Nitride/Melonite/QPQ or Chrome Lining---which is more accurate in identical barrels?

[noonesshowmonkey]

Yea, well this is the best info of the sort coming out that I know of, so I, for one, welcome it.

I agree. This isn't the journal Nature, or some shit.

Either way you cut it, no one is doing anything remotely close to this. And while a 3-5 shot group may not be statistically relevant to an elitist, there is a real performance:cost ratio at work here. A mathematician says, 'are you crazy, that'll never work!' A physicist says, 'these are hardly ideal circumstances!' And an engineer says, 'close enough for me!'

I'm in the engineering camp with this one.

While I'd love if Molon came swooping in from on high with some serious info-based real-talk, he isn't. And, honestly, these videos aren't a bad comparison. Accuracy =! barrel life, and the common argument here is to compare any specific detail about shooting with a worst-case-scenario 'hard use' situation at the expense of literally everything else, despite the fact that professional trigger pullers can swap their barrels at whatever usage level they want.

Get real.

[Mrgunsngear]

Shooting 3-5 shot groups to shorten video time represents a poor test and certainly doesn't provide the best analytical data. If the goal is to get more "clicks" on the website, certainly highly detailed and accurate material may not be for the general shooting community where more curiosity clicks may come from. TOS is the place for hobbyist reviews. Most folks here are looking for highly technical and detailed data.

I don't want to turn this into a "how youtube works" thread but clicks haven't mattered for a year or two with the new algorithm.

But, that's not always what drives the channel and I do put out videos that I know will hurt the channel's growth. For instance, last week I put out a tutorial on how to remove a staked castle nut----it's terrible for analytics but I believe it will help folks who are intimidated by the process or are classically ignorant and believe staked castle nuts are 'permanent' because Joe 6 Pack at the LGS said so.

I try to reach the most people while getting good information out to the masses and eventually encourage more people to take up arms. That's the ultimate goal of what I do as a public figure. That benefits the people on this site because 5-10% of the new shooters folks like me bring into the gun world will become shooters who crave details and as much knowledge as possible about the firearms they come to love. The other 90-95% hopefully will enjoy their new hobby and become part of the American population that stands up to unconstitutional proposals that aim to strip us of our natural rights.

[Mechan1c]

Thanks for doing it.

[GiddyHitch]

There's been a lot of discussion over how well QPQ can perform after higher round counts and/or more aggressive rates of fire. While not definitive, there've been a few reports of Melonited barrels being essentially shot out in around 10,000 rounds; either keyholing or producing excessively large groups. Again, in those instances, there were too many unconfirmed variables to draw meaningful conclusions; small sample size, rates of fire, quality of the actual barrel maker, quality of the finishing, etc.

When these discussions inevitably come up on this board, I feel compelled to point out (because I'm a PWS fanboy) that DMack was getting 1MOA accuracy on a PWS Mod0 carbine with an Isonite QPQ barrel with over 20k rounds on it (see the thread on the old Hide). This was a SWAT training rifle so no full auto though, I'm guessing.

[Stickman]

While I'd love if Molon came swooping in from on high with some serious info-based real-talk, he isn't.

He is tired of dealing with imbeciles, and I can hardly blame him. Now multiply that times ar15.com, and the level is astounding. Of course the fish rots from the head down, and that site doesn't seem to moderate anything for the sake of credibility even if what is posted is clearly incorrect.

while a 3-5 shot group may not be statistically relevant to an elitist, there is a real performance:cost ratio at work here.

Agreed. I had an article set up for RECOIL in which it was going to be based on barrel thickness and treatment. The barrel company initially was all about doing it, then evidently changed their minds and withdrew. It makes you wonder if companies want FACTUAL information, or if they just want internet commandos making up BS fishing stories about their group sizes.

Once again, I'll point out I'm NOT referring to GNG with my negative comments.

[Kdubya]

When these discussions inevitably come up on this board, I feel compelled to point out (because I'm a PWS fanboy) that DMack was getting 1MOA accuracy on a PWS Mod0 carbine with an Isonite QPQ barrel with over 20k rounds on it (see the thread on the old Hide). This was a SWAT training rifle so no full auto though, I'm guessing.

Hey, kindred spirits. I'm in the same boat with a different brand. Not a fanboy necessarily, but I'll defend them from the nonsense. Now, regarding QPQ, I'm hoping it holds up just as well. A number of barrels I'm considering for a build are Melonited. I'm excited about MrGnG's test because it'll be another data point to help people like me work towards drawing some conclusions. As I'd said earlier, I'm not really to worried about crowning an accuracy king. In spite of the small sample size of groups in this first video, it served its purpose for my interests. My takeaway, both barrels are equally capable of producing better than combat accuracy. At 5k rounds, hopefully the same general conclusion can be applied again to both. Frankly, I feel like this is one of those things where the MFG doing the treatment is what matters. If they're worth their salt, any difference in longevity is likely negligible under normal shooting schedules.

He is tired of dealing with imbeciles, and I can hardly blame him. Now multiply that times ar15.com, and the level is astounding. Of course the fish rots from the head down, and that site doesn't seem to moderate anything for the sake of credibility even if what is posted is clearly incorrect.

I saw a thread on ARFCOM recently where someone mentioned he was run off from there too. But, I'm pretty sure he's posted there within the past month. I don't think he's been on here since the borescoped ballistic advantage thread. Full disclosure, I don't believe he was without blame for the attitudes that caused that pissing match to go down. I still hope to see him come back at some point.

[BufordTJustice]

I saw a thread on ARFCOM recently where someone mentioned he was run off from there too. But, I'm pretty sure he's posted there within the past month. I don't think he's been on here since the borescoped ballistic advantage thread. Full disclosure, I don't believe he was without blame for the attitudes that caused that pissing match to go down. I still hope to see him come back at some point.

Having been present for the thread in question, there comes a point when anybody would tire of having their motives attacked and questioned. I think he reached that point.

Did he get surly? Sure, he did. But I think it was all in-kind and proportionate to the B.S. that got flung his way. Just my take.

I cannot blame the college professor for declining to be lectured by his undergraduates.

[Stickman]

H

I cannot blame the college professor for declining to be lectured by his undergraduates.

Well stated.

[Korgs130]

When I take the time watch a video, I want to learn something. I almost always walk away better informed after a GnG video. For me, the 3 x 5 shot group base line is very practical because it's close to something I would do at the range. GnG, thanks for the test!

[Stickman]

When I take the time watch a video, I want to learn something. I almost always walk away better informed after a GnG video. For me, the 3 x 5 shot group base line is very practical because it's close to something I would do at the range. GnG, thanks for the test!

I think 3 five rounds groups give an honest baseline that everyone can understand.