Barrel Cleaning…data

[prm]

Summarizing would not do his words justice. He indicated numerous times the data was not drive some absolute recommendation. They collected pressure and velocity data from thousands of barrels using test ammo. They wanted to identify when unwanted anomalies (I forget his term, but it applied to their ammo testing and ensuring reliable data) would occur due to not cleaning or barrel wear. All he implied was this data indicated the ranges at which cleaning or barrel life would negatively impact their testing. Defining any negative impact is up to each individual user.

 

[Marbles]

Sure. Data is- “in this test we used 5 each of 223, 6ARC, 6.5cm, 308win, 6.5 PRC, 7PRC, 300 PRC and shot them using “x” lot number of our factory ammo. Then we shot them for 20, 30, 50, and 100 round groups letting them cool every 20 rounds fired. “X” barrel went over 65,000 PSI chamber pressure at “X” round count. “Y” barrel went over 65,000psi at “X” round count”.

That’s what they did in the “Your groups are too small” series, but is not how they started the barrel cleaning podcasts, and does not seem to be how they did this one.

That’s why I was asking.

The issue that they didn’t need to discuss “stories” in their accuracy series- they used legitimate data. However, as I have posted before- the moment they started talking about barrel cleaning, they started talking emotions and beliefs- not raw data.

How many variables do you think are at play? How much testing would be needed to get good data on all those variables?

There is no data to say not cleaning is safe. Lots of emotions and stories though. So at best we have a coin flip.

Hornady ammo often has been extremely variable lot to lot- I, and others have posted about this multiple times. Between two lots of 140gr ELD-M 6.5cm ammo in brand new rifles- MV went from 2,600fps, to over 2,800fps and blowing primers- in the same guns, back to back. Zero issues with original lot number, 200fps increase win MV Witt new lot, back to original MV’s and zero issues with original lot.

In 7PRC- 30+ members shot, or watched us shoot Hornady 7PRC 180gr ELD-M, 175gr ELD-X, and 160gr CX being shot in the Bronwing X- Bolt 2 this year. The very first rounds from that gun were the 160hr CX- they were absolutely way over pressure. Massive ejector swipes, flattened primers, and hard extraction, along with 4+ inches. The ELD-M and X had zero issues right after. 9 months and 700 rounds without cleaning later- that original 160gr CX ammo still is way over pressure, the original and multiple other lots of 180gr ELD-M and 175gr ELD-X, and a new lot # of 160gr CX shows no issues at all.

Hornady sent 308 ammo to be used and tested to Ryan. In 2x brand new rifles, and 3x used rifles it shows high pressures- a couple of them very high. Only one rifle shoots the ammo under 2.5 MOA for ten rounds. A different lot # of the exact same ammo shoots sun 1.5 MOA in every one of those rifle and zero pressure issues.

Hornady is well known for issues between lots of 6.5cm, 6.5 PRC, and 7 PRC- and from people that clean regularly.

I'm hearing stories here, got some data? See your definition above.

How do you know that the rifle is not just slightly tighter than spec (perhaps due to carbon build up, perhaps due to being the last barrel cut on a worn reamer), rather than the ammo not being in spec, but on the high end of spec in say bullet diameter? Please provide chamber casting measurements and micrometer measurements on the ammunition.

No I think, I feel, but hard proof the mmo is out of spec and the rifle is in spec.

I will. Apologies for trying to discuss your thoughts on it.

Know is a high standard. I don't know, but I can create my own reference loads and see how cleaning effects velocity. If people can be told to read the 223 thread, then it is a fair response.

Edited for spelling and clarity.

 

[grappling_hook]

Their discussion of barrel life is okay, and although not clearly articulated with results from data testing, at least the processes described suggest that they actually tested it.

Based on the episode, though, the same is just not true of barrel cleaning. Not only do they not define degradation thresholds they used related to barrel cleaning (or even whether the degradation was in velocity, pressure, or dispersion), they didn’t describe the testing process at all.

If they really tested it, then they would have been able to make a statement similar to my 223 example quote above.

 

[Formidilosus]

How many variables do you think are at play? How much testing would be needed to get good data on all those variables?

They made a big deal in the accuracy series about not making statements unless you have actual data collected without bias and share it. It doesn’t take very much of every shot is logged and tracked- as it is, to provide and use the data. They did so without hesitation in the accuracy series- why the change?

That’s the point.

There is no data to say not cleaning is safe. Lots of emotions and stories though. So at best we have a coin flip.

That is not true. There are people saying “you must clean, yet never actually shoot without cleaning to find out. Then there are people saying “I don’t clean at all, and shoot thousands of rounds a year with no issues”.

Fly down to Montana in June, stay for the entire month and watch 50,000 plus rounds being fired without cleaning and see what happens. 4 if the rifle used will be from this last year- that already have 3 classes of use on them.

I'm hearing stories here, got some data? See your definition above.

That was exactly my point.

How do you know that the rifle is not just slightly tighter than spec (perhaps due to carbon buildu,

You mean the brand new barrels have carbon buildup? Or the 200fps difference in MV between lots fired back to back? Hornady ammo at times have large changes and issues between lots is well known, and well proven. Google “hornady over pressure”.

perhaps due to being the last barrel cut on a warn reamer), and the ammo is not in spec, but on the high end in say bullet diameter?

On these not edge t clean barrels as well?

Please provide chamber casting measurements and micrometer measurements on the ammunition.

No I think, I feel, but hard proof the mmo is out of spec and the rifle is in spec.

I’m not sure that you understood what I was trying to say.

Know is a high standard. I don't know, but I can create my own reference loads and see how cleaning effects velocity. If people can be told to read the 223 thread, then it is a fair response.

Sure. Today I checked MV on the MK12 I use the most. Today’s MV was 2,688fps MV with Blackhills MK262. Last April in the S2H class with them same lot # of ammo, it’s MV was 2,695fps. More than 2,000 round have been fired from April to today.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

There was no systematically collected empirical data or results of statistical data tests presented; only anecdotes and a claim that the algorithm they used for the table was based on observation.

In other words, their claims cannot be verified or validated with the information provided in Episode 3 and so we as viewers cannot draw conclusions about best cleaning practices beyond “trust us because we have seen hundreds of barrels shot out.”

This is disappointing but not surprising. I’ll give it a listen on my airplane ride on Tuesday.

 

[grappling_hook]

Hornady just needs to fill in these blanks for N, X, Y, and Z if they do an Episode 4:

"We took N number of barrels and shot each to establish a pretest baseline in dispersion. Our results showed that dispersion increased by percentage X on average at round count Y, with a standard deviation of Z. Cleaning and shooting a post-test showed no statistically significant difference in dispersion from the pretest."

Show it using any standard cartridge and controlled environmentals. Repeat with change in velocity and/or pressure if you like, but I think dispersion is the thing most of us would care about in order to make our own decisions about cleaning frequency.

 

[Justin Crossley]

I have a Tikka 243 with factory barrel that has been shooting the same 95 grain Bergers at 3100 fps with the same load for years and hundreds of rounds without a change in velocity or accuracy.

Sample of one but that gun hasn't been cleaned for at least 4-5 years.

My Tikka 6.5 CM barreled this spring has 790 rounds on it without ever being touched with a brush or patch. Velocity and accuracy have been very consistent with that rifle as well.

 

[prm]

They made a big deal in the accuracy series about not making statements unless you have actual data collected without bias and share it. It doesn’t take very much of every shot is logged and tracked- as it is, to provide and use the data. They did so without hesitation in the accuracy series- why the change?

That’s the point.

This is lab collected data of pressure, velocity, and dispersion using reference ammo across the lives of thousands of barrels. Actual data. From this data, he built a model.

“…The goal with this was to contrast the low data, anecdotal low sample size biases in the community...”

 

[TxLite]

I didn’t listen to the podcast but came across this barrel life data chart from it. All I have to say is my 7prc barrel is totally f’d for long term usage if this is what happened with factory ammo because my N570 load is absolutely booking lol

 

[Marbles]

That is not true. There are people saying “you must clean, yet never actually shoot without cleaning to find out. Then there are people saying “I don’t clean at all, and shoot thousands of rounds a year with no issues”.

Fly down to Montana in June, stay for the entire month and watch 50,000 plus rounds being fired without cleaning and see what happens. 4 if the rifle used will be from this last year- that already have 3 classes of use on them.

This shows a fundamental misunderstanding of low probability events. How many people died due to the Ford Pinto issue in the 70s? 3.3 million Pintos were made. 27 people died. Even if we assume every death was one vehicle, it is still a rounding error in the number made.

You mean the brand new barrels have carbon buildup?

Funny how you separate out the chamber being too small when it was cearly listed in the same parenthesis as an alternative to carbon build up.

I also never said the ammo was in spec, but you have failed to show that out of spec ammo is the only possible explanation.

Or the 200fps difference in MV between lots fired back to back? Hornady ammo at times have large changes and issues between lots is well known, and well proven. Google “hornady over pressure”.

I provided a possibility, but you chose not to see it as such, repeating it is unlikely to help.

I also googled Berger and Winchester and Nosler over pressure and not sure the Google shows anything more than people report factory ammo being over pressure.

The problem is you are saying Hornady is acting in bad faith and flat out lying as they specified checking the ammunition in test barrels that were verified with reference ammo and measuring the pressure. Which I already discussed above.

Sure. Today I checked MV on the MK12 I use the most. Today’s MV was 2,688fps MV with Blackhills MK262. Last April in the S2H class with them same lot # of ammo, it’s MV was 2,695fps. More than 2,000 round have been fired from April to today.

They never said if you don't clean bad things will happen, only that they could happen.

 

[bergie]

So should I clean or not? Or is this a case of bad stuff might happen if I clean or the dreaded, bad stuff might happen if I don't?

 

[Formidilosus]

This show a fundamental misunderstanding of low probability events. How many people died due to the Ford Pinto issue in the 70s? 3.3 million Pintos were made. 27 people died. Even if we assume every death was one vehicle, it is still a rounding error in the number made.



Funny how you separate out the chamber being too small when it was cearly listed in the same parenthesis as an alternative to carbon build up.

I also never said the ammo was in spec, but you have failed to show that out of spec ammo is the only possible explanation.

I provided a possibility, but you chose not to see it as such, repeating it is unlikely to help.

I also googled Berger and Winchester and Nosler over pressure and not sure the Google shows anything more than people report factory ammo being over pressure.

Yes. People have issues with pressure and factory ammo often enough regardless of cleaning or not- so why tilt it to “not cleaning” as causing the issues?

The problem is you are saying Hornady is acting in bad faith and flat out lying

No. That’s BS from you to say that. Please quote where I stated they were lying.

They are biased about cleaning and were from the very first podcast nearly a year ago about it- before they had “data”.

What I am saying is that by what is being stated about their barrel cleaning podcast- it is a not the “same” as how they did the precision series- which was actual, open, consistent data without “opinion” or “may be”, or “might be” in it.

They never said if you don't clean bad things will happen, only that they could happen.

Sure. And I could get struck by lightening. Anything “could” happen- what were the actual numbers and results of not cleaning per their data? How does that answer any question about not barrel cleaning causing safety issues?

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

I have a Tikka 243 with factory barrel that has been shooting the same 95 grain Bergers at 3100 fps with the same load for years and hundreds of rounds without a change in velocity or accuracy.

Sample of one but that gun hasn't been cleaned for at least 4-5 years.

My Tikka 6.5 CM barreled this spring has 790 rounds on it without ever being touched with a brush or patch. Velocity and accuracy have been very consistent with that rifle as well.

I have 12 Tikkas and Sakos now that haven’t been cleaned in over 3 years. Many on their 2nd barrel now.

I noticed no decrease in barrel life, speed degradation, or “guns blowing up” in any of them yet. I used to regularly clean guns.

There was one blued Tikka .223 out of 20ish barrels that didn’t meet what’s normally seen for round count before it started shooting poorly. Cleaning snd then fouling did not resolve the issue.

 

[Marbles]

No. That’s BS from you to say that. Please quote where I stated they were lying.

Based on what they claim to have done, that is the only possible interpretation of how factory ammo being over pressure makes what they report invalid, which was your implication.

Sure. And I could get struck by lightening. How does that answer any question about not barrel cleaning causing safety issues?

They report having observed and verified not cleaning causing safety issues. They sell a lot of ammo, it could be 1 in 100,000 guns that present an issue with not cleaning and they would see more than one pretty easily.

If you strap a 5 foot copper rod to your pack and go walk ridge lines in thunderstorms for the next year, I'll consider your struck by lightening example a valid comparison. Ever wonder why men are 4 times more likely to die from a lightning strike than women?

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Based on what they claim to have done, that is the only possible interpretation of how factory ammo being over pressure makes what they report invalid, which was your implication.

They report having observed and verified not cleaning causing safety issues. They sell a lot of ammo, it could be 1 in 100,000 guns that present an issue with not cleaning and they would see more than one pretty easily.

If you strap a 5 foot copper rod to your pack and go walk ridge lines in thunderstorms for the next year, I'll consider your struck by lightening example a valid comparison. Ever wonder why men are 4 times more likely to die from a lightning strike than women?

Did they test 100,000 guns? From what I’ve read here it’s all been “trust us bro”.

Where is the real data?

I’d love to see the numbers. I’m open to going back to cleaning every few hundred rounds like I used to, but so far in what I’ve seen, there is no benefit to shoving shit down my barrels.

Clean the action, bolt, throat, firing group with brake clean with barrel facing up, re-oil bolt and keep on rolling.

 

[prm]

There’s an echo in here…

 

[lhbackcountry]

So should I clean or not? Or is this a case of bad stuff might happen if I clean or the dreaded, bad stuff might happen if I don't?

Yes and yes.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

There’s an echo in here…

There’s no data in here and the title is data… Care to share any @prm ?

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

They do provide the numbers in 1 (I think, might be 2).

Would you be able to share this here?

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

***I listened/watched only the 3rd episode.

IIRC, there was one specific anecdote regarding a rifle exhibiting pressure issues from not being cleaned at all, and it was assumed/suggested there were more situations like that.

The rest of it was essentially the results of an algorithm based on powder capacity vs bore & chamber volume, along with pressure, that gave barrel life and cleaning interval expectations for different chamberings. I assume the algorithm was informed by what they've seen from shooting bullet and pressure test barrels out, but it wasn't a report on that raw data.

Would be helpful and add validity if they shared this “report”.

I hate cleaning guns but if there is hard data on very large sample sizes showing failures or benefits that is something to consider for me.