View Full Version : Real evidence supporting hammer forged barrels????
Is there any real evidence stating the superiority of hammer forged barrels over regular AR barrels??? I can get 1 MOA out of many of my ARs at 1-200M. These are standard weight barrels.
Just wanting to know if the cost is worth it and am looking for data, not conjecture. Seems the barrel weight would have more to do with accuracy over hammer forging.
Let me have your experiences.
Whootsinator
12-04-10, 14:24
I don't think many people who actually know what they're talking about even bother arguing that hammer forged barrels are more ACCURATE/PRECISE than barrels with cut rifling. Usually their argument is that they are MORE DURABLE/TOUGHER than barrels with cut rifling.
While not specific to barrels there is plenty of evidence on the net on hammer forging and how it affects metal. One could infer that any pros or cons would also apply to barrels.
Just from a quick browse it looks like hammer forging deforms the crystalline structure of metal to the shape of whatever is being forged. I would guess this means more strength by having a solid crystalline structure over any form of cutting which would interrupt the grain of the metal.
The above may be completely wrong but its what i picked up from 5 minutes of browsing a couple of reference materials online. The actual difference between barrel types is not something i can comment on but the reasoning behind hammer forging is solid.
Belmont31R
12-04-10, 15:34
Hammer Forging
Again, it was the demands of war that was responsible for the development of this process - only it was done by the other side. Hammer forging was developed in Germany in 1939. Here a drilled barrel, rather than being reamed, is honed to give it a very fine interior finish. Then it is placed on a tungsten carbide mandrel that has the entire rifling pattern ground in relief into its surface. The barrel/mandrel combo is then placed between two opposing power hammers and rotated. The hammers literally beat the barrel into the mandrel’s pattern. I’m told a barrel will actually grow around a third of its length during this process. It usually takes around three minutes for the rifling process to be completed. As you would think, this method produces tremendous stresses in the barrel that have to be relieved through heat treating.
The advantages of hammer forging is the fact that the interior finish is very good, and the bore surface becomes work hardened in the beating process. The result is a very durable, long lasting barrel. Modern hammer forging has progressed to the point that even the chamber can be included in the mandrel pattern. These machines are very large, complex, and expensive however. So the small custom barrel shops are pretty much eliminated from using them.
Additionally, some say that the induced stresses are so severe in this process that they never can be entirely eliminated. As a result, the bench rest crowd won’t touch a hammer forged barrel. However, I can’t help but wonder how valid this belief actually is, and whether anyone has actually tried it. Remington barrels, which always had a reputation for accuracy, used to be hammer forged, including those used in the XP-100. I know I always had excellent results with original XP barrels. Indeed, in Europe, hammer forging is the standard. Sako, Tika, H&K, Steyer, and Sauer all use hammer forged barrels. I’d hardly call their products junk.
http://www.lasc.us/RangingShotBarrelMakingFeature.htm
http://technology.calumet.purdue.edu/met/higley/NotesOnHammerForgedBarrels.pdf
http://technology.calumet.purdue.edu/met/higley/rmfireHammerForgedBarrels.pdf
Thanks for the information.
Is there any real evidence stating the superiority of hammer forged barrels over regular AR barrels??? I can get 1 MOA out of many of my ARs at 1-200M. These are standard weight barrels.
Seems the barrel weight would have more to do with accuracy over hammer forging.
Thats like asking if you can fit more apples in a Ferrari or a Corvette. While you can use both for hauling apples, its not really the main reason most people buy them.
CHF barrels are known for durability and longevity, with good accuracy being a bonus. Military testing has shown the hammer forged barrels hold up longer.
To my understanding, there is no question about the quality of Hammer Forging when it comes to the "toughness" of the material.
My only question as of late. Can somebody explain to me how Chrome Lining may negate the benefits of having a Hammer Forged bore?
What I really mean is, "Is there a difference in the bore between a cut or forged barrel when you take chrome lining into consideration?"
ETA:
I got myself thinking about it. Is the "increase" in accuracy of a CHF a resonance thing? I mean, I know it's not going to be "on par" with a stainless barrel. But surely the bore of a CHF vs Cut barrel are the same because of the Chrome Lining.
To my understanding, there is no question about the quality of Hammer Forging when it comes to the "toughness" of the material.
My only question as of late. Can somebody explain to me how Chrome Lining may negate the benefits of having a Hammer Forged bore?
What I really mean is, "Is there a difference in the bore between a cut or forged barrel when you take chrome lining into consideration?"
ETA:
I got myself thinking about it. Is the "increase" in accuracy of a CHF a resonance thing? I mean, I know it's not going to be "on par" with a stainless barrel. But surely the bore of a CHF vs Cut barrel are the same because of the Chrome Lining.
There are pry smarter people than me on this, but barrels wear out most quickly in the throat and gas port. The underlying material is key in how quickly these two places wear.
They ought to be nitriding barrels anyway, as the chrome burns off.
variablebinary
12-05-10, 04:36
They ought to be nitriding barrels anyway, as the chrome burns off.
It makes no sense to go CHF.
Nitride CMV barrels makes much more sense than going CHF if you don't already have a CHF pipeline in place, which most don't.
Suwannee Tim
12-05-10, 12:35
The toughness of a material is important only if it is subject to failure due to impact loading. Provided that the strength of a material is sufficient that it is not deformed plastically, strong enough is strong enough and stronger than necessary gains little advantage. Descriptions of the hammer forging process and comparisons of post-forming material properties don't really prove that hammer forging is "better". Let me draw an analogy, say you built two structures, one of A36 structural steel plate and the other of quenched and tempered tool steel, the QT structure is not necessarily "better" as it accomplishes the task no better than the A36 structure. First, you have to define "better" and two obvious candidates are, last longer and more accurate. It would be interesting to see some evidence or even informed opinion on those specifics.
Suwannee Tim
12-05-10, 12:38
Regarding plating, plating can make a rough surface smoother or a smooth surface rougher, depending on a lot of real complex science, much of which is poorly or not at all understood.
Suwannee Tim
12-05-10, 12:39
They ought to be nitriding barrels anyway, as the chrome burns off.
The nitrogen in the powder nitrides the barrel with each shot. I just made that up.:sarcastic: Who knows, maybe it does!
Note that no matter how it is alloyed, iron is still iron for the most part. For example, the Young's modulus of any iron alloy, A36, 316, O1, all of them, is about 30X10^6. Similarly, the thermal conductivity, melting point and specific heat of all iron alloys are about the same. These properties have great impact on erosion resistance. Chrome on the other hand is not iron and higher melting point than iron which makes it dramatically more resistant to flame erosion in rifle barrels. Nitriding and chrome plating produce very different results.
First, you have to define "better" and two obvious candidates are, last longer and more accurate. It would be interesting to see some evidence or even informed opinion on those specifics.
I couldn't agree more. I have no doubts that the science behind the process is more than proven. But for it to make the barrels last longer, we'd be talking about the bore. To my knowledge the chrome lining is what we talk about in that regard. However, I don't know near enough about precision barrels to speak about if they have the capability to be more accurate.
Robb Jensen
12-05-10, 12:51
Is there any real evidence stating the superiority of hammer forged barrels over regular AR barrels??? I can get 1 MOA out of many of my ARs at 1-200M. These are standard weight barrels.
Just wanting to know if the cost is worth it and am looking for data, not conjecture. Seems the barrel weight would have more to do with accuracy over hammer forging.
Let me have your experiences.
My experiences (shooting ARs since 1975).
General experience: Stainless lasts 1/2 as long as chrome lined barrels. Hammer forged 11595-E chrome lined barrels last almost double that of standard 4140 chrome lined barrels we're talking throat erosion and gas port erosion not unsafe to fire wear.
AR barrels become shotguns as far as accuracy essentially long before they become unsafe to shoot.
I find hammer forged chrome lined barrels to shoot much more accurately than non hammer forged barrels (generally 1/2-3/4MOA). This is due to the way in which these barrels are chromed vs. it being the hammer forging. Hammer forging makes barrels last longer. Chome lining generally hampers accuracy. Lets just say a certain company knows how to make match grade chrome lined barrels.
i really don't know much about nitride. is it thinner or thicker than chrome generally?
at some point any surface treatment/coating is going to burn off near the chamber.
as i understand it, hammer forged barrels have a better grain structure on the inside of the barrel, making them harder and usually smoother than cut rifled barrels. Much like the way a forged part is generally stronger than a CNC machined part.
ForTehNguyen
12-05-10, 13:23
i really don't know much about nitride. is it thinner or thicker than chrome generally?
at some point any surface treatment/coating is going to burn off near the chamber.
as i understand it, hammer forged barrels have a better grain structure on the inside of the barrel, making them harder and usually smoother than cut rifled barrels. Much like the way a forged part is generally stronger than a CNC machined part.
nitride doesnt add to the metals dimension unlike chrome lining. Nitriding is a surface treatment that is harder and it wont chip off because the surface metal itself is permanently changed
nitride doesnt add to the metals dimension unlike chrome lining. Nitriding is a surface treatment that is harder and it wont chip off because the surface metal itself is permanently changed
oh alright, along the lines of glock's tenifer then.
any idea how deeply this penetrates the metal? I believe tenifer is about .002" but not exactly sure. Regardless, at the throat of the barrel, there will be some erosion, so the nitride in that area will have a finite lifespan.
Given better grain structure with cold forging, wouldn't nitride work better on these barrels? With chrome I'd be tempted to say it wouldn't really matter, as you're mostly wearing the chrome surface, not the underlying metal. At least from a wear standpoint.
So what exactly is the argument for HF barrels then? "It's tougher"...does that mean longer barrel life in terms of rounds fired? Or does that mean I can use my barrel as a jack handle?
edit: just read the post a few up....so its a barrel life issue.
To be honest, it's a way to get us to spend more money. You cannot quantify the difference in barrel life, therefore it must be quite small.
Additionally, the hammer forging causes the metal to be under high stress which can enhance heating related issues. Reason benchrest shooters won't touch them. The zero drifts more.
The Germans were the first to hammer forge barrels more than 60 years ago. If it made that much difference it would have become more common.
The cost of the forging machines is a barrier to entry, hence not every one does it.
Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk
Well...the cost is more a function of the machine costs and the relative volume that manufacturer produces. For example: a BCM CHF barrel costs a lot more than their standard, but one by DD is comparable to any other quality standard rifled chrome lined barrel.
SpankMonkey
12-09-10, 19:50
Where's Kino? He would know!
Cincinnatus
12-09-10, 20:18
If it made that much difference it would have become more common.
No. It is the cost. Not just any company can afford the equipment involved.
See this thread for more info.
http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=756
and
http://technology.calumet.purdue.edu/met/higley/
To be honest, it's a way to get us to spend more money. You cannot quantify the difference in barrel life, therefore it must be quite small.
Except for reports like Robb Jensen above.
Colt Canada:
• Hammer Forged Barrel. The long-life chrome lined cold hammer forged barrel is the most advanced and durable barrel available.
HK:
To improve reliability, service life, and operator safety during obstructed bore occurrences or after extreme extended firing sessions, the HK416 uses barrels produced by Heckler & Koch’s famous cold hammer forging process.
The highest quality steel is used in this unique manufacturing process producing a barrel that provides superior accuracy for greater than 20,000 rounds with minimal degradation of accuracy and muzzle velocity.
Brig. Gen. Mark Brown, commander of Program Executive Office Soldier:
Another upgrade under consideration is a “hammer-forged” barrel. While there is no timeline in place, Brown said switching to this specific manufacturing process could yield M4 barrels that “have a longer life.”
You could also look up the service life of certain belt fed machine guns that have hammer forged barrels and see they exceed the expected life of an M4 barrel under hard use.
I say there's plenty of info out there but the exact number of rounds longer life is going to vary based on type of use. It may or may not be worth it for you, that depends on how hard you shoot, how often you replace a barrel, and how much it costs (outside of the barrel itself) to get your barrel replaced.
I still do not understand how a Chrome Lined Hammer Forged Barrel can have a longer life?
Isn't the Chrome Lining going to wear out before the barrel sees any deterioration? Even under heavy use, we're not talking about M249's here.
ETA: I speek for myself when I say I'm not talking about AR 15s that are not going to see heavy use similar to a machine gun. I'm quite sure that Hammer Forging the barrels of belt fed weapons is absolutely neccessary. I just want somebody to tell me how a Chrome Lined Semi-Auto Barrel lasts longer if it is Hammer Forged. I'm not a doubter, just inquisitive.
Yes most major Firearm manufacturers utilize hammer forging techniques when producing barrels.
Let me start by first stating that both techniques generate fantastic barrels. I've shot Kreiger that hammer forge and Douglas and Wilson that perform button rifling.
Most manufacturers that generate primarily barrels use a button rifling technique. The major difference is in the manufacturing process. Hammer forging barrels is quicker.
If hammer forged barrels were so superior why would specialty companies not utilize hammer forging???? It really doesn't matter that much. Both methods produce outstanding barrels.
The barrel is going to wear primarily at the throat, gas port, and muzzle. Deterioration in these areas are what causes rifle barrels to become useless shotguns.
The main advantage of Chrome is being much harder and impervious than 4150 steel, will hold up to wear a lot longer giving a much longer effective lifespan of a barrel. Its also much easier to clean as powder residue and lead will not work into the pores, like it does in bare steel.
However a chrome lined barrel can still wear and reduce accuracy quickly depending on the use its subjected to. Most wear occurs in the throat, where the most heat and contact friction is, if the wear is sufficient it can cause the bullet to be less stable as it travels down the barrel, even chrome lined rifles will have reduced practical accuracy life in full auto use.
Chrome lining also does not protect the crown, which can have a major impact of accuracy of a barrel.
The bottom line is, for any utility or defense rifle there is no reason to not opt for chrome lining where offered. But its not necessary either.
Robb Jensen
12-09-10, 21:22
Yes most major Firearm manufacturers utilize hammer forging techniques when producing barrels.
Let me start by first stating that both techniques generate fantastic barrels. I've shot Kreiger that hammer forge and Douglas and Wilson that perform button rifling.
Most manufacturers that generate primarily barrels use a button rifling technique. The major difference is in the manufacturing process. Hammer forging barrels is quicker.
If hammer forged barrels were so superior why would specialty companies not utilize hammer forging???? It really doesn't matter that much. Both methods produce outstanding barrels.
The barrel is going to wear primarily at the throat, gas port, and muzzle. Deterioration in these areas are what causes rifle barrels to become useless shotguns.
The main advantage of Chrome is being much harder and impervious than 4150 steel, will hold up to wear a lot longer giving a much longer effective lifespan of a barrel. Its also much easier to clean as powder residue and lead will not work into the pores, like it does in bare steel.
However a chrome lined barrel can still wear and reduce accuracy quickly depending on the use its subjected to. Most wear occurs in the throat, where the most heat and contact friction is, if the wear is sufficient it can cause the bullet to be less stable as it travels down the barrel, even chrome lined rifles will have reduced practical accuracy life in full auto use.
Chrome lining also does not protect the crown, which can have a major impact of accuracy of a barrel.
The bottom line is, for any utility or defense rifle there is no reason to not opt for chrome lining where offered. But its not necessary either.
Very likely cost.
The bottom line is, for any utility or defense rifle there is no reason to not opt for chrome lining where offered. But its not necessary either.
I didn't know if you were talking to me? So sorry if my post is off base.
I couldn't agree with you more. To me, there are two types of barrels in ARs. Stainless Steel Match Barrels, and Chrome Lined Combat Barrels.
I also understand how Hammer Forging is definitely a quality way to make barrels.
What I don't know is.... How is a Chrome Lined Hammer Forged barrel "better" than a Cut Barrel.
Don't get me wrong, I don't see a down side to Hammer Forged Barrels. But I also don't understand what all of the hoopla is about. In my mind Chrome Lining makes any benefit of Hammer Forging moot.
If hammer forged barrels were so superior why would specialty companies not utilize hammer forging????
Because hammer forging is economically reasonable only for high volume production. Cost of equipment is prohibitive for small volume manufacturers. In Europe most of high volume manufacturers use CHF or at least have CHF barrels in offer (this include HK, SAKO/Tikka, Steyr/Mannliher, FN, Merkel, Beretta, FB Radom, Lothar Walther and several others). When making high volumes it is significantly cheaper to make good quality, precise barrel than in traditional methods. Of course making "average" CHF barrel is even more cheap. As with traditional barrel it can be made good or poor. CHF barrel depends on material use, quality of finish on pre-blank before forging (drilling and honing), quality of mandrel (shape, surface quality, wear) and forging process (force, duration). So one CHF barrel not necessary equals other so they should not be assessed generally.
ETA Generally chrome lined CHF barrels are made only because... customers want chrome lined barrels. When some 15 years ago FB Radom offered Polish Army that they will fit Beryl rifles with nitrided CHF barrel Army responded "but they are not chrome lined!". So military rifles have chrome lined CHF barrels, while civilian version is nitrided CHF. Same for HK - HK416 uses chrome lined barrel, because military wants chrome lined period! Civilian model (MR223) does not have chrome lining. Remember that chrome lining was introduced by Soviet Union to allow make barrels from poor steel and for soldier who can not maintain weapons with corrosive ammo. It then "conquered" west because allowed to make longer living barrel cheaper. But now we use advanced alloys and non-corrosive ammo. But military is so used to chrome lining... and most of people think that military can not be wrong...
In US several factors that make CHF catch slower is that there is large number of relatively small manufacturers, that can not afford CHF process. Also due to nature of US gun laws barrel is only "consumable part", that is cheap and easy to replace, so durability factor is less important.
Surprisingly, while US market is full of novelties in accessories and equipment, on the other hand is very conservative both in design (largely dominated by 60-100+ years old designs) and used manufacturing processes. And when marked did not demand it, only small number of manufacturers decided to go for it. Just "outsider" POV.
I need quantification of improvement in barrel quality to justify spending additional dollars, not conjecture. With a chrome lining I do not see the advantages. I think what it does is lower the unit barrel cost if one can afford the forging machinery. They save money through greater production rates, not that it makes the barrel so much better.
Then they feed you how much better it is for such and such and get another $100 profit out of you. I don't see the reason to pay more for these different manufacturing processes.
You can't say I'm going to get another 5k rounds out of a barrel b/c of the forging. One can easily get 10k rounds out of most chrome-lined AR barrels if not more. When the chrome wears off then you are into barrel steel. The two are bonded and hence one. It's not really just a lining. It's not going to chip off. Chrome will extend barrel life, ease cleaning, and resist corrosion. Chrome lining makes perfect sense. I'm just not sold on the hammer forging technique.
If that isn't obvious...:sarcastic:
They ought to be nitriding barrels anyway, as the chrome burns off.
You mean like LWRC?
Just one of the reasons they're my favorite AR (yea, even if they are pistions).
I need quantification of improvement in barrel quality to justify spending additional dollars, not conjecture. With a chrome lining I do not see the advantages. I think what it does is lower the unit barrel cost if one can afford the forging machinery. They save money through greater production rates, not that it makes the barrel so much better.
If that isn't obvious...:sarcastic:
That's fine - there are companies that have the ammunition budgets to do exactly this kind of testing, and oddly enough all of them sell chrome lined hammer forged barrels whenever the perceived mission calls for maximum lifetime of accurate fire.
Nobody is saying that the stainless match rifles can't produce tighter groups, but instead that the CHF/CL units can still be producing 'pretty good' groups much longer.
A more valid point to be made would be this: for most shooters who are new to the issue, the odds of them achieving a high enough round count to care, and still wanting to use the same barrel are astronomical at best, and in practical terms, there are lot of CHF barrels sitting on hardly any use while guys out there with cheaper cut rifled units can handily outperform them.
Cincinnatus
12-09-10, 22:39
This whole topic has already been discussed much. Here are some links to those threads:
http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=59403
http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=54614
The issue isn't the chrome lining.
A coating, being chrome in this case, will never exceed the strength of its base material.
If the material under the chrome deforms, then you have a chrome covered deformity.
Because the HF process creates a very consistent density, you don't have the weak spots...if you can call it that, this is all very simplified.
I wouldn't say the HF process is better than cut/button rifled barrels. It depends on what you are trying to do.
Noveske, who is known to make very accurate, long lasting barrels, uses cut stainless. Now, there is a ton of work involved in making a Noveske barrel...they are very well engineered, this is reflected in cost however.
You can get a DD CHF barrel for around $250.
The Noveske ones, for a comparable product, are about $450.
The little bit of accuracy between the two costs a lot.
Per unit, the HF process allows you to create a very accurate long lasting barrel for a cheaper per unit cost, as there isn't as much labor involved.
IMO, if one is looking for the highest possible accuracy, he needs to look more to ammunition than barrel.
Modern barrels are very well made, provided they come from a reputable company, regardless of manufacturing technique.
There is much more crap ammo on the market than crap barrels.
Well...the cost is more a function of the machine costs and the relative volume that manufacturer produces. For example: a BCM CHF barrel costs a lot more than their standard, but one by DD is comparable to any other quality standard rifled chrome lined barrel.
Daniel defense produces their own barrels and over time, hammer forging can be a less expensive way to mass produce barrels. BCM Sources their barrels from another manufacturer. As a result, there is an additional layer of profit built into the BCM barrels.
Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk
Well...the cost is more a function of the machine costs and the relative volume that manufacturer produces. For example: a BCM CHF barrel costs a lot more than their standard, but one by DD is comparable to any other quality standard rifled chrome lined barrel.
Daniel defense produces their own barrels and over time, hammer forging can be a less expensive way to mass produce barrels. BCM Sources their barrels from another manufacturer. As a result, there is an additional layer of profit built into the BCM barrels.
I have also heard that daniel defense bought their forging machines in anticipation of a government contract that didn't materialize. IMHO, They're selling them cheap and as fast as they can in order to recoup their initial investment.
Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk
A coating, being chrome in this case, will never exceed the strength of its base material.
It is not a coating...the chrome lining is bonded and the barrel steel and lining are effectively one. Chrome is indeed harder than the base 4140/4150 steel. It wears less than the natural barrel steel, that's why the treatment/lining increases barrel life.
Just trying to get that point across. The chrome is not just a coating. It won't chip. It will increase any malformations in the rifling and hence CL barrels are not the most accurate. We aren't looking for that kind of accuracy.
Large scale hammer forging of barrels is cheaper thats way its done. Ruger does this for this reason. Yes it is stronger but can be less accurate. Hammer forging barrels can also give you a higher amount of reject barrels due to stress cracking.
Hammer forged is noramlly only used by very large companies like Steyr, SAKO, CZ, Remington(not sure if they still do) and Ruger. See a pattern here?
By no means does hammer forged make it better right off the bat, it has its issues. Most are caused by the manufactures for the very same reasons why they hammer forge in the first place.
TIME and MONEY
A Nitrided good button rifled 4150 steel barrel with a good chemical composition is better than hammer forged.
KEY WORDS ARE
GOOD chemical composition (not 4140 even though some 4150 is so crappy its very close to 4140)
GOOD button rifled
GOOD Nitride, salt or gas type.
These 3 "features" make the best barrel and is the future of barrels ASK SIG SWISS.
ALSO proof testing is very important in barrels but only if its inspected correctly afterwards.
Hammer forged is noramlly only used buy very large companies like Steyr, SAKO, CZ, Remington(not sure if they still do) and Ruger. See a pattern here?
Anyone can selectively use companies to help reinforce their bias against hammer forging.
What about HK, Colt Canada (Diemaco) and Izmash (Russian AK armory)?
I see a completely different pattern with my list.
Nobody has a bias against them. Hammer forging just does not inherently produce a superior barrel. Folks have the idea that they are somehow superior are incorrect in that assumption.
It is merely a different process that favors manufacturers with high output. It makes barrels cheaper to produce in the long run if your output can offset the machinery/engineering investment.
It sounds cool....hammer forged barrels. It's BS as far as making the barrel more robust. It doesn't increase Rockwell hardness and wear resistance. It actually generates barrels that are under increased stress and heating can cause loss of accuracy due to zero drift. The blank actually elongates by as much as 35% as it is forged. Squeezing/pushing the barrel steel forward of the mandrel. I cannot visualize how this makes a superior barrel in contrast to button rifling techniques where the steel has been relieved and stays that way and is even usually relieved again by the barrel producer. So are hammer forged barrels, but the metal stress is no relation.
Again chrome lining does much more to improve corrosion and wear resistance than anything else.
Why so resistant to obvious physical chemical properties and material sciences information about the manufacturing techniques and products generated????
While not specific to barrels there is plenty of evidence on the net on hammer forging and how it affects metal. One could infer that any pros or cons would also apply to barrels.
Just from a quick browse it looks like hammer forging deforms the crystalline structure of metal to the shape of whatever is being forged. I would guess this means more strength by having a solid crystalline structure over any form of cutting which would interrupt the grain of the metal.
This.
Hammer forging steel compacts its crystalline structure, creating a denser material that is much tougher than its original form. The downside is it creates stress patterns in the material that need to be normalized in heat treatment. Most people don't realize the amount of chemistry that takes place in steel due to its solid structure. But a significant amount takes place on the molecular level.
By the way, forged knives are also tougher, and capable of taking and holding a keener edge for the same reason.
Anyone can selectively use companies to help reinforce their bias against hammer forging.
What about HK, Colt Canada (Diemaco) and Izmash (Russian AK armory)?
I see a completely different pattern with my list.
I'm not bias I said there stronger but can have issues, normally caused by time and money.
I believe a good steel barrel, rifled with a well designed and maintained button, turned / profiled correctly and then Nitrided is a better barrel.
This idea that hammer forged is the only or best way to go is BS if done right its a great barrel like many other types. The issue is the whole idea of hammer forging is about cost and any idea with that as the major reason opens the door to how well they well turn out anyway.
I worry more about gas port erosion than anything ease, let alone the manufacturing process of my barrel.
Forging does not increase material density. The steel just flows under forging. The grain is more continuous making the steel stronger. How much does this add to barrel life expectency????
Can't be quantified. I am a scientist and any effect that cannot be quantified is marginal at best.
Well maybe under this condition or that environemt it is better. Bologna.
Theoretical arguements with little data for support does not equal practical results.
ForTehNguyen
12-10-10, 11:09
what it does do is its more barrels can be produced per hour. The reason it costs more is the freaking machine is so expensive. Over the long haul it lowers manufacturing costs.
You can't say I'm going to get another 5k rounds out of a barrel...
Our Hammer forged barrels will.
No offense Todd, but where is your data????
What were the conditions tested, etc?????
Cincinnatus
12-10-10, 12:04
No offense Todd, but where is your data????
What were the conditions tested, etc?????
On the contrary, where is YOUR data? The data to support CHF has been well known throughout the industry for decades. You are arguing something based on suppositions without actual DATA to back it up.
No offense Todd, but where is your data????
What were the conditions tested, etc?????
I beleive Todd 100%
Hammer forge is great if done right and Todd will make sure it is for his products this I know.
On the contrary, where is YOUR data? The data to support CHF has been well known throughout the industry for decades. You are arguing something based on suppositions without actual DATA to back it up.
You and they are the one's claiming it is in some way superior. The burden of proof is on supporters like you and the manufacturers.
You are making a claim that it is better. I am not saying it is not stronger, but I want to know how much stronger vs the original barrel steel. A quantifiable difference or enhancement imparted by hammer forging vs traditional methods.
No one can state any real data???? It's stronger due to the consistency of the grain. How much stronger and how many more accurate rounds do I get for the extra money spent to buy one??? Buying a BHF from Bravo is more expensive....is it justified???? I would like to know. I am certain you don't know as you are not relaying any detailed info, just stating that it is already known. Where are you making your judgements from. The data I observe on the net is largely theoretical based on metal properties. A rifle barrel is not a knife. It gets whipped, flexes, and is subjected to repeated high heat and subsequent mechanical stresses.
How does forging improve barrel quality, both longevity and accuracy???? Seems to me the chrome lining is more important as that can be easily quantified. You chrome line it you get X number of rounds before you see excessive throat errosion, general wear at the grooves, muzzle, and gas port and corrosion resistance.
You can't quantify the difference for hammer forging b/c it is so minute and dependent on other factors such as steel quality and heat treatments, etc. It is not that big of a factor to justify the costs b/c you can't quantify the differences. If something in nature is observed to have an effect on a process than you can quantify it. Simple scientific methodolgy. If X has little to no effect in multivariation anlaysis than it is deemed to be of little or no consequence.
tfltackdriver
12-10-10, 12:49
New consideration:
I've always been under the impression that as the rifle-cutting machinery wears out, the twist rates become inconsistent. My common sense tells me that the twist rate is going to be identical on every barrel hammer-forged on the same mandrel, though there may be a point when the quality of the rifling begins to degrade.
Anyone know if this is true?
jasonhgross
12-10-10, 13:29
To be honest, it's a way to get us to spend more money. You cannot quantify the difference in barrel life, therefore it must be quite small.
Additionally, the hammer forging causes the metal to be under high stress which can enhance heating related issues. Reason benchrest shooters won't touch them. The zero drifts more.
The Germans were the first to hammer forge barrels more than 60 years ago. If it made that much difference it would have become more common.
Your idiocy gets worse with every post. Why are you even in this forum. You get an answer to your question, then you discard the answer that people with more experience and knowlege spent time on constructing. Go away.
Belmont31R
12-10-10, 13:44
You and they are the one's claiming it is in some way superior. The burden of proof is on supporters like you and the manufacturers.
You are making a claim that it is better. I am not saying it is not stronger, but I want to know how much stronger vs the original barrel steel. A quantifiable difference or enhancement imparted by hammer forging vs traditional methods.
No one can state any real data???? It's stronger due to the consistency of the grain. How much stronger and how many more accurate rounds do I get for the extra money spent to buy one??? Buying a BHF from Bravo is more expensive....is it justified???? I would like to know. I am certain you don't know as you are not relaying any detailed info, just stating that it is already known. Where are you making your judgements from. The data I observe on the net is largely theoretical based on metal properties. A rifle barrel is not a knife. It gets whipped, flexes, and is subjected to repeated high heat and subsequent mechanical stresses.
How does forging improve barrel quality, both longevity and accuracy???? Seems to me the chrome lining is more important as that can be easily quantified. You chrome line it you get X number of rounds before you see excessive throat errosion, general wear at the grooves, muzzle, and gas port and corrosion resistance.
You can't quantify the difference for hammer forging b/c it is so minute and dependent on other factors such as steel quality and heat treatments, etc. It is not that big of a factor to justify the costs b/c you can't quantify the differences. If something in nature is observed to have an effect on a process than you can quantify it. Simple scientific methodolgy. If X has little to no effect in multivariation anlaysis than it is deemed to be of little or no consequence.
Thats impossible to say, as you said before....no two barrels will be shot the exact same way, and are slightly different from the start.
Since you are a scientist why don't you do some research on your own. Ive done my own based on builds Ive done, and not conclusive Ive found CHF barrels to generally be more accurate. If thats the only gain I see then the extra whatever is worth it to me, and I trust people who make them for a living they last longer. Do I expect to see their data? No...because its IP of that company, and Im not of the habit of going around demanding companies cough up their IP in detail.
Ive owned or currently own BCM, Centurion Arms, KAC, and Noveske uppers with CHF barrels. They have all shot more accurately for me than any of the standard 4150 barrels Ive owned including BCM, Colt, and LMT. As to longevity Id be more than happy to post some results if you'd drop off about 100k rounds of 5.56 ammo.....;)
Your idiocy gets worse with every post. Why are you even in this forum. You get an answer to your question, then you discard the answer that people with more experience and knowlege spent time on constructing. Go away.
You call that an answer. Of coures, you probably stopped at high school.
I don't have data for 4150 CHF barrels as ours use a higher grade CMV as well as thicker chrome.
Why have you asked the same question 10 times in the same thread?
Stating your question repeatedly does nothing to further the discussion in a meaningful way.
You have posited your hypothesis. Now go test it.
You call that an answer. Of coures, you probably stopped at high school. And your response is equally adolescent (and misspelled). People with a number of years of experience are probably the ones I would trust to have a more definitve answer to any questions about the subject matter I have questions about. You have yet to substantiate any contrarian claims you have against the process of hammer forging(other than price) and several well known and prestigious manufacturers still forge their barrel steel. It sounds more like you have a problem with the cost, more than the utility.
Robb Jensen
12-10-10, 20:39
M4Carbine.net is not TOS we don't need people arguing like 5yr olds saying my dad can beat up your dad.
Hammer forged barrels simply last longer than non hammer forged barrels. It's a fact. Does everyone need one? No. Can people who shoot an metric shit ton of ammo benefit from one. You bet.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.