Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
The bore of the current barrel installed prior to 1913 is bright and shiny. No sign of corrosion at all. I am of course guessing but I wonder if decison to have the gun barrel shortened and rechambered to .32Ideal was due to the chamber throat being eroded.
Some discussion of this Single-Shot coming up at Amoskeag – involving a speculated factory barrel change and the lack of proof mark:
By the way, the “added weight”? I’m not familiar with that. What did they use?
steve004 said
Some discussion of this Single-Shot coming up at Amoskeag – involving a speculated factory barrel change and the lack of proof mark:By the way, the “added weight”? I’m not familiar with that. What did they use?
That is interesting, Steve. I’m not familiar with what it might be either.
James
steve004 said
Some discussion of this Single-Shot coming up at Amoskeag – involving a speculated factory barrel change and the lack of proof mark:By the way, the “added weight”? I’m not familiar with that. What did they use?
This is a Bert question but #5 barrels were available.
jwm94 said
It makes sense to me that the chamber is ordinarily going to go before the barrel rifling, and it can happen overnight. For example, I had to give up my M-1 two days before the Western Division Matches at Camp Pendleton was to start in ’71. My coach was Gunner PIETROFORTE, famous USMC marksman. He was, of course, accustomed to shooting fist sized rapid fire groups from the 2 and 300 yard line, and I had begun to match them in size, and a day later the groups had become huge and show up in different locations…chamber shot out in a day.
James
Jim, that is one reason why we measure our chambers. It let’s us load better and track the erosion.
Steve, I don’t know how much lead may be softer than copper but hot loads and many of them really can wear out a barrel.
steve004 said
Some discussion of this Single-Shot coming up at Amoskeag – involving a speculated factory barrel change and the lack of proof mark:By the way, the “added weight”? I’m not familiar with that. What did they use?
If that barrel was installed by Winchester in 1902 during the “R&R”, it should be marked “J.P.P.” and the same work order number specified in the R&R entry stamped on the bottom of the barrel. Without the benefit of examining the rifle myself, I suspect that it was rebarreled & restocked by Winchester during the R&R.
In regards to the “added weight”, I have not encountered that before. Another oddity is that it has an early “thick-side” receiver frame. Those were typically used on the larger (heavier) calibers.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Than
Chuck said
Jim, that is one reason why we measure our chambers. It let’s us load better and track the erosion.
Steve, I don’t know how much lead may be softer than copper but hot loads and many of them really can wear out a barrel.
Thanks, Chuck. If I had another life to live, I think I’d really like to learn to reload and shoot for fun.
James
November 7, 2015
Offline
Chuck said
Jim, that is one reason why we measure our chambers. It let’s us load better and track the erosion.
Steve, I don’t know how much lead may be softer than copper but hot loads and many of them really can wear out a barrel.
Chuck-
I’m in the camp that attributes throat erosion to the amount of powder burned relative to the caliber. That’s why a small caliber bore with a large bottleneck case will have erosion sooner than other cartridges. Burn rate and pressure probably have something to do with it but I’m not certain. I think copper jacketed bullets may wear a bore more than lead but I also consider that a rifle fired with jacketed bullets may be cleaned with more aggressive methods than one firing all or mostly lead. As you know, improper cleaning has “worn out” more barrels than bullets. I’ve only had one barrel failure due to normal use and that was when a bit of rifling let go in a Winchester 670 after quite a few thousands of rounds of jacketed bullets and quite possibly some overly aggressive cleaning efforts in my younger years.
With my current inclination towards slow lead bullets I suspect I won’t be wearing out any more barrels.
Mike
Don’t get me started on cleaning. I think that cleaning a barrel that has shot jacketed bullets is easier to clean than one shot with lead. You get chunks of lead sometimes and you need to use a brush to break it all loose. All cleaning should go in one direction toward the muzzle if possible. No back and forth with a brush unless it is plastic and even that is a maybe. I do go back and forth sometimes with a wet cotton patch. I have spent 2 days breaking in my barrel pushing/honing all the roughness toward the muzzle. After about 40 rounds and all the annoying cleaning my gun stops leaving copper and the groups get better. Future cleaning is a lot easier. I don’t clean my target gun every time I shoot it since I shoot it every week. The Winchesters get cleaned after each firing because I don’t know when I might shoot them again. I hate cleaning.
November 7, 2015
Offline
It’s obvious you know what YOUR guns need, Chuck. Obviously they have very good barrels and that makes a huge difference. A good barrel with properly fit and lubed lead bullets needs very little cleaning as little or no lead is deposited in the bore. In most cases all I have to remove is bullet lube and powder residue, a nylon brush generally works quite well. I probably clean them more than they need but with load development I like to start each session with a clean bore. Every now and then I get a wild hair and shoot a rifle with a rough bore. They need a few passes with a copper brush but the fun is worth it. Easiest rifle I have for cleaning has only been fired with black powder and lead, seldom lakes more than a half-dozen patches and a little “moose milk” to get it clean. Takes longer to wipe down the exterior than to clean the bore.
I don’t like cleaning up after copper bullets either. I understand some of the new powders make it easier, have you had any luck with them? I wish I could use my copper solvents outside, they stink up the house for hours, if not days. I’ve learned a lot watching the bench rest shooters at my club, sounds like you use some of the same methods they use.
Mike
Chuck said
I think that cleaning a barrel that has shot jacketed bullets is easier to clean than one shot with lead.
That’s because copper & brass can be “attacked” (dissolved) by bore solvents containing ammonia (like Sweet’s), while lead is impervious to everything but acids that would do worse damage to the steel itself! In fact, there’s not much except physical abrasion (such as that accomplished with a Lewis Lead Remover) that will “get the lead out.” So if I must deal with fouling, make it copper (gilding metal, actually), not lead!
TXGunNut said
Every now and then I get a wild hair and shoot a rifle with a rough bore. They need a few passes with a copper brush but the fun is worth it.
A FEW? Mike, I think we must have different definitions of a “rough bore.” And also “fun.”
I agree with Chuck: I HATE cleaning.
November 7, 2015
Offline
Clarence-
I’ve bought a rifle or three with horrible lead fouling and found that Kroil was pretty helpful in removing the lead. It’s not a quick process and it involves a bit of elbow grease with a bronze brush but I like the way Kroil smells. Reminds me of some old gunsmith shops and machine shops. Just have to give it some time to get between the lead and the steel, then the lead brushes right out.
Mike
November 7, 2015
Offline
RickC said
Anyone you wipeout ?
Yes, have used it a few times. Pretty impressive but very strong. Worried about its effect on wood finishes so I only use it on modern guns.
Mike
TXGunNut said
It’s obvious you know what YOUR guns need, Chuck. Obviously they have very good barrels and that makes a huge difference. A good barrel with properly fit and lubed lead bullets needs very little cleaning as little or no lead is deposited in the bore. In most cases all I have to remove is bullet lube and powder residue, a nylon brush generally works quite well. I probably clean them more than they need but with load development I like to start each session with a clean bore. Every now and then I get a wild hair and shoot a rifle with a rough bore. They need a few passes with a copper brush but the fun is worth it. Easiest rifle I have for cleaning has only been fired with black powder and lead, seldom lakes more than a half-dozen patches and a little “moose milk” to get it clean. Takes longer to wipe down the exterior than to clean the bore.I don’t like cleaning up after copper bullets either. I understand some of the new powders make it easier, have you had any luck with them? I wish I could use my copper solvents outside, they stink up the house for hours, if not days. I’ve learned a lot watching the bench rest shooters at my club, sounds like you use some of the same methods they use.
Mike
Mike I wish I knew what my guns need. It would really make my life less stressful. The barrels on my collector guns run from rough to very good. I don’t have many that don’t have a reasonable amount of rifling left. I do have a couple that have been shot too much. Right now I’m using shooters Choice MC-7 Bore Cleaner. I follow that up with Sweet’s for jacketed bullets only. First shots on my paper puncher are usually not affected by the cleanliness of my bore. I did shoot on my first really cold and windy day (for California) and the first few shots were accurate but the FPS started low and got higher with each shot until the barrel felt better.
November 7, 2015
Offline
Sounds like you have a pretty good understanding of your target rifle’s barrel, Chuck. Most important thing I’ve learned about rifles is they have personalities. Some need fouling shots, others don’t. Some will only shoot cold, others shoot just fine when too hot to touch. A rifle that loses a little velocity when cold is interesting, I haven’t used a chronograph enough to observe that. With my vintage rifles some bores look decent but shot poorly. A few look terrible but actually shoot fairly well. I’m actually not a very good shot with a rifle so a truly accurate specimen would likely go unnoticed in my collection. If I ever suspect I have an exceptionally accurate rifle I’ll need you or Big Larry to shoot it for me.
Mike
jwm94 said
Another question about proof marks. Winchester mailed out heavy barrels to the Springfield Armory and other interested parties for assembly that did not have the mail order proof, but the WP mark, itself. Comments as to why, please.James
Hi James,
Heavy barrels for what model(s)?
WACA Life Member #6284 - Specializing in Pre-64 Winchester .22 Rimfire
I think I figured out the question I had, myself, Jeff. 
Sometimes I don’t think too clearly!!!! In the case that I was thinking about, Springfield apparently replaced some 1903 match rifle barrels with heavy barrels made by Winchester, Remington, or Springfield, and later sold them through DCM. These barrels were available to individuals, or companies like Sedgely.
James
JWA said
Hi James,
Heavy barrels for what model(s)?
1 Guest(s)
