why did ARC suspend Barloc sales?

missed

nothing
Belligerents
Feb 21, 2013
1,708
773
219
TEXAS
I tried to order one the other day and was told by ARC guys there not selling them right now. He said reports of POI change if the barrel is struck. I would have figured the amount of positional shooters, hunters, yahooos here it would have shown up here with an issue. I'm gathering my parts for the 7MM SS and was planning on putting one on the rifle while it's apart.
 

cageli

Sergeant
Belligerents
Apr 12, 2014
536
115
49
WA
I have used barloc extensively and while I hate to be a smart ass, the system has limitations that will affect accuracy and poi. I do think it needs to be redesigned. It’s a great concept so really looking forward to version 2 of it, I will still buy once it’s revised.
 

Sierra770

Gunny Sergeant
Belligerents
Nov 2, 2013
507
231
49
Atlanta, GA
It has worked fine for me. I like the concept but I don't change barrels frequently enough to appreciate its full potential.
 

MarkLeupold

On board the .25 train
Belligerents
Feb 10, 2017
485
300
69
I have used barloc extensively and while I hate to be a smart ass, the system has limitations that will affect accuracy and poi. I do think it needs to be redesigned. It’s a great concept so really looking forward to version 2 of it, I will still buy once it’s revised.
Care to elaborate on this? Truly interested in the limitations as I plan to use a Barloc extensively...
 

missed

nothing
Belligerents
Feb 21, 2013
1,708
773
219
TEXAS
The couple guys I know have no complaints about there ones either. I mentioned what they said. He shot a few rounds into a Target at 300, picked the rifle up about a foot above the barricade and let the barrel fall back to the barricade. Shot another few rounds at the same target, they were all in the same POI.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TCG76

blbennett1288

de·plor·a·ble
Belligerents
Apr 24, 2017
2,067
1,518
219
Hoover, Alabama
Barloc makes it quick and easy to change barrels, but I found RTZ was always different no matter how diligent I was in swapping barrels.
 

blbennett1288

de·plor·a·ble
Belligerents
Apr 24, 2017
2,067
1,518
219
Hoover, Alabama
Yeah, I never had any RTZ shift once the barrel was on, but then again I didnt strike the barrel with anything. It was just swapping barrels.
 

MarkLeupold

On board the .25 train
Belligerents
Feb 10, 2017
485
300
69
Barloc makes it quick and easy to change barrels, but I found RTZ was always different no matter how diligent I was in swapping barrels.
And that's why I like the look of the Barloc. Super easy to change barrels myself. Not worried about RTZ, just nice to order a prefit and swap a barrel myself if I need to.

Maybe an occasional caliber change if I really feel like it, but I can zero before taking it out no problem.
 

BurnOut

DDOJSIOC
Belligerents
Nov 24, 2013
1,673
607
219
Dallas
I'm just fine with inconsistent RTZ from one barrel swap to another, as long as zero doesn't move once the barrel/Barloc are tightened up.

I mean, the DTA SRS is supposed to be one of the best RTZ setups on the market, and I don't bother keeping track of each barrel's zero in reference to one another... after each barrel swap, it's close enough to be on paper at 100 yards, and that's all I need... just a few rounds to twiddle the knobs and match POI to POA.
 

cageli

Sergeant
Belligerents
Apr 12, 2014
536
115
49
WA
Care to elaborate on this? Truly interested in the limitations as I plan to use a Barloc extensively...
I did some tests a while back as somehow my barloc rifle did not reach my accuracy expectations, which is consistently under 1/2 moa 5 shot group. Not average, has to be below. I couldn’t figure out what was the issue so I compared nut set up, barloc setup and shoulder set up, luckily I had same caliber in two barrels made by same manufacturer, one shouldered and one remage. My accuracy was best with shoulder setup , then nut setup and last barloc. Also the poi of 3 setup are different, if consider shoulder to be center, nut is about 0.3 mil to the right, and barloc was 0.8 mil down. My guess is barrel run off from axis by different systems. I think it would work great with floating bolt head action but I was using badger m2013 so not an option. Anyway above was my observation and experience, it may be just a correlation instead of causiation. Like some folks mentioned it is serving some folks just fine in their term.

Forgot to mention, poi shift post every barrel switch is just a symptom, thinking behind it, my guess is the system always introduces barrel run off, it just happened to different directions in certain way. A solid, consistent system should not have poi shift no matter how many time you switch it, of course this is idealism.
 
Last edited:

BurnOut

DDOJSIOC
Belligerents
Nov 24, 2013
1,673
607
219
Dallas
Maybe they finally caught on that "switch barrels" are teh gayz
See, now that's just absurd. Personally, I'm not made of money, so anything I can do to save a few bucks in the long run holds some interest for me.

The slick thing about switch barrel setups is that they allow the user to have one stock/chassis, one trigger, one scope, etc... and use them to shoot multiple chamberings. Alternatively, it also allows the user to have a spare barrel in hand that has been cut to a known spec and is able to switch it himself in only a few minutes. Another advantage is that a single rifle and multiple barrels take up less real estate in the safe, for those who have space restrictions.

As much as I might like to have a dedicated rifle for every chambering I want to shoot, it's just not within my financial means to be able to buy that many quality actions, optics, etc...
 

kthomas

Sergeant
Belligerents
Jun 17, 2009
2,772
3,007
219
32
Tucson, AZ
See, now that's just absurd. Personally, I'm not made of money, so anything I can do to save a few bucks in the long run holds some interest for me.

The slick thing about switch barrel setups is that they allow the user to have one stock/chassis, one trigger, one scope, etc... and use them to shoot multiple chamberings. Alternatively, it also allows the user to have a spare barrel in hand that has been cut to a known spec and is able to switch it himself in only a few minutes. Another advantage is that a single rifle and multiple barrels take up less real estate in the safe, for those who have space restrictions.

As much as I might like to have a dedicated rifle for every chambering I want to shoot, it's just not within my financial means to be able to buy that many quality actions, optics, etc...
I do all that with shouldered barrels.

My PRS rifle has a 6BRA and 6.5 creedmoor shouldered barrels. Takes 3 minutes to change and my zero shift between the barrels is less than 0.1 mils.

I also keep spare shouldered barrels for my .300NM. Got one in the closet.

Every rifle is a "switch barrel" rifle. I prefer to not have to rely on a set screw to retain my barrel. I think the whole "switch barrel" thing is a silly fad.
 

JamieD

Wolf Precision, Inc.
Belligerents
Jul 17, 2007
927
74
34
Johnstown,pa
www.wolfprecision.net
We went back and forth on this - myself and Bat Machine, and agreed that the shouldered barrel was the way we wanted to go, but its hard to do if there is any fluctuation in head spacing from action to action. We stayed with a shouldered barrel and made the Bat Actions to hold such tolerances so we could do the shouldered pre-fit. So any of our shouldered barrels will headspace on any of our actions from current to many years ago. And lock up at 110 foot pounds on a shoulder.

JamieD
Wolf Precision, Inc.
www.wolfprecision.net
 

cageli

Sergeant
Belligerents
Apr 12, 2014
536
115
49
WA
I do all that with shouldered barrels.

My PRS rifle has a 6BRA and 6.5 creedmoor shouldered barrels. Takes 3 minutes to change and my zero shift between the barrels is less than 0.1 mils.

I also keep spare shouldered barrels for my .300NM. Got one in the closet.

Every rifle is a "switch barrel" rifle. I prefer to not have to rely on a set screw to retain my barrel. I think the whole "switch barrel" thing is a silly fad.
I have switched to same method of yours. I also guess that’s why impact and their on the shelf shoulder barrels are so popular. Get a wrench and barrel vise, it is just as fast and don’t really cost much more. Previously no one made shoulder prefit except AI but shoulder prefit will be new trend that’s my view.
 

winniethepooh

I basically live here...
Belligerents
Feb 13, 2017
672
723
99
East Wenatchee, WA
I have switched to same method of yours. I also guess that’s why impact and their on the shelf shoulder barrels are so popular. Get a wrench and barrel vise, it is just as fast and don’t really cost much more. Previously no one made shoulder prefit except AI but shoulder prefit will be new trend that’s my view.
I also agree. For how expensive some of these actions are they should be made with closer tolerances so prefits become more viable options for the consumers. I for one have a nucleus that I run a barrel nut on. My impact just cam in today so I can do the shoulder prefit without sending in my action
 

Notdylan

Privates
Belligerents
Jun 14, 2017
236
59
34
Beechgrove, Tennessee
I also agree. For how expensive some of these actions are they should be made with closer tolerances so prefits become more viable options for the consumers. I for one have a nucleus that I run a barrel nut on. My impact just cam in today so I can do the shoulder prefit without sending in my action
Pretty sure you can get off the shelf shouldered barrels for the Nucleus as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jgs8163

BurnOut

DDOJSIOC
Belligerents
Nov 24, 2013
1,673
607
219
Dallas
I do all that with shouldered barrels.

My PRS rifle has a 6BRA and 6.5 creedmoor shouldered barrels. Takes 3 minutes to change and my zero shift between the barrels is less than 0.1 mils.

I also keep spare shouldered barrels for my .300NM. Got one in the closet.

Every rifle is a "switch barrel" rifle. I prefer to not have to rely on a set screw to retain my barrel. I think the whole "switch barrel" thing is a silly fad.
Fair enough... and I don't want to have to remove my action from my stock in order to grab the barrel near the tenon before torquing it in place, so it looks like there are options on the market the support both your and my preferences. Ain't it a beautiful thing?
 
  • Like
Reactions: MakeSawdust

reubenski

First Sergeant
Belligerents
Jun 8, 2008
3,312
2,730
219
40
Colorado Springs, CO
Fair enough... and I don't want to have to remove my action from my stock in order to grab the barrel near the tenon before torquing it in place, so it looks like there are options on the market the support both your and my preferences. Ain't it a beautiful thing?
Any reason you think you need to grab the barrel near the tenon?
 

Kiba

Major Hide Member
Belligerents
Jan 13, 2011
1,263
259
189
Central Valley, CA
Any reason PVA can do it but others can not? That's intersting.
I believe LRI sells prefits too.

Any smith should be able to spin up a shouldered barrel for a mausingfield, nucleus, or Archimedes action without having the receiver. Ted posted the interface drawings and the receiver face to bolt face dimension is held within +/- 0.001". I have short and long action nucleus receivers and every bolt head ARC makes, and every receiver and bolt combo is within a 0.0007" range for that dimension. That's as good as the half dozen AI's I've had and measured over the years.
 

winniethepooh

I basically live here...
Belligerents
Feb 13, 2017
672
723
99
East Wenatchee, WA
I believe LRI sells prefits too.

Any smith should be able to spin up a shouldered barrel for a mausingfield, nucleus, or Archimedes action without having the receiver. Ted posted the interface drawings and the receiver face to bolt face dimension is held within +/- 0.001". I have short and long action nucleus receivers and every bolt head ARC makes, and every receiver and bolt combo is within a 0.0007" range for that dimension. That's as good as the half dozen AI's I've had and measured over the years.
Well that’s good to know. I asked a couple well known shops and they both wanted my action shipped to them:/
 

whatsupdoc

Major Hide Member
Belligerents
Minuteman
Dec 12, 2017
1,002
928
119
LRI made me a nucleus prefit using my blank, head-spaced perfectly.
I initially ordered a barlock with my nucleus then changed my mind and canceled the barlock. I never switch barrels.
If I want to shoot something else I switch rifles.
 

drwood96

Samsonite! I was way off!
Belligerents
Minuteman
Sep 16, 2017
383
191
49
Tuscaloosa, AL
No issues to report on my Barloc barrel nut. I only have 200 rounds down the tube and a match next week that should expose any issues.

The Barloc barrel nut version does have an advantage over the standard barrel nut setup as you can torque it down with effecting the head space.

Since bighorn shouldered prefits are becoming as common as a savage prefits, I’ll be switching after this barrel.
 

BurnOut

DDOJSIOC
Belligerents
Nov 24, 2013
1,673
607
219
Dallas
Any reason you think you need to grab the barrel near the tenon?
To reduce the odds of inducing any sort of stress/deflection in the barrel while twisting the action with an 18" torque wrench to get it tightened down?
 

BurnOut

DDOJSIOC
Belligerents
Nov 24, 2013
1,673
607
219
Dallas
Wouldn't you stretch threads or twist an action first? Neither are a problem at 40 - 70 ftlbs
No, I'm talking about vertical/horizontal deflection. If you grab your rifle by the barrel at the fore end of the stock, the weight of the action, stock, optic, etc... is going to want to induce some vertical deflection, right? And using a rear-entry action wrench in conjunction with a torque wrench is only going to either induce deflection in another direction or compound the deflection that's already there (depending on the orientation of the torque wrench as it interfaces with the action wrench).

Or you can use something like a Barloc (or AI's Quickloc,etc...).
 

missed

nothing
Belligerents
Feb 21, 2013
1,708
773
219
TEXAS
On a 1.0625 thread and stainless barrel plasticity range is nearing #1000 ftlb. Depending on alloy and treatment.
 

B-P-UU

Full Member
Belligerents
Feb 13, 2017
881
458
69
I do all that with shouldered barrels.

My PRS rifle has a 6BRA and 6.5 creedmoor shouldered barrels. Takes 3 minutes to change and my zero shift between the barrels is less than 0.1 mils.

I also keep spare shouldered barrels for my .300NM. Got one in the closet.

Every rifle is a "switch barrel" rifle. I prefer to not have to rely on a set screw to retain my barrel. I think the whole "switch barrel" thing is a silly fad.
I do not understand why this is such a hard concept for some.

A barreled action is a pretty simple bolted joint. Anything beyond those two components is just adding complexity to this simple joint.
 

Carl_Ross

Sergeant
Belligerents
Jun 4, 2006
279
98
49
Bozeman, MT
No, I'm talking about vertical/horizontal deflection. If you grab your rifle by the barrel at the fore end of the stock, the weight of the action, stock, optic, etc... is going to want to induce some vertical deflection, right? And using a rear-entry action wrench in conjunction with a torque wrench is only going to either induce deflection in another direction or compound the deflection that's already there (depending on the orientation of the torque wrench as it interfaces with the action wrench).

Or you can use something like a Barloc (or AI's Quickloc,etc...).

Having installed barrels hundreds of times while gripping them close to the muzzle, I can assure you that there are no problems doing so. Return to zero is also as close to perfect as I can measure. It’s a non-issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: reubenski

BurnOut

DDOJSIOC
Belligerents
Nov 24, 2013
1,673
607
219
Dallas
I do not understand why this is such a hard concept for some.

A barreled action is a pretty simple bolted joint. Anything beyond those two components is just adding complexity to this simple joint.
Complexity with an added purpose (convenience). No one is arguing that traditional shouldered barrels threaded directly into the action is inferior in any way except the effort/tooling involved in the barrel swapping process.

Further, no one is arguing that switch barrel mechanisms somehow result in a stronger barrel/action joint than traditional shouldered barrels... the issue in question is whether switch barrel mechanisms result in a barrel/action joint that is strong enough for the application while offering an easier method for swapping barrels.

To use the logic of "simpler is better" is to ignore solutions that provide adequate durability AND enhanced functionality; an example would be scope knobs. Would a knob fixed directly and (semi-)permanently to the elevation adjustment mechanism be simpler and ultimately more durable than something with an adjustable zero stop and resettable zero? Certainly. Would it be as useful to the shooter as an elevation knob that allowed for resetting the zero and configuring a zero stop? Most of us would say no. Therefore, we can see that a well-designed solution that sacrifices ultimate durability while providing enhanced functionality is desirable to most of us as long as it is durable enough.
 

reubenski

First Sergeant
Belligerents
Jun 8, 2008
3,312
2,730
219
40
Colorado Springs, CO
Complexity with an added purpose (convenience). No one is arguing that traditional shouldered barrels threaded directly into the action is inferior in any way except the effort/tooling involved in the barrel swapping process.

Further, no one is arguing that switch barrel mechanisms somehow result in a stronger barrel/action joint than traditional shouldered barrels... the issue in question is whether switch barrel mechanisms result in a barrel/action joint that is strong enough for the application while offering an easier method for swapping barrels.

To use the logic of "simpler is better" is to ignore solutions that provide adequate durability AND enhanced functionality; an example would be scope knobs. Would a knob fixed directly and (semi-)permanently to the elevation adjustment mechanism be simpler and ultimately more durable than something with an adjustable zero stop and resettable zero? Certainly. Would it be as useful to the shooter as an elevation knob that allowed for resetting the zero and configuring a zero stop? Most of us would say no. Therefore, we can see that a well-designed solution that sacrifices ultimate durability while providing enhanced functionality is desirable to most of us as long as it is durable enough.
It's because it is a better solution. All it requires is a 12" long cheapo torque wrench from AutoZone and two flats cut into the muzzle end. Torque it on to 30 or 40 ftlbs. Done. It's quick, can be done right on the line, easy, without dissasembling anything else on your rifle, returns to zero perfectly....and no, you're not going to deflect your rifle.
 

cageli

Sergeant
Belligerents
Apr 12, 2014
536
115
49
WA
Barrel is made of steel which is quite elastic, the dozens of foot lb torque is nothing, the barrel vise applies way more pressure and we apply even more shock, fluctuations and pressure to barrel every single trigger pull.

I really think those what pro use articles should change to how pro does it instead, I want to hear from Carl what his final dremel touch secret sauce is....
 

B-P-UU

Full Member
Belligerents
Feb 13, 2017
881
458
69
Complexity with an added purpose (convenience). No one is arguing that traditional shouldered barrels threaded directly into the action is inferior in any way except the effort/tooling involved in the barrel swapping process.

Further, no one is arguing that switch barrel mechanisms somehow result in a stronger barrel/action joint than traditional shouldered barrels... the issue in question is whether switch barrel mechanisms result in a barrel/action joint that is strong enough for the application while offering an easier method for swapping barrels.

To use the logic of "simpler is better" is to ignore solutions that provide adequate durability AND enhanced functionality; an example would be scope knobs. Would a knob fixed directly and (semi-)permanently to the elevation adjustment mechanism be simpler and ultimately more durable than something with an adjustable zero stop and resettable zero? Certainly. Would it be as useful to the shooter as an elevation knob that allowed for resetting the zero and configuring a zero stop? Most of us would say no. Therefore, we can see that a well-designed solution that sacrifices ultimate durability while providing enhanced functionality is desirable to most of us as long as it is durable enough.

I would say based on the title of this thread and ARC's current position on such mechanisms, said products do not meet the intended functional requirement. And accuracy, precision, reliability should all be weighted heavier than convenience when discussing precision rifles.

Not going to comment on the silly scope analogy as it doesn't apply (tracking and adjustment in general is certainly a requirement of a scope)

When I was a young engineer who didn't know head from tails, I was reminded by someone with far more experience "the design isn't complete when there is nothing else to add, its complete when there is nothing else to remove."

People buying bar locks and other devices affects me 0%, so I probably just should have just not commented on this one.
 

reubenski

First Sergeant
Belligerents
Jun 8, 2008
3,312
2,730
219
40
Colorado Springs, CO
I'll give that a shot and post what I find out, but I really don't think all that random smacking of the barrel is necessary. For context, I have parachuted from high altitude with, not the same rifle I'm using now, but the same mechanical system at 40ftlbs and PLF'd with my rifle front mounted, put it into action and shot 300yd head shots on a countdown.

I'd be more impressed with his video if he shot for groups on a 300yd paper target. That's what I will do. His results don't see real quantifiable.
 
Last edited:

jerryrva

Sergeant of the Hide
Belligerents
Minuteman
Nov 15, 2018
261
193
49
Pure speculation until Ted at ARC comments once they look more into it. No need to drift off into what switch barrel system works best in this thread.
 

BurnOut

DDOJSIOC
Belligerents
Nov 24, 2013
1,673
607
219
Dallas
I would say based on the title of this thread and ARC's current position on such mechanisms, said products do not meet the intended functional requirement. And accuracy, precision, reliability should all be weighted heavier than convenience when discussing precision rifles.
...and this is what design development/evolution looks like. I'm not saying anything one way or another regarding Barloc accuracy, repeatability, etc..., because I have no hands-on experience (there seem to be conflicting reports from those who do have hands-on experience), and it heartens me to hear that Ted and Co are investigating. It may be that a design revision is required, or perhaps there is a trick to getting the Barloc to perform as designed (either in the installation/usage of it or the machining of the barrel). Perhaps the whole concept is flawed; we'll have to see. In any event, if no one ever tried anything new, we'd never see any advancement in the equipment or techniques that we use as precision shooters.

As for the scope analogy, it is appropriate, because no one said anything about a scope that couldn't be mechanically adjusted; I was talking about having old school adjustments (think Leupold-style capped coin-turn adjustments) vs. modern finger-adjustable knobs that can be reset to zero and have an adjustable zero-stop. The old school knobs are undoubtedly more robust in an absolute sense, but well-designed modern knobs are robust enough for the application while offering increased functionality.

As for the concept of grabbing a barrel past the fore end of the stock with a barrel vise and twisting the action on/off, there are still a couple of things that I don't like about it; namely that it has the potential to damage the barrel finish or requires wrench flats on the barrel. That's to say nothing of carbon fiber barrels that must be grabbed all the way at the muzzle if they're not grabbed near the tenon. The point is that there is usually more than one way to skin a cat, and having options is nice.
 

Kimber.204

Sergeant of the Hide
Belligerents
May 30, 2017
296
150
49
Pittsburgh, PA
For work I spend a lot of time in various manufacturing plants redesigning/refurbishing equipment. Customers often say that they this or that machine is junk because it didn't do what they wanted it to do. They completely ignore the original design intent for the machine. They use it the way they want to use it and then when it breaks they say it was a bad design or wasn't strong enough or whatever.

I recall watching Ted's original video (not the facebook post, but the one that was previously on his website - but is no longer posted). He stated that the user could use it as a switch barrel gun, but said ---- I don't know why you would do that, when I get a gun set up I want it to stay that way till it's time to change the barrel (i'm paraphrasing). Ted's original design intent was to allow uses to swap barrels mid-season without the gun smith waiting time.

So, while I use it as a switch barrel system and change back and forth between practice and match barrels, I am okay with some small POI shift. But I will also say, that when I hand tighten the barrel down onto the Go Gauge and then torque the barloc that my POI shifts are very minimal.

Good luck
Ross
 

BeAccurate

Wasting space, ammo, and oxygen
Hessian
Belligerents
Jun 21, 2013
158
84
34
FL
I did some tests a while back as somehow my barloc rifle did not reach my accuracy expectations, which is consistently under 1/2 moa 5 shot group. Not average, has to be below. I couldn’t figure out what was the issue so I compared nut set up, barloc setup and shoulder set up, luckily I had same caliber in two barrels made by same manufacturer, one shouldered and one remage. My accuracy was best with shoulder setup , then nut setup and last barloc. Also the poi of 3 setup are different, if consider shoulder to be center, nut is about 0.3 mil to the right, and barloc was 0.8 mil down. My guess is barrel run off from axis by different systems. I think it would work great with floating bolt head action but I was using badger m2013 so not an option. Anyway above was my observation and experience, it may be just a correlation instead of causiation. Like some folks mentioned it is serving some folks just fine in their term.

Forgot to mention, poi shift post every barrel switch is just a symptom, thinking behind it, my guess is the system always introduces barrel run off, it just happened to different directions in certain way. A solid, consistent system should not have poi shift no matter how many time you switch it, of course this is idealism.

Not to derail this, but how are you using a Remage barrel with the badger? Maybe we should just PM, but I'm intrigued.
 
Last edited:

cageli

Sergeant
Belligerents
Apr 12, 2014
536
115
49
WA
Not to derail this, but how are you using a Remage barrel with the badger? Maybe we should just PM, but I'm intrigued.
Badger is Remington thread pattern so really the same thing, you just need to have the tenon made long also eliminate counterbore.
 

kthomas

Sergeant
Belligerents
Jun 17, 2009
2,772
3,007
219
32
Tucson, AZ
I saw some interesting conversation today on Instagram, with two top PRS shooters stating that they have gone back to shouldered barrels due to observed POI shifts with their switch barrel systems. Specifically they were seeing issues with RTZ whenever their barrel suffered a directional force to it on their switch barrel setup.

I didn't see mention of which switch barrel systems they were using, I imagine they all suffer it to some degree when the barrel is impacted by something.

A shouldered barrel torqued up to ~100 ft-lbs is going to provide a whole lot more POI shift resistance than a set screw. As an engineer that works in the oilfield, I don't have a whole lot of faith in set screws for anything delegated to more than extremely light duty. I would not trust one on a rifle barrel. For how easy it is to swap out a shouldered barrel, the "switch barrel" setups really don't make any sense, not to me anyways. Too much to lose for trivial gain.