Break-in method
- Thread starter Srewball
- Start date
- Status
See now that right there has always been why I think barrel break in can help . If barrels don't benefit from something smoothing them out . Why do so many match barrel makers lap there bores . There must be something to it .
Before break in
After break in
Those tool marks look to be less after break in but I don't know that just regular shooting would not have done the same thing
I fire and clean, just cause it doesn't hurt to do it, other then time. You can use those shots to sight in.
An article by a barrell maker claims his competition does this to shorten the life of the barrels. I dont do enough to do that.
You could wonder if the custom barrels don't need it since the quality is higher.
An article by a barrell maker claims his competition does this to shorten the life of the barrels. I dont do enough to do that.
You could wonder if the custom barrels don't need it since the quality is higher.
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
Shooting is a lapping process.
My only objection to some folks' view of break-in is all the cleaning that's taken as gospel. My own opinion after a whole bunch of years, rifles and shooting is that all that cleaning is not necessary. Too much sub-MOA in my past to believe otherwise.
My only objection to some folks' view of break-in is all the cleaning that's taken as gospel. My own opinion after a whole bunch of years, rifles and shooting is that all that cleaning is not necessary. Too much sub-MOA in my past to believe otherwise.
My thinking ( and that's all it is ) is that the cleaning is to remove any copper fouling so the next bullet has the same clean bore to smooth out . Unlike lapping with a very soft compound . The copper fouling is harder and will actually cause no lapping to occur in areas it was left in the bore . The next bullet just slides right over the fouling doing nothing to the metal under it . This leads to uneven fire lapping .
So the theory is to clean the bore after each shot allowing the next bullet to contact all the same high/uneven/tool marks the last bullet hit smoothing the whole thing out more evenly .
How's that for theory 
I almost believe it my self 
You posted while I was writing the above . What's wrong with my pics showing a virgin bore with a bunch a tool marks and after a 50rd break in they're pretty much gone ?
Last edited:
Double Naught Spy
New member
Well, except the pictures are not visually comparable. The top pic appears to be closer up and in better focus than the lower pic. The lower pic where the tool marks are "pretty much gone" may have the tool marks pretty much gone, but nobody can tell because of the lack of proper focus.
On top of that, this statement alone negates the notion that your break-in is necessarily better that just shooting.
The barrel is going to wear with shooting. We know that. You put 50 rounds of barrel wear on the barrel. It will be different. The question of whether or not doing the magical break-in procedure produced any results that were better than just plain shooting is not supported by anything you produced.
I have probably seen 30 different break-in sets of procedures over the years, none being the same as others. Which is correct? Why aren't they all the same?
g.willikers
New member
For a second there, I was afraid I'd somehow been high jacked into a burglary forum.
But seriously, the results from breaking in a rifle never seemed to be worth the hassle.
Maybe the idea was invented by the folks who make and sell ammo and cleaning stuff.
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
g.willikers, that's why I posted the Gale McMillan URL. He named the originator.
My uncle began gunsmithing around 1925-ish. He and my father put me into the '06 fun in 1950. Until I joined TFL, I had never heard of "break-in" as a specific process. For sure, I've spent beaucoup hours talking guns at gun shops and with various gunsmiths.
My uncle began gunsmithing around 1925-ish. He and my father put me into the '06 fun in 1950. Until I joined TFL, I had never heard of "break-in" as a specific process. For sure, I've spent beaucoup hours talking guns at gun shops and with various gunsmiths.
Art, really???????? Whether you agree or not, it has been discussed for a long time. Being from TX, I am thinking you are exaggerating about how much time you spent talking guns.
The people who don't do it, act like people do it, are spending all kinds of money, on a few shells and cleaning patches. A few of the shells would be used to sight in anyways.
The people who don't do it, act like people do it, are spending all kinds of money, on a few shells and cleaning patches. A few of the shells would be used to sight in anyways.
reynolds357
New member
Break in is a waste of cleaning supplies. Poor quality barrels have to be shot in, but break in is nothing but a myth. Once you shoot a poor quality barrel in, you mess it up again when you thoroughly clean it. How well does copper smooth up 4340, 4140, or 4150? Try it. All you will do is deposit copper on top of an imperfection. You will not remove the imperfection.
Last edited:
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
Berserker, dangfino. I never heard of "break-in" until 1999. McBride's in Austin was my fairly regular visitation from 1966 on. BSing on many topics. A dozen guys on the deer lease, with occasional gun talk around the campfire; break-in was never mentioned that I know of.
I had a bench rest and 100-yard backstop in the yard or on the porch from 1968 on through 2013. Occasionally sighted in a buddy's new rifle. No mention.
Be interesting to read through some instruction booklet from the 1960s or 1970s to see if some mention of a break-in process is mentioned. I don't really recall any, though. Nothing in my Weatherby booklet from 1971.
I don't claim any sort of perfect memory, but I've read every American Rifleman from 1940 through 1990. The "Dope Bag" was a must-read, and again, no recall of any talk about breaking in a rifle. None of the shoot, clean, shoot, clean, anyway. "Accepted wisdom" has been that the initial few boxes of ammo "settle the rifle down"--as in the expected burnishing. But that's not what today is argued about as break-in.
So I dunno. Anyhow, I've generally been able to get sub-MOA out of a fair number of rifles, through the years. Some half-MOAs in there. Seems good enough for me.
I had a bench rest and 100-yard backstop in the yard or on the porch from 1968 on through 2013. Occasionally sighted in a buddy's new rifle. No mention.
Be interesting to read through some instruction booklet from the 1960s or 1970s to see if some mention of a break-in process is mentioned. I don't really recall any, though. Nothing in my Weatherby booklet from 1971.
I don't claim any sort of perfect memory, but I've read every American Rifleman from 1940 through 1990. The "Dope Bag" was a must-read, and again, no recall of any talk about breaking in a rifle. None of the shoot, clean, shoot, clean, anyway. "Accepted wisdom" has been that the initial few boxes of ammo "settle the rifle down"--as in the expected burnishing. But that's not what today is argued about as break-in.
So I dunno. Anyhow, I've generally been able to get sub-MOA out of a fair number of rifles, through the years. Some half-MOAs in there. Seems good enough for me.
Art, I am not disputing how small you are. I am just saying this has been debated for a long time.
Problem is you Texans don't know there is a whole world out there, plus you guys say everything is bigger then it is.
My deer camp, doesn't talk about breaking in rifles either. Women, beer, family work, and sometimes deer. But that doesn't mean it is not out there.
Just cause you jawjack at the gun counter, doesn't really mean much either, as they are trying to sell you something.
Problem is you Texans don't know there is a whole world out there, plus you guys say everything is bigger then it is.
My deer camp, doesn't talk about breaking in rifles either. Women, beer, family work, and sometimes deer. But that doesn't mean it is not out there.
Just cause you jawjack at the gun counter, doesn't really mean much either, as they are trying to sell you something.
Last edited:
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
Small? 'Scuse me?
I was merely offering the courtesy of an explanation of the reasons for my own opinions, based on some sixty-plus years. It's the simple belief that if one offers an opinion, the reasons should be articulated.
My apologies for offending you.
I was merely offering the courtesy of an explanation of the reasons for my own opinions, based on some sixty-plus years. It's the simple belief that if one offers an opinion, the reasons should be articulated.
My apologies for offending you.
For two different points of view,try the sticky post here "The Wisdom of Gale McMillan"
And then go to Kreiger barrels and read about break in.
Lets differentiate between production barrels and premium,hand lapped barrels.
There is NOTHING the shooter can do to improve the best efforts of a premium barrelmaker.
To the actual workof the barrelmaker,I say "Just shoot it"
However:The barrel maker,hopefully,has all of the "lines",the texture,in the long direction of the barrel.(Not so much on production barrels).
The issue is in chambering.Thats usually outside the barrel makers hands.
We will get SOME degree of cutter marks,burrs,mismatch,and other imperfection from twisting a chamber reamer in.
A very good job can be done!.Sharp reamer,fitted pilot,gunsmith skill!! It can be 99% perfect.But no one can go in and deburr the downstream side burr on the edge of a land.Even the sharpest cutter leaves a burr on an interrupted cut.Maybe a very small one,but its there.
Those imperfections CAN cut,and litter the bore with bullet jacket flakes.
Those burrs can be worn off with a few rounds of shooting.
I don't think it crazy to wipe metal chips out of the bore before shooting another bullet over them,smearing or impressing them into the bore.I'm talking maybe a wet patch and a couple dry patches.
And in case you think softer copper cannot hurt harder steel,I worked for many years with plastic injection molds.
P-20 pre hard mold steel or DME #2 Mold plate steel are not that different than 4130-4140 sort od steels they make barrels out of.
If your mold or process leaves plastic flakes,drool,etc on the parting line,when the mold machine clamps up,even polyethylene or santoprene can leave an impression,a dent,in the mold faces.
IMO,a 'break in" bore wiping is NOT about "Improving" the work of the barrel maker.Its about protecting the bore from damage running bullets over jacket flakes.
Now,a "Midells" or "Brownway" $127.00 pre-threaded,short chambered barrel"
or a Remchester,or ? just MIGHT look like power feed tool marks or galled,smeared cheese from the button or?.And any "texture" that's crossing the path of the bullet will foul.Bore cleaning between shots won't help much.
I actually have had surprising success with a "nothing to lose" substandard barrel via my own firelapping process.It was a 30 cal bbl.I used 170 gr cast 30-30 bullets. I filled the lube grooves and charged the OD with the green #9 diamond mold polishing compound. I can look up the micron size.Its quite fine.
After about 20of those,modest loads,with a lightly wet bore,that rifle shot surprisingly well.
My hint with firelapping? FORGET progressive grits.The big rocks cut more clearance,or a larger hole.
And you don't sand 80 grit marks out of a board with 400 grit going the same direction.You have to cross the lines.
IMO,you only do this to an otherwise poor barrel,out of a "nothing to lose" experiment.
And then go to Kreiger barrels and read about break in.
Lets differentiate between production barrels and premium,hand lapped barrels.
There is NOTHING the shooter can do to improve the best efforts of a premium barrelmaker.
To the actual workof the barrelmaker,I say "Just shoot it"
However:The barrel maker,hopefully,has all of the "lines",the texture,in the long direction of the barrel.(Not so much on production barrels).
The issue is in chambering.Thats usually outside the barrel makers hands.
We will get SOME degree of cutter marks,burrs,mismatch,and other imperfection from twisting a chamber reamer in.
A very good job can be done!.Sharp reamer,fitted pilot,gunsmith skill!! It can be 99% perfect.But no one can go in and deburr the downstream side burr on the edge of a land.Even the sharpest cutter leaves a burr on an interrupted cut.Maybe a very small one,but its there.
Those imperfections CAN cut,and litter the bore with bullet jacket flakes.
Those burrs can be worn off with a few rounds of shooting.
I don't think it crazy to wipe metal chips out of the bore before shooting another bullet over them,smearing or impressing them into the bore.I'm talking maybe a wet patch and a couple dry patches.
And in case you think softer copper cannot hurt harder steel,I worked for many years with plastic injection molds.
P-20 pre hard mold steel or DME #2 Mold plate steel are not that different than 4130-4140 sort od steels they make barrels out of.
If your mold or process leaves plastic flakes,drool,etc on the parting line,when the mold machine clamps up,even polyethylene or santoprene can leave an impression,a dent,in the mold faces.
IMO,a 'break in" bore wiping is NOT about "Improving" the work of the barrel maker.Its about protecting the bore from damage running bullets over jacket flakes.
Now,a "Midells" or "Brownway" $127.00 pre-threaded,short chambered barrel"
or a Remchester,or ? just MIGHT look like power feed tool marks or galled,smeared cheese from the button or?.And any "texture" that's crossing the path of the bullet will foul.Bore cleaning between shots won't help much.
I actually have had surprising success with a "nothing to lose" substandard barrel via my own firelapping process.It was a 30 cal bbl.I used 170 gr cast 30-30 bullets. I filled the lube grooves and charged the OD with the green #9 diamond mold polishing compound. I can look up the micron size.Its quite fine.
After about 20of those,modest loads,with a lightly wet bore,that rifle shot surprisingly well.
My hint with firelapping? FORGET progressive grits.The big rocks cut more clearance,or a larger hole.
And you don't sand 80 grit marks out of a board with 400 grit going the same direction.You have to cross the lines.
IMO,you only do this to an otherwise poor barrel,out of a "nothing to lose" experiment.
Last edited:
And the yeas and nays will live forever.
FWIW: I bore scope all my gun barrels when new or when I get them (if used) before they are ever thought of shooting.
Depending on what I see makes my decision for me.
A rough barrel gets a good lapping before shooting.
An OK barrel gets to be shot....a lot depending on caliber.
I have never followed the typical "break in" protocol, whatever it might be. Every manufacturer and barrel maker has different instructions. Makes a person think about it, with so many different methods...if they can't decide on a common method, then what is right and what is wrong?
That is the most significant reason that I don't pay much attention to them.
I have a barrel on a gun, a very old gun, that looks like a rocky road inverted from breech to muzzle. It shoots 1 1/2 MOA with cast bullets without fail depending on me.
So who's to say that the accuracy improves with any method. All I do is create a finish that produces the very least copper or lead fouling. That is my main objective and it works for me.
FWIW: I bore scope all my gun barrels when new or when I get them (if used) before they are ever thought of shooting.
Depending on what I see makes my decision for me.
A rough barrel gets a good lapping before shooting.
An OK barrel gets to be shot....a lot depending on caliber.
I have never followed the typical "break in" protocol, whatever it might be. Every manufacturer and barrel maker has different instructions. Makes a person think about it, with so many different methods...if they can't decide on a common method, then what is right and what is wrong?
That is the most significant reason that I don't pay much attention to them.
I have a barrel on a gun, a very old gun, that looks like a rocky road inverted from breech to muzzle. It shoots 1 1/2 MOA with cast bullets without fail depending on me.
So who's to say that the accuracy improves with any method. All I do is create a finish that produces the very least copper or lead fouling. That is my main objective and it works for me.
- Status