Interesting results after grouping my standard and BFH BCM barrels - update 02 JUN

[sinister]

Going back to your original post, this particular barrel now has northward of 5,000 rounds through it? If so, for a mid-life barrel I think it's doing pretty well.

[Wake27]

Going back to your original post, this particular barrel now has northward of 5,000 rounds through it? If so, for a mid-life barrel I think it's doing pretty well.

No the BFH barrel in question is right around 1k. The standard ELW-F barrel on my backup gun that shoots better is at about 1.3k. The Noveske upper that the BFH barreled upper replaced was at about 5k when I discovered some issues with it, which is where you probably saw that number.

[Wake27]

Results from today’s shooting. Unlike my OP, this was an outdoor range. Wind was present, but didn’t feel too significant. Temperature in the low 80s, I don’t know about humidity but I doubt it matters. Marker on the range said 50, but I lazed the target frame at 48 and didn’t move it. I didn’t shoot my BCM ELW-F (the best shooting upper I have), mostly because I didn’t want to mess with the zero on its T-2 and it has a keymod rail so I didn’t feel like switching the mount for my bipod. The targets are in the order that I shot them, or at least pretty close to it. To get to BCM’s recommendation, I fired one round at a throw-away target and then moved to a clean target, fired five, then fired a final round at the throw-away target. I only did this for the BCM, really not sure how much of a difference it made. All targets were shot with an Atlas bipod and rear bag. The BCM BFH still has the G MK16 while the PSAs used Magpul MOE MLOK handguards. Targets were set up in a 2x2 square on the same target frame. These groups were fired much faster than on the first day, as I had the mags preloaded and was not willing to wait for the range to go cold after only firing one group. The indoor range obviously allowed me to bring the target to me after each group so the barrels had a few minutes to cool. I also checked the torque on the mount either before or after every single group. Interestingly, I did have two (maybe three?) occasions where the front nut would go about 1/8 of a turn before the wrench clicked over, but it was such a small movement that I wouldn't be surprised if that was more due to tolerance in the wrench. Not sure though. I've always set the torque at 70 inch-pounds, which is slightly under the G spec of 72, to account for slight variations in the wrench.































Obviously the 77gr Federal Gold Metal Match shot well, I wish I had more with me for a second group. The PPU seems to consistently shoot poorly out of this gun, despite shooting fairly well in my ELW-F upper. I think the variation in POI and group size for the 73gr Berger is a little weird. Obviously the ELW is a skinny profile, but at less than 50m and with a relatively slow cadence, that is worse than I'd expect. The PPU clearly doesn't do well in this barrel, despite decent performance out of my ELW-F upper. The Magtech 77gr 262 clone is super weird. On the first group, I was pretty sure that I had fired five rounds at the target but could only see four holes so I fired one more, thinking that maybe I miscounted. When I moved over to fire the second group, the first round is the one on paper. I have no idea how the next four were off, but that solidified the idea that I had indeed fired six rounds for the previous group, and one was off paper. I also think the zero-shift on the IMI is interesting, though not necessarily relevant as it looks like that was a decent group (pretty sure its the five that are just off the target at the 2:00.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SomeOtherGuy]

So what do you think? The first target with FGMM is more than I would hope for with your setup. The BFH targets on average look a lot better than the "PSA skinny nitride" targets, although the PSA phosphate barrel did decently with Magtech.

[Wake27]

So what do you think? The first target with FGMM is more than I would hope for with your setup. The BFH targets on average look a lot better than the "PSA skinny nitride" targets, although the PSA phosphate barrel did decently with Magtech.

I have no ****ing idea. I wasn’t expecting much out of the PSA uppers, but the fact that the phosphate government barrel shot the Magtech so well compared to whatever craziness happened with the BFH is really weird (that entire upper cost less than the BCM BFH barrel alone). Also, the IMI didn’t cause anywhere near the same shift in the PSA that it did in the BFH, though IIRC, there was a significant difference between the BFH POI with the PPU and the PSA and I have no idea if any of that actually matters. At this point, I’m probably just going to insist that BCM takes a look, if for nothing else than piece of mind. Robb explained that he used a Geissele alignment rod to check for concentricity with the barrel and muzzle device and torqued the barrel nut to spec after tightening and loosening it 4-5 times to season the receiver and barrel nut. So I highly doubt anything went wrong on install. Maybe the barrel nut is loose as I haven’t taken the time to check, but I doubt it’d shoot the FGMM 77gr group that well if that was the case. I also want to see if Vortex will take a look at the scope and mount, since it did take a hard fall and I can't seem to nail down what's going on. I wish I had more of the FGMM 77gr on hand, as well as a decent 55-62gr round to keep testing, but I’m also just kind of over it at this point. I’ve had a KAC upper sitting in a shopping cart for a while now and I’m probably just a few drinks away from getting that to put my Razor on and then throwing the EOTech on the BFH upper, somewhat content with it as a heat sensitive 2MOA gun.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jpmuscle]

The world needs more structured barrels

https://www.instagram.com/p/ByLBfiQg...=1vq28vkk6qjcg

https://www.tacomhq.com/civ-structured-barrels.html

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AKDoug]

The world needs more structured barrels

https://www.instagram.com/p/ByLBfiQg...=1vq28vkk6qjcg

https://www.tacomhq.com/civ-structured-barrels.html

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The problem is, you have to have an 1.5" barrel blank to do it under .338. Even with all the holes it's way heavier than an 7lb 12oz Shilen target barrel.... about twice as heavy as a matter of fact.

[arptsprt]

We’re all those at 6x at 48 yds?

Based on this thread, I’ve dusted off a few 16” BCM BFH carbines from the safe and took my go to BFH 11.5” to the range the last few days just to see.

I only used three types of ammo; IMI 77 gr Razor, that Winchester 62 gr OTM, and Wolf Gold. Shot 50, 100, and 200 yds.

Suffice it to say I was very pleased with my groups compared to what you’re seeing. I’m think that while probably in spec, you didn’t get the best barrel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[T2C]

I've fired .223 loads that would shoot 1" at 100 yards, then 3" at 300 yards. I 've also fired loads that would shoot 1" at 100 yards, then 9" at 300 yards. You won't know how a particular load will perform until you actually stretch out and shoot at distance. With a good barrel, 75g Match should shoot decent groups at 600 yards.

As far as the "going to sleep" theory applies, my personal experience is mostly with .30 caliber cartridges and I was told that 175g Match "goes to sleep" past 400 yards. I've seen 168g Match loads shoot 2" groups at 300 yards, but not very well at 800 yards. I've seen 175g Match shoot 4" groups at 300 yards, then shoot very good groups at 800 yards. You just don't know until you actually shoot at distance.

I've taken good equipment and good ammunition and shot poor groups due to inconsistent cheek weld. It may be something to consider.


What were the dimensions of the steel you shot at 300 meters?

[AndyLate]

There really is nothing wrong with a 2 MOA barrel, but a bigger scope, front and rear bags, and accurate ammunition will give you a better indication how the barrel shoots.