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
Musings on barrel life...
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="Dzaw" data-source="post: 144319" data-attributes="member: 7794"><p><strong>Thanks!</strong></p><p></p><p>Thank you!</p><p></p><p>I have read quite a lot about moly fusion, and you're the first I've ever seen give it a negative review. I really appreciate your candor, and the timely information! I will be testing it myself, along with some other products in the relatively near future. In my forge, with abrasives, with acids, salt water, and buried in some reloading poeder and lit! I figure if I can quantify and control the factors that cause barrel problems, and test treatments and coatings against those factors, I should have a decent idea on weather or not to put it into my gun!</p><p></p><p>Yes, 3 grooves are rougher when firecracked, but does it take longer for a similar amount of scale (cracking) to build?</p><p></p><p>Have you perhapse been able to substantiate the cut vs button rifled argument?</p><p></p><p>Another thought has occurred to me... In handguns, polygonal rifling is used as opposed to land and groove style and reports are vastly extended barrel life. This is, of course, problematic for rifles for two reasons: 1: at the corners of the polygons there will be some blowby of expanding gasses. 2: the polygonal rifling will warp the shape of the bullet, paerhapse adversely affecting accuracy.</p><p></p><p>I would think that both problems could be overcome in the following manner: more sides to the polygon, with better dimensional control. Example, typical handgun poygonal riling is octagonal. Why not 12 sides. Sure there are more corners, but they will be substantially smaller. Squeeze the bullet just a little tighter, and you can force the bulletr right into those corners, eliminating the blowby effect. Further, 12 sides is a lot closer to the original round state of the bullet, which, spinning at high RPM's will carry with it an air cusion anyhow. Sort of like why golfballs have dimples, they are actually more aerodynamic because of them! Again, like many of my ideas, dodecagonal rifling in a tube as long as a rifle barrel is a nightmare to engineer! Even if it could be pulled off, it may not be worthwhile anyhow, as without testing (an expensive proposition at best) we have no real way of knowing weather or not it would ruin accuracy all to hell, or even if it would help barrel life much.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dzaw, post: 144319, member: 7794"] [b]Thanks![/b] Thank you! I have read quite a lot about moly fusion, and you're the first I've ever seen give it a negative review. I really appreciate your candor, and the timely information! I will be testing it myself, along with some other products in the relatively near future. In my forge, with abrasives, with acids, salt water, and buried in some reloading poeder and lit! I figure if I can quantify and control the factors that cause barrel problems, and test treatments and coatings against those factors, I should have a decent idea on weather or not to put it into my gun! Yes, 3 grooves are rougher when firecracked, but does it take longer for a similar amount of scale (cracking) to build? Have you perhapse been able to substantiate the cut vs button rifled argument? Another thought has occurred to me... In handguns, polygonal rifling is used as opposed to land and groove style and reports are vastly extended barrel life. This is, of course, problematic for rifles for two reasons: 1: at the corners of the polygons there will be some blowby of expanding gasses. 2: the polygonal rifling will warp the shape of the bullet, paerhapse adversely affecting accuracy. I would think that both problems could be overcome in the following manner: more sides to the polygon, with better dimensional control. Example, typical handgun poygonal riling is octagonal. Why not 12 sides. Sure there are more corners, but they will be substantially smaller. Squeeze the bullet just a little tighter, and you can force the bulletr right into those corners, eliminating the blowby effect. Further, 12 sides is a lot closer to the original round state of the bullet, which, spinning at high RPM's will carry with it an air cusion anyhow. Sort of like why golfballs have dimples, they are actually more aerodynamic because of them! Again, like many of my ideas, dodecagonal rifling in a tube as long as a rifle barrel is a nightmare to engineer! Even if it could be pulled off, it may not be worthwhile anyhow, as without testing (an expensive proposition at best) we have no real way of knowing weather or not it would ruin accuracy all to hell, or even if it would help barrel life much. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Musings on barrel life...
Top