Gunsmithing Carbon Wrapped Barrels, More PROOF

[J-Ham]

Re: Carbon Wrapped Barrels, More PROOF

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That can happen with anything technology wise, look at your computer. </div></div>
I AM looking at my computer... I bought it three years ago & it's still working great!

I guess what I mean is are they standing behind those barrels? Simply telling me, the customer, 'Sorry, that's the risk you run with cutting edge technology' just isn't going to cut it... For me!

 

[seanh]

Re: Carbon Wrapped Barrels, More PROOF

call them and find out...

 

[Straight Shooter]

Re: Carbon Wrapped Barrels, More PROOF

The Opti-Grab of barrel technology? I hope not. I have one on order for a Chey Tac build.

 

[Boogaloo]

Re: Carbon Wrapped Barrels, More PROOF

What if the heat "dissipation" angle is just marketing hype, and the real secret sauce is that by wrapping these barrels, they have some how "calmed down" the overall harmonics of a barrel by dampening it with a carbon fiber wrap?

This would allow them to create a lighter (thinner) barrel with say the intrinsic stability of much heavier profiled barrel.

Or do I look like I just took a bong hit by even suggesting that?

P.S. I don't own a bong, nor do I smoke pot (or even drink alcohol for that matter) but I do enjoy these high tech conversations very much...

 

[Early Cuyler]

Re: Carbon Wrapped Barrels, More PROOF

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BlackOps Tech</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

As a result, I'll be receiving a donation of recent technology POOF barrels, along with some "older" technology POOF barrels and I've been asked to conduct testing relative to heat dissipation, longevity and sustained accuracy (with the presence of heat), in accordance with a formal testing protocol.

I'll post details relative to the protocol and provide a full data package related to the wrapped barrels, as compared to non-wrapped barrels.

</div></div>

This is why I love this site and visit it more than any other. Industry leaders providing objective testing on new technology.

Big thanks to Proof Research for providing the barrel and to Black Ops Precision for doing the testing! I'm looking forward to reading the results.

 

[Jhnmdahl]

Re: Carbon Wrapped Barrels, More PROOF

Are the "new" owners still claiming enhanced heat dissipation? I could see a carbon fiber/epoxy shell having some sort of vibration damping effect that might be interesting even if it inhibits heat transfer somewhat.

 

[Blanman]

Any new developments with this?

 

[damoncali]

Really late here, but I'll chime in just because. I used to build composite aerospace structures for a living. Composites have two parts - the fibers, which give it strength and stiffness, and the matrix, which holds it all together. Carbon fibers are fantastic heat conductors. Way better than steel. But your average matrix is just fancy plastic, and an awful heat conductor. I think that's where the confusion lies. But but the bottom line is that a composite will not conduct heat worth a crap unless you're using a very high-end specialty conductive matrix (I've used titanium matrix composites on one project, but there goes your weight savings, and good luck affording one). I suppose if someone came up with an affordable, conductive matrix, you'd have something to work with. But that's not the only problem with composites...

Another little known fact is that composites are structurally unbalanced unless you do it exactly right. In other words, if you lay up a flat composite sheet, and the layers aren't done just right, you will get a potato chip shape when you stretch the sheet.

Wrapping a barrel in carbon fiber makes little to no sense to me, but to each his own. An aluminum sleeve would make more sense if you want to play with stiffness/weight.

I'm not condemning anyone's barrels. Just saying that the justification for the practice is unclear to me. If the point is heat dissipation, it's exactly the wrong material. If it's light weight and high stiffness, you can get there but you're playing with fire when it comes to consistency and durability.

 

[dwtaylorpdx]

Snip...

I'm not condemning anyone's barrels. Just saying that the justification for the practice is unclear to me. If the point is heat dissipation, it's exactly the wrong material. If it's light weight and high stiffness, you can get there but you're playing with fire when it comes to consistency.

Based on using steel and carbon fiber rope for winching.,,,
just a sideways thought... What if it works because the CF
filament does not stretch as much (As easily?) as the barrel.
So essentially it reduces/prevents the expansion of the barrel
providing a tighter grip of the rifling on the bullet? Add to that the
damping affect of a material that does not compress or stretch well
and for a short time you could have something, until heat starts to take a tole..
Carbon exhaust on motorcycles have the same delam issue with age.

I did see a gun once built similar to a dan wesson revolver with the threaded stressed sleeve barrel.
Was very accurate but bulky as hell, the tube was 2" and 1/2 inch thick.. with about a 1/4
inch air gap between the barrel and tube.

Dave

 

[coues7]

Tag for knowledge

 

[pinsandpitons]

..... aluminum sleeve would make more sense if you want to play with stiffness/weight.

Based on previous observations you've made I have reason to listen closely to what you say. Why aren't there aluminum sleeved centerfire barrels? Works well for .22lr and would definitely be stiff and lighter with good heat transfer.

 

[dwtaylorpdx]

AL expands faster than steel. So a Al sleeve theoretically would get looser as it heated wouldn't it??
Hmm..

Dave

 

[pinsandpitons]

Yup, I guess so. Also longer. But alloy has a lot to say about that.

 

[ranger1183]

Sorry guys but I just stumbled onto this thread. If someone had PM'd me about it earlier, I could have commented in a more timely fashion.

What follows is my ACTUAL EXPERIENCE with ABS / Proof Research Carbon Fiber wrapped barrels. No videos and no Internet "wisdom". Just my experience from a shooter using these barrels.


My history with Proof Research is as follows.

I was laid off from an electrical job in early Febuary 2011 while working out of Spokane, Wa. By June of 2011 I was able to get a job at Proof Research so I moved to Columbia Falls, MT. I worked that job from some time in June until Dec 1st 2011. I left Proof at that time and have not been back.

I own no stock in Proof Research, I have no investments or holdings of any kind with Proof Research or any associated company. I'm not drinking buddies with anyone at Proof nor do I associate with any Proof employees or their families in my off time. I hold no grudges against Proof nor do get any favors from them.

According to my email folder labelled "ABS", my first ABS barrel was purchased on May 5th, 2006. Since that time I had built, owned and fired roughly one DOZEN Carbon Fiber wrapped barrels by ABS. As a rifle A.D.D. junkie, I'd build rifles, sell them and go off to the next project. I build numerous .308's, several .260's, one .260 AI (I still own that one), a 300 Rem SAUM, a 6.5 Grendel gas gun and at least two different 6mm's (one a 6XC and the second a 6x47 Swiss Match if I remember correctly) using ABS barrels. All of those barrels shot well except one. That one was later determined to have been chambered skew (at an angle) to the bore [ Skew lines - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ].


I am NOT a sub-MOA "all day long" shooter on a daily basis. In fact, some days I just plain suck. I have found that it is much easier for me to shoot well with a very heavy rifle (off of a bench) than a light weight rifle. Shooting a lightweight rifle can be a real ball busting experience on a bad day.

I have, however, found that ABS / Proof Research barrels are as accurate and as consistant as anyone elses that I've used and these include Bartlien, Krieger and Rock Creek barrels. In particular, I had one ABS wrapped .260 Remington that shot very tight one hole groups at 100 yards using factory Black Hills ammo. That was one crazy-accurate rifle.

FROM MY EXPERIENCE: I have found ABS / Proof Research Carbon Fiber wrapped barrels to be as accurate as any other brand named barrel out there.

FROM MY EXPERIENCE: I have found ABS / Proof Research Carbon Fiber wrapped barrels cool faster than a standard all steel barrel (ie: Bartlien, Krieger and Rock Creek barrel) .

FROM MY EXPERIENCE: I have found ABS / Proof Research Carbon Fiber wrapped barrels require the shooter to practice the fundementals of shooting to a stricter degree because you are shooting a significantly lighter rifle.

FROM MY EXPERIENCE: I have found ABS / Proof Research Carbon Fiber wrapped barrels are over TWICE as expensive as a brand name barrel with fluting (Bartlien, Krieger and Rock Creek barrel, etc.) .

FROM MY EXPERIENCE: I have proven that this technology works for at least one guy in this world (me!). I have several shooting buddies that have shot my rifles and done so consistantly better that I have.

If I win the lottery some day, I will buy a bunch of these barrels for future builds. HOWEVER, since I can buy 2 light contour FLUTED barrels from Bartlien for the price of just ONE ABS / Proof Research Carbon Fiber wrapped barrel, I'm sticking with Bartlien for the foreseeable future.

No LOVE, no HATE, just my EXPERIENCE with these barrels.

 

[damoncali]

Based on previous observations you've made I have reason to listen closely to what you say. Why aren't there aluminum sleeved centerfire barrels? Works well for .22lr and would definitely be stiff and lighter with good heat transfer.

As dwtaylorpdx points out, you'll run into differential expansion problems when the sleeve expands at a different rate than the liner. You could try a few things to mitigate that, but again, you're getting into some dicey areas when it comes to consistency. It would take a lot of effort to get right if it can be done at all. Note that this is also true with carbon fiber, and may even be worse depending on the composite used. And it's not clear that a lighter, stiffer barrel is what you want anyhow.

Another thing to keep in mind is that a CF wrapped barrel will stay cooler longer - on the outside. On the inside, it will be frying. A thin liner will be absorbing all the heat that is normally taken in by a thick barrel. The result will be a very hot liner wrapped in an insulator. So unless you're measuring the temperature in the bore, external temperatures will be very misleading.

 

[damoncali]

Based on using steel and carbon fiber rope for winching.,,,
just a sideways thought... What if it works because the CF
filament does not stretch as much (As easily?) as the barrel.
So essentially it reduces/prevents the expansion of the barrel
providing a tighter grip of the rifling on the bullet? Add to that the
damping affect of a material that does not compress or stretch well
and for a short time you could have something, until heat starts to take a tole..
Carbon exhaust on motorcycles have the same delam issue with age.

I did see a gun once built similar to a dan wesson revolver with the threaded stressed sleeve barrel.
Was very accurate but bulky as hell, the tube was 2" and 1/2 inch thick.. with about a 1/4
inch air gap between the barrel and tube.

Dave

The filiments are stiffer than steel. BUT, they're not lined up right, and the matrix is much, much less stiff. In practice, it gets very difficult to line up the fibers so that you can take advantage of their stiffness without running into severe durability problems. Composites are generally best used when the loading is in one predictable direction. Making them useful in more general loading situations means decreasing their strength and stiffness dramatically.

In other words, what you're describing is really hard to figure out, and even harder to build.

 

[Bangnclang]

Nice post Ranger!

BnC

 

[mkollman74]

Based on previous observations you've made I have reason to listen closely to what you say. Why aren't there aluminum sleeved centerfire barrels? Works well for .22lr and would definitely be stiff and lighter with good heat transfer.

Ask and ye shall receive... Lothar Walther

 

[GlockandRoll]

Interesting thread.. anyone else trying them lately?
I'm considering one for a 6.5 cheetmoor build.

 

[Lucky Jack]

I have A .30 CAL Sendro in my lathe right now. 300 Win Mag, McMillan G-30, AI Ax in OD green. I just found this thread too. I was stressing until the bottom of page one. My experience buying the blank from PROOF was super good and they sent me a thank you card a few weeks later. A nice touch I thought. I buy a lot of stuff but I've never gotten a special thank you card until now. I'd rather have had a twenty bucks off or free shippping but I'll take the card for now.

 

[hoguer]

Just as a observation as a present owner of several ABS/Proof barreled rifles, one thing i would like to point out, is that if you read anyones reviews of the use of a Proof barrel, mostly in the tactical setting, one of the biggest complaints is of the MIRAGE that is produced after prolonged/strings of fire. To most this was considered a annoyance and written off as a con of a CF barrel. Common sense tells me that if my CF barrel is producing a MIRAGE that is more noticable after being fired, then in effect it is SHEDDING the heat faster or more efficiently than my bull barreled rifles. I am not a engineer nor do i have any fancy degree to back up my claims. I have a 300WM with a proof barrel, had a 6.5x47 lapua with a ABS barrel, had a 16" 223 AR upper, and have ON ORDER a 27" 338 barrel that will soon be a beautiful little Lapua. Just a point i wanted to make and something that i have noticed in my personal use. (Also, my proof rifles have been the MOST ACCURATE rifles that i have owned ((and ive had my fair share ))

 

[sniper177]

I'm new to this forum, but was very intrigued by the technical posts. I believe there is a proprietary technology used in this, and it's called nanotechnology. By using carbon nanotubes, CNT, or more commonly, graphene, you can increase the thermal conductivity by an order of a magnitude (converges to carbon with no matrix). The reason for poor heat conduction is because thermal plastic creates a boundary between each carbon layer (plastic being a poor conductor). By growing CNT's on the carbon fiber or mixing graphene into the substrate, it creates multiple bridges between each layer. This also increases the stiffness and toughness of the CFRP, not to mention the material is now completely electrically conductive. The only downside to this would be cost, obviously, and it will corrode the steel faster because of galvanic corrosion.

I also hypothesize that they use some sort of pyrolysis hybridization on there substrate to withstand the high thermal heat (use ceramic or some other substrate on their first layup).

No I did not Google this. I'm a PhD student in mechanical engineering, researching nanotechnology. Also 12 years in Infantry and Cav scouts.

 

[phorwath]

I've received a number of emails and a few phone calls relative to the information in this thread, particularly related to a question I posed in a prior post:

<span style="font-style: italic">"The question remains, do the Carbon Wrapped barrels, regardless of when they were made, dissipate heat at a rate higher than non-wrapped barrels and do they last some period longer than non-wrapped barrels?" </span>

As a result, I'll be receiving a donation of recent technology POOF barrels, along with some "older" technology POOF barrels and I've been asked to conduct testing relative to heat dissipation, longevity and sustained accuracy (with the presence of heat), in accordance with a formal testing protocol.

I'll post details relative to the protocol and provide a full data package related to the wrapped barrels, as compared to non-wrapped barrels.

The above post was dated 2-13-2013. Is this comparison testing effort still a GO? Should we be awaiting some temperature testing data?

 

[bhoges]

I plan on stopping at their both today while at Shot. Its a lot of money for a barrel compared to others in the market. They have to be on sale for me to ever think about one.

 

[damoncali]

I'm new to this forum, but was very intrigued by the technical posts. I believe there is a proprietary technology used in this, and it's called nanotechnology. By using carbon nanotubes, CNT, or more commonly, graphene, you can increase the thermal conductivity by an order of a magnitude (converges to carbon with no matrix). The reason for poor heat conduction is because thermal plastic creates a boundary between each carbon layer (plastic being a poor conductor). By growing CNT's on the carbon fiber or mixing graphene into the substrate, it creates multiple bridges between each layer. This also increases the stiffness and toughness of the CFRP, not to mention the material is now completely electrically conductive. The only downside to this would be cost, obviously, and it will corrode the steel faster because of galvanic corrosion.

I also hypothesize that they use some sort of pyrolysis hybridization on there substrate to withstand the high thermal heat (use ceramic or some other substrate on their first layup).

No I did not Google this. I'm a PhD student in mechanical engineering, researching nanotechnology. Also 12 years in Infantry and Cav scouts.

A while back when I was working in aerospace, the electrical guys did some testing on some carbon fiber laminate panels with regards to their conductivity. They did continuity tests at various parts of a smallish (12" square) panel. I thought the results were interesting.

The continuity from one face of the plate to the other was zero, even when they dug the probes into the surface a little. The plastic effectively insulated the carbonfibers, which should be bad for heat transfer.

But, the conductivity from one edge of the plate to the other was good, even in cases when the layup made it impossible for one unbroken fiber to be connecting the two points. We just sort of assumed that there was enough fiber to fiber contact to make the whole thing pretty conductive, but that seems like a bad thing to count on. For our purposes at the time, that was enough testing.

Are you saying that in the years since, the materials guys have learned to sprinkle magic bits of carbon into the plastic that will make the whole thing reliably conductive in every direction without negatively impacting the structural characteristics of material? If so, that's pretty cool, and makes this whole carbon barrel thing take on new light, at least as far as thermal conductivity goes. I still have structural concerns, but that's progress.

 

[bhoges]

I stopped by their booth today to speak to them. It seems they are making their own cut barrels now. I can't believe they can start making quality barrels right out of the gate. They look awesome but I can't see guys dropping $1000 on a barrel. I asked about the heat transfer as well as bonding the cf to the core. They say the barrel are turned and wrapped before they cut the rifling. Also the way the cf is bonding to the core with a resin that is able to expand at the same rate of the steel. Very interesting Id love to try one but Id have to see one first hand at the range. No deals at the show unfortunately.

 

[zenbiker]

I stopped by their booth today to speak to them. It seems they are making their own cut barrels now. I can't believe they can start making quality barrels right out of the gate. They look awesome but I can't see guys dropping $1000 on a barrel. I asked about the heat transfer as well as bonding the cf to the core. They say the barrel are turned and wrapped before they cut the rifling. Also the way the cf is bonding to the core with a resin that is able to expand at the same rate of the steel. Very interesting Id love to try one but Id have to see one first hand at the range. No deals at the show unfortunately.

Quality Barrels...I don"t know any barrel maker who claims to make anything but quality barrels. Its nice that they cut rifle, and appropriate that they do so after turning and wrapping. Button rifling would likely pop any seal that existed between the steel and the CF. As far as what I'd want to see is this list:

1) Borescope videos of randomly selected barrels; you can't tell how good a barrel is made by holding it up to the light. Boots Obermeyer once said this was the equivalent of looking up a dog's ass to tell if it could hunt.

2) Air Gauge measurements of the same barrels; see Boots Obermeyer comment above.

3) Thread and chamber a randomly selected barrels in 6.5 CM, 300 WinMag, and 375 CT; install into test beds and fire for expected life of a conventional barrel OR until any failure related to CF debonding. 10 shot group monitoring should be logged. Borescope videos should be recorded every 100 rounds

4) Section the barrels lengthwise to show the condtion of the CF to steel bond.

That would be a fair test to prove claims of "quality" where everyone else has failed. The only other test I can think of is to go ahead and spend my $$ on proven equipment, and see what everyone who has used these barrels thinks of them in a couple of years.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[Colcalcipherol]

Guys,
I cannot speak for products of the past but I am a new Proof customer and I am sold on their hardware. I run a Proof barrel in .375 CheyTac and it's a near one-holer. I haven't shot it in rapid fire and likely never will but so far it is a great piece of hardware. Once it's finally shot out, I'll report back. Perhaps I can cross section it at that time but this will likely be a few years.

 

[Colcalcipherol]

And I just noticed a post above from "Straight Shooter." This is the guy who built my CheyTac and is the one who generated the "Proof" that it can be a near one-holer.

 

[Papa Zero Three]

As far as what I'd want to see is this list:

Not a bad list of things to examine if you were doing a comprehensive review of a barrel. However, the barrels you are currently shooting, did the manufacturer provide the same type of information to convince you it was a good barrel?

I have no issues with people asking to "see the facts" or "science" beind a product but I find it laughable that whenever a new product comes out that goes against a persons personal beliefs/experiences that they demand to see astronomically absurd amounts of "data" that supports the mfgrs claim when it is not only cost prohibitive but beyond any reasonable expectation for a company to provide and or industry standard. Yet the same people will buy a scope, mount, piece of gear,etc, based off a group of peoples input/feedback on the internet, and this from people they don't even know. Shit like this makes me laugh.

With that said, I was highly skeptical of Proof and of the Teludyne systems. Having seen good feedback from other end users and from people I know personally who use their guns harder than most on the Proof system, I am confident that it does work. The longevity/barrel life claim is impossible to predict at this point for either companies systems as they are both relatively new to the market. However, to date, I haven't seen or heard anything about the Telydyne system that convinces me it does what the mfgr claims or the added performance improvement. There is one very good paper on the system, done by another industry professional, and it is very well done, but one does not make it a statistical fact or even a baseline. I also find it hard to find unbiased feedback from everyday guys who have bought it and are using it in the field.

So while I am a believer in asking for "Proof", I am not a believer in asking for molecular level evaluation reports and tests that are unsupportable by anything but a professional testing house and or gov't financing.

 

[Goatman007]

I've spent some time doing thermal calculations for high-performance electric motors with integrated controllers (think of a servo motor driving a hydraulic pump and bolted to the outside of a transmission or differential that is operating at 150C, and you've got the idea). Heat was always a major problem. Here is what I learned:

1) If you have something sitting in "still" (unmoving) air, the thermal resistance of the air/sink boundary is the main obstacle to conducting heat. Dicking around with material composition between the source of the heat and the air/sink boundary has moderate effect. Of course, moving from a good conductor (metal) to a poor conductor (composite) does not improve matters one bit, and to think otherwise is to be completely ignorant of physics.

2) Getting the air moving just a bit (a few m/s) is of enormous benefit. If you can design the part such that natural convection creates this airflow, great; unfortunately, rifle barrels (and whatever fluting shapes are typically cut into them) are not oriented properly to create convection... unless someone is using a lot more hold-over than I do

3) Heat transfer via radiation is not going to be a significant contributor at temperatures around 100C, so part color is a very small influence on its thermal performance (note that this is true only to the extent that you don't mount the part in "view" of a radiant heat source, in which case some heat transfer in the opposite direction can occur).

If someone wants to prove the thermal performance of a carbon-wrapped barrel, then I would suggest that they either thermocouple the barrel at a variety of depths (none of this surface-temperature bullshit), or at the very least go perform some thermal FEA modeling with ANSYS or similar software. With proper assumptions, I've seen thermal FEA obtain accuracy of less than 1C on a motor that had maximum internal temps of 135C, so it's a pretty powerful tool in the hands of a trained and experienced user.

This is exactly what I have been thinking since the carbon wrapped barrels came out!! Carbon is an insulator, NOT a conductor, the best way to dissapate heat is to use existing technology, a plain steel barrel, And I am not sold on fluting a barrel either. If one of those flutes are cut too deep or shallow, I would think that the barrel would warp towards or away from that point as it heats up.

 

[BPaulk]

The above post was dated 2-13-2013. Is this comparison testing effort still a GO? Should we be awaiting some temperature testing data?

Tag for results.

 

[idaho1]

How did the barrel perform now that a year has passed?

I have used ABS and Proof in the past and the results were as others have described, excessive impact shift. Carbon separating from the steel after long periods of use.

However, I have also heard that recently they have figured out where the problems they were having came from and have been told things are different now, I just built one of My team guys a rifle on his Team Action in 6.5 Saum, He will defiantly fill me in on the performance, and will be shooting it at this years Snipers Hide cup. His barrel last year was a standard so he has a baseline to compare on. Ill post the findings here in a year or so.

 

[rgrmike]

Tag

 

[PWScottIV]

Test Results

I've received a number of emails and a few phone calls relative to the information in this thread, particularly related to a question I posed in a prior post:

<span style="font-style: italic">"The question remains, do the Carbon Wrapped barrels, regardless of when they were made, dissipate heat at a rate higher than non-wrapped barrels and do they last some period longer than non-wrapped barrels?" </span>

As a result, I'll be receiving a donation of recent technology POOF barrels, along with some "older" technology POOF barrels and I've been asked to conduct testing relative to heat dissipation, longevity and sustained accuracy (with the presence of heat), in accordance with a formal testing protocol.

I'll post details relative to the protocol and provide a full data package related to the wrapped barrels, as compared to non-wrapped barrels.

I'm considering purchasing two Proof Research barrels (one in .223 and one in 308), but I'd like to have some confirmation that these are actually worth the additional expense. Did you ever receive the barrels and test them? Please PM me if you don't want to disclose your findings publicly. Thank You

 

[LRI]

Brand new 22 cal 8 twist RV contour Proof barrel sitting on the shelf.

ready to deliver if your (anyone) is interested.

c.

 

[mike e]

Sorry guys but I just stumbled onto this thread. If someone had PM'd me about it earlier, I could have commented in a more timely fashion.

What follows is my ACTUAL EXPERIENCE with ABS / Proof Research Carbon Fiber wrapped barrels. No videos and no Internet "wisdom". Just my experience from a shooter using these barrels.


My history with Proof Research is as follows.

I was laid off from an electrical job in early Febuary 2011 while working out of Spokane, Wa. By June of 2011 I was able to get a job at Proof Research so I moved to Columbia Falls, MT. I worked that job from some time in June until Dec 1st 2011. I left Proof at that time and have not been back.

I own no stock in Proof Research, I have no investments or holdings of any kind with Proof Research or any associated company. I'm not drinking buddies with anyone at Proof nor do I associate with any Proof employees or their families in my off time. I hold no grudges against Proof nor do get any favors from them.

According to my email folder labelled "ABS", my first ABS barrel was purchased on May 5th, 2006. Since that time I had built, owned and fired roughly one DOZEN Carbon Fiber wrapped barrels by ABS. As a rifle A.D.D. junkie, I'd build rifles, sell them and go off to the next project. I build numerous .308's, several .260's, one .260 AI (I still own that one), a 300 Rem SAUM, a 6.5 Grendel gas gun and at least two different 6mm's (one a 6XC and the second a 6x47 Swiss Match if I remember correctly) using ABS barrels. All of those barrels shot well except one. That one was later determined to have been chambered skew (at an angle) to the bore [ Skew lines - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ].


I am NOT a sub-MOA "all day long" shooter on a daily basis. In fact, some days I just plain suck. I have found that it is much easier for me to shoot well with a very heavy rifle (off of a bench) than a light weight rifle. Shooting a lightweight rifle can be a real ball busting experience on a bad day.

I have, however, found that ABS / Proof Research barrels are as accurate and as consistant as anyone elses that I've used and these include Bartlien, Krieger and Rock Creek barrels. In particular, I had one ABS wrapped .260 Remington that shot very tight one hole groups at 100 yards using factory Black Hills ammo. That was one crazy-accurate rifle.

FROM MY EXPERIENCE: I have found ABS / Proof Research Carbon Fiber wrapped barrels to be as accurate as any other brand named barrel out there.

FROM MY EXPERIENCE: I have found ABS / Proof Research Carbon Fiber wrapped barrels cool faster than a standard all steel barrel (ie: Bartlien, Krieger and Rock Creek barrel) .

FROM MY EXPERIENCE: I have found ABS / Proof Research Carbon Fiber wrapped barrels require the shooter to practice the fundementals of shooting to a stricter degree because you are shooting a significantly lighter rifle.

FROM MY EXPERIENCE: I have found ABS / Proof Research Carbon Fiber wrapped barrels are over TWICE as expensive as a brand name barrel with fluting (Bartlien, Krieger and Rock Creek barrel, etc.) .

FROM MY EXPERIENCE: I have proven that this technology works for at least one guy in this world (me!). I have several shooting buddies that have shot my rifles and done so consistantly better that I have.

If I win the lottery some day, I will buy a bunch of these barrels for future builds. HOWEVER, since I can buy 2 light contour FLUTED barrels from Bartlien for the price of just ONE ABS / Proof Research Carbon Fiber wrapped barrel, I'm sticking with Bartlien for the foreseeable future.

No LOVE, no HATE, just my EXPERIENCE with these barrels.

Interesting, I have one of the ABS barrels on my 3 Gun AR. Was purchased off ABS themselves in 2006-2007. 16 inch "Rock Creek S/S wrapped and chambered in .223 Wylde) Not sure of the round count now but carbon "Sleeve" has never come loose. Accuracy is still better than I can shoot and it has been given death in practice. Would I buy another, yes BUT given the cost and hassle exporting out of the USA most likely not. My $600USD barrel ended up costing me $1500 after fees and other exporting costs, Cant speak for them sine ABS was sold however.

Sometimes it sucks living out of the USA.............. but not often)

 

[Richie Rich]

There's been a lot of debate surrounding barrels that are wrapped with Carbon Fiber. The claims are that they dissipate heat faster, last exponentially longer than non-wrapped barrels and are just plain "magic."

I'm of the opinion that Carbon Wrapped barrels have their place on lighter weight rifles that are used in applications where long strings of fire are not present, such as hunting rifles, where group dispersion is not a problem. But when they're marketed to missions where U.S. lives are at stake, I take issue with it.

About a year ago, I and one other individual cross sectioned a Proof Research barrel, and we were astounded by what we saw. Clearly, the claims of heat dissipation, extended life, etc., certainly didn't line up with sound Engineering practices.

I've attached a video here of a Proof Research barrel mounted to a 50 cal MG. As I understand it, the claims were that under extended fire, the barrel would dissipate heat so quickly that at the end of the string, you could grab the barrel with your hand. However, after roughly 23 or so rounds, epic failure. There's a large pile of brass from the conventional barrel. Heat readings were taken to compare the two barrels and ultimately to test the very tall claims that were being made.

Proof Melting Barrel

You are right on Key about those carbon fiber barrels. Carbon fiber retains heat!
There’s a new Heat Sinking super fast heat barrel about to inter the weapons industry soon. Final testing is all but finished. The new barrel in question you will see no burnt hand when you hold the barrel after 25 to 50 rounds fired from a .50 Cal. Bolt action Called the Warmonger L.R. M 2.5 which is videotaped on U Tube. Weight is 14.5 lbs.
with a 31.5 inch barrel and scope and bipod. Test fired by John snow writer for Outdoor Life and Field & stream magazine.

 

[Dustyplyr]

Holy necro batman

 

[abn31c]

You are right on Key about those carbon fiber barrels. Carbon fiber retains heat!
There’s a new Heat Sinking super fast heat barrel about to inter the weapons industry soon. Final testing is all but finished. The new barrel in question you will see no burnt hand when you hold the barrel after 25 to 50 rounds fired from a .50 Cal. Bolt action Called the Warmonger L.R. M 2.5 which is videotaped on U Tube. Weight is 14.5 lbs.
with a 31.5 inch barrel and scope and bipod. Test fired by John snow writer for Outdoor Life and Field & stream magazine.

S
T
O
P

T
Y
P
I
N
G

A
N
D

L
O
O
K

A
R
O
U
N
D
.
.
.

 

[Richie Rich]

Holy necro batman

Yup,Super Man stuff is coming, look out Batman . LOL

 

[Aftermath]

 

[338dude]

There's been a lot of debate surrounding barrels that are wrapped with Carbon Fiber. The claims are that they dissipate heat faster, last exponentially longer than non-wrapped barrels and are just plain "magic."

I'm of the opinion that Carbon Wrapped barrels have their place on lighter weight rifles that are used in applications where long strings of fire are not present, such as hunting rifles, where group dispersion is not a problem. But when they're marketed to missions where U.S. lives are at stake, I take issue with it.

About a year ago, I and one other individual cross sectioned a Proof Research barrel, and we were astounded by what we saw. Clearly, the claims of heat dissipation, extended life, etc., certainly didn't line up with sound Engineering practices.

I've attached a video here of a Proof Research barrel mounted to a 50 cal MG. As I understand it, the claims were that under extended fire, the barrel would dissipate heat so quickly that at the end of the string, you could grab the barrel with your hand. However, after roughly 23 or so rounds, epic failure. There's a large pile of brass from the conventional barrel. Heat readings were taken to compare the two barrels and ultimately to test the very tall claims that were being made.

Proof Melting Barrel

Video shows it is unavailable , I like carbon barrels but I agree with everything you say I don’t believe anything about the heat they will save some weight and look cool that’s about it.

 

[338dude]

Re: Carbon Wrapped Barrels, More PROOF

I installed two on a few rifles, did one on a personal rifle. The barrel in my opinion did disapate heat better on a 308 bolt gun, or quite possibly retained it well enough that i could not feel it ?, but when after 11 rounds the accuraccy went crazy. The carbon fiber became unwound, an i could essentially spin the carbon on the barrel by hand. Barrel was replaced, and used on a different rifle, muzzle was threaded, and was used for 226 runds,carbon came loose at the muzzle again. Havent used another one to date.

I have heard of this phenomenon before. I’ve only had experience with 3 proof carbon barrels and never had that happen ,but even when at the range I try to control my rate of fire.my latest is still carbon but it will be a Bartlein this go around.

 

[BigPrince]

9 year old thread. no wonder the video isn't available anymore. good lord.

 

[Mike Casselton]

I miss the old setup where you could see the OP date.
Resurrecting old posts just increases site traffic and adds to daily entertainment.

 

[Dustyplyr]

I miss the old setup where you could see the OP date.
Resurrecting old posts just increases site traffic and adds to daily entertainment.

What do you mean. You can see the original post date in the first post but even in the app before you click on the thread it says it's from over 9 years ago

 

[Mike Casselton]

What do you mean. You can see the original post date in the first post but even in the app before you click on the thread it says it's from over 9 years ago

Before clicking on the thread.
You actually have to open it now to see the first post date.
It could be different on a computer or apple product.

On my phone, I have to open to the first post to see the OP date.

BTW, I don't use the app either.

 

[adubeau]

Before clicking on the thread.
You actually have to open it now to see the first post date.
It could be different on a computer or apple product.

On my phone, I have to open to the first post to see the OP date.

BTW, I don't use the app either.

The app doesn't give date - it just says x years, months or days ago - I use it and so far it works fine for me.

 

[b6graham]

it's funny to look back at this thread and see the names on each side of this argument