Quote Originally Posted by Thomas M-4 View Post
The Sig 550 is supposed to have a nitride treated barrel it has been done in Europe for years.

I don't care for LWRC but nitride treated barrels and hammer forged barrels all are supposed to extend usable barrel life. I have not seen any documentation that the nitride treatment will out last chrome lining.
With salt bath nitrocarburization there is "no need" for the cold hammer forging - or stainless steel barrels.

Why?

No need for the several million dollar tooling though one can make a barrel per minute with CHF process at or near final dimensions. Besides, cut rifling produces a more accurate rifle and grooving with the least amount of stresses.

One can treat stainless steel but it actually loses corrosion resistance from this process and it won't be as hard as the chromoly steel (nor as tough for 416) and it's slightly more difficult to machine - surface speed is less so it's cut at a slower rate.

With the tougher, less expensive steel with less internal stresses (and cheaper tooling) I can then use ferritic nitrocarburization to make the surface nearly impervious to corrosion and the chamber, land and grooves should be tougher than hard chrome without the issues of geometric anomalies and flaking.

Look at H&K, Sig Sauer, Glock, Walther and FNHUSA - all carbon steel; and S&W for martensitic stainless steel. In Europe, several use the process (I believe) - and they also use different (read "better") alloys like 9310.

I was told by Accuracy International at SHOT 2006 that they nitrocarburize their barrels. I'm told they hold their accuracy for "well over 15,000 rounds." I don't own one so I cannot give you firsthand results.

I have experimental results comparing ferritic nitrocarburization, Tungsten DLC and hard chrome somewhere in storage. I'll try to ferret it out.