Why use a carbon wrapped barel?

Rich Coyle said:
A couple years ago I did two 6.5 mm rifles. One on the twenty-six ounce six lug Mark V Weatherby action using a 26" heavily fluted .550" muzzle steel barrel. The other was a 26" carbon fiber .850"muzzle barrel on a Pierce titanium action. Both barrels looked really cool to me and both weighed forty ounces. The Weatherby fired groups about 5/8" for three shots and up to 15/16" for five shots. The Pierce fired 1 1/2" for three shots on a good day. The Weatherby had a wildcat that matched a .264 Win Mag without the belt. Velocity with Hammer Shockhammer 130 averaged 3,190 feet per second. The Pierce used a .338 RUM chamber but .300 RUM brass to get a .100" longer neck. While I was at it I did a Lilja 28" 9 twist barrel on my son-in-law's Savage. It fired Nosler 140 Accubonds at 3,419 feet per second and did five shots around 3/4". By the way, Son John took one of my Bushnell 6500 4 1/2-30X50's for his Savage. Now I have only two. The other is on the .375 wildcat.

For reference the Weatherby had a Swarovski z5 5-25X52. The Pierce had a Leupold VX-6 4-24X52. The Swarovski went back for service twice in about eighteen months. The Leupold never gave any trouble. The Pierce rifle was disassembled and parts sold; including the scope. The Swarovski was sold with full disclosure about its history and replaced with a Bushnell 6500 4 1/2-30X50.
Click to expand...
Hummm the Swarovski giving you trouble! Did they honor the warranty? I had trouble with a night force scope jumping gimbles and they said nothing was wrong with it. Sold a scope after it jumping twice with full discloser, nasty letter to NF. I fully use Vortex or US Optics now.
 
Send it 284 said:
I pulled my 22" #5 fluted Benchmark barrel tonight, and out of curiosity I put it on the scale.
Its .720 at the muzzle and shoots .2s with a suppressor. I paid $450 for the blank
So why is carbon fiber all the rage right now🤔
View attachment 238760
Click to expand...
Curious to see high fast it heats up ? I'm very impressed with my carbon barrels with heat verses my fluted barrels seem to heat up faster and stay warm much longer .
 
Rhino55 said:
Gentlemen Can we agree to disagree? This has turned into a contest with no winners because everyone is talking pass each other. A fluted barrel has more surface area for heat to dissipate faster and a CF barrel is thinner Steel core so it won't retain or store heat.
Click to expand...
I can agree to disagree with your point. You're ignoring the fact that the thinner steel core has an insulator wrapped around it so it is no longer apples to apples in terms of rate of cooling.

A skinny person with a coat will stay warmer, longer than a naked fat person on a cold day and feel cooler to the touch at the same time.
 
UniqueUserName said:
A fat piece of metal will have greater thermal capacitance. It will absorb a greater amount of thermal energy to reach a given temperature and tend to hold it longer. If you put the same amount of thermal energy into a smaller mass of the same material, it's going to get a lot hotter, faster and will tend to cool faster because of the greater temperature differential and the lesser ratio of mass to surface area. It's the peak temp that's going to destroy things. Now if you take that skinny tube, wrap an insulating blanket around it and dump the same amount of thermal energy into it, it's still going to get very hot, but now it will cool much more slowly due to the reduced rate of thermal transfer through the insulator. It's going to have a much lower surface temp because of the slower thermal transfer, but it's going to be much hotter and stay hotter, longer at the bore. But yes, starting at a given temperature a skinnier piece of steel will lose heat more rapidly than a fat piece of steel, but the fat piece of steel will absorb a much greater amount of thermal energy before it reaches the same temp as the smaller piece of steel.

BTW: I know enough about farming to know that it requires a lot of smarts to be successful at it.
Click to expand...

Everyone is ASSUMING the carbon fiber CONTINUOUS FIBER MAT is RELEASING HEAT SLOWER than the metal milled away!!!! and IGNORING THE CONDUCTIVITY OF HEAT THROUGH THE RESIN AND MAT!!!!

FWIW

THAT ASSUMPTION MIGHT BE WRONG!!!

THINK ABOUT THE TOILET PAPER ON THR TP TUBE....

IT STILL CONDUCTS HEAT OUT OF THE MAT OVER THAT GIGANTIC SURFACE AREA!!!

SIMILAR TO A 2 CORE RADIATOR AND A 20 CORE RADIATOR on the same size tanks.... similar not the same....
 
bdyal1972 said:
Everyone is ASSUMING the carbon fiber CONTINUOUS FIBER MAT is RELEASING HEAT SLOWER than the metal milled away!!!! and IGNORING THE CONDUCTIVITY OF HEAT THROUGH THE RESIN AND MAT!!!!

FWIW

THAT ASSUMPTION MIGHT BE WRONG!!!

THINK ABOUT THE TOILET PAPER ON THR TP TUBE....

IT STILL CONDUCTS HEAT OUT OF THE MAT OVER THAT GIGANTIC SURFACE AREA!!!

SIMILAR TO A 2 CORE RADIATOR AND A 20 CORE RADIATOR on the same size tanks.... similar not the same....
Click to expand...
You're invited to put numbers to your theory. Quantify the thermal conductivity of the two materials. Quantify the emissivity of the material surfaces. There is no magic. Thermal transfer only occurs via three mechanisms (i.e., conduction, convection and radiation). Describe the physics in quantifiable terms, not mysterious anecdotes that you claim are "classified".
 
Last edited:
Rhino55 said:
Gentlemen Can we agree to disagree? This has turned into a contest with no winners because everyone is talking pass each other. A fluted barrel has more surface area for heat to dissipate faster and a CF barrel is thinner Steel core so it won't retain or store heat.
Click to expand...
This happens every time this CF vs Steel comes up. Also, same barrel profile to profile CF is going to be lighter weight all the time.
 
bdyal1972 said:
Everyone is ASSUMING the carbon fiber CONTINUOUS FIBER MAT is RELEASING HEAT SLOWER than the metal milled away!!!! and IGNORING THE CONDUCTIVITY OF HEAT THROUGH THE RESIN AND MAT!!!!

FWIW

THAT ASSUMPTION MIGHT BE WRONG!!!

THINK ABOUT THE TOILET PAPER ON THR TP TUBE....

IT STILL CONDUCTS HEAT OUT OF THE MAT OVER THAT GIGANTIC SURFACE AREA!!!

SIMILAR TO A 2 CORE RADIATOR AND A 20 CORE RADIATOR on the same size tanks.... similar not the same....
Click to expand...
This goes back to the point I made about critical radius of insulation. It's possible to cool something through an insulator if enough surface area is added but I've never seen a mfg reference this in their literature so I doubt it's the intent of the design. It very well may be the case but I'd have to see numbers backing it up. For the moment I'm sticking with the level 3 thermographer over a mysterious govt test
 
Rhino55 said:
Gentlemen Can we agree to disagree? This has turned into a contest with no winners because everyone is talking pass each other. A fluted barrel has more surface area for heat to dissipate faster and a CF barrel is thinner Steel core so it won't retain or store heat.
Click to expand...
I think the takeaway shouldn't be agree to disagree. It should be different tools for different jobs. A carbon fiber barrel is fine and probably is a good option for a hunting rifle. I sincerely doubt it would hold up long in an F class role. Obviously a 20 lb rifle will be easier to shoot that a 12 lb gun but I'm pretty sure if CF barrels were actually superior to steel in regard to heat dissipation BR/F class guys would be using them and just adding weight to their stocks to make weight.
 
UniqueUserName said:
You're invited to put numbers to your theory. Quantify the thermal conductivity of the two materials. Quantify the emissivity of the material surfaces. There is no magic. Thermal transfer only occurs via three mechaisms (i.e., conduction, convection and radiation). Describe the physics in quantifiable terms, not mysterious anecdotes that you claim are "classified".
Click to expand...

I am ONLY reporting what the largest MOST ACCURATE metrology lab IN THE WORLD DECIDED ALMOST 30 YEARS AGO!!!

BEFORE

99% OF YOU HAD TOUCHED OR KNEW WHAT CARBON FIBER WAS..... OR USED..... OR KNEW HOW IT WORKED....

FOR ME IT JUST MEANT 10 YEARS LATER I COULD HAVE A 300 WIN MAG 10LB TOTAL WEIGHT MARK 248 MOD 1 REPLICA IN THE WOODS WHERE MY ISSUE M24 IN PRE MARK 248 WAS 18 LBS LEAVING THE WIRE....

AND 1/2 MOA AT 1000 YARDS AT 10LBS VS 1MOA AT 1000YARDS AT 18LBS....

CF TECHNOLOGY LOWERED THE WEIGHT OF A TITAIUM ALUMINUM MAGNESIUM YZ 250 FROM 235LBS TO 155LBS IN 1997!!!

CF IS MONUMENTAL

IN MAKING M4S WORK BETTER IN E&E AS WELL....

POINT PROVEN BACK IN 1992-1995 IN MULTIPLE PLACES AND TIMES

ASK AROUND TO GUYS WHOS LIVES DEPEND ON TRIGGER PULLING....

IT WORKS AND HAS ALMOST 30 YEARS....

I KEEP HEARING ARGUEMENTS SIMILAR TO ANTI TUPPERWARE GLOCKS IN 80S

AND

ANTI M16 VS GARAND GUYS IN 70S

PIC OUT 2 IDENTICAL PROFILE BARRELS

PUT THEM ON A SEMIAUTO

SHOOT THE CRAP OUT OF THEM SCIENTIFICALLY

Which barrel lasted longer moa?

Which barrel had a consistent cold bore shot Longer?

Which barrel had a longer distance to transgenic instability?????

You can not accept THE TRUTH AS LONG AS YOU WANT

BUT

IT WAS TESTED FACT ALMOST 30 YEARS AGO

You are trying to DISPROVE FACT WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE-ABILITY-DEPTH NOR TESTING FACILITIES....

GOOD LICK PILGRIMS
 
Warning! This thread is more than 4 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

R
Anyone using IBI carbon wrapped barrels
2
Replies
14
Views
14K
338LM-V8
3
T
Reboring a carbon wrapped barrel
Replies
4
Views
482
Aoudad shooter1975
Aoudad shooter1975
G
Carbon Wrapped Barrels
2
Replies
17
Views
4K
Litehiker
Litehiker
D
Carbon wrapped barrels
2
Replies
18
Views
15K
26Reload
26Reload
S
Carbon Wrapped Barrels
Replies
5
Views
3K
jwp475
J

Recent Posts

Top