Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Fluted Bartlein vs Proof Research sendero contours
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Pdvdh" data-source="post: 1401102" data-attributes="member: 4191"><p>The information provided from the Christensen Arms' engineer stated:</p><p>"<em>This means that carbon fiber epoxy parallel to fibers has an approximate thermal diffusivity <u>of 450 times greater</u> than carbon steel and perpendicular is approximately <u>37 times greater</u>.</em>"</p><p></p><p>Does your CF wrap<u> feel between 37 and 450 times warmer</u> (<strong><em>edit - my bad here</em></strong>) than you've experienced when touching the steel after a string of fire? Does the CF wrap feel 37 to 450 times colder (<strong><em>edit - my bad here</em></strong>) than the steel shank of the barrel out of your chest freezer? <strong>[Edit</strong>: <em>It doesn't equate to 37 to 450 times warmer or colder temperature. I know they'll come gunning for any miss-steps.</em>] The CF should provide a 37 to 450 times higher rate of heat transfer, if those thermal diffusivity values are an accurate indicator of heat transfer rates. You get the idea... there should be a notable difference in sensed or measured surface temperature.</p><p></p><p>Why didn't Bryan Litz detect between 37 and 450 times additional heat transfer? That's not a teeny, itsy bitsy difference. Yet Mr. Litz's book did not report any remarkable differences between CF & steel barrels. (I haven't read the book - only the SH Forum posts on the findings reported in the book.)</p><p></p><p>If there's an incredulous disconnect between thermal diffusivity values and real life experiences on CF wrap heat transfer, could it be that "thermal diffusivity" is a poor term/coefficient for purposes of quantifying the heat transfer property of the carbon fiber wrap?</p><p></p><p>I don't know the thermal conductivity coefficient of Proof's carbon fiber wrap, just as I didn't know the thermal conductivity coefficient for Christensen Arms CF wrap. Does anyone? Has it ever been published or provided, anywhere? In the midst of the promotional advertising claiming improved thermal efficiencies, does ANYONE know their thermal conductivity value?</p><p></p><p>This much I do know... If I owned Proof Research, and my carbon fiber wrap transferred heat much better than the competition's carbon fiber wrap, and if it kept the bore much cooler than the competition's CF, I'd be <strong><em>running</em></strong> (not walking) to publish that Thermal Conductivity coefficient value. Promoting this much improved feature of my product, compared to all the competition's products. Is that not the way it works?</p><p></p><p>The pertinent heat transfer property has not been provided. The evidence is nebulous - a mystery. The claims of improved cooling abound. Yeah, I believe...</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Pdvdh, post: 1401102, member: 4191"] The information provided from the Christensen Arms' engineer stated: "[I]This means that carbon fiber epoxy parallel to fibers has an approximate thermal diffusivity [U]of 450 times greater[/U] than carbon steel and perpendicular is approximately [U]37 times greater[/U].[/I]" Does your CF wrap[U] feel between 37 and 450 times warmer[/U] ([B][I]edit - my bad here[/I][/B]) than you've experienced when touching the steel after a string of fire? Does the CF wrap feel 37 to 450 times colder ([B][I]edit - my bad here[/I][/B]) than the steel shank of the barrel out of your chest freezer? [B][Edit[/B]: [I]It doesn't equate to 37 to 450 times warmer or colder temperature. I know they'll come gunning for any miss-steps.[/I]] The CF should provide a 37 to 450 times higher rate of heat transfer, if those thermal diffusivity values are an accurate indicator of heat transfer rates. You get the idea... there should be a notable difference in sensed or measured surface temperature. Why didn't Bryan Litz detect between 37 and 450 times additional heat transfer? That's not a teeny, itsy bitsy difference. Yet Mr. Litz's book did not report any remarkable differences between CF & steel barrels. (I haven't read the book - only the SH Forum posts on the findings reported in the book.) If there's an incredulous disconnect between thermal diffusivity values and real life experiences on CF wrap heat transfer, could it be that "thermal diffusivity" is a poor term/coefficient for purposes of quantifying the heat transfer property of the carbon fiber wrap? I don't know the thermal conductivity coefficient of Proof's carbon fiber wrap, just as I didn't know the thermal conductivity coefficient for Christensen Arms CF wrap. Does anyone? Has it ever been published or provided, anywhere? In the midst of the promotional advertising claiming improved thermal efficiencies, does ANYONE know their thermal conductivity value? This much I do know... If I owned Proof Research, and my carbon fiber wrap transferred heat much better than the competition's carbon fiber wrap, and if it kept the bore much cooler than the competition's CF, I'd be [B][I]running[/I][/B] (not walking) to publish that Thermal Conductivity coefficient value. Promoting this much improved feature of my product, compared to all the competition's products. Is that not the way it works? The pertinent heat transfer property has not been provided. The evidence is nebulous - a mystery. The claims of improved cooling abound. Yeah, I believe... [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Fluted Bartlein vs Proof Research sendero contours
Top