Best Quality Barrel?

[Zonie]

To everyone:

A comment was made about Tensile Strength and Yield strength that was, IMO very misleading.

Just for the record one should NEVER look at the Ultimate Tensile Strength or Yield Strength of a material and assume that the number represents the internal pressure the material can take before it fails.

Putting this in another way, just because a steel has a Tensile strength of 95,000 psi does not mean you can fire a gun made from that material with a 60,000 psi pressure inside it.

The Ultimate Tensile Strength or Yield strength is based on a crossectional area of 1 square inch.
If the item has less than 1 square inch of crossectional area it will fail with less force.

Take for instance a round bar that is 1/8 inch in diameter. That would have a crossectional area based on the Pi R squared formula of 3.1416 ( .0625^2) = 0.0123 square inches.

If this bar was made from a material that had a Ultimate Tensile strength of 95,000 psi, we can expect to see a failure by multiplying the area times the Tensile Strength of the material or: 95,000 X .0123 = 1165.82 pounds of load to failure.

If we are speaking of barrels and the pressures they are safe with, we get into an entirely different formula where the Tensile Strength is only one of several different equally important players.

Getting back to materials and barrel quality the free machining steels have so far proven they are safe if one looks at the number of barrel failures due to black powder loads.

Yes, all low carbon steels and perhaps the free machining steels even more-so have their weaknesses but to the best of my knowledge they have never had a problem when loaded with black powder or synthetic black powders in sensibly sized powder loads.

 

Stump,
"Best" is a relative term best defined by the person asking the question. It may not be the "best" by some people's definition but I have a Sharon barrel looking for a new home. PM me if you have an ineterest.
Mark

 

[Rifleman1776]

Douglas went out of the ML business when they had several catastrophic failures from using the same material still used in many ML barrels, cheap leaded screw stock.

I have been criticized for not providing proof of a statement.
Like you, I have been at this ml business for a long time. (40+ years) I have never heard anything like what you said about Douglas.
Where is your proof there were catastrophic failures of Douglas barrels (excepting stupid loading errors, etc.) and the reason they went out of business? A business can close for many reasons. And, often for reasons that have nothing to do with the product.
BTW, I have an offhand target rifle made with a Douglas barrel. I won two benchrest matches with it on the 100 yard range, beating genuine bench guns. I loaned the rifle to a friend. He fell in love with it and I almost lost a friendship when I asked for it back. BTW, that rifle has been in use for about 35 years.

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

Douglas didn't go out of business and I don't think anyone said that. They simply stopped making black powder muzzleloading barrels after a couple of failures of their products which resulted in expensive litigation. I'm not saying they were responsible, the failures could have been shooter induced, I don't remember anymore. It's just that the BP end of their business simply didn't bring in enough money to cover the legal costs that the failures incurred. And the competition was beginning to take away business as well - better quality. When a part of your business isn't making money you get rid of it, that's all.

 

[Tumblernotch]

Douglas didn't go out of business and I don't think anyone said that. They simply stopped making black powder muzzleloading barrels after a couple of failures of their products which resulted in expensive litigation. I'm not saying they were responsible, the failures could have been shooter induced, I don't remember anymore. It's just that the BP end of their business simply didn't bring in enough money to cover the legal costs that the failures incurred. And the competition was beginning to take away business as well - better quality. When a part of your business isn't making money you get rid of it, that's all.

Correct. A couple of years ago, I called Douglas with some questions about a barrel I was using (and by the way, there are only two employees still working there that were involved in the ML production) and while talking to the employee it was verified that it was due to customer stupidity (grossly overloading and using smokeless powder) as well as bore obstructions that caused the failures and the company was vindicated. However, it still cost the company a lot of money to defend itself and wasted hours in court better used in the shop. A friend of mine who used to buy a lot of their barrels (including seconds that still shoot great) was also told the same. Also, besides the up and coming competition, they wanted to expand their CF business which is stronger to begin with.

 

[Rifleman1776]

Douglas didn't go out of business and I don't think anyone said that. They simply stopped making black powder muzzleloading barrels after a couple of failures of their products which resulted in expensive litigation. I'm not saying they were responsible, the failures could have been shooter induced, I don't remember anymore. It's just that the BP end of their business simply didn't bring in enough money to cover the legal costs that the failures incurred. And the competition was beginning to take away business as well - better quality. When a part of your business isn't making money you get rid of it, that's all.

OK, fine. We are talking ML here. They did go out of the ml business. And, there is no evidence their ml barrels were/are any less quality than others available. I would still buy and use their ml products today if they were available. Not casting aspersions on GM. Same with Montana if they still made ml barrels.

 

[RADeO]

Same with Montana if they still made ml barrels.

Can you give me any history on Montana rifle barrels? I have a 36" x .50 Montana that I got near 25 years ago I believe. Never did anything with it and probably never will, but was wondering if you or anyone else had any experience and/or opinions about them.

Thanks :hatsoff:

 

[shmrck1]

Hi everyone
I cant beleive someone hasent asked this question already but i cant seem to find it . I am planning to build a new southern mountain rifle in a flint and I would like to buy the best barrel that can be had.Also there are many makers of kits but I have only built kits from TOTW.Anyone have any experience with the other suppliers of gun kits.By the way it has to be a left hand flint kit I dont really care about cost as I dont have a wife and gonna die broke anyway.Sure would like some knowledgable input cause I want a close to accurate copy, also does anyone know if they came in 45cal or smaller as I have 2 50cals and 2 54 cals already any ideas about barrel length is 42in too long to hold or feel awkward to shoot or carry.Any input would be greatly appreciated thx in advance
Don

Don,
Maybe I am the Lone Ranger here????
Do you think you have to spend $400 or more for a barrel that will shoot well.
Well,I don't think so. I love the performance
of the Green Mountain barrels.They have never
disappointed me.JMHO

 

[Rifleman1776]

Same with Montana if they still made ml barrels.

Can you give me any history on Montana rifle barrels? I have a 36" x .50 Montana that I got near 25 years ago I believe. Never did anything with it and probably never will, but was wondering if you or anyone else had any experience and/or opinions about them.

Thanks :hatsoff:

I have a .54 Montana on my Jaeger. I won it at a match many years ago and it wasn't built onto a rifle until a few years ago. It is a fine barrel, no complaints. It is a 1:72 twist, perfect for a hunting rifle. (Jaeger means "hunter") But, for target shooting it does require a hefty charge for accuracy. I dunno if the twist is/was standard for Montana barrels but you might check before you decide to use it for a new gun project.
I dunno why they quit making ml barrels.

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

Douglas didn't go out of business and I don't think anyone said that. They simply stopped making black powder muzzleloading barrels after a couple of failures of their products which resulted in expensive litigation. I'm not saying they were responsible, the failures could have been shooter induced, I don't remember anymore. It's just that the BP end of their business simply didn't bring in enough money to cover the legal costs that the failures incurred. And the competition was beginning to take away business as well - better quality. When a part of your business isn't making money you get rid of it, that's all.

OK, fine. We are talking ML here. They did go out of the ml business. And, there is no evidence their ml barrels were/are any less quality than others available. I would still buy and use their ml products today if they were available. Not casting aspersions on GM. Same with Montana if they still made ml barrels.

They just never got into making tapered and flared (swamped), octagon-to-round, full round, etc. If they had (despite cost) I'm sure they would have done fine but the competition was killing them and their business dropped off because they refused anyway. I could just never get over the off-center bore thing that Douglas seemed to think was normal. But their barrels did and do seem to shoot well enough, no argument from me, just place the sights on the right flat and you are good to go.

 

[Billnpatti]

I am not knowlegable enough to comment on the HC and PC correctness of rifle design. However, I can comment on the makers of top of the line barrels. Some of the best are Rice, Long Hammock and Getz. There are others but if you were to order from one of these folks (especially Rice) you will definately have one of the best barrels you can get. For your application, there is no question that you will want a round ball twist rate. Something like 1:66. If you buy from Rice, they will talk to you about barrel shape (straight, tapered, swamped) the twist rate, groove design (square bottom, round bottom), etc. They also lap your barrel for you so that there is little to no break in. No cut patches. One SA-WEET barrel. You would be well advised to consider one of their L&R locks....none better.

 

[jerrywh]

Douglas did make swamped barrels for a couple of years. My personal gun had a douglas swampped 50 cal. barrel. I'm sorry I ever let anybody talk me out of it. Also I never saw a douglas barrel bored off center.

 

[Rifleman1776]

They just never got into making tapered and flared (swamped), octagon-to-round, full round, etc. If they had (despite cost) I'm sure they would have done fine but the competition was killing them and their business dropped off because they refused anyway. I could just never get over the off-center bore thing that Douglas seemed to think was normal. But their barrels did and do seem to shoot well enough, no argument from me, just place the sights on the right flat and you are good to go.

Couple points there. Douglas really made barrel blanks. Tapering and swamping would be left up to the eventual gun builder and many were.
The off center thing was a result of the manufacturing process. It happened because of mass manufacturing and Douglas stamped their name on the flat to go top or bottom. In no way did it affect accuracy of the barrel. Accuracy? Very accurate. Will not go into a debate on that subject. Results speak for themselves.