Surely someone has some micro sensors that detect the motion of the barrel at different locations when a cartridge explodes and the bullet and gases travel down the barrel. I think that is what is needed.
Proof Carbon VS Steel deflection test.
- Thread starter Rhovee
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Lefty7mmstw
Well-Known Member
I'd like to see a high temp thermocouple inserted to the 4-5" mark in a hot rod like the 7rum on a carbon wrapped and a standard steel bull barrel... it would have to read rather high temps so I doubt a cheapy for cooking would be enough... give each barrel a few shots with full steam stuff, wait a few seconds and measure...
Rhovee
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2017
- Messages
- 1,595
My opinion from having both is that carbon will cool off faster. But that pencil barrel inside the carbon will also heat up faster than say a #4 would. They need to be cared for more than typical steel barrel because it seems like the steel isn't hot when it actually is. I burned one up pretty fast just going off of feeling how hot the carbon felt.
Wow. I learned something that I never thought of from this.
Guess I'd better pamper my Christensen 300WM a little more.
I have very little practical experience with Carbon barrels. I do have a fair bit in other applications. I have looked at them numerous times but can't get past the reservations and have always ended up with a steel barrel with varying contours or maybe fluting to save weight.
That said, Carbon Fiber itself is as good or likely better heat transfer than Stainless - that's fibers only. However when laid up in an epoxy it's much worse. When I've spoken with manufacturers they are quick to quote the bare carbon properties but skip over the assembly. It would be possible to get better with a more complex laminate including copper or silver, etc. but to my knowledge none of the barrels have that. BTW, SS is worse heat transfer (better insulator) than non-stainless by a bit. That's talking generalities and specific materials, alloys and techniques will vary.
LB for LB Carbon Fiber has the potential to be much stiffer than steel. Whether that translates over in the real world I'm still sceptical. And add in the thermal properties and different materials moving against each other we'll see...
Thanks for posting up the test results, it's great information.
That said, Carbon Fiber itself is as good or likely better heat transfer than Stainless - that's fibers only. However when laid up in an epoxy it's much worse. When I've spoken with manufacturers they are quick to quote the bare carbon properties but skip over the assembly. It would be possible to get better with a more complex laminate including copper or silver, etc. but to my knowledge none of the barrels have that. BTW, SS is worse heat transfer (better insulator) than non-stainless by a bit. That's talking generalities and specific materials, alloys and techniques will vary.
LB for LB Carbon Fiber has the potential to be much stiffer than steel. Whether that translates over in the real world I'm still sceptical. And add in the thermal properties and different materials moving against each other we'll see...
Thanks for posting up the test results, it's great information.
historically Carbon wrapped barrels insulated rather than dissipated heat relative to steel. So, the gunsmiths were right. But, Proof's Carbon compound is different and dissipates heat faster. I can vouch for that as I have fired many thousands of rounds through them and steel barrels as well.
Yep, as I said, the heat related poi shift of steel barrels varies. I just had some that frustrated me. So, I did research, tried Proof barrels, and think it solved my problem.
It does seem to me that POI shift from heat is a barrel issue more than bedding.
Cost and benefits are not usually proportional but often cost is exponential relative to marginal improvements. So, twice the accuracy for twice the cost is not what I am after. The reduced weight, 25-64% based on barrel length and contour, while maintaining match accuracy is my thing. Heat dissipation is real nice when working up loads as I can shoot more quickly and have less heat mirage from barrel.
I was told the heat dissipation is 5x as fast. Not sure that really translates to overall barrel. More likely the carbon at 5x serves as a wick to accelerate cooling of steel. I can vouch for the barrel cooling more quickly and not getting as hot.
Bartlein and many other steel match barrels are excellent. Think everyone should have several. I just like the Proof barrels for light weight, heat dissipation without sacrificing accuracy. Perhaps gaining on the poi shift relative to steel.
We can have them all! Spend our money as we like!
Yep, as I said, the heat related poi shift of steel barrels varies. I just had some that frustrated me. So, I did research, tried Proof barrels, and think it solved my problem.
It does seem to me that POI shift from heat is a barrel issue more than bedding.
Cost and benefits are not usually proportional but often cost is exponential relative to marginal improvements. So, twice the accuracy for twice the cost is not what I am after. The reduced weight, 25-64% based on barrel length and contour, while maintaining match accuracy is my thing. Heat dissipation is real nice when working up loads as I can shoot more quickly and have less heat mirage from barrel.
I was told the heat dissipation is 5x as fast. Not sure that really translates to overall barrel. More likely the carbon at 5x serves as a wick to accelerate cooling of steel. I can vouch for the barrel cooling more quickly and not getting as hot.
Bartlein and many other steel match barrels are excellent. Think everyone should have several. I just like the Proof barrels for light weight, heat dissipation without sacrificing accuracy. Perhaps gaining on the poi shift relative to steel.
We can have them all! Spend our money as we like!
How exactly did you measure this heat dissipation??
User4302021
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2018
- Messages
- 0
Seems to me that the best way to test one against the other, (in a way meaningful to actual use) would be to do side by side charge weight progression in small 0.2 or 0.1 grain increments (OCW style,but without the other implications being measured).
Every barrel I've ever tested showed a definite sine wave pattern that could vary dramatically in it's vertical and lateral movement depending on barrel profile.
I just looked at a couple of OCW tests on another site where the Proof barrel was used. Neither moved around nearly as much as a steel barrel of the same weight. Maybe even less than one of the same profile.
Every barrel I've ever tested showed a definite sine wave pattern that could vary dramatically in it's vertical and lateral movement depending on barrel profile.
I just looked at a couple of OCW tests on another site where the Proof barrel was used. Neither moved around nearly as much as a steel barrel of the same weight. Maybe even less than one of the same profile.
Last edited:
Alex Wheeler
Well-Known Member
I would have to go look for sure . I shot the 338 Rum that day too .
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 103481
Guest
Very interesting, what manufacturer made the steel barrels?
