I thought barrels over approximately 60 rounds weren't supposed to be nitrided?
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I thought barrels over approximately 60 rounds weren't supposed to be nitrided?
Is this true? Never heard this, I do remember reading that some Nitride processes were not recommended for stainless. I also read that many people are happy with this president, so many people have so many oppinions.
I have maybe 500-600 rounds on my stainless barrel, wouldn't want to degrade it in any way. I have not read anything saying the nitride process is not recommended for a shot barrel (yet), but I appreciate any links giving more info.
Edit to add, I just found this (on this site), written by Kevin J:
I just wanted to follow up on this. I've done a few of these barrels in the last few months. The barrels and extensions are treated installed as is the gas port. Actually the barrel needs to be broken in, I should say burnished, prior to treatment. This is great because I've been able to get some accuracy comparisons before and after, but I'm still finalizing those. The color is a very deep black and is pretty matte. I'll take some pics and post them up. But over all I am really happy with these so far in my SPRs.
I think there is a large misunderstanding of the temps involved in this process as it is applied to barrels. The temps do not cross 900 Deg. so "Warpage" and "Distortion" are not present. These temps actually serve to stress relive the barrel after all of the machining has been done, which is the exact opposite of about every other barrel.
I can't obviously attest to durability when compared against Chrome, but just based on the available data this is the perfect route for accuracy intended guns.
Last edited by ricochet; 08-27-11 at 16:38. Reason: found more info related to the question asked.
the "60" round quote comes from joel kendrick saying that if a barrel was shot to the point of it having fire cracking in the throat, and you applied the heat of the nitride'ed process, it could make the cracks worse...
i am not aware of any actual tests to confirm this.
as for SS, and chromemoly, the chromemoly will get harder and more corrosion resistant then the SS, but chromemoly is harder then SS to start.. so no surprise..
How about a contract CHF G-3 barrel ?
Interesting about treating a hard chrome-lined barrel. Have any studies been done on how well that will wear?
"One cannot awaken a man who pretends to be asleep..."
Correct me if I'm wrong. I can send my DSA FAL barreled action to them to be treated even though the rifle has fired approx. 500 rounds and this wouldn't degrade the performance of the nitriding to the bore? If so, that would be great. I never liked the idea of having a non chrome lined barrel.
I know it's not a rifle barrel, but I had a SIG P226 barrel QPQ'ed. The barrel's interior looks "rougher" now, kindof like VERY FINE bead-blast bluing. Other than that, I cannot tell any difference other than the wear on the barrel-hood/lug contact area with the slide stopped cold. The slide was also QP'ed, as it is stainless and the final procedure is left off with stainless. I have noticed VERY FINE chipping of the slide/contact area that would take a high-res camera to capture. It appears self-limiting and a non-issue. The shoulders of the rifling in the pistol bore show no chipping or adverse effect. The barrel/pistol are easily capable of demonstrated 1-1.2" CTC 5-shot groups off a sand-bag at 25yards.
Last edited by WS6; 08-28-11 at 11:33.
QPQ won't work on chrome. Chrome does not have the necessary iron and other components in it.
http://www.northeastcoating.com/SaltBathNitriding_1.htm
After reading and understanding this, you can easily see why a barrel is not a good item to QPQ UNLESS you are ACTUALLY going to polish it, as is stated in the process. Otherwise you get a really rough/hard surface in the bore. For my pistol it doesn't matter much other than it coppers up real fast. For a rifle? Hell no. That is why to have a barrel PROPERLY QPQ'ed is an expensive procedure. It requires hand-lapping of the bore as part of the process. Not just a dunk/dunk like I suspect a $50 job would entail.
Let me know how the copper fouling works out on non-OEM QPQ'ed bores as I am curious to see if my observations are correct in practice. I know one benchrest shooter who paid $500 a barrel for it because of this laborious process. I doubt he would pay that for just a dunking, even thought he was doing this "early on" when QPQ became on the horizon for weapon-bores. It was used decades ago in other products, so it's not exactly new as Glock would have you believe. I suspect the OEM supply has a way of polishing the bore, as a Glock barrel looks NOTHING like my SIG barrel did.
The observation by one poster of the barrels being "matte" color probably extends to the bore, as it did with my SIG, which is to say "rough". The bore should look like a mirror. If it doesn't, it's going to copper up pretty quick.
Last edited by WS6; 08-28-11 at 11:41.
Yikes, I now have more questions than before. I currently have 2 barrels that are QPQ'd and they have shown no tendency to foul. But I do not know the processes used, nor how much polishing in the P part of the process. I understand $50 does not allow much profit for time spent per part.
Everything I read leads me to believe if this process is done correctly, wear and corrosion is affected dramatically. I would rather leave this barrel alone than do it harm, but better yet, would rather pay more if this means getting it done correctly. The 60 round statement has my curiosity up, I must read more and learn more before making up my mind. I am quite confident that if done correctly, it offers much.
Ring, do you know if there is any polishing between treatments at the offer we have? Thanks for the info and patience guys.![]()
Last edited by ricochet; 08-28-11 at 12:56. Reason: fat fingers hit wrong keys...
Bookmarks