• 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!

OFIS

Gunny Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
  • May 28, 2007
    1,333
    30
    Harrisburg, PA
    does anyone have diagrams for crowns, and is there any science/advantage to the geometry of one style vs another? im aware the the proper crown is just the little bevel between the rifling and the face of the muzzle, ive seen these at 11º 45º 60º... is this a personal preference thing? seems pretty important to be left to chance.

    i know i want a recessed/step target crown but i dont know how to put that into technical terms.
     
    Re: crowns

    The recess protects the actual crown.
    My latest build has no chamfer where the rifle meets the end of the barrel (90* crown I guess it would be), and that's recessed about .200" back from the muzzle.
     
    Re: crowns

    Found this also:
    Author unknown.

    When someone says "target type crown" they really mean a crown machined with precision in mind. It really does not mean a particular type, although two types are normally used. One is the 11° cone crown and the other is stepped (two 90° planes separated by a small distance). This is hard to describe in a few words.

    As long as the gases escape evenly around the base of the bullet, then any type will work fine. It is said that with boattail bullets that the crown in not as important as it is with flat base bullets. I know of no study one way or the other on this.

    I've crowned my barrels at 11, 12, and 13 degrees and also the two step design. All seem to work equally well. The stepped type crowns are not as critical as far as centering the barrel as the cone type demands. I've read this and can picture it in my mind.

    When "indicating in" a barrel for crowning, I key of off the grooves, and want to see no more than .0005" (.0127mm) of runout, and .0002" (.00508mm) is much better and is what I strive for. If one looks closely enough, it will be found that the grooves and the lands have their own centerlines, Now for chambering I key off of the lands. This keeps the "push" fit pilot running true and not orbiting. Working at "tenths" (.0001" or .00254mm) is tedious and the better part of an hour can be used in just dialing in just one end of the barrel. This is not a hurry up job.

    Although some chamber and crown between centers, but this is not the way I do it. I prefer the rigidity of the headstock to hold the barrel. Both methods have their advantages and disadvantages. Both techniques can build winning rifles.

    Some gunsmiths break the crown's interior sharp edge with cutting tools or a little lapping compound on a brass ball. This strengthens the corner and may be important for tactical use. I prefer to leave all my crowns sharp and they are very easy to inspect for wear or damage. If the corner edge reflects any light at all, then something is suspect. This is just like checking the sharpness of a kitchen knife.

    Some people cut towards the bore, but I always pull my tool away from the bore. The cutting tool is hand honed and has a large amount of rake and relief. It cuts the barrel material like butter and no burrs are raised in the bore. This is checked by dragging a Q-tip across the barrel exit while watching closely for any fiber snagging.

    This is more than you wanted to know, but I'll bet each paragraph could be expanded into a page without too much trouble. Much has been left unsaid.
    Ron N.
     
    Re: crowns

    i actually have the ability to google search as well, and did so before i posted.

    but since i know there is more than 1 gunsmith that posts here i thought i could pool some direct first hand input.
     
    Re: crowns

    Another good one; says a 11 degree produced best accuracy from a machine rest:
    (Bart Bobbitt)
    Subject: Re: Crowning
    Crowning a rifle barrel, in simplest terms, is shaping the muzzle so
    the rifling's edge is protected from impact. Most factory barrels have
    a round, convex-shaped crown from bore's edge to the barrel's outside
    diameter. That's easy to make and finish, plus looking rather pleasing.

    The accuracy part of the crown means the land and groove part of the
    barrel must let the bullet's base exit evenly all the way around. When
    this happens, gas escapes uniformly and evenly around the bullet's base.
    If gas escapes unevenly (poor crown, even unsquare bullet bases), the
    point of greatest gas release will push the bullet in the opposite
    direction and tilt it. Tilted bullets leaving the barrel just don't
    shoot straight; how far they move sideways depends on their velocity,
    spin rate, and degree of tilt (or yaw, as it's sometimes called).

    Some factory barrels have different-shaped crowns. Some will have the
    muzzle faced flat at right angles to the bore from outside diameter to
    inside bore diameter. Others will have a flat face, but the lands
    will be angled back some amount. A counter-bored crown is set back
    from the front-most part of the muzzle, then the inside part will be
    either flat-faced or angled.

    In the late 1950s and early 1960s, a few smallbore and highpower
    competitive shooters wore out a few barrels doing tests with different
    muzzle face and crown ideas, dimensions, etc. Fired from machine rests,
    the results were often opposed to what most folks thought was the best
    way to face/crown a rifle barrel's front end for best accuracy. Here's
    what they found out produced the best accuracy:

    * The face (part from barrel's outside diameter to the groove diameter)
    must be centered on bore center. This means turning the barrel with
    its center at the exact middle of rotation. This gets the bore edge
    of the face perfectly centered.

    A flat, eleven-degree face produced the best accuracy with both
    smallbore and highpower match rifles. That's 79 degrees back from
    the bore axis looking forward; 11 degrees from a plane perpendicular
    to the bore axis.

    * The crown (part from bore diameter to groove diameter, about .004-in.
    in 30 caliber barrels) angle doesn't matter much, as long as the back
    of the crown is deeper in the bore than its front. This protects the
    bore-edge of the crown.

    A round, brass ball charged with fine lapping compound is typically used
    after the muzzle's faced to 11 degrees. This way, the crown is concentric
    with the bore just like the face.

    No other face and crown angles have been as successful in match rifles as
    these. If the barrel can't be turned on it's true bore center, then a
    flat, zero-degree face/crown is probably best; it'll give the squarest edge
    for the bullet to exit.
    There's a lot of ideas regarding what's the best crown/face thing to do.
    BB
     
    Re: crowns

    Sir, I apologize and did not mean for the post to come across that way. After re-reading it I see how it can be taken as a smart ass post. I will edit it now.
     
    Re: crowns

    s'allright i just want to measure twice and cut once when it comes to this rig im putting together, leaving no stone unturned.
     
    Re: crowns

    What I was describing is what stillbuster's second post referred to as a "stepped" crown. The smith that did mine has his finger on the pulse of what the top shooters at Camp Perry are up to and from what I've garnered from those in the BR community many are going to the sharp perpendicular crown.

    Shoots as well as anything else I've had.
     
    Re: crowns

    The most important thing about the crown is that it's cut concentric to the bore. everything else is a cosmetic or durability issue.

    On large match barrels I do a recessed 11 degreee crown because it brakes up the large flat of the muzzle face. On sporters I do a standard 11 degree. But I ALWAYS cut a 60 degree chamfer to the crown. This is for durability. A sharp corner that is left by not cutting this 60 degree chamfer is more suseptible to damage by your cleaning rod. Feel the joint between your jag and rod, there is usually a little lip, as you draw your rod back thru it hits the crown. One top benchrest smiths who uses a 90 degree crown, told me he recrowns every 200-400 rounds because of the fragility of this cut of crown.

    The 60 degree produces great accuracy, and my site has many pictures to prove it.
     
    Re: crowns

    My thinking on crowns is that they neeed to be consistent profiles at all points around the bore exit. Beyond that consistency, I think the actual profile is secondary, and it's my belief that the most durable is the best. I have had several of my crowns contoured at 45" to the bore/muzzle face, with the angle cutting back through the lands to the base of the groove, and maybe just a smidge further. I believe such a crown is less vulnerable to physical damage, and that invulnerability is the only real advantage.
     
    Re: crowns

    Several above are correct: as long as everything is even and concentric, the angle does not matter whatsoever.
     
    Re: crowns

    Here's the type of crown I use. It's a modified USMC crown as it's not .090" deep.

    Muzzle being dialed in prior to crowning
    14kgr9i.jpg


    Finished crown
    r1l7bo.jpg
     
    Re: crowns

    As greg states, I feel that the type of crown is inmaterial and as long as it protects the lands in the rifling its not gonna affect accuracy. I dont like the range rod like wn i use a .0005 indicator with a 3" needle. It makes it easier to indicate in chambers as well you can get inside the barrel where the neck is actually going to be. I use a Inter-Rapid 312B-15.
     
    Re: crowns

    Dial in the barrel to .0001" run out (or as near as it will go)

    Here are a couple of mine - all these are screw cut with thread protectors, I usually go in .050" deep with the last cuts in .0005" increments to get a real sharp edge to the crown.


    _ASC0363.jpg


    _ASC0264.jpg


    _ASC0214.jpg


    I think the phrase for these is recessed target style.


    Prefer it to the 11 degree personally.
     
    Re: crowns

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NineHotel</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In an upcoming episode of Mythbusters they are going to prove that Bart Bobbitt never did and does not currently exist. </div></div>

    Not a reliable source of info?


    Can one of you that has been doing this longer than I explain this?
    http://www.ct-precision.com/crown.html

    selling the sizzle, not the steak? snake oil?
     
    Re: crowns

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: stillbuster</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NineHotel</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In an upcoming episode of Mythbusters they are going to prove that Bart Bobbitt never did and does not currently exist. </div></div>

    Not a reliable source of info?


    Can one of you that has been doing this longer than I explain this?
    http://www.ct-precision.com/crown.html

    selling the sizzle, not the steak? snake oil? </div></div>

    I actually know and have shot with Bart. His musings are often quoted from back in the days of the rec.guns list where he posted a lot of info. He's one of the few that took a scientific approach to SOME of his musings. The only thing that can be proved about crowns is that if they are uniform and well cut then the angle does not matter - everything from zero to 45 degrees has been deployed with success. To stand firm on an 11 degree crown as the holy grail is something that science cannot support.

    Hardness testing of bedding compound? Yes, he did a good job on that one. Crowns? Supposition/anecdotal.
     
    Re: crowns

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: stillbuster</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NineHotel</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In an upcoming episode of Mythbusters they are going to prove that Bart Bobbitt never did and does not currently exist. </div></div>

    Not a reliable source of info?


    Can one of you that has been doing this longer than I explain this?
    http://www.ct-precision.com/crown.html

    selling the sizzle, not the steak? snake oil?</div></div>

    Bobbitt?

    Didn't Lorena do a hell of a job cutting his "crown"?
    wink.gif