Criterion vs FN CHF Barrels

[GoldnBullet]

Looking for Opinions on Both:

Criterion Barrels vs FN CHF ( taking the profile differences out). Which would be preferable? I have been told by gunsmiths and barrel makers CHF is only a cheap way to pump out barrels. ( The Criterion does have an advantage with the Wylde chamber)

Criterion Test:
https://criterionbarrels.com/media/criterion-barrels-vs-cold-hammer-forged-video/

[Leuthas]

Cold hammer forging (+CMV with chrome lining) is a long proven method for rifling durable and accurate barrels. It is not the cheap way.

[gaijin]

I’m running a couple Criterion barrels; 16” Wylde 5.56 and a 16” .308.
The 5.56 barrel has been exceptionally accurate.

[gunnerblue]

What are your goals?

CHF was indeed originally created to efficiently and economically produce barrels. It is not necessarily “cheap” as far as low quality goes however. My Noveske 12.5” will put ten rounds of my 77 grain match ammo into ~1.25” at 100 yards. I expect my 16” Centurion medium-profile to do the same based on what I’ve read about this particular barrel (both the Noveske and Centurion are FN-made).

In contrast, my 16” Criterion will put the same ten rounds into 0.6 MOA. Unless extreme accuracy is the concern, I’d say either will work for you. If that level of precision is what you’re after, I’d say skip both and get a Bartlein or Krieger from Compass Lake.

[MorphCross]

This is a case of "it depends." You will have Cold hammer forged barrels that are produced out of steel that lasts longer than CMV, is hammered out on mandrels that get changed more frequently, and that go through straightness tolerance checks more stringent than other cold hammer forged barrels.

You will run into button rifling barrel companies that use precision lapping equipment, that use a more precise and expensive process of chrome-lining, and that independently verify their barrels to a standard for accuracy before they ship them out.

Every one of these steps increase cost.

This does not mean that you are getting a bad barrel when you go for something lower priced, just that there was less diligence in the picking and choosing.

Criterion or Colt for button rifled chrome. Hodge, Centurion Arms, Daniel Defense, and probably Noveske for Cold Hammer forged chrome lined.

[Short_barrel_daddy]

What are your thoughts on the 308 barrel? Was looking at it for my maten build

[pinzgauer]

I have been told by gunsmiths and barrel makers CHF is only a cheap way to pump out barrels.

Any smith or mfg who tells you that is at best severely misinformed and at worst intentionally being deceptive.

It certainly was faster when first developed, but not necessarily cheaper, especially when capital equipment costs are factored in.

Many detailed threads on this including gov test white papers, etc.

[MistWolf]

I have been told by gunsmiths and barrel makers CHF is only a cheap way to pump out barrels.

Cold hammer forging was a barrel making process developed during WWII to rapidly turn out barrels economically, once the machinery was amortized. It was the opinion that the process introduced stresses in the steel that would warp the bore as the barrel heated up and cause shot groups to open up. This opinion was so strongly held that Remington kept from becoming public knowledge that the barrels of the Model 700, which has enjoyed a reputation for superior precision going back several decades, for many years used a CHF manufactured barrel.

Today, CHF AR barrels demand a premium price based on their reputation for longer barrel life. There is some debate whether or not that reputation is well deserved or not. But as CHF is meant to rapidly produce barrels economically, I question whether or not they are worth the premium. With the current state of modern barrel making, getting a bad barrel from a reputable company is almost unheard of. There will be little practical difference between the Criterion and FN barrels for the uses the majority of ARs will be put to.

[HelloLarry]

I put a chrome lined Criterion on an AR and shot two shots at 50 yards to get zeroed, then put 3 shots into 1/4" at 100 yds. They DO shoot.

[scooter22]

I have never seen a test/report/experiment that shows CHF is more accurate than a comparable buttoned barrel.

More durable? Maybe. I'd rather spend the money on ammo.

[MegademiC]

I think it would help if you spec’d out accuracy requirements and what you plan to do with the rifle.
Hike, bench shoot, 50yd in machinegun barrel, 3 gun?

[pointblank4445]

If you're going to feed it junk, the Criterion will eat and print well some of the worst 55gr reman I've ever seen. They are an excellent value.

FN CHF's often shoot very well if built properly (2 big problems is people overestimate their building and shooting prowess). Most of mine will print duty ammo 1.25 MOA or better and match is often MOA or better. You're not going to get benchrest-grade groups but they will take you to the limit of 5.56/.223 in an AR and beyond.

To say that CHF barrels can't shoot is a lie. Sako/Tikka, HK and FN have long since proven otherwise.

Someone else said it on the boards earlier...there probably aren't that many "bad" barrels out there. Bad builds, bad shooters, bad ammo, bad optics don't get their fair share of the blame.

[GoldnBullet]

Thanks for the Input. Rainer Arms had a sale on their house branded FN CHF Barrels for $150.

I used to think CHF was worth it but after talking to barrel makers as said before, the only thing you gain is longevity and lose accuracy potential. Criterion CL barrels looked really accurate and more consistent based off their YouTube video: Criterion vs CHF. Tho $140 difference is quite a bit for .4 moa probably.

[vicious_cb]

Thanks for the Input. Rainer Arms had a sale on their house branded FN CHF Barrels for $150.

I used to think CHF was worth it but after talking to barrel makers as said before, the only thing you gain is longevity and lose accuracy potential. Criterion CL barrels looked really accurate and more consistent based off their YouTube video: Criterion vs CHF. Tho $140 difference is quite a bit for .4 moa probably.

That is not true. If you lose accuracy potential then why on earth would FN use their hammer forged barrels in the precision bolt action SPR that is in use with the FBI HRT? As I said before in previous threads CHF barrel manufactures CAN pick and choose how much accuracy potential they want in a CHF blank to have based things like mandrel replacement intervals and how much QC they want to pour into the barrel.

Not to mention Daniel Defense who recently released their precision bolt action using their CHF barrels.

[HelloLarry]

Are the $150 FN barrels listed as match grade? If they aren't, then they probably are not.

[pointblank4445]

Thanks for the Input. Rainer Arms had a sale on their house branded FN CHF Barrels for $150.

I used to think CHF was worth it but after talking to barrel makers as said before, the only thing you gain is longevity and lose accuracy potential. Criterion CL barrels looked really accurate and more consistent based off their YouTube video: Criterion vs CHF. Tho $140 difference is quite a bit for .4 moa probably.

The Rainier FN "mountain" barrels do fine; I've had 2. Mine shoot some ammo extremely well and pretty much hold everything in 1.5 MOA.

Just find something with the chamber/barrel length/profile/gas system you like and go shoot.

[jsbhike]

Everything I have read indicates the barrels should be practically identical in accuracy with similar QC in place. The hammer forging equipment is more costly than traditional barrel making gear, but can be amortized via higher production volume which works for a large manufacturer while most custom shops won't have the volume to absorb the equipment cost.

Other than that, I have heard the chf is more resistant to bursting from obstructions. Not sure how valid that is, but have wondered if that could be the magic sauce in the HK 416 versus Colt M4 video instead of the gas system.

Also, at least in theory, a chf barrel should cost less than a traditional barrel due to the higher production volume. Similar to a forged versus stamped receiver cost difference.

[alx01]

QC has nothing to do with the barrel accuracy - it only confirms that some part falls within a required specification.
Previously (during WWI/WWII years), QC basically determined if barrel falls within a tighter specs it was sent to a sniper line for evaluation. If test fire confirmed its capabilities it was made into a sniper variant of the rifle. If not, back to the generic line.

No magic source in HK416 - it has to do with the overall system design and not particularly one component.

Most accuracy has to do with the processes and standards. Can CHF barrels be more accurate than other types? Absolutely! I've never understood why people claimed one vs the other. If smaller precision oriented companies had an access to experiment more with CHF process I'm 100% sure that they would have perfected it after a few iterations to achieve the same accuracy their existing methods.

However, when we're purely discussing an off the shelf barrel (chf or otherwise) vs a precision oriented product (Criterion/Noveske/Lilja/else) latter will always be better in terms of accuracy and longevity given the same materials. On average out of 100 barrels second type will always outperform the first kind.

Buying a generic mass produced FN/Palmetto/AR Stoner(midway)/Bear Creek *special* on sale and thinking that it will be just as accurate or durable as Criterion or Noveske which costs more 2x-3x more is simply false. Can you be lucky and get a good one? Yes. Can you get a bad Noveske - yes, I've heard people complaining about them as well getting 1.5-2 MOA accuracy.

Although I haven't done the testing, I'm confident that on average with copper jacketed ammo, a Criterion(or Noveske and such) chrome-lined barrel will last at least as long as a generic CHF FN chrome-lined and be more accurate over its lifespan. If you start comparing different steels and linings/coatings, that would not be an accurate comparison. Criterion/Noveske/other quality CL barrel will last longer simply because CL will be more even and chip less vs a budget barrel.

[jsbhike]

Who makes Noveske chf barrels?

[pointblank4445]

Who makes Noveske chf barrels?

lol...FN

[grizzman]

That was an entertaining post.

[MorphCross]

Who makes Noveske chf barrels?


lol...FN

True. But they are manufactured under a set of contracted specifications. The full extent of what those specifications are is I.P. so we only know through what Noveske tells us as well through what we can test and measure on our own.

[pointblank4445]

True. But they are manufactured under a set of contracted specifications. The full extent of what those specifications are is I.P. so we only know through what Noveske tells us as well through what we can test and measure on our own.

Yeah, yeah...

Spec'd FN barrels can vary on minor criteria, but FN is going to maintain a certain standard no matter what. Do some get more TLC/extra steps than others and reflect in the price?...that's the rumor at least. To date, the FN CHF's I've had:
2x Mountain FN's
1x FN factory
2x Hodge Defense Mod 2 FN barrels
1x Noveske
2x Centurion barrels
If you're in the camp that assumed BCM's are FN...then 3x of those too.


Would you like to take a stab at which one shot the worst?...you would probably be surprised.

[vicious_cb]

Yeah, yeah...

Spec'd FN barrels can vary on minor criteria, but FN is going to maintain a certain standard no matter what. Do some get more TLC/extra steps than others and reflect in the price?...that's the rumor at least. To date, the FN CHF's I've had:
2x Mountain FN's
1x FN factory
2x Hodge Defense Mod 2 FN barrels
1x Noveske
2x Centurion barrels
If you're in the camp that assumed BCM's are FN...then 3x of those too.


Would you like to take a stab at which one shot the worst?...you would probably be surprised.

Pretty much, Ive never seen a bad FN barrel. Overgassed yes, but never any major problems.

Im gonna guess BCM which would also mirror my experience in terms of pure accuracy potential.


QC has nothing to do with the barrel accuracy - it only confirms that some part falls within a required specification.
Previously (during WWI/WWII years), QC basically determined if barrel falls within a tighter specs it was sent to a sniper line for evaluation. If test fire confirmed its capabilities it was made into a sniper variant of the rifle. If not, back to the generic line.


You are correct, I simplified it for times sake. The major mfgs that CHF know exactly what to look for weeding out lesser performing barrels from the good ones which is usually consists of some dude at a bench with a bunch of gauges and a bore scope. As you can imagine this would be very time consuming to do for every barrel and where much of the price difference in the different "tiers" of barrels they put out.

[alx01]

I have nothing for or against any companies I've mentioned above or below. I just use them as baseline examples of brand names for the reference in the marketplace.

Key point is not necessarily who makes the barrel FN, DD, HK (i.e. origin of manufacture), but to what standards and what processes as well as post processing. Top end manufacturers do additional individual inspection (not batch testing), hand lapping, concentricity check, possibly crowning, threading, air gauging, hardness check, port drilling location (lands vs grooves), and other things I don't even know about to ensure both consistency and uniformity of an individual unit and across the product line. This is without getting into the discussion of chamber profile, barrel profile and resulting harmonics, rifling profile. All of this increases costs and rejection rate significantly for the premium barrel manufacturer.

Brand X (FN/DD/Green Mountain) barrel from Palmetto (or other value oriented brand) is NOT the same as the barrel you'll get from Noveske/Criterion/Lilja. Customers who buy those typically know the difference and are willing to pay for it. Even if randomly tested barrel performance of Noveske/Criterion is similar to Palmetto/BA premium customer pays for the assurance and guarantee of premium quality, product and customer service.

Here is a recent example which aligns well with my point: https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?203824-Figuring-out-a-new-Faxon-barrel

[pointblank4445]

Pretty much, Ive never seen a bad FN barrel. Overgassed yes, but never any major problems.

Im gonna guess BCM which would also mirror my experience in terms of pure accuracy potential.

Of the 3 BCM's one was a shooter so that brought the average up. The worst overall is the FN factory and since it's a 14.5 pinned middy, I can't confirm nor deny that the Warcomp CT is partly to blame. It inexplicably loves MEN 5.56 55gr. It's an expendable bullet-hose trainer gun with a red dot so It doesn't matter.

Pretty much all of the 16" FN middy's are what some would be considered "overgassed" or at the top end of the desirable gas port size. My old Mountain barrel was a gas ring eatin' MFer. Probably changed those out 2x more than other guns.

Again...it's a $275ish (give or take depending on who's name is on it) barrel. Some people can't accept it for what it is.

[alx01]

Yeah, yeah...

Spec'd FN barrels can vary on minor criteria, but FN is going to maintain a certain standard no matter what. Do some get more TLC/extra steps than others and reflect in the price?...that's the rumor at least. To date, the FN CHF's I've had:
2x Mountain FN's
1x FN factory
2x Hodge Defense Mod 2 FN barrels
1x Noveske
2x Centurion barrels
If you're in the camp that assumed BCM's are FN...then 3x of those too.


Would you like to take a stab at which one shot the worst?...you would probably be surprised.

It makes sense and I think you are right on the FN. They are large enough and probably have a well established process not to bend over backwards for a small order of a few thousand barrels to save costs. I suspect it will cost them more to adjust the process to a lesser quality than savings they'll pass on to the customer (customer being a company OEM'ing barrels from FN).

[vicious_cb]

Of the 3 BCM's one was a shooter so that brought the average up. The worst overall is the FN factory and since it's a 14.5 pinned middy, I can't confirm nor deny that the Warcomp CT is partly to blame. It inexplicably loves MEN 5.56 55gr. It's an expendable bullet-hose trainer gun with a red dot so It doesn't matter.

Pretty much all of the 16" FN middy's are what some would be considered "overgassed" or at the top end of the desirable gas port size. My old Mountain barrel was a gas ring eatin' MFer. Probably changed those out 2x more than other guns.

Again...it's a $275ish (give or take depending on who's name is on it) barrel. Some people can't accept it for what it is.

Im curious if you are seeing improved accuracy out of the Hodge and Centurions. Rumint says they are spec'd with tapered bores to improved accuracy.

[MorphCross]

Who makes Noveske chf barrels?


lol...FN


Would you like to take a stab at which one shot the worst?...you would probably be surprised.

Given the tone either:
One of the Hodge.
The Noveske.
One of the Centurion.

Not so much surprised. As with all things large sample sizes from a single production run, or even under a single contract order would be telling. Barrel purchases strung out over a period of years with no context to quantity purchased at a given time.

Just saw the disclosed reply. It seems I must feast on crow tonight.

[pointblank4445]

It makes sense and I think you are right on the FN. They are large enough and probably have a well established process not to bend over backwards for a small order of a few thousand barrels to save costs. I suspect it will cost them more to adjust the process to a lesser quality than savings they'll pass on to the customer (customer being a company OEM'ing barrels from FN).


Just out of curiosity - which was the worst performer FN for you and which one was the best?

The Hodge barrels is the widest varying to the FN lightweight design that's seen in the Centurion, Noveske, and others. The Mountain is the same less the lightened profile froward the gas block journal.

So you want to know performance...Let's say:
Excellent: MOA with 2+ factory loads with sub MOA potential
Good: 1-1.25 MOA with at least 1 load, no more than 1.5 MOA w/ quality factory
"Meh": 1.5ish MOA consistency
Poor: 2 MOA is all you're going to get

The Mountain's: 1 Good, 1 Meh
BCM: 1 Good, 1 Meh, 1 Poor
FN: 1 Poor
Centurion: 2 Good
Hodge: 1 Excellent, 1 Good (at least...limited range time)
Noveske: 1 Meh

Pretty much all had a go with at least a 1-4x or 1-6x and had a Geissele trigger and free-float rail (KAC, Larue, DD, Geissele or Hodge/MEGA) and BH Match ammo at the least. Again, I can't confirm nor deny subtleties in tolerance stacking or different muzzle devices affecting accuracy in a significant ways.

To put it plainly, 1/2 of the lot could out-shoot my Colts consistently...the other 1/2 not so much.

HK...now I'll admit I'm not the fan I once was, but they have always shot around MOA with Hornady or BH. I actually had one out-shoot a Noveske stainless with more than a few different factory loads. What's funny is they are slow when you chrono them...they pretty much are about 100fps slower than their DI Colt counterpart.

[alx01]

Goldmine of information! Thank you. Very interesting to know your experience and perspective. I really appreciate it.



The Hodge barrels is the widest varying to the FN lightweight design that's seen in the Centurion, Noveske, and others. The Mountain is the same less the lightened profile froward the gas block journal.

So you want to know performance...Let's say:
Excellent: MOA with 2+ factory loads with sub MOA potential
Good: 1-1.25 MOA with at least 1 load, no more than 1.5 MOA w/ quality factory
"Meh": 1.5ish MOA consistency
Poor: 2 MOA is all you're going to get

The Mountain's: 1 Good, 1 Meh
BCM: 1 Good, 1 Meh, 1 Poor
FN: 1 Poor
Centurion: 2 Good
Hodge: 1 Excellent, 1 Good (at least...limited range time)
Noveske: 1 Meh

Pretty much all had a go with at least a 1-4x or 1-6x and had a Geissele trigger and free-float rail (KAC, Larue, DD, Geissele or Hodge/MEGA) and BH Match ammo at the least. Again, I can't confirm nor deny subtleties in tolerance stacking or different muzzle devices affecting accuracy in a significant ways.

To put it plainly, 1/2 of the lot could out-shoot my Colts consistently...the other 1/2 not so much.

HK...now I'll admit I'm not the fan I once was, but they have always shot around MOA with Hornady or BH. I actually had one out-shoot a Noveske stainless with more than a few different factory loads. What's funny is they are slow when you chrono them...they pretty much are about 100fps slower than their DI Colt counterpart.

[pointblank4445]

Im curious if you are seeing improved accuracy out of the Hodge and Centurions. Rumint says they are spec'd with tapered bores to improved accuracy.

While not solely the best ones, they seem to be the most consistent.

I am regretful that those goons at ADCO ruined my heavier "medium" profile Centurion FN...I wish I could have done more testing on that thing. Knowing now some of the details I would overlook back then, I think I could do it more justice now.

I've heard the whole "tapered bore" thing from both FN and HK before. Cut-down's have shot well, the precision community used to argue in circles about if a .299 "tight bore" mattered for 308, and some have said the taper is a byproduct of the CHF process to remove the mandrill and is just cleverly marketed as a benefit. Hard to say. I'm oldschool and say that profile matters too. At the very least, I have confidence in Jim and Monty and their prospective missions.

I dunno...the older I get and the more guns I complete, the more I/we overthink some of the unimportant voodoo and don't pay enough attention to the little things that stack up and bite us. Like I said...probably not as many bad barrels as there are bad builds, bad shooters, bad ammo, or just plain bad days at the range...but the barrel takes the blame.

[pointblank4445]

For the record, I'm more than likely going to piece together an upper with a Criterion hybrid 14.5 middy. So maybe I'll be able to add that for a direct comparison in time.

[jsbhike]

I should have stated equal specifications traditional versus chf instead of QC.

On the tightness, as I have seen mentioned a few times, the tightest a chamber or bore can ever be is when the tooling is close to it's end of life.


Also, do any companies that offer chf and traditional barrels that are similar in materials and intended use ever sell the chf barrels for a lower cost than the traditional? I am not aware of any where that is the case.

[Biggy]

I want a true 5.56 NATO spec chamber in my fighting rifle.

[pointblank4445]

I want a true 5.56 NATO spec chamber in my fighting rifle.

If you want more accuracy out of a factory chambering, you're probably going to have to go with some sort of compromise of a chamber...Wylde, Mod 0, or some of the varying "5.56 match" chambers that all closely relate to the Wylde.

But for the most part, I agree.

[Defaultmp3]

I've heard the whole "tapered bore" thing from both FN and HK before. Cut-down's have shot well, the precision community used to argue in circles about if a .299 "tight bore" mattered for 308, and some have said the taper is a byproduct of the CHF process to remove the mandrill and is just cleverly marketed as a benefit. Hard to say. I'm oldschool and say that profile matters too. At the very least, I have confidence in Jim and Monty and their prospective missions.Just some more info:

I was given a link so I figured I’d come over and respond.
Looks like you guys pretty much have the concept. The bore gets slightly smaller as it moves to the muzzle end of the barrel.
I did not come up with the concept and it is not new. So why have you not seen taper bores in the AR platform before?? Probably because using hammer forged barrels is a fairly new thing in the AR rifles. Taper bore is something that is only realistically done by the hammer forging process. The mandrel that is used to put the rifling in the barrel is slightly tapered and this leave the tapered dimension in the barrels as the forging machine beats the blank around the mandrel.
So what does it offer you? Taper bore gives you a slight boost in velocity over a non-taper bore barrel and it help negate any potential accuracy issues caused by chroming the bore since it is not always a consistent thickness.
Taper bore does not extend the life of the barrel our barrels last longer because they are hammer forged and made from a different spec material that was engineered for machine guns. Hammer forging work hardens the material and the chrome is thicker than a normal barrel. The barrel steel is the same used on the MAG58, 240, M249, MK46, and MK48 machine guns it is also the same barrel material and process used on the 1/2moa sniper rifles FN won the FBI contract with and that are still in service. The FN SPR sniper rifles use hammer forged hard chrome lined taper bore barrels to get ½ moa accuracy and this is the same barrel specs and processes I have done to my barrels.
So who else uses this?
Obviously FN, who has the time, money, and resources to do the research to find this type of barrel steel and proof out this type of process and specs. FN hands down manufactures the best machine guns in the world and there isn’t even a close second in this field there isn’t even any two companies you can combine that has as much institutional knowledge as they do in making beltfed machine guns.
HK also taper bores their hammer forged barrels for all their rifles.
So why do I use it?
Well I didn’t really think much about hammer forging and taper bore before I was sent to work doing combat systems development and operational testing for SOCOM. There I worked on several weapons programs one that used these barrels on one of the rifles we were testing. I got to observes millions of dollars worth of R&D and testing that was done and got to see hundreds of thousands of rounds run through these weapons and got to see firsthand that these barrels did indeed last allot longer and on a whole shoot better than standard button rifled barrels that were chrome lined. The difference was significant and I wondered why the hell no one made these barrels for the M4/AR rifles so I figured I would bring them to market myself. I have over 20 years of service and have shot out plenty of M4’s in my time and can with full confidence say this is a improvement I’ve seen it first hand.

Thanks
Monty

Source: http://www.weaponevolution.com/forum/showthread.php?2765-Centurion-Arms-barrels&p=25608#post25608

I have heard of a complete Hodge Mod 2 upper shooting 4 MOA at 100 using 77 gr BHA, with multiple shooters trying, so lemons clearly exist.

[pointblank4445]

Just some more info:


Source: http://www.weaponevolution.com/forum/showthread.php?2765-Centurion-Arms-barrels&p=25608#post25608

I have heard of a complete Hodge Mod 2 upper shooting 4 MOA at 100 using 77 gr BHA, with multiple shooters trying, so lemons clearly exist.

Damn...been many a moon since I've seen something shoot that bad that wasn't M855 or Federal 193. Don't suppose you recall the muzzle device on it...

[alx01]

reference for all bargain hunters out there: https://aimsurplus.com/bear-creek-arsenal-16in-416r-ss-5-56-midlength-barrel

Bear Creek Arsenal currently on sale from a reputable vendor. $49.95, 16" 416R stainless steel mid-length, government profile.

"All Finished Barrels go through a 100% Inspection Process. Inspections Equipment includes CMMs and Air Gauges for the Bores. BCA's expectations is that our Barrels, 16 inch or longer, will hold a 1.000" MOA at 100 yards with appropriate ammo and shooting techniques."

I'm really serious about just buying one of those out of stupid curiosity and giving it to somebody like pointblank4445 to test. probably going to be 4 MOA barrel, but who knows. i'm even surprised they can sell them for that cheap out of 416R steel.

[Defaultmp3]

Damn...been many a moon since I've seen something shoot that bad that wasn't M855 or Federal 193. Don't suppose you recall the muzzle device on it... No idea. The story was told to me by a student who was with me in a Blowers class, who had witnessed this issue at a Defoor class he had attended a just a few weeks prior.

I also had a friend that was averaging 4 MOA out of his new SR-15 Mod 2, using various factory match ammo; using his handloads, he was able to get down to 2 MOA on occasion. He had to send that back to KAC, who said it was due to a burr at the gas port. I believe after coming back from KAC he was getting around an MOA with factory match ammo.

[elephantrider]

Pretty much all of the 16" FN middy's are what some would be considered "overgassed" or at the top end of the desirable gas port size. My old Mountain barrel was a gas ring eatin' MFer. Probably changed those out 2x more than other guns.

Again...it's a $275ish (give or take depending on who's name is on it) barrel. Some people can't accept it for what it is.

The Centurion 16" barrels (and pretty sure the 14.5s did as well) come with 0.080" ports, which is a tad too large IMO. Did you happen to check the port size on that Mountain barrel? If it isn't related to excess gas drive from the barrel, I'd assume gas ring issues are due to the bolt carrier inside diameter.

[elephantrider]

Looking for Opinions on Both:
Criterion Barrels vs FN CHF ( taking the profile differences out). Which would be preferable? That all depends on what your performance, and purchase priorities are. What do you want out of the barrel? There have been a ton of responses on this topic, but little info on what the OP actually wants/needs.



I have been told by gunsmiths and barrel makers CHF is only a cheap way to pump out barrels. ( The Criterion does have an advantage with the Wylde chamber) That's not true, and not even remotely the whole story on one barrel mfg method vs another, and really has little bearing on an AR15 barrel purchase choice anyway. If it were true the market would be flooded with CHF barrels for under $100. However, that is not what we see. We see lots of bargain bin barrels that are typically button rifled. The CHF barrels are usually the most expensive, and make up a minority of barrels on the market. AGAIN, what matters is what you want/need out of a barrel.

[pointblank4445]

No idea. The story was told to me by a student who was with me in a Blowers class, who had witnessed this issue at a Defoor class he had attended a just a few weeks prior.

I also had a friend that was averaging 4 MOA out of his new SR-15 Mod 2, using various factory match ammo; using his handloads, he was able to get down to 2 MOA on occasion. He had to send that back to KAC, who said it was due to a burr at the gas port. I believe after coming back from KAC he was getting around an MOA with factory match ammo.

Here's one of the Hodge barrels earlier today. I call it the Au Mock 1.75 since I pieced it together and it's somewhere between a Mod 1.5 and 2. I swapped out the scopes and did a 12-round confirmation after resetting my elevation (the windage was frozen) at the end. BHA red box 77gr.

Given the cold/wind, 4x scope, off the pack, and circumventing a 4' snow drift on my half-dozen trips down range during the zero process (because I didn't bring my spotting scope or binos)...it wasn't bad

I called shot #2 was called wide right, shot #5 was called wide left.

https://i.imgur.com/oTX9yYq.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/sKoGAik.png

https://i.imgur.com/q3KjH4h.jpg

[pointblank4445]

The Centurion 16" barrels (and pretty sure the 14.5s did as well) come with 0.080" ports, which is a tad too large IMO. Did you happen to check the port size on that Mountain barrel? If it isn't related to excess gas drive from the barrel, I'd assume gas ring issues are due to the bolt carrier inside diameter.

I never checked that barrel; I wasn't in tune enough to gas port sizes at that point. That was back when people were still debating on whether 14.5 middy's were GTG or not if that tells you how long ago that was. I also used a lighter buffer and spring than I would now and the carrier in that gun was from a vendor I don't normally use. Probably all that and a diet of full-strength loads could've added up, but it never skipped a beat.

[calvin118]

I have owned several 16 inch Centurion barrels and the ports were all smaller than . 080, .078-9 as best I could measure. That said I think too much is made of relatively small differences in gas port size. I used a .073 insert to reduce one of the uppers to an equivalent of .075 gas port. I shot it side-by-side with an identically configured upper and lower combination without the gas port modification. I could definitely tell the difference in perceived bolt momentum in recoil but there was absolutely no difference in speed or accuracy on a timer in any drill that I tried, and I burned through a whole lot of factory m193 ammo trying to find a difference.

[sentinel77]

What are your goals?

CHF was indeed originally created to efficiently and economically produce barrels. It is not necessarily “cheap” as far as low quality goes however. My Noveske 12.5” will put ten rounds of my 77 grain match ammo into ~1.25” at 100 yards. I expect my 16” Centurion medium-profile to do the same based on what I’ve read about this particular barrel (both the Noveske and Centurion are FN-made).

In contrast, my 16” Criterion will put the same ten rounds into 0.6 MOA. Unless extreme accuracy is the concern, I’d say either will work for you. If that level of precision is what you’re after, I’d say skip both and get a Bartlein or Krieger from Compass Lake.

Which Criterion barrel did you get (hybrid or pencil contour)? And did you need their bcm headspaced bolt to achieve their advertised accuracy claims?