Theshedhunter
Active member
Do slower burning powders extend barrel life? Do fast burning powders degrade a barrel faster? Is there any relation to burn rate and barrel life?
Powders and barrel life
- Thread starter Theshedhunter
- Start date
scoremaster
New member
In gonna take a stab at an answer and of course I may be wrong . So please don't take it as gospel.
A question would be for what a person would consider a barrels life .
Meaning a factory 3006 I believe I read some where is good for like 10000 rounds they never said handloads or factory but now the fps on them is right at 2800 to 3300 depending on load bullet and such
So basically that's why a deer rifle such as the odd6 could be handed down many times before it was technically wore out .
But then again take a bench rest shooter say a 6ppc a lot of the top ranked shooter don't get much more than 1000 rounds before they consider a barrel used up but they can get to that number in just a few matches not 50 years.
So back to the question at hand I'd say 95% of the time it is just the throat that is burned out so to speak so if you take that barrel to a gunsmith and he would take a inch off the threaded end and rechamber it you would be good for another go round.
Heat and pressure are the damaging factors that come into play .
A slow burning powder say in a 26 inch barrel would have heat longer and pressure longer so I believe that is why a good many of the bigger sized rifles say 300 weatherby is free bored meaning there is a funnel shape sorta to the lands instead of the casing resting in the throat creating a hot spot.
But a fast burning powder has a short heat range and a sharp pressure spike such as a 22-250, 204 etc
And the damage is in the heat right in front of the casing hence the throat burn out. Which results in a pressure change which in turn changes ballistics but trim a thread or so off the chamber and chamber and the same loads can be right back on target.
It would take a lot of burn to take a new rifle shooting dime sized groups at 100 yards to open up to 3 inches .
So after all that jibber jabber I would say a guy hunting for pleasure or putting food on the table could use any size rifle and use any powder and get many many years of service compared to someone looking for a 5 shot bug hole at 100 or 300 yards.
So load them up if you want and shoot fast or slow powder they are all gonna burn the throat just at different rates fast is fast and slow is slow .
Just my 2 cents and sorry for the long slightly off center reply
Scott
A question would be for what a person would consider a barrels life .
Meaning a factory 3006 I believe I read some where is good for like 10000 rounds they never said handloads or factory but now the fps on them is right at 2800 to 3300 depending on load bullet and such
So basically that's why a deer rifle such as the odd6 could be handed down many times before it was technically wore out .
But then again take a bench rest shooter say a 6ppc a lot of the top ranked shooter don't get much more than 1000 rounds before they consider a barrel used up but they can get to that number in just a few matches not 50 years.
So back to the question at hand I'd say 95% of the time it is just the throat that is burned out so to speak so if you take that barrel to a gunsmith and he would take a inch off the threaded end and rechamber it you would be good for another go round.
Heat and pressure are the damaging factors that come into play .
A slow burning powder say in a 26 inch barrel would have heat longer and pressure longer so I believe that is why a good many of the bigger sized rifles say 300 weatherby is free bored meaning there is a funnel shape sorta to the lands instead of the casing resting in the throat creating a hot spot.
But a fast burning powder has a short heat range and a sharp pressure spike such as a 22-250, 204 etc
And the damage is in the heat right in front of the casing hence the throat burn out. Which results in a pressure change which in turn changes ballistics but trim a thread or so off the chamber and chamber and the same loads can be right back on target.
It would take a lot of burn to take a new rifle shooting dime sized groups at 100 yards to open up to 3 inches .
So after all that jibber jabber I would say a guy hunting for pleasure or putting food on the table could use any size rifle and use any powder and get many many years of service compared to someone looking for a 5 shot bug hole at 100 or 300 yards.
So load them up if you want and shoot fast or slow powder they are all gonna burn the throat just at different rates fast is fast and slow is slow .
Just my 2 cents and sorry for the long slightly off center reply
Scott
Theshedhunter
Active member
Thanks for the insights fellas. Soooo, ball powders possibly extend barrel life over stick powders. Is this due to:
A) ball powder not burning as hot?
Or
B) ball powders spherical shape reduces friction and "sandblasting" effect on barrel/throat vs more abrasive stick powders?
Or
C)both
And still wondering of the effects of burn rate on barrels. i.e I have two powders to use in a cartridge. One has a faster burn rate than the other. Over 2000 or 3000 rounds would you see a difference in using one powder over the other? This is hypothetical just fishing for knowledge.
A) ball powder not burning as hot?
Or
B) ball powders spherical shape reduces friction and "sandblasting" effect on barrel/throat vs more abrasive stick powders?
Or
C)both
And still wondering of the effects of burn rate on barrels. i.e I have two powders to use in a cartridge. One has a faster burn rate than the other. Over 2000 or 3000 rounds would you see a difference in using one powder over the other? This is hypothetical just fishing for knowledge.
OldTurtle
Moderator - Deceased
If you are concerned about barrel life, actually chamber life, consider the speed at which you are loading your rounds...From information I have read over the years, the higher speed loadings seem to cause throat erosion faster and more pronounced than moderate loadings....
Example,,When .204 rounds are shot at 4000+ fps, there is a definite erosion factor that has been observed...Hornady, when the first .204 factory rounds came out, was advertising the 32gr round to have a muzzle velocity of 4,100fps....(we never found that to be true at the range)...
I think that you can safely assume that the hotter you load your rounds, regardless of powder, the more damage you will likely do to your barrel...I have not read any definitive studies between the two types of powder in respect to specific damage...However, I won't discount observations of those that shoot a lot, that are not 'hot rodding' their loads by pushing acceptable envelops...
Example,,When .204 rounds are shot at 4000+ fps, there is a definite erosion factor that has been observed...Hornady, when the first .204 factory rounds came out, was advertising the 32gr round to have a muzzle velocity of 4,100fps....(we never found that to be true at the range)...
I think that you can safely assume that the hotter you load your rounds, regardless of powder, the more damage you will likely do to your barrel...I have not read any definitive studies between the two types of powder in respect to specific damage...However, I won't discount observations of those that shoot a lot, that are not 'hot rodding' their loads by pushing acceptable envelops...
Darkker
New member
While erosion from powder sandblasting is a real wear, you can't make any blanket statement about burning rates. Powder progressivity, plays a large part, as does ignition curve, case design, etc. Just to many variables. Here is an example in the Creed using two different 4350's. Note the ignition curve difference.
Much different curves, much different barrel exit points, same pressures.
Much different curves, much different barrel exit points, same pressures.
joed
New member
Originally Posted By: OldTurtleIf you are concerned about barrel life, actually chamber life, consider the speed at which you are loading your rounds...From information I have read over the years, the higher speed loadings seem to cause throat erosion faster and more pronounced than moderate loadings....
Example,,When .204 rounds are shot at 4000+ fps, there is a definite erosion factor that has been observed...Hornady, when the first .204 factory rounds came out, was advertising the 32gr round to have a muzzle velocity of 4,100fps....(we never found that to be true at the range)...
I think that you can safely assume that the hotter you load your rounds, regardless of powder, the more damage you will likely do to your barrel...I have not read any definitive studies between the two types of powder in respect to specific damage...However, I won't discount observations of those that shoot a lot, that are not 'hot rodding' their loads by pushing acceptable envelops...
That's a very true statement about hotter rounds causing more wear. However, I'd like to see the benefit of cutting back. Over the life of the barrel what are we talking, 100 more rounds from a more moderate loading?
I'd like to see some studies and data. My guess is it won't be a big payback.
As to the ball powders vs stick, it brings back something I was taught a long time ago. You don't get something for nothing. Burns cooler? Well, the downside is try shooting it where temperatures vary by a big amount. I gave up on H380 pretty quickly even though it seemed like a great powder in the summer. Winter saw a change in POI every month. Varget was the cure. Maybe if I lived in Hawaii I'd go back to ball powder.
Example,,When .204 rounds are shot at 4000+ fps, there is a definite erosion factor that has been observed...Hornady, when the first .204 factory rounds came out, was advertising the 32gr round to have a muzzle velocity of 4,100fps....(we never found that to be true at the range)...
I think that you can safely assume that the hotter you load your rounds, regardless of powder, the more damage you will likely do to your barrel...I have not read any definitive studies between the two types of powder in respect to specific damage...However, I won't discount observations of those that shoot a lot, that are not 'hot rodding' their loads by pushing acceptable envelops...
That's a very true statement about hotter rounds causing more wear. However, I'd like to see the benefit of cutting back. Over the life of the barrel what are we talking, 100 more rounds from a more moderate loading?
I'd like to see some studies and data. My guess is it won't be a big payback.
As to the ball powders vs stick, it brings back something I was taught a long time ago. You don't get something for nothing. Burns cooler? Well, the downside is try shooting it where temperatures vary by a big amount. I gave up on H380 pretty quickly even though it seemed like a great powder in the summer. Winter saw a change in POI every month. Varget was the cure. Maybe if I lived in Hawaii I'd go back to ball powder.
What I have seen, both as a shooter that has burned up many a throat and gunsmith that has set back and rechambered many a barrel is that the biggest factor is how fast you crank out the rounds one right after another. Velocity definitely is a factor. Here is a good example...in the summer I like to take a case of skeet targets to the gravel pit behind my house and place them on one bank then go across the pit 300 yards or so and get prone and just break clay. It is easy to shoot 100 rounds in an hour or slightly less doing this. My 30-06 or 308 doesn't show any throat erosion. My 223 doesn't show much, extremely very little. My 204 was cooked in about 3 trips...so was one of my 243's. Barrel or rifling wear directly depends on how much you shoot and how clean you keep the bore. You aint getting no 10,000 rounds out of a 30-06 at 3300fps but at 2600 easy. As to the original question...I believe some powders are easier on a barrel than others. Slower burning powder if not used to get maximum velocity {which is really what they are for} is easier, the slower ball powders and some of the newer stuff VV N series is supposed to be cooler burning. Again, you can wipe out any barrel, just crank oout one right after another on a hot summer day.