same ammo is used from the same lot as well needs to be used and fired in the same conditions.

Then run your test and get the data.

Without knowing the bore and groove size of each barrel and the same chamber reamer being used... You don't have an apples to apples comparison.
Are you saying you think every barrel in the country should be made to the same specs before they can be compared? Please tell me you have some really good shit, you are baked and posting.
 
Just got a melonite barrel that is not lapped. The manufacturer recommend cleaning before firing and clean every 2 or 3 rounds to for a few cycles get the barrel to shoot the best.

I figured that process would take the tooling marks out but I I wondered if that had anything to do with the barrel being melonited or not???
Yes and No!

Melonite treatment is going to take the surface hardness to around 70RC. Any tooling marks that are there...your most likely not going to get out at all.

The reason for the scrubbing cleaning is to get the scale out of the bore. My recommendation is this.

Take a worn out brush....wrap 0000 steel wool around it. Coat it with oil and scrub the bore 50 strokes. Clean it out and look at it again. If your seeing the bore start to get shiny.... your getting the scale out. Then repeat the process for another 50 strokes. That should get you 90% or better of the scale out of the bore.

That's what I had to do to my 260 Rem. barrel when I played with the melonite treatment done to my barrel. That also came directly from the place doing the treatment and the owner is a BR shooter and we make his barrels as well. We had several discussions on the phone about it all.

Now do the same thing to the chamber.
 
Are you saying you think every barrel in the country should be made to the same specs before they can be compared? Please tell me you have some really good shit, you are baked and posting.
Don't think your following me?

I'm not saying every barrel should be made to the same spec.

We make barrel to spec's that are not our own. We are a custom shop... we will make barrels to a custom gun maker, to ammo makers for testing purposes etc...

At times a gun maker will call out a spec. If there is any concern on my part I will give a recommendation and the reason for my recommendation and will voice my concerns but in the end they are the customer.

But... you cannot make a fair comparison from barrel to barrel maker custom or factory etc... if you don't know what spec the barrels are made to. That's all I'm saying.

It isn't a fair comparison to say this barrel is faster than that barrel or that this barrel is more accurate than that barrel if you don't know what the actual spec's of the bore/grooves are.

Bore and groove dimensions as well as the actual chamber spec have a big impact on velocities and pressures and can effect accuracy.
 
We had a test facility want to order some test barrels but with the bore and groove made to a tighter spec.

The ammo they are working on is already at a very high pressure. What they wanted to test was for trying to find something to help with barrel life. So they wanted to tight up the bore. I told them flat out...not going to help you and it's going to make the pressure problems worse.

They insisted... we made the barrels to the different spec's and guess what....

Yep...pressure problems got worse, fouling got worse which in turn caused accuracy issues.

So again will make stuff to a different spec at times and to a customers requests.
 
Yes and No!

Melonite treatment is going to take the surface hardness to around 70RC. Any tooling marks that are there...your most likely not going to get out at all.

The reason for the scrubbing cleaning is to get the scale out of the bore. My recommendation is this.

Take a worn out brush....wrap 0000 steel wool around it. Coat it with oil and scrub the bore 50 strokes. Clean it out and look at it again. If your seeing the bore start to get shiny.... your getting the scale out. Then repeat the process for another 50 strokes. That should get you 90% or better of the scale out of the bore.

That's what I had to do to my 260 Rem. barrel when I played with the melonite treatment done to my barrel. That also came directly from the place doing the treatment and the owner is a BR shooter and we make his barrels as well. We had several discussions on the phone about it all.

Now do the same thing to the chamber.
Thanks for the advice I appreciate it!
I don't have a old brush for the steel wool but would a 17 cal nylon brush work instead?
 
Don't think your following me?

I'm not saying every barrel should be made to the same spec.

We make barrel to spec's that are not our own. We are a custom shop... we will make barrels to a custom gun maker, to ammo makers for testing purposes etc...

At times a gun maker will call out a spec. If there is any concern on my part I will give a recommendation and the reason for my recommendation and will voice my concerns but in the end they are the customer.

But... you cannot make a fair comparison from barrel to barrel maker custom or factory etc... if you don't know what spec the barrels are made to. That's all I'm saying.

It isn't a fair comparison to say this barrel is faster than that barrel or that this barrel is more accurate than that barrel if you don't know what the actual spec's of the bore/grooves are.

Bore and groove dimensions as well as the actual chamber spec have a big impact on velocities and pressures and can effect accuracy.
What is stuck in your head that makes you think that? There are thousands of people every day comparing BCA, to Faxon, to PSA to BA to Criterion to Wilson to BCM and the questions on this forum show that. None of those barrels have the same specs. and by specs I mean exact same chamber, exact same button design pulled through the same material resulting in the same diameters, sure don't use the exact same stress relief process.
ETA-I designed the button that rifles those barrels to get as much velocity and accuracy as I could and I chose the reamer all made by JGS, it could have been a 5.56 Nato, 223 Wylde, 5.56 CLE or my own 5.56 DMR depending on which I thought would produce the best accuracy with the bullets currently in use. The 223 Wylde probably works best as an all around for bullets 55 to 77gr.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: backcountryguide
Thanks for the advice I appreciate it!
I don't have a old brush for the steel wool but would a 17 cal nylon brush work instead?

I think you should just go shoot it, if it sucks call the company and see about a refund or exchange.

If they won't exchange or refund then you can start scrubbing away at it. That probably does the equivalent of shooting a few hundred rounds through it.
 
Ernest, you didn't ask me but most AR barrels are not lapped. Some AR barrels are lapped because the tooling marks are so bad they have to be lapped. Other companies have figured out the lube to use, the pull speed and button coating to cut down on tooling marks.
I've been Meloniting barrels since 2009 and there is a big difference between companies that Melonite/Nitride treat barrels. Some are terrible and don't even rinse the barrels, that salt crud gets baked on when removing the barrels from the hot vat. It takes iosso bore paste and about 20-30 strokes to get that stuff off. Other companies are good about rinsing and oiling, the bores are shiny and when looking through a bore scope you can tell there is no residue left in the bore.
As someone above said you aren't going to remove the tooling marks in a Nitride/Melonite(same thing) treated barrel. Most of the time Melonite treated barrels do not foul as bad as chrome or even lapped stainless but again that depends on the compound used when lapping. Tim North at Broughton has retired but his barrels were the slickest barrels I have ever seen, must have been lapped with 800 or 1000. I don't shoot dry bullets in a squeaky clean bore but I had no copper fouling in his barrels.
I have a borescope to check but my opinion is don't clean it unless you see copper building up. Copper stuck in the bore will collect more copper. What I try to do is get a thin layer of carbon to act as a barrier between the bore and the copper bullets.
Again opinion- never shoot dry copper bullets in a squeaky clean dry bore, that is a good way to start copper fouling. When I have to clean I finish by running a patch with light oil on it then 1 dry patch(not tight fitting) to remove the excess oil.
 
Last edited:
Just curious for some recommended 12.5 barrels for the ar platform.

So far leaning towards a criterion core, or a Daniel defense but I’m still very green.

Appreciate it.
Try looking at Centurion Arms. They have good profiles for stainless, CHF and CMV. They make a MK12 profile in 12.5 which I find intriguing. I really like the idea of their midweight profile for a GP set up (I have one in 16" but it has not been put on a build yet, so no data to share).
 
  • Like
Reactions: EchosGalahad
Try looking at Centurion Arms. They have good profiles for stainless, CHF and CMV. They make a MK12 profile in 12.5 which I find intriguing. I really like the idea of their midweight profile for a GP set up (I have one in 16" but it has not been put on a build yet, so no data to share).

Did you read my post about them?
 
Did you read my post about them?

You mean this one?
Those two I have seen too many reliability issues.... they CAN'T run weak ammo.

If you want a less expensive option- Ballistic Advantage BA Hanson 12.3. I have had one for about 3 years now and have had zero issues.
No, I didn't see that. Are you talking about the 12.5s specifically or everything they make? All I've read about them up to now is positive.

Since we're talking about barrels only, is there more to the weak ammo thing than gas block size? My understanding was that there is a trade-off between running brass/quality ammo and steel/weak/range-only ammo: you either get over-gassing in order to run weak stuff or you get a good reliable rifle when running factory ammo at standard pressures.

What am I missing?
 
You mean this one?

No, I didn't see that. Are you talking about the 12.5s specifically or everything they make? All I've read about them up to now is positive.

Since we're talking about barrels only, is there more to the weak ammo thing than gas block size? My understanding was that there is a trade-off between running brass/quality ammo and steel/weak/range-only ammo: you either get over-gassing in order to run weak stuff or you get a good reliable rifle when running factory ammo at standard pressures.

What am I missing?


I was talking about 12.5 specifically. The problem is that that they are way UNDER gassed. This is for several reasons. People don't understand that if the internet crowd thinks it is OVER gassed, that means it is probably gassed. Those barrels are all under gassed. They work ok with a can, but without they are hit or miss.
 
It takes about 30 seconds to drill out the gas port after removing the gas block. We have been making mid gas 12.5" barrels since 2010 and use a .081" port. If you want it to work with Wolf and without a can it will be over-gassed with m193 or MK262 with a can, there is no way around it although you can run a AGB or swap red springs and H2 buffers in and out.

.0785 works IF you plan to shoot M193, m855, mk262 or reloads using CFE or Lever powder with a can.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TonyTheTiger
I really like my sionics 12.5 mid, chrome lined 5r 1 in 7. it's been to hot in Vegas to go to the range much since I got it, but everything appears good from first impressions.

you can get it with the standard gas port or there reduced gas port for suppressor use. sionics makes great products but flies under the radar.
 
I was talking about 12.5 specifically. The problem is that that they are way UNDER gassed. This is for several reasons. People don't understand that if the internet crowd thinks it is OVER gassed, that means it is probably gassed. Those barrels are all under gassed. They work ok with a can, but without they are hit or miss.
I see. Okay, that makes a bit more sense. I guess they're designed around suppressor use... maybe? Thanks for the info, sir. (y)
 
What is stuck in your head that makes you think that? There are thousands of people every day comparing BCA, to Faxon, to PSA to BA to Criterion to Wilson to BCM and the questions on this forum show that. None of those barrels have the same specs. and by specs I mean exact same chamber, exact same button design pulled through the same material resulting in the same diameters, sure don't use the exact same stress relief process.
ETA-I designed the button that rifles those barrels to get as much velocity and accuracy as I could and I chose the reamer all made by JGS, it could have been a 5.56 Nato, 223 Wylde, 5.56 CLE or my own 5.56 DMR depending on which I thought would produce the best accuracy with the bullets currently in use. The 223 Wylde probably works best as an all around for bullets 55 to 77gr.

Give me a dimension of the bore and groove you are ending up with? Or that your trying to hold to and the tolerance?

Are all the other places you listed above running to the same spec? Same lot of steel, same diameter of steel?

You list 5 different chamber reamer spec's above. Are you using all of those or just one of those?
it could have been a 5.56 Nato, 223 Wylde, 5.56 CLE or my own 5.56 DMR depending on which I thought would produce the best accuracy with the bullets currently in use.
 
It takes about 30 seconds to drill out the gas port after removing the gas block. We have been making mid gas 12.5" barrels since 2010 and use a .081" port. If you want it to work with Wolf and without a can it will be over-gassed with m193 or MK262 with a can, there is no way around it although you can run a AGB or swap red springs and H2 buffers in and out.

.0785 works IF you plan to shoot M193, m855, mk262 or reloads using CFE or Lever powder with a can.

I am not trying to start a fight, but I was wondering what your definition of Over-Gassed is? That would help me understand your post better.

Thanks
 
  • Like
Reactions: PappyM3
I am not trying to start a fight, but I was wondering what your definition of Over-Gassed is? That would help me understand your post better.

Thanks
Every builder sets their rifle up differently, some may plan to use a standard spring and buffer and some may start with a red spring and H2. The port must be matched to the ammo being used and the way the rifle was built or the build needs to change around the way the barrel was ported and the ammo being used.
For a duty/combat rifle I want the ejection to be 3:00-4:00 with the ammo I'm using, If the ejection angle is 1-2:00 it is over-gassed, tunable but over-gassed.
The problem is some people use low powered ammo that is producing 52,000psi one day and using Mk262 producing 62000 the next day but think both should eject to the same angle. Same with a can, a dedicated 223 can especially a bolt gun suppressor can cause a lot of back pressure making tuning even tougher.
Originally stronger springs and H2, H3 buffers were made to fix over-gas problems
 
Give me a dimension of the bore and groove you are ending up with? Or that your trying to hold to and the tolerance?

Are all the other places you listed above running to the same spec? Same lot of steel, same diameter of steel?

You list 5 different chamber reamer spec's above. Are you using all of those or just one of those?
No none of those barrels have the same spec just like yours aren't the same as Krieger, Broughton, Rock. Lilja or Hart. You keep saying the barrels can't be compared but the general public does it every day. Back in 2008-2009 when I was making custom high power barrels and accurate barrels for bolt guns. I used some of your blanks, Kriegers, Broughtons, Pac Nors and Shilens and I compared them all against each other for accuracy, straightness and velocity. Yeah they didn't have the same specs. so what, it's what you all were selling on the open market. I still made a decision based on the performance of the blanks you all were selling. I was very impressed with the blanks I got from Broughton, Tim has retired so if I was buying a barrel for myself to be used in PRS, highpower or just a bench gun it would be a Krieger every time.
No I'm not going to tell you the button size or design. I will agree to disagree but people are comparing the blanks you are selling to all other blanks being sold whether you like it or not.
 
Just to stir the pot, carbine gas is for transgender folks. Got a couple KAK 12.5 mids because they were cheap and I've been very impressed with them.
gotta agree as I did two budge 308 builds with their barrels and perform well and expected as they are green mountain blanks
 
  • Like
Reactions: TonyTheTiger
No none of those barrels have the same spec just like yours aren't the same as Krieger, Broughton, Rock. Lilja or Hart. You keep saying the barrels can't be compared but the general public does it every day. Back in 2008-2009 when I was making custom high power barrels and accurate barrels for bolt guns. I used some of your blanks, Kriegers, Broughtons, Pac Nors and Shilens and I compared them all against each other for accuracy, straightness and velocity. Yeah they didn't have the same specs. so what, it's what you all were selling on the open market. I still made a decision based on the performance of the blanks you all were selling. I was very impressed with the blanks I got from Broughton, Tim has retired so if I was buying a barrel for myself to be used in PRS, highpower or just a bench gun it would be a Krieger every time.
No I'm not going to tell you the button size or design. I will agree to disagree but people are comparing the blanks you are selling to all other blanks being sold whether you like it or not.
Your comparing barrels but you reference nothing in regards to sizes etc...

So again you cannot compare apples to apples unless you have known dimensions.

If you lay five barrels out on a bench.... and lets say you chamber them with the same reamer and you run the same lot of ammo thru them. Your using the same cleaning procedure etc...and they are all brand new to start with.

Then it comes down to bore and groove sizes that will have the biggest impact on velocities and pressures. I'll guarantee you if you have one barrel right in the middle of saami spec for tolerance (which we run saami min spec as well as tolerance in the vast majority of what we make for the general public and lets just use a 30cal with a .3002" bore and a .3082" groove size. If the next barrel is .2996" x .3079". I'll guarantee more pressure which in turn will have an affect on velocity.

I figured you wouldn't give me the button size or design. That's fine and I respect that. You also never answer the question in regards to bore or groove sizes you end up with in the barrels. I also offered you to send me a couple for me to shoot and chronograph and I would measure the bore and groove sizes to see if there is a correlation in what we see and you never responded to that.

Also you never once mentioned where you made any ammunition pressure test barrels with known bore and groove sizes and had testing done to fall back on actual results/data. When I see actual data from ammunition test barrels we make and do all the work and see the data that gives you facts.

When I seen a button maker screw up a batch of test barrels because they didn't use a different button size for a larger diameter barrel blank they pulled it thru and the bore and grooves on all go a full .0005" under min spec and pressures go up 10k psi and velocity goes up +150fps. Again factual data.

Barrels like a lot of other things will always be compared from one to the next etc.....that will never stop. I get that.

But when you or anyone else starts saying something to the effect of "This barrel is faster than this brand barrel...." What I'm saying is this for the last time... unless you know bore and groove dimensions, what chamber reamer was used, ammo being shot etc... you really don't know what is causing one to be faster than another and you cannot make a accurate comparison.

I'm done with this thread as there is nothing else to talk about.
 
Last edited:
I see both the point Frank and Constructor are making. Technically Frank is right, to have a fair comparison using the same reamer, dimensions, and, test ammo/procedure.

On the other hand it doesn't matter because for the most part no one even advertises those dimensions on thier barrels. Sure one or a few examples isn't enough to say one barrel is faster than another. Rather the trend shows one barrel on average tends to be faster than another.
 
  • Like
Reactions: antecedent and BCP
Your comparing barrels but you reference nothing in regards to sizes etc...

So again you cannot compare apples to apples unless you have known dimensions.

If you lay five barrels out on a bench.... and lets say you chamber them with the same reamer and you run the same lot of ammo thru them. Your using the same cleaning procedure etc...and they are all brand new to start with.

Then it comes down to bore and groove sizes that will have the biggest impact on velocities and pressures. I'll guarantee you if you have one barrel right in the middle of saami spec for tolerance (which we run saami min spec as well as tolerance in the vast majority of what we make for the general public and lets just use a 30cal with a .3002" bore and a .3082" groove size. If the next barrel is .2996" x .3079". I'll guarantee more pressure which in turn will have an affect on velocity.

I figured you wouldn't give me the button size or design. That's fine and I respect that. You also never answer the question in regards to bore or groove sizes you end up with in the barrels. I also offered you to send me a couple for me to shoot and chronograph and I would measure the bore and groove sizes to see if there is a correlation in what we see and you never responded to that.

Also you never once mentioned where you made any ammunition pressure test barrels with known bore and groove sizes and had testing done to fall back on actual results/data. When I see actual data from ammunition test barrels we make and do all the work and see the data that gives you facts.

When I seen a button maker screw up a batch of test barrels because they didn't use a different button size for a larger diameter barrel blank they pulled it thru and the bore and grooves on all go a full .0005" under min spec and pressures go up 10k psi and velocity goes up +150fps. Again factual data.

Barrels like a lot of other things will always be compared from one to the next etc.....that will never stop. I get that.

But when you or anyone else starts saying something to the effect of "This barrel is faster than this brand barrel...." What I'm saying is this for the last time... unless you know bore and groove dimensions, what chamber reamer was used, ammo being shot etc... you really don't know what is causing one to be faster than another and you cannot make a accurate comparison.


I'm done with this thread as there is nothing else to talk about.
Sorry Frank, I don't need your approval or you to test the barrels I have been making since 2009.
 
Seems like if the question is "which available barrel is best for my application," take Constructor's advice.

If the question is "Who makes (or how do I get) the fastest barrel possible" see Frank's posts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EchosGalahad
Seems like if the question is "which available barrel is best for my application," take Constructor's advice.

If the question is "Who makes (or how do I get) the fastest barrel possible" see Frank's posts.
The only way to really know is buy some barrels and test them against each other. It isn't just one thing that increases velocity without causing excess pressure.
 
The only way to really know is buy some barrels and test them against each other. It isn't just one thing that increases velocity without causing excess pressure.

Thanks. I'm just here to learn!

Seems like what Frank is saying is that due to wear and tear on tooling, the same manufacturing process with the same tools will not yield identical barrels, even if all other things are held constant.
 
Thanks. I'm just here to learn!

Seems like what Frank is saying is that due to wear and tear on tooling, the same manufacturing process with the same tools will not yield identical barrels, even if all other things are held constant.
That would be caused by using tools much longer than they should be. Most barrel manufacturers turning out a good number of barrels are using carbide reamers. The only company I know turning out hundreds of barrels using HSS reamers is Green Mountain and the chambers are rough. What I do with my barrels was not by accident.
A little background on me, I started reloading in the mid 70s, turned my first barrel 100% by myself (no help from father) on my16th birthday 1978, received my first gunsmith cert in 1980, designed my first wildcat and built the rifle in 1982, worked as an engineer for 24 years before starting a business machining AR15 parts, bolts, barrel extensions, muzzle devices, carriers, receivers, handguards and finishing barrels, that includes designing the first bolt and extension that allowed me to shoot a 6BRX(308 diameter) in an AR15. Designed 6-8 wildcat cartridges during those years also. I shut down all of my CNCs in 2017 but still have a few for personal work. I retired last May and gave the business to Blackstone Arms in Texas. He uses my button design and barrel specs to produce the barrels the same way I did.
I assume by Franks comments he thinks I tested one barrel or maybe just read comments online about velocity. I buy 10-12 barrels of different makes and test them against the barrels I make( all on the same day with the same lot of ammo through the same chrono) every year since 2009. I test 5 barrels of my own out of every batch of 100. Post #41 explains why I had a mission, I wanted to prove maj Steve Holland, Cris Murray AMU gunsmith were correct about the performance they were getting from the 6.8 SPC.

The problems with the 6.8SPC were many but it was because of the barrel makers just making cheap barrels and not paying attention to details. There is a bore area spec that Murray used, it is on the SAAMI print. EVERY barrel maker using 6 groove 6.8 SPC barrels were wrong and still to this day 14 years later are still wrong, the bore area was/is too small and that caused excess pressure to the point that the ammo makers had to reduce the powder charge which reduces velocity. I designed, had produced and tested 5 different buttons to rifle the barrels with the goal to get as much velocity as I could while not causing excess pressure. After I got the 5R button right I used the info I had learned to design a 3R button which allows me to use more powder and get even more velocity. It isn't just the bore area that makes the difference, it isn't just the reamer design, it isn't a worn reamer, it is several different things combined found by experimenting with different things.
As it is today 110gr Hornady factory ammo hits apx 2550fps from a 16" barrel, my barrels hit 2600-2640 with the same ammo but I can also handload and push the same bullets to 2750fps easy using a Pressure Trace system to confirm it is not over 58000psi. I know it will come up so- it normally takes 3-5000psi to gain 100fps. Hornady ammo generates 54000 psi in a 6 groove barrel that does not meet the bore area spec, it does not generate 54000 psi in my barrels.
I use the same ideas that led me to that performance of the 6.8 to design the buttons and set the specs for the 223 Wylde barrels I make. Same Ideas to make the TAC6 and TAC30 barrels, the 5.56x42(similar to the 224 Valkyrie but I did it in 2007 long before Federal), same ideas in the 224 and 6mm Predator barrels ( 22 and 6mm Grendel more or less).
ETA post #41
 
I mainly use Noveske barrels. Both the stainless steel and CHF barrels. I've had no issues with them and they shoot better than I am capable of. I'm looking at trying a Proof barrel next... but so far I've been very happy with the Noveske barrels.
 
12.5” 5.56 NATO, all 10 shot averages. BCM 12.5” Barrel, Chrome-Lined, CLGS (Data from Eagle_19er)
55gr FMJ

IMI M193___________3028 fps
PPU M193__________2776
PMC XTAC XP193___ 2759
Winchester Q3131___ 2941
Federal XM193______2830
Federal AE223J_____ 2722
PMC Bronze 55gr____2712
Wolf Gold 55gr FMJ__2864
MEN M193 55gr_____2877
Norma TAC 223_____2833

62gr FMJ (M855, Clones)
IMI M855___________2827
PPU M855__________2812
PMC XTAC LAP______2801
Winchester Q3269___2780
Fed XM855-----------2842
Armscor 62gr FMJ----2668
Hornady Black 62gr---2739
Magtech First Def-----2785
GGG M855-----------2836

Fleet test data from US Army for the 14.5” M4/M4A1 in the early days with M855 was an average of 2920fps MV.

If you take the 14.5” M4 vs the 12.5” and look at the practical differences in effectiveness, it’s pole-vaulting over mouse turds.

14.5” M855 62gr 2920fps SA
100yds 2618fps 944ft-lbs
200yds 2336fps 751ft-lbs
300yds 2071fps 591ft-lbs

12.5” M855 62gr 2842fps SA
100yds 2545fps 892ft-lbs
200yds 2268fps 708ft-lbs
300yds 2007fps 555ft-lbs

If you’re shooting high volume training, I would lean on the barrel that lasts long and is reasonably accurate. To me, there isn’t much benefit in longer barrels in 5.56 because projectile weight and BC are so low. When you try to brute force it with velocity, but don’t have the propellant mass to support that, you just don’t see dramatic increases in performance that are meaningful downrange.

This is the main reason why 18” SPRs fell out of favor so quickly. Normal carbines and CQBRs with good triggers, free-float Block II SOPMOD rails, Mk.262, and good optics were plenty. SPR is still great for range work as a stable platform for learning trajectory and wind, but sucks to carry around.

The 12.5” velocities are negligible compared to 14.5” in practice, which is why I really like that barrel length. 14.5” turned out to be a lot faster than a lot of the gun rag experts proclaimed, and a lot of those articles had an agenda to push a new cartridge anyway.

If you ever see me buy anything longer than 12.5” 5.56, pay very close attention because something will need to have been so exceptional about the barrel to make me go longer. I’ve also been a big fan of 11.5” since the 1990s. My first 2 AR-15s I bought after the Colt AR-15A2 Sporter II in the 1980s, were 11.5” guns in the 1990s.
 
12.5” 5.56 NATO, all 10 shot averages. BCM 12.5” Barrel, Chrome-Lined, CLGS (Data from Eagle_19er)
55gr FMJ

IMI M193___________3028 fps
PPU M193__________2776
PMC XTAC XP193___ 2759
Winchester Q3131___ 2941
Federal XM193______2830
Federal AE223J_____ 2722
PMC Bronze 55gr____2712
Wolf Gold 55gr FMJ__2864
MEN M193 55gr_____2877
Norma TAC 223_____2833

62gr FMJ (M855, Clones)
IMI M855___________2827
PPU M855__________2812
PMC XTAC LAP______2801
Winchester Q3269___2780
Fed XM855-----------2842
Armscor 62gr FMJ----2668
Hornady Black 62gr---2739
Magtech First Def-----2785
GGG M855-----------2836

Fleet test data from US Army for the 14.5” M4/M4A1 in the early days with M855 was an average of 2920fps MV.

If you take the 14.5” M4 vs the 12.5” and look at the practical differences in effectiveness, it’s pole-vaulting over mouse turds.

14.5” M855 62gr 2920fps SA
100yds 2618fps 944ft-lbs
200yds 2336fps 751ft-lbs
300yds 2071fps 591ft-lbs

12.5” M855 62gr 2842fps SA
100yds 2545fps 892ft-lbs
200yds 2268fps 708ft-lbs
300yds 2007fps 555ft-lbs

If you’re shooting high volume training, I would lean on the barrel that lasts long and is reasonably accurate. To me, there isn’t much benefit in longer barrels in 5.56 because projectile weight and BC are so low. When you try to brute force it with velocity, but don’t have the propellant mass to support that, you just don’t see dramatic increases in performance that are meaningful downrange.

This is the main reason why 18” SPRs fell out of favor so quickly. Normal carbines and CQBRs with good triggers, free-float Block II SOPMOD rails, Mk.262, and good optics were plenty. SPR is still great for range work as a stable platform for learning trajectory and wind, but sucks to carry around.

The 12.5” velocities are negligible compared to 14.5” in practice, which is why I really like that barrel length. 14.5” turned out to be a lot faster than a lot of the gun rag experts proclaimed, and a lot of those articles had an agenda to push a new cartridge anyway.

If you ever see me buy anything longer than 12.5” 5.56, pay very close attention because something will need to have been so exceptional about the barrel to make me go longer. I’ve also been a big fan of 11.5” since the 1990s. My first 2 AR-15s I bought after the Colt AR-15A2 Sporter II in the 1980s, were 11.5” guns in the 1990s.

If I wasn’t on the 12.5 trail I would be from that post man thank you! How much do you lose going to 10.3 say like Daniel defense mk18 for instance?
 
12.5” 5.56 NATO, all 10 shot averages. BCM 12.5” Barrel, Chrome-Lined, CLGS (Data from Eagle_19er)
55gr FMJ

IMI M193___________3028 fps
PPU M193__________2776
PMC XTAC XP193___ 2759
Winchester Q3131___ 2941
Federal XM193______2830
Federal AE223J_____ 2722
PMC Bronze 55gr____2712
Wolf Gold 55gr FMJ__2864
MEN M193 55gr_____2877
Norma TAC 223_____2833

62gr FMJ (M855, Clones)
IMI M855___________2827
PPU M855__________2812
PMC XTAC LAP______2801
Winchester Q3269___2780
Fed XM855-----------2842
Armscor 62gr FMJ----2668
Hornady Black 62gr---2739
Magtech First Def-----2785
GGG M855-----------2836

Fleet test data from US Army for the 14.5” M4/M4A1 in the early days with M855 was an average of 2920fps MV.

If you take the 14.5” M4 vs the 12.5” and look at the practical differences in effectiveness, it’s pole-vaulting over mouse turds.

14.5” M855 62gr 2920fps SA
100yds 2618fps 944ft-lbs
200yds 2336fps 751ft-lbs
300yds 2071fps 591ft-lbs

12.5” M855 62gr 2842fps SA
100yds 2545fps 892ft-lbs
200yds 2268fps 708ft-lbs
300yds 2007fps 555ft-lbs

If you’re shooting high volume training, I would lean on the barrel that lasts long and is reasonably accurate. To me, there isn’t much benefit in longer barrels in 5.56 because projectile weight and BC are so low. When you try to brute force it with velocity, but don’t have the propellant mass to support that, you just don’t see dramatic increases in performance that are meaningful downrange.

This is the main reason why 18” SPRs fell out of favor so quickly. Normal carbines and CQBRs with good triggers, free-float Block II SOPMOD rails, Mk.262, and good optics were plenty. SPR is still great for range work as a stable platform for learning trajectory and wind, but sucks to carry around.

The 12.5” velocities are negligible compared to 14.5” in practice, which is why I really like that barrel length. 14.5” turned out to be a lot faster than a lot of the gun rag experts proclaimed, and a lot of those articles had an agenda to push a new cartridge anyway.

If you ever see me buy anything longer than 12.5” 5.56, pay very close attention because something will need to have been so exceptional about the barrel to make me go longer. I’ve also been a big fan of 11.5” since the 1990s. My first 2 AR-15s I bought after the Colt AR-15A2 Sporter II in the 1980s, were 11.5” guns in the 1990s.
To your point regarding training... this is why my training/most used rifle is a 12.5" Noveske CHF barrel. Before the 12.5 was a 12.5 it was a 10.5 and that wasn't enough for what I was doing with it.
 
Frank vs Constructor is the quality content I'm here for. I respect both.
And now @LRRPF52 joins the chat. This is going to be one of the great threads for posterity for folks who got their start like me. Enthusiasts Google searching for information before they're ever forum members or likely, even yet shooters. A tip of the hat to everyone here who contributes to growing our hobby.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EchosGalahad
A few articles about terminal performance of bullets from DOC GKR and others relating velocity and barrel length.- edited to pick out a few paragraphs. Velocity matters, unless you're just shooting paper.

https://www.itstactical.com/warcom/ammunition/military-ammunition-failures-and-solutions/
https://www.justice.gov.za/comm-mrk/exhibits/Exhibit-JJJ-112.pdf
http://www.mlefiaa.org/files/ERPR/Terminal_Ballistic_Performance.pdf
https://www.realcleardefense.com/ar...ich_service_had_the_better_bullet_114140.html


"Criticism
There has been much criticism of the poor performance of the bullet on target, especially the
first-shot kill rate when the muzzle velocity of the firearms used and the downrange bullet
deceleration do not achieve the minimally required terminal velocity at the target to cause
fragmentation.[19] This wounding problem has been cited in incidents beginning in the first
Gulf war, Somalia, and in the current conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. In recent lab testing
of M855, it has been shown that the bullets do not fragment reliably or consistently from
round-to-round, displaying widely variable performance. In several cases, yawing did not
begin until 7–10 in of penetration. This was with all rounds coming from the same
manufacturer.[19] This lack of wounding capacity typically becomes an increasingly
significant issue as range increases (e.g., ranges over 50 m when using an M4 or 200 m when
using an M16) or when penetrating heavy clothing, but this problem is compounded in
shorter-barreled weapons. The 14.5 inches (37 cm) barrel of the U.S. military's M4 carbine
generates considerably less initial velocity than the longer 20" barrel found on the M16, and
terminal performance can be a particular problem with the M4.

Combat operations the past few months have again highlighted terminal performance
deficiencies with 5.56×45mm 62 gr. M855 FMJ. These problems have primarily been
manifested as inadequate incapacitation of enemy forces despite them being hit multiple times
by M855 bullets. These failures appear to be associated with the bullets exiting the body of
the enemy soldier without yawing or fragmenting.
This failure to yaw and fragment can be caused by reduced impact velocities as when fired
from short barrel weapons
or when the range increases. It can also occur when the bullets pass
through only minimal tissue, such as a limb or the torso of a thin, small statured individual, as
the bullet may exit the body before it has a chance to yaw and fragment. "

"Unfortunately, combat operations since late 2001 have again highlighted terminal performance problems, generally manifested as failures to rapidly incapacitate opponents, during combat engagements when M855 62 gr “Green Tip” FMJ is fired from 5.56 mm rifles and carbines. This is not surprising, since M855 was not originally intended for use in carbines or rifles, especially those with short barrels."
"This failure of 5.56 mm bullets to upset can be caused by reduced impact velocities when hitting targets at longer ranges, as well as by the decreased muzzle velocity when using short barrel carbines. Failure to upset can also occur when bullets pass through minimal tissue, such as a limb or the torso of a thin, small statured individual, as the bullet may exit the body before it has a chance to upset. Finally, bullet design and construction plays a major role in reliable bullet upset. Without consistent bullet upset, wounding effects are decreased, rapid incapacitation is unlikely, and enemy combatants may continue to pose a threat to friendly forces and innocent civilians."

"These carbines had shorter barrels, usually around 14.5 or sixteen inches, which gave them lower muzzle velocity compared to the full twenty-inch barrel of the M16. The lower velocity of these carbines led to incidents such as those in Mogadishu where the M855 fired out of a CAR-15 failed to fragment and put targets down reliably.


The issue of M855 lethality continued to plague the military in the post-9/11 era. As the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan dragged on, the U.S. Army and Marines began to issue out M4 Carbines, which use a 14.5-inch barrel, in larger numbers. This only exacerbated the problem with M855. "

Terminal Ballistic Performance of the 5.56mm Cartridge
"If using a short-barreled weapon: The same guidelines apply as for barrier penetration loads. SBRs
usually have insufficient velocity to achieve fragmentation velocity."
 
Last edited: