taking your first shot

[LynnJr]

Most of the guys working for Kreiger shoot and or compete.
When they recommend a cleaning or break in procedure it is not a guess or hunch but what works for them.
BUT
If you think they are making this up in an effort to decieve there customers I would avoid buying there products.
I own a borescope and will continue doing what works for myself no matter what I read on a message board.

[1859sharps]

Most of the guys working for Kreiger shoot and or compete.
When they recommend a cleaning or break in procedure it is not a guess or hunch but what works for them.
BUT
If you think they are making this up in an effort to decieve there customers I would avoid buying there products.
I own a borescope and will continue doing what works for myself no matter what I read on a message board.

again...where is the controls? where is the evidence of what would happen if they hadn't broken in the barrel.

you continue to provide NOTHING in support of the claim.

I don't doubt their sincerity or even yours. I have nothing to support a claim of dishonesty on their part or yours. Nor am I trying to say there is. It is VERY common for something like this to take on a life of it's own and since so many people repeat it...it must be true. But is it?

unfortunately no one has actually (at least to my knowledge) setup some experiments to test the claim.

I am starting to wonder if you even understand how you would actually need to go about collecting data to support the claim (aka theory) that a barrel break process improves accuracy.

This is one of those questions that I doubt we will ever get a black and white answer to. BUT we can setup experiments just the same to test the theory and collect data and see some trends.

But saying you have a borescope and so you can see the tool marks is not proof of anything except that there can be tool marks . posting emails that were made public that only show there was bad blood between two people is not proof of anything related to this discussion except there was bad blood. heck even Gail's claims are not proof, but then nor are kriegers.

to actually know if a barrel break in process works..you need controls to eliminate other possible reasons for achieving "better accuracy". you also need to have some means to show results had you not done barrel break in.

until then if someone says "I took this new rifle, right away did X barrel break in procedure, and it helped improve accuracy" has not proven a thing. their conclusion that break in improved accuracy is based on "superstition".

[bazineta]

Chiming to to support what 1859 is saying here. I've had a long career in my particular field, and there's a lot of my work around. While frankly you can't swing a dead cat without hitting 12 people smarter than me, the body of that work means that you see a lot of folks copying they way I've done things, simply because I am an expert, and so therefore that must be the correct solution.

It's disheartening in some cases; it's as if people just stop thinking. It makes me recall the story of little Susie asking her Mom why she cuts the ends off of the roast before putting it in the oven. Mom thinks for a second, says she doesn't really know, but Grandma always did it that way, ask her. Susie asks Grandma, who says, "well, my dear, it was during the war, metal was scarce, and I couldn't get a big enough roasting pan to fit most roasts, so I just cut the ends off of them to make them fit."

I think a lot of this received wisdom is much like that; the expert, who is in many cases just too busy to mess with something that's worked for them in the past, does it that way, so it must be correct. It becomes simply an article of faith with scant if any supporting evidence.

[LynnJr]

I am not claiming to be an expert barrel maker but I do think Kreiger Barrels are qualified as such.
I posted there recommended procedure straight from there website and you can follow there instructions or ignore there instructions.
I don't know most of the posters in this thread but I do know who I trust when it comes to barrels and Kreiger is at the top of the list.
Gale McMillan doesn't make barrels anymore and I have never seen one in use in 20 years of competing in benchrest.
But following your logic I won't trust Tiger Woods to know about golfing and I won't trust the engineers at GM to know anything about a 350 Chevy engine because neither has shown me there test parameters?🚷

[1859sharps]

the older I get, the more I discover even experts can get caught up in received wisdom just like anyone can, mostly because it was what they were taught and they didn't stop to question.

every time I get into this conversation, the more I am convinced "we" do not know as much as we think we do about this whole barrel breaking theory. and yes, it is a theory well more like an educated hypothesis bordering on theory.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory

[hambam105]

Taking Your First Shot....taking your first shot...taking your first shot at what?

[LynnJr]

The more "We" get into this conversation the more I realize you can't teach an old dog new tricks.

[Xtracrispy]

I am certainly not an expert, I can see benefits to both sides. I think it is similar to things like motorcycle break in. Some say follow the manufacture and baby them at first, some say flog them as soon as you leave the dealer. There are babied ones that break, and flogged ones that go forever, and the other way around.

At the end of the day read what you can, make an informed decision that you feel comfortable with, and go for it. It will potentially make as much of a difference as what color pants you wear to shoot it.

[RandyD]

After reading all of the comments, my conclusion is the only thing I lose if I follow the Krieger cleaning method is some time (which is about 30 minutes) and the cost of some cleaning supplies (which is at most a few dollars). There is no harm in following the procedure. The cost of putting a high quality barrel on a rifle is around $600 and Krieger has a wait time measured in months, so given the time and cost of getting a new barrel, I'll follow their recommended cleaning procedure until there is quantifiable proof that it is a waste of time and cleaning supplies.

[NiMiK]

I've tried the method when I first got my Savage 10. Pain in the *** but you'll notice that it'll take less patches to run through the barrel to come out clean. I don't know how effective this was. Would I do it again? Probably not with a factory barrel. I did my break in at Angeles range.

[Memnon]

I was tempted to do it after watching that Tib...rex guy on youtube do it.

But I didn't, and still get tight groups. I'm guessing most people don't so it should be proof enough that it's not required.

[LynnJr]

Barrel break in isn't intended to make your groups smaller.
It's purpose is to get those small groups sooner or with less rounds down the barrel.
Once the tool marks have been eliminated the barrel will shoot to its full potential.
Nobody on this forum shoots Benchrest so your definition of good groups is different than the guys actually shooting very small groups.
If you look at the Bartlein website on barrel break-in one of there barrels agg'ed 0.211 for 310 shots. That is what shooting small groups is all about.
Here is another.
Gene Buky won the 2014 Benchrest Nationals and that year he set 4 new world records at the Nationals including 5, 5-shot groups HV 100 yards .134″, 5, 5-shot groups 100/200 yards combined .1688″, 5, 5-shot groups LV 100/200 yards combined .1702″ and Sporter Class combined 100/200 yards .1777″
A Dime measures 0.700 so 25 shots at 0.134 is pretty small and that same dime would cover 50 shots if you put them 25 shots each side by side with plenty of room to spare.