Poll Barrel Break-in Myth or Not

Barrel break-in needs to be done or waste of time?

  • Total voters
    95
  • Poll closed .
Two mythbustings I've read about this week that should make my life easier: 1."Panel Advises Against Prostate Cancer Screening" (AP). 2 Sept. issue of Rifle magazine:"Barrel Break-In Voodoo".
 
Never broke in a gun barrel yet and I have some very good shootin' sticks. Gale Mcmillan, one of the best, didn't believe in "breaking in" a barrel, and neither do I. All I ever did was shoot it and clean it up after I was done. Some of the bore cleaners should absolutely never be placed in a hot or warm barrel anyway.
 
Myth....break-in equates to early wear.

Just use it normally and it will take care of its self. As any machine will.
 
I have never broke one in and the ones I have shot for many years shoot just fine. I haven't heard about the break-in theory until lately so I can't say for sure if it would help or not.
 
You can repost Gale McMillans posts ad nauseum, but unless he chambered the barrel which he likely didn't, he had no control over the condition of the reamer or the talent of who chambered the barrel.

McMillan himself explained why a barrel settles down and shoots better after a couple of hundred rounds if a dull throater left burrs. I don't understand why everybody ignores that post.

Here'e the quote

The reason you hear of the help in accuracy is because if you
chamber barrel with a reamer that has a dull throater instead of cutting
clean sharp rifling it smears a burr up on the down wind side of the
rifling. It takes from 1 to 2 hundred rounds to burn this bur out and
the rifle to settle down and shoot its best.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Timely information. I just purchased a new Remington 700 5R .308 and have yet to take it to the range. When I purchased the rifle the salesman told me to talk to another employee about barrel break in procedures. I will continue to research but everything I've read suggests its unecessary.
 
I don't do break in. I have a .308 AR that shoots 0.60" MOA without break in. May breaking in have made the rifle more accurate? Idk. But it's plenty accurate without a break in procedure.
 
So IF you buy a crappy barrel, cut with dull equipment by an angry beaver, then you may need to break in a burr, but otherwise it is just premature wear on your barrel?
 
So IF you buy a crappy barrel, cut with dull equipment by an angry beaver, then you may need to break in a burr, but otherwise it is just premature wear on your barrel?
Click to expand...

I'm never going to wear out a barrel. I don't shoot any single rifle that much before I get bored with it.

The percentage of barrels made by McMillan or any of the other custom barrel makers is pretty small. Making a decison on your Gander Mountain rifle based on what McMillan said about his custom hand lapped barrels is ridiculous IMO.
 
It's funny but McMillian never send anything out with his barrels stating barrel break in was neccesary. He got real active after he sold the barrel making business and I have one of his barrel before he sold out.

I look at the cost of new barrel plus chambering like Rock Creek/Bartlein/Brux barrels so spending alittle time break-in isn't a waste of time to me.

I know guys that put on a good barrel go shoot it clean it after shooting and happy with the new barrel.
 
Nothing more scarey than an angry beaver!:eek:


But like a fine new tool, it always works better when "broken in" and lightly oiled afterwards!!;)
 
hell no man.

My M&P 15PS shot like a champ out of the box after I cleaned the grease off it. Today, 2000+rounds later, it shoots like a champ first round, every round.
 
All with barrels the shooter didn't have to improve on by breaking
them in.
Click to expand...

That may be true but...

McMillan himself explained why a barrel settles down and shoots better after a couple of hundred rounds if a dull throater left burrs.
Click to expand...

And..

But like a fine new tool, it always works better when "broken in" and lightly oiled afterwards!
Click to expand...

Maybe if every barrel was made to the same level of quality as a McMillan barrel this stuff wouldn't be true. And if they were McMillan barrels wouldn't have won so many things, set so many records, yadda yadda yadda.

"MY" best rifle shot better after I had shot maybe 150 rounds through it. I never did any of that shoot 5, clean, shoot 5, clean two step stuff. I just shot it and cleaned it a reasonable amount (which isn't very much for me BTW). And presto changeo it started getting gradually better after about 50 rounds right up until about 150 rounds when it levelled off.

To me "that" is breaking in a barrel. You're knocking off those little imperfections that maybe McMillan doesn't have but most rifles made on mass production equipment do have. If anyone thinks that every company changes the cutting head on a bore cutter after it shows the slightest bit of wear raise your hand about face high and smack yourself in the forehead. Because you should have just had a revelation. Unless your barrel company is McMillan the chances are they don't change those bits until they reach a certain level of tolerance.

Cutting steel can leave little burrs here and there if the bit isn't "perfect" and few bits are perfect. In a perfect world we would all have McMillan perfect barrels but I doubt even McMillan sells 100% perfect barrels in this imperfect world.

I don't buy the whole razzamataz about cleaning every 3 rounds, stand on your head, sacrifice a chicken, blah blah blah but I do believe bullets have a way of knocking off those tiny little burrs that can make a big difference in accuracy.

In short I don't think either side is 100% wrong or 100% right here. I think it's a matter of how good your barrel actually is when you get it and how well shooting a few bullets through the barrel will actually help it.
 
I have little doubt that breaking in a barrel has proved to be a myth. Or maybe I should say proven to be a bad idea instead. I do believe that many guns shoot better after a couple hundred rounds and I call this "seasoning". What's the difference? One lets nature take it's coarse and the other is a forced action with the possibility of messing up a fine gun. You make the call as to whch one you would prefer on your new gun.

LK
 
I have little doubt that breaking in a barrel has proved to be a myth. Or maybe I should say proven to be a bad idea instead. I do believe that many guns shoot better after a couple hundred rounds and I call this "seasoning".
Click to expand...

+1
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top